The Da Vinci Code Review
by Andrew Staker (mallowisious AT hotmail DOT com)May 20th, 2006
THE DA VINCI CODE
Let me commence with what I consider to be apt for a film so drenched
in Catholicism: a confession. I have not read Dan Brown's book, nor
do I ever really intend to. From what I have heard about his prose 'style', it's enough to keep me away. But I just had to watch the
movie because it's a cultural tsunami-you can choose to have your
eyes open or your eyes closed, but either way you will get soaked.
I found the movie to feel very long. The time seemed to drag on and
lead to mild nausea. The dialogue was thoroughly explicative, up to the point of being ridiculous. A radio commentator yesterday on Sydney's
2BL (ABC 702) called it the 'CSI-ification of cinema', whereby the
tricks and potential of film qua medium are being evaporated in favour
of 'good ol' fashioned story-tellin''. This consists of people
talking their way through the narrative and explaining their
motivations, sensations and reasoning. Director Ron Howard is guilty of this, but he stops short of having an omniscient narrator doing
voice-overs!
As for the suspense factor in this so-called 'religious thriller',
there was just one-when crazed monk Silas (a bleached-out Paul
Bettany) lunges across the screen from right to left. Audrey Tautou
tries ever-so-hard to shake the elfin curse of Amélie and almost
succeeds. I would have cast Italian seductress Monica Bellucci in the
role of Sophie Neveu... but it may have ruined the 'gleaned grand-daughter' angle. Tom Hanks does it aptly, but yet again, I
would have picked Kelsey Grammer for that truly convincing intellectual presence-which only Ian McKellan possessed and indulged in, much to
the appreciation of the audience.
I hear from those who have read the book at the emphasis on the clue-hunting and problem-solving has been diluted noticeably on the
film. The clues in The Da Vinci Code movie seem to materialise
efficiently and thereby quickly-there is less mystère about them.
The whole sequencing of the pursuit and pacing seemed to have that
little extra excess, which allowed me to catch my breath too often, diminishing from the tension that could have been.
On the plus side, I can't say I detested the film. I am not seeking a refund for my ticket. The locations were stunning and this must surely have helped cinematographer Salvatore Totino capture their
'ageless' qualities. I liked the overall imagery of the film and
the many symbols etc.
But now on to the good stuff. With so many Christian groups upset and calling for a boycott, it got me thinking. Why would they be so
concerned about a work of fiction? Have a look for example at:
"'The Da Vinci Code' gratuitously insults Jesus Christ and the
Catholic Church," said Vincent Nichols, the Roman Catholic archbishop
of Birmingham, England. "It deliberately presents fiction as fact."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/19/AR2006051901303.html
Is representing fiction as fact really all that new? You see, I believe the church is really afraid because Dan Brown and Ron Howard have
engaged the church at its own game! We atheists have known for a long
time that the divinity of Christ (and all religions for that matter) is nothing more than 'fiction as fact'. I think the protests are
really a sign of panic that the final vestiges of credibility are unravelling. In the post-modern world of competing meta-narratives,
truth is that to which we subscribe. I think this is what scared the churches. Nietzsche, all those years ago, proclaimed the death of the philosophic God-Brown and Howard have brought it to the masses, with computer graphics, famous actors and exciting locations.
The all-too-rare glimpses into the clouded ecclesiastical history that
the filmmakers give us-Council of Nicaea, Emperor Constantine, The Apocrypha, The Crusades, Opus Dei-function as hooks of interest for dramatic purposes: we are intrigued by this hush-hush, crypto-symbolic fetishism. But these points also illustrate just how much of a human institution Ecclesia Catholica is. It raises so many juicy questions, I could not help myself. For the interested reader/viewer, I provide two links. The first is a Wikipedia entry on Apocrypha, the second is the
text of New Testament Apocrypha online. The existence of this
'Other', non-canonical texts is in itself a tantalising challenge
to Christian 'orthodoxy' and authority... the tempting flavour of
which the churches are combating against.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocrypha
http://www.comparative-religion.com/christianity/apocrypha/
Happy reading!
Andrew Staker
More on 'The Da Vinci Code'...
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
