On May 19, 2006, it was released worldwide. The film of the same name adapted from the novel "The Da Vinci Code" by American best-selling author Dan Brown, which has ranked No. 1 on the New York Times best-seller list for two consecutive years. People crammed and got a "hardcover" full of picture explanations from the bookstore to make up for it before the movie was released. I hurriedly rushed and still couldn't finish reading this novel filled with a lot of information - the history of science and religion - so I had to take Professor Langton and the beautiful agent Sophie into the unsolved mystery after entering the castle of Villette The subject entered the cinema.
In fact, as early as two years ago, I heard about Dan Brown's most famous book, The Da Vinci Code, but under the influence of friends, I always refused to read the works of writers with poor writing. This year, I couldn't stand the temptation of the movie, so I finally read it. As a result, what my friend said was right: the story in the book is good, but the writing is really bad! A lot of background information and the recollection of the characters in the text are all bluntly inserted into the process of the story, and there is almost no transition, just like a poorly written science and technology paper. Thinking about how crazy I was at the end of my college days, I couldn't write a thesis. It seems like I grabbed a family in the east and copied a section in the west, and I didn't have time to carefully revise and transition my own views and other people's arguments. This Dan. Brown's writing level is still at the stage of college thesis, but this story is really good, and his whimsy still has to be greatly admired.
In addition to the blunt transition, the problem of the novel is the paleness of the characters. However, according to the writing principle of episodic novels, the characters are originally to serve the plot, so the weak portrayal of the characters is also reasonable. If the novel is adapted into a movie, it can highlight the theme and at the same time strengthen the thickness of the characters, it should be very successful.
The entire movie is very faithful to the original book except for a few changes in details, and almost all important puzzles and decryption processes are fully displayed. Since I read half of the book, the movie was automatically divided into two halves for me: before entering the castle of Villette and after the castle.
In the first half, I couldn't help comparing the plot of the movie and the book, and felt that this movie was just browsing in a light-speed spaceship. If you don't have a certain understanding of Christianity and Da Vinci's works of art before watching it, then you will not hear that Yunshan Mist Cover is inexplicable! Especially about the key to the safe with the lily symbol in Priory of Sion, although I can understand it, but without the detailed and interesting explanations in the book, eating it whole is a little unpleasant, it's really not enjoyable!
But in the second half, I didn't have the plot in the book as a reference, and I completely concentrated on watching the movie, but was immersed in the ups and downs of the plot. Although there are also a lot of deciphering processes that are half-understood, because they are mainly immersed in thinking and sighing about the central mystery, those less important details are put aside first, but they are also watched with relish. Although the speed of the movie was faster than that of the book, and the plot could not be cut any further, it took a full two and a half hours to read. I wonder if there will be a 4-5 hour detailed DVD version like "The Lord of Ring" in a few months?
Compared with the book, the movie can be said to be very bland. There are no major mistakes, but there is nothing exciting. Basically, the content of the book is compressed into a package and stuffed into people's mouths. Whether it is digested or not, everyone has a taste first. As for what many critics have said about main actors Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou, I don't agree. As mentioned earlier, the images of the hero and heroine in the book are already very weak. To be more extreme, they are simply playing tricks for the development of the plot. Changing to other characters/characters will not affect the progress of the main storyline. The movie did not enrich the characters, the same thin and the same characters serve the plot. Which actor must be changed, the performance is similar. Two big names with super acting skills took on such an unchallenging role, and they couldn't do anything without rice. It was purely from the perspective of momentum and box office. On the contrary, Paul Bettany, who played Silas, the albino killer, made a big splash this time, not only selling handsome but also showing his stage performance. An idol + a powerful new star is rising again.
After thinking about it, the movie can't actually pick out any big mistakes. The mistake is trying to explain a complex theory that would have required a long discussion in just two or three hours. For the sake of time, the details of the story have to be sacrificed; without the details and the interlocking decryption and derivation, the credibility of the story itself will be greatly reduced. If this book is not adapted from a movie but a TV series, I believe that its entertainment, splendid, and credibility will be greatly improved. At that time, mainstream Christian churches will really go crazy!
Speaking of which, not only do I have to despise this guy Dan Brown again, he uses other people's theories and speaks like the truth; but I have to praise this guy a lot because he can use so many arguments to make a case for it. It is also very talented to have the academic views of the minority come true. Besides, people originally wrote novels and never said they were academic research, believe it or not!
View more about The Da Vinci Code reviews
