A thrilling fast moving film true to the book

Rating: 9/10 (20 May 2006)

I went to see this film after reading the book and intend to write an objective comment based on the film, uninfluenced by other comments, reviews and the publicity hype that has surrounded it. This is the first film that I have ever seen that did not significantly change or distort the storyline in the book. Dan Brown must be pleased with the way it was adapted into a film - not an easy task. Maybe the religious implications it raised made it necessary not to leave out contentious issues. Whatever the reasons it was well produced, directed and acted. I thought that the best performances were from Audrey Tautou, Ian McKellen, Paul Bettany while Tom Hanks, although cast in the main role, was in this film, out-casted by the others. He is an undoubted brilliant actor but this was, in my view, not an ideal role for him. This film is adapted from a work of fiction and must be seen as such but it does give food for thought about the many ways religious history can be interpreted. Before the age of enlightenment when people believed what they were told as they had no way of knowing or separating truth from myth, the Christian Church in common with other religions often sought to deceive to retain power. A point made in the film. Myth, mysteries, stories that are handed down through the generations provide fertile ground for writers who wish to seek out the real truth or just stimulate the imagination through fiction. Now people can investigate almost everything themselves so writers who want to succeed has to do their research carefully, unlike the the scribes of ancient times who could write anything they wished if it brought them fame or fortune. Dan Brown clearly did his research and using his imagination able to write a plausible story which is probably why the film writers did not need to make any significant changes. The content may be against what was written in the bible which underpins the Christian faith but whatever belief one has there is no way to conclusively prove that Jesus did not in his early life as a man marry a woman and have children. It does not really matter whether this is fact or fiction since it does not alter the message in the gospels that led to the birth of the Christian Church. Surely Christianity is strong enough not to be worried by a work of fiction. Therefore it is difficult to see why the Catholic Church was so angered by the film. It knows like all Churches it has both good and bad people within it. The closing scenes of the film summed it up when the character Robert Langton said to Sophie that the only thing that really mattered was what she really believed. Surely this is the point for everyone. If such a story or film can change a person's fundamental belief then the foundation of that belief is on very soft ground.
I saw the film today at a cinema that was nearly full even at an afternoon showing. There were many very young people in the audience and I expected some noise and the usual jeering but all through the performance there was an uncanny silence. May be it was because the film was fast moving, had a well defined storyline and the characters were very real. It worked for this audience anyway. I did have the advantage of knowing the story and have been to some of the locations in Paris so it added to my enjoyment. It may be little more difficult for people who have not done so to follow the codes and symbols so basic to the story. I therefore recommend reading before seeing. My final comment is that unlike so many Hollywood films that rely on computer generated effects, stunts and artificial sets, this film used real locations, real people and a thrilling and interesting story. People who do not go to see it for any reason, will miss a rewarding experience.