Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Word on 'Da Vinci Code' ? Not good.

Community
Search
Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Word on 'Da Vinci Code' ? Not good.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-21-06, 11:25 AM
  #176  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Josh Hinkle
For those saying the religious stuff wasn't directly causing bad reviews.

"I'll say it: It is anti-Jesus and anti-Catholic. Unintentionally though, it is a recruiting film for Opus Dei. Where do I sign up?"

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/click/...=1&rid=1507583

It's certainly not the reason for bad reviews across the board, but I'm sure it's having more of an impact than many are admitting, and many reviewers are probably scoring it lower for such reasons and not being so foolishly overt about it in their reviews.
It's too bad you didn't take the time to read this review. The title is a joke. The review is not about religion at all - which the reviewer calls "claptrap" -, it's about how the screenwriter sanitized the book so much it feels like it was financed by the Opus Dei (pretty much like my own review) since the only character who is having any fun in the movie is Silas, the self-flagellating Opus Dei member.

Here's an excerpt:

Ron Howard's "The Da Vinci Code" is a limp version of the Chase-the-Mystery blockbuster novel. I knew it would suck. Howard doesn't have the nasty grit or wit to delve into the world of religious skullduggery.

And screenwriter Akiva Goldsman? He's the go-to guy for cleaning up any story for box office numbers. He could sanitize Hitler.

Last edited by baracine; 05-21-06 at 12:28 PM.
Old 05-21-06, 11:28 AM
  #177  
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sand Point
Posts: 2,249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by sethsez
It wouldn't get made because Islam simply isn't a part of our everyday lives. It isn't the predominant force behind most of society's actions here, so it would have little relevance and would come off as a meaningless attack. Likewise, you don't get movies in Japan about the evils of Christianity, but films about throwing off the shackles of tradition and questioning whether the gods of Shinto even exist are a dime a dozen (and wouldn't you know it, when they come out over here the common complaint is that they assume knowledge of Japanese history, traditions and religious practices, which clearly isn't an issue for anyone living in Japan).

Basically, if largely Islamic nations were free to make such films, I'm sure you'd see them being made there. You don't see them from non-Islamic nations because they would serve no purpose and wouldn't connect with the audience in any meaningful way. The audience doesn't believe in it (thus there's not much to question) and doesn't know enough about it to establish any sort of meaningful thought process. This is why you won't see an "Islam is false" movie in America.
Is this the same reasoning you apply to why Comedy Central allows South Park to have Jesus taking a crap on the American flag, but refuses to show a two second depiction of Mohammed doing nothing offensive so as not to offend any Muslims? I guess they were afraid that heads would literally roll.

But you are free to ignore an obvious double standard.
Old 05-21-06, 11:47 AM
  #178  
Cool New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by exm
It's really a guess, but I would say it makes around $25m opening weekend. So many people I speak with that are regulars in the movies are skipping this one.
The numbers are in and The Da Vinci Code made $77 million this weekend.

13th Highest Opening Weekend Ever

4th Highest Non-Sequel Opening Weekend

7th Highest May Opening Weekend
Old 05-21-06, 03:47 PM
  #179  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Leandro/San Francisco
Posts: 7,422
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Peep
X-Men 3 will probably open big but it has "stinker" written all over it. Word of mouth will kill it by week 2. I think DVC will hold out for a while and fans of the book may come back for seconds (and bring more of their friends).
Xmen has stinker written all over it by who? The fanboys on the boards here? Ebert and Roeper gave it thumbs up and there are not many reviews of it out yet so who knows.DVC will do well and people will go see it but I dont see adults going back to see it again and again and teens, I doubt, have very little interest in it.

Last edited by riley_dude; 05-21-06 at 03:54 PM.
Old 05-21-06, 04:22 PM
  #180  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: KS
Posts: 3,204
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There are 3 reviews up on rotten tomatoes (not including E & R) that are positive so maybe there is some hope for this one. Again, this is the type of movie that may be really good with average reviews by the critics so let's hold out some hope.
Old 05-21-06, 05:19 PM
  #181  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Desslok
The numbers are in and The Da Vinci Code made $77 million this weekend.

13th Highest Opening Weekend Ever

4th Highest Non-Sequel Opening Weekend

7th Highest May Opening Weekend
Yeah that guy made an educated guess with that $25 million comment. Well done.

Don't forget it made like $145 overseas opening weekend. Safe to say with the rest of its run in theatres and with DVD sales, this movie will be a massive success. I don't think anyone was worried about that (most popular book ever + Hanks + Ron Howard). Whoever green lit this project went to business school.
Old 05-21-06, 05:52 PM
  #182  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 30,012
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Josh Hinkle
Caught it this afternoon and really enjoyed it. I loved the book and though Howard did a very good job with the adapatation. All the performances were solid, especially Bettany as Silas. Not sure why it's gotten panned critically.

4/5 for me. I'll pick up the DVD.
Count me in as well. Far exceeded my expectations. Even with all the claptrap of the premise (which I well knew because I have read the book) it managed to be interesting and suspenseful as long as I suspended my disbelief which was easy because the film flowed so well.

Also, I have been in the "Tom Hanks has been miscast" camp ever since I heard he had gotten the part. He made me eat my words within ten minutes.

Strangely, I didn't care much for McKellen as Teabing. Don't get me wrong, he was splendid and did everything right. I just did not have anything like him pictured in my mind from reading the book in the way of his physical characteristics. I would have preferred to have seen Ian Holm in the role because he does fit my picture and he would have done just as splendid a job.
Spoiler:
Also, McKellen has a way of exuding menace just by being there which Holm doesn't. The less overtly menacing, quieter, more soft spoken performance would have made him seem that much more dangerous when the character was looked at in his entirety.
Old 05-21-06, 06:26 PM
  #183  
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legolas
Is this the same reasoning you apply to why Comedy Central allows South Park to have Jesus taking a crap on the American flag, but refuses to show a two second depiction of Mohammed doing nothing offensive so as not to offend any Muslims? I guess they were afraid that heads would literally roll.

But you are free to ignore an obvious double standard.
Mohammed was in the Super Best Friends episode, and Team America certainly didn't shy away from Islam jokes.

Quit being such a victim, especially over a dumb airport thriller.

Last edited by sethsez; 05-21-06 at 06:29 PM.
Old 05-21-06, 07:42 PM
  #184  
Moderator
 
Geofferson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: The Village Green
Posts: 39,765
Received 97 Likes on 80 Posts
Saw this today and was underwhelmed. My biggest gripe (besides it being 30 minutes too long) was with the leads - especially Hanks. No charisma and no chemistry.
Old 05-21-06, 07:44 PM
  #185  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Mt. Olympus
Posts: 11,818
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I so wanted to like this movie but unfortunately, I didn't.

I'm a huge fan of the book and was really excited to watch the movie, but damn. I too thought Tom Hanks was miscast when I first heard that he was going to be Langdon a couple years ago. But I thought it might be good that he could put people in the seats. Well, I guess he put people in the seats (and to be fair, it wasn't all because of him), but he was absolutely fricking horrible! I cannot believe how atrocious his acting was in this movie. I usually like Tom Hanks movies too.

I was disappointed that they left out a bunch of stuff from the movie and/or changed some things. To me, it seemed like the movie editor assumed you had already read the book and therefore conveniently left out some things. I couldn't help but wonder if my friends that I saw the movie with were scratching their heads wondering what the hell was going on (cause they didn't read the book).

I did think that everybody other than Tom Hanks did a fairly admirable job, given the crappiness of the script.

I think people who didn't read the book will probably like the movie more than those who did.

5/10...and that may be slightly generous.

Old 05-21-06, 07:51 PM
  #186  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Grounded in reality. For the most part.
Posts: 4,806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Geofferson
Saw this today and was underwhelmed. My biggest gripe (besides it being 30 minutes too long) was with the leads - especially Hanks. No charisma and no chemistry.


Saw it today and that pretty much sums up my feelings, as well.

In addition, the forced "character development" was atrocious.
Old 05-21-06, 11:51 PM
  #187  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Papillion, NE!
Posts: 2,342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I couldn't place my finger on Hanks here. I don't know if he was miscast or if he was trying his best with a script that seemed to be forced. I thought Ian McKellen was fantastic though. I didn't read the book, but I enjoyed it, but didn't love it. The stuff that needed to go was the albino monk's backstory, I don't think it was necessary.

Grade: B-
Old 05-22-06, 12:12 AM
  #188  
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think Hanks did a good job with what he had to work with. Overall a great movie, but not near as good as the book. 77 million on opening weekend will surely help pay the bills for the production company.
Old 05-22-06, 12:56 AM
  #189  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 7,337
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by riley_dude
Xmen has stinker written all over it by who? The fanboys on the boards here? Ebert and Roeper gave it thumbs up and there are not many reviews of it out yet so who knows.DVC will do well and people will go see it but I dont see adults going back to see it again and again and teens, I doubt, have very little interest in it.
By anybody who has seen the lame trailers and the crap effects and makeup job on all of the newly introduced mutants.

Maybe I'm wrong. I'll let you know tomorrow (if I can get out of work in time).
Old 05-22-06, 01:19 AM
  #190  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I work in a bookstore...

where just about everyone goes to the movies the first weekend. About five or six people were talking about the film over the weekend. It's the first time I can remember EVERYONE saying the film sucked. Largely it was based on the opinon that there was too much talking and that it didn't follow the book at all. I haven't seen the film, but I've read the book. A couple of them that saw it agreed it perhaps followed the book about 20%. My question is why in the hell make a film on a book millions have read and not follow the storyline?
Old 05-22-06, 01:46 AM
  #191  
Cool New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Linn1
where just about everyone goes to the movies the first weekend. About five or six people were talking about the film over the weekend. It's the first time I can remember EVERYONE saying the film sucked. Largely it was based on the opinon that there was too much talking and that it didn't follow the book at all. I haven't seen the film, but I've read the book. A couple of them that saw it agreed it perhaps followed the book about 20%. My question is why in the hell make a film on a book millions have read and not follow the storyline?
Okay, if some likes or doesn't like the movie is a matter of personal taste. But to claim it doesn't follow the book is just plain wrong. While it condenses and trims some material, for the most part it follows the book very closely, in some places word for word.
Old 05-22-06, 01:48 AM
  #192  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sitting on a beach, earning 20%
Posts: 9,917
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
$224 Million dollars in one weekend. Wowsers. Even if Sony had a conservative share in that opening weekend, with 25% going to the theaters, that's immense. It has to have covered recoupement and marketing... nothing but profit from here on out.

And Akiva Goldsman will get to keep writing films.
Old 05-22-06, 02:28 AM
  #193  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Virginia Beach, VA USA
Posts: 3,583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have hated Akiva Goldsmans writing 'talent' for a while now. He just isnt good. But a good director cleans up his crap enough that it looks like he knows what he's doing. This was a good film, but the writing wasn't that great. And most of that came from the book. But Akiva gets to add it to his resume, "Look, I wrote a HUGE hit". It really really irks me that this guy keeps getting jobs. It's like the guy at work who sucks at his job but is friends with the boss so he keeps getting promoted while everyone else has to cover for him. Thats Akiva Goldsman's career.

D
Old 05-22-06, 02:55 AM
  #194  
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Linn1
it perhaps followed the book about 20%
No way. If anything it sticks too closely to the book.
Old 05-22-06, 07:21 AM
  #195  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,835
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by sethsez
No way. If anything it sticks too closely to the book.
agreed!

I don't know what people are thinking that they say it didn't follow the book. It was VERY close to the book.

~Jason
Old 05-22-06, 08:28 AM
  #196  
DVD Talk Legend
 
raven56706's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Back in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 21,766
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
holy gazookas....... this movie was even sold out on sunday
Old 05-22-06, 08:46 AM
  #197  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Desslok
Okay, if some likes or doesn't like the movie is a matter of personal taste. But to claim it doesn't follow the book is just plain wrong. While it condenses and trims some material, for the most part it follows the book very closely, in some places word for word.
People and reviewers who hadn't read the book (or didn't like it, like Roger Ebert, or simply forgot the details) initially assumed that the film followed the book "closely" because it all seemed so... complicated. That's the only reason I went to see a film by the same screenwriter who had done such a butcher's job on "A Beautiful Mind". Actually, the film changed quite a few things, such as the bloodline which is at the very core of the story. These unnecessary changes prevent us from knowing
Spoiler:
that Sophie broke up with her grandfather - who is her real grandfather and not an adoptive parent as they would have you believe - because she saw him perform a sexual ritual with an unknown woman and later found out that this woman is in fact her surviving estranged grandmother and that her brother also survived the car crash, all elements which are essential to the closure in her life. By removing all those elements out of prudery and so as not to associate the belief in the bloodline with "strange sexual rituals" and the fact that Saunière, a descendant of Christ, may have had a sex life, the filmmakers essentially eliminated the essence of the human drama in the book and left Sophie high and dry, without any other "family ties" than this weird adoptive cult and not even the promise of a date with Langdon. I mean, the poor girl! So that when a Central Casting granny comes out of the rank-and-file of the Prieuré at the end to announce "I am your grandmother!", we collectively ask: "Like, do you mean you are her actual grandmother on the mother or father side, or some kind of adoptive grandmother and we should care, at this point, because...?" The new, simplified and sanitized ending also eliminates the final mystery of the sarcophagus' last move out of Rosslyn and makes the last scene empty of all logic. The script also makes Fache into a bad guy who is also stupid, makes an enigma of Silas and totally eliminates Teabing's listening station as a major source of revelations.


Without those elements, the film becomes "Da Vinci Code" LITE (tm), expurgated, watered down, de-balled and bowdlerized for Midwestern American sensibilities. Please note that any mention of Da Vinci's private life and motivations have also been eliminated so as not to mix up the public with "the gay thing". I suppose it would be too much to ask that the DVD contain an alternate ending for more mature audiences that actually makes sense and follows the book's story...

The initial positive reviews (what few there were) also talked about the film having a lot of "atmosphere", which unfortunately turned out to be that the film looks at all times like it was shot through a mud-splattered funeral veil and the film score will depress you into a coma.

Last edited by baracine; 05-22-06 at 10:34 AM.
Old 05-22-06, 09:27 AM
  #198  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Mr. Cinema's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 18,044
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by raven56706
holy gazookas....... this movie was even sold out on sunday
I saw it at 11:30 am yesterday and the theater was about 3/4 full. I was surprised at how many showed up that morning.
Old 05-22-06, 09:52 AM
  #199  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 12,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Linn1
where just about everyone goes to the movies the first weekend. About five or six people were talking about the film over the weekend. It's the first time I can remember EVERYONE saying the film sucked. Largely it was based on the opinon that there was too much talking and that it didn't follow the book at all. I haven't seen the film, but I've read the book. A couple of them that saw it agreed it perhaps followed the book about 20%. My question is why in the hell make a film on a book millions have read and not follow the storyline?
I agree with others in that I'm not sure at what point your coworkers fell asleep, but the 20% number is just crazy. Now if they believed that the movie was only able to cover about 20% of the book's content, they'd still be wrong, but it would be a little more understandable. Then again, I find it hard to believe that on one hand people complain about all the talking, and on the other hand want more content (since it would have led to quite a bit more talking and exposition). There was a lot that was cut out because it had to be (or because they wanted to), but the movie is closer to the book's story than I expected.

Yes, as baracine points out, one or two very important elements were changed, for better or worse. That could be for any number of reasons, but it isn't unusual that filmmakers choose to change an ending, for example, to give a new twist to the story (and I agree that the ending didn't work as well as the book). Those changes do not represent an 80% departure from Brown's novel.
Old 05-22-06, 11:13 AM
  #200  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 7,337
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by immortal_zeus
I couldn't help but wonder if my friends that I saw the movie with were scratching their heads wondering what the hell was going on (cause they didn't read the book).
Why didn't you just ask them? I spent a while talking about the movie with my friends after we saw it. Most of us, including myself, hadn't read the book and none of us were confused by the story.


Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.