Eye Nosh: Is This the Best Pastrami in America?
The Creepy, Yet Beautiful Street Art of Dan Witz Now in L.A.
Does Traffic Get Worse After the End of Daylight Saving Time?
Silver Lake Art Crawl: Also a Food Truck Crawl?
Thomas Keller Comes Home: Book Signings and a Recipe(!)
When we heard that Tom Hanks was cast as the lead Prof. Robert Langdon in The Da Vinci Code, LAist was worried. Then when we heard that Dan Brown's page turner would be directed by Ron Howard, we were totally bummed. Not to take anything away from Hanks or Howard, but really, why do the studios need to always take the safe (read: boring) route with the blockbusters?
We reserved comment until the film came out, and it debuted at the Cannes Film Festival today. The reviews are not good:
Here's the lede from an AP story:
"The Da Vinci Code" drew lukewarm praise, shrugs of indifference, some jeering laughter and a few derisive jabs Tuesday from arguably the world's toughest movie crowd: critics at the Cannes Film Festival.
From an E! Online story:
There's no such thing as bad publicity, even when it comes to the The Da Vinci Code. But there is such a thing as a bad movie.
Ouch. If there are going to be protests in LA about the film, maybe they should protest the squandering of a really good popcorn flick and not religious controversy.
Now if you had a chance to cast Robert Langdon and choose a director, who would it be? Clive Owen, maybe? A younger Harrison Ford-type? Directors like Robert Rodriguez? Quentin Tarantino? Weigh in 'cause we're curious like that.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
This project was doomed from the beginning. Ron Howard's films have the intellectual depth of an episode of the Andy Griffith Show and Hanks is perhaps one of the most overrated flm actors ever. Without a doubt, watching a cantaloupe play Langdon would be more exciting than sitting through Mister Hanks's interpretation.
I have to admit, too, that it would be ironic if, after all the hype, the film dies on the vine. It looks entirely possible, though they may have a good one-week run with the blue haired old ladies who loved Dan Brown's book.
Can we pick a new author for the book, too? I'd've even read the thing if Salman Rushdie'd penned it and set most of it in Kashmir.
The project was doomed when Tom Hanks grew his mullet.
Throughout reading the novel I had Harrison Ford from his Indiana Jones days in mind for Langdon. Given that, Tom Hanks was absolutely not my first choice for the role and I'm not overly surprised that his performance has been subpar. Also, I really really like Jean Reno but he doesn't quite fit Bezu Fache in my mind either.
Audrey Tautou and Ian McKellen on the other hand seem well suited for their roles. As much as I've come to believe my fears of tremendous suckage will come to pass I'll likely see the movie this weekend and confirm it for myself. So much like a car wreck, these movies of late.
I quote support your Clive Owen nomination. He's one of the few intelligent actors on screen nowadays.
Christopher Nolan would have been a dark director choice but I bet he had his hands tied with Batman at the time.
For The Da Vinci Code, I would bring in award-winning director/actor Brian Laesch to not only play the lead role of Robert Langdon, but to direct the film as well, and also re-write a new script, not based on the book as well, because he is that much of a genius.
No, but seriously, I would have Brian Laesch play the lead role and direct the picture.