The Da Vinci Code

Well, I finally got around to watching ‘The Da Vinci Code’. I’ve had a healthy curiosity in regards to how well a film adaptation would’ve been pulled off… I read the book way, way back when the publicity ball was just beginning to roll and even then it read like a film. It’s the sort of book that could be adapted into a big budget Hollywood film quite easily… colourful, European locations, an easy range of recognizable characters, fascinating back story, plenty of action and twists, and the perfect Hollywood ending. And yet… the film seems so average.

Obviously, when you watch a film version of a book that you’ve already read, there’s going to be a certain degree of nonchalance – the film isn’t going to be surprising, you already know all the twists. But still, there’s that added element of ‘ooooh, I wonder how they’ll do this’ or ‘that was so spot on like the book’. The perfect example would be the ‘Lord of the Rings’ adaptations - which were excellent. ‘The Da Vinci Code’ isn’t a crap film by any means, it just felt so supremely middle-of-the-road.

For anyone unfamiliar with the story, Robert Langdon is a historian who specializes in symbols. In his spare time he solves mysteries and gets into adventures and stuff. In this story he is embroiled in a massive conspiracy involving the Holy Grail and various other religious secrets that certain factions of the church would like to see covered up. What follows is a race against time, with Robert and his sexy new friend, a French codebreaker named Sophie, trying to track down the Holy Grail and find the murderer of Sophie’s grandfather before the French police can catch them and arrest Robert for the same murder. Along the way we get all sorts of fascinating explanations in regards to various religious icons and other things we take for granted (more so in the book than the film – a film can’t afford such depth to superfluous details in the same capacity that a book can).

Anyway, this is a very safe adaptation of the book. The biggest artistic flourish on Ron Howard’s part as director are the flashbacks to religious events only alluded to in the book – and I’ve got to admit, these sequences work in opening up the film and are probably the most inspired parts in the whole thing. The film is also very fast-paced (like the book), and that’s a commendable achievement too. The cast on the other hand, is the most predictable paint-by-numbers blockbuster ensemble you could possibly think of… likeable and non-threatening leading man? How bout Tom Hanks? Sexy French chick? Well, there’s only one French actress in the world and that’s Audrey Tatou. We need someone for the French policeman… well, there’s only one French actor and that’s Jean Reno! Old and slightly-amusing colleague of Langdon’s with a dark side? Of course, Ian McKellen!

For such a controversial book it makes a fairly tame film… the ending has been twisted into this disgustingly Christian piece of propaganda, and Langdon’s views on the Holy Grail are completely at odds with those in the book, suggesting some Christian-appeasing backfooting on Howard’s part. Even the kiss at the end (shown in the book to be a big clichéd Hollywood-ending kiss) is a ridiculously chaste and fatherly kiss on the forehead. I’ve got to say, this film disappointed me – and I wasn’t even expecting that much. Oh well, another Hollywood cock-up to add to the thousands!

Vote