Good Movie but lacking the books thrills

Rating: 7/10 (28 May 2006)

I read and found the DaVinci Code an entertaining, fast paced read. Like most I prefer Angels and Demons to the DaVinci code. Given that all of Brown's books are the same story with different details any of them could have made a good movie. DaVinci with its massive sales and popularity was the natural choice.
This movie, as directed by Ron Howard, has tense action sequences and phenomenal craft shown in the making of the movie. My favorite sequence was the last in the movie where Tom Hanks' Robert Langdon finally breaks the last code and realizes where the sarcophagus of Mary Magdalene has found its resting place. Throughout the rest of the film the establishing shots for the location scenes are spectacular.
The failing of this movie though is basically in its scripting and character development. Robert Langdon in this movie is not the Robert Langdon of the novel. Langdon, in the novel, is the reluctant adventurer who is again dropped into a Catholic conspiracy and must use all of his knowledge of theology and symbolism to escape. In the novel Langdon is quick witted, a bit whimsical, and decisive.
The movies Langdon comes off as more than a bit slow. He is a college professor who relies on cheap photographic tricks to get his point across in lecture. Except for a little bit of quick work with anagrams in the Louvre sequence, he has to be practically hit over the head everyplace else. I think that this, more than anything, is what makes the movie seem like a less intellectual thriller than the book. Revelations come more by accident than through insight.
Sir Ian McKellan, though, plays Leigh Teabing to perfection. This character is everything he was in the novel brought to life on the screen. The wit, quiet brilliance, and fanaticism that McKellan layers into the character makes for the only real tension in the film as you slowly realize that Teabing is in fact driving everything.
The other characters and their relationships are downplayed quite a bit more. You get no real sense of the depth of the devotion between Aringarosa and Silas. The audience also develops no real affection for Sophie until her final scene. During the rest of the movie the audience could care less if she lives or dies, unless you have read the book and know who she really is.
As for Sophies revelation at the end, it was well played if different from the book. It comes across a bit darker than in the book. I do wish they had left her brother in the scene though.
All in all, a decent movie. If you have seen National Treasure, you have seen this movie too. A good job by Ron Howard and the cast and crew. An excellent job by McKellan.
Its decent entertainment but not the classic thriller it could have been.