« From Vatican Radio... | Main | Template for a DVC Review »
May 17, 2006
Thank goodness for bad movies
They give critics a chance to shine:
(A.O. Scott in the NYtimes)
"The Da Vinci Code" is one of the few screen versions of a book that may take longer to watch than to read. (Curiously enough, Mr. Howard accomplished a similar feat with "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" a few years back.) To their credit, the director and his screenwriter, Akiva Goldsman (who collaborated with Mr. Howard on "Cinderella Man" and "A Beautiful Mind"), have streamlined Mr. Brown's story and refrained from trying to capture his, um, prose style. "Almost inconceivably, the gun into which she was now staring was clutched in the pale hand of an enormous albino with long white hair." Such language — note the exquisite "almost" and the fastidious tucking of the "which" after the preposition — can only live on the page. To be fair, though, Mr. Goldsman conjures up some pretty ripe dialogue all on his own. "Your God does not forgive murderers," hisses Audrey Tautou to Paul Bettany (who play a less than enormous, short-haired albino). "He burns them!"
(snip)
Soon Langdon is joined by Sophie Neveu, a police cryptologist and also — Bezu Fache! — the murder victim's granddaughter. Grandpa, it seems, knew some very important secrets, which if they were ever revealed might shake the foundations of Western Christianity, in particular the Roman Catholic Church, one of whose bishops, the portly Aringarosa (Alfred Molina) is at this very moment flying on an airplane. Meanwhile, the albino monk, whose name is Silas and who may be the first character in the history of motion pictures to speak Latin into a cell phone, flagellates himself, smashes the floor of a church and kills a nun.
A chase, as Bezu's American colleagues might put it, ensues. It skids through the nighttime streets of Paris and eventually to London the next morning, by way of a Roman castle and a chateau in the French countryside. Along the way, the film pauses to admire various knick-knacks and art works, and to flash back, in desaturated color, to traumatic events in the childhoods of various characters (Langdon falls down a well; Sophie's parents are killed in a car accident; Silas stabs his abusive father). There are also glances further back into history, to Constantine's conversion, to the suppression of the Knights Templar and to that time in London when people walked around wearing powdered wigs.
Through it all, Mr. Hanks and Ms. Tautou stand around looking puzzled, leaving their reservoirs of charm scrupulously untapped. Mr. Hanks twists his mouth in what appears to be an expression of professorial skepticism, and otherwise coasts on his easy, subdued geniality. Ms. Tautou, determined to ensure that her name will never again come up in an Internet search for the word "gamine," affects a look of worried fatigue. In spite of some talk (a good deal less than in the book) about the divine feminine, chalices and blades and the spiritual power of sexual connection, not even a glimmer of eroticism flickers between the two stars. Perhaps it's just as well. When a cryptographer and a symbologist get together, it usually ends in tears.
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
Comments
I love reading good critcs' writing about bad movies. A.O. Scott is one of my favorites.
Paraphrasing him, then: bad book + bad director = bad movie.
Posted by: Local Man at May 17, 2006 3:50:46 PM
I suspect that I enjoyed that review a good deal than much of the audience enjoyed the movie.
Posted by: Ed the Roman at May 17, 2006 3:53:30 PM
I like the way this review opens from the Chicago Tribune:
How can a film contain so many clues yet remain utterly clueless?....
Ha!
Posted by: Old Zhou at May 17, 2006 3:59:21 PM
Almost inconceivably, the movie about which I was now laughing was ripped to shreds by the able hand of a ginormous film critic with indeterminate hair.
Posted by: J. Christian at May 17, 2006 3:59:22 PM
The reviews are all over Cable News- See, there is a God- and I think He is laughing!
Posted by: Pat at May 17, 2006 4:00:53 PM
When a cryptographer and a symbologist get together, it usually ends in tears.
ain't it the truth!
Posted by: Fred at May 17, 2006 4:08:31 PM
Just out of curiosity, I've seen refences to the main character of the book and film as being a professor of "symbology". Is this a word Brown just made up, as if adding "-ology" to something makes it sound intelligent and scientific? Surely the intellectual discipline he really means to refer to is "semiotics", isn't it?
Posted by: Dennis at May 17, 2006 4:15:31 PM
Ah, what I wouldn't give for a John Simon review of DVC!
Posted by: cricket at May 17, 2006 4:21:19 PM
Dennis,
It's like this:
Brown: He's a symbologist.
Average DVC Fan: Oh. He studies symbols.
Dennis: No, he's a semiotician.
AvgDVCF: Huh?
Posted by: cricket at May 17, 2006 4:24:53 PM
I also love reading a good critic savage a bad movie, and A.O. Scott is one of the best ... I can't say I feel bad at all that this got such awful reviews ... I hope it simply sinks at the box office
Posted by: Keith Demko at May 17, 2006 4:57:44 PM
Dennis, I had the same question you did when I came across the book. I thought he should have used "semiotician." (Interestingly, I know about the word "semiotics" from reading Umberto Eco, the semiotician author of _Foucault's Pendulum_, a book with interesting parallels to DVC (only Eco's book is good, if a bit windy).) "Symbology" is in the dictionary. I forget which one I checked, but it was a standard one at our law school-Webster's or Collegiate. I'm sure Brown used "symbology" either because he's too dumb to be familiar with semiotics or because he realizes his target audience is that dumb.
Boy, what great news that the movie is a critical bust. It seems like the word is getting out widely and in a timely manner. Let's hope the movie tanks! (I'm just so bitter and insecure in my faith that I need this one, God, please!)
Posted by: Charles at May 17, 2006 5:07:23 PM
We need more "-ologies." Here are a couple suggestions (with inspiration from Dan Brown):
mythocology - the practice of using foggy thinking to turn truth into myths.
historiology - like history, but without the intellectual heavy lifting and things like "facts."
Posted by: J. Christian at May 17, 2006 5:56:54 PM
I have the feeling DVC will probably get huge box office over the weekend because of all the hype - and then sink like a stone, as disappointed DVC fans tell their friends and family, "It's not nearly as good as the book." There are people who proudly say "I don't pay any attention to the critics" - but if Aunt Flo says it stinks, they'll think twice before shelling out $9 plus another $6 or $7 for popcorn and soda.
It would be nice if some of the DVC fans who didn't notice the absurdities of the plot when they were caught up in the book notice them on the screen and think, "Whoa! Is this thing a a crock or what?"
Posted by: Donna V. at May 17, 2006 6:25:28 PM
I was more entertained by those 4 paragraphs than I have been by the various Dan Brown-isms I've been subjected to in reading about DVC. They should film Scott reading the review & show that at Cannes! Prolly win the Palm D'or!
Posted by: Gene Branaman at May 17, 2006 8:49:47 PM
Well, it appears they blew it. I hadn't realized that the story takes place over 24 hours - perfect for a mimic of 24! except without Jack Bauer. But they probably could have gotten Chuck Norris (Chuck Norris doesn't sleep, he waits).
I agree about nasty reviews. The British music press was fun to read during the 80s, when Madonna and the gloved one needed a little tearing down in the eyes of the public.
Posted by: Troll at May 17, 2006 11:07:05 PM
There's a creppy trivia note on IMDB that 24 procuders wanted to use DVC as a plot for Season 3. Man, Jack Bauer against Albino Assassin Monks? But the 24 producer eventually was hired to produce the DVC movie.
Posted by: Delance at May 18, 2006 5:39:49 AM






















