Better than expected after having read the book

Rating: 8/10 (22 May 2006)

I have reservations on how they are going to squeeze all that information into a movie without making Tom Hanks sound like a walking encyclopedia (many of the information presented in the book are through memory flashbacks of Robert Langdon). The beginning of the movie is very shaky and confusing to those that have not read the book. The introduction of Opus Dei, The Priory of Sion, The Louve, Robert's char and especially Sophie's char are all under done. Sophie's char was really underdeveloped and as a result i think they left out the romantic portion between her and Robert (if not it would look like it is forced). Her history and flashbacks are too vague which is sad because i felt that it was one of the more important aspect of the book.
But the movie really picks up when they got to Teabing's mansion. From there onwards, it was a good blend of adventure, mystery and a bit of a "history" lesson. The music also really contribute to the excitement. The movie really does the book justice from that point onwards.
Tom Hanks does a credible Robert Langdon and Audrey is quite good, but the show is stolen by Ian McKellen. The key of the book (and this movie) is to make people think the "history" is real, and Sir Ian McKellen delivers.
I am a bit disappointed by the ending (not the part when Robert found the grail, that was good!!!) but the part where they traveled to that place (forgot the name) following the last clue. It was changed from the book and they made it worst. Also a bit disappointed about the romance being left out.
All and all, a relatively well done adaption of a very difficult act to follow, considering that they really have nothing to show for on =the movie format except a great conspiracy story (unlike LOTR with the scenery, CGI monsters, action etc)