Grrrrr, I can't believe after all this time this is the one that gets me blogging again.
I went to see The Da Vinci Code film last night.
I've read the book, and I've heard about all the negative film critic reviews.
So I went expecting to see a turkey.
But in fact the film is very good. It follows the book almost exactly. The screenplay is good, the direction is good, it's well shot, the casting is good, and the acting is good. So what the hell is going on with the critics, and why are they acting like gutless sheep, too frightened to stand up and say the film is good?
I met a couple I know, coming out of the same showing, and they expressed a similar surprise, at how good the film was, relative to the "critics". Yeh, Audrey Tautou is cold, Tom Hanks is slightly wooden, but that's called acting, that's what the characters are supposed to be like. And some critics have complained there is no chemistry between the Audrey and Tom characters, well isn't that a well directed film where there's a hint of chemistry but nothing else, just like in the book.
And as for the plot. IT'S FICTION. It's supposed to be fiction. It's a Ripping Yarn.
And most of the negative stuff seems to be about the book plot, and confusing Tom Hanks with Forrest Gump, and the criticism on IMDB has been written early, in line with the critics. But once most people have seen the film, the positive reviews have picked up.
And finally. Don't you think that if you agree that Jesus was around, 2000 years ago, that the main premise of the The Da Vinci Code, is reasonably likely?
And the true measure.... Would I watch the film again? Yes.