The Da Vinci Code (2006)

The Da Vinci Code

Call No: PN1995.9.S87 D3 2006

Every once and a while, a bandwagon full of people comes along with some new book or show that everybody absolutely loves and everyone else must see. That was how I was unfortunately introduced to The Da Vinci Code. The fastest way to turn me off of a book or movie is to tell me that it’s the greatest thing ever written/filmed/watched, etc (my only exception is top 100 film lists, collaborated from dozens of people). I like to have a reason to sit down and watch a movie, be it the actors, writers, directors, plot or just general interest. If you’re one of my closest friends, you learn that the best way to get me to read a book or watch a movie is to give me a bit of the plot and let curiosity gnaw away at me until I finally track it down. That was how my housemate and close friend got me to watch The Da Vinci Code.

“It’s not bad,” she’d said, “You know, huge religious conspiracy that could threaten Christianity.” Then she said the magic words: “Also, it’s got Tom Hanks and Paul Bettany.”

I haven’t been disappointed by them yet, so needless to say, I gave it a shot.

Almost everyone knows the premise: For thousands of years, an underground society has protected a great secret, one that would throw into question the entire foundation of Christianity. Caught in the middle of a war over the vital information are Robert Langdon (Hanks) and his newfound ally Sophie Neveu. The two must work together to stay alive and decode the clues to lead them to the truth, before someone gets to them first.

I remember when the film came out that there was a great deal of boycotting because of the content and interpretation of Christian history. While I can see why some people would react that way, I don’t see the film having any detrimental effect. The ideas suggested in the film have been around for decades. Christianity is the world’s largest organized religion, followed by Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. If you’re going to create a conspiracy about a religion, why pick a little one? Why not go for the biggest fish in the pond?  The film centers around the idea that Leonardo Da Vinci has hidden clues about this conspiracy in his work. This, to me, is excellent plotting: take something that people see every day, hiding in plain sight, and make it the keeper of a secret. The author, Dan Brown, wins points for that. He’s taken superstitions already well known, paintings that people recognize, and interpreted them in a way that captures the viewer’s attention, making perfect sense to them. Other treasure hunting movies follow the same idea. Why wouldn’t there be a secret map on the back of the Declaration of Independence in National Treasure? It’s guaranteed to be protected for years, which guarantees the map’s safety.

Clues hidden within well-known items makes for a great treasure hunt.

 While the acting was good and the story wasn’t bad, I found that I was most impressed with the special effects and the music. Because of the importance that history plays in the film, combined with Langdon’s eidetic memory, often before and after scenes of the same location are placed one on top of another. Memories are unfolded directly in front of the characters’ eyes. I wasn’t expecting it, and it was a pleasant surprise to me. I find that the best music in movies is the soundtracks that make me sit up and take notice without distracting me from the action taking place on screen. Hans Zimmer has the exceptional ability of doing that for me. I found his soundtracks for Inception, Batman Begins, and The Dark Knight to have to same impact: they enriched the film not simply as background music, but as a powerful enforcer of the actions or feelings onscreen.

Was the film good? I thought so. Is it the greatest film ever made? No. Is it a great conspiracy movie? Definitely. Would it work best on a Friday night with a side of popcorn? Yes. And I don’t need to hide some clues in some paintings to tell you that. Although, I would if you asked nicely. :)