Finally, after reading dozens of critical reviews, I decided to get a ticket and see The Da Vinci Code. I hesitated a bit because most critics labeled this movie with “not what we expected” sticker. However curiosity and hype took over gray newspaper columns with C and C- grades. And while looking for a comfy seat in a local movie theater, somewhere deep inside of me lived a thought: it is easy to critic someone or something, and maybe this movie is not as bad as they claim.

A large coke, jumbo popcorn and 2 and ½ hours later I had a second thought: probably, some books can’t be adapted by Hollywood. This movie left no impression whatsoever. It was not dull and dragging experience and yet it obviously did not live up to all its hype and expectations.

The book full of historical and religious facts and conspiracy theories was zipped into two and half hour movie. I agree, it is not that short according to Hollywood norms and yet it is too condensed to fully understand a concept behind it. And here, we are talking not just about a basic plot telling us that Jesus was a married man and had a child. This part was pretty clear in the movie; however, all clues in a form of codes and hidden messages were too shallow.

If you never read the book, some moments shown in the movie will not be clear to you. A director attempted to show how code-breaking thinking works by employing computer-generated effects and totally failed. When you see Tom Hanks who plays a role of Harvard symbologist, staring at a code and all of sudden letters and symbols move on the screen forming an answer, one thing comes to mind: that’s it?

In the book, the code and secret message solving process plays a big role and mainly responsible for creating an atmosphere of mystery that makes the book such page-turner. It is so involving and exciting that at some moments you feel like in the shoes of Robert Langdon taking on uneasy task of solving the puzzle. It never happens when you watch the movie. It is too fast and jumpy from one point to another, and while it keeps a viewer occupied, at the same time, it does not let him to get involved.

However, despite some obvious flows I will stop short from branding this movie as a total failure. I did liked some moments and maybe, if I had not read the book before, my reaction could be more positive. And yet, an advice: read the book first.

This entry was posted on Monday, May 29th, 2006 at 1:00 pm and is filed under Movies. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.