(Previous note: Because the book I can read is the original English version, some words and names are not translated properly, so I simply use English directly) 280 pages, 105 chapters plus an epilogue, I finally read it. I took the time to watch the movie version. This is the third time I have watched this movie. The first time I went to the movie theater with my mother when it was released in China. The second time I saw the gap year supplement to write a short review. The difference this time is that I released the extended version, which is half an hour longer than the previous theatrical version. Movies and books are different in many details, but movies are basically loyal to the original. We will discuss the clues of the success or failure of this later. First, we will work for the welfare of the British colleges who have only watched the movie and have not read the book. A simple inventory of the differences between books and movies is not an inventory, just a few words about the ending of the characters that everyone cares about the most. I don’t know if the actors are too good, the casting is too good, or they are preconceived. I think these big names are very suitable for their roles, unlike when I read "The Guardian of My Sister", Sarah was always Kate in my mind. Winslet, when I checked the movie cast list, it was Cameron Diaz... Okay, let me talk about the movie version of "Sister Guardian". I haven't had time to watch it yet. I heard that even Julia is the character. Nothing. The biggest branch outside the protagonist's family was cut in half. Qiong Yao lost the heroine, leaving only Campbell alone, not to mention Julia's gay sister, and Jesse's crazy fun of her. I didn't want to criticize the director, but I just felt it was a pity. Come back and talk about Da Vinci Code, Tom Hanks’ temperament is in line with Langdon, the “American Beauty of the Year” who missed "American Beauty" because of a play, is exactly the same as the character's upright, authoritative, wise, and honest and innocent image. , Don’t forget that Forrest Gump is the living Buddha in the hearts of all Lao Mei. It’s rare to see Hanks playing a villain in "Cloud Atlas". This year, Captain Philip and Mr. Disney are the two great saints. Therefore, as Langdon who has run all over the audience, I won't repeat it. Like many good movies, the real success is often the supporting role. Ian McLean is really suitable for Teabing (although the description of him in the book is not as handsome as our old comrade, yes, he is a comrade), humorous and scornful like the arrogant attack of "The best friend", and the evil belly is as dark as " Magneto in X-Men, Gandalf in wit like the Lord of the Rings, desperately ruined as the old king in King Lear, and Ian himself has been canonized as Knight. In the movie, Teabing guessed that Langdon had broken the password before getting on the police car. In fact, Leigh found that it was empty when he picked up the cryptex in the book, and the letters APPLE were dialed out. He knew that Langdon had already gotten it. The secret of the Holy Grail, but in the end, he can only pretend to be crazy and behave stupid on the police side, trying to exonerate himself with mental illness. Teabing's servant Remy is overly handsome. In the book, when he hesitated to appear in Temple Church, he considered that it doesn’t matter if he shows his face. After he gets the money, he needs to make his face a handsome guy so that he can live a happy life. Shuai is the same as in the movie, is he still alive when he trims wool? And when Silas asked him if he was a Teacher, his sentence I am almost made me spray the screen, but after thinking about it, it also saved the conversation in the trunk. In the book, Remy replied only: I also serve Teacher. As far as his death was not caused by poisoning, Teabing would not make things so like a crime scene, but peanuts were added to the wine. I mean when the agent reported that Remy was allergic to peanuts in the movie, Collet said that my daughter was also allergic to me. At that time, I was still cursing in my heart, the movie is only a short time, who cares about your daughter! I think the original director was to emphasize that this allergy is the cause of Remy's death. Speaking of Silas, innocence and viciousness, Paul Bettany's interpretation is very good. Paul last time in this director's film was "Beautiful Mind", and he was simply an illusion character of the protagonist. Although he has long hair in the book, his image is more extreme, and he is completely naked at every turn. Naturally, this is not the case in the movie to keep his grade, and his self-abuse scenes are already uncomfortable enough to watch. The last Silas in the book should be back to the hospital in heavy rain. The picture was very expressive, but unfortunately it did not appear in the movie, and Silas was not killed on the spot after killing Aringarosa by mistake. He sent the injured Aringarosa all the time. When I arrived at the hospital, I dragged my bruised body, and then in the misty park, I said I am a ghost in despair and annoyance, but in the end I fell to the ground peacefully in prayerful prayer. It was a kind of exhaustion and a kind of relief. . As for the character of Aringarosa, it feels the most ugly in the movie, but the actor Alfred (the Chinese name is too long...) is too young. According to the Vatican Bank incident in 1982, he had already been added with the scepter. He wouldn't be a hairy boy. Now that 30 years have passed, he should be nearly 60 years old. How can he be born with thick black hair, tall and mighty... Seriously, first of all, Aringarosa made this deal, which can also be said to be anxious. This is the next move. The book explains that the Vatican has issued a ruthless expulsion order against him and his Opus Dei. If he can obtain the secret of the Holy Grail as he wishes, he can obtain it by threatening the church just like the Holy Knights. The supreme power in order to preserve the sect that he worked so hard to manage. When negotiating with the Teacher who took the initiative to find him, he made the Teacher promise that he would not let Silas kill talents and let his angels take orders from him, so Aringarosa yelled No when he saw Silas shooting a policeman in London. In fact, Aringarosa later contacted Fache not to lie that Langdon confessed that he was the murderer, but to Fache when he learned that the situation was out of control. All told, I hope that Fache can prevent Silas from being abused by Teacher. This also explains why Fache finally rushed into the church of Newton’s burial ground. The arrest was not Langdon, who he had decided before, but went directly to our Teacher: another person. Leigh Teabing. In the movie, Fache and Aringarosa finally fall out. In the book, the two meet him in the hospital. Fache came to the hospital to visit him, and gave him the ring of the leader he gave to make the pilot turn around to London. They looked at each other and smiled and said that we should all retire sooner. The scene was actually very warm at the time. by the way, There is no Opus Dei badge on Fache. The shot Langdon saw in the elevator was added by the director himself. There is also Fache threatening Vernet, and fisting against the flight controller of the London airport. These arrogant behaviors are also not in the book. As for Aringarosa's lie to him in the movie, Silas actually used to deceive the curator. He told Jacques Sauniere that someone had confessed that he had done harm to Sophie, and Sauniere agreed to meet him. According to Teabing’s plan, he not only interrupted The date with Langdon directly led the wolf into the room. Teabing knows so much because Sauniere has his own monitor on his desk, which Collet found near Teabing's house in the movie. Fache is over, it’s Sophie. There are only three French actors I can name. Except for Marion Cotillard, it’s Jean Renault from "This Killer Is Not So Cold", that is, Fache, and the other is "Angels Love Beautiful". "Audrey Tatu, also known as Sophie. The spirituality to love beauty is exactly what Sophie needs, but the film lacks the color of the feminist aura in the book. Not only does he give all the reasoning to Langdon intellectually, but he also hides behind Langdon’s arm by force. Suddenly there was a big fire on Silas on the plane. It seemed to be a play. Only when you hit Silas can you finally see her agent's style. In fact, in the book, she is the kind of IQ that is not worse than Langdon's courage. Someone much older than him. Then what needs to be explained is her life experience. In the movie, Langdon said that Sauniere is not her grandfather. In fact, he is, but his bloodline comes from her renamed grandmother. Only Sophie's parents died in the car accident, and the grandmother took her brother to hide. At Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland, It was threatened by the church and could not be made public. There are also two other characters, Vernet and Collet, whose personalities have changed a lot. Vernet in the movie seems to want to embezzle treasures. If I remember correctly, there is no so-called safe passage treaty in the book. Vernet took the two out because he did not want the police to arrest them in the Bank. This would damage his reputation. As for him It is not known why it was taken back to protect the reputation of himself and his bank, or to consider the interests of his friend Sauniere after he was convinced that they were criminals, because later Sophie's grandmother confirmed that Vernet was indeed a loyal and close friend of Sauniere. As for the police Collet, the movie changed him from an embarrassing subordinate responsible for running errands to a relationship with Fache, and used him as the side of the entrance to show the police's internal doubts about Fache, and added that he told Fache that he was transferred from the task. The plot, of course, does not exist, because as mentioned above, Fache did not assault the airport staff. The last two protagonists, Langdon and Sophie, their last thought-provoking and interesting dialogue in the film was added by the director himself. A kind of teacher-student friendship, a kind of love and gratitude, become the final footnote of the relationship between the two, just like an adventure is just an encounter, there will not be too much nostalgia at the end of the song, because there have been too many gains, and even more. The sentiment that it is better to forget the rivers and lakes to have each other is better than I am in my heart. The end of the book is much more romantic. The two embraced and kissed each other in the lingering night, and under the witness of Venus, they talked about love as if they were about to promise each other for life. What’s more interesting is that the movie is actually more focused on the interaction and emotional communication between the two than the novel. Almost all the dialogues between the two in the book are busy in reasoning. This is also the review of this movie. The main reason for going to the extremes is that the reasoning process is compressed so that there is no place to stand between adventure and sentiment. First of all, let’s talk about the advantages of Ron Howard this time. In order to keep the rhythm smooth and tight, the adaptation of some details is tolerable, and even impressive. For example, through an interview at the beginning, the book is a large part of Opus. Dei's narration was introduced neatly. There is also the restoration of historical events and the childhood of the characters through the floating and flashing of the oil painting texture. It is also a highlight of the film. Although the intuitiveness and curiosity of interpretation are increased, the tightness and limitation of these pictures are also correct. The understanding of new acquaintances poses certain obstacles, and the precious time squeezed out in the movie is not used to make concessions to the reasoning process, but is all given to the emotional interaction of the characters and the expression of the director's author's intentions. The latter can be clearly felt not only in the series of monologues and dialogues added to Teabing, Sophie, Langdon, Fache and Aringarosa after the film is coming to an end, as well as the rendering of the atmosphere at the end of the film, as well as the briefing of Langdon at Teabing's house. The quarrels are all the author deliberately distilling or even improving the ideological theme and central idea of the novel. It can be said that although this kind of approach of primary school students with big questions at the end is slightly more straightforward, compared with the novel that has always been restrained and strives for objectivity, the film is like this. This kind of expression is more thought-provoking. It is not entangled in lengthy and complicated reasoning, but seizes the right to speak what the book did not say, did not say, or did not want to say. Let’s talk about the reasons why it has received bad reviews. We all know that the inference details that cover the entire book cannot be condensed into a movie, but the two and a half hours of the extended version is not a short container, but reasoning. The part is simply weakened to the point of outrageous, I think this is also the reason why Conan's theatrical version is getting less and more unsightly. One of the most exciting reasoning scenes is the Louvre and the aircraft cabin (Ps Leigh’s plane was originally bound for London. It’s not like in the movie that he first decided to go to Zurich and then turned around.) I personally think that the most exciting thing is in the Louvre, because there is the oppression of escape, and it is the beginning of the secret, no matter the reasoning Both inside and outside the play are exciting and tense. I remember a scene in the book. Langdon who was fleeing suddenly wanted to understand something and then rushed back. In my mind, there is already a scene of Tom Hanks suddenly stopping in an empty white corridor, and the lights in the corridor are still There was a flash in response to the scene, and then his solemnly thoughtful expression suddenly dilated his pupils, a panic, and struggling a little, his brows wrinkled, and he ran back. Of course, my imagination did not appear in the movie. They are as easy as peekaboo, and the key is turned out. In fact, there are still many very interesting long passages of knowledge, like the exposition of the golden ratio that made me fascinated. In the film, I only used the phrase "passer-by" after the Langdon lecture at the beginning; there were also words like Langdon in In the lesson in prison, the laughs in the section alone are estimated to be more than the laughs in the whole movie, and they are all at the same level as the Teabing military rank in the movie. In short, the consequence of the violent weakening of reasoning is that there will be two reactions to books that have not been read. The first is the same as the first time I read it, and I don’t understand it at all. Even when I read it the second time, They thought that Mary was the Virgin Mary they were talking about all the time... The second case is to yell at the movie as a bullshit, which is normal, because all the reasoning results in the movie are almost directly given without a detailed reasoning process. Not to mention its wonderful theoretical basis and evidence support. In the eyes of many people, this is the greatest joy of this book, so the reaction of people who have read the book may also be disappointed because their own fun is stifled, because the greatest charm of this pseudo-academic novel is not about taking risks. It's about revealing the secret! Just like people like to watch "Into Science", not the result of thunderous sentient beings, but the suspicious process. This book is creepy. It’s not the long-standing folk legend that Jesus is a man, but how to take you step by step to subvert the existing traditional logic, to witness and experience personally, and finally to confirm this legend. It's a short distance away. "The Da Vinci Code" may not be a good book, but it does not prevent it from being good-looking. "The Da Vinci Code" may not be a good movie, but it does not prevent it from becoming a global hit. Books and movies are almost all my interests. Art and business are the issues before every author and director. Life and survival are the issues facing everyone. (Post note:
View more about The Da Vinci Code reviews
