Killing In The Name Of
So I went to see the big hoopla movie last night, and it was okay. Not great, not amazing, not riveting, just okay. Tom Hanks didn’t play the part the way I envisioned, and the directing was actually a little boring. There were a lot of oppurtunities to do something amazing with the story, but the editors stuck to the book, so in true movie fashion, the book was better. But you could hear the Christians hissing at each religious reference. That actually turned out to be more entertaining than the movie.
The references were fascinating, though, but lost on the majority of the crowd. For one thing, you had to have a pretty good knowledge of Christian history to figure out what they were talking about some of the time. And, of course, you had to appreciate what a genius DiVinci was (although much of DiVinci’s “code” was left out of the movie, so it almost didn’t make sense to call it that anymore). If you were clueless about art history, then you missed even more. There were so many visual references that were lost on so many people.
I think the biggest irony is that the movie seemed geared towards intellectuals (the very people who have momentarily lost their intelligence), but they took all the intellect out of it. Sad. I can’t believe people are getting upset about this.
May 23rd, 2006 at 6:10 pm
Most normal people have lost the ability to think critically. Thus the state of the world. I’d like to read the book. I hear the story is good, but the premice is weak.
~Jef