Ouch. That's brutal, but well worth your time if you want a laugh. The mocking of Dan Brown's writing is simply delicious (in a seemingly deservedly cruel way). Though actually, it makes me want to see the film, since it makes it even less likely that I'd ever willingly pick up the book - and it seems I should have some idea of what all the fuss is about. Watching a bad movie would seem to save both time and stress on my nerves (which couldn't withstand many pages of writing that's that bad).
Posted by armand at May 17, 2006 11:06 PM | TrackBack | Posted to MoviesI haven't read it either, but I think I'm going to have to, if only to participate in the conversation. *sigh*
Posted by: jacflash at May 18, 2006 08:23 AM | PERMALINKI think I'll go your route, Armand. Not only haven't I read it, but even before hearing Scott's particular skewing of Brown's writing as a matter of technique, I had been in the habit of automatically nixing online personal profiles solely because the woman in question touted that as a favorite book (see also, The HoweverManyPeople You Meet in Heaven, inter alia). I didn't need to know how bad it was to know that it's a far cry from worthy "favorite" material for any reader with tastes compatible with my own. I really wouldn't mind seeing Tom Hanks phone it in, too; and I'm pleased to hear that his latest stab at his umpteenth Oscar is dead on arrival.
Posted by: Moon at May 18, 2006 10:47 AM | PERMALINKFor what it's worth, everything I'd heard from people who saw it yesterday was at least marginally positive (and some people REALLY liked it). The most interesting response I've heard is from a couple who'd read the book and found the movie more complicated than the book.
Posted by: Armand at May 20, 2006 12:29 PM | PERMALINK