Solemn and gloomy.

Rating: 7/10 (25 May 2006)

"The Da Vinci Code" was OK. It wasn't a great movie and I don't think the book could be made into a great movie. The book was too much about ideas, word games, anagrams and puzzles that are better read than seen. The movie suffered from too much dialog used to explain the plot. Movies are visual and time taken for long swathes of dialog tends to be boring. In this movie Ron Howard chose to fill the exposition periods with many jump shots and extreme close-ups that I found irritating. In fact the movie is filled with jerky cuts and extreme close-ups. Given the lure of the locales used in the movie I expected to see some nice shots of the Louvre and old cathedrals but what I got was some quick overall establishing shots then it was back to the extreme close-ups and jerky camera. Why make a big deal about where the movie was filmed and then hardly use the setting. Most of the shots in the Louvre could have been done in my family room. Put some old painting on the wall with the actor's head in front of it and presto a museum shot. I disliked the look of the movie. It was very dark and gloomy and the active camera work tended to be irritating. The latest trend in movies is to have a very mobile, jerky camera maybe used to add interest to an otherwise boring scene but for me it detracts from the scene and cheapens the movie. If you need a mobile camera to keep the audience entertained maybe you should rethink the scene. Many, many, many wonderful movie scenes were filmed using a static camera where the actors created the interest not the motion. Tom Hanks was miscast. I like his work but he is best as an everyman caught up in extraordinary circumstances not as a supposed expert who looks mostly befuddled. Audrey Tautou was OK. She is attractive and did a competent job but there was no spark in her performance. Ian McKellen was the best thing in this movie and scenes containing him were highlights. The rest of the cast was competent and forgettable. Given the hype of the book this movie could never live up to the expectations. Unless my watery coke got turned to wine or I was levitated out of my seat the movie would have been a let down. I read the book, ( a good airplane book, not at all great literature), and I wonder if the movie would have been better watched cold. I based my rating on the movie alone since most movies made from books are a disappointment. I would have probably been more entertained if the story line was discovered as the movie unfolded instead of being known and anticipated. It's worth a watch but it is flawed.