Friday, May 19, 2006

Fearless

Rare enough that a movie actually supersedes the book it as based on. Only a handful of movies from what I can recall have actually surpassed the novels they were based on such as Ben Hur, Gone with the Wind, the Godfather Novels and the excellent Lord of the Rings Trilogy - to name a rare few.

Sadly that didn't hold true for the movie I saw last night. Although it differs only slightly in the movie, I have to say that the print version of the Da Vinci Code is by far superior. In the movie - as in the pages of the book, the surprisingly fearless Robert Langdon, a conservative American professor, utilizes his knowledge of art history, mythology and the annals of Christianity to search for clues to the murder of a renowned Louvre curator.

Divine Evil
Bringing church fashion into vogue!

Only recently inducted into the Dan Brown Book Club, Big Bicep Barry found himself utterly engrossed with the movie - and like the typical Archer, full of enigmatic questions that not even Robert Langdon could fathom. Like how does a giant Albino dressed in monkish robes pop in and out of the crowded streets of London and Paris unnoticed? Like what exactly drives the villains to pursue the fumbling Langdon endlessly? After a while, I was confused myself!

Still Barry had braved the maniacally driven crowds for the precious tickets the day before so I had no decent cause to complain. Not even when he was five minutes late although I have to admit that his hastily fumbled excuse of going back to change into spectacularly tight jeans helped soothe my savage temper somewhat. Hard to get angry with guys who look good in jeans.

Although the beautiful computer-generated cut scenes of the historical events does justice to the printed page, the frequent history lectures by Langdon and later Teabing would inevitably bore the average corn-popping movie viewer - especially if they haven't had a prior acquiantance with the book. Unfortunately the exhaustive lessons about etymology, early Christian theology and historical minutiae that fascinate me in the book doesn't translate as well onto the screen. Even the spectacularly rendered effects detailing the rise of early Christianity failed to revive a few uninformed audience members who were snoring in the back.

With all the controversy surrounding the recent release of The Da Vinci Code, by now the movie itself is almost beside the point. Despite the fact that I've sadly lapsed into an occasional reader of the Bible, it's hard to believe that anyone could think that the secrets revealed in this book could topple the Christian faith. Revealing the possibly maligned Mary Magdalene as the chosen leader of the Church and the companion of Jesus Christ could hardly be the secret that could rock the very foundations of the faith. Seriously, those who find their faith that easily shaken should take a closer look at their foundations - which are obviously not as strong as they imagined.

But overall, I still couldn't appreciate the occasional plodding pace of the movie ( far different from the breathless, breakneck speed chase in the page-turning novel ) and the intolerable casting of Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon. Prematurely balding yet with an unusually poufy coif, aging and possibly pudgy, his portrayal of the symbologist protagonist is as far from my imagined ideal as possible - and it's difficult to root for him as the intellectual hero dreamt up by Dan Brown. After the unforgivable character assasination, half the time I found it quite understandable that everyone else wishes to throw him behind bars.

Paul : Good God. Why Tom Hanks?
Barry : Why not?
Paul : Well, look at him! I imagined Robert Langdon as someone far better-looking! At least with a tight ass.
Barry : And looks are that important to you?
Paul : Uhh... it isn't?
Barry : What about intelligence? Personality?
Paul : Ehhh... that doesn't come off that well onscreen, does it?

By God, I do hope I am somewhat intelligent.

***

There is some good news about the endless battle over the forces of evil however. Barry finally gave up trying to rescue his demonically possessed phone from the clutches of supreme evil and is getting a tamer Sony Ericson phone. Hopefully blessed with some holy water this time.

14 comments:

pakcik said...

i was yawning halfway thru the movie. wasted my RM11. should just stay at home and watch Amazing Race finale though. Maybe it will make me sad as Eric n Jeremy lost to BJ n Taylor :(

dude..give him a break la. Tom Hanks was not the 1st choice for the role. Instead, the role was offered to Bill Paxton, but he was not available for it.

You can live with that, dont you :)

That Girl said...

im SO glad to see your opinion of the Da vinci Code...

im a graduate in Fine Arts and i can tell you without a single bat of an eyelid.. that Leonardo Da Vinci DIED years even BEFORE he could be a member of that PriorySion group that the book claims he is from....lol and then i see it here.. in this blog

you should read this...
http://switchbladespeaks.blogspot.com

Anonymous said...

1. the lotr movie will never b b better than the book...never

2. if memory serves me correctly..i remember reading dan brown's description of langdon being not very handsome n sporting a small paunch...

3. anywayz...barry is rite (whoever he is)...looks aren't everything...u should watch 'v for vendetta'...i thought it was a good hollywood movie propounding the fact that not all antagonists had to b perfect...

Alex said...

Cool.... I haven't read the book yet (oopps... am I the rare few here?). Anyway, planning to watch the movie soon.... Had a great time with Barry eh? :P

Petie said...

I agreed with you Paul on the issue that is this really the secret worth killing for??

In my opinion it seems such a minor issue whether Jesus was married or not. Heck even some priest nowadays has a wife.

Also, if I remember my religion studies correctly, the prophet of all other major religions (Buddism, Islam and Jew) were all married at one point in their life.

They should really focus their energy to other more important issues.

Just Me said...

How was Audrey Tattoo? I love her, was she good?

famezgay said...

anyway think tom hanks is ok for the role.. erh.. hardly got hot ass n handsome professor out there... ahaha At least he's old enough to looks dependable n knowledgeable ahaha..

Maximus Leo said...

Well. well, well - looks like I'm going to give this a miss in Tokyo then! Not going to spend freaking US$20 for a movie that does not meet expectations!

Have a good weekend!

joshua said...

I totally imagined Langdon to appear more brainy than merely having a photographic memory. Hanks just blurted out lines like a script, somewhat unconvincingly.

Teabing is enlivened by the graces of Sir Ian McKellen, fantastic as usual. Another dosage of the Gay Knight next week awaits!

Silver screen adaptations rarely compare to the books.
The company of Barry surely compensated it for you.

Jay said...

Well this is disappointing. I thought the story was fun while the writing was piss-poor, so I was hoping the movie would be good, seeing as I wouldn't be subjected to Dan Brown's awful prose.

-sigh-

And not even a hottie in sight.

ça va pas la tête said...

For me, it's like rewalking the streets of France and Paris.. i am excited more for the environment than the movie... Of course, I dont deny l like the fiction too.

Paul: yeah, Langdon should have been someone else.

CR: Audrey is always good. I am a huge fan of her. ;) I bet you like her from Amelie of Montmartre. :)

savante said...

Pakcik! But Bill Paxton isn't that great either :P

Whoa, grafxgurl. Switchblade certainly expounded on the Da Vinci topic.

But it's the movies. At least provide us with some male eye candy, k :)

Alex, you didn't read it?!

Precisely, pete. Not worth killing over for sure.

cr, she was okay... but she didn't have much to do anyway.

I'm sure there are a few around, ceusm. Professor Ben is one of them :P

God, Tokyo is an expensive place, Ian!

Ian McKellen was great as you said, Joshua.

Yeah, I know, jay. A single shirtless hottie would have saved the whole movie.

True enough, cava. That's certainly reason enough to watch the movie.

Paul

Xavier said...

the storyline and development as per the book was great, finished the book in 2 days!

anyway, gonna watch it later with Alex... hope it's at least nice to watch though.... (darn! why Tom Hanks??? according to the book, robert is quite WELL MAINTAINED despite his age aint it???)

anyway... while going to this movie.. my mind kept thinking of X-MEN III and those delicious mutants :p.... can be considered unfaithful or not le...

Anonymous said...

thanks for the comments, will wait till it comes out on DVD. Or make my house like Samoa and ban it.

I liked the book, liked the "real" & fictional traits beng mixed together - anyone read Margaret George's book on Mary Magdalene? I don't remember such a furore then! The advertising guru behind this book must be a genious (hey, Roxie spelling!)