Slitherine

...is a pretty good movie

Not from what I've heard. One guy, who liked the book, said this about the movie "Don't waste 2 1/2 precious hours of your all too short life watching this film".

Dithy

I've read bad reviews, but I never listen to film critics, at the end of the day the "critics" are just people too...

Yeah, but this was an average joe, not a film critic. I also rarely listen to the critics, as they usually say bad things about good movies and good things about bad movies. But this guy, along with quite a few other non-movie-critics said that it was boring. He even said that he would've fallen asleep if his friends hadn't pinched him to keep him awake.

it's the most action packed thing in the world, but the heart of the book is about the theory.

I heard that it is great as an actionb movie, but is a let-down if you've read the book.

I thought it was quite true to the novel, one of the better screenplay adapations I have seen. Thats my 0.02 tho.

AFter seeing the movie, I was kind of dissapointed. The book was too massive and complex to be put in a movie and still work. They still tried to fit the plot in there, and as a result left out most of what made it interesting.

I saw the film without reading the book and was disappointed. They half explained things and then never referred to them again. Odd thigns happened without any explanation. The most annoying thing was the treasure hunt, which felt so contrived.

I'll probably try the book at some point as the film on its own didn't really measure up to the hype!

iainmcneil wrote:I saw the film without reading the book and was disappointed. They half explained things and then never referred to them again. Odd thigns happened without any explanation. The most annoying thing was the treasure hunt, which felt so contrived.

I'll probably try the book at some point as the film on its own didn't really measure up to the hype!

That was more or less how I felt about the film, and I had read the book. Unfortunantly, the film managed to give away most of the major plot points without making them really interesting, so you may want to wait a bit before reading the book, so that you can forget the plot points.

Yeah, book is still definately worth a read, Only took me a day or two to finish not like its a long book or anything

The Davici Code book spent a lot of time putting forward the theories behind plot: Magdelene & Bloodline of Christ. In some respects the book was a form of arguing the case for the theory - the story itself was actually pretty second rate as are some other of Dan Brown's novels. If they had done a similar job with the film it would have been hours long and very much like a documentary.

If you really want to understand what it was all about, I strongly suggest you read the 'Holy Blood & Holy Grail' or the 'Messianic Legacy'. The former was the book the recent law suit was all about. No matter what the judges said (They're establishment anyway), the Davinci Book was lifted right out of the Holy Grail. I read the HG 20 years ago and when I read Davinci the first thought was they'd pinched Michael Baigent's work!!

Regrettably the film falls between two stools; it's not very exciting and it is not very informative about the background history. It's okay to watch but that's about it. I suspect the computer game will be similar.

Now to the Templars...........................
Guido Publius Maximus

PS Anyone see the Hannibal film on TV recently?

Its funny how Leigh Teabing is an homage to 2 of the authors of Holy Bloodline, Teabing being an anagram of Baigent, and Leigh the first name of one of the other authors. As you say about the other Dan Brown novels, his first book has a decent story if you grant him a ton of artistic liscese with the crypography facts he presents. I expect the same is true of Da Vinci Code, as I don't know that much about the historical/bilibical facts he is manipulating towards the argument he wishes to prove I can't see just how far he goes, but if Digital Fortress is anything to judge by, he goes along way :-p

No i didn't see Hannibal on TV, but i've seen it enough times It's a fair decent movie.

ste wrote:Its funny how Leigh Teabing is an homage to 2 of the authors of Holy Bloodline, Teabing being an anagram of Baigent, and Leigh the first name of one of the other authors. As you say about the other Dan Brown novels, his first book has a decent story if you grant him a ton of artistic liscese with the crypography facts he presents. I expect the same is true of Da Vinci Code, as I don't know that much about the historical/bilibical facts he is manipulating towards the argument he wishes to prove I can't see just how far he goes, but if Digital Fortress is anything to judge by, he goes along way :-p

No i didn't see Hannibal on TV, but i've seen it enough times It's a fair decent movie.

Lol, having them as the villian isnt very homage-like, I always thought.

The Hannibal I was referring to was a documentary of Hannibal's war against Rome shown on BBC2 about a month ago. It seemed pretty realistic and accurate to me! If you missed it it must come out on video or be reshown. Try and see it!
Guido Publius Maximus

my bad, i thought you were talking about the sequel to Silence of the Lambs... another excellent movie Infact, if you don't count the original version of Red Dragon and excellent trilogy of movies.

I thought the original Red Dragon (Man Hunter) was a far superior film!
Guido