Movie beautifully captures book in tone and story

Rating: 9/10 (27 May 2006)

Great movie, lots of action, gorgeous sets in some very interesting locales. Thought provoking, tender. Yeah, it's a bit talky but that's called "dialogue". (It used to be in movies before "Terminator").
Concepts were presented in a way which made them very understandable. I disagree with folks who claim Mr. Hanks was wooden(apologies to Toy Story). I thought he developed his character to a high degree and played him truthfully throughout. The character Langdon is a Harvard professor folks...and Hanks is a great actor in an important role.
To the critics who say there is no chemistry between Sophie and Langdon in the film?...um this isn't a love story. If anything, he is her protector and she is the metaphorical "wisdom". Think of him almost like a modern Galahad, the knight who seeks then protects the grail. Galahad was chaste/pure thus deserving to find the grail in Arthurian legend. Having a love affair between them would have weakened the story, even though ironically the story is "about" a love affair. I thought there was plenty of chemistry between the two leads albeit nonsexual.
The direction was another feather in Ron Howards cap. He took a very cerebral and controversial novel and made it very watchable while remaining true to the novel. One of the best adaptations I can think of. I have often felt Dan Brown has mastered the elusive art of edutainment, where he presents information wrapped around an interesting story line so, as you enjoy the twists and turns of a mystery yarn, you don't notice that you're learning something. Howard understands this and does a great job as well. Opening to 225 Million dollars worldwide??? 77 Million dollars US??? Not too shabby!!
Great Photography!!! Great locations even if there were some stand-ins. I thought the flashback historical scenes were illuminating and beautifully realized, not cheesy as some critics have posited.
My thinking is the people who are trashing the film are doing so out of allegiance to a particular religious dogma. And that's fine, they have their opinion. (I guess the idea of a "divinity" having sex and a child while in human form would upset the rank and file especially since the taboo against sex ironically seems to have been a staple of the religion.(Thankfully every generation has caved or their'd be no one left to view the film.) To be fair, Mr. Howard presents opposing thematic views, having Langdon frequently debate Teabing albeit without much fervor, but the film is not meant to be a spirited fair debate, it is an adaptation of a novel after all, thus the final question of the film needs be... does it do justice to the book? I believe it does with exceptional grace, sensitivity, emotion and understanding. The problems I had with the movie were the problems I had with the book. The ending drags on a little long but the final scene is such a beautiful moment it is well worth that indulgence. Teabing's motivations are still the real mystery to me but Brown likes to seed his bad-guys as the ones you'd least expect, for the surprise factor I assume. To the critics who judge the movie not on it's merits but on it's subject, remember it is the villain who makes most of the "heretical" claims/points.
I don't think the film will alter anyone's faith or start a new religion as perhaps the book may, but I don't think asking questions and seeking answers, even if they are as elusive as the grail itself, should ever be shamed out of the seeker of truth, the reader of fiction or the summer popcorn-eating blockbuster movie patron. Thumbs up, way up!!!!