Mediocre movie based on a mediocre book...

Rating: 4/10 (19 August 2006)

It took me over a month to finish the book, choking down the final pages like so much cold, lumpy oatmeal. It wasn't the worst book I've ever read, but I found it terribly annoying. I found the narrative to be condescending, the foreshadowing ham-fisted, and the pacing irksomely slow. The entire book felt like Dan Brown was so busy smugly congratulating himself for being so darn clever that he forgot to make the book really interesting. There were times I wanted to shout, "Get on with it!" Every five pages or so, the characters would be stunned into silence at some new revelation that the reader had seen coming a mile away. And after all this frustration and annoyance, for some reason I went to see the film anyway.
The film, like the book, is condescending to the audience, frequently transmitting the next key point of the story long before it's revealed. The characters are continually being shocked by things the audience figured out ten minutes ago.
There are some fine performances in this movie that made it more bearable. Jean Reno, as always, turns in the outstanding performance his audience has come to expect from him, as does Sir Ian McKellen. Paul Bettany and Alfred Molina also give fine performances. All in all, Tom Hanks and Audrey Tatou did the best they could with the dialogue they were given, although many of the lines would have come across as cheesy coming from even the most highly skilled actors.
If you liked the book, then you'll probably like the movie. But if you found the book as annoying and slow as I did, this movie is worth skipping. And if you know anything about the Sangraal/Priory theories and are hoping to hear some, you wil be sorely disappointed.