Great Movie-making - showing the lie to "cineasts"

Rating: 9/10 (30 May 2006)

Ron Howard's film of Dan Brown's third and most successful novel, The DaVinci Code, may or may not be a great film (we'll see how it holds up in 25 years), but it is great film MAKING which illustrates the maddening tendency of self proclaimed film "experts" to denigrate anything which recognizes that FILM isn't the only art form which contributes to our culture.
"They" trashed the first two Harry Potter films which, in faithfully putting the essence of J. K. Rowling's well written and popular books on screen proved infinitely more satisfying than the two from "movie-movie" directors which followed, reducing even better books to tawdry CGI excuses. Now "they" carp how The DaVinci Code, similarly capturing almost everything which made the novel such a satisfying, pleasurable experience is somehow "lacking in cinematic chemistry."
Balderdash! What might they have done to the great literary/film translations from Rebecca to Gone With The Wind of the past!?
I went into the theatre having read the generally disappointing reviews and prepared to resist Tom Hank's rather long haired interpretation of Brown's expert on symbology, Robert Langdon (not the image I had formed in my head while reading the book), and offended by the campaign of the lunatic fringe (including a few actual Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church) which seemed bent on proving that the least credible of the fictional portions of Brown's book were in fact gospel by rabidly savaging the book and film, only to find that Howard had transferred the bulk of the book to screen with enormously involving tact and skill.
While there was the usual necessary editing of content for time constraints, Howard's film managed to honor the essence of the book in superb fashion with few serious omissions going to the essence of the story until near the end when the leads arrive at Roslyn Chapel. Even there, with the exception of one seriously missed visual (a not immediately recognized pattern on the floor) and a foolishly added one (downstairs), the editing actually improves on some of the minor weaknesses in the source material.
Yes, the full reason for Sophie's estrangement from her grandfather has been soft pedaled (and slightly altered in the details of the showing) yes, multiple "codexes" have been combined with the loss of one code the reader had fun guessing ahead of the characters in the book, and yes, only readers of the book will know who the young man in the Chapel actually IS, but none of this changes a great story in any way which matters.
Without exception, the casting and cinematography are as good as we've seen this decade. Hanks grows beyond his simple good guy image in a performance with simple dignity and surprising depth, matched every step of the way by his Sophie, the perfect (and new to me) Audrey Tautou recalling and surpassing the best work of Genevieve Bujold.
If the Akiva Goldsman's sensitive screenplay removes one aspect of the Langdon/Sophie relationship - which, in the book, appeared to wrap Langdon even deeper into the ongoing mythology of the Magdeline bloodline (a "mythology" certainly as historically and religiously credible as the sexist Pauline heresy which has dominated the Christian church since Peter and Paul wrested control of the movement from James and Mary), it actually enhances Sophie's screen image as the fictional film story ends.
Even the much complained of "albino murderer" is actually given (through superior casting and direction) a sensitive portrayal which blends what had been a mere showy plot device into the fabric of the story so well few honest observers could object.
This is an excellent, satisfying mystery thriller which it's difficult to imagine any other film maker improving upon (though the source material might still make an excellent grand opera). It's easily the most satisfying major film this year and more than worth anyone's time who loves either the Brown book, a historical mystery (has Josephine Tey's "Daughter of Time" been filmed yet?) or simply a good movie.