Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" could be taken as historical fact. In the film, they must rush to conclusions that it takes the book pages to reveal, which leaves the audience thinking, "Yeah, right." As the film draws, at last, to a close in a conclusion that, like the book, contains one of its weakest mysteries, you just want to grab the characters and yell, "Just figure it out already! We did!"Īt worst Mr. Brown is able to bludgeon us with dense passages of hokum until we submit to his version of reality. Brown's plot, the film reveals its inherent flimsiness. Of course, like any adaptation, a film can never go into the depth that a novel can. Goldsman even gives Langdon the Hitchcockian tic of claustrophobia, apparently for no other reason than to give Mr. McKellen believably get into a heated debate over the Council of Nicea, while the wonderful Audrey Tautou ( Amélie, A Very Long Engagement) is constantly made to say, "wait, I don't get it." Mr. Of course, in order to do that, he needs to have Mr. Kudos to Hollywood go-to screenwriter Akiva Goldsman for his heroic attempt at turning pages and pages of flat dialogue into something resembling an actual conversation. Which is fine because: an albino monk, Dan? Come on. Though, with blue eyes and shorter hair than in the novel, this Silas looks closer to Roy Batty from "Blade Runner" than any albino. Bettany plays the much-derided murderous, self-flagellating albino monk Silas. Jean Reno, Alfred Molina (always a pleasure to see him) and Paul Bettany round out the solid cast. You know, the type who says "anno domini" when the rest of us would say, well, nothing. Brown's many well-monikered characters, Leigh Teabing, an eccentric gazillionaire Grail historian. Ian McKellen is also on hand to play one of Mr. Since Langdon is described in the novel as "Harrison Ford in Harris tweed", we'll have to take the casting of Mr. He also has the clout to get more or less any actor he wants, which means we have Tom Hanks playing Mr.
He films most scenes in "Da Vinci" exactly as any of us would, but there are some vivid and downright beautiful historical recreations which are a feast for the eyes. Howard is, after all, a gifted if somewhat obvious filmmaker. In fact, you'll probably come away saying, "so what's all the fuss about?" Or worse, "this is just like 'National Treasure'." But unlike last year's blatant, ham-handed attempt to cash in on "Code's" success, there are some pleasures to be had here. If not, there's nothing here that will change your mind.
If you were going to read it, you still probably will. A mysterious murder, exotic locales, an attractive male-female team on the run from the police, clues hidden throughout history. All the pieces are still in place for a top-notch page turner. For the seven or so people who have yet to read the book, Ron Howard's adaptation of Dan Brown's wildly successfully "The Da Vinci Code" isn't likely to sway you.