A Pinoy Blog About Nothing

We weren’t too keen on giving Dan Brown more money by watching The Da Vinci Code movie. But curiosity got the better of us. After dodging the huge lines in the first week of its screening, we decided to give this, erm, controversial movie another shot.

Should’ve watched District B13, Thank You For Not Smoking, Art School Confidential or Brick instead. Since this isn’t exactly a special effects movie, it could’ve waited on DVD. And that’s what I’d recommend to the few who haven’t seen it — wait for it on DVD. That way you can a) have the subtitles on to understand the thick French accents, b) linger on the beautiful locations where they shot the movie.

Outside of that, what’s the fuss about? Other than Tom Hanks’ atrocious haircut, I mean.

Given its pedigree and its budget, The Da Vinci Code is a good looking movie. They were blessed to be allowed to shoot in the Louvre and to have access to some of the most beautiful architecture in that side of Europe. It’s refreshing to see Audrey Tatou shown as ‘normal’ instead of a loopy chick (Amelie) or a hysterical chick (L’Aubrege Espagnole). Quite cute. I can see why the producers chose her among the other actresses who wanted the part. And yeah, I can accept the claim made at the end of the movie. Sir Ian McKellan is always a pleasure to watch, Magneto or not. The movie was beginning to drag up until the point he showed up.

I haven’t read the book nor do I have any intention of reading it in the future. Not because it might *shudder* challenge my Catholic upbringing or *gasp* shake my faith in the Church. The issue I take with Mr. Brown’s book is that, it’s hardly original. I’ve read my share of Holy Grail stories, novels, comic-books and purported non-fiction accounts. Back in college we had Medieval History taught by a guy who looked like Ogre from the Revenge of the Nerds movies albeit he was wearing a bow-tie. In that course we tackled the Templars and the Merovingian Line of Kings. Not that I’m saying one semester of Medieval History makes me an expert. All I’m saying from what I’ve read of reviews and feedback from other people, Brown doesn’t add anything to the Grail myth.

In fact, Tom Hanks’ Robert Langdon didn’t seem to do much by way of moving the story as you’d expect the protagonist could be. Langdon and Tatou’s Sophie Neveu seems to be swept along with the events and barely making it past their Opus Dei pursuers and the French / English police. I prefer my protagonists pro-active.

The redeeming factor of the movie (aside from watching Ms. Tatou) are the locales in which they’ve shot the movie. President Jacques Chirac assured them of shooting at the Louvre instead of a soundstage and it lends the movie some weight. While computer effects has made tremendous headway into recreating locales (and even actors as we’re supposed to see in the upcoming Superman with Marlon Brando), being actually there and moving about in the actual setting of the story makes it more convincing. I guess the actors pick up on that vibe too. The shots of the ruins and the churches were postcard pretty.

But the movie is just a tad above the National Geographic special on the Da Vinci Code. We’ve seen Hanks, Tatou, McKellan, Paul Bettany (as Silas the Albino Assassin) and Alfred Molina (as Bishop Doc Ock) in much better and engaging stories. It’s not just that an engaing story as translated from Brown’s work. Then again I just blog and Mr. Brown is collecting millions from his royalty checks and residuals. Now that’s a Dark Con if there ever was one.