Despite the remarks of most critics, Tom Hanks’ performance is not atrocious. Although his character is bland at best, he wasn’t given much with which to work. Robert Langdon’s lack of development is more attributable to poorly written dialogue and poor choices in direction. Ron Howard tries to cover up some of the excessive dialogue with visual images, but narrative is still narrative even with flashback sequences. Audrey Tautou delivers her lines well, but suffers from the same constraints as her Academy Award-winning screen partner.
The only shining performance is provided by Ian McKellen as the eccentric and charming Grail expert, Leigh Teabing. Some of his one-liners add a bit of comic relief, but they’re only band-aids on the gushing head wound that is this film. In the end, The Da Vinci Code is a lesson on the distinction between two differing mediums. Movies haven’t replaced books, or vice-versa, for a reason. Sometimes, it’s just better to read the book. In the case of The Da Vinci Code, this is one of those moments.
Britt's Rating: 7.2/10
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - Nicholas Stix
Interesting review, but you neglected to talk about the real issue at the heart both of this movie, and of world civilization: Tom Hanks' makeover.
From the TV ads, he appears to have lost thirty pounds, and either got hair plugs or a rug or somethin,' because ol' Tom, who was seriously thinning out on top in recent years, suddenly has a very full head of hair, though not the (somewhat?) curly hair of his youth, IIRC.
This movie could determine the fate of the King of Hollywood, which is one issue that is of equal importance to Saudi fundies and American nihilists.
2 - MiniShrink
I'd just like to clarify that I haven't seen the film yet. However, based on whatI've read in the book, I'd have to agree on the comment about Tom Hanks' character, but that was Dan Brown's fault. Robert Langdon as a character was comprised of an award-winning mind, a gentleman-like charisma that cannot possibly be faulted, and an athletic build complete with flawless looks and his own pet poodle, and it's hard to project any amount of depth into a poorly-written character like that. Dan Brown may be skilled in layering plots together, but his character depth is obviously lacking.
3 - Ty
My wife who read the book: Why did they make changes to the story that did not need to be changed?
Me, non-christian who didn't read the book: I'd like to reiterate that no one in the USA would give a damn about the book or movie if all this crap was about hinduism and not Christianity.
I also would like to point out that it was quite cheap for Ron Howard to use his stupid special effect from A Beautiful Mind in this movie. If you have seen both films, you know what I am talking about, especially when both lead characters of their respective films are figuring things out.