Worth the watch, but is it a classic?

Rating: 7/10 (17 September 2009)

The Da Vinci Code. Talked about a great deal, caught in a firestorm of controversy for fictional theories on one of the world's major religions (Christianity), and a star-packed cast... all the fuel is there for a potentially great fire. But does the Da Vinci Code satisfy? Let me evaluate the movie as a movie, for movies are a different animal than books. If you've read Dan Brown's novel, you will have preconceived notions. I encourage you to take this as a movie and leave out the comparisons until later if that is the case.
Casting is well done. Tom Hanks is a strong name and with that comes the task of making the character its own. For actors with star power the challenge is to make you forget that you are watching the actor and are instead watching the character. Hanks does well as the lead in this regard, but is not perfect. Audrey Tatou is not a household name, yet her Sophie Neveu is also fairly strong. The pairing of Hanks and Tatou does not generate stellar chemistry, but is not objectionable either.At the top of his game is Sir Ian McKellen. His portrayal of Leigh Teabing is excellent and believable. Alfred Molina is a great actor, yet I found his priestly character a bit melodramatic. Granted, the character is a supporting role, yet there are moments where you wonder if a priest could really be "that way." Paul Bettany IS Silas and is suitably creepy as a fanatical if misguided monk. Jean Reno puts forth a strong performance as Bezu Fache.
Cinematography is lush and consistent. The film is visually appealing and makes excellent use of lighting and color. It's easy to believe you are in Paris, which is helped by the sparing and timely use of the native language, which is captioned where it appears. Special effects are sparingly used and to good effect to help advance a complex story. One niggle for me is the fact that the albino monk does not have pink eyes - although it appears Bettany is wearing some kind of contact lens to make his stare burn into you, it's a strange inaccuracy.
The soundtrack is excellent in that it's transparent. Tension is built at the appropriate moments but never overwhelming. Thankfully, the film is not used as a vehicle to promote singles or artists, allowing the score to do its job effectively without jarring the viewer.
Pacing starts off quickly - you are brought into the action almost immediately without confusion. Many "aha!" moments keep the movie from becoming a snoozer. All the same, the length of the film (2.5 hours) is a factor, and the long running time might make the viewer feel a bit tired. If you experience something for long enough, you become fatigued and this film feels a bit languid towards the end. The climax of the film is almost understated and not substantially more dramatic than the events leading towards it.
Finally, the production is excellent overall. The sets are designed well and do not overpower the acting. The locations were well chosen and provide an excellent environment for the heart of the story. Ron Howard develops the characters well as the movie progresses and brings out strong performances from most of his cast. There are also a few cheap scares and plot devices, but they are infrequent and forgivable.
Having viewed this on both the big and small screens, I find the Da Vinci Code to be an entertaining evening. Where the film suffers tends to be in minor things: the length contributing to a somewhat slow feel at the finish, and some perfunctory character development where the leads are not concerned. A 7/10, the Da Vinci Code leaves you satisfied but not wanting more.