Could've been better...a lot better; but ended up being decent enough.

Rating: 7/10 (16 July 2006)

It wasn't bad! I actually enjoyed it a good bit. Not a GREAT movie, but good. First and foremost, I have to say that, of all the films I've ever seen, casting Paul Bettany as Silas was probably one of the best casting decisions I've ever seen...he was absolutely perfect. Each and every scene of his in the film was electric...he commanded attention, and was able to simultaneously draw fear and sympathy to the character, as in the novel. I've always noticed Bettany in his movies, but this one really solidifies it for me...the man is incredibly talented (and I hope he wins out for Joker in the next Batman...I might actually go see it if he does, ). Um, anyway, so...aside from a few wooden moments from Tom Hanks, and a few cringe-worthy lines, (ie. "No, this can't be, what I think it is" ), the movie was pretty durn good. I found it well-paced, true to its source, well-acted, and interesting. It reminded me a lot of a slower, less action-packed version of National Treasure, which I realize many people hated, but I loved it (I love historical fiction, 'treasure' hunts, conspiracies, puzzles/codes, etc). My only major qualm was that, as someone who had read the novel, it was painfully obvious in parts that they had tried their best to make the movie less offensive than its source material...one critic said the movie was "nervous about offending someone", and that's true...although I'm not entirely sure how obvious that would've been to someone who didn't read the book. That's the major reason I gave the movie a 7/10, and not an 8.