Friday, May 19, 2006

Post-Film Discussion #1123: The Da Vinci Code

(upon exiting the theatre)
CKL: So, what did you think of the movie?
D: I have two words for it: National. Treasure.
CKL: Hmm. Or perhaps "Inter-National Treasure"!
D: Perhaps. I have two more words: Bull. Shit.

Referring, of course, to the egregious historical inaccuracies and outright fiction perpetrated by author Dan Brown and company.

Being an atheist, I don't really care about or believe the film's central premise: that settling the question of Jesus Christ's divinity with empirical evidence would destroy Christianity, in particular the Catholic Church. (This is the same problem I had with Stigmata, which also posits the existence of long-lost Gospels which have been covered up by The Man.)

The question also seems like something that's more likely to be debated in academia, as demonstrated by the lengthy expository scene wherein Ian McKellen's character lays out all the author-fabricated evidence for this crackpot theory. You call this archaeology?

Anyway. This really should have been Audrey Tautou's movie, since her character, Sophie Neveu, has the most interesting story arc. As D pointed out later, Kevin Smith had already covered pretty much this same territory, religious controversy-wise, with Dogma. Linda Fiorentino's character in that movie was on the same journey as Sophie, but Bethany actually got to be the hero. After the car chase in the first act, I was hoping that Sophie would continue to kick ass, but I guess Tom Hanks has a better agent. And a couple of Oscars.

But if there's a sequel, it should totally be called The Da Vinci Code II: Never Say Neveu Again.

Totally.
Post a Comment