Anyone who respects the book... (cont.)

Rating: 4/10 (1 June 2006)

I'm not quite sure what happened but I think I accidentally entered my review without finishing it.
My opinion is that Ron Howard decided to do this for one of two reasons: 1. He knew that it would scrape in an ass-load of cash or 2. He wanted to look cool making a movie that the whole world has been arguing about.
All that aside I think he did a pretty great job. It's a great looking movie with an outstanding cast (except for Mr. Hanks and Ms. Tautou's chemistry which was horrible and poorly written by the screenwriter) and of course you can't put everything in there, because otherwise it wouldn't be marketable to the people who hadn't read the book which is a probably a majority of the people who saw the movie. I also thought it got very boring at times because the only way to present some information was to us duologue which feels too much like a lecture. The reason that it is so interesting to read is because your mind creates your own unique version of what is going on and with this book i don't think it can be conveyed suitably to film. So if you really think the whole concept of church conspiracies is interesting go pick up the book its much more worthwhile. However if you want a nice crash course I suppose I would recommend this movie as most people who did not read the book but saw the movie seemed to enjoy it.