The Da Vinci Code

While in Paris on business (seems like a conference and autograph session), Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) was approached by the 'French FBI' Captain Fache (Jean Reno) to 'assist' in the murder of the curator Jacques Sauniere. Little did Robert realise that Fache was bent on arresting him as the murderer.

Langdon had thought he was approached to assist in the murder case, because he was suppose to have met Sauniere at the bar, which he never showed up, and that Langdon was an expert in symbols... And his expertise was needed in solving the case.

Although Jacques Sauniere was shot, what the police found at the murder scene was done by Sauniere himself... before his eventual death. Stripped himself naked, lying within a circle, Langdon immediately realise Sauniere was depicting one of Da Vinci's drawing - The Vitruvian Man.

And drawn on this chest, was the Pentacle. What did he really meant, Langdon was puzzled. Fache insisted on the devil, but Langdon dismissed the idea of that, for the pentacle wasn't the symbol for the devil. Also, written on the floor was a series of number and these words...

It didn't make any sense to Fache.. and not to Langdon too. Shouldn't a dying man leave clues to his murderer?

Then comes Sophie Neveu, a cryptologist that came with the news for Fache that the series of number was the Fibonacci Sequence... scrambled. (Just in case you were wondering what the Fibonacci Sequence is, it is a sequence of number defined by a linear recurrence equation.. 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13...)

Neveu hands Langdon a note to call his Embassy... it was a matter of life and death. It was then Langdon realise that he was being suspected on murder, that Fache was so certain it was Landgon that he isn't even looking for suspects, according to Sophie Neveu. They then misled the police away from The Louvre Museum (The glass pyramid museum) with the tracking dot, which was accurate within 2 feets on this globe. Sophie and Robert returns to the crime scene to figure out what her grandfather, Jacques Sauniere wanted to tell her.

Langdon, solving the enigmatic riddle... "O, Draconian Devil! Oh, Lame Saint!", what Jacquese Sauniere meant was "Leonardo Da Vinci The Mona Lisa" Then the trail of clues lead to different works of Da Vinci, which ended with a key that Langdon identified as the symbol for the Priory of Sion. It seems that Jacques had something to do with this ancient secret society...

In a race through Paris, Langdon and Neveu teams up to solve the mystery... which was related to the Priory of Sion and the Holy Grail, which Sophie had assumed was a cup. Robert Langdon was an expert in symbols... not the Grail. And so, an expert was approached - Sir Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen), the scholar who has spent most of his life studying and searching the Holy Grail.

Together, this trio embarks on a Holy Grail search.... and what exactly is this Holy Grail? Teabing explains to Sophie in his mansion, using the famous picture by Da Vinci, once again, The Last Supper.

*Quotes from the movie... the best I can remember.* Sir Teabing explaining to Sophie the mystery behind Da Vinci's Last Supper... for she thought that the Holy Grail was a cup. *haha*

Sir Teabing: "Madamoiselle, where is Jesus sitting?"

Sophie: "In the middle."

Sir Teabing: "Good. He and his disciples are breaking bread. And what drink?"

Sophie: "Wine... they drank wine"

Sir Teabing: "Splendid. And one final question... How many wine glasses are on the table?"

Sophie: "One? The Holy Grail."

Sir Teabing: "Open your eyes"

(She opens her eyes and looks at the painting)

Sir Teabing: "No single cup.. No chalice... Well that's a bit strange isn't it?

And so, the battle of good versus evil begins. So who is on the bad side this time? Who is this mysterious "Teacher" that seems to be the ally of the Council, all out to destroy any evidence of the Holy Grail? And who, is the descendant of Jesus Christ... this "source of God's power on this Earth"?

For those of you who have read the novel or caught the movie, I need not explain further. For those of you who haven't read the novel nor watch the movie, please do either. *haha*

And in the end, Robert Langdon finds it....and kneels before her.

Okay, on to the reviews. For those who haven't read the novel, the movie is catchy enough to make you want to pick up Dan Brown's novel. For those who have read the novel, the movie is simply an 'animation' to the text that you have been reading.

Though much reviews have said that the movie was disappointing, I felt that the Director and Dan Brown himself have done a good job in preserving as much suspense and central controversy (Jesus was still mortal, a man. His wife was Mary Magdelene and they had a daughter) in the novel itself, considering it was a 150mins movie.

The plot was good and script well written too. It explains to us the controversies that have been raised and debated over... with pictures and animations to make it all seems clearer and, most importantly layman. Photography was good too, and suddenly it seemed that History and Ancient Arts seem so mysterious and beautiful at the same time, that you suddenly have this urge to study these subjects in Europe, to follow the Da Vinci trail... to be at least part of it, if not have that little knowledge of the things that were mentioned in Da Vinci's Code.

Unlike the usual blockbusters, the movie contains with minimal CGI, shootouts, stunts and mindless what-nots, and instead the movie is filled with intellect, history, arts and religion... Well, how many movies, in fact, how many blockbusters have actually achieved that? The Da Vinci Code has certainly made its mark. Perhaps, not as beautiful as many had expected. Were the expectations raised too high... because of the novel? I wonder.

As for the casting, the performance of Tom Hanks was certainly disappointing. Although he plays the main lead, Robert Langdon, a symbologist suddenly caught in this whole frenzy murder-cum-quest, the actor was rather... dull, and perhaps flat. Little expression, little life... I don't know. Was it me or that Tom Hanks seemed the same throughout the movie? I'm sure it wasn't the character itself, because if you had read the novel, Langdon was surely more than that.

Audrey Tautou made a passable Sophie Neveu.. but still rather dull and lifeless, yet slightly better than Tom Hanks. All the mysterious Priory of Sion, Holy Grail.. to even her upbringing and her grandfather Jacques Sauniere... she seems to have a tat too little expression for all these things that are happening to her. Hmmm.... But then again, a good attempt TRYING to be convincing.

Perhaps, the most worth noting is Ian McKellen, who plays the role of the British religious theologian and Holy-Grail fanatic Sir Leigh Teabing. He captures not only the essence of mystery, with its twists and turns in the plot, but makes this whole Da Vinci quest so amusing and wonderous, that we can't help but 'fall in love' with this man. From a simple question 'Should I serve coffee, or tea?', he makes even drinking tea sound so exquisite and mysterious at the same time, to his expression-full of delight and anticipation of the Holy Grail... like a 3 year old kid waiting to open his Christmas present. The light in his eyes, the facial expression, the body language, the voice... everything seems so... real. Not forgetting his humour, in this midst of frenzy and mystery, Ian McKellen certainly did a great job in saving this whole movie on the whole.

Catch him also in the other blockbuster movie, X-Men III, as Eric Lensherr, or more famously known as Magneto *Ahh... no wonder he looked so familiar?* And if you still remember seeing him somewhere... yes, you have. Another blockbuster triology, The Lord of the Rings. He plays Gandalf the Grey/White. Wow. Ian McKellen... *applause!*

The Da Vinci Code

While in Paris on business (seems like a conference and autograph session), Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) was approached by the 'French FBI' Captain Fache (Jean Reno) to 'assist' in the murder of the curator Jacques Sauniere. Little did Robert realise that Fache was bent on arresting him as the murderer.

Langdon had thought he was approached to assist in the murder case, because he was suppose to have met Sauniere at the bar, which he never showed up, and that Langdon was an expert in symbols... And his expertise was needed in solving the case.

Although Jacques Sauniere was shot, what the police found at the murder scene was done by Sauniere himself... before his eventual death. Stripped himself naked, lying within a circle, Langdon immediately realise Sauniere was depicting one of Da Vinci's drawing - The Vitruvian Man.

And drawn on this chest, was the Pentacle. What did he really meant, Langdon was puzzled. Fache insisted on the devil, but Langdon dismissed the idea of that, for the pentacle wasn't the symbol for the devil. Also, written on the floor was a series of number and these words...

It didn't make any sense to Fache.. and not to Langdon too. Shouldn't a dying man leave clues to his murderer?

Then comes Sophie Neveu, a cryptologist that came with the news for Fache that the series of number was the Fibonacci Sequence... scrambled. (Just in case you were wondering what the Fibonacci Sequence is, it is a sequence of number defined by a linear recurrence equation.. 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13...)

Neveu hands Langdon a note to call his Embassy... it was a matter of life and death. It was then Langdon realise that he was being suspected on murder, that Fache was so certain it was Landgon that he isn't even looking for suspects, according to Sophie Neveu. They then misled the police away from The Louvre Museum (The glass pyramid museum) with the tracking dot, which was accurate within 2 feets on this globe. Sophie and Robert returns to the crime scene to figure out what her grandfather, Jacques Sauniere wanted to tell her.

Langdon, solving the enigmatic riddle... "O, Draconian Devil! Oh, Lame Saint!", what Jacquese Sauniere meant was "Leonardo Da Vinci The Mona Lisa" Then the trail of clues lead to different works of Da Vinci, which ended with a key that Langdon identified as the symbol for the Priory of Sion. It seems that Jacques had something to do with this ancient secret society...

In a race through Paris, Langdon and Neveu teams up to solve the mystery... which was related to the Priory of Sion and the Holy Grail, which Sophie had assumed was a cup. Robert Langdon was an expert in symbols... not the Grail. And so, an expert was approached - Sir Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen), the scholar who has spent most of his life studying and searching the Holy Grail.

Together, this trio embarks on a Holy Grail search.... and what exactly is this Holy Grail? Teabing explains to Sophie in his mansion, using the famous picture by Da Vinci, once again, The Last Supper.

*Quotes from the movie... the best I can remember.* Sir Teabing explaining to Sophie the mystery behind Da Vinci's Last Supper... for she thought that the Holy Grail was a cup. *haha*

Sir Teabing: "Madamoiselle, where is Jesus sitting?"

Sophie: "In the middle."

Sir Teabing: "Good. He and his disciples are breaking bread. And what drink?"

Sophie: "Wine... they drank wine"

Sir Teabing: "Splendid. And one final question... How many wine glasses are on the table?"

Sophie: "One? The Holy Grail."

Sir Teabing: "Open your eyes"

(She opens her eyes and looks at the painting)

Sir Teabing: "No single cup.. No chalice... Well that's a bit strange isn't it?

And so, the battle of good versus evil begins. So who is on the bad side this time? Who is this mysterious "Teacher" that seems to be the ally of the Council, all out to destroy any evidence of the Holy Grail? And who, is the descendant of Jesus Christ... this "source of God's power on this Earth"?

For those of you who have read the novel or caught the movie, I need not explain further. For those of you who haven't read the novel nor watch the movie, please do either. *haha*

And in the end, Robert Langdon finds it....and kneels before her.

Okay, on to the reviews. For those who haven't read the novel, the movie is catchy enough to make you want to pick up Dan Brown's novel. For those who have read the novel, the movie is simply an 'animation' to the text that you have been reading.

Though much reviews have said that the movie was disappointing, I felt that the Director and Dan Brown himself have done a good job in preserving as much suspense and central controversy (Jesus was still mortal, a man. His wife was Mary Magdelene and they had a daughter) in the novel itself, considering it was a 150mins movie.

The plot was good and script well written too. It explains to us the controversies that have been raised and debated over... with pictures and animations to make it all seems clearer and, most importantly layman. Photography was good too, and suddenly it seemed that History and Ancient Arts seem so mysterious and beautiful at the same time, that you suddenly have this urge to study these subjects in Europe, to follow the Da Vinci trail... to be at least part of it, if not have that little knowledge of the things that were mentioned in Da Vinci's Code.

Unlike the usual blockbusters, the movie contains with minimal CGI, shootouts, stunts and mindless what-nots, and instead the movie is filled with intellect, history, arts and religion... Well, how many movies, in fact, how many blockbusters have actually achieved that? The Da Vinci Code has certainly made its mark. Perhaps, not as beautiful as many had expected. Were the expectations raised too high... because of the novel? I wonder.

As for the casting, the performance of Tom Hanks was certainly disappointing. Although he plays the main lead, Robert Langdon, a symbologist suddenly caught in this whole frenzy murder-cum-quest, the actor was rather... dull, and perhaps flat. Little expression, little life... I don't know. Was it me or that Tom Hanks seemed the same throughout the movie? I'm sure it wasn't the character itself, because if you had read the novel, Langdon was surely more than that.

Audrey Tautou made a passable Sophie Neveu.. but still rather dull and lifeless, yet slightly better than Tom Hanks. All the mysterious Priory of Sion, Holy Grail.. to even her upbringing and her grandfather Jacques Sauniere... she seems to have a tat too little expression for all these things that are happening to her. Hmmm.... But then again, a good attempt TRYING to be convincing.

Perhaps, the most worth noting is Ian McKellen, who plays the role of the British religious theologian and Holy-Grail fanatic Sir Leigh Teabing. He captures not only the essence of mystery, with its twists and turns in the plot, but makes this whole Da Vinci quest so amusing and wonderous, that we can't help but 'fall in love' with this man. From a simple question 'Should I serve coffee, or tea?', he makes even drinking tea sound so exquisite and mysterious at the same time, to his expression-full of delight and anticipation of the Holy Grail... like a 3 year old kid waiting to open his Christmas present. The light in his eyes, the facial expression, the body language, the voice... everything seems so... real. Not forgetting his humour, in this midst of frenzy and mystery, Ian McKellen certainly did a great job in saving this whole movie on the whole.

Catch him also in the other blockbuster movie, X-Men III, as Eric Lensherr, or more famously known as Magneto *Ahh... no wonder he looked so familiar?* And if you still remember seeing him somewhere... yes, you have. Another blockbuster triology, The Lord of the Rings. He plays Gandalf the Grey/White. Wow. Ian McKellen... *applause!*