I sending this out to all of us that are both book readers and movie hounds, we who appreciate both, and wait with breathless anticipation for when the best of both worlds join together and create something more than a book, or a movie–a magical interpretation of shared archetypes and individual dreams. Alas, more often we must endure the half-breed zombie step-children of each who have inherited only the worst of their progenitors. Ever more tragic is when the best and the brightest from one form are saddled with a misfit, an abomination, a mockery of the other.
You guessed it, I’m referring to the fact that not only has Ron Howard been ensnared, but it is now offical that Tom Hanks has also been condemned to portray the lead character in the movie version of that dreadful book The DaVinci Code. Such a tragic, tragic waste of talent. Don’t they realize that they won’t always be able to make movies? That they should not spill their seed on the barren soil but cast it into visions of truth, beauty and goodness?
I would ask the Gods to intervene and make the movie better than the book, but I doubt there is any way for anything to the worse than that drivel.
I really need the DVDs of the Lord of the Rings, the 1939 version of Goodbye, Mr. Chips, and A Christmas Story. And one of those Star Trek books.
I’m feeling much better now.
I have to agree with you and face the impending movie version of the DaVinciCode with trepidation. Yet, given public tastes, i don’t know if this will ruin the carreers of Tom Hanks or Ron Howard. The movie, bad or worse, should make a killing at the box office.
One can always hope that it will rise above the written word, as did Mystic River. I felt that the book was flat and pedestrian, but Clint Eastwood managed to get some stunning performances from some first rate actors. They brought emotion to what I had perceived as cold, dull words on paper.
I agree. I haven’t read the book, and won’t read it. Conspiracy theories are stupid, and why more than half the human race buys into them I don’t know. I really belive that nothing can stay secret for long, humans have too much inclination to talk. I can’t believe they’re making a movie out of this drivel.
I bought The DaVinci Code cheap on Amazon about five months ago to give to my sister (an almost-fundie. I love her despite this.) and she really enjoyed it so I’m already a bit leery of it. This is the same woman that bought and read all the Left Behind***** books too.
*****Okay, okay. I bought and read about eight of them too but I was just a stupid teenager at the time! May the invisile pink unicorn have mercy on my soul.
I was given a copy, so I read it. The conspiracy theory is the fun part. The bad part was: that the estrangement that she had with her grandfather was over something so very tame. Maybe it was not tame to your nearly fundie sister.
That and it also seemed to fall apart in the end, but that could have just been me ticked by the bad part.
I haven’t read The Da Vinci Code, but I’ve read about what it’s apparently based on. Stupid stuff, yes, but that doesn’t mean tha the book is necessarily bad. I can “buy” a truly bizarre premise using that magical Willing Suspension of Disbelief, after all. Anyone who really believes the premise of, say, Sinister Barrier is a dangerous loony, but , if you accept it for the sake of the book, it’s a good read.
As noted above, there have been several good movies made out of bad books. I’m told that the book Orson Welles based Touch of Evil on was pretty awful. I wasn;t particularly fond of Harry Bates’ “Farewell to the Master”, but The Day the Earth Stood Still is one of the great SF films.
How could it NOT be made into a movie- the damn thing read just like a screenplay.
While I enjoyed the book enough to read it all (though I saw the “secret” coming a mile away- I’m an avid crucifixion conspiracy theorist)- I recognized the disgustingly bad writing style, but I’ve never really read that time of “adventure” paperback before so it sucked me in- I actually think it might be beneficial for some Christians (especially teens) in that it even dares to suggest that the Bible was, at some point, edited by mere mortals. I know there are glaring factual errors, but the mere suggestion… Am I the only one who thinks this is a plus? I am, aren’t I?
Not a practice (he did Rebecca and The Thirty-Nine Steps, for instance), but I’ve heard it said that there is an advantage filming an obscure book – the audience hasn’t read it, so you don’t have to be 100% faithful to it.
Wow, I think you are right on the money with those two. I did like his films of The Birds and Rear Window better than the books, though. I also think you make a good point with having an advantage by filming an obscure book. Was Daphne du Maurier obscure at the times Rebecca, The Birds, and Jamaica Inn were filmed? I’ve always wondered about her popularity then, and whether Hitchcock helped to make her famous.
I haven’t read the book but I was talking about it with my sister-in-law last week. When she started to tell me what it was about I started ti fill in details - French royal family, knights Templar, French village on a hill blah blah blah. It turned out I knew most of the story from some book I read 30 years ago, so how the hell is this book an original work of fiction?
It certainly was a work of fiction but original it was not.
I enjoyed it as brain candy, but I figured everything out right in the beginning (as most of us did, no?). I hate that.
Kallessa - Don’t you just think the movie folks are hoping that “popular book = popular movie”. No wait - “Extremely profitable book = Extremely profitable movie”. Now this hasn’t always been the case, but it does seem to be the way Hollywood thinks.
You wouldnt call Leonardo Da Vinci “Da Vinci” Thats like calling george bush “of Connecticut”
Stupid book
read Foucault’s Pendulum… much better research