Movieus Malificarum
May. 23rd, 2006 12:12 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chaosvizierFinally, Summer Blockbuster season is here, and the name of the game is bad movies! Let's see what the summer has in store for us...
The Da Vinci Code
The controversy over The Da Vinci Code, let's be frank, is complete bollocks. First off, the book itself has been out for years now, and for some strange reason did not elicit this religious dilemma then. Apparently, once converted into film, it becomes much more naughty. Again, bollocks. Secondly, this is not the first time this topic has been addressed. Any number of books and tales have used the whole "Jesus is a dude who gets married and has kids and woohoo" plotline. I'll cite Kevin Smith's "Dogma", just because it's funny and has Alan Rickman in it. Strangely, Asian Catholic priests did not issue a death edict on Kevin Smith's head upon the production of that movie, and honestly, that film was just as good as this one. Thirdly, Tom Hanks. The man is about as controversial as a glazed donut. How can you hate anything with him in it? It just becomes so boring and mellow, like himself.
The second controversy is about albinos being portrayed in a bad light. Oh no, the bad guy happens to be an albino. So the fuck what? I think this might be the first movie I've seen where the bad guy was an albino; I don't think they have a case here. Every racial, geographical, religious, and mental stereotype imaginable has been a Bad Guy at some point in time; they can suck up and deal.
The real controversy should be, is this movie really all it's cracked up to be? And frankly, again, it's not all worth the hype and hullabaloo. Maybe it's because I think Tom Hanks is a monkey.
The plot: It's the quest for the Holy Grail. Kinda like the Monty Python version, only a bit different.
The pros: There is a solid blend of equal parts history, mystery, action, suspense, and personal drama to make the movie flow quite well. There's a lot of information that needs to be conveyed to the audience, and the film does a decent job of getting that info across. The history is complex, but reasonable; the suspense and mystery are engrossing, and the action sequences are brief but intense. A very subtle score by the ever-present Hans Zimmer keeps the mood, and excellent supporting parts by Jean Reno (The Professional), Ian McKellan (Gandalf The Grey), Alfred Molina (Doctor Octopus) and Audrey Tatou (Amelie) make the characters believable and even sympathetic.
The cons: So dark the cons of this movie... I'm not big into Tom Hanks, but that's just my personal prejudice. It was a bit long, at 150 minutes. Really, the biggest issue isn't that it is a bad movie, but that it's not as unique as it claims. Honestly, if you have seen Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, and then combine it with aspects of Dogma and any other mystic quest movie, you have The Da Vinci Code. Mysterious codes, puzzles, evil sects following the heroes, final confrontations, and the revelation of the treasure... it's all been done before. Only Lo Pan could have defied this formulaic endeavor with his cackling ways.
The verdict: Having not read the book, I can say that it was an enjoyable movie, nothing extraordinary, but still decent.
Disclaimer: I almost didn't recognize Juergen Prochnow until he started kicking ass.
The Da Vinci Code
The controversy over The Da Vinci Code, let's be frank, is complete bollocks. First off, the book itself has been out for years now, and for some strange reason did not elicit this religious dilemma then. Apparently, once converted into film, it becomes much more naughty. Again, bollocks. Secondly, this is not the first time this topic has been addressed. Any number of books and tales have used the whole "Jesus is a dude who gets married and has kids and woohoo" plotline. I'll cite Kevin Smith's "Dogma", just because it's funny and has Alan Rickman in it. Strangely, Asian Catholic priests did not issue a death edict on Kevin Smith's head upon the production of that movie, and honestly, that film was just as good as this one. Thirdly, Tom Hanks. The man is about as controversial as a glazed donut. How can you hate anything with him in it? It just becomes so boring and mellow, like himself.
The second controversy is about albinos being portrayed in a bad light. Oh no, the bad guy happens to be an albino. So the fuck what? I think this might be the first movie I've seen where the bad guy was an albino; I don't think they have a case here. Every racial, geographical, religious, and mental stereotype imaginable has been a Bad Guy at some point in time; they can suck up and deal.
The real controversy should be, is this movie really all it's cracked up to be? And frankly, again, it's not all worth the hype and hullabaloo. Maybe it's because I think Tom Hanks is a monkey.
The plot: It's the quest for the Holy Grail. Kinda like the Monty Python version, only a bit different.
The pros: There is a solid blend of equal parts history, mystery, action, suspense, and personal drama to make the movie flow quite well. There's a lot of information that needs to be conveyed to the audience, and the film does a decent job of getting that info across. The history is complex, but reasonable; the suspense and mystery are engrossing, and the action sequences are brief but intense. A very subtle score by the ever-present Hans Zimmer keeps the mood, and excellent supporting parts by Jean Reno (The Professional), Ian McKellan (Gandalf The Grey), Alfred Molina (Doctor Octopus) and Audrey Tatou (Amelie) make the characters believable and even sympathetic.
The cons: So dark the cons of this movie... I'm not big into Tom Hanks, but that's just my personal prejudice. It was a bit long, at 150 minutes. Really, the biggest issue isn't that it is a bad movie, but that it's not as unique as it claims. Honestly, if you have seen Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, and then combine it with aspects of Dogma and any other mystic quest movie, you have The Da Vinci Code. Mysterious codes, puzzles, evil sects following the heroes, final confrontations, and the revelation of the treasure... it's all been done before. Only Lo Pan could have defied this formulaic endeavor with his cackling ways.
The verdict: Having not read the book, I can say that it was an enjoyable movie, nothing extraordinary, but still decent.
Disclaimer: I almost didn't recognize Juergen Prochnow until he started kicking ass.
