Has it's moments, but not totally rewarding

Rating: 7/10 (7 June 2006)

Is there really anyone who has not read The Da Vinci Code? Dan Brown's behemoth best seller was a definite page-turner, and clearly had the makings for a film. So when it was finally announced, there was obvious skepticism over whether it would work as well as the book did. Casting decisions were brought with heavy criticisms, but the hype machine persevered anyway (if anyone had doubts about that, I am certain they did not last). So despite reading the book and not being overly impressed by it (and seeing the film have key moments practically ruined by the trailer), I still decided to give it a shot.
The curator has been murdered in the Louvre, and the French Police decide that Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks), an American symbologist, is the best man to go to in order to find out why. Of course, when Langdon arrives, he finds out that he is totally over his head, and that his symbology skills will become more than handy. What follows is a totally political story, which questions our faith in the knowledge we have, and brings on a whole flurry of new questions for us.
Brown's page-turner was fast-paced, and practically flies right through its four hundred plus pages. But as any film fan should know, a good book does not always make for a good film. Ron Howard's film attempts to fly through its one hundred fifty minute runtime, but hits the roadblock of the immense historical elements of the book, and just slows down entirely about halfway through the film. And as it tries to recover, you realize that it just does not have the same charm as the book did. The book had flashbacks, it had motivations, it had emotions, it had everything you could expect from a good writer. It was practically written like a screenplay. So then, why did Akiva Goldsman find the influence to cut those things out, and allow the film to only make total sense to the book readers (while changing other things around, taking things out and adding in comic relief)? It totally takes away from the overall impact that the book had, and the film suffers as a result. When the interesting parts come, they just do not have the same thrill, or just come off as totally uninteresting.
Howard does make a valiant attempt at staying true to the book though, even with the changes. The editing in of Langdon's puzzle solving work helps the audience better understand his thinking, and the footage used to show off the historical events is pretty well done as well (except for when they try to seamlessly edit it over the modern day, with Hanks and Audrey Tautou walking through it). But while that may work sparingly, the entirety of the soundtrack quite simply, does not. The songs seem out of sync, as if someone edited them into the film at the wrong frames. The volume loudens at the wrong moments, and goes quiet at the even more wrong moments. It seems totally misplaced throughout the film, and lessens the film even more so.
Hanks was the wrong choice from the start, and he shows it with his lackluster performance. It is nowhere near as good as the majority of his work, and he just does not seem to be enjoying himself. Tautou, the female lead, does not fare much better, but at least she puts some work into her performance. Unfortunately, like in the book, these two characters are the most seen, so excellent supporting character work from Jean Reno, Alfred Molina and Paul Bettany falls to the wayside. In fact, Bettany's role as Silas is the most underrated here, because he has nowhere near as much to work with as he would have if his character was adapted a whole lot better. On the other hand, Ian McKellan is fabulous in his role, and shows up anyone he's on-screen with at all times. The passion he has in this role almost makes me want to forgive Howard for even bothering to give Hanks a shot at this.
The film has it's moments, but is ultimately unrewarding to book fans. Some things work, but many do not. The film feels rushed, and feels like it needed much more time to be developed. Brown's book was not disappearing off the best seller list, so why the need to rush out the movie? With time, and a few choice changes, this film could have met the same raving success that the Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter films met. But unfortunately, it falls short of any expectations. Even without reading the book, you may find some enjoyment out of it. Just don't expect it to feel totally complete.
7/10.