Today's box office is definitely very hot, we watched the 10 o'clock game, actually can only sit in the third row. The third row is the third row. But in the process of watching, I found that besides dizziness, there is another disadvantage of being too close, which will be discussed later.
It wasn't until I was sitting in the third row that I remembered the film director Ron Howard's predecessor "Tekken Man". The terrible lens language speaks of a legend and speaks like plain water. I can't help but worry about whether Ron Howard can tell the story well this time. Soon after the opening, this worry really became more or less a reality. It would be great if Ron Howard could reproduce the original work completely, but it is clear that the film only copied the plot of the novel but did not replicate the essence of the original work.
Before filming started, Ron Howard faced such a problem, how exactly would this film be made? Is it true to the original or an adaptation? It turned out that he chose the former. But he faces another problem, how to tell a story that is no longer suspenseful for a large number of readers. On this issue, Ron Howard made the most wrong choice. In order to avoid losing the suspense and appear boring, the director put the focus of the film on adventure. No wonder Cannes’ comments put this movie on the same level as "Indiana Jones". In fact, many readers go to the movies not to get any freshness, but to regain the joy of reading from the movies.
Where is the pleasure of reading "The Da Vinci Code"? Obviously most of them are not taking risks. In my opinion, the original "The Da Vinci Code" is a pseudo-academic novel. The hypocrisy here is not to say that it is not good, but that the author combines some science-related knowledge and things into the story in a way of joking, so that readers have a kind of thinking and pleasure. The choice of the form of the adventure story is more to ensure that the rhythm of the story is lively. The movie can be said to be quite a failure at this point. The two-and-a-half-hour film length should not be too short, but because the plot of the novel is almost completely copied, the protagonist of the story can't stop for almost a moment during these two and a half hours, soaring all the way to the end. The audience sees only the two protagonists running wildly in Europe, the most exciting thinking process of the code deduction and cracking in the novel is squeezed by the excessive behavioral drama, and the thrill of thinking is completely offset. Perhaps influenced by last year's imitation of "National Treasure", Ron Howard made "The Da Vinci Code" too prominent in its adventurous style, and the literary drama shrank to the extreme due to lack of time and space to show. If you can't figure out what to do, just tell the audience. In this way, almost everything about the history of the monastery, the history of Christianity, and the cracking of codes is expressed in a straightforward manner. In fact, the essence of the original "The Da Vinci Code" is just the opposite. The shell of the adventure story and the connotation of the reasoning story complement each other. The movie completely reversed the two. The result of the inversion is that most viewers complained about two problems after watching it. First, it's not interesting, obviously because of the lack of pleasure of thinking; second, messy, you can't understand without reading the original, obviously because of the copying of the original plot without any compromise.
Let's also talk about the adaptation. Recall the original work carefully. Almost every plot of the story takes place indoors, the Louvre, the bank, the villa, the church, and so on. The movie is also shot in this way, but due to the small interior space, there are too many close-ups in the movie, which gives the audience a sense of potential depression that cannot be released from the beginning to the end. The few action scenes that could have been the finishing touches were compromised because of the improper use of the lens. For example, the lens of car chasing is taken by hand to enhance the sense of instability, but the lens shakes so violently that I can't see what is happening at all. And the bridge section where the car is driving backwards doesn't seem to be new.
The lack of features in the use up is also quite obvious. More night scenes are not a bad thing for running out. However, the use of a large number of ambiguous contour lights in the film makes the characters unstylized. The role of light in shaping the image of the characters is minimal in the film. I was slightly impressed that when the heroine massaged the hero's face with her hands to relieve claustrophobia, the light from the car window hit the hero's face. The ritualized use of light here implies the sacred background of the heroine, which is quite interesting. In addition, the side backlights of several virgin heroines also have a similar effect. However, the stylization of scenes like this in the movie is too rare. This makes the character image thinner and worse because of the low proportion of literary drama.
Of course, on the whole, this movie is still loyal to the original, telling a very complicated and interesting story in two and a half hours. Especially for those viewers who haven't read the original.
View more about The Da Vinci Code reviews
