Skip to comments.The DaVinci Code crashes after big opening weekend
Posted on 05/28/2006 11:30:50 PM PDT by dangus
The way I see it, Dan Brown should be very happy for Fandango, which allowed millions of theater-goers to see "The Da Vinci Code" before reading the reviews. Normally, movies don't crash, losing 57% of their audience in the second weekend. Especially not when the 2nd weekend is a holiday weekend and the first weekend was not. But normally people who see movies this stupid have already invested in their Jar-Jar Binks Happy Meal Action Figure. Go figure that the Happy Meal featuring a dead, naked museum curator with a pentagram scratched in his back didn't sell to well. (OK, I recycled that joke concept, but Da Vinci Code readers aren't known for having good memories.)
Come on, folks; the problem isn't Ron Howard or Tom Hanks. The problem is that you could read the entire 450-page book faster than you can watch the movie. I mean, I'm not saying that Brown is a devil-spawned, historically ignorant hack who simply makes stupid people feel smarter. But only because I'm alone at my keyboard and my cat kinda looks at me funny when I talk to her as if I expect her to know English.
I know, calling 60 million people "stupid" is no way to win friends and influence people, but by now I've used enough three-syllable words that I've lost most of them. My big issue is that the raves this story got proves how anti-Christian the nation's book reviewers are. Come on, this is the sort of book movie viewers should *warn* us about: "Caution: Put down this book and go smoke some pot. It will kill fewer brain cells and make you more capable of coherent conversation."
OK, Dan Brown fans. You don't have to respond saying, "it's only fiction." We all have heard that. First of all, Dan Brown has been all over all the talk shows insisting that the backstory is all true. But there's also something really nasty about making such horrific accusations of genocide against people in a backstory.
You see, backstories about historical peoples and characters usually are generally true. If they are preposterous, book critics will point it out, and knowledgeable readers' suspension of disbelief will be shattered, and they'll go tell their friends how stupid the book was. But Dan Brown's readers, apparently, aren't used to historical fiction, unless it's got that guy from the "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter" commercials on the front cover. Brown puts horrific slander in people's brain as little details, and the next time they hear those tid-bits, they say, "oh, yeah, I think I heard about that."
Some critics have pointed out how bad Brown's history is as if it were a product of his ignorance. This is not the case. Brown is quite well aware, I'm sure, that "Da Vinci" is not a name, as many critics have pointed out it isn't, but rather an origin. Please understand; he's trying to attract an audience which last read a book about Leonardo that was subtitled, "Heroes on a Halfshell."
As much as I'm picking on his audience for being nitwits, it actually is a simple truth that novels, since they contain far more information than a movie, can spend much more effort convincing people that something preposterous is actually believable. Many books I've read, particularly science fiction, have the more incredible portions of them toned down to maintain credibility. For instance, in the novel, "2010," we learned about plant life on Io by reading about how a Russian spacecraft was virtually devoured by a mobile plant; the novel could explain why Io might have mobile plants. In the movie, the crew thought they might have seen readings indicating a trace of photosythetic material.
There simply is no toning down the ridiculousness of Brown's story, because it's all necessary for the plot line. In the movie, it all seems so insipid that viewers apparently have been warning friends not to see it (as evidenced by its crash at the box office), if they are willing to admit to having shelled out $9 to see it in the first place.
Danged nice essay.
Yousa meean thissa movie suck?!
Browns' Da Vinci Code makes the sledge at the bottom of the Hudson seem pristine.
I understand it made back its money the first weekend. So Follywood will chalk it up as a success. Needless to say it fell far short of the hype.
It got lukewarm (at best) reviews, even in liberal publications. Big career mistake for the actors involved. I know some people who saw it and were quite underwhelmed. This will be landing in $5.99 DVD bargain bins across the nation real soon.
I'm not saying the movie sucks,
but Tom Hanks' career has been hurt so bad, "Wilson" is refusing to make the sequel to "Cast Away" with him.
I like "The New Yorker" magazine review of this scurrility...
You understand incorrectly, then, but it's likely not your fault; you were probably misled badly. Counting international box office receipys, it made more money than it cost to produce. But theater owners get over half of the take; overseas distribution costs a lot more; and there's always marketing costs.
Rule of thumb is if the Domestic take is greater than the production costs plus marketing costs, the movie will have made money. On the one hand, the movie seems like it has done better in the foreign market than most movies grossing the same amount in the domestic market make. On the other hand, that rule of thumb also includes presumptions of VHS and DVD sales and rentals. Usually movies that crash so quickly underperform as VHS and DVDs.
Nonetheless, it probably eventually will make a prophet. The issue is whether it is worth the damage to the principals' careers. Howard and Hanks both rely on a very Mom-and-Apple-Audience which is most likely to think badly of them afterwards... like me.
LOL. Your real name wouldn't be Dennis Miller would it?
>> Your real name wouldn't be Dennis Miller would it? <<
I've been asked that more than a couple times :^) For now, as much as Dennis Miller irritates me, I'll take that as a compliment.
Good read. The great political cartoonist Mike Rodriguez says that the Mona Lisa is smirking because of the number of idiots that believe the stuff in Brown's novel. LOL!
By the way, if you think you'd enjoy reading the Dixie Chicks get bashed, this is my last post:
"it probably will make a prophet."
Hows that for a Freudian slip, folks?
By the way:
1st weekend: $77 million
2nd weekend: $32 million
It was more popular in the rest of the world than in the US
Who....? Howard and Hanks....? Never heard of them!
Dr. Freud, your slip is showing.
Not here. The advertisement on ITV 3 last night was telling - it said "No matter what you've heard, come and see the Da Vinci Code."
That indicates a film in trouble to me.
Domestic estimate is $133 million, $288 for global with a budget of $125 million.
Quite the flop, they haven't tripled their money in the first 2 weeks.
Dang it. I've got baseball, basketball and NASCAR on the mind tonight. It should have been Mike Ramirez.
I am just hoping people understand Dan Brown didn't even get the background history right in many cases
Do you mean the MSM orgasm over it didn't help the movie like they thought it would? That was enough reason for me to ignore it.
I would like to, but I can't find it, even though I went to the NYer's site... Do you have a link?
1. If Mary Magdalene is in the painting of the Last Supper instead of John, then WHERE IS JOHN??? Did he have a dentist appointment that day?
2. Why are the evil Cardinal and the albino monk loyal to Christ and the Church? After all they KNOW that Jesus was married and the Church is covering it up. They are fanatical followers of Jesus yet they are seemingly ashamed he was married and are tying to hide that fact from the world. I am totally confused as to their motive for even being Christians given that Jesus has disappointed them by being married.
3. For the sake of argument let us say that the young woman really was the last in the bloodline of Jesus. IMHO, So what???? What good is she to the world more than any other person? And what good to the world was the "real grail", ie, Jesus's baby daughter. Did she do something earth shattering? What did she DO? Was she sacred in some way more than any other human? What's the big deal about anyone who is related to Jesus? I don't get it.
4. If Jesus DID have sex, who would he cry out to in the middle of it? Himself?
(sorry, that one was probably planted in my brain by someone else...)
As a movie, I enjoyed "National Treasure" more. As a book, I enjoyed "Holy Blood - Holy Grail" more.
How can acting in a movie for several million dollars be a career mistake? According to this link, Tom Hanks is the highest grossing actor of all-time. His career won't suffer. This is the biggest film that Audrey Tautou has been in and she is being introduced to millions of Americans who will probably want to see her again. Therefore, I think your analysis is wrong.
Maybe that's where the phrase "Who's your daddy?" came from.
That indicates a film in trouble to me.
If that's not desperation, I don't know what is.
I remember when Ron Howard was a bench warmer on the very bad Burroughs (Burbank, Ca) High Basketball team. Looks like another case of shoot and miss.
That was my quote, though I think Dangus and I agreed on that point.
Tom Hanks could get any number of high paying roles in better films. Here, he got a miscast role in an overhyped stinker flop.
All the critics I read said Tautou was likewise miscast and sucked big time in this movie. If her career takes off as a result of DVC, I will concede that you were right and I was wrong.
Doesn't seem very "Christian".
It's a book, a story. It was a fun, easy, read - much like a Tom Clancy or Star Wars FICTION Novel. I don't see you all sitting around carping and sniping at George Lucas because "his x-wing fighters fly in space like there is actually an atmosphere!!!"
I must admit that, many times, the pettiness and sheer smallness of the way some folks think around here is downright embarassing.
And, don't bother checking my sign-up date....I've probably been here longer than you!
Virtually all films fall in box office by at least 60 percent after a blockbuster opening weekend. Da Vinci has done much better than expectations in the US; and its foreign box office is about twice that of the US, breaking records in places like Japan, Germany, Italy and many smaller countries.
So, you're like so very open minded, eh dude?
Yes, I am "open-minded". If that means that I allow new information to come into my brain and be processed and incorporated into my world-view - rather than spitting out the same platitudes, insults and one-line derisions everyone else is saying - in order to make myself feel accepted - the YES, I am VERY open minded.
It increases tourism in the south of france. It's been slacking of late. Have you seen the websites? They are all the same, in effect, "In search of the feminine Goddess in the south of france."
Not to mention you "must" have a renewed interest in DA Vinci who's paintings are all in Paris...right? You know..the guy who was at the last supper...for real!!!/s
In fairness, George Lucas and (most of) his groupies don't go around pretending that Star Wars is anything other than what it is. The DVC, on the other hand, takes itself very seriously, and many of of its fans have taken it as a historical and spiritiual manifesto. You might not be in that group, but plenty of folks are. We even have a few at FR. They consider The DVC to be a novel built around a fact-based debunking of the "greatest cover-up in human history."
Dan Brown's intention of bringing this to light assumes that people are not aware of these "books".
Once again, Hollyweird jumps on the bandwagon, underestimating the intelligence of Americans in their mad pursuit of a buck because the rest of the world thought his book was "interesting".
Micheal Moore must be proud.
Aren't all Tom Clancy backstories true? I'm crushed!
Nonetheless, it probably eventually will make a prophet.
That's punny! Intentional or not?
Kudzu? Dollar Weed?
A new Prophet or profit...do you think anyone will understand the difference in Euros?
So what. He was not doing anything anyway.
Now who is misleading. Theater owners do not get "half of the take." They are fortunate to make 5%. The "take" comes from concessions according to a former manager I know.
Maybe it would have been better if he had started "A Long time ago in a galaxy far, far away" .....then both extremist sides would be happy.....
Actually, they are ALL TOTALLY FACTUAL....but if you really believed that, we'd have to kill you - and that takes WAAAY too much paperwork. So, no, they are made up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.