Critic's Grade: C+

Dan Brown's novel, known as The Da Vinci Code, has sold perhaps over sixty million copies worldwide and is one of the most popular books since the bible itself. The book fictionally jumbles some of the facts and incorporates Leonardo Da Vinci as being one of the holders of an ancient secret as part of Opus Dei. Opus Dei is a real society dedicated to spreading the teachings of the Catholic Church and is simply comprised of priests and regular people.

I attempted to read the book days before the opening of the film, but it's lenghth was a challenge to read in just a few days. What I've read from the book is interesting, but written in a very poor way. Thinking of what I have read in the book and what I have read elsewhere, the film stays very true to the book. Attempting to compare and contrast the two with only the small amount I have read I cannot do.

I know plenty of you have read The Da Vinci Code and I'm sure plenty of you haven't. The reason you probably haven't is more likely not because you haven't gotten around to it, but probably more likely that you think it is offensive in some way. Once again, the book and film are fiction. It is heavily researched and for the most part really creative, but again, it's fiction and nothing more.

On a late evening inside of the Louvre (One of the most famous museums and art galleries worldwide), Paris, France, a murder has taken place. We witness the murder happening, an Albino monk named Silas (Paul Bettany) is a member of Opus Dei and plans to keep "the secret" (at this point we don't even know what it is) locked away as the organization and his teacher, Bishop Aringarosa (Alfred Molina) wish. A man named Jacques Sauniere (Jean-Pierre Marielle) was discovered by the polce stripped naked, spread like Da Vinci's "Vetruvian Man", and has a pentagram carved onto his body. What's odd is that apparently he did all that to himself after he was shot. Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) is called to the scene by Captain Fache (Jean Reno) of the French law force. He is currently in Paris lecturing students on his work as a proffesor of religious symbology at Harvard when he is informed that a man has been murdered.

When Robert arrives, he meets Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou), and the two learn that it was Sauniere's last wish that Robert and Sophie come together. The two later learn that they are being tracked and shake of the police. They return to the crime scene and investigate some anagrams and works of Da Vinci and discover a saftey deposit key that will guide them to secrets and a man who knows the whole truth, Sir Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellan).

Wait, that's it? Absolutely not! The Da Vinci Code holds a multitude of secrets. The book and movie heavily change the beliefs of real life and with this you may realize why so many people are getting ticked off. A. Jesus was not a god, but a man. B. Jesus married Mary Magdelene (believed to be a prostitute). C. She should be worshipped as a goddess. C. The two (Jesus and Mary Magdelene) had a daughter. D. The daugther lived on and spawned a family that is still present in Europe today. E. The bible was put together by a Pagan Roman Emperor. F. Jesus was not viewed as a God until the fourth century when he was defied by the Emperor Constantine. G. The gospels were edited to support the later claims of Christians. H. Mary Magdelene was directed to establish the church, not Peter. I. A secret society exists known as the Priory of Sion that still worships Mary Magdelene as a goddess and is still attempting to keep the truth alive. J. The Catholic Church and Opus Dei are aware and are fighting to keep it all a secret. It has also murdered to do so. K. The Catholic church will and has assasinated any members of Christ's bloodline to keep it a secret.

A lot of stuff to think about and now I realize that there really is a lot to be ticked about, that is if the movie and book were actually accusing the Church of doing such things and believing such things are true. It's a fictional novel. It declares itself as fiction, it's even listed as fiction at your local library and book store.

I was surprised at how much the film didn't publicize itself, but sort of let the publicity of the entire controversy build to epic proportions. Many churches and organizations are boycotting it, but the truth of the matter is, the more you boycott the more publicity it is getting which equals more people are interested in going to see it. So in a way you are actually helping the film. Doing that is like a critic going to see a film that did not hold a press screening and reviewing it. Any publicity is good publicity.

The film is directed by Ron Howard, who we all know so well of directing such fantastic works, has crumbled a little bit working on this film. A lot of the scenes in the film are themed quite darkly and the drama that he commonly establishes well isn't always convincing, especially the way the opening murder of Sauniere was crafted.

The screenplay by Akiva Goldsman is as dry as a stale scone. For the most part it doesn't work because it doesn't completely estabish the entire controversy of it all. Tom Hanks's role appears very minor but even in the first few chapters of the book he has much more to say. It's actually quite a shame to have a two-time academy award winner for best actor not be able to show of his colorful feathers.

The acting, even though the film is poorly written, is at a level where you can still be interested in what is going on. As I mentioned before Tom Hanks, as well as Jean Reno, Ian McKellan, and Am?lie? I mean Audrey Tautou, are all actors of high skill but their talent is trapped from the light of day in a dark cellar of bad writing.

The interesting story is one of the only things that is holding the film together even though it is somewhat absurd. Of course, though it is absurd, it is a film, a work of fiction. The events don't flow that well, but the fact that it keeps the reader thinking throughout and after the film is really important. The film is long, but doesn't run dull at any point over the two and a half hours.

The cinematographer Salvatore Totino seems to be a new favorite of Ron Howard, who also used excellent shots in films such as The Missing and last year's overlooked masterpiece, Cinderella Man. In The Da Vinci Code, Totino uses a a series of rather clever claustrophobic shots to establish Langdon's fear that I will not reveal to you. He also a few bulgy shots that rotate downward almost making you feel as if you are in a fish bowl and some shots of placing the viewer where an artistic work or symbol to have the actors almost examine us.

The film has plenty of flaws, but to honestly correct them, Dan Brown would have to rewrite the book. It remains entertaining and interesting throughtout and will probably keep you interested or atleast wanting to look more upon the matter of Da Vinci. It doesn't alter your beliefs as much as Brokeback Mountain doesn't make you question your sexuality, but does makes you question yourself. It is fiction, but could something even a lot more minor than this shake the foundations of a religion?

All Reviews by Max Einhorn [Home page]
If you are the author of this review, you may edit it by signing in.