Missed opportunities

Rating: 5/10 (1 June 2006)

I read the book and enjoyed it very much, but the movie didn't quite measure up. I think this may be partly because the screenplay followed the book too closely. (I can't believe I just wrote that.)
For example, I think an opportunity was missed at the beginning of the film when Robert Langdon's character is established. I would have liked to have seen him waiting for Sauniere as the credits rolled, and then when Sauniere doesn't show, having him run into a bunch of other academics who have read his book. They scoff at him, but he explains his theories so logically and brilliantly (writing symbols down on a cocktail napkin) that they're blown away. They are full of respect. Then he dashes off to do his lecture, having been fully established as Symbolic-Man for the rest of the movie. That would have been better than the lecture alone, even though it was interestingly inter-cut with the opening scene at the Louvre.
But if we had seen him waiting for Sauniere, we would know that he was speaking the truth a little bit later when Fache asks him if he's met Sauniere, and Langdon says no.
Langdon should be the audience's stand-in throughout the movie, and I don't think we identify with him enough. The storytelling seems distant and removed from his character. The book was great because readers could solve the puzzles along with the characters, but in the movie you don't get the same feeling of urgency and triumph.
If Langdon's character had been all about "puzzles are cool! symbols are my life!" I think we would have been drawn in more deeply. Unfortunately, Langdon doesn't care deeply about anything, so neither do we.
The scenes with Ian McKellan and Tom Hanks are brilliant, and full of the kind of excitement that bring the movie to life. Finally, SOMEBODY cares about these darn symbols. It seemed to me that the story really caught fire once it got to that part, when it should have been like that from the beginning. They're so "Gee Whiz! look at these cool secrets hidden in the painting!" It was great. That same excitement should have been present in the opening scenes.
Also, I think Sophie should have had a chance to solve a puzzle. Audrey Tatou's character is emotional and handles her gun competently enough but doesn't get a chance to display any intellectual prowess. Another missed opportunity.
Anyway, the rest of the movie was fun. It just took so long to get the ball rolling. Jean Reno was terrific (and his sidekick was great, too), Albert Molina was in great form, and Paul Bettany was a scary Silas.
I don't give a hoot about the so-called theological underpinnings. It's fiction, nothing more. No sense straining at gnats and swallowing camels, folks.