Ian McKellen on the Da Vinci Code...

[fajrdrako]

Ian McKellen, from an interview about The Da Vinci Code:

"We went to Lincolnshire, which stood in for Westminster Abbey, because the Abbey didn't want us filming there. It would have disrupted their tourist take. I think that was the problem. So we went off to a quieter place called Lincolnshire, and there there was a demonstration against the filming in the hallowed portals of the cathedral, but the objections were only from one person who was dressed as a nun. And I said 'dressed as a nun' advisedly, because apparently the outfit she was wearing wasn't actually a nun's outfit. It just looked like one, and she'd borrowed it from some fancy-dress store. So that's the only person I know who's objected to this film, a fake nun. So I really can't help you."

Comments

[hamadryad11.livejournal.com]

I think the large number of people who thought the book was crap might have objected to the movie, but probably not very loudly or energetically. :P

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Well, not quite so publicly. I am known to have ranted a little (in my apazine, for example) about the stupidity of the hero and the idiocy of the history. I didn't think of dressing up as a nun in public protest, though. I'm sure I could borrow a nun's outfit left over from our last performance on Nunsense....

My main objection to the movie is that I don't like Tom Hanks, but Ian McKellen might be a nice antidote.

[hamadryad11.livejournal.com]

Hmm. I don't have any particular problem with Tom Hanks. I'm not a fan, but he doesn't bother me. My objection is... it's a stupid, badly written book. And now it's being made into a movie... which are typically worse than the material they started from.

I shudder to think.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

My objection is... it's a stupid, badly written book.

Well, yes. One could list the many ways in which it is stupid. (The grade-school vocabulary, the obviously easy puzzles, the formatting of the chapters in a repeating pattern, etc.) But it seems to have worked for many people who enjoyed it. My thought is that the movie might not seem as dumb - movies often use simple vocabularies, and the acton might compensate for lack of substance.

Or maybe not.

[monsieureden.livejournal.com]

LOL. I liked the book but not because it was well written or a good mystery, I liked how fast it read and it was fun, connecting ideas and history, albeit incorrect. It was fiction, so I didn't expect much. I'm no fan of mystery, so I didn't care that I knew what was happening right from the start.

I don't know why the author put it forth as fact when it's fiction and I don't think it should be taken half as seriously as it is, though we should know that the theme is bound to start a stir, as anything religious would, no less the core of a religion.

I will see the movie for Ian, and for what's-his-name playing the albino, and hope for a fast-paced ride with lots of shots of the Louvre and England, etc. so on.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I do like mysteries, and it annoyed me by being a bad mystery. At the same time... I wasn't bored with it, certainly! No, it shouldn't be taken seriously. And I am on some level glad that a book which is, in its way, about the study of history, is getting so much attention.

I am still not sure whether I will see it or not, but I would like to see it for Ian McKellen and Alfred Molina. Tom Hanks and Paul Bettany are both reasons not to see it - so I'm still not sure.

[countrycousin.livejournal.com]

My local paper had an unenthusiastic review, but Ebert, acknowledging that the book is "utterly preposterous", says that the movie is "preposterously entertaining" and gives it 3 stars. So it will at least be on my "to rent" list . . . That does not guarantee I will watch all of it . . .

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

My local paper had an unenthusiastic review

Yes, mine too. I was amused by the publicity last week that was referring to it as a 'blockbuster' movie... Even though nobody'd been to see it because it hadn't opened yet. There was something suspect about the concept.

I might go see it, still haven't decided, but I think I'd rather stay home and read a good comic book.

[megaloo13.livejournal.com]

Haha, Ian McKellen wins. :)

I am one of those people who still hasn't read the book. When some people hear that they go "WHAT? How could you have not read it YET?!" to which I shug. The book sounds interesting, I suppose, but apparently the protagonist is the authors ideal hero, one of my dealbreakers. Gimme a nice fucked up anti-hero anyday, or even a hero with some realistic flaws.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Ian McKellen wins. :)

Always! I am always impressed by his comments, whatever they may be about.

If I were you I wouldn't rush to read The Da Vinci Code. I thought the hero was very flawed - but not in a good way, he was just stupid. A world-renowned cryptographer who can't even recognize mirror-image handwriting? That just doesn't make sense to me.