Customer Reviews

The Da Vinci Treasure

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

The Da Vinci Treasure is an awful,horrible,badly made attempted rip-off of a film...That anyone would bank-roll this dud boggles the mind..C.Thomas Howell,looking like he is suffering from some wasting illness,plays the lead,an adventurer seeking a "Di Medici"treasure trove alledgedly to be found following "hints"and "clues"to be found in items associated with Leonardo Da Vinci..Any similarity with the more popular"Da Vinci Code" book and film ends here..Instead one gets tongue-in-cheek jokes being told by Howell and the busty female lead while simultaneously they are being shot at,or otherwise menaced,usually by the rather over-the-top arch-villian,played by Lance Hendriksen..There is no real rhyme or reason to anything that goes on in this movie...The Shroud of Turin is stolen,a cardinal is shot,several chase scenes occur in Italy during rush hour,complete with AK47 gunfire,a secret chamber is found in Afganistan,ect...None of these sequences really add to the flimsy plotline,but do take up time...Without these elements this badly scripted story would probably clock in at about fifteen minutes from start to finish...Truly a grade "Z" production,made probably so that someone with bucks could claim a major tax write-off rather than as entertainment.

Lance Henriksen can't sink much lower than this pitiful attempt to cash in on THE DA VINCI CODE.

What's wrong with this snoozefest? EVERYTHING!!!

*Horrible direction--from the endless use of ineffectual freeze frames to the red-draped camera work.

*Laughable acting. C Thomas Howell is not Harrison Ford. He's not even Casper van Dien!

*Some of the worst action sequences on film.

*Does anyone care how tall characters are?

*The movie was filmed at private residences in Southern California, not London, Milan or Afghanistan!!

Don't waste your time--it's too valuable.

.....to know the good. Once in a great while you have to watch something like this in order to confirm to yourself that you can still tell the difference between the good, bad and ugly. You don't have to know why something is one or the other as long as you "know". And I "know" this is bad, really bad. To be honest, I liked the first minute. I was in London several years ago and stayed at the Tower Hotel so it was nicely nostalgic to see the bridge and surrounding area. It was steeply downhill from there. Since this is supposed to be an action tale why does the director (or editor?) insist on inserting freeze-frames in every single such scene? Are they expecting their audience to doze off for a second or two and are considerately allowing them to not miss anything. They must expect them to nod-off somewhere between two and three hundred times. And what about the freezes during the non-"action" scenes. Are these so important to the storyline that they must be emphasized? Let's see: taking the shroud out of a purse - freeze it; look, there's a torch on the wall - freeze it; a gun on the back seat - yup, freeze-it. And let's not overlook the stupid dialogue. Not one minute after the good guys say "Who would think to look for the shroud here (in an unguarded basement)" who comes running down the steps but the bad guys, not bothering to have asked the Cardinal (who looks like a priest) where they've "hidden" the shroud before they shot him. The film contains no "strong horror/gore" as advertised on the box. Lance comes across strongly as a really dangerous pyscho but he can't salvage this. This is one treasure that should have remained buried.

THE DA VINCI TREASURE

I don't know what it is about The Asylum but I just keep buying and watching all of their films. I mean at one point they did original films all the time but now it seems it is only mostly these mock busters. This is obviously a rip off of The Da Vinci Code but since I don't think I have seen that film I can't compare. Yes I know every one has seen it but it didn't interest me in any way, so I skipped it and will most likely continue do so. With that said this I guess is not totally horrible but like I said there is no comparison, it may be horrific compared to the big budget flick. Still it has the great Lance Henriksen in it as well as C. Thomas Howell so that is good I guess.

The story is all about a guy named Michael Archer [Howell] who is you guessed it looking to uncover a mystery surrounding the works of one Leonardo Da Vinci. Of course there will be obstacles such as the lead villain played by Lance. So he enlists the help of some woman and they are off to find a buried treasure that is in a tomb full of traps. There are a few things that happen in between with some being actually entertaining at times. The thing is that since I know it is a rip off I can't help but think how the original plays out, I guess I might see one day.

The film is bad, don't get me wrong and I assume you would most likely hate it if you loved the mainstream one, but it isn't all that bad. The acting for the most part is pretty bad though and even Lance can't save the film from that down fall. Lance him self seems like he was just here to get a quick pay check to be honest and Howell is decent in the lead role I suppose. The rest I will leave up to you as far as their performances go, for the most part it is non impressive.

There are four writers on this film including director Peter Mervis who some may know from "When a Killer Calls, and Snakes on a Train". The writing I assume is a lackluster version of the original and the direction seems off. Still I don't know what I like about this movie because I don't hate it, it's weird. I don't maybe I need to watch it again or something but it seems like something in it is appealing, Lance maybe.

I think this would be a rental at most for well most, unless you are like me and collect all of these films from The Asylum. Some of their films are excellent, some good, and some not so much. My brother didn't like this one as much as others but he felt it was ok. If you don't like low budget flicks or rip off flicks this one is most certainly not for you.