There is an old saying in publishing, what the bestselling author can hope for in Hollywood is the opportunity to be disappointed. There are innumerable examples of that, and I am neither surprised nor disappointed to hear the same from Cannes and the US after The Da Vinci Code was premiered and released last week. Having read the book, it is a possibly fad to scoff at the movie, disregarding the fact, a film maker's challenge to adapt a novel ( that too a bestselling one ) is hundred times more difficult than the author's. I am not sure how the Germans liked it, or more importantly the French, as Corso Kino is the only theatre in Stuttgart where we managed to get hold of the English version of Sakrileg - the Deutsch release of Dan Brown's paperback crusade against accepted dogmas of Christianity through a highly absorbing concoction of thrills, murder, conundrum and medieval history.
Novelists and the mesmerized readers of their bestsellers are also the harshest critics of the movie versions. They hate to be adapted and edited, expect every single word written to appear on the screen, with vivid portrayal of every character and scene how irrelevant it might be. Never mind the director's pain to condense your three day reading into a 152 minutes audiovisual presentation. Also disregarding the fact, had the book been made into film verbatim, it would be 20 to 30 hours longer.
However, with all my admiration for Da Vinci Code - the novel, having read it over seven days first time and reread it over two sleepless nights immediately after, I am biased to give Ron Howard the benefit of doubt. Overcoming the high benchmark set by the novel, controversy in tow and dealing with over 40 million prospective viewers who had already 'read' the movie itself was a gargantuan task at hand. Deciding it to take this risk within three years of the book release did not make it any easier.
If anyone else, it was Brown who made things somewhat easier for Howard, with choice of locations that make the movie a tryst with history and a journey through the exquisite locales of medieval Europe. Add to that, the eeriness of the Denon Wing within the mammoth piazza of the Louvre well past midnight, over 60000 artifacts enticing you to this cryptic journey of intrigue and mystery is in itself a good enough reason to go and see it for once. Where else could you be alone with 'Oh Lame Saint' ( as Sauniere encrypted it ), no pushing crowds in front of the plexi-covered masterpiece or stealthy flashbulbs impairing your view of the most talked about painting in history.
To start with, the movie does not begin with any disclaimer ( or a double disclaimer as demanded in India ). That's honest film-making I should say, as the book is not purely fiction but a pointer towards an existing underground organization and its Vatican-sponsored anti-organization whose fight is over a piece of disputed history. Priory of Sion exists as knowledge since 1975, Opus Dei's headquarters in Lexington Avenue is highly visible, as is the Louvre and her curators in some humanly form. It is also known that the Welsh physicist, Dr Robert Lomas is the inspiration behind Robert Langdon. Trivia also has it that John Langdon, a close friend and typography master who worked with Brown on an ambigram logo "Angels and Demons" could have inspired Robert Langdon as well. It would have been therefore great hypocrisy to have disowned the factual reference towards this alleged 'greatest cover-up in human history', which unfortunately, political and religious compulsions are forcing to pursue in India.
To Ron Howard's credit, this honesty theme is carried throughout the film with very minor digression from the storyline. For a reader, that would be great comfort, as the unfolding pages of the book have in fact been a running sequence of pictures. For one who has not yet read it, the movie doubles up as a video-book.
Howard cleverly juxtaposes the opening sequence of the chase across the Denon corridors with Langdon's talk on Interpretation of Symbols ; only to rush-in Collet to pickup Langdon not from his sleep at the Ritz in Paris, but from the post-lecture signing session on his new book 'Symbols of the Lost Sacred Feminine'. Brown mentions this only as a manuscript in the novel, but knowing from his storyline, Sauniere's pre-access to the manuscript and his resultant desperado to meet Langdon makes this book-release only realistic. The Silas-Sauniere scene across the famous parquet floors of the Grand Gallery are straight out of the book, complete with all the staring edifices and gilded frame of the Caravaggio that Sauniere lunged at to bring down the gates. It is pertinent to mention here, the book characters tend to float our own choices for the cast, as a Richard Attenborough for Sauniere in my case. Brown gives his choice for Langdon in the book itself ("Harrison Ford in Harris tweed" ) but Ron Howard possibly thought the 60+ actor was too old to play the 42 year old Harvard symbologist.
As Langdon is driven to the Louvre, you are ushered into the majesty of the archetypal new entrance, the neo-modern glass pyramid, now as famous as the museum and somewhat controversial too. The illumination at the dead of the night combined with the impending suspense on the murder recreates the thrill from the book. This is the time for Capt Bezu Fache to make an entry, whose shadow grows longer as the plot thickens. From sneering at the glass pyramid entrance as 'Scar in the face of Paris', Jean Reno exudes a lot of character but still lacks the ruthless vindictiveness of being Le Taureau. His dogged pursuit of Langdon and Sophie later in the film lacks the energy a Tommy Lee Jones brought in while tracking Dr Richard Kimble in 'The Fugitive'. However to be fair to him, Fache's character was also painted with a lot Catholic color than that of a cop alone.
Sauniere lying dead in a Retruvian position with the bloody pentacle, complete with the anagrams and Fibonacci numerals scribbled aside was a grotesque depiction of the murder. In a rapidly unfolding sequence of events, Audrey Tautou enters as Sophie and Robert Langdon is delivered the spine chilling message through her answering machine. Ron Howard dogged fidelity to the novel is once more evident, with the rapid cast introduction to form the Anglo-French family of stars. The grammatical correctness on the choice of Sophie however cannot be disputed here.
What unfolds thereafter is exhilarating blend of relentless adventure, scholarly intrigue and cutting wit through the Italian Masterpieces in the Louvre.
It would be seem Langdon and Sophie finding it a child's play to decipher the clues left behind by Sauniere. The pace at which they unlock Leonardo Da Vinci ( O draconian devil ), The Monalisa ( Oh lame saint ), Madonna of the Rocks ( So dark the con of man ) and the Fibonacci series to retrieve the cryptex from the Swiss bank would seem unbelievable . That's possibly the difference between the time taken to grasp twenty pages of the book and fifteen minutes of the film. The real quest however does not unfold, till the time it strikes Langdon that "PS : Find Robert Langdon" could actually mean the Priory of Sion.
The film then enters the controversial theme on the quest for the Holy Grail who's Grandmaster, Sauniere died to protect it. This is where the disputed history is described in vivid details with Sir Leagh Teabing portrayed wonderfully by British actor Sir Ian Mckellen. Speeding across London, Lincolnshire and Edinburgh at breakneck speed, the greatest cover-up is unfolded at the Rosslyn Chapel, an artwork from Templar, Rosicrucian, Freemason and Grail traditions and often referred to as Tapestry in Stone. Legend has it that the Holy Grail is hidden here under the 'Apprentice Pillar'. That the grail is a flesh and blood entity than a physical object could not have been told better here. The parting scenes of the last living descendant of the 'Sangreal' are touchy. Not to mention of the finer depiction of testing by the royal bloodline to turn water into wine.
The handling of the contentious theme of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is done vividly and logically, true to the book, without fear. The consistency of sticking to the book is worth mentioning over and over again, which, though robs the viewer off any surprise element, affirm Ron's credibility as a level headed filmmaker.
When you go and watch such a film out of a bestseller, coupled with a cast and crew that features multi Oscar winners, you expect to exalt the product. Ron Howard does not deliver a masterpiece here, but spare a thought for him before you sneer at his effort. Fighting against the various odds of the loss of suspense, Ron was effectively doing a thankless job. Crippled with the over burdening euphoria on the book, what unknown was left to be seen was his treatment of the storyline which had right doses of a taut thriller, investigative content, picturesque locales and potentially explosive hypothesis.
At the end, one has to compliment him for being religiously faithful to the book, not experimenting the way others have turned great novels into garbage films and ensuring the characters get the space they deserved from the novel. Add to that Hans Zimmer's music, defining a new dimension to the theme and you have a fairly good movie. Not reading the book would steal you from some vital understanding of the storyline though.
Approach the movie with little expectation and you will enjoy the ride.
