A poorly made interpretation of a properly made book

Rating: 3/10 (21 May 2006)

The DaVinci Code is arguably one of the best thriller books ever written. The plot is interesting, fast paced and the suspense is constant, from beginning to end. Dan Brown knows exactly which parts of the plot to thicken/lengthen and which to shorten.
The same can NOT be said on the movie. Ron Howard's work as director seems highly inadequate. Important parts of the book were not emphasized, most times shown so casually, the viewer can hardly notice them, and sometimes not shown at all. On the other hand, less important parts of the book were over emphasized. Weird interpretations were given and changes were done to key elements in the book, sometimes such ridicules changes that only lessen the suspense of the movie.
Seems to me that if I hadn't read the book prior to seeing this movie, I wouldn't have understood many parts of the movie.
While the book builds the plot carefully, never letting the reader get lost or lose interest, the movie simply bombs the viewer with information. Mysterious riddles are solved within seconds, ancient secrets are revealed as if were hidden behind a glass window (For example, a long search at one of the world's biggest libraries became a 3 seconds internet search using a cellular phone), deductions are made with no basis whatsoever. Nothing seems to go wrong. Suddenly Langdon and Neveu find the grail's previous burial place and a library of grail documents. Suddenly Langdon decides Sophie is a descendant of Jesus. Suddenly a woman appears and claims she's Sophie's grandmother, and Sophie accepts all of it as if irreputable truth.
Though initially impressed by the cast, the main stars' performances were also highly inadequate. Tom Hanks was very disappointing as Robert Langdon. He is boring, unrelatable and so unconvincing, to the point of being ridicules in the eys of the viewer. Audrey Tautou was a bad choice for Sophie Neveu. She is uninteresting, has virtually no chemistry with Hanks, and leaves the impression of being neither smart nor mentally strong, as Neveu of the book. Ian McKellen was a disappointment as well. He makes Teabing seem an unserious figure. The scene were he is revealed as 'The Teacher' is badly made, unconvincing and, as many times in the film, not loyal to the book. Teabing's footprints in the Issac Newton scene are laughable, as can be said on the scene were he is being taken into custody by the police. Jean Reno was also boring, and seemed to be a remote figure that somehow found its way into the plot. Only Paul Bettany as Silas seemed to give an adequate performance.
Overall, this movie is a huge disappointment. It is boring, hard to understand, and makes the controversial, yet plausible ideas presented in the book seem impossible and ridicules in the movie.
See it if you want to, but don't waste your time unless you've read the book.