So Dark the Con of Man: Da Vinci Code on the Rocks

When I first read The DaVinci Code by Dan Brown a few Summers ago, over the course of no more than a couple of days, I must admit, I felt as if the material had smacked me in the face and opened up a completely new world of ideas for me. The whole concept of Mary Magdalene being the wife of Jesus Christ, and carrying his child was astounding.

Having grown up very loosely protestant, and having seen films like The Last Temptation of Christ, The Passion of the Christ, and my personal favorite, the film production of Andrew Lloyd Webber's Jesus Christ Superstar (not to mention the several stage productions of that and Godspell) the introduction of something so wild was quite an experience, which led to several hours of internet research and all kinds of discussion of the topic.

So now, it's a couple of years later, and Ron Howard has brought Dan Brown's amazing "historical religious suspense thriller" to the big screen, which brings up two points. One being that the movie is a mediocre, run of the mill treasure hunter movie that happens to bring up some pretty outrageous "information", and the second being that the book really wasn't as great or exciting as I remember it. Sure, I'll admit I did like the book, and I still do, it's just that, looking back I feel the book was just average, a fictional regurgitation of ideas brought up in the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail, whose writers recently sued Dan Brown.

Their case was legitimate, considering the fact that Dan Brown pretty much took the "non-fictional" ideas from their book, and put them into a suspense thriller. Though, it's not as much Dan Brown's fault as it is the readers and the publicists and such who made such a big deal out of the content contained within the pages of "the code". It's also a bit ridiculous that the judge who ruled in favor of Brown, included his own "code" in the ruling report, a bit unprofessional, and also a bit biased, if you ask me.

Nonetheless, Ron Howard, who I do respect as a great director, could have done a bit of a better job of turing the text into a movie. He included basically everything that needed to be included, but some of Robert Langdon seemed a bit superhuman. There was really no mention of any kind in the novel, of a magical power that allowed Robert Langdon to look at something and see it dancing before his eyes at his own disposal. It just didn't seem right. Also, Tom Hanks was not the appropriate choice for the role.

I look at Tom Hanks and see a very versatile actor, a mentally challenged vietnam vet/shrimp boat tycoon, or a foreigner stranded in an airport, or my personal favorite, an advertisement artist posing as a woman so he can live in a women's apartment building with his now less famous "bossom" buddy Peter Scholari. I'm not saying that Tom Hanks is incapable of playing an intellectual, though what I am saying is, Tom Hanks is a likeable guy, he can play serious roles, but he's better at playing the "everyday man who seems to be put in strange situations" type. Robert Langdon is not an "everyday man" at least not in "the code".

Anyone who is familiar with Dan Brown, knows of his other Robert Langdon novel Angels and Demons which was his first attempt at fictionalizing secret organizations and some sort of historical ideas. Sure as a stand-alone, we don't necessarily need to know of Robert Langdon's past, but it would sort of help to shape the character, to make more sense of his deductive abilities, and why he of all people would be pulled into the mess.

As for the film itself, it moved very slowly. I got kind of anxious throughout most of it. I almost wanted it to end. There were parts that were slightly enjoyable like seeing some scenes turn out as I'd imagined they would, such as all of Silas' coporal mortification scenes. The historical flashback stuff was a bit much, and could have gone with just explanation instead of the full acted out history. There is enough imagery in the words, that doesn't necessitate a visual. I also became a bit squeamish at the mention of the name "Jesus Christ" every couple of minutes; it kind of gave it a preachy feeling. As for the protesters and the hype, I couldn't care less.

Months before the movie was even released, the Catholic church was already outraged by the idea of turning such a sacreligious book into a movie. Sure it goes against their particular beliefs, but what they and everyone else needs to understand is that their beliefs are not everyone's beliefs and that anything is debatable. It almost led me to believe that all of the protesting was just another form of advertisement for the film.

All of this said, I liked it enough that I could probably sit through it again, but at the same time it wan't great. It could have
been great, but it wasn't. It was long, choppy, and all in all overhyped, and overprotested, go see it if you feel like it.