DOWN WITH PANTS!

WARNING: SPOILERS!!! I may have spoiled the movie for some of you. I forgot to warn you of this so I apologize to anybody who wanted to see it and then was put off by my review. So if you want to see it, please don't read this review...

As a big fan of Dan Brown's flawed, but still riveting book The Da Vinci Code, I have been anxiously awaiting the movie version for a couple of years. Naturally, Death? and I faithfully had to go see the movie on opening night despite our reservations about the adaptation and all of the poor reviews that the film has received from critics.

Maybe we should have trusted our gut and stayed away. Of course, a film is rarely as good as it's book, especially when the book is as detailed and just plain long as this one. I was willing to give the movie a break because of the challenges of adapting it, but even then, The Da Vinci Code is a massive disappointment on so many levels that it boggles the mind. Rather than dwell on all of it's problems, including the added "that's just a theory" dialogue and Langdon's testimony at the end that are obviously aimed at diffusing criticism, I have one major beef that I have yet to see anyone address.

In the book, Sophie Neveu is, more or less, the protagonist. She is smart, sassy, sexy and she is the equal of, if not smarter than, Robert Langdon. Langdon is the one that gets swept up by Sophie and is caught in the action. Sure he is smart and helps solve many of the puzzles, but he is the one that looks on in wide eyed amazement as the clues and puzzles unfold in front of them. For those of you who are Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy fans, Sophie Neveu is to Robert Langdon as Ford Prefect is to Arthur Dent.

In the movie, Sophie (Audrey Tautou) is completely stripped of the intelligence, moxy and strength that she possesses in the book. Langdon (Tom Hanks) solves all of the puzzles on his own and practically drags Sophie behind him on his quest for the grail. In fact, at one point in the movie you see them cross the street. Langdon has a hold of the back of Sophie's arm, right above the elbow. If you have ever had this done to you, you know that means you are being controlled 100% by the person holding you. Sophie exists merely because of how the film ends but needs protection and looks like a deer caught in the headlights throughout the rest of the movie.

Why Ron Howard and Akiva Goldsman chose to go this route with Sophie's character is beyond me other than the fact that this is what America expects out of female characters in big summer blockbusters. They are weak and helpless and need saving. Apparently, this is what Hollywood thinks we want out of our women. If I were a woman, I would be extremely offended and tremendously disappointed. Here there was an opportunity for a blockbuster film to have a very strong female lead and the men running the show decided to marginalize her and make the film male dominated drivel.

And the movie suffers for it. The book is great partially because of the interplay between Langdon and Sophie and how the process of being pushed by Sophie inspires Langdon to continue and change and eventually leads to a romance. Instead they opted to portray Langdon as a protector and a father figure to Sophie, or one of the Knights of the Templar. He is the hero and she is his damsel in distress making the relationship one big, long cliche' that ultimately falls flat and goes nowhere, just like the rest of the ridiculously frustrating Da Vinci Code.