No Mona Lisa

Rating: 3/10 (19 November 2006)

After all the hoopla given the subject matter, calls for censorship by opposing parties and buildup to its release in general, what we are presented with is a poor effort at film-making which is insulting to the audience's intelligence. I'll spare the plot outlines since practically everyone and their mother has read the book. Personally, I did not read Dan Brown's novel, but I was familiar with the theories presented prior to its release.
The two lead actors, Tom Hanks and Audrey Tatou, do a laughable job of portraying their respecting characters. Stoicism is the best adjective to use here.
The story as is shown in the movie lacks any sort of urgent rhythm to it, this despite a script that features a Europe hopping context. Hanks and Tatou go here and there, do this and that, all the while every single detail is said to the viewer as if one were in kindergarten.
"We must find the secret to the Holy Grail because my grandfather died for it."
"Right, allow me to crack the code verbally and visually so a two year old could understand it.
"Following that we have to go to Scotland in order to use da Vinci's device on stone tablet, which remember, unlocks the secret of Mary Magdalene."
"I really think this can be done in only a few days with practically no sleep."
Granted, the book's complexity required explanatory prose, yet the end result is so tediously laid on that the film is chock full of uninteresting dialogue. When the theories are presented, the counter-theories are declared at the same instant, apparently concluding the audience is too lazy or stupid make up their own minds. Controversial source material such as this should be said with conviction by the filmmakers, whether the viewer believes it is right or wrong, and not give politically correct garbage as not to offend anyone. A perfect example is Oliver Stone's JFK, where a clear message is conveyed and doesn't hide its viewpoint for the sake of agreeable cinema.
The European locations are a tourist's wet dream, historically and visually appealing. However, the cinematography comes off as more like a TV commercial than actual cinema, foregoing any form of stylishness for mundane images.
However, Ian McKellen is the only one to get it right in this god awful mess. His dramatics are at their usual best, despite said dialogue and the rest of the movie being so inferior. Bettany too does a reasonable job as Silas, though emotional exaggeration does occur from time to time. Their screen time alone influenced my decision to not give a worse score.
The Da Vinci Code perfectly captures what casual entertainment represents, avoiding boldness whatsoever. What a waste.