His ingenious concepts in many subjects and technological inventions were so advanced for the 14th to 1 5th century technology that even some 20th-century inventors, like he Wright brothers, pulled from his work.
There have been a lot of theories on Dad Vine’s life and on his paintings and it is believed that “Last Supper” contained hidden messages, which Dad Vinci encoded in the painting himself.
The movie progresses through a series of exotic and historic venues where more clues are revealed, but then Langdon and Neveu are pursued, so they flee to the next backdrop and the next clue.
On their tail are Fache and creepy albino Opus Dei zealot Silas (Paul Bettany), both taking orders from misguided Bishop Manuel Aringarosa (Alfred Molina).
Instead, the two-and-a-half hour running time is spent chasing an idea, which once revealed, really isn’t confirmed at all.
The filmmakers were so concerned about doing justice to the book’s ideas that they forgot there’s an audience to entertain.When it comes to world-famous paintings, Leonardo Dad Vine’s “Last Supper” is always on the top of the list.What is it that, even now, 500 years after its creation in 1498, makes “Last Supper” such a mysterious and conspiracy-laden painting?This is a fact-finding mystery told with all the trappings the genre offers, simply with a religious-themed hook like when Nicolas Cage was finding secret maps on the back of the Declaration of Independence. Because the central Mc Guffin is Christ’s long-lost bloodline.Had Brown made wild thinly-researched claims about some non-Christian subject, no one would have complained about historical or religious accuracy.Much has been made of the story’s , which suggests that Mary Magdalene and Jesus Christ conceived a child and the bloodline continues to this day, its heir kept secret by the Priory of Sion and continually hunted by Opus Dei—religious factions exaggerated and skewed by Dan Brown’s text, as if that matters.Liberties with history are taken and some readers are particularly offended by this, accusing Brown and later the filmmakers of promoting religious heresy and historical inaccuracy.First, there is a level of mystery surrounding its creator, Leonardo Dad Vinci.Not only was Dad Vinci an influential painter, he was also an engineer, sculptor, designer, and scientist. And those ideas are very clever, at once intriguing and controversial enough to send audiences racing into their local library, or at least Wikipedia, to find out the real story.Unfortunately, the movie’s ideas mask any semblance of character development or believable narrative, as the ideas don’t have the time or room to allow for such things within the script—they’re too busy being fascinating.