I've read all of Dan Brown's books, and I love them all, but I don't really like their endings. They all have the same kinda "twist," so after reading one of his books, all the others are somewhat anti-climactic. Still, his books make for fast-paced, interesting reading, but despite having a whole lot of fans, Dan Brown also has a whole lot of detractors. The way I see it, his books may not be Shakespeare, but they entertain me, and that's all that matters. Not everything has to be "To Kill a Mockingbird." His books are engaging, and they seem almost cinematic, so it makes sense to produce a feature film version of "The Da Vinci Code," his runaway bestseller. Unfortunately, what works for a book you can't put down doesn't always make for an exciting movie you can't take your eyes off of. I liked the feature film version of "The Da Vinci Code," it was pretty good, but I have to admit, I was a little disappointed.
I'm not sure why "The Da VInci Code" sold so well, it's not even the best book by Dan Brown (I think that "Angels & Demons" is his best... I'm sure that will be the next film, since it also features the "Robert Langdon" character, though it actually takes place before "The Da Vinci Code"). Either way, for whatever reason, "The Da Vinci Code" became one of the biggest selling novels of all-time, and now it's a movie, a movie that seems to have three endings. The first ending is the twist in the book that I don't like. When it happens, you might be tempted to walk out of the theater, 'cause it really does seem like the movie is about to end, but don't leave just yet. There's still another 20 minutes after that point. The second ending has a big reveal about one of the characters, and the third ending works as something like an epilogue. In book form, it all works, but in the movie, it seems tedious.
On paper, "The Da Vinci Code" seems to have the makings of a fantastic movie. The cast is excellent, the director is one of the best in the business, and it's based on an extremely popular book read and adored by millions. Also, the subject matter, while extremely controversial, is fascinating. Still, the movie is a disappointment, and I'm not sure who should be blamed. I guess if I were to point at anybody, it would have to be Akiva Goldsman, who adapted the novel into a screenplay. I have some issues with Akiva Goldsman, because he wrote "Batman & Robin," but he also wrote the screenplay for "A Beautiful Mind" (I think the movie was overrated, but it had a really good script), as well as the screenplay for the excellent film "Cinderella Man." Both of those films happen to be directed by the man who directed this film, Ron Howard. Ron Howard is a great director, but I think "The Da Vinci Code" was rushed. The script was rushed, the production was rushed, and the editing was rushed. Maybe I'm wrong, I dunno, but even though I thought the movie was pretty good, I know it could have and should have been better.
The cast is faultless. I originally thought that George Clooney should have been cast as "Robert Langdon," since the book basically describes him as Clooney-like, but Tom Hanks is great in the role. I also think that he's more believable as the character. Audrey Tautou (the star of the masterpiece "Amélie") is an excellent choice to play "Sophie Neveu." She's who I pictured while reading the book, and I'm glad she got the role. Ian McKellen as "Sir Leigh Teabing" is perfect in every way, as is Jean Reno as "Bezu Fache." My favorite casting choice is Paul Bettany (probably my favorite actor right now) as "Silas." He was so good in the role, and so creepy! To me, the standouts in the movie are Paul Bettany and Ian McKellen.
In the end, I have to say that even though I liked "The Da Vinci Code," I was disappointed. It was too long, it was slow at times, and the twist (the first ending) is lame. Then again, that's the fault of the book, not the movie. Maybe if I never read the book, I would have liked the movie more, but as someone who did read it, I think that "The Da Vinci Code" is a good movie, just not a great movie. Critics are bashing it, but many critics bashed the book, too. Hell, Roger Ebert, one of the few critics who wrote a positive review of the movie, used half of his review to bash the book, so take that for what it's worth.
Scale of 1-10: 7