Yowza! Not even a Money Pit could help this!

The Da Vinci Code, by all accounts I’ve read, was a terrible book. Even people who somewhat buy into the possibility of its ridiculous claims make no defense of Dan Brown’s fiction writing abilities. Despite the absolute mockery of real archeology and history (and the pathetic abuse of language in treating Da Vinci as though it were a last name instead of a reference to where Leonardo was from), the book was hot business, and therefore a movie had to be made.

Ron Howard, a director who has made a lot of academy award winning movies that are extremely watchable once (and once only), was selected to helm the film, and Tom Hanks, magnificent superstar, was matched with Amélie’s adorable Audrey Tautou to carry the film. Ian McKellen was also cast to be a mysterious whisperer of dark secrets.

Who let this happen?

Sadly, before any discussion can be had of the possible heresies espoused by this film, one glaring act of absolute blasphemy makes its presence known.

Tom. Hanks’. Hair.

I am not alone in realizing how bad this hair is:

Nothing is going to stop the movie of “The Da Vinci Code” from being an unqualified success—except maybe Tom Hanks’s terrible hairdo. Sounds silly, right? But Hollywood, like high school, is a silly place, and folks never pass up a chance to play their favorite parlor game: trying to put a dent in a rival movie’s prospects by quietly trashing it. For “Da Vinci,” they’ve zeroed in on the flowing mane of hair that Hanks, 49, chose for his role in Ron Howard’s screen adaptation.

“In Hollywood, it’s not enough that I win. You have to lose,” says one studio executive who didn’t want be identified discussing a competitor’s project. “People are really trying to sabotage each other. It’s not a sport anymore. It’s a science.” (Of course, when asked about Hanks’s hair, this source didn’t blink: “I loathe it. It looks greasy.”) Columbia, the studio releasing “Da Vinci,” declined to comment, but in a NEWSWEEK interview last winter, Hanks was jocular on the subject: “Let’s just say I got positive feedback from the chicks in Ron’s office.” – The Newsweek Periscope

Tom can’t even see his own hair, but still has to squint his eyes just to survive.

I failed to see The Da Vinci Code, and therefore I cannot give a fully accurate review. In spite of this, I will still score his hair using estimates based on the trailer and other photographic evidence.

Is Christianity threatened by this hair?

The filmmakers might have had a shot at de-emphasizing the hair, but The Da Vinci Code relies too much on close ups of main characters being shocked at the ridiculous things they are being told and then frightened as they are pursued to the next plot point.

This employment of the “shock and awe” close-up has effectively eliminated all leeway the filmmakers had to, say, only show Tom Hanks from the neck down throughout the entire movie (except for extreme face close-ups). Yes, that might have been rather awkward, but some compromise would have been encouraging as a sign of good faith in the audience.

Sadly, as a result of this film, others are feeling free to employ simliar hair tactics. Will you stand for this?

In a random, non-scientific exit poll, a full 100% of viewers at the premiere said they would have been “totally fine” with close-ups of Tom Hank’s “shocked and surprised neck” in place of the close-ups that included his hair.

“Sure, his neck isn’t the most attractive neck I’ve ever seen, but anything –ANYTHING– would be better than having to watch that hair flop around!”
- this viewer preferred to remain anonymous

The aforementioned compromise (only showing Tom Hanks from the neck down) was not to be, and we are forced to watch his hair. It’s greasy. It flaps around. Tom and Audrey can find patterns and clues in artwork and history, but they fail to see how bad Tom’s hair is. They act like it’s not there, like it’s not destroying the entire universe.

---

Offensiveness Breakdown

Tom Hanks, The Da Vinci Code

Screen presence: 4/5
Lack of dignity: 3/5
Level of clash (with other hair, costumes, sets, etc.): 3.4/5
Flowiness/Flappiness: 3.8/5
Greasiness: 4/5

Overall Distraction Index (ODI): 3.7/5

---

The Last Word
It remains to be seen if Columbia Pictures will mercifully release a “Below The Neck” edition of The Da Vinci Code.

---

Next in Bad Movie Hair? Will it be Mel Gibson in Lethal Weapon? Wesley Snipes in Demolition Man? John Travolta in Battlefield Earth? You’ll just have to wait!

(For those interested, here is a discussion of my Review Model and a Rationale for the existence of this kind of review.)

 
Posted in Movies, People by Michael

Share: digg this!