Anyone See The DaVinci Code [Archive]

FreshyFresh23

05/19/06, 08:50 PM

Did you really think the movie could fit everything in it that the book had?

When did i say it was bad because it was lacking content?

weezer182

05/19/06, 08:55 PM

When did i say it was bad because it was lacking content?Why didnt you like it then? Thats the impression I got from your comment

kirbs84

05/19/06, 10:18 PM

I was on the fence about seeing this. after reading some of the horrible reviews it's been receiving, I think I'll pass.

shes soo lovely

05/19/06, 10:45 PM

i just saw it and i thought the movie was done really well. yes alot of the information was rushed but what do you expect from a 500 pg book. the movie does move at a fast pace and it probably is easy to get confused if you havent read the book. i read alot of reviews saying it was dull but i found it to be the opposite.

i would give it about 8/10. i think ron howard did as good of a job with it as anyone could of

drudo182

05/19/06, 10:57 PM

Never read the book. But it was okay. Don't think I'd purchase it and don't think I need to see it again and I do enjoy seeing movies more than once.

3 / 5

niveK

05/19/06, 11:55 PM

The book blew in more ways then you mother. However the book seemed like reading a summer big budget action flick. So how they managed to screw up adapting this for the screen is a mystery

aheroinmyeyes

05/20/06, 12:15 AM

I know I'm in the minority here (and pretty much everywhere) but I honestly did not like the book at all. I also didn't like the movie all that much, but found it to be a little better than the book. So I'd say it was better than the book, but in my opinion that isn't saying much.

ActorInThisPlay

05/20/06, 12:17 AM

this movie was great. i never read the book but i followed the story perfectly fine. it was not dull at all. my friends who have read the book and now seen the movie thought the movie was a very enjoyable as well. i would recommend it to anyone.

8.5/10

irthesteve

05/20/06, 12:50 AM

1. it is much faster paced than the book, especially the beginning. the first 20 or so chapters are coverd within 20 minutes...
2. The movie didn't (obviosuly) go into depth with all the concepts and backstories etc.
3. It followed the book's storyline perfectly, just a shortened version and the ending was mixed around a bit.
4. Tom Hanks was so-so
5. The rest of the cast was very well casted for their characters and played them flawlessly.

so i'd say somewhere between a 7.5 and 8.5

Trainsaw

05/20/06, 06:11 AM

I loved the movie, had not reading the book beforehand made me appreciate it even more i think because i wasn't nit-picking, its about an 8.5 or 9 out of 10

Poultrylicious

05/20/06, 07:03 AM

should i read the book or watch the movie first?

wyverna

05/20/06, 07:06 AM

watch the movie. that way you won't be disappointed.

YourMusicSucks

05/20/06, 07:49 AM

The book blew in more ways then you mother. However the book seemed like reading a summer big budget action flick. So how they managed to screw up adapting this for the screen is a mystery

Truer words have never been spoken.

Brownpants06

05/20/06, 08:08 AM

should i read the book or watch the movie first?
Book. That's true for anything thats gone book to movie. Watching the movie will just ruin the ending and make it not worth reading.

Adeniz19

05/20/06, 11:39 AM

everyone says it's around an 8. i wonder what all the critics thought was so horrible about it

yodaplaysdrums

05/20/06, 11:45 AM

It was ok. I didn't enjoy it as much as the book, but obviously the movie had a good story and Sir Ian McKellen was great in the movie.

NetNerdsRevenge

05/20/06, 12:18 PM

Trainsaw

05/20/06, 01:03 PM

It was way rushed. If you hadnt read the book you would of been confused with the backstory and I didnt like some of the characters. I thought the bishop and silas played the best. Didn't like Langdon and Remy, but whatever.

It was decent for the amount of time they had.
i didn't read the book and i wasn't confused at all....alot of it is explanitory

ActorInThisPlay

05/20/06, 01:20 PM

i didn't read the book and i wasn't confused at all....alot of it is explanitory
yeah same here...i really enjoyed it and didn't read the book. i had no problem understanding the story.

de la sympathie

05/20/06, 01:27 PM

I found it extremely disappointing. The friend I went with and I basically laughed through the whole thing, and I didn't like it half as much as the book. Plus the acting wasn't all that great either.

radiofriendly

05/20/06, 02:50 PM

.boring.

PJ1336

05/20/06, 03:17 PM

Book. That's true for anything thats gone book to movie. Watching the movie will just ruin the ending and make it not worth reading.

case and point of why that isn't always true, Fight Club. apart from the ending being different, watching that movie made me want to read the book so badly that i actually bought it less than an hour after seeing the movie for the first time, and began reading it that night. a well done movie will only make the book that much better as it can, and should serve as a complementary visual companion to the book. obviosly there are many cases in which this is not true, but you can't simply say that in every instance in which a book becomes a movie, the horrible film version ruins the book. it's an overgeneralization.

mpw

05/20/06, 06:21 PM

i liked the book alot better, but that's in almost every case when a book is made into a movie. The Green Mile for example didn't have every detail in it. The one problem i did have with the movie is that it added other things to it that really, had no reason why the director put it in the movie. But for the most part, the movie was alright.

dashboard1190

05/20/06, 06:47 PM

I liked it, overall: B.

laryssa

05/20/06, 07:47 PM

I haven't read the book, but I liked the movie.
Everyone knows that book adaptions are never better than the book, but it doesn't mean that they're horrible movies. I'm definitely going to buy a copy of the book and give it a go during the summer after all of my stupid English assignments are out of the way.

richter915

05/22/06, 11:21 AM

It was way rushed. If you hadnt read the book you would of been confused with the backstory and I didnt like some of the characters. I thought the bishop and silas played the best. Didn't like Langdon and Remy, but whatever.

It was decent for the amount of time they had.
reviews said Silas was one of the worst cause he was overacting...Langdon sucked cause Hanks was underacting (same critique of Sophie).

waggy

05/22/06, 04:36 PM

this movie bored me out of my mind. everyone involved from ron howard to tom hanks to the freaking marketing department phoned it in. there's one thing a summer movie has to do and that's not be boring. 2 stars (of 4) if i'm being generous. (never read the book, but had it spoiled 8 ways to sunday)

to kill this

05/22/06, 06:22 PM

reviews said Silas was one of the worst cause he was overacting...Langdon sucked cause Hanks was underacting (same critique of Sophie).

exactly. the movie was pretty good except for the fact that tom hanks's acting was pretty boring and he didn't take any risks or so much emotion or enthusiasm at all. people think he was the safe choice. i thought sophie's performance was pretty decent. I didn't think silas was all that bad. umm magneto was fucking awesome. (ian mcKellen) he was by far the best actor in it. but he's always the best actor in every movie he's in.

quote unquote

05/22/06, 07:00 PM

I don't know if I wanna go see it or not because I've heard about the lack of content, but what can you expect from a movie. Also, I was so mad at the ending of book I wanted to throw it across the room, so I don't know if I want to relive the anger and punch someone in the face at the end of the movie.

RyRyY

05/22/06, 07:45 PM

i read the book and loved it and i wasnt unhappy with the movie at all. i thought it was great, i would give it a 8/10. also i thought silas was cast perfectly

AbsentTruth

05/22/06, 08:55 PM

I wanna see this movie pretty damn bad.

Emopunkthrice

05/22/06, 09:12 PM

I think I wanna see Angels and Demons!!!!

swizzle

05/23/06, 04:49 AM

It was ok. I didn't enjoy it as much as the book, but obviously the movie had a good story and Sir Ian McKellen was great in the movie.
i thought it was brilliant when he was getting arrested! V. Funny

I enjoyed the movie but didn't like the ending where sophie and lanhdon were in the church, it was as if they had never read the book. The ending in the book was far better how it all comes together for sophie. But the ending with langdon gets me every time i see it and read it, blows me away. Because of this i want to go to Paris and look around the Louvre.

Bobcat46308

05/25/06, 06:31 AM

i never read the book, but the movie wasn't too bad. except for all the b.s. about Jesus that ian mckellen explains, i really don't buy any of that (it was based on a fiction novel, though). now i know why all of the catholics are pissed and boycotting the movie.

sophie is sexy as fuck in this movie, by the way