Disappointing 'Da Vinci' lacked tension and wasn't thrilling ...

Rating: Null/10 (19 May 2006)

I saw this film at the cinema today, and although I own the book, I have yet to finish reading it(I only got to chapter 2). So, watching the film like any other cinema-goer who has no previous background experience from the novel, I found it entertaining, but unlike I thought it lacked sufficient thrills.
The main plot in which the curator of the Louvre museum is shot by Silas(an albino monk), is the opening scenes of the film. Before he dies, this curator leaves behind symbols and anagrams to pass on the ancient secret which "could shake the foundations of Christanity".
Robert Langdon, a professor from Harvard, is brought to the murder scene, later joined by Sophie Neuveu, a cryptologist who helps him to discover what exactly the symbols and anagrams mean - which, as we discover, leads to the Holy Grail.
The following chases that follow lack any kind of suspense that make me feel that the main characters are in immediate danger. It seems very ... formulaic in a way. We get some very good performances from Sir Ian McKellen(Sir Leigh Teabing) and Paul Bettany(Silas) but I do get the feeling that the other main leads were miscast - namely Hanks and Tautou. Don't get me wrong, they can act well, but they don't have ANY chemistry and Tautou's strong French accent is hard to understand at times.
Even I, that I haven't even read the whole novel guessed the ending and fate of the characters before the credits rolled. I would say it was somehow thought-provoking, but more in a controversial way, like: should I believe this or not? In my opinion, as a Christian, I feel the whole quest for a 'Holy Grail' is rather far-fetched and is something more of a conspiracy theory, a fantasy rather than the actual truth that has been hidden from us by Catholics for 2,000 years. Let me add that I'm not rating this film on the whole 'Holy Grail' theory, but rating it on how it is shown on the screen, whether I support these claims or not - in other words, I'm rating this as a FILM not how 'believeable' the theory actually is.
This book is merely a fictitious thought that has been blown way out of proportion. Whatever conclusion you come to, is up to you - I'm not forcing anyone to share my opinion. The fact is, though that as humans, we live by our beliefs and beliefs can be manipulated.
Rather than the religious people protesting to ban this, I reckon it should be seen as more of a springboard for a discussion about religion - more of a way of debating about our beliefs(or lack of). Watch the documentary 'The Real Da Vinci Code' to get more of an idea of the theory presented in the novel this film is based on.
However, that being said, there were certain moments in the film that made me jump in my seat, and was quite entertaining, just not up to the persistent hype for the film that I had hoped for, really.
It's not a TERRIBLE film, but not a brilliant one either. I think that Langdon only exists to serve the plot of the film/book and doesn't really have any depth of character as such - kind of like a cardboard cut-out. This film had the potential to be better, but it was hindered by a bad script and not-so-great performances by the main leads, as aforementioned.
It's a shame that this wasn't as outstanding as I had hoped, and was a bit disappointing. I'd give it a 6.5/10.