Movies

The Da Vinci Code

Published Sunday, May 21 2006, 12:13 BST | By Daniel Saney | 10 comments
The Da Vinci Code
Director Ron Howard
Screenwriter Akiva Goldsman
Starring Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Ian McKellen, Jean Reno, Paul Bettany
Running time: 148 mins
Certificate 12A

Whilst in Paris for the launch of his new book, American symbology expert Robert Langdon (Hanks) is called to the Louvre to help the police shed some light on the bizarre murder scene of its curator. With the help of the victim's granddaughter, cryptologist Sophie Neveu (Tautou), Langdon sets off on an adventure following clues hidden in the works of Leonardo Da Vinci which will bring him face to face with one of Christianity's greatest secrets.

Though Dan Brown has been criticised by the academic world for not being a literary genius and by the religious one due to his chosen subject matter, his populist novel was certainly a page-turner which had readers gripped from the outset. Combined with the addictiveness of the plot and the talent that has gathered to put it to screen (Ron Howard, Tom Hanks, Ian McKellen), it's disappointing that their efforts have resulted in a whole so much inferior to its parts.

Big fans of the book might appreciate screenwriter Akiva Goldsman's faithfulness to the source material but unfortunately this fidelity is so slavish that it just comes across as being too long-winded for the average audience. Given more strict editing, Brown's addictive book (nobody seems to take longer than a week to read it) could have made a truly enthralling thriller if handled correctly as opposed to the embarrassingly uncinematic experience that's been delivered.

Rather than making a film based on the book - keeping the story and feel but making it a separate entity - Ron Howard has made a movie that comes across as merely an illustration of the book. It simply fails to add anything, which is unfortunate since the thrills in Brown's Da Vinci Code come chiefly from the revelations that are made and the conspiracies that are suggested. Naturally, these don't come across as particularly shocking on the second journey through the story so the lack of anything new to hang on to is damning. That said, there are a clutch of thrilling moments, though some more so than others.

A flaw of the film which can equally be blamed on the book is the fact that the puzzle solving can be a little alienating to the reader/viewer. Since the puzzles are far more often than not grounded in history or symbology it's far more a case of watching the characters work out the solutions rather than solving it with them or being a step ahead of them. When looking at some paintings or other clues the film has a habit of illuminating the relevant sections of it which either comes across as helpful or condescending depending on your point of view. Unless it hints at some strange power of Langdon's that wasn't made clear in the novel.

Tom Hanks portrays Langdon faithfully enough, though this isn't necessarily a good thing - the straight-faced character is an ill-fitting movie hero and denies Hanks his usual charisma. Ian McKellen's performance is the most enjoyable by far, stealing the show as Leigh Teabing, but unfortunately it's an hour before he appears and then he doesn't remain to brighten up the screen for the duration.

Despite the undeniable talent and promising source material involved, The Da Vinci Code is something of a disappointment most likely to please fans of the book who want to see an almost word-for-word recreation of it. Others might find that watching the film feels longer than reading the book.

More about these subjects
More: Movies
Your Views
10 Comments
Submit your comments


1 (Awful)   2   3   4   5 (Excellent)

We reserve the right to edit, refuse to post or remove any content submitted to "Your Views". Please read our terms and conditions in full.

Your Responses
3 Stars
3 Stars
Robert, Doncaster, on June 9th, 2006
This is a mediocre film based on a great book. While certain scenes are repeated word for word, so much of the story is changed, shortened or missed out of the film altogether.
4 Stars
Nigel Rathbone, Birmingham, on May 28th, 2006
You need to read the book, and be slightly intelligent to gather the clues, blink and you miss them. So if you are moron who talks during the picture you will miss the plot. Critics who needs them missed good films in the past due to them. Remember how many critics does it take to change a light bulb, millions they never can find the right light bulb.
4 Stars
Michael, Newcastle, on May 27th, 2006
I thought the the film was quite good, but nowhere near as good as the book. I know it was a long film, but everything in it seemed to happen so fast. To really make the film better they should have made it even longer. It was a shame that the ending was totally different to the book. Overall though, I thought the movie was quite good.
5 Stars
Alex, on May 25th, 2006
The film was absolutely fantastic. People who write bad reviews on it obviously are fans of other sort of movies, like horror or comedy. Forget the religion part and enjoy the suspense.
2 Stars
Abes, Sheffield, on May 24th, 2006
I thought the film was boring and tedious- bits of it dragged on and on, especially the ending. If you've read the book, then the film is probably going to be a major disappointment- the book was a masterpiece because it was tense and because of the 'revelations' it contained. The film remained too faithful to the book and as such, it seemed like a re-read, except without the tension and the surprises. As a few other people have said, Ian McKellan was the highlight of the ploddy film, although Bettanny did a great job too.
5 Stars
Jay, Guildford, on May 23rd, 2006
I thought the film was truly fantastic. The only downside to it was they dragged it out way too far in some bits! I'm very glad Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou were cast as Robert Langdon and Sophie Neveu - they were perfect! I would definitely recommend this film, although in my eyes you can only watch it once.
5 Stars
The_Irish_Rover, Ireland, on May 22nd, 2006
I loved the film, I really did. It's getting awful reviews and I can't understand why. I haven't read the book so maybe it's because I have nothing to judge it against. I felt the high expectations provided by both the church and the media were fulfilled. Also, I viewed the film as complete fiction. Which made it much more enjoyable. I was really and truly taken away with it.
1 Stars
Derick Hostings Hall, Birmingham, on May 22nd, 2006
Ghastly ghastly (as Derek from BB would say:D). The book is the greatest litery achievement of all time though read it instead! It has brilliant thought out characters; wonderful suspense and facts - even more better than the classic Weathering Heights - fact! Whereas the movie is dire- Sir Ian McKellen is what gets it one star- bye for now.
4 Stars
Helen, Milton Keynes, on May 22nd, 2006
Personally I enjoyed the film. It did stick fairly closely to the book, and I found that knowing the final outcome and the twists didn't spoil the experience that much. I feel that there has been a jumping on the bandwagon when it comes to criticising this movie. I've seen far worse ones which have got better reviews.
3 Stars
Neelam, Birmingham, on May 22nd, 2006
I have to say the film wasn't as good as I had expected, yet saying this at times it was gripping. I did enjoy the movie but in comparison to the book, it wasn't as gripping and it didn't hold the same excitement for me on a personal level.

Movie Reviews

'The Vow' reviewChanning Tatum tries to win back Rachel McAdams in romantic drama The Vow.
'The Vow' still

Top Stories

BAFTA film nominees with Orange
Watch with Orange Wednesdays and win prizes
Win This Means War luxury screening
A private screening plus hotel stay & dinner for you and 9 friends
Sign up and get two free cinema tickets
LoveFilm 30 Days Free Trial
S21 T2.151652097702 {run_id}