Did Ron Howard do the book justice?

Rating: 6/10 (4 June 2006)

I had just finished reading the book a week before seeing the movie, and every detail was fresh in my mind as I saw it with my daughter. As one who hadn't read the book, she had little idea what Silas's true calling was. The book portrays him as a devoted re-born man with a tormented past, willing to kill or be killed serving his beloved bishop. The movie offered a muddled collage of Silas's past that left him looking more like an emotionally needy ex-con with a zeal for self abuse.
Teabing's character was toned down considerably compared to the book, which really disappointed me. Peter O'Toole would have been fantastic for the part, and perhaps would have brought the broader ranges of the character to the screen. Though Remy (his man-servant) was instrumental in the book, his character could basically have been written out of the movie without affecting anything. His presence was trivial, and his murder pointless to the movie plot.
Considering the story was designed to pay tribute to the "Sacred Feminine", Sophie's book character as a brilliant cryptographer was reduced to more like a side-kick chick who received occasional compliments.
Ultimately, I think that certain cast choices were off, and that Ron Howard should have made the movie thirty minutes longer if that's what it would have taken to tell the story thoroughly.