TDVC revisited

I had to stop watching that awesome match between Nadal and Mathieu last night coz one good soul, my ever-reliable source – Miss JT came by to drop off The DaVinci Code. Sabi ko nga dati, hindi yong movie ang pino-protesta ko and I will watch it, as I am bound by my duty as a film critic - HAHAHAHA! - without prejudice. So please, huwag nyo akong taasan ng kilay coz here I am once again with quite a mouthful regarding the same topic.

9:30 na yon at inaantok na ako but still I can’t go to sleep knowing that the most controversial movie of the year is sitting in my player waiting for me to press that very tempting PLAY button. Needless to say, curiosity took the best of me.

What struck me at first eh the copy itself – siyempre, pirata yon pero having the film’s title displayed in Russian, nagulat ako. Pinirata sa Russia, dinala sa middle east? Galing talaga nila.

Eniweys, 2 hours and 30 minutes yata yong buong film as I read in some papers pero in my case, inabot lang ng 2 hours flat. In this particular movie, I used the FF button one time too often.

Because this is a film where you have to focus on the dialogue, not the acting (if ever there was), not the nuances, to understand the whole thing. Unfortunately, maraming scenes where you can not understand the conversation. Unless you’re a linguist with mastery in Latin, hindi mo ipa-fast forward yong film tulad ng ginawa ko. And French of course, dahil most of the scenes took place in Paris. Sad to say, years of watching Multivision did not improve my French a bit! Bonjour at Si Vous Plaiz pa rin lang ang naiintindihan ko! Darn!

In scenes where Silas (the Albino monk) was talking to his boss priest (Alfred Molina) or the cardinals talking among themselves, Latin ang ginagamit nila. Of course, may subtitles. But since this is a Russian copy, eh di ano pa ang magiging translation? E di Russian! Na pinatungan pa ng another translation. And again, hindi pa rin English. Ano pa, e di Arabic! Grrrr!

But of course the film makers made sure na lahat ng highlights, in English. Para nga naman maintindihan ng lahat. Mahirap na, something might get lost in translation.

One very long scene took place in a French villa somewhere in the outskirts of Paris. Dito tumakbo ang dalawang fugitives na bida ng pelikula – si Professor Langdon (Hanks) and the lady (Tautou) he met just a few hours ago na ngayon ay cohort na nya agad for some mission that neither of them knows or understand. The villa is owned by Langdon’s long-time friend, a crippled scholar played by Ian McKellen whose main interest is revealed later on in the film. In this scene, para ka na lang nanonood ng play. Ito siguro yong isa sa mga disappointments ng mga critics. Why?

The director and scriptwriter tried too hard to explain the whole plot of the film in this long scene. Dito pinaliwanag, by a very boring theatrical-style of conversation ng tatlong characters, kung ano yong Priory of Sion, the Templars, the Holy Grail, pati yong interpretations sa Last Supper in Leonardo. One of the disciples daw na nakaupo is actually Mary Magdalene. Pareho daw ang style of dressing, and even the positioning of Jesus and Mary, nagawan ng istorya dahil changing positions of the two eh yon daw yong vessel and that the Holy Grail daw was not a chalice but a woman who is a direct descendant of Jesus who impregnated Mary who fled to France and gave birth there (hingal) ergo, ang babaeng descendant ni Jesus ay isang French woman. Etc. etc.... blah-blah-blah…..

The scene was too contrived. Supposedly, malalim itong film but for them to try to explain every bit and every detail in such manner, para sa akin, it’s like forcibly shoving a pill right into my throat. At para sa akin, it is a sign that they themselves are not too convinced with what they are saying. And it showed. Without a doubt, this is nothing but fiction. Fiction with a capital F! Failure!

How could you make such conclusions from a painting by Leonardo who lived millions of years apart from Jesus’ time? And whose painting is based on models he recruited based on his gut feel that their faces would most likely represent the facial attributes of the disciples? BBC Prime’s Prominent People documented this – that Leonardo took years to complete the casting of the Last Supper. Kaya malaking kalokohan na yong Last Supper ang gawing basehan to challenge the Catholic institution. If Leonardo lived during Jesus’ time, baka maniwala pa tayo, di ba Tatz?

Ang isang scene pa na natawa ako, at siguradong nainsulto yong mga totoong critics, eh pinakita pa kung paano tumakas from the jet yong dalawa (Hanks and Tautou, with the captive Silas) at nagtago sa nearby car. Djosko, kailangan pa ba namang ipakita yon? Ano, grade 1 ang nanonood? They’re not in the jet, so they must be in the car. Hindi naman sila mga X-men to disappear just like that di ba? Pero hindi yon naisip ng mga pulis dahil sabi ng director, huwag tingnan ang car, mahuhuli ang mga bida!

Ang nakaka-irita pa dito, which made me press the FF button in frustration, eh yong dalawang beses na build-up ng storya at eksena na ang ini-expect mo ay ending na ang next scene, hindi pa pala. Yong anticipation ko tuloy, when I saw na hindi pa pala yon ang ending, parang naguumpisa na naman ako ng isa pang pelikula. Something of a sequel. Di bale sanang gawin yon kung yong susunod na ending ay mas bongga, mas patok at mas grand doon sa sinundang “false ending” at yong totoong ending eh the grandest of them all. Then End. Then credits.

Dito, hindi, ang final ending, sa Paris pa rin. Nagtatatakbo si Langdon papunta sa Louvre. Binilang yong Rosetta markers forming the Rose line. Pagdating sa Louvre, tumingala siya sa langit. Tsaka nag-spiral ang camera pababa indicating na yong Sarcophagus ni Mary Magdalene ay nasa ilalim mismo noong Louvre. Nagpakalayo-layo pa eh dito rin naman pala babagsak. Very anti-climactic.

Yong isa namang false ending, ni-reveal kuno, na si leading lady ang hinahanap na descendant ni Jesus. Oppps, teka, I thought that was established ages ago doon sa eksena sa French Villa. Ano na naman ang iniisip ninyo? Kindergarten ang nanonood?

Flawed ang direction, flawed ang screenplay. But I would say magaling yong cinematography and even the production design. Mapi-feel mo yong mysticism, dark secrects and the ominous power of the Christian church in most of the scenes.

Now let’s talk about the cast. Tom Hanks is definitely wasted here. Aside from the fact na ang boses niya ay nag-iiba from one loop to another (hello, dubbing supervisor?), this is no acting piece for a two-time Oscar winner. Sana hindi na lang nya ito tinanggap, he could have retired from Holywood still in high laurels.

Yon namang si Tautou who looks like a cross of ABS’ Connie Sison and young Aiko Melendez, may consistency issue din. In most scenes, heavily accented yong English nya. Pero noong nagka-kilala sila ng may-ari ng French Villa, ang galing ng diction niya, flawless. Disturbed din ako sa buhok nya na sa dami ng action scenes na dinaanan ay ayos na ayos pa rin. Hmm, I wonder if we are using the same gel!?

If only to indicate that this is a true-blue fiction, two key characters were played by actors from recent fiction blockbusters. Ian McKellen who’s Magneto in X-Men and Alfred Molina who played the doomed doctor-turned eight-legged freak in Spiderman 2. Kaya wag na kayong mag-protesta mga kapatid – Fiction lang talaga ito.

Well, buti na nga lang at hindi ito critically viable. Kung hindi, I would have contradicted myself if I had to praise the film after all my tirades before. Panoorin nyo just for entertainment value. After that, wala na. I’m sure it will go down history as just another failed movie. Something who capitalized on controversy just to generate cash in the box office. Tapos, it will soon be forgotten at mababaon sa limot earlier than it should have lasted.

Meanwhile, life for Catholics go on. And the Christian church is still as formidable as ever. Sorry Dan Brown, you have not shaken even one pillar of Christianity. And shame on you for even trying!