Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Okay, so I liked the Da Vinci Code....

Since I must be the only person in American (the world?) who hasn't read The Da Vinci Code, I went into the movie last Friday with only a vague idea of what it was about.

Sure, I'd heard that the premise of the book/movie was based on Jesus and Mary Magdalen having a family, etc., etc., but I didn't really know how it all fit together.

I have to say, I liked the movie, with all of its flaws (unless you've been living under a rock, you've heard the reviews). I liked it a lot.

Except for one thing that bugged me. Everything made sense, and followed along logically in the story except for the clue to open the cryptex (cryptix? I dunno; I haven't read the book so I don't know how it's spelled. Yeah, I could look it up, but I'm in the throes of a blog entry.).

Why was the word "apple" the password? It's English. Why would the Priory of Scion make their code word to open its most important document in English?

It should have been in Latin, the universal language of the Church and Opus Dei or barring that, in French, which was the original language of the Knights Templar. It made no sense for me for the word to be in English.

Granted, I haven't read the book, so if I'm missing something, by all means, clear it up.

But as a writer who has created a world and legends and secret societies, I've taken great care to keep in mind the language these people would have used when creating their passwords, terminology, etc., that are meant to span centuries and geography. It seems like such a small thing, yet, to me, it's a big flaw in the story.

As I was watching Tom Hanks try and figure out the word, I kept thinking of Latin or French words that would work; and when he finally divulged the clue, all I could think of was Gwyneth Paltrow's baby.

It totally didn't work for me.

The other thing that niggled at me--and always does in a Tom Hanks movie (even though I absolutely adore him)--are those big deep lines he gets between his eyebrows when he's serious. They're getting deeper and deeper, and unfortunately, whenever I see them, I'm always reminded of that scene at the end of When Harry Met Sally... when Harry is telling Sally all of the reasons he knows he loves her, and he says, "...and I love the way you get that little crinkle above your nose when you're looking at me like I'm crazy....and I love...."

It makes me want to massage them away, or at the very least, call him up and tell him he's giving himself wrinkle lines!

It's probably too late for that.


Anonymous Mom soliloquized...

Why APPLE? Read the book! But here's a hint.....the fall of the sacred feminine......

Think Hard :)
Love, Mom

Wednesday, May 24, 2006 8:32:00 PM  
Blogger Colleen Gleason soliloquized...

No, no...I understand why it's "apple," just not why it's the English word for apple, and not the Latin or French word for apple, since that was the language they spoke. See what I mean?

Thanks, Mom!

Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9:36:00 PM  
Blogger Diana Peterfreund soliloquized...

Isaac Newton was english. that's the way I made it work in my head. For what it's worth. Also -- ALL the clues were in English. "So dark the con..." and "lame saint" and whatever they translated to. The clue itself was in English. Why wouldn't the answer be?

What I couldn't figure out was why they made Sophie such a terrible cryptologist. I did like how they made her much younger when she came across grandpa doing the nasty. Made a lot more sense that way. In the book, she's in college, and I don't know a Parisian chick who would freak out so much.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:48:00 PM  
Blogger Diana Peterfreund soliloquized...

Also, in the book, there are TWO cryptexes.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:48:00 PM  
Blogger Jana DeLeon soliloquized...

Yes, as usual, the book was better and covered far more ground. I liked the movie okay and found all the theories in the book very interesting. What I think it lacked is the things the rest of us put into our work - a great plot, superb ending (I felt let down), character arc??????

Essentially, I saw the "story" as a setting for Brown to unleash a bunch of hypothesis that is actually what caused the controversy and sold the book. I don't think the suspense itself was all that great.

And another thing, why is everyone upset at the thought of Christ being married? What the heck difference does it make. He was a man.....granted, a man without sin, but since when is marriage and children a sin?

Thursday, May 25, 2006 7:55:00 AM  
Blogger Janice Lynn soliloquized...

I have the book, but haven't read it yet. Had to wait on hubby to finish & then ball season was full swing (no pun intended ;) & I haven't gotten to it yet. Very cool discussion & piques my curiosity all the more!

Thursday, May 25, 2006 11:21:00 PM  
Blogger MaryF soliloquized...

I liked the movie, too. I read the book awhile back, so didn't remember much (which, if you think about it, doesn't say much for DB's writing.) I wish they'd played up the Sacred Feminine more.

What didn't work for me in either the book or the movie was this dying man runnning around the museum leaving coded clues. But once I suspended that disbelief, I liked it.

Jana, I'm with you - I don't get the big deal about Jesus having a family. And I was raised Catholic.

Friday, May 26, 2006 7:29:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Who links to me?