O Tesouro Da Vinci

I rented this out of curiosity when I saw it on the shelf the same day "The Da Vinci Code" came out. This movie is an insult to the viewer and everyone involved. It was slapped together so fast that I could find no reference to it anywhere on the internet for several days after I watched it. I just looked it up today to see if anyone had claimed it yet and give it my vote which might be too high now that I think about it. Somebody must have made some money on it somehow. There is no other excuse or motive for such trash. The lack of quality of the production reminds me of some cheap porn. Do you suppose Henrikson and Howell owed somebody a debt they couldn't refuse? I see 8 people actually gave this a 10 rating. Could that many crew members have had the gall to claim this as their best work? Bottom line - don't bother.

This is a terrible rip off of The Davinci Code. The packaging is intended to trick you into thinking you're picking up the original. Then you get home and find that you've been had.

The scene cuts are so terribly distracting that you feel like a couple of 12 year kids edited this movie in their basement. I could only stand to watch about 10 minutes of it before I felt my self respect draining away.

Don't waste 10 seconds of you time on this movie.

It should be illegal to produce movies that are rip offs of (semi)good movies and then package them in deceptive cases. I've told my local movie rental to pull it from their shelves or face lots of dissatisfied customers.

Unlike a few, but like many others, we were tricked by the misleading DVD-cover. After more than 15 minutes of not seeing Tom Hanks I realized this was NOT The Da Vinci Code.

These are my other impressions divided into positive (+), neutral (±) and negative (-) remarks:

(+) I'm glad that bad movies like these exists so that you can refer to them. It's fun to talk about. ^^

(+) The movie had a few decent moments. Still not enough to compensate the negatives though.

(±) Sometimes I couldn't follow the plot. Their way of reasoning was far beyond me because they connected dots I didn't even know about. But I don't dare to say whether that's the writer's fault or my own.

(-) Annoying, distracting "freeze frames" at the beginning of the movie that didn't mean anything.

(-) Bad acting.

(-) Bad plot.

(-) Bad special effects, especially at the end of the movie.

(-) Lack of suspense.

(-) ... should I go on?

Believe me, even though these are all opinions, I think the low ratings for this movie are justified.

My comments are straight forward; I highly recommend no one watch this movie. If you want to waste your time you'd be better off putting a bullet in your head than watch this movie. I've never seen such a stupid, very badly acted and the worst script writing in my entire life.

I'd rather watch puke drip down a wall than watch this movie ever again and if you intend to watch this movie then bad your head against a wall and ask yourself if you have any taste with anything in your whole entire life. I really wish I knew the score of this movie before watching it and I wish I saw the comments but now that I know about IMDb I promise that I'll always look up the score. This movie can't even have a rating of 2, I give it a minus one thousand and thats the bottom line.

This takes cheek to a new level . From the outset characters mention " The Da Vinci Codex " which leads to the conclusion that THE DA VINCI CODEX was going to be the original title of the movie but Asylum got cold feet at the last minute , especially when it became clear Dan Brown was no stranger to plagiarism court cases even if he was the defendant . Titles of films aren't copyrighted but this film does sail close to the wind . Unfortunately as the film continues you realise the title is the least of the problems

From the outset it's clear there is zero reality involved . The producers could claim it's escapist fantasy not a documentary but even so there still has to be credibility for a film to work . For example the opening sequence takes place at a mansion in London where a couple of bodyguards patrol the gardens armed with AK47s . The gun laws are very strict in Britain with possession of an assault rifle enough to get you a life sentence , it's not something you can posses even if you have a firearms license . Sure enough many shots are fired in the opening sequence but for some strange reason the police never arrive

The film is full of these gaps in credibility. There's a car chase involving hero and heroine Michael Archer and Gulia Pedina where they're pursued by the villains who continually fire shots at the duo . The bad guys eventually catch up with the goodies in a culdesac and politely ask for the Turin Shroud in Michael's possession then drive off . Let's see they were trying to kill Michael and Gulia seconds earlier and when they catch up with them they suddenly decide not to kill them ? Can anyone spot an inconsistency here ? The scene also sees Michael refers to the villains killing Gulia's relative who is a cardinal .Unless I missed something there's no way Michael would know this since he and Gulia were in a different location when it happened . I suppose theaudience aren't supposed to think about these plot holes instead they're attention is concentrated on Gulia's cleavage ? I'm sorry but no woman has a good enough cleavage to hide such clumsy and careless scripting

If the screenplay by Paul Bales and Carlos De Los Rios is bad then the directing is worse . Much worse . Director Peter Mervis is also the editor on the film and the editing is possibly the most noticeable thing about THE DA VINCI TREASURE and that's not a compliment . Remember in these old classic Hollywood movies a newspaper man takes a photo with a big camera with a light bulb ? There's a flash of light and a whooshing sound . We see something similar continually happen throughout the film but there's absolutely no consistency to it . It happens during action scenes then it doesn't happen . It happens when characters are introduced then doesn't happen when other characters aren't introduced . We have no idea why the director does it and it's literally painful to watch

Don't be fooled by the presence of Lance Henriksen either because despite being the main villain he's only in the film for a total of three scenes . Most of the screen time is composed of C Thomas Howell and Nicole Sherwin trying to convince us they're a couple of academic anthropologists and failing . Howell looks exactly like he did in WAR OF THE WORLDS 2 THE NEXT WAVE where he lived in a shanty town after surving an alien invasion that has destroyed civilization . Honestly he looks like some homeless heroin addict than an intellectual . As I said earlier Ms Sherwin has an impressive cleavage but if cleavage is the best thing about a movie then it's just got to be a very poor movie