Disappointing

Rating: 6/10 (23 May 2006)

Hmmmm - is there anyone else out there who read the book (in my case probably about 5 times), thought it was pretty damn good (not exactly Shakespeare in terms of the skill of the author) but a decent story nonetheless and yet was completely disappointed with the film?! I'm not going to go into storyline details but some of my feelings are listed below. 1. What was the point of Audrey Tautou's character? Yes, she looked very pretty but she had absolutely nothing to do! In the book, as the cryptologist, she solved, or at least had a very big part in solving, the riddles, puzzles and clues. On top of this, Sophie was feisty, in control and had a very major role. In the film, she simpered and pouted. Not a great performance. 2. I went to see this with a friend who had also read the book and we both agreed that if we hadn't have done, we wouldn't really have known what was going on. Before anyone jumps down my throat, I know it isn't possible to put absolutely everything from the book into the film, but I feel too much of what was important/interesting/relevant in the book was left out. 3. Why was Jean Reno's character such a thug? In the book he came across as tenacious, determined and rather bullish, but he also came across as a decent police officer and human being. In the film, he was simply portrayed as a bully.
However, there were parts of this film that were very well done. I think Paul Bettany did a really good job as Silas; although I usually avoid Tom Hanks films like the plague, I actually didn't mind him in this; the support cast generally were very good (Collet and Vernet) and the pace of the film was good. Special praise must be given to Ian McKellen who was simply phenomenal as Leigh Teabing. Without his explanation as to the Grail legend halfway through the film, I honestly believe the whole thing would have collapsed.
My advice? Wastes a couple of hours but wait for it to come out on DVD