Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

More tabloid DA VINCI CODE casting rumors! Is Silas cast' Plus Variety confirms Gandalf and Doc Ock!!

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here this fine evening with a little rumor from the beings known for their journalistic merits including, but not limited to pictures of celebrities buying milk, the most accurate and recent JFK/Elvis/Martian sightings and an occasional DA VINCI CODE casting rumor. This could very well be true. We know that there must have been a really good reason for Christopher Eccleston to leave DR. WHO, a show that is on the good side of most fans of the original series. So, you can click below for the story, if it's true. I'll meet you below for the confirmed bit from Variety.

CLICK IT HERE FOR SKY'S REPORT ON THE TABLOID BREAK!

Am sure you have heard this rumour but here it is in case you haven't. The Sunday Mirror is probably not the most trustworthy of tabloids to be honest.......

Cheers

Dicky

Now Variety has Sir Ian McKellen and Alfred Molina announced as being in the movie. If you have an account you can read the full story here... or you can click through and read the first two sentences.

For those who don't want to try, it seems that McKellen is cast as Sir Teabing, "a wealthy man who acts as a resource for Langdon even as he shows his own ambitions to uncover the Holy Grail." Alfred Molina will play Bishop Arigarosa, "who's keenly interested in the sleuthing activities of Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) and cryptographer Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou)."

The cast on this one seems second to none and it keeps on building. What do you folks think of the tabloid rumor and the confirmed casting? I haven't read the book, so you tell me... Perfect casting or off by a mile?


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • April 20, 2005, 3:05 a.m. CST

    FIRST!!!

    by BNITT

    :)

  • April 20, 2005, 3:06 a.m. CST

    And 2nd!!!!

    by BNITT

    :)))

  • April 20, 2005, 3:07 a.m. CST

    I hope Captain Panaka is in this one!!!

    by BNITT

    You need a one eye bastard to dish out cynical one liners!

  • April 20, 2005, 3:16 a.m. CST

    Captain Panaka should be in EVERY movie. He just shows up and s

    by Tall_Boy

    That would rule.

  • April 20, 2005, 3:28 a.m. CST

    That's not Panaka. It's Typho.

    by Some Dude

    Owned. Or not.

  • April 20, 2005, 3:29 a.m. CST

    Christopher Lloyd should be in every movie.

    by iamnicksaicnsn

    Ever. Why is he in Stacked? Or at least, why does it have to be bad? "If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits eighty-eight miles per hour... you're gonna see some serious shit. "

  • April 20, 2005, 3:35 a.m. CST

    If Captain Panaka used a high powered rifle with a scope, would

    by Monkeybrains

    Just wondering. Viva Panaka!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • April 20, 2005, 3:35 a.m. CST

    Sir Ian Mckellen can play anything. He could be Bridget Jones an

    by sindala

  • April 20, 2005, 3:40 a.m. CST

    Casting

    by TheDarkKnight

    Is getting better for the supporting roles, but the leads suck! Langdon = Clooney/Jackman Neveu = Irene Jacob/SophieMarceau Fache = Tcheky Karyo Teabing = Jim Brodbent Silas = Carrey/Cassel Aringarosa = Javier Bardem Sauniere = Jean Rochefort

  • April 20, 2005, 3:48 a.m. CST

    Yea McKellen is perfect.

    by Dented Helmet

  • April 20, 2005, 4:19 a.m. CST

    This sucks - wait, what article am I replying to again?

    by scrumdiddly

  • April 20, 2005, 4:20 a.m. CST

    and you got fucked by your priest,

    by iamnicksaicnsn

    quit your bitching.

  • April 20, 2005, 4:28 a.m. CST

    Now...

    by Drworm2002

    ...we are getting back to some cool news. I can't wait for this movie.

  • April 20, 2005, 4:31 a.m. CST

    I thought the book was awful

    by Phloton

    It had interesting ideas in it, I'll grant it that, but the writing itself was really bad. It read like someone trying to sell a screenplay. The symbologist making connections between things was like people interpreting Nostrodamus hundreds of years after his death. You can make anything sound like what you want after the fact. And I certainly don't see Tom Hanks as the character. We'll see what Ronnie can do. After all he has Akiva Goldsman on the case, and he's never written a bad script. Oh wait, all of his scripts are crap. As always, this is just my opinion.

  • April 20, 2005, 4:32 a.m. CST

    most of the casting, if true, is pretty good. except for hanks.

    by ElGuapo

    you always feel you're watching tom hanks, rather than the person he's supposed to be.

  • April 20, 2005, 5:08 a.m. CST

    Worst-talkback-ever

    by Heckles

    Some of you should have been beaten as children.

  • April 20, 2005, 5:38 a.m. CST

    Yeah, the book was rubbish

    by Flipao

  • April 20, 2005, 6:03 a.m. CST

    Two Words... Bonfire of the Vanities

    by Judge Doom

    No Whait, that was four. Anyway, the main cast of this movie is as bad as Bonfire was. HUGH JACKMAN, Dammit, he should be langdom.

  • April 20, 2005, 6:42 a.m. CST

    Truer words were never said: Ron Howard was born to direct The

    by InspectorDoppler

    And whether you take that as a bigger insult to the hamfisted hack Howard or the airport-giftshop-grade book, you're right either way.

  • April 20, 2005, 9:17 a.m. CST

    Cast and Book

    by TheFount

    Most of the casting is good, but Hanks is completely wrong for this role. Of course it doesn't really matter, as the book is so appallingly bad that no cast can save it from itself. For a full review look here: http://thefount.blogspot.com/2005/03/book-review-da-vinci-code.html (beware of spoilers, if you haven't read)

  • April 20, 2005, 9:54 a.m. CST

    Sophie Marceau and Richard Attenborough

    by rogerconnery

    rather than Tatou and McKellan. The romantic lead should be older. And the Teabing character was fat and cherubic.

  • April 20, 2005, 10:02 a.m. CST

    It doesn't matter who plays in this movie.

    by MattCG

    The characters are thinner than Campbell's soup and the plot is non-existent. People won't be going to see the story, they'll be going to either have something to bitch about the next day or to help reaffirm shit they already believe. But, you cannot deny that it's going to be a massive hit and you've got to credit Dan Brown and his publisher for the amazing marketing job they've down with this book. There have entire bookshelves written to refute this FICTIONAL book, all due to the genius of those first three pages and the willingness to piss everyone off. This is how you write a best seller.

  • April 20, 2005, 10:08 a.m. CST

    Perfect casting except...

    by delsol

    Tom Hanks as Langdon. Eccleston playing Silas the Albino Monk is inspired, while McKellen and Molina work extremely well. Since watching Audrey Tautou requires extra injections of insulin, I do wish someone less "sweet" had been cast as Sophie. But she does fit the bill.

  • April 20, 2005, 10:26 a.m. CST

    Ian McKellan was my choice for Teabing ever since I read this th

    by Nice Marmot

    Molina's a good choice too. And none of you whiny bitches hat e the book. You hate that Dan Brown did enough more work than you have ever done on anything, got a book published, & now its #1 on the bestseller list & has been in the top 10 for 105 weeks. Therefore, he's friggin' loaded. You bitches don't hate the book, you hate da player AND da game.

  • April 20, 2005, 10:30 a.m. CST

    We are all in agreement?!

    by Dannychico

    What the hell kind of talkback is this? We are all in perfect harmony. The book is hogwash pisspoop, Hanks is miscast. Allow me to realign the stars: Judge Doom, you moron, Hugh Jackman is worse than Hanks. Langdon isn't a superhero; he's a nerdy member of the intelligencia. Also, the movie will NO DOUBT be better than the book. I'm not saying it's going to be good, but transplanting the plot from the book and shedding Dan Brown's obnoxiously elementary writing can't be a bad thing. Goldsman is a first-rate hack, but Dan Brown is a second-rate one.

  • April 20, 2005, 11:34 a.m. CST

    SILAS CASTING

    by lambchop

    Oh please, Christopher Ecclestone is waaayyy too thin and cadaverous for this role - Silas is supposed to be this really scary,hulky character who could flatten someone with one blow. Nooooo people! Get it right!

  • April 20, 2005, 11:35 a.m. CST

    firsthater

    by Grando

    You are becoming as tiresome as the first posters you campaign against.

  • April 20, 2005, 11:36 a.m. CST

    This book is a work of fiction.

    by Jeditemple

    The only facts are that Jesus never married Mary, nor did they have any children. If they did, the Bible would have clearly mentioned it. There's no conspiracy, other than the hoax behind the Priory of Sion, which was started by Pierre Plantard.

  • April 20, 2005, 11:37 a.m. CST

    I second the motion that the film will be better than the book.

    by Barry Egan

    Clint Eastwood's film version of The Bridges of Madison County was a vast improvement on a hugely popular yet crappy novel. There is probably a good thriller lurking in The DaVinci Code once you strip away Brown's awkward prose.

  • April 20, 2005, 11:48 a.m. CST

    So McKellen plays the villain again?

    by Spike Fett

    SPOILER!! BITCHES!

  • April 20, 2005, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Spike

    by Dannychico

    Haha, I read the book and couldn't even remember if he was really the villain. That book had so many convoluted twists. Wasn't everybody the villain at some point?

  • April 20, 2005, 12:48 p.m. CST

    The perfect casting for Silas would be...

    by skittles

    Hulk Hogan. Think about it! With a little makeup, a little work on the hair, a little bit of acting lessons... It could work!

  • Sorry, could not resist.

  • April 20, 2005, 3:05 p.m. CST

    Wnanahara7 -- back at you

    by Jeditemple

    Hey Wnanahara7, can you PROVE that the Bible is a work of fiction? No you can't. So believe what you want to, but can you afford to be wrong?

  • April 20, 2005, 3:12 p.m. CST

    FIRST!!

    by Deeez Nuuuts

    Or not.

  • April 20, 2005, 4:20 p.m. CST

    Casting is cool, except for Hanks....

    by Russman

    Someone... DIFFERENT, would be a better match but, the people love Tommy so Tommy it is.

  • April 20, 2005, 4:24 p.m. CST

    A Little Off Topic, But . . .

    by underscore_only

    I hate people who condemn others to hell for being atheists or of another religion. I think it only matters the kind of person you are, not what building you enter to kneal(although if you're catholic, and an altar boy, it's a different kind of knealing).

  • April 20, 2005, 4:27 p.m. CST

    and if CE is really thin, then I I don't think he's a good match

    by Russman

    I always pictured that cross-eyed dude who played the killer in 8MM. He may not have the height, but he's got the right build and the bald head and has that crazy act down pat. Less than a month away... "YOU WERE THE CHOSEN ONE!!!"

  • April 20, 2005, 4:32 p.m. CST

    purple haze.... all in my brain.....

    by the_man_from_Rio

    happy 4/20 geekdom...paul bettany should be cast as silas. THINK ABOUT IT MAN!!! whoever's seen "the reckoning" knows what i'm talking about. maybe even jake busey if the money ran out. i like molina because he can act his way out of a vietnamese russian roulette showdown, and as far as teabag, ian mckellen will rule, but i was kinda hoping for richard attenborough or ian holm.

  • April 20, 2005, 4:43 p.m. CST

    clint howard

    by the_man_from_Rio

    ron gotta hook a brotha up!!! i wonder what part he could play. but he's must be in the movie. it would take it to a whole new level.

  • April 20, 2005, 4:47 p.m. CST

    Hm

    by Hamish

    Teabing should be fatter. I thought Brendan Gleeson/Brian Cox. McKellen is certainly English enough, as well as being class. Ecclestone could be cool, but needs to bulk way up. Molina would be perfection, as he so often is.

  • April 20, 2005, 4:57 p.m. CST

    I thought Hugh Laurie for Teabag

    by Dannychico

    But McKellen is totally awesome in everything EVER.

  • April 20, 2005, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Alfred Molina: I'll always remember him as the "throw me the ido

    by Ted Striker

    And that's the way it is.

  • April 20, 2005, 5:51 p.m. CST

    Reno & Molina are PERFECT!

    by delwin

    He is who I saw when reading for Bishop Arigarosa, perfect. I don't mind Tom Hanks, I really don't, I love him. Audrey Tatou is the kind of girl, looks wise, I imagined playing Sophie, but I thought she would be a little more mature, older, like Helena Bonham Carter. And I also think Christopher Eccleston will be awesome from what I've seen of him.

  • April 20, 2005, 5:51 p.m. CST

    Elton John as Sir Teabing

    by tfmm

    I don't know why, but this is who I pictured when reading the book.

  • April 20, 2005, 5:52 p.m. CST

    Oh, I forgot, Jim Broadbent should have been Teabing.

    by delwin

  • April 20, 2005, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Eccleston is too lanky...

    by El Fuego

    He's cool, but I don't know if he's right.

  • April 21, 2005, 8:17 a.m. CST

    "The only facts are that Jesus never married Mary, nor did they

    by minderbinder

    Sounds like the church articles that try to debunk DVC by using bible quotes to prove that the bible is "true". On to the movie: it is pretty hilarious that this is the TB where everyone seems to agree. Hanks doesn't seem right, the book describes Langdon as Harrison Ford, and the book tries so hard to be an Indy adventure (although mostly in professor mode). The book has a pretty amusing plot (assuming you haven't read Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which all the best material is lifted from, in which case you know the ending literally from page one). But it is horribly written, the dialogue is atrocious and even the pacing sucks, if they stuck to the movie they wouldn't escape the museum until 3/4ths of the way through. Could make for a decent template for a film though, they just need to scrap ALL the dialogue and take whatever liberties they feel necessary. Oh, and the ending where you find out the real bad guy is horrible, anticlimactic, and barely even makes sense. Nothing like ending a "thriller" with some people just standing around talking. But I'm sure that will change.

  • April 21, 2005, 9 a.m. CST

    Bad Book, excellent cast

    by Darth_Dutch

    The Book was horrible predictable, with a few cheap puzzles to keep the reader distracted from what could be a good book. Dan could have better invented a good plot, instead of a -well documented- cheap rip-off of "24". Well, the movie has Jean Reno: Excellent actor. Ian McKellen is too old for the part of Sir Teabing. Tom Hanks.... well, nice actor, but I don't see him as a professor in ancient Symbology. Audrey Tautou, well.... Allways a pleasure. Alfred Molina : Well cast, the only really fitted for his role in this book/movie. Albeit a bit too young

  • April 21, 2005, 3:10 p.m. CST

    Tautou & Mckellan

    by Zoviet Squid

    Well, it took them awhile, but now I'm almost sorta interested in seeing this.

  • April 21, 2005, 4:26 p.m. CST

    Jeditemple

    by Gruesome Wedgie

    The bible is no different from any other religons collection of lies, kark, fantasy & delusion. The fact the minions of mindless droolers want the treat a FICTION book like Da Vinci Code as gospel writ only shows that America is stepping backwards, not forwards. The Da Vinci Code is a fantasy based on a delusion. It carries all the relious weight of this weeks TV Guide. I'll be keeping my money in my pocket, thank you.

  • April 21, 2005, 4:36 p.m. CST

    A better book

    by Gruesome Wedgie

    A much better book than Da Vinci Code is Tom Robbin's Another Roadside Attraction, where a character stumbles around under the vatican until he finds the mummified remains of Jesus, which he promptly swipes. Much better book, would make a FAR better movie, &, like the Da Vinci Code, ITS ALL TRUE!!! Tits ahoy, Captain Marvel!