Worth seeing but somewhat over-hyped

Rating: 6/10 (20 May 2006)

Tom Hanks and a pretty French girl in high heels on a quest for the Holy Grail in the churches and museums of France and England.
Interesting and worth seeing, but not as good as Raiders of the Lost Ark, the first Star Wars, or the first Ghostbusters, and hence somewhat over-hyped. I agree with the SF critics that while the characters are in constant danger, people keep getting shot, and a centuries-old mystery is about to be revealed, it's not all that thrilling. Maybe Ron Howard's directing is too conservative, or the book is a glorified Agatha Christie novel.
For those who haven't read it (myself included) "The Da Vinci Code" is a Grail-Quest novel, set in France, featuring a renegade Catholic sect (with some Opus Dei members) who want to wipe out all traces of the Grail, versus another ancient secret society (The Priory of Zion) who are sworn to preserve it. The quest involves a series of clues, like an Easter Egg hunt. There are many mysteries and reversals as characters are revealed to be part of one group or the other, and engaging in gangland style warfare.
Despite the religious furor, few would (I hope) mistake this for serious history. The list of what-ifs goes on and on, the plot is driven more by hunches and coincidence than evidence, and the underlying premise of a secret that will shake the foundations of Catholicism might have been electrifying 50+ years ago, but is ho-hum today, at least in the West.
(In particular, since Christianity didn't exist in France in 43 AD, any descendants of Jesus would have lived in total obscurity for centuries. Also during the Middle Ages every monarch in Europe tried to claim descent from the Caesars, Jesus, King Solomon, or whomever, to bolster their claims to the throne. So there would have been ample motive and opportunity to fabricate such a romantic legend in Merovingian France, including perhaps still-existing secret societies.)
This movie needed a director who realized he could not coast on the bestselling book. Just narrating the story isn't enough. Why is the Grail such a big secret? How will the Church 's foundations be shaken? What was the real richness of the message or meaning that was handed down through the centuries? If the film had done a better job of laying some groundwork, the plot action could have been more compelling.
Even just some eerier music, more portentous scenes and lighting, or a few miracles could have made a huge difference in setting things more on edge. Plus the idea that this is a "millennial revelation" of an ancient secret (with current news value) is not leveraged at all. "The Bridges of Madison County" did a much better job of faking authenticity for emotional impact.
Many in the audience, and anyone who's seen or read "Possession," will guess the secret at least 40 minutes before the end, so how suspenseful can that be? Author Dan Brown did a nice job of borrowing themes from "The Celestine Prophesy" (ancient religious quest with violence) and "Possession" (self discovery via historical research) and weaving them with some old French legends. But that's it -- it's a decent novel, not a major cultural event.
Rated PG-13. No sex, not even a kiss, but brutal killings, some nudity, and disturbing images.