The Da Vinci Code

8

RossA.R.May 21, 2006

Very interesting and thought provoking. Sure, it might feel a little slow for today's short-attention span audience and will be despised by religious folk who won't give the movie a chance to tell its story, but if you're in Very interesting and thought provoking. Sure, it might feel a little slow for today's short-attention span audience and will be despised by religious folk who won't give the movie a chance to tell its story, but if you're in the mood for a good thriller and like puzzle solving adventures, The DaVinci Code is a good bet.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

JoshuaM.May 21, 2006

I'm suprised at the harsh reviews the movie is getting from a substansial amount of critics, I wonder if they were caught up in the negative publicity the release of it into theaters is causing. I read the book and it was a fantastic I'm suprised at the harsh reviews the movie is getting from a substansial amount of critics, I wonder if they were caught up in the negative publicity the release of it into theaters is causing. I read the book and it was a fantastic piece of literature fiction or not. The Vatican should actually be thanking author Dan Brown to begin with for renewing interest in the church. When I looked at the first reviews that it got from the Cannes film festival I was pretty shocked and as I saw more and more negative reviews pour in from all over I knew something was wrong. Critics cannot always be trusted becuase sometimes they buy into the negative contoversy surrounding something and basically go with the flow. I thought the film was a fantastic adaptation and a very solid thriller even if you didnt read the book. Ron Howard did an excellent job in adapting the material into a visually arresting film that a larger audience can enjoy. My advice go see the film dont always believe what the critics have to say if you read the book you'll definatly enjoy the film and if you didnt you still will because it has a great cast and a great story that will keep you on the edge of your seat until the very end.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

RedragonGreenMay 20, 2006

OK Andy, the movie sucked. Yes the acting is "wooden," directing is sloppy, if not lazy. On a religious note, yes Da VInci was no saint, was very much a naturalist in his religious beliefs, maybe even neo-pagan, maybe even gay (hey, it was OK Andy, the movie sucked. Yes the acting is "wooden," directing is sloppy, if not lazy. On a religious note, yes Da VInci was no saint, was very much a naturalist in his religious beliefs, maybe even neo-pagan, maybe even gay (hey, it was the renaissance for crying out loud) but there is no proof by any historian that Da Vinci was putting anything anti-catholic in his artwork. In regards to the Priory of Sion, that is a fabricated organization created by a neo-nazi in 1956. His name is Pierre Plantard, and a recent 60 Minutes episode exposed Plantard as a mentally deranged anti-Semite. He was even arrested for being a con-man in the mid 1950s. All the documents about the secrets of the Catholic Church and the Knights Templar were proven to be false becasue the script used never existed in the time period that Brown and Plantard said the documents were from. Also, the person who the Priory of Sion gave their "historical" documents too for safe keeping stated they were forgeries. So what gives people? The movie and the book are offensive and based on anti-catholic lies. and it seems that for all the people who say it is just entertainment and fiction, why do some people, like you Andy, seem to feel if this movie is rated low, or if catholics are pissed off, that your anti-catholic reliigious beliefs are somehow being criticised???? Its all fiction Andy, why are you so upset?? How does it feel to have your religion criticised, since thats all this piece of trash is, a smear campaign against the Catholic Church and the divinty of Christ. Oh, can someone please provide proof that Opus Dei is involved in murder? I mean if they are so secretive and deadly, how does Dan Brown know so much, and live to tell about it? Why is it that those who defend Brown and his work, defend him and his work as if its the truth? Well, the DA Vinci Code will now go down in history just like the Protocols of Zion: bad and hateful fiction that only provides bigots with more ammunition to hate those who believe in a religion and set of morals that are different than their hateful bigotry. PS why does Dan Brown on his website say all his evidence is fact, such as the Priory of Sion, if this is just a work of fiction? Why is it that historians, whether Catholic, Protestant, Jew, or Agnostic, who have written biographies about various characters that Dan Brown says were part of the Priory of Sion, never ever mentioned they were in the Priory? Because the Priory never existed. Also, the Romans and Jews both knew Jesus was never married. and there never was any occurance of Jesus ever being married. So a long dead French royal blood line is actually alive? I bet the French are rolling in their seats over that. I bet the french never knew that one, at least I have never read that in history books. Oh, but I forgot, DAn Brown knows the real actual history...but wait...arent we talking about a work of fiction??? And if Dan Brown all of a sudden knows the real meaning of the bible, than how come all of the various christian and jewish denominations, with ministers both male and female, have never found any meaning in the bible to support this whole "goddess" religion that Brown seems to think that Newton and Da vinci were following. makes one wonder...Dan Brown...author, historian , or con-man??? I guess some would say all of them, but if he is a con-man, how can you trust him with what he says? I thought we were talking about fiction in the first place? How is it that the Da Vinci code has become a religious work of belief? So, what do we now call those who believe the Da Vinci Code is fact and not fiction? Do we call them Brownites, Danites, or Davincians?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

SteveK.May 20, 2006

I am completely baffled at how wrong the majority of critics got it. This is an entertaining movie. Everyone I saw the movie with enjoyed it and there were even some people clapping in our theater at the end of the movie. Don't have I am completely baffled at how wrong the majority of critics got it. This is an entertaining movie. Everyone I saw the movie with enjoyed it and there were even some people clapping in our theater at the end of the movie. Don't have huge expectations... movies based on books are NEVER as good as the books, they can never jam in as much info as a book can. Ron Howard did a good job of making the movie interesting and suspenseful throughout. I really think critics wanted to hate this one so bad that they didn't allow themselves to have a good time. It won't win any Oscars but it was all I wanted it to be. I go to movies to be entertained, take it for what it is.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

EricS.May 20, 2006

There are some movies that are so provocative and controversial that professional reviews can't be taken seriously. As much as critics know about films, personal views can still interfere with providing a fair judgment. The Da Vinci There are some movies that are so provocative and controversial that professional reviews can't be taken seriously. As much as critics know about films, personal views can still interfere with providing a fair judgment. The Da Vinci Code is one such example. While no masterpiece, it is a well-made, exciting film. It even brings up some valid points involving the history of Christianity. Dan Brown didn't come up with these ideas himself; they have been debated for a long time. However, he and the directors of this film deserve credit for bringing them out into the mainstream. It is a pity that these theories are dismissed by most people, including the critics, who are coincidentally Christians. All talk of truth aside, the De Vinci Code is the perfect example of a great intellectual thriller, even if its reputation is marred by hype and controversy.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

LiamHuangMay 20, 2006

A pleasant surprise!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

RickyQ.May 20, 2006

This is a great compliment to the book. There are some parts missing but overall it is nothing major. The movie seemed to move a little to quickly in the first half but later finds a perfect pace in the middle. Enjoy the book, enjoy the movie!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

HelenB.May 20, 2006

Fantastic movie, very true to the book. But this movie is sure to get mixed reviews, it depends on your beliefs, that's why there is so much contrast in the reviews we are getting by the critics. Plus critics make mistakes sometimes. Fantastic movie, very true to the book. But this movie is sure to get mixed reviews, it depends on your beliefs, that's why there is so much contrast in the reviews we are getting by the critics. Plus critics make mistakes sometimes. they're only human. The movies is great, loved it. Casting was well done and the settings were amazing. The acting is pretty good, not as bad as the critics said it was.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

ClaranneL.May 20, 2006

Despite the reviews, took a chance and really enjoyed the movie - take it for what it is a great fictional story - hard job to fit in all the details from the book - but RH did a good job...

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

DaleM.May 20, 2006

Exciting. Critics at Cannes seem to be getting better and better at picking bad movies and missing good ones.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

SammyMay 20, 2006

The book was one of the most outstanding works of literature to ever surface the earth. The movie is a Hollywood appeal to everybody movie. Many crucial parts are left out, the end is somewhat changed, and Robert Langdon seems to realize The book was one of the most outstanding works of literature to ever surface the earth. The movie is a Hollywood appeal to everybody movie. Many crucial parts are left out, the end is somewhat changed, and Robert Langdon seems to realize that he may be offending people. Instead of a fascinating theory about the foundations of Christianity, the movie basically shows a simple guess.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

TracyB.May 20, 2006

Such a good book- not a good movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

JeffSMay 20, 2006

Under-rated, over-hyped and a darn-fun great translation of a good book.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

PeterH.May 20, 2006

I found that by the half way point my concentration was wandering. Perhaps too much talking and explaining. Perhaps I was just confused as to where the movie was going. I actually thought the movie had ended ... well, at least four times. I found that by the half way point my concentration was wandering. Perhaps too much talking and explaining. Perhaps I was just confused as to where the movie was going. I actually thought the movie had ended ... well, at least four times. Finally when the end did arrive I didn't see the point. So what?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

BillM.May 20, 2006

An OK mystery with too many endings. The hype around it, made me expect it to be great. It fell far short of the hype.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

AndyMay 20, 2006

Alfred N B: It is a movie for entertainment purposes. Quit bringing in your religious pontification to the discussion. It is not a documentary, doesn't say it is fact. It isn't a great MOVIE by any means, the pacing is bad, the Alfred N B: It is a movie for entertainment purposes. Quit bringing in your religious pontification to the discussion. It is not a documentary, doesn't say it is fact. It isn't a great MOVIE by any means, the pacing is bad, the acting a bit wooden. But don't decry it for going against your religious beliefs. And don't get me started on your complaint that they Catholic church, Jesus, et al are portrayed "with so little factual truth." If you have factual truth about all of this, and I'm not talking about the Bible, please, let's all see it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

JohnF.May 20, 2006

The critics are wrong. The movie moved at a good pace and it was a good piece of fiction. Just sit back and enjoy.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

SusanW.May 20, 2006

This movie is definitely not into the movie searchingas bad as critics say it is. Not mind-blowing fabulous like we were all expecting, but still an entertaining movie. If you go in to the theatres searching for the meaning of religion and This movie is definitely not into the movie searchingas bad as critics say it is. Not mind-blowing fabulous like we were all expecting, but still an entertaining movie. If you go in to the theatres searching for the meaning of religion and life, sure, you may be disappointed (as you will by all movies), but as a night out with friends, its definitely very entertaining.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

AlfredNB.May 20, 2006

Cannot understand why Jesus Christ, Mary Magdalene and the Catholic Church are portrayed with so little factual truth. What is the point?

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

WilsonMay 20, 2006

People have a high expectation on this film way too much. They need to cool it down. The movie was okay. Tom Hanks' acting is not that great, but still enjoyable.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

TimG.May 20, 2006

Contains nearly as many examples of Deus ex Machina as the entire Harry Potter series, some of the most wooden dialouge outside of an Uwe Boll film, and multiple ridiculous "history lessons" where characters feel the need take a pit stop Contains nearly as many examples of Deus ex Machina as the entire Harry Potter series, some of the most wooden dialouge outside of an Uwe Boll film, and multiple ridiculous "history lessons" where characters feel the need take a pit stop while being chased by the police so they can spout off lectures about ancient history. How could millions of readers be so dumb?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

JuantagMay 20, 2006

I read the book; I've got advanced degrees in history and theology; this movie was a real dud. Tedious to the extreme, muddled and academically laughable (like the book), it doesn't do its actors justice at all. Don't bother; I read the book; I've got advanced degrees in history and theology; this movie was a real dud. Tedious to the extreme, muddled and academically laughable (like the book), it doesn't do its actors justice at all. Don't bother; see Gigli instead.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

6

MarkS.May 20, 2006

Good mystery.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

StanR.May 20, 2006

We saw it last night with a group of 6. We all really liked the movie and cannot believe we saw the same movie that the critics have slammed. The audience clapped at the end and generally seemed to like the movie. It held our interest and We saw it last night with a group of 6. We all really liked the movie and cannot believe we saw the same movie that the critics have slammed. The audience clapped at the end and generally seemed to like the movie. It held our interest and told the story without skipping any important points. It is a thinking person's movie- maybe the reviewers didn't want to think. Sure, it isn't the book, but that's a different medium.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

DanS.May 20, 2006

Never read the book, but the movie wasn't a total failure. The plot twists kept me entertained and there was just enough action to both reatin the film's propsed heady status and restrict it from falling into an explosion fest. The Never read the book, but the movie wasn't a total failure. The plot twists kept me entertained and there was just enough action to both reatin the film's propsed heady status and restrict it from falling into an explosion fest. The dialogue was pretty uninspiring and Tom Hanks was kind of dull (for a lead role, he only really did something a few times). The movie became more predictable towards the end, but it was entertaining and considerably better than National Treasure (which DVC reminded me of with the artifact hunting). For what it's worth, I don't think I wasted my money seeing it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

[Anonymous]May 20, 2006

I did not read the book. I thought it was a very well done screenplay. The plot was interesting and had a good amount of twists. It's based on enough fact to make it believable fiction. It is fiction nonetheless.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

FrankieA.May 20, 2006

Great movie. I can understand why some people wouldn't like it (or understand it). The end stretches itself out a little too much and some important aspects of the novel are absent from the film. However, these negative aspects of the Great movie. I can understand why some people wouldn't like it (or understand it). The end stretches itself out a little too much and some important aspects of the novel are absent from the film. However, these negative aspects of the film are insignificant, as the movie is awesome. But the book's better. ^.^… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

EdmundB.May 20, 2006

Boring, sacriligeous. Poor concept and worse acting.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

GodComplexMay 20, 2006

This movie is smart, like the book. A lot of idiots are going to see this and not get it.. They haven't read the book, and they don't know much about history, which menas they are lost after the first five minutes. ::shruggs:: This movie is smart, like the book. A lot of idiots are going to see this and not get it.. They haven't read the book, and they don't know much about history, which menas they are lost after the first five minutes. ::shruggs:: I'd ignore idiots/critics alike. God see it if you know your history, read the book, or are just a bright cookie!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

MichaelB.May 20, 2006

I understand that story elements often get changed or condensed in the book-to-movie transition, but this is way out of line. The book is ten times better.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

AmberH.May 19, 2006

Excellent work. In the light of fiction. Well casted. Tom Hanks was perfect for the role and very believable. A little drawn out in the beginning but overall a very entertaining watch! Must see for all.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

BobbyW.May 19, 2006

I personally didnt think much of the book: it is only a so-so thriller, the writing is poor, the plot absurd, and the characters cut-out cardboards. The only reason why it is so popular is the usage of biblical figures and real places. I personally didnt think much of the book: it is only a so-so thriller, the writing is poor, the plot absurd, and the characters cut-out cardboards. The only reason why it is so popular is the usage of biblical figures and real places. Saying that, any conversion from book to film is always very difficult: those that loved the book will never be satisfied becuase they themsleves have already made their own movies in ther mind. However, the movie seen on its own its not too bad given the difficulty of bringing some of Brown's theories into a visual form. The plot moves along at a pretty decent clip with the clever use of computer imaging to tell some parts, the acting can be better but I guess Tom Hanks was just being loyal to his character created by Brown which is card board like. But at least its only 2 hrs plus long instead of four hours - which would be that long if the director had followed too closely to the book. And I am glad he didnt.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

DavidC.May 19, 2006

If plot holes bother you, don't see this film. I went and saw this movie just to spite everyone protesting it, and I came away with quite a few laughs. It's not a comedy, but Da Vinci Code is so poorly thought out and assembled If plot holes bother you, don't see this film. I went and saw this movie just to spite everyone protesting it, and I came away with quite a few laughs. It's not a comedy, but Da Vinci Code is so poorly thought out and assembled that you'll find humor in several of the lines and shots. I didn't read the book, but I can't imagine it being as bad as this film. At the end of the day, the creators walk away with fat checks, so congrats on marketing an awful film. The unintended comedic scenes.bring my score up to a 3.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JanY.May 19, 2006

It's a fiction and should be seen as a fiction. Does it compliment Dan Brown's book? Yes, in the visual sense and it does include cleverly concocted clues and riddles to keep me glued to the screen. As a thriller, it succeeds to It's a fiction and should be seen as a fiction. Does it compliment Dan Brown's book? Yes, in the visual sense and it does include cleverly concocted clues and riddles to keep me glued to the screen. As a thriller, it succeeds to keep my eyes, ears and brain cells ticking from beginning to end.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

DaveW.May 19, 2006

Good Summer Movie, Don't believe the bad critics they just scared of offending the church. If in doubt check there ratings on the Passion inwhich should have gotten about a 3 out of 10.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

NatS.May 19, 2006

I can't believe this is getting such bad/poor reviews. The only people who would not like this movie are either devout Christians who are offended (not saying they shouldn't be), or people who read the book and were disappointed. I I can't believe this is getting such bad/poor reviews. The only people who would not like this movie are either devout Christians who are offended (not saying they shouldn't be), or people who read the book and were disappointed. I went in expecting to be disappointed but I was completely wrong. I read the book, too, and there was nothing even wrong or left out. Part of me is thinking that these bad user reviews are Christians who just hate the book, and who haven't even read it, and are just trying to discourage people from seeing a great movie. Otherwise, there is no reason to give it a 0 or a 1. That is how I know, a movie with Tom Hanks and directed by Ron Howard can't be a 0 or 1, even if it is below average. Trust me, see this movie, don't let reviews prevent you from seeing it. If you're interested in seeing it, then see it, and then you can hate it later. But in my opinion seeing the most controversial movie for the next ten years is worth 10 bucks in itself, even if you don't like it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

KevinS.May 19, 2006

A great book to film adaptation. I think you have to read the book to really get what is going on, but even if you havent you still may catch on. Good film, but the reading book was better and more fun.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

CoriMay 19, 2006

The Da Vinci Code

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

LouisB.May 19, 2006

The critics were wrong.The movie was entertaining and fast paced.The actors were good and were faithful to the book.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

MikeJ.May 19, 2006

Much better than the book! But that's not saying much. I rate it high because I think it is a very tough book to make into a good movie, especially a big summer movie, and I think they pulled it off. Entertaining and interesting.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

LeeF.May 19, 2006

Tons better than I expected -- much better than any critic said it was. Go see it for yourself -- it's a lot of fun and exciting even if you've read the book and know the story.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

KennethD.May 19, 2006

The problem is before you see the movie you think well it can

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

JaredD.May 19, 2006

Best movie of the year. The critics were wrong. If there was never a book before this movie, people would be applauding the film. This beats out anything put out by the film industry lately. Very entertaining. Everyone at the premiere I went Best movie of the year. The critics were wrong. If there was never a book before this movie, people would be applauding the film. This beats out anything put out by the film industry lately. Very entertaining. Everyone at the premiere I went to loved it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

MarioD.May 19, 2006

The film and its actors must be inmediatly considered as front runners for the Raspberry awards... they are the sure winners.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

SteveC.May 19, 2006

[I have read the book and thoroughly enjoyed it.] I can't believe it! Discounting the visuals (which are not merit of the film), It is overall such a bad film on so many levels. Sure there are worse films, but heck these people are [I have read the book and thoroughly enjoyed it.] I can't believe it! Discounting the visuals (which are not merit of the film), It is overall such a bad film on so many levels. Sure there are worse films, but heck these people are supposed to have gone to film and acting schools. It's absolutely obvious that the writing doesn't work! This is a film not the book! And with such a script (recalls the last Star Wars films) what do the actors do...? No chemistry at all, just i blah, then he blahs, then the other guy blahs, like reading away mindlessly... Hanks' worst acting, as miscast as Tatou. So, just another hollywood megaproduction soon to be forgotten.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JohMay 19, 2006

Great movie, very close to the book, misses some details but this is to be expected in the film version. It's the novel come to life on the screen.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

JoelL.May 19, 2006

Awful. The book is gripping. The movie is not; it's a dud.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

EzequielB.May 18, 2006

Great movie like a religious X-Files, full of conspirations and secrets to solve. Best actor: Sir Ian Mackelen.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JamesMay 18, 2006

Faithful adaptation of the novel, but simplified some of the more complex elements. Fans of the book should enjoy while those who have not read the book might get lost in the dialogue.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

CinemeisterMay 18, 2006

i am from Manila, i saw the movie premiere Thursday here (blame it to the Greenwhich Time), as a Dan Brown buff, ive read Da Vinci Code thrice and swear to be open minded not with the religious matters but with film, in short, i leaved the i am from Manila, i saw the movie premiere Thursday here (blame it to the Greenwhich Time), as a Dan Brown buff, ive read Da Vinci Code thrice and swear to be open minded not with the religious matters but with film, in short, i leaved the words in the book and opened my eyes with the car chases, Robert Langdon as Tom Hanks, yeah the Priory maniac Teabing played by Sir Ian and how will Ron Howard weave Browns words into pictures. Everyone knows about the story so here is the verdict: the film is not a masterpiece, it lacks chemistry between Hanks and Tautou, what made it amazing are the locations in Europe, the revelations became interesting thanks to Sir Ian, while Hanks and Tautou are the shadows of new tourist guides in Europe. The Da Vinci Code is Hollywood's National Geographic Channel shown in big screen.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

LuisMay 18, 2006

I have lowered down my expectations to this movie after reading bad reviews from Cannes critics but yet it's disappoints me. Ron Howard failed me and so are the other fans of this bestselling book. Da Vinci Code is one of the most I have lowered down my expectations to this movie after reading bad reviews from Cannes critics but yet it's disappoints me. Ron Howard failed me and so are the other fans of this bestselling book. Da Vinci Code is one of the most exciting book of all times but I didn't feel it in the movie. The screenplay and approach simply just did not work. I am also disappointed with the actors except for Jean Reno (who played the character of Bezu Fache exactly the way I imagined it). It's a lousy adaptation. I am so disappointed because I was hoping that it is a good movie after the awful Poseidon but it's not.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

AldrinC.May 18, 2006

Dear Mr. Howard ("The Da Vinci Code" director) and Mr. Goldsman ("The Da Vinci Code" screenwriter): Where have all the suspense gone?

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

OCuculizaMay 18, 2006

A disappointment. It's sort of entertaining but after 2 hours of flashbacks, bad dialogue and stupid scenes with Tom Hanks totally miscast, it gets awful. Sir Ian McKellen is def. the best thing about htis, all the scenes where he A disappointment. It's sort of entertaining but after 2 hours of flashbacks, bad dialogue and stupid scenes with Tom Hanks totally miscast, it gets awful. Sir Ian McKellen is def. the best thing about htis, all the scenes where he appears are great just because of him.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

The Da Vinci Code

User Reviews