![\"da-vinci-thumbs-350.jpg\"](\"https:\/\/www.davidbordwell.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/da-vinci-thumbs-350.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Kristin here\u2014<\/p>\n
First, a little background. In the new edition of Film Art<\/em>, we have added a new feature. At the end of each chapter we recommend DVD supplements that tie in with the respective subject matter. The task of watching lots of supplements\u2014around 60 films\u2019 worth\u2014devolved upon me. That wasn\u2019t always as fun as it might sound. There were some informative sets of extras, but all too many were mutually congratulatory fests, with directors praising actors, actors praising directors, actors praising other actors, and so on. \u201cX was just perfect for that role. I can\u2019t imagine anyone else playing the part.\u201d You know the kind.<\/p>\n Film Art<\/em>\u2019s new edition is finished, but I keep looking for supplements we can recommend here or in the ninth edition. One promising-sounding DVD set was the recent \u201cSpecial Edition\u201d of The Da Vinci Code<\/em>, with 90 minutes worth of extras.<\/p>\n I know The Da Vinci Code<\/em> has a so-so reputation based on the reviewers\u2019 responses. I went to it during its first run and was pleasantly surprised. It\u2019s no masterpiece, but the idea that it is dull or slow seems very odd. It was entertaining and reasonably well-made, and I enjoyed it. It\u2019s certainly miles above the overly long Dan Brown novel, which has a tendency to have information revealed in the dialogue and then redundantly summarized in the third-person narration. It also has those thudding cliff-hanger sentences at the end of just about every one of its choppy little chapters. The movie positively races along in comparison. And the washed-out historical flashbacks during the Grail explanations have a loony, experimental feel to them that appeals to me. It\u2019s startling to see such epic scenes tossed in briefly in the midst of a modern thriller. I can see, though, where others might dismiss them as silly.<\/p>\n I don\u2019t know how it happens, but sometimes a film comes along that all the critics simultaneously decide to trash, whether it deserves it or not. Some sort of telepathic thing, maybe, or perhaps in this case they all consulted each other during the famous long press junket on a special chartered train traveling from London to Cannes this past spring. (Ian McKellen has posted an amusing account<\/a> of answering the same questions over and over during this journey.) The Da Vinci Code<\/em> was the opening-night film at Cannes, and that\u2019s where the lukewarm critical response began. The reviews were completely ignored by moviegoers, who made The Da Vinci Code<\/em> the second highest grossing film of 2006 internationally.<\/p>\n Anyway, having enjoyed the film and knowing that its DVD was laden with supplements, I set out to purchase it. Investigation on the internet turned up the surprising news that there was an \u201cextended version\u201d available. That was news to me, and no wonder. When I searched further, I discovered that this longer cut was not available in the U.S. While the familiar 149-minute theatrical version can be had here\u2014complete with a replica cryptex if you buy the deluxe version\u2014the unknown 168-minute version cannot. Not only that, but though I Googled as hard as I could, I could find no explanation as to why there would be an extended version at all and why we Yanks have no access to it.<\/p>\n There\u2019s a Region 2 French edition, as advertised on Amazon\u2019s French site. The Germans seem to have the best selection, with the extended version available on a simple two-disc set, a deluxe edition that throws in a cryptex, and a boxed set of the two DVDs with six CDs containing the audiobook. The long version is also available on Region 4 DVDs in New Zealand and Australia. I have not been able to locate any Region 1 (U.S. standard) DVDs of this version. By the way, all the DVDs, regular, extended, fullscreen, and widescreen seem to have an identical set of supplements.<\/p>\n Perhaps an extended Da Vinci Code<\/em> is not at the top of everyone\u2019s Christmas list, but the lack of availability or even knowledge of this version in the States is puzzling. Was there something in this longer version that would bore, offend, or otherwise put off American viewers? Which version would one write about in doing some sort of analytical essay on The Da Vinci Code<\/em>? Aided by eBay and a multi-standard DVD player, I set out to investigate.<\/p>\n The copy I bought, an Australian one, doesn\u2019t have a list of where the extra footage comes. I didn\u2019t sit down with two DVD players and two monitors side-by-side, so I can\u2019t pinpoint every single difference. I had seen the film in a theater in June, and upon watching the extended version, I was able to spot ten additions, ranging from a couple of shots at the beginning of a scene to five new sequences. I don\u2019t think these add up to an extra 26 minutes, so there are presumably some I missed. Those who are interested can have the pleasure of ferreting out all the details of the extra footage for themselves. (It does make one appreciate the Lord of the Rings<\/em> extended-edition menus, where changes are marked with asterisks.)<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.davidbordwell.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/da-vinci-portrait-3501.jpg\" "\\"da-vinci-portrait-350\\"")
<\/a>Still, the extra scenes and bits do make a difference, though it\u2019s often minor. In the scene at Teabing\u2019s (Ian McKellen) country house where the group moves from the kitchen to the study to look at the Last Supper slides, the establishing shot of the new setting has an oil painting of a woman framed prominently in the foreground. It presumably was meant to hint at a backstory for Teabing, some great lost love whose absence may have contributed to the man\u2019s obsession with the Grail. The painting is clearly visible in one shot of the shortened version, but since it comes during the invasion of the house by Silas (Paul Bettany), the viewer is not likely to notice it.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.davidbordwell.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/da-vinci-checking-3501.jpg\" "\\"da-vinci-checking-350\\"")
<\/a> inspects an elaborate surveillance post in the barn, including recordings marked with the names of the four men killed by Silas. This event makes it quite clear why in the climactic scene at Westminster Abbey Fache arrests Teabing rather than Langdon and Sophie. In the shorter version, his change of quarry is rather fuzzily motivated by his realization that Aringarosa has duped him. (Maybe I missed some other plot point, but the surveillance-post scene certainly makes things clearer.)<\/p>\n![\"da-vinci-handshake-350.jpg\"](\"https:\/\/www.davidbordwell.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/da-vinci-handshake-350.jpg\")
<\/p>\n