Are DaVinci's reviews changing your mind about seeing it?

[CraftyMouse]

I just got back from seeing it. I was hesitant because of the reviews but am happy to say I disagree with them all. The only gripe that I have (and I have it with lots of book-to-movie translations) is what they changed. I have no problem when filmmakers leave something out for time, but it bothers me when they change things. The changes were VERY minimal and not essential to the story, but they still bugged me a bit. Other than that it was an afternoon well spent!

 

[RealMickeysGirl]

At some point DH and I will go see it. We have both read the book and were looking forward to the movie. I started expressing my doubts to him when they announced that Tom Hanks would be Langdon - not a good fit in my opinion.

Of course - we have to both be off work at the same time in order to go anywhere so we will see how long it is before we actually get to see the movie.

 

[wdw4us2]

I don't let critics sway my opinion because I rarely like the same movies they do.

DH and I saw the movie at the 10:15 show this morning. He had not read the book and I have and we both enjoyed it.

 

[HomeSweetDisney]

I just got back from seeing it. I was hesitant because of the reviews but am happy to say I disagree with them all. The only gripe that I have (and I have it with lots of book-to-movie translations) is what they changed. I have no problem when filmmakers leave something out for time, but it bothers me when they change things. The changes were VERY minimal and not essential to the story, but they still bugged me a bit. Other than that it was an afternoon well spent!

Glad to hear a positive review from someone on here

 

[darrose]

Still going to go see it.

 

[katerkat]

I'll see it on video, eventually. I tend to agree with critics, somewhat, so the nearly universal panning of the film isn't encouraging.

 

[PaulaSue]

I hope it is good. We are going tomm to celebrate our 10th anniversary.

 

[eclectics]

Unless it got 'jump up and down, excellent, must see' writeups, I was going to wait for the DVD. I guess my plans stay the same. I usually like Ron Howard's work though.

 

[Sandy51]

Just got back from seeing it. DH and I liked it very much. ( I also agree that Angels & Demons was the better story) Go see it and decide for yourselves.


Sandy

 

[Skatermom23]

Dh and I went to the early show and we both liked it very much! I never listen to the critics reviews. If I want to see something, I go.....

 

[Feralpeg]

I loved the book. I've yet to see a bad movie made by Ron Howard. Although I would not have cast Tom Hanks in this part, I'm usually not disappointed in his performances. Therefore, I will see the movie and make up my own mind.

I would have cast Sam Neill in the part. He was the person I pictured while reading the book.

 

[Daxx]

Just saw the film and thought it was good. Slow at first, but picked up. I liked that you could take someone who hadn't read the book and they'd still understand it and you wouldn't have to sit there and explain what was going on.

Having read the book over a year ago, I thought it was pretty close to the book. I didn't notice any glaring changes ... however, had I been fresh from reading it, I might pick up more.

While Tom Hanks wasn't the best (physically) for Langdon, I don't know who I would've cast! Seems like not enough actors to fill that Langdon role properly. I though Audrey Tatou was a good Sophie. Had visions of her in Amalie and thought "no way" ... but after seeing her, I though she was good.

I was really second-guessing my decision to see it, but I have to say that I enjoyed it. Although I wasn't hugely, outrageously impressed, but wasn't disappointed either. Worth the matinee price. I've paid more to see worse movies, that's for sure!!!

~Daxx's Wife

 

[smilingmouse]

I'm still going to see it, despit the reviews. I agree w/ the other posters re: tom Hanks. He seems like poor choice for Langdon. I'll post my thoughts tomorrow

 

[Zippa D Doodah]

I wish I had heeded the bad reviews. You can check out my review thread for details. It makes the whole thing seem a lot sillier

 

[2sweetangels]

DH and I never go to the movies to see anything, we wait untill it comes out on DVD. DH is an over the road truck driver and is never home, so we just wait it out

 

[SueM in MN]

DH and I went to see it this eveningl he liked it. I didn't like it so much. I understand some things need to be changed from a book to make a movie, but there were some pretty major facts that they changed near the end of the movie.
I hate it when they change things that worked perfectly well in the book and would have worked the same in the movie. I do have to say that many of the reviews said the movie "slavishly followed the book" and all I have to say to that is those critics must not have read the book recently (or maybe at all).

Tom Hanks was not as bad in the part as I expected (except that every time he came onto the screen, I found my eyes drawn to his really bad hair).

We didn't hear anyone laughing at inappropriate times. There are some funny lines (especially by Ian Mcclelan) at dramatic points, but they are obviously meant to be funny.

 

[DISUNC]

I never pay ANY attention to critics! Yes I will see it...probably next week.

 

[arminnie]

And, let's face it, how many people haven't read the Davinci Code?

Me - I have a hard copy of the book that has been sitting here for at least two years.

I don't have anything against it, it just hasn't interested me enough to get past a few pages. I'm kind of picky - I want my fiction to be extremely well written (think the classics). Most of the fiction best sellers are definitely not literature that will stand the test of time. I haven't read enough of Davinci Code to judge it though.

I probably won't go see the movie as most feedback (from viewers not reviewers) is that it is very slow and boring.

 

[Planogirl]

I think that a lot of critics tend to dislike anything different or controversial before even seeing it. I usually ignore them and go more by what the public says.

It appears that most DISers that have seen the movie have liked it, at least so far. That's way more important to me than what the critics say with one exception. I do respect Roger Ebert's opinion and he gave it a B. That's good enough for me.

 

[Cool-Beans]

I saw the movie, but didn't read the book. After I read the reviews I was a little concerned, but the tickets had already been paid for, so wth?

It wasn't what I'd call a good movie. It was a little boring and extremely predictable. The scenes with the old English guy were entertaining, as he and Hanks are both good actors.

Overall, I give it a C-.