Feelin' Rather Ripped

I remembered I picked up Da Vinci Code back in mid 2004 when I was in Wellington. Before that, I have no idea what the book is about. The cover looked boring, and all I know is that I remember seeing it on top of every best-seller shelf every bookstore I went. I found myself picked up the book and read the plot summary on the back cover. What's the fuss? It's just another fiction, but I bought it anyway because I have a 12 hour train ride for me to read when I leave Wellington 4 days later. As soon as I start reading, holy oh my god, it's like so so interesting, I mean,... well anyway, I ended up staying up late, finishing the book in 3 days, because I was simply too obsessed with it and I don't even want to put it down because I just had to know what happened next.

So after almost two years waiting for the movie to hit the big screen, it comfirmed the exciment as well as my fear; it did not live up to my expectation. What I find amusing about the original fiction is that it is so full of adventure and the detailed description of how the codes are being cracked, and how Dan Brown has so richly potrayed each character in the book. And these are exactly what the movie lacks of. Picture this, Ron Howard decided to take the 400 pages book to a butcher shop and had it chopped to pieces. "Wait a minute, how about Leornado DaVinci? I can't possibly butcher him man," says the butcher, and Ron Howard would reply "Don't worry about that, I am sure my viewers had read the book with all the reference books available out there". The movie fails because it left out the most interesting thing the book offered; the meanings behind Da Vinci's work, and the mythologycal background associated with the master himself. Having said that doesn't mean Ron Howard (or the writer for that matter) disrespected the book. They probably have too much respect for it to follow it so faithfully that the movie had to have everything that was mentioned in the book, and that is the reason why it loses so much vital information. For those who went to Venus for vactions, ie, those who had not read the book, they would either find the movie amusing because they don't have the expectation/pressure after having read the book; or totally hated it because they have no fucking clue to what is going on in the movie. Holy Grail? Mary Magdelene? Jesus's Wife? WTF????????? I mean how could a movie that provide so many clues could remain entirely cluesless? Are the viewers supposed to crack the Da Vinci Code themselves? I don't think so.

** Warning: Spoiler Ahead**

So to elaborate where I am coming from, first of, when Langon arrived at the magnificient Lourve, Captain Bezu mentioned about the mysterious 666 pieces of glass used to construct the glass pyramid. Great piece of information huh, probably too great to elaborate further, Langdon rushed to the crime scene where the Lourve curator Jacques Sauniere was killed and had left a weirdshit symbol on his body, some absurd numbers, and some nonsence clues on the floor. Immediately, Sophie came into play and says "It's fibonacci sequence". Then come Robert Langdon, who happened to have just read "O Draconian Devil" written on the floor concluded "it's anagram" and so clever-ly rearranged to word and BANG! "Leornado Da Vinci!!" . So, wow, Fibonacci huh, Anagram huh? Cool, now let's assume that Fibonacci and Anagram has to do with Leornado, so why not go and have a look at the Mona Lisa for some clue? Hmm, probably not, it's just a painting, well, let's move on to the Madonna of the Rocks. Nothing, oh ah, the police is chasing us, we'd better flee the Lourve.

Run Run. Que. Opus Dei, Opus Dei and Opus Dei. Cool. Before the viewer even know what Opus Dei is, comes the death. Well it doesn't take Pentium 4 to process it. It's some religious extremist because where there is Opus Dei, sure we expect to see death. Hmm, wait a minute, what the hell is the thing Silas is wearing? Oh why is he beating himself up? Oh hang on, what does it have to do with Leronado DaVinci then? Pick up a book or maybe sit in the cinema for mere 120 minutes before the movie finally revealed that Opus Dei, is actually an extrimist sect of Catholic and that Silas is actually cleansing his daily sin with those bondage looking tools.

Another problem with the movie is how the characters are being potrayed. I certainly do not question Tom Hanks's (or Audery Tautou) ability to act and I think they suit the characters just fine. But watching the movie, I can't help but to feel an utter disguist to the poor character development and the zero chemistry between them. The plot is not driven by it's character but by the over fast-paced need to find a solution, moving quickly from one scene to another resulting a painfully blatant presonality. But I do praise Ian McKellen for playing the character Leigh Teabing. He is the only character in the movie that actually performed better than what the book described.

Last but not least, I also have problem with the flashbacks to ancient biblical and medieval historical religious wars in the Holy Land and Europe. C'mon, what are you thinking, they look like pieces taken from Kingdom of Heaven oh-my-god. I did expect these flashback and was actually pretty excited as how it will be done in the movie. However, what I did not expect is how poorly it's done. It was just seconds of glimpses accompanied by Robert Langdon's speech about the history, and trust me it's really not convincing at all.

Anyway, this movie is neither bad or good, it's like a religion. Either believe it or not. Watch it and decide for yourself