MOVIES

THE DA VINCI CODE


i went to see it last weekend while fighting off of a nasty flu so i was just a wee bit distracted. i was sitting dead center and kept looking left and right considering which way was the shortest distance to the exit in case i had to hurl.

i wasn't crazy about the book to begin with. i thought the writing was mundane and the theories posited were built up to an anti-climatic resolution. perhaps i would have been more awed had i not read Holy Blood, Holy Grail first and delved a bit into the disproval of them. i didn't know alot - snippets here and there but enough to keep the oohing and ahing at bay. i was all in all disappointed with Dan Brown's version of the story. so much Grail romanticism wasted with mediocre writing. i love the lore and can suspend my disbelief for a good story with good writing.

the critics slammed the movie. the biggest complaints being that it was 1) slow and lecturey and 2) the characters were disconnected with each other. the movie was ok - much like the book. the movie kept the same pace as the book: something happens to shallow description to explaination and then something happens again. no big change. really how would can you unravel such a complex story with less explanation? the movie maker rightly assumes that the average viewer is neither a theological symbols of art expert or someone familiar with all of Da Vinci's work. as for the disconnect between the characters - they were written that way! there really wasn't all that much development in the book either.

so the movie was ok for me. Audrey Tautou and Ian McKellan were pretty brilliant i thought considering how little they had to work with. the cinematography was my biggest dissappointment. the trailers made the movie look textured and rich with creative imagery but even this was lacking. and the ridiculous hype the media has been charged with and the long 3hr wait didn't help matters.

*sigh* i give it a 2/5

X-MEN 3: THE LAST STAND

first of all, is Ben Foster as Archangel not the most beautiful thing u've ever seen? humina-humina!

the highly anticipated X3 turned out to only be a surprising 1 hr 45 min. what gives? i went in assuming there must a good reason for this or the movie is gonna suck - but neither seemed to be true. the story was rushed - way too rushed. there could have been alot more. i know i say this alot - i get unusually depressed at the end of good books and good movies but this time it's actually true. the plot and the characters really should have been developed more. Cyclops was given a whole 3 lines maybe and 1 dramatic "nooooooo!" to grieve over the love of his life!? what was the big rush to cannon ball right into the next plot point?

Storm's role in this movie differs from the past 2 but where was the lead up? where was the adjustment? she was this and then she was that. it felt kinda 'in yer face, suck it up and deal!' yes, we were there for action, we wanted to see X-Men kickin ass but the characters do be beloved, we coulda stood to see them think/feel/do a bit more.

There was alot of concern over the change up in directors and understandably so. naming a move the Last anything is gonna stir up some 'going out with a bang' expectations. Brett Radner is no stranger to the action flick with projects like Prison Break under his belt but he lacked the artistic eye of Bryan Singer of "The Usual Suspects" and, soon to be, "Superman Returns" fame. it turned out to be a bit of a jarring change up and the cohesiveness was certainly disturbed. Radner seemed more concerned with the money shots rather than the over all look of the movie. it felt kinda like, 'look at this, and that, and that!' it lacked style.

my last complaint - i swear! the inclusion of Kitty Pryde, Archangel, and Callisto, as much as i love them, seemed to be included just for the sake of inclusion. there was talk before the release of how crowded the movie was and the need to leave characters like Nightcrawler out. eh? really? i'm not seeing it. i'll buy the need for Archangel - cuz humina-humina oh and the storyline with his father but reason for all else eludes me. come on! - was Arclight really necessary? Spike? and was that really Kid Omega?what was up with the quills? i'm so confused. i could barely figure out who's who. I assume the mutant power-sucking kid was Leech but isn't he supposed to be green? and i thought Juggernaught wasn't actully a mutant but that his power had magical origins - so he wouldn't actually have been effected by Leech's powers. am i just going totally crazy here? oh and speaking of Juggernaught - was it just me or did he look a heck of alot like Ram Man from He-Man? and don't even get me started on the Pheonix split personality thing.

it was a decent enough movie, some parts more abiguous than others but not completely up to par with the rest of the X-Men movieverse. i can forgive most of the problems i had with it - i kinda understand the direction they were taking. the Last Stand had to be seperate from the comic or cartoon plots. it was a dramatic ending to the movieverse/trilogy.

for all my bitching tho - i'm still gonna go see again. i give it 4/5.