Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

Related: TV discussion forum.

Films

the da vinci code

20 replies

shellybelly · 16/05/2006 13:09

loved the book and looking forward to seeing the film, tom hanks is perfect for the role of professor langdon, just hope the film lives up to the book

OP posts:

Report

sweetmonkey · 16/05/2006 13:10

im going to see it on sat and am v excited

Report

megglevache · 16/05/2006 13:15

I think the casting has been genius I must say.( I imagined the albino monk Silas to be Christopher Walken but Paul Bettany looks perfect). I thought the book was ok but really looking forward to seeing the film if only to swoon and imagine I was as gorgeous as Audrey Tatou.

Report

shellybelly · 16/05/2006 13:19

I can't go till dh has read the book (infact going to try and read it again as well)

OP posts:

Report

sweetmonkey · 16/05/2006 13:39

the pictures of silas do look scarily good. i love most films with tom hanks so am hoping this will be good. i know they were at Biggin Hill filming some of it and had all the posh cars there

Report

hazlinh · 19/05/2006 06:55

saw it last nite!

think movie was really slow compared to the cracking pace in the book. some parts i felt like nodding off.it was really dull in the beginning..picked up a bit when they went to leigh teabing's place. that part was more fun.
ian mckellen's character really livened things up a bit.

i expected tom hanks to be really good, but he just wasn't charismatic enough in the movie i thought.his hair was awful...

plus there wasn't as much going on between him and the sophie character in the movie.

plus i thot audrey tautou was a bit flat-ish..

and the scene where they (ahem)

SPOILER ALERT

figured out what the holy grail was...was just quite silly and unbelievable compared to when you read it in the book.

But all in all, quite entertaining and I'm glad they tried hard not to make it a no-brainer action-packed kind of movie...and put in lots of dialogue but the pace couldve been faster and maybe they should've had a bit more fun with it....

Report

SecondhandRose · 20/05/2006 00:09

Just got back from the 8.40 showing. Really enjoyed it and its even more enjoyable if you've read the book. A few discrepancies for me but I wont say as it will spoil the film. Forget the reviews, got and see it for yourself.

Report

Ledodgyherring · 20/05/2006 00:22

I've not seent he film but read the book never pictured tom Hanks as being any good saw more of a kevin spacey type figure.

Report

Xavielli · 20/05/2006 00:42

The film was good.... too fast in places and too slow in others but essentially true to the book.

Ian McKellen was brilliant as Teabing!

Also think that old Tom Hanks could do with a bit of Nip/Tuck around his neck.......

The villian was revealed a little too early for my liking!

Report

almostanangel · 20/05/2006 01:42

been back ,long but good i havent read the book ,but might now ,

Report

hamster · 20/05/2006 08:10

I thought the film was good. My partner-who hasn't read the book-also eally enjoyed it.

In parts, to those unfamiliar with the book's story line, it moved a little quickly, and rather quickly from scene to scene.

The albino monk man, I hated in the book, but I felt sad for in the film. The actor really gets across just how messed up Silas is, and how brainwashed he is. Very very good actor.

Tom Hanks was fine in my opinion. A little more passion in parts may've helped, but he still did his job very well.

The only thing that I disliked about this film was the fact thar it's so darn long(my bottom was fast asleep by 1&1/2 hours in, however it needs to be that long I suppose! :)

Report

Tortington · 20/05/2006 20:37

what a pile of SHIT

dont waste your money

Report

SecondhandRose · 20/05/2006 23:20

custardo - what didn't you like or should we start with what did you like? Have you read the book? Didn't you think it was pretty true to it?

Report

Tortington · 21/05/2006 01:15

yes i read the book - its one that was literally translated to film. with something the cryptic nature of the book kept you reading - becuase it kept you on edge - this format did not work in the film. and i like forest gump - but he was the most boring character and robert langon struck me as more of a thigh trembler.

i loved the book - i liked angels and demons too.

but the premis of the book did not translate to film in an exciting way - and the book was very exciting - when you read it you thought 'this will be a great film!' but it wasn't the action was poor, the unfolding of the plotline was not as detailed - the throwback to past events - was amaturish - really 1980 film stuff and dissapointing - stuff like that can be done in the book - but cannot be literally done (imo) on film it comes accross as tacky and unrefined. some poetic license neede4d to be taken with the film - the same plotline and premise but there needed more action and a different robert langdon

Report

SecondhandRose · 21/05/2006 16:46

In the book, I am sure they snogged at the end, didn't like Hank's hair very strange. There was a lot in the film left unexplained like Silas's childhood, the fact that her brother was alive etc. But I still like it.

Report

mum2sam · 21/05/2006 23:36

I thought the film was good (but i am biased as i love hanks) i felt in parts that they could of explained things better for those who havent read the book as i got lost in parts. I would of liked to have known more about silas background.I must admit i did find myself looking at my watch a few times not as exciting as it could of been but still good.

Report

WestCountryLass · 26/05/2006 00:16

I thought it was good but was of the midset that films are rarely as good as the book.

I don't know why they changed the ending though as I don't see what difference it amde really.

Report

chestnutty · 27/05/2006 22:19

saw the film today. Quite good but i preferred the book.

Report

Northerner · 03/06/2006 09:06

I saw the film last night, quite good, but boy did my arse go numb in those cinema seats!

I liked Tom Hanks, Silas was fab, Fache was OK. I prefferred the ending in the book where she discovers her Grandmother and brother, not where all those weird looking priory folk turn up.

Did I miss something in the book? Wasn't Sanciere really Sophie's Grandfather according to the book? And was she part of the royal blood line in the book?

Must go and check.....

Bloody glad I read the book first though. Don't think I would have had the foggiest idea what was going on otherwise

Report

AllieBongo · 03/06/2006 09:12

i haven't read the book , but thought the film was great. Makes me disbelieve the bible even more! I know it's not real, but can believe this more

Report

sunnydelight · 06/06/2006 20:44

I brought my 12 year old in half term and we both really enjoyed it. He hadn't read the book, I had. I thought it was a blockbuster type adaptatation of a popular novel: great fun for what it was. I had warned DS1 that he would really have to pay attention to work out what was going on - I wasn't whispering in his ear throughout! I love when your kids are old enough to watch proper films with.

Report

Flip

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.