Da Vinci Code movie and it's casting
- Thread starter Skaadi
- Start date
AmishSlayer
Tank
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2003
- Messages
- 5,898
- Reaction score
- 3
Adrien C said:
Well then there's still hope for Angels & Demons and I'm happy to admit I was way off.
Adrien C
Newbie
- Joined
- May 12, 2004
- Messages
- 3,352
- Reaction score
- 0
KagePrototype
Tank
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Messages
- 6,356
- Reaction score
- 1
Having never read the book, known what it's about, nor understood the hype, I kinda liked it. A very silly convulted plot in retrospect, but what else are we to expect? I suppose the story is the film's major downfall; it's too long to comfortably contain within the normal confines of what is little more than a european thriller movie. I imagine there's a lot left in the book that never made the translation to celluloid. Ron Howard is a really good director, but here he has a thankless job.
Ian McKellen is delightfully mad, and absoutely carried this film; I imagine with a lesser actor in this role, I wouldn't have enjoyed it as much. Tautou looks good, and reacts well enough to Ian McKellen's monologues that we can care for her. Again, carried.
Tom Hanks could have been just an off-screen narrator for all I care; Langdon is almost see-through. But hey, it's Tom Hanks; ya gotta love him, even he is doing the worst performance of his life. Given the material, I can't blame him.
Jean Reno is as suave and cool as he always is.
Paul Bettany is just downright awesome; the perfect example of where embracing blind faith will eventually lead. Alongside McKellen, Silas is one of the only 2 interesting characters in the film (Jean Reno deosn't count; he's just being Jean Reno).
The middle is the best bit; the ending is too long (but still entertaining), and the beginning tries to invest our emotions into characters and situations that we don't understand and couldn't give two shits about. Like I said, Ian McKellen carries this movie and gives it enough life for us to make it to the end.
I'd recommend it. :thumbs:
Ian McKellen is delightfully mad, and absoutely carried this film; I imagine with a lesser actor in this role, I wouldn't have enjoyed it as much. Tautou looks good, and reacts well enough to Ian McKellen's monologues that we can care for her. Again, carried.
Tom Hanks could have been just an off-screen narrator for all I care; Langdon is almost see-through. But hey, it's Tom Hanks; ya gotta love him, even he is doing the worst performance of his life. Given the material, I can't blame him.
Jean Reno is as suave and cool as he always is.
Paul Bettany is just downright awesome; the perfect example of where embracing blind faith will eventually lead. Alongside McKellen, Silas is one of the only 2 interesting characters in the film (Jean Reno deosn't count; he's just being Jean Reno).
The middle is the best bit; the ending is too long (but still entertaining), and the beginning tries to invest our emotions into characters and situations that we don't understand and couldn't give two shits about. Like I said, Ian McKellen carries this movie and gives it enough life for us to make it to the end.
I'd recommend it. :thumbs:
VictimOfScience
Newbie
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Messages
- 7,020
- Reaction score
- 1
Having read the book, I was excited for a great flick, but was pretty darn disappointed in it. It was actually quite boring until Sir Ian shows up and only then did it get anywhere near good.
The problem is that there is so much information in the book that makes it enlightening and interesting and the movie has virtually none of that. It gets maybe a 5 out of 10 from me. Good, but by no means great.
The problem is that there is so much information in the book that makes it enlightening and interesting and the movie has virtually none of that. It gets maybe a 5 out of 10 from me. Good, but by no means great.
Similar threads
