Over at Latino Review I found two interesting interviews with the men behind the screen adaptation of the Da Vinci Code, some of it bodes very well, some comments not so.
Brian Grazer discusses the adaptation in one of the articles:
“We want to be true to the audience. It√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s fiction and we just want to be true to the audience and the readers, the very loyal readers of The DaVinci Code.”
Good, good. We’re all quite pleased so far, wait though, there’s more…
“We’re going to make it really tense and we’ll probably beef up the action and the way we use scale will offer a lot of power to the movie.”
…
John Calley also speaks in another interview:
“The way it worked was I got a call from Ron Howards agent asking if we would be interested in Ron to direct it, and of course we would,” Calley said. “He and Ron are partners, Brian and Ron are partners. It’s just what you buy.”
Some brilliant news for all of us concerned about the move on Tom Hanks as the lead (previously on the MovieBlog), sensible words here:
“I think that it depends upon how he’s rendered. Obviously, Ron Howard isn’t going to say, √¢‚ǨÀúHe’s wrong but he means something at the box office.’ Because forgive me, in the best possible way, we don’t need a big gross star because I don’t think The Da Vinci Code has to be supported by an actor’s name. It has to be well done. My sense is that if Ron feels that that’s the way he can do it, then he should do it that way. I don’t think he’s deliberately trying to overcast the part just so that he can get a celebrity’s name on the title.”
Well that does sound good, they know there’s concern over the choice and they are actively defending it. Remember, we are talking Ron Howard here, it’s got a good chance of working…especially in this “beefed up” version!
Good location news as well, when we hear that Calley seems confident that exteriors are to be shot of the Louvre, and that they will be building interiors to be able to complete some of these shots, although shooting in the Louvre itself has not been ruled out entirely.
As for the length of the story and the content, it all seems in somewhat contrast to Glazers comments. A very faithful rendition of the book itself, although how they are going to cram everything in there I have no idea!
“As for handling all that dense exposition about religion, art and history, “It’s very hard to describe it, but he somehow is able to compress it. All the salient stuff is there, but it’s not as long. But if it works the first time, I’d like to do the full version in four or five days. I’m kidding.”
Though Grazer once said the film would increase the scale of the action, Calley suggested that it would not. “It’s as the book is, I would say. There’s not a significant difference. There’s no jets crashing and things like that.”
Phew! The Da Vinci Die Hard Code didn’t really strike me as a good move!
