The Da Vinci Code (2006) -vs- National Treasure (2004)

 Separated at Birth? 

The Smackdown.  I've never read the book of "The Da Vinci Code." I bought it when it first came out, meant to read it, but once they decided to make the film I thought I'd let myself be the only person in America who hadn't read it and try to enjoy the movie in a way that readers could not. I would bring a fresh perspective. That was the theory anyway, and it had the added advantage of adding a few more days of productivity to my life which gave me time to stay current on the entire Brad/Jennifer/Angelina situation and other important issues. So I've watched the controversy about whether or not it was offensive and to whom, and whether it was real or not, and I've thought to myself, "At least the way they tell the story will be new to me." Not so fast!

The Challenger.  "The Da Vinci Code" is finely mounted film from Ron Howard, an Oscar winning director, starring Tom Hanks, an Oscar winning actor. It's based on the book by Dan Brown, of course, a novel that may have sold more copies than the Bible it purports to undermine. None of it is enough. This is a movie you keep rooting for it to kick in, to deliver the goods you've been put on alert to expect, but they don't come. It doesn't work.

The plot to "The Da Vinci Code" is no big mystery, at least not anymore. It involves a vast conspiracy of silence to cover up the fact that Jesus Christ was married to Mary Magdalene and had a child, and that there are people out there today who are descendants of Jesus.

The Defending Champion.  If this was your standard movie review, then it would be over-and-out. I'd add a few more paragraphs explaining the plot, toss in some film analysis and spin out the reasons why I couldn't get excited about it.  With Movie Smackdowns, however, we get to add a little suspense to that tired review equation because even though "The Da Vinci Code" is unexceptional, there's no guarantee it will lose in the head-to-head competition. Enter "National Treasure," a film about how there's a clue written in invisible ink on the back of the Declaration of Independence which will lead the person who can de-code it to vast treasure.

These two films really do have a lot in common. They both involve large conspiracies that have survived centuries, if not millenia. They both involve the Knights Templar as being up to their chain mail in this conspiracy. They both involve well-known historical artifacts like the Mona Lisa and the Declaration of Independence. They both end up in the basement of ancient churches. They both have huge stars like Tom Hanks and Nicholas Cage playing characters who can spout mumbo-jumbo in great style and leap to conclusions like the Olympic actors they are. I loved what Roger Ebert had to say about "National Treasure" when it first came out:

If you are one of the millions, like me, who plowed through "The Da Vinci Code", you can be forgiven for thinking they've made it into a movie. And, in a way, they have, but the movie is titled "National Treasure." This new Jerry Bruckheimer production is so similar in so many ways to the plot of the Dan Brown best seller that either (a) the filmmakers are the only citizens of the entertainment industry who have never heard of "The Da Vinci Code", no, not even the countless people on the set who must have been reading the book, or (b) they have ripped it off. My attorneys advise me that (a) is the prudent answer.

The Scorecard.  Of course, what neither "The Da Vinci Code" or "National Treasure" had was an ounce of credibility in the search for the secret or search for the treasure storylines they pursued. Each one sets up its cliff-hangers briskly, places the characters in grave danger, allows for nearly impossible escapes, and then takes us to the next plot point. Here's one more point of commonality: both of these films are much better in their front halves than their back halves. As mysteries at the beginning they both more-or-less work. But as the logic falls apart in each, so did my patience.

Ron Howard's movie looks better and feels more important. He's given "The Da Vinci Code" a palpable vibe that says Important Summer Blockbuster. "National Treasure" has more of that Jerry Bruckheimer trademark crazy action, plot and character coming second. It's certainly more fun. So, what we have here, is a Director's Movie in a slugfest with a Producer's Movie.

The Decision.  You're probably going to go see "The Da Vinci Code" no matter what any reviewer says (according to Rotten Tomatoes, it's anything but fresh). And, even though I liked a lot of "National Treasure" better, its careening zeal to blow up its own logic just finally wore me out. Plus, there are lot of people out there who actually want to believe the conspiracy in "The Da Vinci Code" but there aren't too many people wandering around today who think we need to pull the Declaration of Independence off the wall and dust off its backside with lemon juice to see what we can see.

So the Smackdown goes to The Da Vinci Code. It could have been great, probably should have been, but in the summer blockbuster tentpole mentality that this film had to come to life in, it's probably a wonder it wasn't a lot worse.