Blast From the Past

With the imminent release of the movie The Da Vinci Code, I think it's the perfect time to resurrect an old post from my quasi-mirror blog, Terra Occulta. In the post, I reviewed The Da Vinci Code, the book. How did I like it? Not very much. A note: Disregard the first paragraph. I couldn't bring myself to write more of the supposed series of posts.

This is going to be the first of many entries that are going to talk about widely popular books/music/movies that I do not think deserve the praise. First up, The Da Vinci Code (I'm going to get a lot of flak on this).

First of all, the reason I don't like The Da Vinci Code has nothing to do with the revelation of the Christ bloodline. That's actually one of the strongest part of the novel, storywise. I'll acknowledge The Da Vinci Code's attraction: Murder mystery, scandalous revelation, plot twists, puzzles, exotic locales, the Catholic Church, Centuries-old conspiracy, murderous Albino henchman. The book seems to have all the ingredients for a thrilling read.

It doesn't.

It's missing two important ingredients of a story: a logical plot and character development. Big claims, I know. I'll defend my point.

The plot exists only to provide Dan Brown a chance to show off how he can make intricate puzzles. Reading the early parts of the novel, you will very likely sense the suspense of Langdon trying to solve the puzzle of Jacques Sauniere's gruesome death. I did. And then Langdon had to solve another puzzle, and another, and another, and... you get my point. It gets repetitive and boring pretty fast. For the plot twist, well... let's just say [Leigh] Teabing is no Keyser Soze (If I spoiled the story for you, don't worry. You're not missing much). You can see the twist a mile away.

What's worst, Langdon, the protagonist, does not experience any character development. He is basically the same before, during, and after the story. The protagonist has learned nothing to resolve his conflicts. That's a no-no, folks. With no character development, the story is pointless. There are no reason the story should be told.

In fact, without these two things, The Da Vinci Code reads like, dare I say it, a mindless summer blockbuster flick. Okay, that maybe a little harsh. The book does have it moments. But for something this hyped, I expected more. The Da Vinci Code is officially overrated.

That being said, I really hope my dissatisfaction with the book doesn't extend to the movie. I really want to enjoy a good thriller set in Europe and its picturesque locales. My problems with The Da Vinci Code seem to come from the truly bland writing. Hopefully, the adaptation to screenplay will solve the issues I had with the book (though with Akiva "Batman & Robin" Goldsman writing, I'm not holding my hopes too high).

The cast looks impressive with Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou, two of the most charming actors today, playing Langdon and Neveau. But what got me really excited is the genius casting of three brilliant actors: Paul Bettany as Silas, Alfred Molina as Bishop Aringarosa, and Ian McKellen as Teabing. If the script delivers, this could be a good movie.