Movies scene
Yes, I know that should be "seen" and not "scene". :-)
I've seen a lot of movies lately, so many that I am not certain that I can remember all of them. But I thought it was time that I admit that, like so many others last weekend, I braved the picket lines to view the DaVinci Code. And yes, even though I purposely had not yet read the book (don't ask, sometimes I can be stubbornly and unreasonably nonconformist), had made certain that I really didn't even know what it was about, and I was able to predict fairly accurately what was going to happen and who would end up being who by the time all the characters had been introduced, I actually enjoyed the movie. I didn't even notice that I was lacking water and a snack, and I can go through a good liter of water in an average length movie.
Now, I will read the book. :-) Well, as soon as I get time.
I've seen a lot of movies lately, so many that I am not certain that I can remember all of them. But I thought it was time that I admit that, like so many others last weekend, I braved the picket lines to view the DaVinci Code. And yes, even though I purposely had not yet read the book (don't ask, sometimes I can be stubbornly and unreasonably nonconformist), had made certain that I really didn't even know what it was about, and I was able to predict fairly accurately what was going to happen and who would end up being who by the time all the characters had been introduced, I actually enjoyed the movie. I didn't even notice that I was lacking water and a snack, and I can go through a good liter of water in an average length movie.
Now, I will read the book. :-) Well, as soon as I get time.
6 Comments:
I cannot comment re the movie, as I have yet to view it. Not that I am in any hurry to do so... as the book sucked. Big time. It is vapid and inane, and annoyingly so. It (the book) polarizes its audience: you either love it or hate it. Count me among the latter group. Include Anthony Lane in that group as well, as any reader might know after reading his review of the movie... http://www.newyorker.com/printables/critics/060529crci_cinema
David G.,
Nice to see you again!
I'm told the movie was not true to the book, and that it was actually better in some places. It is not destined for an award of any type, but it was entertaining enough to keep me from falling asleep. I do that a lot in movies. :-)
I trust your opinion on the book, as always, and I will look at the review, however, I will most likely still attempt to read the book and form my own opion.
Of course, whether the book or the movie is any good or not, money will be made due to all the free publicity.
Did you hear that it's possible a movie will be made from Angels and Demons?
David,
Thanks for the link to Anthony Lane's review. It would not have stopped me from viewing the movie, nor will it stop me from at least attempting to read the book--I really do like to form my own opinions--, but I did say the movie was predictable, and I agree on most of the points he made with that regard. Besides, the former seminary student in me wanted to see how the tale blended all the facts, supposition, and just plain unproved rumours and stories into a work of fiction that had caused so much controversy. There was nothing there I hadn't heard before, I was just curious.
I still can't figure out why there is so much controversy, and what the heck people are picketing about. Good or bad, this is a purely fictional tale and as such should have no more impact than any other average novel.
I finally viewed the movie (last week), and it is equally atrocious as the novel. Gosh, perhaps even worse. Not solely because there are no surprises in the twists of plot, if you read the novel prior to seeing the movie, but also because those twists were told so ploddingly.
Oh well. To each his own. If you liked this novel, try instead THE RULE OF FOUR for a similar tale but told umpteen times better, more accomplished. Better yet, read REAL fiction. You know the type -- what William Faulkner describes as being about "the human heart in conflict with itself."
After seeing the movie twice--yes, I said twice. I had a friend who wanted to see the movie, but not alone, so, being the marshmallow that I am, I went again. Ok, I didn't actually see the movie a second time--I slept through the entire show. I might even have snored, though I don't have elbow bruises on my ribs to prove it.
Anyway, after seeing the movie twice, I begin to think that the only thing that kept me interested at all was the fact that I wanted to see how they blended fact and fiction together to make a viable tale.
And, like I said, it was predictable. So, I didn't really find any plot twists either. Of course, I find most movies predictable, so I don't always trust my judgement.
For now, I have yet to touch the tiniest tip of my finger to the cover of the book--and no, I haven't purchased it yet either. My guess is, though I don't like to prejudge, that this may end up being one of those books that I force myself through 2-10 pages of, and then set it in a pile somewhere to gather dust for a while. I'd put it on a shelf, but I am sorely in need of those.
Ah well, for now, I barely have time to skim my e-mails, so a book will have to be very good indeed to hold my attention at the moment. :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home