It took a while, but I found my casting... DaVinci Code

[lordandrei]

My undergraduate study (well one of them) was directing for stage. This of course was complimented by classes in Musical Theatre, Radio/TV Production, Film theory

Comments

Re: Unabashedly tangenting

[lordandrei]

Wait... you think I even watch film dubs?

If it doesn't have subtitles and I can't hear the original voices and original language.... It damned well better be an old Martial Arts film. Otherwise... I AIN'T WATCHING.

[tzaddi_93]

As a moviegoer looking for entertainment, I was disappointed in the film. Besides shortchanging the characters, they shortchanged the art! They were in the fucking Louvre!!! Don't rush the scenes that feature the art. They sanitized it and made it safe. They used a safe, bankable actor. They made it overly mainstream because they wanted the mainstream blockbuster return.

That leads me to what I did like about the film. They made a sanitized, mainstream film featuring a popular A-list actor who stated emphatically that paganism and satanism is not the same thing. Sadly, in our culture, that carries more weight than most of the educational outreach that pagan groups do. And that kind of popular media statement is good for all of us who practice alternative spirituality.

Which reminds me of a favourite moment in film

[lordandrei]

! They were in the fucking Louvre!!! Don't rush the scenes that feature the art.

I absolutely adore Ferris Bueller's Day Off

John Hughes may have been touted as the King of the 80's High School films.. but the scene in the art gallery where you experience being in a gallery (the line of children), see the artwork, and then use the artwork to reflect the emotions and states of the characters was nothing short of brilliant.

Art isn't easy. Don't EVER take it for granted.

[fiannaharpar]

I disagree with Shanks, but only because I don't actually know his work. I would have leaned more towards someone like Hugh Laurie, who can do wonderful dramatic work - as his performances in "House" have shown. Notice, it was "like" Hugh Laurie, someone who can do "I'm a effeminite artfag, but I totally go for chicks" believably. I know that Jerry O'Connell comes immediately to mind, but not him. More James Spader in Stargate (the original film), which Shanks is performing the Spader role, isn't he?

[roy_batty]

It's an interesing dynamic - a book by a not-yet household name author, that becomes a big hit BECAUSE it pushes buttons and ventures into unsafe territory, that because it's such a hit spawns a movie which will be presumed to be big and in the effort to fulfill that presumption becomes none of the things that propelled the book into the stratosphere. The star of the book was never the half-baked mytery, nor the supposedly intelligent characters who are unable to figure out the simplest of riddles until the all to convenient climax of the story arc. The star of the book was the underlying subject matter, it was the delivery of (regardless of some of the wacky extent of conspiracy theory) what should be historical common knowledge, it was the questioning of common assumption, the asking of questions asked all to infrequently within the mainstream audience that ended up devouring it

[lady_saffir]

Although I could quite easily go on for days about what disappointed me in the movie, however you and the others who have responded here have already done a really good job at it. I would like to add one thing:

What the hell is up with no "Harris Tweed" jacket? I mean really, it is a huge part of Langdon's character not only in this book but in "Angels & Demons" too.