Film & TV Da Vinci Code movie

[Amara]

Filming is gonna start soon....to be released in 2006.

I gotta admit, I'm already disappointed that Tom Hanks has the lead as Langdon.
Bearing in mind Langdon was supposed to look somewhat distinguished, with a fit, swimmers body.... I just never pictured someone like Tom Hanks. Other people preferred someone like....Viggo Mortenson (Aragon from Lord of the Rings) or Liam Neeson. But I would have picked someone like Val Kilmer or a lesser known actor that looked the part.

At least they actually cast a french woman in the role of Sophie with Audrey Tautou. I heard rumours about Gwyneth Paltrow taking that role, thankfully that was wrong! lol. Looks-wise, I pictured Sophie as someone like Claire Forlani.

I think with a movie like this one that is built on a very successful book, the production and the screenplay have to be pretty good because expectations will be high, although you know, no matter what, people will go and see it.

Ooh, and it is going to be filmed in the Louvre. :thumb:

There's also speculation that they have the rights to make at least three movies (including Angels and Demons), I guess they are planning on it being pretty successful.

 

[Rosco]

It's got Oscar written all over it before they even start filming, it's just one of those films.

 

[Az-Tech Loc]

yes, this does seem to have Oscar written all over it. Every movie that stars Tom Hanks is automatically considered, even though I would have liked Val Kilmer or Patrick Swayze to get the part, mostly because they are great underrated actors.

 

[dark spirit]

I just finished readin' the book last week. Had a wonderful time reading it, but this has got to be a very difficult book to adapt into a screenplay. First, there's a lot of flashbacks which don't go quite well in film. I don't know how they'll go about describing all those paintings and historical facts. But Tom Hanks being cast is a good sign that they succeeded at adapting this.


Spoiler:
For those who have read this, I know it wasn't a let down for me to find out that langdon never actually finds the Grail or that it was some kind of metaphor to undestanding Mary Magdelene, but don't you think if the movie is made, it'd be a let down for the viewers?

 

[Amara]

IFirst, there's a lot of flashbacks which don't go quite well in film. I don't know how they'll go about describing all those paintings and historical facts.But Tom Hanks being cast is a good sign that they succeeded at adapting this.

Yeah, i really hope they dont leave out the historical facts and details, they are what make the book so interesting. It could always be included in the dialogue, with flashback scenes interjecting. Can't agree about tom hanks though.

Spoiler:
For those who have read this, I know it wasn't a let down for me to find out that langdon never actually finds the Grail or that it was some kind of metaphor to undestanding Mary Magdelene, but don't you think if the movie is made, it'd be a let down for the viewers?

Well if the book was such a success, wouldn't the primary audience be those who have already read it? Depending on how well they are able to communicate the information and major themes of the book, there won't be a let down....who knows, they could always throw in a better ending to the relationship between langdon and sophie to satisfy viewers...j/k.

 

[Rukas]

To be honest when I read the book I pictured a younger Harrison Ford in the role.

Personally as far as Tom Hanks is concerned I just cant take him serious, I dont think he comes accross as distinguished or intelligent at all, two characterisitics the role needs.

Im glad they have a name actor though, I think it adds a sence of credibility to the film that a story like this really needs.

 

[Amara]

Im glad they have a name actor though, I think it adds a sence of credibility to the film that a story like this really needs.

See I think it has credibility of its own accord, it does not need a high profile actor to generate interest...but rather one that will stay true to the character. Yes, a young Harrison Ford would have been good.

 

[Rukas]

See I think it has credibility of its own accord, it does not need a high profile actor to generate interest...but rather one that will stay true to the character. Yes, a young Harrison Ford would have been good.

I mean, Im glad its got a big budget. If it had been released on DVD or a short cinema release, a lot of people would not have seen it. You have to remember, a lot of people havent read the book, but with a big name and budget for promotion, those people will hopefully go see the movie.

 

[dark spirit]

What I meant with regards to Tom Hanks was, he's an established actor who has worked with the likes of Steven Spielberg and always an oscar contender. This only goes to show his experience in film. Although 'terminal' I think was horrible, it doesn't undermine his knowledge of a good script. With that said, I still don't think he was the best choice for Langdon.

 

[Bender]

The first thought when I heard that it was going to be a movie is - is it going to be shot is Paris and in the same locations as the book?


It should be fun to see Tom jump out a high window. I'm not so sure about seeing naked men though.

 

[dark spirit]

^^ Sorry to ruin the fun for you but he never actually jumps, try rereading the chapter.

 

[Story]

i think viggio mortenson would be perfect, others i could see in the role are people like say, patrick swayze who has been said already, maybe somene like dennis quaid (although he isnt "fit or young" so to speak), jim cavazeil (guy from "The Passion)) someone like that

 

[2Quik]

Fuck the Da Vinci Code, when they are gonna make a Stone Barrington movie?

 

[Flipmo]

Im also dissapointed its Tom Hanks. Dude looks like a dirty diaper.

The original choice was Russell Crowe. He would have done a good job.

 

[Zero Cool]

Why is everybody hating on Tom Hanks? IMO Tom will do a great job, he's one of the greatest actors Hollywood has ever seen.

 

[Flipmo]

Tom Hanks is a good actor, never said he wasn't, but when you read the book. You don't picture Tom Hanks.

BUT

Who knows, Tom has pulled off some movies where I thought he would be garbage.

I still think the original rumors of it being Russell Crowe or Hugh Jackman (..not sure about him though) would have been a better choice

 

[Amara]

I still think the original rumors of it being Russell Crowe or Hugh Jackman (..not sure about him though) would have been a better choice

Not to hate on my fellow Australians, but hell no! lol. Russell would have a hell of a lot of body work to do! Hugh just doesnt have allure - he's nothing special imo.

^Zero, I'm not denying Tom Hanks' success as an actor - but like I said, he doesn't have the "distinguished" or intelligent features Langdon is described as having. This role is as much as character representation as it is good acting. That's the thing about books turned into movies - you can't mess with the characters, their personality, looks, querks etc are already set. It was said in the book something like Langdon is like a "sex symbol in the academic world," and from a female's perspective, there ain't nothing sexy about Tom Hanks.

You know who would have been good......Pierce Brosnan.....if he could do an American accent that is. He has the distinguished, intelligent, sex symbol factors happening.

 

[Flipmo]

Russell Crowe has been known to research for months on a character and act like him. Like become the man. Russell is already a huge guy. So body work wouldn't be a problem

Distinguished he's done it already in a Beautiful Mind. That goes with intelligence too.

Pierce is a good choice also, come to think about it.

whatever, we'll see though

 

[Amara]

Russell Crowe has been known to research for months on a character and act like him. Like become the man. Russell is already a huge guy. So body work wouldn't be a problem

That's what I mean, he is huge, he'd have to shed quite a few kilos!

 

[Flipmo]

Oh ok. Well even to that. Many actors have gone on a 'no food' diet for a role. Even Christian Bale did it for a role where he pushed his wight down to 110 pouds or something and the dude was pretty big.

Isn't it said in one of the books, I think Angels and Demons that Langdon had a body of a swimmer? Well, you ever see how big those guys are? Especially the fact that swimming builds every muscle in the body, a somewhat huge guy would be a good choice.

But ya, I know what ya mean. Russell looks like a grizzly and I would never fight him cause he'd crush me like bug.