 Fun & Exciting Chase Through History & Mystery w/ Panache |
| Review Date: November 13, 2006 |
| Reviewer: G. R. Adams, Texas |
Prepare to be entertained. Having read the novel first, and also armed with the blasting reviews the film received, I kept my expectations low as I prepared to see this movie. However this is a very fine film. I found it respectful and tasteful in presentation of those sensitive issues which seem to be so threatening to so many. Besides it's just plain beautiful to look at. The scenery and cinematography is not to be missed, and keep your eyes moving about the backgrounds and details as you watch.
Of course, few films can capture better the scope and mental details we add as we read an intelligently written book, but one would really be missing out to avoid seeing this one. I don't believe the filmmakers were seriously looking to convert anyone, merely create enjoyable and thought-provoking entertainment. I'd personally rather have something to think about during and after a film other than not, which is so often the case today.
There are also some nice goodies packaged in this DVD set, and I'm looking forward to receiving my copy. If you have any interest in history whatsoever, or in mindbenders, you should enjoy this. Without the background interest? It is, after all, an action adventure movie filmed in incredible places! See it! |
True to the book; a strangely beautiful film
|
| Review Date: September 1, 2006 |
| Reviewer: B. Mc Donald, CA USA |
The Da Vinci Code, directed by Ron Howard, is an excellent adaptation of Brown's novel that leaves you with an odd mixture of quizzicality, wonder and contentment by the time the movie is over.
All the actors put in an excellent performance, but Audrey Tautou, the actress who plays Sophie Neveu, is exactly how I imagined her when I was reading the book and practically steals the show with the interpretation of her character.
As those who have read the book know, the plot goes into very controversial subject-matter, and that atmosphere of intrigue, mystery, religious zeal and hermeticism that keeps you in its grip from the first page to the last is expertly conveyed in the film. Lavish production, beautiful sets and locations (the Louvre!) and an ending that pretty much left me in a daze (I enjoyed the ending more watching the movie than when I read the book) make for a truly magical movie-going experience.
|
An exciting adventure for viewers with open minds
|
| Review Date: August 27, 2006 |
| Reviewer: Ronald L. Russell, Pangaea |
The film adaptation of Dan Brown's book, "The Da Vinci Code" can be viewed as a test to determine how receptive the readers mind is to new ideas. Be warned, some of the ideas presented in this story can be very uncomfortable for some people, depending on their religious convictions and on their receptivity. However, the material contained in his book is relevant on several levels.
First, the plot deals with a theme which is near the hearts of hundreds of millions of potential viewers, namely the history of the Christian Church. The story challenges readers with new information which may not agree with what they think they already know.
Second, the story is exquisitely well researched, drawing from documents as old as the 1st century, through medievel Holy Grail legends, through Renaissance paintings, and ties them together into what the British used to call "a ripping yarn".
Third, although most of the characters in the story are fictional, many of the concepts presented in the story are historically true. It is perhaps this last point which has created the greatest amount of controversy.
The movie (and the book upon which it is based) develops the idea that before Christianity, many religions embraced a balanced worldview in which the sacred feminine principle and the sacred masculine principle joined to maintain harmony. That this was once the case is evident from the mythology of many cultures, with their pantheons of gods and goddesses. However, Brown writes that Jesus embraced these ideas as well, a notion which would have been radical to patriarchal Jews of that time, and would certainly have stepped on the toes of the Jewish clergy.
Brown does a good job of supporting this idea, and echoes what is documented in many other historical non-fiction works, such as "The Chalice And The Blade" by Riane Eisler.
Perhaps the most difficult aspect of the story for some readers to accept is that in addition to his revolutionary teachings, Jesus lived as did other Jewish men in his culture, and took a wife, Mary Magdelene, and had children with her, descendants of whom survive in the present day. Documents written in the first century comment on Jesus relationship with Mary, however these were eventually suppressed several hundred years later following the Nicean council. Interestingly, the four canonical gospels do not specifically deny that Jesus married, and are completely silent regarding his life between age 12 and age 30. Any given reader will accept or reject this premise of a married Jesus depending primarily on what they choose to accept as evidence.
Whether a reader believes that Jesus married or not, the premise does make a great "what if" foundation on which to construct a thrilling story, in a manner similar to "what if" the Ark of the Covenant were still in existence, and an archeologist found it? (i.e. Raiders of the Lost Ark). One does not need to actually believe that the Ark still exists, or even that it ever existed, in order to be entertained. Such is the case with "The Da Vinci Code".
As was the case with films such as "The Last Temptation of Christ", many (although certainly not all) Christians do not like to hear that what they already believe may not be completely accurate.
For some people, anything which might require a readjustment in thinking is automatically branded a falsehood. These are the people who picket movie theatres protesting films which they have never seen, or who write reviews slamming books which they have never read.
In an ironic manner, these people become part of a policy of suppression which attempts to block access to alternative information which presents a different view. As one who prefers to weigh both sides of issues and decide for myself what makes more sense, all the protests and denials made me want to read the book, and see to the film, even more.
Although difficult for some to admit, the reality is that sometimes new information becomes available which renders previous understandings obsolete. For example, we now know that diseases are caused by germs and virus, and not by an imbalance in four humours as was once believed. We also now know that Earth is spherical, and orbits the Sun, instead of being flat and located at the center of the Universe, as was once widely believed by Christians (the ancient pagans knew better, as proven by their surviving writings). Some of the information in this book will be new information to some people, others already were aware of the historical elements which form the basis for this story.
I found the book to be sufficiently well written and interesting that I read it through in parts of three days. Nothing I read offended me, I read with an open mind and tended to think "Well, it COULD have happened that way".
When I read the book, I had not yet seen the movie, but was aware that Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Ian McKellan and Alfred Molina were cast in leading roles, so I tended to see them in their roles as I read.
When I actually saw the movie, I found that the story moved quite quickly, and kept me enraptured with beautiful imagery and stirring music. At times, the director caused a flashback to overlap the action on screen, so that you could see the character, and what they were remembering, at the same time. This was used in several of the scenes where Langdon was rearranging letters or images in his mind while attempting to solve a clue. At other times a similar technique was used to show modern action and action hundreds of years previously which occurred at the same location, on the screen at the same time. All of the characters were played with genuine depth, having complex, well developed personalities. Tom Hanks was very good as Robert Langdon, the expert symbologist. I especially appreciated the manner in which Audrey Tautou played Sophie Neveu, the cryptographer. In this role, she simply radiated a pure feminine quality, which, as the story developed, proved that she was the perfect choice for the role.
Sir Ian McKellan was also very good as Sir Leigh Teabing, a wealthy enthusiast in all things related to the search for Holy Grail.
Many of the twists and turns in the story came as complete surprises to me. Some of the people I was sure were sinister were actually motivated by noble intentions, and some of the people I thought were good guys turned out to be ruthless.
I strongly recommend this movie, and the book upon which it is based. For the maximum enjoyment, see the movie first, then go back and read the book for additional details.
I eagerly look forward to the movies release on DVD. |
Simply wonderful
|
| Review Date: July 23, 2006 |
| Reviewer: Sascha Fink, Allentown, PA USA |
I never listen to critics. No one should. I loved to book The Da Vinci Code, not only for it's raw FACTS concerning the Christian destruction of the indiginous Pagan/Goddess oriented religions around the world and it's campaign against women for 2,000 years, but for the intellectual treasure hunt it contained. I'm not surprised that the critics hated it. I think they were afraid to say they liked it.
For those of you who have not read the book, I can understand how you may think it's choppy and disjointed. For those of us who did read the book, it flowed beautifully. The sections of the book that had to be reduced or elimated due to time constraints were handled properly. It is understandable that not all the subtle plot points can be translated into film. Ron Howard managed to do so smoothly and without detracting from the main plot.
The music was beautiful and haunting and I left the theater in a state of calm bliss. In the end, the movie might do its job and get you to read the book. You won't be sorry.
|
Belief
|
| Review Date: December 13, 2006 |
| Reviewer: C. leary, the Real World |
OK; let's be clear on something. This is a work of fiction. It is well crafted, slick, and enticing in it's message. But it is fiction. However, let's also be clear on some other things. First, many of the points that are made here ARE true. Which ones? Well, I'll avoid spoilers but suffice it to say that people often ask me if I am an atheist. No, I say, I do not deny the possibility of a higher being. But I do deny the church. This story shows clearly how organized religion has routinely destroyed the best messages but corrupting them with greed, lust for power, and cruelty. Groups of men made human choices and wrote human words to describe a system that would keep them in power, and this story delves into that. It delves into the little known facts surrounding the so-called "holy" bible...the idea that what we know as the bible today differed greatly from what it once was. And so on. I do not seek to destroy faith, neither does this story. What it DOES do is hopefully entice the viewer/reader to THINK for THEIRSELF.
This is a fun, well-acted, well-photographed story from a well-written and enjoyable work of modern fiction. I hope that if nothing else, it creates THOUGHT about the topic, and maybe, just maybe, people will begin to see the formal religious institutions such as Christianity for what they are...
|
|
No details are available for this product
