Didn't quite capture the magic!

Rating: 6/10 (1 June 2006)

In my very humble opinion, I think in general terms Ron Howard did a very good job of this screen adaptation. I never looked at my watch, plus the quality of the cast and use of the Louvre gave it a credible feel. However, there were a number of disappointing elements. Firstly - the entire film lacked the pace of the novel. The book reads like an episode of 24, however the film sadly didn't capture it as it was bordering the boring line. Secondly - there was absolutely no chemistry whatsoever between Robert Langdon and Sophie as described in the book, particularly at the end when the film was altered to fit the no chemistry factor. Audrey Tatou was a bit of a cold fish in this as well which was rather disappointing. Thirdly - what was with those special effects in and around Westminster Abbey?!?! That gave the whole film a completely unrealistic feel to it and brought the credibility of the film down several notches.
I also believe Tom Hanks didn't shine as he normally does in his films as the other cast members ie. Sir Ian McKellan, Jean Reno and Paul Bettany, were absolutely superb and such strong characters in the film that it took the limelight off him a little bit... another difference from the book to the film. I don't mean to be taking away his acting skills at all, just that the others were just as good.
Will be interesting to see how they go with Angels and Demons as I believe that was the better book of the two.