July 14, 2008
The Da Vinci Code (2006)
Should I see it?
Nope.
Nope.
***Bias Alert - I am a Christian. There is no way this film wouldn't erk me. I went into this thing with my long knives out so keep that in mind while reading the following review.***
Short Review: This thing is as coherent as Keith Richards reciting Naked Lunch.
***Spoiler Alert: I ruin the film in this review so be warned. I mention things like Jesus Christ was The Son of God and was crucified for our sins and was risen. I talk about the movie at some point as well.***
One has to assume Tom Hanks made this film as a result of his issues with his father, and his own troubles with incontinence. Is it possible that his partaking in this ill-founded attack on the Christian faith is little more than a cry for help? Of course, difficulty retaining the love and respect of one’s father must be devastating. We can all imagine the incontinence must be deeply unsettling for a grown man. How these personal issues have brought Mr. Hanks to make this film, we cannot say. Personally, I can’t say for certain they actually drove him to make this silly movie. But alas, the question about if his wetting his pants and his loveless relations with his father remains. Are those to items connected? We will never really know, but its worth discussing.*
Let’s put aside the spiteful anti-Christian core of this piece and look at the film itself. Thanks to Ron Howard’s uncharacteristically inept handing of the production, this is the only place we need to look to bury this piece forever. This is a complete mess. The opening act promises some intrigue but quickly sours into a convoluted hash of pseudo-history and bad dialog. The fact that the story gets convoluted isn’t inherently bad, The Usual Suspects is a knot of a film but retains its potency. The difference between this film and others such as The Usual Suspects or 12 Monkeys is that this story is convoluted not because the story is complicated, it is because the story is poorly told.
The piece centers around a series of murders which eventually lead the hero Dr. Robert Langdon (Hanks) to reveal a conspiracy to hide the truth about Jesus Christ. As the story goes, Christ rolled around in the hay with Mary Magdalene and had a kid or two.** There’s a vicious group of Catholics here, a gaggle of nasties over there and Hanks with his pompadour and a twiggy French woman are stuck in the middle. The whole deal revolves around trying to find the final resting-place of Magdalene, who is otherwise known as “The Holy Grail”. Actually, her birth cavity is The Holy Grail, the rest of her is apparently just regular ol’ chick. From what I can gather from the foggy plot, the film comes down on the side of turning all of Christendom into Mary Magdalene’s personal crotch cult, which will celebrate her ability to produce the offspring of Jesus. The film points to her as being holy because of their unfounded demand that she was Jesus’ sexual partner while at the same time claiming that said unfounded claims prove that Jesus was not God after all. If having relations denies Jesus his Christ title then how is it that Magdalene is anyone important either? If Jesus is not God then Magdalene is no one more important than the girl selling eyeliner down at your local Wal Mart. With all of the Harvard professors mincing about in the film you’d think one of them would work this out. Then again, Hanks playing one of the aforementioned Harvard professors mispronounces the word “liberry” instead of the accepted “library” (it’s a good thing he didn’t say Nu-clur.) Apparently, we’re not dealing with Harvard’s varsity squad in this film.
The film is long and ultimately pointless. The seething hatred expressed towards the Christian faith is like dropping a turd in an already brimming barf bag. Even if you’re not Christian and don’t mind the clumsy slander forwarded by this film, you’re still stuck with a poorly constructed piece. There is nothing good about this movie. It is both Ron Howard’s and Tom Hank’s worst piece in years and yes I’m including both Turner & Hootch and The Missing. Howard’s direction is episodic and littered with broken pacing. Hanks is almost zombie like as he struggles to find something to do until his character expels another litany of useless facts which may or may not actually be facts. This seems like the work of people with far less experience and talent than those who worked on the production.
For those of you who want to offend Christians, you’ll have to do better. This film, if it weren’t such a huge production, wouldn’t be good enough to be deemed offensive. It’s like having a five year old tell you that they hate you. It’s sad day for those who would spend so much effort to construct something so obtuse and pathetic. Christians who are offended by this, I understand your issue. The fact is we should have pity on those who work so hard to deny the truth. Don’t get me wrong, we shouldn’t take their crap laying down, but we should have some pity. Fools abound in a world dedicated to man’s designs.
* I do not posses definitive proof that Mr. Hanks involuntarily wets his pants. I cannot say for certain that his relationship with his father was anything but normal. This said, he has made a number of films with absentee fathers and others where his character has some issue with urination. If it is reasonable to look at The Last Supper to support unfounded claims against Christ, why is it so far fetched to look at Hanks films to deduce things about his personal life? After all, Da Vinci wasn’t hanging around in the time of Christ, for our purposes we’re looking at the direct result of Hank’s work.
** Since we’re defiling Christ and making crap up to suit our purposes how about a sequel where Langdon finds Jesus’ DNA in some sap and then takes the results to produce a Jurassic Park populated with the prophets? If you don’t like that, how about sending Marty McFly back in time to keep his ancestral grandmother from dating the young Jesus. Think these are silly? They’re no worse than the fiction puked out by this rabble.
Related Reviews:
Tom Hanks movies
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
The Terminal (2004)
Other Critic's Reviews:
Celluloid Heroes
DarkMatters: The Mind of Matt
Labels: anti-Christian, Dan Brown, film, movie review, Ron Howard, The DaVinci Code, Tom Hanks
posted by Michelle Obama's Left Nut at 9:00 AM
Share
Previous Posts
Friends & Reads
Christian & Culture
Film Resources
Christian Sites
Faithcom
Featured On
Good News Film Reviews LLC 2004-2010 - used with permission
Images, video and titles are the property of their respective copyright holders. Good News Film Reviews LLC claims no ownership or connection to them.
The views expressed on this site are not the opinion of any advertiser or external entity.
While we take care to only link to responsible entities, Good News Film Reviews LLC takes no responsibility for the content linked from this site. There are sharks in the waters. Surf at your own risk.
The Template is generated via PsycHo and is Licensed.
3 Comments:
while witty, I think the personal bit about Hanks was in bad taste.
Not as bad taste as the book, though. I can only imagine how painful the movie must have been. Seeing it is really out of the question.
...And I watch Seagall movies when I'm desperate.
Your footnoted suggestion about a Jurassic Park populated with prophets would be great (certainly the best movie available in this subject matter). I'm not sure what the DNA of a theanthropic hypostasis would be like, though.
Of course, bearing in mind that the bones of Elisha raised the dead well after his burial....
Cheers,
PGE
I'll concede my lowbrow humor gets too low at times.
wow. I see a lot of biased slander that does nothing but degrade a good movie just because it differs from your religious views. Of course that is how the christian church rolls, if it differs from our beliefs shun it and condemn it.
Post a Comment
<< Home