Ok, I know I'm WAY behind the times, but I'm finally reading (currently halfway through, so no spoilers please!) the DaVinci Code. (and, no, I haven't seen the film yet) Have any of you read it? I'm reading a lovely illustrated edition borrowed from my Uncle. It has photos of all the relevent art works etc, which is a huge boon cos I don't have to get up every five minutes and google it to know what they're talking about! :~)
Anyway, I had heard via Harrison Ford when he was doing interviews for 'Firewall' that the main character was supposed to look like him, and yes he is mentioned by name. Also, the character's voice was described like Harrison's - 'smooth chocolate' *yes I'm drooling* - and several times there have been references to his 'lopsided grin'!
And the more I get into the story, the more it reads like an Indiana Jones fanfic! Seriously! The character of Langdon is dead-set Dr (Indiana) Jones! (minus the hat ;~P)
I was so disappointed when I heard Tom Hanks was cast for the role. I like Tom Hanks (and he was actually fine in the film) but the whole time I was reading I imagined the character as sort of a cross between Indy and Mulder.
And Tom Hanks just ain't either one of those dudes! LOL
I can't see Tom Hanks in the role at all, and I haven't heard good reports about the film. Doubtless I'll watch it once I've finished the book, but no... not Tom Hanks. I like Tom Hanks, but the description is all Indy/Harrison. Admittedly Harrison is too old for the role now, but then so is Tom Hanks IMO. ;~P
Actually Hanks did rather well in the film i had just finished the book right before the movie came out (literally 24hours before) andf i too pictured more of an intelectual Indy .. The only complaint i really have as far as hanks as Robert Langdon is he was TOO Dry .. langdon gets much more excited about what he is doing and you can feel that energy from him .. Hanks lacked the Energy . but the movie as a whole is wonderful .. i will be buying it when it comes out! worth going to see.
forgot to add .. dont know if you know yet or not but they are going to be making Angles and Demons and it i belive is slated to come out 2008/2009 which Is the Pre-quel to DaVinci Code . and also has Robert Langdon as the main character .. nothing has been said yet if hanks will be playing langdon in that film yet . i have heard the book is wonderful but have yet to read it.
Ohhh speaking of Harrison Ford. I don't know if you've seen this pic yet, but I adore this artist and she did an amazing Han picture: http://www.deviantart.com/view/18492847/
And to you post, funny my dad compared it to a badly done (he did not like the book ^^) Indiana Jones movie, what with all the country hoping and the really odd mystery.
So if the main character shoulda looked liek Harrisson Ford . . why cast Tom Hanks 0.o
I enjoyed both the book and the movie. (I am also the queen of unpopular opinions.) Harrison Ford doesn't have the right coloring but I could easily imagine him playing a very dynamic and interesting Langdon. Hanks did a good job, but he wasn't the Robert Langdon of the books.
Yes, when I came across the specific reference to Harrison in the novel, I thought, "Was Dan Brown giving a shout-out to the actor he wants to portray Langdon in the movie?" (The book is written in an exceedingly movie-friendly style; I've little doubt that he was hoping/expecting that it would be made into a movie.) In any case, I thought Hanks was badly miscast as Langdon, and Harrison would've been perfect -- ten or fifteen years ago. I wish Brown had written the book that long ago!
I read the book ages ago back in 2004. It was Harrison all the way. The more I read, the more I was thinking that Brown was all but writing a script with the book and that he very clearly had Harrison in mind for the role. And oh YEAH it feels like an Indy fanfic... granted a VERY clever fic.
Tom Hanks... as much as I adore him and think he is probably the best living male actor on the planet (yes I think he's the best- certainly the more versatile- despite listing Harrison as my favorite)... he just was not the incarnation of Langdon.
Ron Howard irritates me as a director so I had a lot of issues with the movie because of that reasoning. Ways he opted to direct, lighting styles he chose, and the camera moves he picked... UGH.
On the subject of Angels and Demons, I HEART THAT BOOK MUCHO. I loved it more than Da Vinci Code. But it wasn't nearly as popular because it lacked the controversial questioning of the christian religion that Da Vinci Code has.
I think Langdon is dumber than Dr Jones. I wont say anything about the book except that it's very helpful to imagine Silas as Paul Bettany. mm. By the way, you totally killed me in a dungeon this morning! Biatch. P.S Great to have an update from you! Busy with the holidays?
I agree, and Da Vinci Code does get really Indiana Jones-y. (But I'm such a sucker for adventure!) I could totally see Harrison playing Langdon... (whoa, their names are alike too... O.o sorta. XD) but I also think he would have been a bit too old for the role now, and also Langdon is a bit sweeter/gentler than Indy's character. (Not that Harrison couldn't just act sweeter, I'm just saying he usually plays adorable jackasses. ;D)
OOooh! What part are you at??? It's soooo good! I just don't want to give anything away! XD
not that I find Tom Hanks a bad actor but, I'm tired to see him as the lead actor in all those movies that are supossed to be a hit. In my humble opinion, please do not be offended or anything, I find Tom Hanks quite 'bland' and lacks that gift that only a few actors have and it's called charisma. They can be on screen and without say a word but they would stole the scene with their own great presence and, Tom Hanks doesn't have it. It's a pity that they do not chose Harrison for that role because he really does have it.
I read it just before the movie was released here so I could see the movie. We've got the illustrated version, too. I enjoyed it; I don't think it was worth all the hype, but it's certainly an enjoyable enough tale.
I read it way back in 2003 and had fun with it, although as a bookseller I am horribly sick of it now. I had forgotten the specific HF references but not the overall Indy vibe. I can imagine you found it very interesting with your art background.
My main complaint was that Langdon is a bit of a Gary Stu and rather boring. I was hoping the casting would give the movie version more depth.
I personally didnt get any character vibes from Langdon- there was just this faceless guy running around in my head. Even when I read it for the second... and third time. Same with Teabing and every other character- apart from Sophie, I always envisioned her as Audrey Tautou.
Character development is Dan Brown's most major let down. In all of the books, the main characters are so under developed it is almost painful!
DO you think you will be in a fan arting mood when you're done?!?
yes I would have much rather seen him do it than Tom Hanks...he has the charisma for that role and the longer hair wouldn't have looked so dumb on him...
An illustrated version of the book...hmmm...I'd like to see that...
Got the credit card statement that had my PayPal payment to you, and hubby said I paid too much...he doesn't get it...idiot
Now that you mention it, yep, I can see it. I wasn't happy with Tom Hanks' casting, and I did see him more as an Indiana Jones, though not quite Harrison Fordish. But interesting thought.
Ha ha, I never read the Da Vinci Code. But the Harrison Ford comparisons remind me of when I was reading Bridget Jones 2 and the character they meet in Thailand (who plants drugs in their bag) was described as looking 'like Harrison Ford.' Ha ha, but when I eventually saw the movie (it sucked) I was like "Shit! That fucker doesn't looke a THING like Harrison!" Ha ha...oh, well.
And Tom Hanks just ain't either one of those dudes! LOL
Admittedly Harrison is too old for the role now, but then so is Tom Hanks IMO. ;~P
*Nods* I think that's why Mulder kept popping into my brain along with Indy.
The only complaint i really have as far as hanks as Robert Langdon is he was TOO Dry .. langdon gets much more excited about what he is doing and you can feel that energy from him .. Hanks lacked the Energy . but the movie as a whole is wonderful .. i will be buying it when it comes out! worth going to see.
And to you post, funny my dad compared it to a badly done (he did not like the book ^^) Indiana Jones movie, what with all the country hoping and the really odd mystery.
So if the main character shoulda looked liek Harrisson Ford . . why cast Tom Hanks 0.o
Tom Hanks... as much as I adore him and think he is probably the best living male actor on the planet (yes I think he's the best- certainly the more versatile- despite listing Harrison as my favorite)... he just was not the incarnation of Langdon.
Ron Howard irritates me as a director so I had a lot of issues with the movie because of that reasoning. Ways he opted to direct, lighting styles he chose, and the camera moves he picked... UGH.
On the subject of Angels and Demons, I HEART THAT BOOK MUCHO. I loved it more than Da Vinci Code. But it wasn't nearly as popular because it lacked the controversial questioning of the christian religion that Da Vinci Code has.
P.S Great to have an update from you! Busy with the holidays?
OOooh! What part are you at??? It's soooo good! I just don't want to give anything away! XD
My main complaint was that Langdon is a bit of a Gary Stu and rather boring. I was hoping the casting would give the movie version more depth.
Character development is Dan Brown's most major let down. In all of the books, the main characters are so under developed it is almost painful!
DO you think you will be in a fan arting mood when you're done?!?
An illustrated version of the book...hmmm...I'd like to see that...
Got the credit card statement that had my PayPal payment to you, and hubby said I paid too much...he doesn't get it...idiot