A most intriguing fiction speculating popular belief! Bold and Excellent Investigation!

Rating: 8/10 (23 May 2006)

Most movie viewers probably read the book before seeing this movie. Hence, suspense and mystery are naturally lessoned. The book reads more thrilling than watching the film. In the film, the controversy of good vs. evil is dull, flat, and formulaic. The test: would it appear less so, had one not read the book? Answer: Not really, just more confusing, as the treasure hunt for the Holy Grail, resting place to Mary Magdalene is too rapidly paced. Whether you read the book or not, the script is too mechanical and superficial, and the character's personalities are too simple, boring, and inanimate, of course with the exception of Silas (Paul Bettany). Nevertheless, even his character is somewhat superficial. We know his psyche acts out with self-inflicting pain. How does he arrive at such state? We want to know. In the book, it says that he shot and killed his father, a drunk. If we saw a Silas flashback to his tormented childhood, we might be more fully engaged in comprehending his self-infliction. We might even internalize his pain more. All of the characters are designed too distant from our sensibilities. As a result, our attention wanes more than it should. This movie is just as much work for us, as it is for the actors, therefore, I would give it seven stars, but due to such interesting historical inquiry, I give the film eight stars. It deserved ten plus. As for author Dan Brown's happiness, in no way is it to be associated with the stars that I assign the film. As an author, he knows what I am talking about. You might say, that it is the "writer's code." Where was the entertainment value that could have strengthened our interest not detracted from it? It was missing. This film is not a documentary but plays itself so, on the book's behalf. It had entertainment potential by bringing greater human expression, interaction, and animation to the screen, but its greatest mistake, ironically is too closely following the black and white of the book. These characters could be more lively, interesting, and emotionally layered, without sacrificing the fiction's storyline. As a reinforcement, poetic license could be more generously utilized. By evidence, it is under utilized, downgrading our mental engagement and enthusiasm, for such a potentially interesting, intellectual, and mystical ancient story of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and the Holy Grail. Such intriguing inquiry is only threatening to selfish, greedy, and unadaptable religious "experts." If the autobiography of Jesus was available, it would probably be the world's number one seller of all time.
Again, Paul Bettany plays his role under the skin of the character. Everything about him is creepy, from scars to buns of steel. For his next role, instead of "Shallow Hal," he should play a fat boy, in "Shallow Sally." Between Paul and his infamous, Academy Award winner wife, Jennifer, have they sacrificed mainstream intelligence for redundant extremist role play, possibly settling for assignment, rather than soul searching for one? Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Alfred Molina, Ion McKellen and a host of others are o.k, but not challenged enough in the film's dry and flat adaptation. As for location cinematography, it is excellent, but lacks dimensional light and varied wardrobe by actors. It is a little too sleepy-eyed X-files, another reminder that I can't retire to the empty heaven of sweats. The film has enough shortcomings, but undeniably does not fall short of clearly laying out the book's story, clue by clue, scene by scene.