the very naked dead body of an old man is found in the louvre. jean reno, the professional, is on the case and his primary suspect is forrest gump who is sporting a bad haircut. suddenlt amelie appears and tells mr. gump that this aint no ordinary murder. together, they embark on a puzzle-laden adventure to solve the mystery about the church's best kept secret, which has something to do with the priory of sion, the holy grail, and jesus banging mary magdalene. hot on their heels is an albino sith apprentice named silas who likes to hurt people and himself. so... run, forrest, run!
with the hype that surrounded dan brown's book, a movie adaptation was inevitable. despite the hype, which i believe was, and is still, too much, i have not read a single sentence inside that book (eventhough i have it in ebook form). probably part of the reason is how those people who have finished the book yap about it so much and feel like they are the smartest being on earth. maybe in the far future when the hype has died down. anyways, equally hyped to the most annoying levels is this movie. and after watching it with zero expectations and uninfluenced by negative reviews, i scratched my head and wondered what the fuss was about. although based on real facts, this is an obvious work of fiction and anyone who'd take it seriously is a moron (and what the heck is the problem if jesus was human and not god? arent his teachings the only things that should matter?!). this is simply three hours of boring talk about what ifs. the puzzles didnt even carry any weight. the plots of indiana jones 1 and 3 also had religious themes but that's a gargantuan load of fun compared to this. and both didnt even need flashbacks to explain stuff. heck, even national treasure is great compared this. the problem of this film is its lack of excitement. id take all the talk you need, but i need some thrills to boost me out of dozing off. the only discourse that entertained me was between langdon and magneto, fresh from his demise in x-men 3, as he is now a crippled geek. sir ian mckellen's performance was the sole saviour of this film, his orgasmic joy upon seeing the crypt text was so genuine.
who played geoffrey chaucer in a knight's tale, although he really needed more creepiness. they should have made him more shadowy and "ghost"-like (there should have been more scenes like when he grabbed langdon's neck in mid-speech). jean reno's fache character required tweaking as well, as it seems it was written exactly for him. then there are the two leads, one of the worst acting couples to a movie. tom hanks's robert langdon was flat and wasnt as dynamic as a hero characters are supposed to be, and the added claustrophobia didnt help 3-dimensionalize him at all. and what the hell happened to you audrey tatou?!? well, i guess this was a case of miscasting because she's a really great non-mainstream actress. she just didnt fit sophie's shoes. the only time i thought she acted well was in magneto's private plane where she was scolding silas. and by the way, if sophie was such an important person, why would her grandfather just let her run away like that? ending was predictable.
i guess it was a bad decision to get ron howard to direct this film. but the fault isnt entirely his alone. the script should have undergone a dozen more drafts. this movie felt like a lecture on a very interesting topic that you wouldnt want to miss. then when you attend it, the lecturer just goes reading a book verbatim aided by dull powerpoint slides. im sure id have hated this movie more if id read the book. but other than a couple of good points, very disappointing and boring.
the good: silas, teabing, subject matter.
the bad: all talk, no action.
the ugly: the controversy.
the verdict: 5 flogs to the back.
leonardo da skizzi.
No comments:
Post a Comment