Ignore the critics' Cliff Notes review

Rating: 10/10 (22 May 2006)

Honestly. Some of the reviews I have seen sound like some high school student's Cliff Notes review of Hamlet. Ignore them. They're not worth a glance.
Something that everyone seems to forget -- this is a FICTIONAL tale. Dan Brown wrote a story -- a "story" -- which asks people to suspend belief and enjoy turning pages at a rapid pace through a narrative that spans 24 hours. And it was a great story. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Now put it on the screen. Put Ron Howard in the director's seat, and have Tom Hanks star. Point to those who are accusing them of blasphemy, devil worship, who are trying to "debunk the codes", swearing to boycott this film, whatever else -- both men are Catholic.
Ain't nothing not to like seeing here. It's beautifully filmed. Paris, the Louvre, the French countryside, the beautiful old mansions and the castles and the churches, what a trip, and they were just magnificent to see.
Ain't nothing to insult your intelligence here, either. It's intense. It's not "talky" (goodness, children, if you're going to criticize, how about reading the book first, see how "talky" it *could* have been!), it's not dull, pedantic -- e-gad, what vocabularies these critics have, and yet not one of them seems to have a clue about the actual definitions of the words they parrot.
I've read the book. I go to church. My PASTOR enjoyed the story, and has been looking forward to the movie. Many in the congregation have the same idea, it's a story, a variation, something to make you not "question your beliefs", but instead, may even re-inforce them -- without "shaking your foundations".
The Priory of Sion was a real sect, it truly existed in Medieval Europe. The Knights Templar, the army of the Priory really were part of the crusades, but their campaign was delegated by the Priory, not the Catholic church. They were very powerful, influential, and wealthy. And they were slaughtered by the envious. The rumor is that they continued to exist in secret. Back somewhere in the mid-50's this was supposedly proved untrue. The whole basis of this film is that this "proof" was also false.
You know what I think really annoys the critics about this movie? There are no wild explosions, no fantastic shootouts, no X-Men, no 00 agents running around, no megalomaniacs trying to take over the world -- there is only Tom Hanks, a professor, nonetheless, but a fairly ordinary person -- and the mad pace of travel is one night and into another day, not weeks, no "epic". There was no revenge, no buried treasure (in the literal sense), there was no hack and slash -- they were asked to use their minds, and the critics don't want to think.
Nobody can tell anyone what to think or to do or to be -- not really. So don't let a movie critic who you don't even know tell you that because they don't understand something, you can't possibly understand it either. This movie is meant to entertain you. Suspend the reality of this reality for a couple of hours. Eat popcorn. Be entertained. Enjoy.