The movie "The Da Vinci Code" is amazingly bland in comparison to the book. The whole problem with the movie is that all of the "eureka moments" from the first half of the book are just skipped over without any fanfare. The murder scene at the beginning of the movie in the Louvre is central to the plot and in the book the finding of the clues at the scene, and the discovery of the Da Vinci paintings are filled with suspense and detailed explanations of the symbology, and anagrams. In the movie Langdon, and Sophie run around like characters on "Supermarket Sweep" discovering clues and filing them away. Langdon and Sophie almost seem to be checking items off of a list as if they were on a scavenger hunt.
Did anyone else think "Da Vinci" wasn't featured prominently enough in this film called "The Da Vinci Code?" I did. The analysis of the imagery in "Madonna Of The Rocks" was fascinating in the book, but in the movie the emphasis was on the fluorescent magic marker writing on the painting. There was no mention of any hidden imagery.
I think the problem was essentially that two hours is not enough to explain all of the nuances of "The Da Vinci Code." The result is a muddled mess of flashbacks, poorly explained plot twists, and double-crossing characters.
A family member who never read the book was really frustrated trying to decipher what was going on at various points. For readers of the book it makes sense, but for the unfamiliar following the film may be a challenge. The makers of the film made a valiant effort, but the book (especially the first half of the book) is a lot more fun. Two hours is not enough time to capture the energy of "The Da Vinci Code."
Did anyone else think "Da Vinci" wasn't featured prominently enough in this film called "The Da Vinci Code?" I did. The analysis of the imagery in "Madonna Of The Rocks" was fascinating in the book, but in the movie the emphasis was on the fluorescent magic marker writing on the painting. There was no mention of any hidden imagery.
I think the problem was essentially that two hours is not enough to explain all of the nuances of "The Da Vinci Code." The result is a muddled mess of flashbacks, poorly explained plot twists, and double-crossing characters.
A family member who never read the book was really frustrated trying to decipher what was going on at various points. For readers of the book it makes sense, but for the unfamiliar following the film may be a challenge. The makers of the film made a valiant effort, but the book (especially the first half of the book) is a lot more fun. Two hours is not enough time to capture the energy of "The Da Vinci Code."