Musings
an Online Journal of Sorts

By Alyce Wilson

This past weekend, The Gryphon and I saw
The Da Vinci Code.

Now, I'd read the book earlier this year, because as soon as the media started to chirp about the upcoming movie, I figured I better read it before they revealed all the secrets of the mystery. I hate when reviewers do that, and unfortunately, since my job involves paying close attention to the media, I can't exactly tune out even if they warn me of spoilers.

Turns out I was right, that the media's endless chatter did reveal a key plot point, although they didn't go so far as to reveal the answer to the whodunit. I enjoyed the book: it was a real page turner. I'd heard of some of the theories in the book, and I found it interesting to see them all connected. My copy of the book was illustrated with photos of the places and works of art discussed in the book, which helped me to visualize the action.

The Gryphon, who has more time in his schedule to read, finished the book a lot faster than I did. He read the book recently and also enjoyed it, and he said he was surprised by the ultimate revelation of the culprit.

I'd read the reviews going into the movie, so I wasn't expecting anything great. It was actually a bit better than some of the reviewers made it out to be. Many people had complained that it drags, with no sense of excitement. I didn't feel that it dragged, but I would acknowledge that, despite director Ron Howard's efforts, through the use of a soundtrack and dramatic editing, he couldn't make such an exposition heavy work as exciting as your typical action film.

Dan Brown's novel is not a typical mystery novel, where investigators discover clues or learn secrets through interviewing witnesses. Instead, the clues are provided through a sort of treasure hunt left behind by the murder victim, many of which are puzzles which must be solved.

In the book, the main characters, Robert Langdon and Sophie Neveu, take a lot of time to puzzle out the clues, often trying multiple theories before hitting the right one. In the movie, Robert (Tom Hanks) and Sophie (Audrey Tautou) find the answers almost immediately, which removes much of the suspense. However, for the sake of expediency, I'm not sure how else it could have been handled.

The book involves a lot of exposition, as Robert and other characters explain to Sophie the necessary historical and religious background to understand their theories. Ron Howard makes every effort to visualize these scenes, by including dreamlike sequences showing the past. Still, it was a narrator giving an explanation, and ended up seeming almost like a Power Point presentation.

That's where the true problem lies: it's hard to keep an action movie going where the intrigue focuses so intently on the exposition. The solution of these puzzles is a mental process, not a visual one. Perhaps there were other ways he could have dealt with it, but that might have involved a dramatic departure from the book, which would only have upset fans.

That said, Ron Howard did what he could. I just don't know if this movie was truly adaptable. In order for it to be more exciting, more drastic changes might have been necessary. The few changes there are, he makes for the sake of expediency, such as having something happen on camera which in the book was simply related to someone later. Or condensing two characters into one.

Those who have read the book will be able to pick them out. Those who haven't would never guess, since the changes work well for the movie.

Tom Hanks does a good job of playing Robert Langdon, who is a college professor who gets pulled into this mystery and who, frankly, is not the most exciting or most excitable of individuals. Again, if Hanks had chosen, he could have invested him with more passion, but that would have conflicted with the book.

Audrey Tautou is fine as Sophie, but much as she is in the book, is relegated to a sidekick after her initial scenes. The rest of the casting is brilliant, and the film is nicely shot.

Though Ron Howard didn't do anything wrong, this film will not be a huge box office smash. However, there are enough people who read the book, and there's been enough press, that despite so-so reviews, the movie will definitely be a financial success, especially after it goes into international release.

The lesson here is that sometimes the book works on the page is the very reason it won't work as a movie.

Copyright 2006 by Alyce Wilson

Musings Index

What do you think? Share your thoughts
at Alyce's message board (left button):