5

Rating: 5/10 (22 May 2006)

Well, too many opinions already, but i'll add this one anyway.
I haven't read the book. I think one does not need to read the book to see any movie. Reading the book leaves you with images that can't be transformed to a film. And reading the book after wards leaves you with the images the film has set for you. So i'm not gonna read the book now. That aside:
The theater was fully packed, so the bar is raised high. Although it's really a mainstream film, it has a long running time. I didn't mind that, but a lot of other people did, getting bored around half way trough the movie. Well, that happens with the MTV generation :)
So, probably the book was better. This 2 1/2 hour flick was to short to tell it's story fully. A lot of things happen, and some interesting theory's didn't get much attention due to the total length of the story. That's the biggest issue for me.
The main story wasn't too difficult to follow for me. But it's the little theories that should make this movie interesting. And some theories now get about 1 sentence attention. That's just too little. The story quickly moves on to the next scene. The main story isn't to interesting, but that's not really objective for me to say. So i'll leave that up to you.
I agree with a lot of people that the acting sucks. Especially the performance of Tom Hanks (weird since he usually isn't a bad actor at all). The rest is average, and because there is a lot of dialog in this movie, it shows. Making the average/bad acting twice as irritating. The dialogs aren't to interesting. could've worked it out better.
So: everyone knew this movie's gonna make a lot of money. So did Ron Howard. And thus he didn't make something special out of it. Sloppy... This movie could've been so much better.