|
|
Post by Amanda on May 20, 2006 7:47:57 GMT -5
Now Amanda's scaring me. I'm supposed to watch it tomorrow night.  I mean... you might like it. Everyone has a different opinion. Personally, I think I'd have enjoyed it a lot more if I hadn't read the book first. There are just too many glaring discrepancies from the book for me to have enjoyed it. It's still one of those films I think everyone should see, though (or better yet--everyone should read the book, but THAT'S never going to happen), kind of like Brokeback Mountain. |
|
|
|
Post by mrsscarecrow on May 21, 2006 11:55:24 GMT -5
I saw the movie two times.....the second time I went to see it because my friends wanted to see it and i wanted to stay with them, so i had to go there....
anyway i did like it, and I think all the discussions people made about it are too exagerated.....after all, it's only a movie, based upon a novel! Don't u think?!
|
|
|
|
Post by hell0sunshine on May 23, 2006 5:37:11 GMT -5
wtfff. some countries actually banned this movie.  i liked it. basically, it's like national treasure except it's about JESUS. |
|
|
|
Post by absolutelydivine47 on May 24, 2006 20:55:21 GMT -5
Okay, I just finished reading the book and I thought it was brilliant. It was so thrilling I actually couldn't put it down. I know I said I would wait until the movie comes out on dvd to watch it, but temptation has gotten its hold on me now. Besides, I just saw the previews and saw that Paul Bettany plays the albino monk so that really persuaded me to go watch it in theatres. In the book I thought the albino monk was the most interesting character, so I'm anxious to see how he's portrayed in the movie. My friend wants to see it also, so early next week we're going to go watch it together. And I don't really believe the whole theory about Jesus marrying Mary Magdalene and having a child with her, but I'm just going to see it out of curiosity. From the previews it looks like a good thriller, and I want to see how true it stays to the book.
|
|
|
|
Post by hell0sunshine on May 27, 2006 4:52:22 GMT -5
It does stay impeccably true to the book - the University lecture, the scene at the Lourve, the swiss bank account, guy with the Rolex, pagan ritual with the old guy having sex (gross.) and even the scene with Sophia's grandma - everything.
But I was a little annoyed whenever they mentioned Jesus having a child (not that I get offended or anything). But this religious couple behind us would keep saying, "THAT'S A LIE!!" blah blah.
....
Thanks for ruining the movie for me, f*ckers.
....
I liked everyone's performance though, especially Ian McKellen's and Tom Hank's. Audrey Tautou is really pretty but for some reason I just don't believe her as the 'heir'. And I couldn't understand smack she said for the first half of the movie.
Paul Bettany's character, Silas, has the scariest eyes I've ever freakin seen.
And I think I laughed way too much at the part where cops tell Teabing to put his hands up. (the guy had crutches... way to rub it in his face, lol.) Funniest part of the movie had to be when it ended and I actually tripped over some guy's crutches in the aisle. How strangely ironic.
Summary: It's a story better read than watched, à la Harry Potter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amanda on May 27, 2006 9:16:05 GMT -5
Summary: It's a story better read than watched, à la Harry Potter. My point exactly. I'm a bit nit-picky, though. There were so many vital things that weren't true to the book that just made me want to cry. The ending scene at the Rosslyn Church was drastically different from the book! I don't want to spoil it, so my thoughts about it are in black text below this so you'll have to highlight it. First of all, the documents were never supposed to still be there! That is hardly a good place for something so important--behind a little chain that says "No Entry" and under a carpet with a trap door? NO, THANK YOU. Then, of course, no one ever said anything about Sophie's brother--and she was IN the car when the rest of her family was killed? And Jacques wasn't her real grandfather, but was just the Grand Master of the Priory and decided to watch over her? WHAT? I might be reading too much into it, but I hhhaaaaaated that they changed all that. |
|
|
|
Post by Mandy on May 28, 2006 14:05:28 GMT -5
i lied it well enough. basically same reaction as i had to the book. Silas was the best part, as he was in the novel too. the only character with any kind of real story to him. everyone else it kind of just felt like they were along for the ride. from the moment they announced Paul was playing Silas i knew he would do a fantastic job. i've always liked him.
|
|
|
|
Post by absolutelydivine47 on May 28, 2006 19:41:58 GMT -5
Yeah, ever since I found out that Paul was playing Silas I began to watch more of his movies. I think he's a fantastic actor. And his eyes are indeed freaky. I was looking at some stills of him from the movie because I got too curious  and I was like "whoa..." I'm glad it stays true to the book, but I somehow get the feeling that since I read the book, I might be a little disappointed in the movie. All the people I know who have seen it say that they wish they saw the movie first before reading the book, because they probably would have liked the movie better. Oh, and hell0sunshine, when I saw the previews I couldn't understand a thing Audrey Tautou's character was saying either. So not much hope for understanding her completely in the movie. Oh, well... life goes on. And they keep the pagan sex ritual in there? Ugh, that was the one thing from the book I was hoping they would leave out. lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Mandy on May 28, 2006 21:13:38 GMT -5
they don't show anything in the sex ritual at all. it's not nearly as disturbing, lol. paul plays a good bad guy, but my favorite role of his was as Chaucer in A Knight's Tale.
|
|
|
|
Post by absolutelydivine47 on May 29, 2006 0:46:20 GMT -5
Well, Mandy, that is reassuring. lol. I guessed they wouldn't show much on that since it is pg-13. I just saw a clip right now and I'm anticipating this movie even more. " Each breath you take is a sin!"  Wow, this Silas character is scary as hell. |
|
|
|
Post by §hannon on May 29, 2006 11:42:03 GMT -5
I'm going to see it tonight. So, I'll post my thoughts later on. :]
|
|
|
|
Post by absolutelydivine47 on May 31, 2006 20:30:53 GMT -5
Okay, I just saw the movie last night and thought it was really good overall. I wasn't disappointed like I thought I would be; I kinda expected how the movie would turn out. In my opinion it was satisfying and something worth watching in theatres, but there were of course some parts that I wish they included and/or left out. I didn't get the whole idea of Jacques Sauniere not being Sophie's real grandfather, because it was not that way in the book. That part was the only major thing that really confused me. I think the acting was equally great on all of the actor's and actresses's parts. There were some parts that really made me and everyone else in the movie theatre jump. Especially the part where Sophie and Langdon are talking in Teabing's office and Silas just jumps out of nowhere and attacks Langdon. I really didn't see that coming, since I believe Silas's entrance was a little different in the book, but it was effective. It was funny though because I really wasn't sure if Silas would be naked in the parts where he beat himself, and to my surprise, you get a really clear view of him naked from behind. In the book he did strip down, so that was true, but I thought he would wear something to cover him from the waist down. I'm not complaining, it was just... weird and unexpected. lol. The self-flagellation scenes were intense, but I can stand gory horror films so I was able to keep my eyes on the screen. My friend wasn't able to though.
When the movie was over, my friend and I were uniquely sad that Silas had to die, even though we had both read the book and knew that was gong to happen. Throughout the whole movie I basically pitied him. My friend and I were also joking that Silas was the best looking male in the movie, so that added to what a shame it was that he had to die. ( I mean, Tom Hanks is getting a little old now.)
The movie also didn't really endorse the fact that Sophie and Langdon have a bit of a romance in the end, but that didn't bother me too much. All in all, it was an excellent film, and for anyone who likes thrillers and some history, I persuade you to watch it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pukkina on Jun 1, 2006 18:22:47 GMT -5
<3 Silas.
I saw this with my friends, a bunch of them and was kind of disappointed.
Everyone kept saying it was "miraculous" and "life-changing" and I got there and I was like..."Um...ok." Because a lot of it seemed (don't kill me, this is just how I feel, not even as a religious freak or anything) it seemed like just large coincidences strung together. I definitely think it's possible, but not necessarily by the painting and stuff. Da Vinci was born hundreds of years after the death of Christ, you know?
But I don't know...
The flagellation things were disgusting...but I kept my eyes open. Winced a few times, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mandy on Jun 3, 2006 14:06:50 GMT -5
absolutelydivine47, i like your picture of Paul from Gangser No. 1. his face looks hilarious there.
|
|
|
|
Post by blue on Jun 3, 2006 19:47:11 GMT -5
I just saw it. It was... Okay. Could've been worse. But man, I had no idea what was up with the end. And these people behind me were gasping at every bleeding moment in the movie, I swear. I thought they peed their pants. But AHAHAH omg. At the "Rosy flesh seeded womb" bit, the dude behind whispered to his wife "Is it a tomato? I never read the book." I nearly burst out laughing. I did when the movie was done.
But Silas was cool. I felt bad for him. The Bishop was uncool.
And I have decided that now that the story has been exposed in the biggest ways something can be exposed in society: Court case, book, film, people flipping... In appx. 200 years, Brownism will be the new world faith. Goodbye, Pope.
(And its downfall will be Scientology)
|
|
and I was like "whoa..." 
Wow, this Silas character is scary as hell. 
