Uneven, see it for good acting and interesting ideas

Rating: 6/10 (14 June 2006)

I agree with many of the reviewers here that the movie is uneven. There are excellent performances from Ian McKellen, Audrey Tautou and Paul Bettany, and, in fairness, no weak links whatever on the acting side. Tom Hanks had perhaps the highest hill to climb because the character given to Langdon in the film is a bit nondescript, but he did as well as anyone could have with the material he was given. The writing I thought varied from acceptable to very poor. Hanks/Langdon and McKellen/Teabing were frequently given long explanatory speeches that came close to voice-overs; lectures to the audience about the ideas underlying the plot. Maybe there was no other way to do this but I think with a little more ingenuity it could have emerged more naturally from slightly more convincing screen conversations. In fact the underlying ideas about cynical manipulation by the Roman Catholic Church of its followers to protect its power was the real centre of interest of the film, but probably by now too familiar to most cinema-goers and people who have followed the debate about the book and the film to come as very much of a surprise in this context. The "action" tended to be the familiar Hollywood over-the-top gunfights and car chases and hidden tracker devices that are so much the stock and trade of Bond films, with occasional flashes of something darker and more character-driven when Bettany/Silas was on the screen. As a straight thriller, without the religious/intellectual dimension, I think the film would go almost unnoticed, but the intrigue surrounding the Church and its history, origins and motives will certainly keep you awake if it isn't by now all too familiar.