i'm sure a lot of you have read the book. one of the most exciting books i've read so far. the movie's coming out May 19, 2006. what are your thoughts on the casting choices, adaptation, or whatever?

it's definitely one of the movies that i'm looking forward to seeing next year.:smile:

I'm looking forward to seeing it as well and I think they made a pretty good choice with Tom Hanks...

when i first heard that they cast tom hanks as robert langdon, i was kinda disappointed coz he was how i imagined langdon would be like.

Yeah, but Tom Hanks pulls off every role he gets just perfect. (that's just my opinion though)

It is hard when you read a book and picture the person different then who they cast.

Still excited to see it :)

I read on one of the posts that the Lost producers had another actor in mind to play John Locke and he turned it down. Can't imagine anyone else playing Locke but Terry but I am interested to know who they wanted first.....

Still excited to see it :)

yup! definitely!

check out the official movie website here:

http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/thedavincicode/

Hanks will make this movie even better. I truly hope it stays true to the book which was so captivating it took me about four hours to read.

It led me to read all his others..."Angels and Demons" was an amazing book...I recommend that one BIG TIME!! I betcha they make that the sequel if TDC does well even though it was written years before.

TDC led me to do a lot of investigating (reading) "Holy Blood Holy Grail" was also an amazing read...

I have to admit that I was dissapointed by the choice of Tom Hanks. He was not at all what I imagined as Robert Langdon. He's a great actor, so I'm sure he will pull it off, but he just isn't what I imagined. I'm psyched about the movie though. I loved the Book. I'm with you Bailey, I read all his books after reading the Davinci Code. Angels and Demons was excellent and so was Digital Fortress. I didn't care for Deception Point as much, but I discussed all this in the Book Nook Cafe. I'll have to check out Holy Blood Holy Grail. Thanks for the recommendation.

Thanks for the link, I will check it out... :)

I have to admit that I was dissapointed by the choice of Tom Hanks. He was not at all what I imagined as Robert Langdon. He's a great actor, so I'm sure he will pull it off, but he just isn't what I imagined. I'm psyched about the movie though. I loved the Book. I'm with you Bailey, I read all his books after reading the Davinci Code. Angels and Demons was excellent and so was Digital Fortress. I didn't care for Deception Point as much, but I discussed all this in the Book Nook Cafe. I'll have to check out Holy Blood Holy Grail. Thanks for the recommendation.

U R welcome..it is a VERY controversial book that really made my mind stretch...which is a great thing....it's a hard read but it is worth it...

I hate when a good movie is coming out and you have to wait months and months for it.......kinda reminds me of this show I really like on t.v. that won't be on again until the new year........ :crybaby:

I don't read very much, but I devoured "The DaVinci Code".. I was sad when I read the last page. When I heard about the movie however, I was thrilled to hear Tom Hanks was playing Robert Langdon. He is just how I imagined Robert to look. Anyway, just my 2 cents!

Here's the cast list from imdb.com::smile:

Cast (in credits order)
Tom Hanks.... Robert Langdon
Audrey Tautou.... Sophie Neveu
Ian McKellen.... Sir Leigh Teabing
Paul Bettany.... Silas
Jean Reno.... Bezu Fache
Etienne Chicot.... Lt. Collet
Alfred Molina.... Bishop Aringarosa
Clive Carte.... Police Captain Biggin Hill
Seth Gabel....Cleric
Marie-Françoise Audollent.... Sister Sandrine
Jean-Yves Berteloot.... Remy
Daisy Doidge-Hill.... Sophie Age 8
Christopher Fosh.... ARU Policeman
Joe Grossi.... Church Official
Jean-Pierre Marielle.... Jacques Sauniere
Jürgen Prochnow.... Vernet
Harry Taylor.... British Police Captain

HLH...you get the award for the wildest username:)

I hate when a good movie is coming out and you have to wait months and months for it.......kinda reminds me of this show I really like on t.v. that won't be on again until the new year........ :crybaby:

:biggrin: i know what you mean.

Im really excited about the movie as well. I have to admit that Tom Hanks wasn't exactly how I pictured Langdon either, but I think they can make it work. I will definately go see it premeire night though. I loved that book. ;)

I was kinda surprised that they chose Tom Hanks to play Langdon. I guess the "Harrison Ford in tweed" or whatever what said in the book, I just always pictured Harrison Ford as Langdon. I still can't wait to see it tho, I've read the book twice. The first time, I finished it in 2 days. It definately sucks you in. I haven't been able to read his other books tho I'm dying to.

I could see Harrison Ford in it. But I was really happy to hear Tom Hanks was cast for the roll of Langdon and very relieved that it wasn't someone like...oh say...Tom Cruise. *shudders at the thought* However, the best casting choice IMHO has to be Audrey Tautou as Sophie and Ian McKellen as Sir Teabing.

I've read the book and I'm REALLY excited for the movie, I bet it will be really good!

I could see Harrison Ford in it. But I was really happy to hear Tom Hanks was cast for the roll of Langdon and very relieved that it wasn't someone like...oh say...Tom Cruise. *shudders at the thought* However, the best casting choice IMHO has to be Audrey Tautou as Sophie and Ian McKellen as Sir Teabing.
Oh god, Tom Cruise. I don't think I could watch the movie with him in it. I don't know who Audrey Tautou is & I thought Ian McKellen was kinda weird. I don't know why, but I thought of Teabing as a short, chubby man. Oh well. I'm sure I'll still enjoy it.

guys, the new trailer for the da vinci code is supposed to be shown during kingkong. i'm not sure about, though. i just read it somewhere...

oooh! pictures!

Tom Cruise, i mean, Hanks (http://www.thezreview.co.uk/news3/davincicode01.htm)

Tom again (http://comingsoon.net/news/davincicodenews.php?id=10236)

Ian McKellen (http://www.thezreview.co.uk/news3/davincicode03.htm)

Paul Bettany (http://www.thezreview.co.uk/news3/davincicode04.htm)

set pics (http://odraconiandevil.co.uk/production/production.html)

I think Tom Hanks will be perfect as Langdon.

When news first broke that Tom Hanks was going to play Robert Langdon, I thought: "Nooooooooooooo!!" While I like him in pretty much every picture he's done (yes, including "Joe vs. the Volcano"... lol) I just couldn't see him in that role.... dunno why.

However, having since seen set pictures and what not, I've come around a little bit. He definitely is one of those actors that can totally mold and transform himself into whatever character he is required to play. He looks alright in those pictures, doesn't he...?

I'm looking forward to the movie... hope they don't mess it up :)

P.S.
Paul Bettany surely looks freaky as Silas, doesn't he?

I'm looking forward to the movie... hope they don't mess it up :)
P.S.
Paul Bettany surely looks freaky as Silas, doesn't he?

i hope they don't mess it up either. but come on. ron howard's directing it. every movie that the guy makes, receives critical success.

paul does look freaky. also exactly how i pictured silas would look like, except that i thought he was bald.

I love, love, love this book and can't wait for the movie to be out. Angels & Demons is also excellent. IMO better then The DaVinci Code.

I like Tom Hanks a lot, so you won't hear any complaints from me. I mean, this man can carry a whole movie by himself - a la Castaway.

Paul Bettany as Silas is perfect casting, it's exactly as I pictured him!

I love, love, love this book and can't wait for the movie to be out. Angels & Demons is also excellent. IMO better then The DaVinci Code.

really? i thought angels and demons was good, but the da vinci code is still the best dan brown book so far.:smile:

really? i thought angels and demons was good, but the da vinci code is still the best dan brown book so far.:smile:

Yeah, I hear that a lot, my husband dosen't agree with me either :rolleyes: . I did read A&D after TDC so maybe it just stuck in my head more? Either way they are both excellent! I would love to see A&D become a movie also!

Yeah, I hear that a lot, my husband dosen't agree with me either :rolleyes: . I did read A&D after TDC so maybe it just stuck in my head more? Either way they are both excellent! I would love to see A&D become a movie also!

i read angels & demons, deception point, and digital fortress after TDC too, but TDC still struck me as the best of the four. hopefully they'd make A&D into a movie in the future, too. it's my second fave dan brown book.

oooh! pictures!

Tom Cruise, i mean, Hanks (http://www.thezreview.co.uk/news3/davincicode01.htm)

Tom again (http://comingsoon.net/news/davincicodenews.php?id=10236)

Ian McKellen (http://www.thezreview.co.uk/news3/davincicode03.htm)

Paul Bettany (http://www.thezreview.co.uk/news3/davincicode04.htm)

set pics (http://odraconiandevil.co.uk/production/production.html)

Thanks for the pics! You rarely see pics of Ronnie Howard without a baseball cap. I love him.... :)

Thanks for the pics! You rarely see pics of Ronnie Howard without a baseball cap. I love him.... :)

no problem.:smile:

I've never read this book, and I may in the future but it's not on my reading list at the moment. I'm still trying to finish The Dark Tower by Stephen King. Still, I will go see the movie, I really love Tom Hanks as an actor, but I'm even more thrilled that Paul Bettany is in this movie - I absoloutely loved him in Dogville, what a great actor!

I was kinda surprised that they chose Tom Hanks to play Langdon. I guess the "Harrison Ford in tweed" or whatever what said in the book, I just always pictured Harrison Ford as Langdon. I still can't wait to see it tho, I've read the book twice. The first time, I finished it in 2 days. It definately sucks you in. I haven't been able to read his other books tho I'm dying to.

i finished it within a day. i was really sick then..so might as well do something productive..yeah i agree, i didn't picture tom hanks as langdon..i was thinking of nicolas cage, like in national treasure...but well, tom's really versatile so i hope he'd do justice to the role...:ohwell:

I think he'll make a good Langdon personally.

Well, I have to say I was a bit disappointed to know that Tom Hanks was going to play Langdon... I am not the biggest Hanks fan I must say, but çI'm quite sure he'll do a good job. I probably would have preferred to see Russell Crow or even Ralph Fiennes as Langdon... oh well!
BTW! I went to the link http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/thedavincicode/ and to my surprise I saw that the first FULL LENGTH TRAILER is there! Nice, I really have to show my boyfriend.... he'll love it!!

i just saw the trailer. dude! it was awesome! so intense! looks really really good!

they played the full-trailer before King Kong today... looks pretty good!

Yeah the full length trailer is sweet!

i can't hardly wait.. it's my top 1 most anticipated movie event! :drool:

Thanks for the pics orli! I watched the trailer online, it looks really good! I don't remember the part about her being underwater. It has been a while since I've read the book, maybe I'm just not remembering right.

Thanks for the pics orli! I watched the trailer online, it looks really good! I don't remember the part about her being underwater. It has been a while since I've read the book, maybe I'm just not remembering right.

no prob!

same here. i don't remember the underwater part either.:undecide: and who's the one falling through the well again?

I don't remember....and it's now driving me crazy. I've been bored lately anyway, I guess I'll read the book again.

good idea! i'll read it again over the weekend.

:biggrin: Wow I just watched the trailer. The film looks absolutely amazing. I can't wait for it to come out at the pictures.

I loved the book so much, and enjoyed reading it. I really hope that the movie lives up to the standards of the book. But I am sure it will considering the caliber of actors and a certain director involved. :biggrin:

i read the book again! that's my third time!

anyway, tom hanks and audrey tautou are on the cover of newsweek. and there's a great article about the movie and a couple of pics of them running. enjoy!

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10509652/site/newsweek/

Yes that was a great article. It sounds like Ron Howard is going to try and stay as true to the story as possible. Bummer about Westminister Abbey though :p.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v216/Grey_Star/MoaningHurley.jpg

Man, that's just wrong on so many levels, lol!

OMG!! MY EYES!! They BURN!!!

As this has nothing to do with the show..I am moving to appropriate forum...it's funny though...:)

It's so beautiful...and yet so disturbing.

um...yeah...that's...very...weird. i like it!

dude.

much props.

i didnt kno hurley had such taste.

new pics here:

da vinci code pics (http://www.gameshout.com/news/012006/article2386.htm)

His lost a ton of wieght! Escept around the chest area... Odd

Didn't know DaVinci got ABC...

Man, that's just wrong on so many levels, lol!

I was thinking the same thing...:biggrin:

That picture freaked me out. Do you do "photoshop this" at fark.com? Might be up your alley.

i just finished The Da Vinci Code... just an incredible read... i'm really looking forward to the movie... love the cast that was chosen... i think Tom Hanks will do the Langdon character justice... other than maybe Sam Neill, i just can't picture any other actor playing the role... the trailer looks fantastic, but i don't remember any underwater scenes...

I personally can't wait to see Paul Bettany, I love that guy, such a fantastic, underrated actor!

I loved the book but was incredibly disappointed in the Hanks casting. I still can't picture him as Langdon. I don't hate Hanks, but I'm so very tired of him - he's in too many movies.

I loved the book, couldn't put it down. I'm really looking forward to the movie.

I'm making it a mission to buy the book this weekend. No question that I'll finish it by the time the movie comes out. I wasn't interested in it when it first came out and my friends told me that it was good but I just brushed it aside. Now I want to read it and see what all the hub-bub is about. I know its a mystery/murder and I do like those. I'm just more into romance novels.

The Da Vinci Code will aired for the first time during the openning ceremony of the Cannes Film Festival. Guess What ? I am living in Cannes and I "would sell one of my leg" to see the World Premiere...
Just kidding of course, but as far as the cast is concerned
IMO,
Tom Hanks : maybe the best actor of our days at least one of the best, when I was reading the book I was thinking of him playing the role. And it was months before Hanks was officialy announced as Langdon.
Audrey Tautou : The french film Amélie Poulain had a good success in the US, so US people already know her, for those who don't, they will discover a very charming actress which is considered here in France as the best actress of here generation.
Jean Reno : This man is more french (kidding), he played in so much US blockbusters !!!

I am sure I will enjoy the movie, I won't be a masterpiece because so many people already know the scenario...

Wally

Loved the book it was the first non-school book i actually finished an it got me into reading again. I'm looking forward to the movie but when i read it i didn't picture Tom Hanks playing Langdon but i've seen previews and he looks the part i like the casting of Audrey Tautou shes a fantastic actress, Amélie is my favorite movie and she was very good in Dirty Pretty Things, I don't like the idea of Paul Bettany playing Silas have you seen Wimbledon???!!!?
Can't wait for the movie.

I haven't read "The Da Vinci Code" yet but that's the next book I plan to read. I just finished "Angels and Demons" and absolutely loved it! I also plan to read Dan Brown's other books.

I see that the female character in the movie that is coming out is Sophie something. What happened to Vittoria Vetra? I assumed that she was also in "The Da Vinci Code" but evidently that's not the case.

I see that the female character in the movie that is coming out is Sophie something. What happened to Vittoria Vetra? I assumed that she was also in "The Da Vinci Code" but evidently that's not the case.

I haven't read any other Dan Brown books, i bought angels and demons last week and my sister stole it but anyway there is no mention of Vittoria in the da vinci code. As with most book to film movies the book will probably be better.

Vittoria is the lead female character in angels and demons..totally a different character..angels and demons is presented as the first langdon adventure that is why it was mentioned in the da vinci code...i like vittoria better though..sophie is quite okay..:cool:

i hope andrea (amelie) plays the role well as sophie..

I honestly am dissapointed they are using Hanks. Robert Langdon is perhaps close to Hanks in age, but he is also supposed to be very good looking and athletic. In the book he mentions swimming laps every day, and all of his female students having crushes on him. In the previews Hanks looks balding and tired, not the type you might have a crush on.

I honestly am dissapointed they are using Hanks. Robert Langdon is perhaps close to Hanks in age, but he is also supposed to be very good looking and athletic. In the book he mentions swimming laps every day, and all of his female students having crushes on him. In the previews Hanks looks balding and tired, not the type you might have a crush on.

yeah, i agree. i don't picture langdon to be tom hank-ish..i was thinking of maybe..nicholas cage or someone a bit fresh..with regards to acting i can't say that tom would not do justice to the role because he is a great actor..it'st the look that bothers me though..

Lovin the trailers, haven't read through the rest of the thread yet, but if anyone was interested in being able to download them for the i-pod here's where you can;

http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/da_vinci_code/small.html


"So Dark The Con Of Man"

I loved it.

I'm almost finished with the book. I'm going to say around 60 pages. It's one of my favorites now and I can't wait to see it on screen. I hope it doesn't move too fast, though.

I have to admit that I was dissapointed by the choice of Tom Hanks. He was not at all what I imagined as Robert Langdon. He's a great actor, so I'm sure he will pull it off, but he just isn't what I imagined. I'm psyched about the movie though. I loved the Book. I'm with you Bailey, I read all his books after reading the Davinci Code. Angels and Demons was excellent and so was Digital Fortress. I didn't care for Deception Point as much, but I discussed all this in the Book Nook Cafe. I'll have to check out Holy Blood Holy Grail. Thanks for the recommendation.

I agree with PhillyGirl for the most part. Loved Da Vinci Code and Angels & Demons; didn't like Deception Point or Digital Fortress.

Tom Hanks is a good choice because he can pull off any character (said before) and because him just being in the film will pull in giant revenue (as if the book/movie needed any help). And on that thought, I suppose they could've gone with a relative no-name and still make a killing...might've been a good idea to do that so everyone would be focused on the plot instead of going "OMG it's THE Tom Hanks!" But I pictured Robert Langdon totally different than Tom Hanks.

the davinci code as a very powerful masterpiece and so is angels and demons and cannot wait to see it on screen

I am so excited for this movie!!
I just re-read the book and it was just as great the second time around!
Angels and Demons was great, not as good- and Deception Point and Digital Fortress were good but not DaVinci caliber. DP and DF were easy to read but not as gripping as A&D and DC.
I can not wait for the movie :clap: -- I can't believe all the hype around the movie from the Catholic Church....
the book is FICTION... right? Hmmm... why are they getting so upset over a fiction book?... unless it comes close to the truth.....
well, the book is brilliant and I think the movie will be too!!

Yeah, I got my tickets this weekend. Im so excited :D.

p.s Maverick, I couldnt agree more. Whats so upsetting about a fictional book right? ;)

I'm Catholic and I have no problem with it cause I do realize it's fiction. There's always going to be controversey with a religious topic so I expected it. I don't understand people sometimes. Always happens with my favorite books: Harry Potter and now this. lol

Hey guys sorry, don't know what happened before, I couldn't find a thread on the Da Vinci Code, so I thought I'd start one and I guess the mods joined my thread with this one.

I just finished the Da Vinci code, and I'm starting Angels and Demons now, it seems to be based upon the same kinda thing, late night, murder etc. But I have only just started.

On the Da Vinci Code, I found it very believeable (I guess I have to read the documentarys and other 'Unfolding the code' books) because to my uninformed historian self, most of what he wrote made sense. Then again, maybe I'll have to read it again.

Girlspy, you're so lucky, I've been trying to organise my family to book at gold class, but things just aren't happening, I think I'll just go and buy myself my own ticket :smile1:
I cannot wait for this movie, the cast looks awesome, it's been a good year for Ian Mckellen.

Maverick, I can't understand it either but I think that because Dan has used so many pieces of the truth such as Da Vinci, Opus Dei, Vatican, Astronomy etc. And because he wrote, "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents and sacred rituals in this novel are accurate" it has an impact on a reader.
However I think a big factor of it would have to be that to people such as myself (un-informed on history in and around BC, and maybe considered an atheist), the connections that Dan made in around past legends (eg. 'Friday 13th' to name one) made them have a deeper meaning and create a form of understanding, which a lot of people responded to.
As you said ".. why are they getting so upset over a fiction book?... unless it comes close to the truth.....", I think this is the reason the church was getting upset, because Dan offered another form of 'metaphor' to the legends that people found intriguing.
Overall people don't like change and I think Dan was offering that.

My favourite line in the book would have to be;
"Every faith in the world is based on fabrication. That is the definition of faith - acceptance of that which we imagine to be true, that which we cannot prove. Every religion describes God through metaphor, allegory and exaggeration, from the early Egyptians through to modern Sunday school. Metaphors are a way to help our minds process the unprocessible. The problems arise when we begin to believe literally in our own metaphors."

Overall Dan placed a conspiracy theory into the mainstream of society, which is based on one of the largest and widely known faiths in the world. Of course there was going to be some controversy. :smile1:

I have never been so psyched about a movie as I am for this one. A true masterpiece. With the teaming of Ron Howard directing, and Tom Hanks starring...I'm willing to bet the farm that this movie with be jam-packed with excitement, just as the book was. I've just picked up Angels and Demons, and already am hooked from page 1. Dan Brown is my kind of writer, and knows how to captivate his readers from the get go. I have faith in Ron Howard doing the same with the film.

Maverick, I can't understand it either but I think that because Dan has used so many pieces of the truth such as Da Vinci, Opus Dei, Vatican, Astronomy etc. And because he wrote, "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents and sacred rituals in this novel are accurate" it has an impact on a reader.
However I think a big factor of it would have to be that to people such as myself (un-informed on history in and around BC, and maybe considered an atheist), the connections that Dan made in around past legends (eg. 'Friday 13th' to name one) made them have a deeper meaning and create a form of understanding, which a lot of people responded to.
As you said ".. why are they getting so upset over a fiction book?... unless it comes close to the truth.....", I think this is the reason the church was getting upset, because Dan offered another form of 'metaphor' to the legends that people found intriguing.
Overall people don't like change and I think Dan was offering that.

My favourite line in the book would have to be;
"Every faith in the world is based on fabrication. That is the definition of faith - acceptance of that which we imagine to be true, that which we cannot prove. Every religion describes God through metaphor, allegory and exaggeration, from the early Egyptians through to modern Sunday school. Metaphors are a way to help our minds process the unprocessible. The problems arise when we begin to believe literally in our own metaphors."

Overall Dan placed a conspiracy theory into the mainstream of society, which is based on one of the largest and widely known faiths in the world. Of course there was going to be some controversy. :smile1:

Well Said Jate48!! Yeah, I was being a tad bit facetious- I am pretty sure the Catholic church and Christianity in general are upset with this book because it suggests that Jesus was a sexual being and had children with Mary Magdalene... among other things too.
If you and others on this board are interested, there is a WONDERFUL book by James Tabor that I highly recommend called The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family and the Birth of Christianity-
Tabor is head of the Religious Studies Dept at University of N. Carolina- very prestigious, and this book is full of his Academically supported findings and evidence for the truth behind Christianity and Jesus.

Back to the Davinci code; I think it will lead people to question the history of the faith they put so much stock into- I think D.Code is great because it makes readers question and ponder taboo subjects. I commend Dan Brown for presenting this alterior view into the main stream! :biggrin:

I am pretty sure the Catholic church and Christianity in general are upset with this book because it suggests that Jesus was a sexual being and had children with Mary Magdalene... among other things too.
Not the WHOLE Catholic and Christian community Church. The ones who are, however, are upset because of what you said.

Thanks Maverick, and I'll definately check out the book, I actually am going to read parts of the bible first so I can gather a form of understanding, I was a student @ a Christian College so I know the basics, but not the specifics.

Aurora could you tell me, should I read both testaments or just the new?

As for the movie, whilst watching the trailers I saw that Langdon receives word of Saunieres death plus the photo at some sort of conference/lecture that he speaks at, not like the bedroom scene at the beginning of the book.

And near the end of one of the trailers there's the scene with Langdon throwing up the cryptex with Teabing dropping his crutches to dive for it, and Sophie spinning around.....the cinematography in that scene looks brilliant.

Cannot wait for this film!

You could read both if you like. lol

Maybe I saw wrong but in the trailer, it looks like a woman (maybe Sophie) is struggling in water? I wonder what that's about.

Is it just me or is Ian McKellen the perfect actor to play Teabing? (Forget the physical description in the book...hahaha)

You could read both if you like. lol

Maybe I saw wrong but in the trailer, it looks like a woman (maybe Sophie) is struggling in water? I wonder what that's about.

Is it just me or is Ian McKellen the perfect actor to play Teabing? (Forget the physical description in the book...hahaha)
Lol, k I'll give them both a look.

As for the trailer yeah I saw that too, and got a little freaked, I know there's the well scene with Langdon as a little boy (thereby signalling his claustrophobia), but I can't pick who the girl is, maybe Sophies mum when crashing into river? But then her hands were tied in the clip, maybe they've altered the film to show Sophies parents being murdered? Who knows :biggrin:

I think the whole cast of characters is great, Ian, Tom, Paul, Jean (love him as an actor) and Audrey; she seems fit for the part, though I haven't heard of her before this, anyone know anything about her from a film?

And do you guyz think that as a hollywood film they'll enforce the major genres; murder, romance, explosions etc. and exceed their use than that from which they were used in the book. Or do you think they'll stick to the novel?

I don't think they'll add anything but they'll obviously take lots of stuff out. While reading, I was just like, "How are they going to fit all of this in?" There's stuff that the movie can do without but all the symbols...woah. Haha.

Audrey is a French actress and she's been in Amelie (one of my favorite movies) and a Very Long Engagement. She's cool.

Uh-oh!
I hope these guys are just hyper-super critical- you know, if the film is not profound and life changing, then it is bad to them.....

http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/ap/20060517/114787788000.html

Except for one rave by the New York Post, all the reviews at http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/davincicode and at http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/?critic=all have slammed the movie, and even complained aboutTom Hanks for once. Ian McKellen however, has gotten praise for stealing the movie by pretty much everyone[but he's Ian McKellen, so that's no big surprise]

I never listen to the critics. When I go to the movies, I go to be "entertained". I've learned a long time ago never to compair apples and oranges. And that's exactly what I do with books turned into films. If Ron Howard even remotely followed the book, then I am sure I will be highly entertained. And having Tom Hanks and Ian McKellen in it, is just a bonus for me.

WORD. I don't really listen to critics, either. I go so I can judge for myself. You're very right about book and films. Of course this movie isn't gonna be exactly the same but since it's the same plot, I know I'll enjoy it.

Go Ian!

Yeah I heard that this morning on the radio and in critics reviews in our papers.... not good reviews either, saying they lost the plot a little :eek2:

I'm like you guys and like to see things for myself b4 I make a decision but I just never thought that would happen to this movie.

The reviews are horrible. I believe its currently 14 percent on rottentomatoes.

It's getting torn apart for its lackluster plot..and some critics (even the most intelligent ones) are even calling it boring.

that's what you get when you give one of the most exciting novels in recent years to one of the most boring directors in Hollywood history.

I'm seeing it tomorrow so I'll let you know what I think, but if it is as dull (god forbid, :biggrin: no pun originally intended) like the critics are saying maybe it's cause they tried to push a movie out on it too fast? Without giving it appropriate consideration to how it should be interpreted as a film.
How long ago was the Da Vinci Code novel released?

That's what I'm afraid of! I don't want the movie to be rushed because you can lose your audience like that. I'm sure Ron knows that, he's a great director. Does anyone know how long this movie is?

How long ago was the Da Vinci Code novel released?

About 5 years ago.

That's what I'm afraid of! I don't want the movie to be rushed because you can lose your audience like that. I'm sure Ron knows that, he's a great director. Does anyone know how long this movie is?

2 hrs. 29 min.
I'm going to see it tomorrow, if its not sold out... does anything think it will be selling out the first night?

2 hours and 29 minutes....good good. That's quite long.

Most movies do on the first night. This one has a lot of hype around it so I'm going to say yes. I think I'll go with my cousins.

K, I just saw it. Overall entertaining, but I thought there was some large pieces missing (like the Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire movie). You definately have to read the book prior to viewing. Don't get me wrong people will get the gist of what's being told however the deeper meaning of the Mary concealment and the symbols surrounding the uncovering of the grail wasn't in depth and didn't seem to be as important as they are told in the novel.

The movie moved slow, but because I knew what was 'supposed' to be going through the characters mind at the time I kept myself entertained.

Of course we knew the plot would change, and there were some changes, slight but recognizable to readers. And as the last criticism, Tom Hanks was (in imo) a bad cast, which surprised me as I thought he would be fantastic. He just didn't seem to be in character (something I never thought possible of him), he was just saying the lines.


The rest of the cast was awesome, and Paul Bettany was fantastic!!

I definately recommend people to go and see it, even if you have read the book cause (whether I didn't read the book properly or they changed the storyline I'm not sure) but there was some things revealed to me that I hadn't picked up when reading, gave me a better understanding. And for people who haven't read it, they will enjoy it and get the gist but (maybe) won't get the same sense of understanding as they would if you read it.

just got back from seeing it... wow, Jate48, your assessment is right on the mark and i agree with all of your points... overall pretty good, but Tom Hanks was just not right for the part... i had confidence and had no qualms about him in the role beforehand, but it just seemed off to me for some reason... everyone else in the cast was excellent though... i agree that the movie moved slow because i knew what was coming, but at points in comparison to the book, it seem like it rushed and glossed over some of the more important scenes... obviously it's hard to translate the mindset of characters onto the movie screen, but it felt like there was more thinking involved in solving riddles, etc... in this, it was like, okay boom got it right off the bat...

don't get me wrong, i totally recommend this movie... good summer flick, but i was expecting a little more... but then again, i almost always say that when i see a movie that was based off a book i've read...

I just got back from the movie also. I liked it, definitely recommend reading the book first... lots of things are just mentioned in passing in the movie but hold much more detail and meaning in the book. I had a little trouble understanding Sophie's heavy accent. Lots of subtitles also. I did enjoy the movie though. As we were leaving the people walking behind me were saying how crazy the critics were... I think I would have been lost without reading the book though.


I'm trying to remember, but in the book wasnt that her brother that was in the church at the very end? If so, they left that out of the movie.

I can see this movie being another Syriana (where some critics bashed it for making viewer's think) or another Last Temptation of Christ (where the christian right scared so many critics with hate mail that the critics felt compelled to bash Scorsese- of course, Last Temptation is one of Scorsese's greatest hits now)

I'll be watching it tonight, so I get to decide wheter Ron Howard is STILL the most boring director in Hollywood.

just got back from seeing it... wow, Jate48, your assessment is right on the mark and i agree with all of your points... overall pretty good, but Tom Hanks was just not right for the part... i had confidence and had no qualms about him in the role beforehand, but it just seemed off to me for some reason... everyone else in the cast was excellent though... i agree that the movie moved slow because i knew what was coming, but at points in comparison to the book, it seem like it rushed and glossed over some of the more important scenes... obviously it's hard to translate the mindset of characters onto the movie screen, but it felt like there was more thinking involved in solving riddles, etc... in this, it was like, okay boom got it right off the bat...

don't get me wrong, i totally recommend this movie... good summer flick, but i was expecting a little more... but then again, i almost always say that when i see a movie that was based off a book i've read...
Thankyou, very well said about the 'right off the bat', that's exactly how I felt it went :clapping:
Stealth, I hope it's okay I used part of your last post with your name as source on a movie review thread here;
http://thefuselage.com/Threaded/showthread.php?p=1002311#post1002311
I just thought it summed it up great.

Lostgurl Yeah he was, I think the boy that closed the door after the guardian members entered the church was supposed to be her brother, indicated slightly by the weird look (kind of a look of understanding) between him and Sophie, plus the dark hair. But again I don't think it was something that could be interpreted unless you had read the book.

I personally thought the movie was soulless. I didn't see the director's touch. I question Tom Hanks' placement as the lead-- he wasn't connecting with Robert Langdon. I think someone like Nicholas Cage would have done Robert Langdon more justice (seriously!).

Actually, I could make a lot of comparisons to "National Treasure," the 2004 movie answer to the Da Vinci Code book craze. And in many aspects, National Treasure is a much more entertaining and fun film (I never thought I'd say that in comparing it to the eventual Da Vinci Code movie).

As I was watching Da Vinci Code, I thought to myself... they could seriously remake this movie with better actors and a director with a more creative, personal touch. Ron Howard seemed to lack passion in portraying the material. I'm not sure who I'd want replacing him as a director... Someone that steps up and isn't assigned to make an incredible movie-- they feel the need to. Ron Howard clearly thought all he had to do was methodically play out what happened in the book with no personal flair or passion for the material.

OMG, saw the movie yesterday night and I thought it was awesome. Im a big fan of Dan Browns work and have read Da Vinci and Angels and Demons and have to say I dont know what the critics are saying about it being boring cause I thought it hit all the bars. Obviously with an adaptation you cant cram everything in, but given the time line and what they did decide to include, I thought it all fit rather well. Great cinematography, suspense, and action. Plus Tom Hanks did a decent job as Robert Langdon. I was skeptical at first because he didnt strike me as a Robert Langdon type, but I think he added his own element to the character. Just a little dry, but Id rather have that versus overdone. Id definately pay to see it in the theater again if someone asked me.

Stealth, I hope it's okay I used part of your last post with your name as source on a movie review thread here

no problem at all


Actually, I could make a lot of comparisons to "National Treasure," the 2004 movie answer to the Da Vinci Code book craze. And in many aspects, National Treasure is a much more entertaining and fun film (I never thought I'd say that in comparing it to the eventual Da Vinci Code movie).

that's funny you mention "National Treasure"... i was thinking the same thing... with National Treasure, it was a lot more action-oriented film... and i agree it was a lot of fun... i think "The Da Vinci Code" (i think i'll refer to it as DVC from now on lol) lends itself to a much more serious topic and is different in that respect... i was expecting more out of DVC because of the book... with "National Treasure", i wasn't really expecting anything... and to be brutally honest, Nick Cage would've butchered the Robert Langdon role... no offense to Cage, since i love his movies

that's funny you mention "National Treasure"... i was thinking the same thing... with National Treasure, it was a lot more action-oriented film... and i agree it was a lot of fun... i think "The Da Vinci Code" (i think i'll refer to it as DVC from now on lol) lends itself to a much more serious topic and is different in that respect... i was expecting more out of DVC because of the book... with "National Treasure", i wasn't really expecting anything... and to be brutally honest, Nick Cage would've butchered the Robert Langdon role... no offense to Cage, since i love his movies

I have to agree about Cage (no offense, and I like his movies too), but I don't know just imo doesn't seem to fit. My auntie suggested Johnny Depp cause apparently in the 9th gate may have had some Langdon resemblance (I haven't seen it so I don't know).

I would suggest someone like Jim Caviezel (though might be a bit weird after the Passion), Matt Damon (age him), Colin Firth, Harrison Ford, Richard Gere. I don't know, anyone else suggest someone?

I have to agree about Cage (no offense, and I like his movies too), but I don't know just imo doesn't seem to fit. My auntie suggested Johnny Depp cause apparently in the 9th gate may have had some Langdon resemblance (I haven't seen it so I don't know).

i really liked The Ninth Gate... Depp's character as Dean Corso was kind of similar to Robert Langdon... in this movie, he plays kind of a book detective hired to decipher various clues of a book supposedly written in conjunction with the devil... interesting movie, and i recommend it... could Depp have played Robert Langdon? that's hard to say but i'm a huge fan of his and i get absorbed by every character he plays... you don't see Depp playing a character... you just see the character and i think that's a hard feat for any actor

I would suggest someone like Jim Caviezel (though might be a bit weird after the Passion), Matt Damon (age him), Colin Firth, Harrison Ford, Richard Gere. I don't know, anyone else suggest someone?

i've read a lot about people wanting Aaron Eckhart to play the role... his latest movie was playing the lead in "Thank you for smoking"... really good actor and physically resembles the Robert Langdon i pictured while reading the book

ETA: one thing i failed to mention in my earlier review was that i really enjoyed how they injected the historical backdrop and scenes by fading them into the present scenes... very well done... also, while i love action films, i do love my fair share of scenes where it's all dialogue with people explaining how things are a certain way and how history unfolded... my favorite scene in the movie (and book) was the discussion between Langdon and Teabing at Teabing's villa talking about the holy grail and the picture of the last supper... just fantastic

I just came back from the movies and I enjoyed the film!:clap:
I found it true to the book and I do not see anything missing that is of consequence. I thought Tom Hanks was fine as Langdon, not stellar like Teabing- but good none the less. My DH saw it with me and he did not read the book- he said he could follow it, it was good and that he enjoyed it. He thought it was a bit slow at times but he liked it overall.
I really do not understand why this movie is getting slammed by critics... could it be that it is because the film treads on "heresy"? Perhaps people do not like what the film is suggesting and that is why there are bad reviews.... Just a thought.... because I have seen much worse movies get higher ratings than this! Here is an example- the new version of Bad News Bears (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/bad_news_bears/)was one of the worst movies I have ever seen, or attempted to watch, and it scored 47% fresh, while DaVinci (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/) is only 18% fresh... I mean come on!! :cnfused1: :cursing: What's the explanation for that, unless critics are taking the subject or implications of the movie/book personally- one of the first critiques on the rottentomatoes page for DaVince reads:
"I'll say it: It is anti-Jesus and anti-Catholic. Unintentionally though, it is a recruiting film for Opus dei. Where do I sign up?"
I thought the film was anything but a "recruiting film for Opus Dei"- what does this review mean by that? :dizzy: Perhaps someone else can shed light into that point of view of the film...?
my 2 cents, my humble opinion-
Namaste:thumb_up:

Just saw the movie. AWESOME It's fast in the beginning and then slows down... but then gets some funny parts. It's awesome! Go see it!

that's funny you mention "National Treasure"... i was thinking the same thing... with National Treasure, it was a lot more action-oriented film... and i agree it was a lot of fun... i think "The Da Vinci Code" (i think i'll refer to it as DVC from now on lol) lends itself to a much more serious topic and is different in that respect... i was expecting more out of DVC because of the book... with "National Treasure", i wasn't really expecting anything... and to be brutally honest, Nick Cage would've butchered the Robert Langdon role... no offense to Cage, since i love his movies

I wouldn't want Nicholas Cage going the shallow "Con Air" route, but he has this air of mystery about him that seems to fit Langdon closer. We already know Tom Hanks as "the guy next door" and someone we can really relate to, so it's weird seeing him in such an outlandish role. Totally unfitting.

Actually, after I read the DVC book in 2004, I made a cast list of my own of who I'd like to see play all the characters... Langdon: Edward Norton. He would have done an incredible job. Sophie: Audrey Tautou or Natalie Imbruglia; Audrey was awesome (and beautiful), but I think I prefer her French-only acting more, she seems to connect to it better. Sir Leigh Teabing: Richard Attenborough, or even moreso, Ian Holms (he'd be perfect, even though Ian McKellen was great). Captain Bezu Fache: Tcheky Karyo; basically a French guy... Just look at his IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001409/)-- he is Fauche! Silas: Paul Bettany.

So I got Audrey Tautou and Paul Bettany right! Paul didn't act the way I thought he would, though. Or, I didn't like the way Ron Howard portrayed Silas.

Almost The Passion-like self-torture scenes. (Too lengthly and drawn out.)

I just saw the movie DVC this afternoon with my husband. I read the book he didn’t. He preferred National Treasure due to its action/adventure theme where I preferred DVC since I read the book and understood the plots within a plot.

The movie did tend to move slower and I felt the character Robert Landgon was dumbed down a bit to make him more interactive with Sophie and more dependent on Sir Leigh Teabing ramblings instead of an equal with brilliant forethought and strength as the book betrayed him. I missed the exchange at the end between brother/sister and the reason they separated the siblings “to keep the blood line safe” that the book played into.

I would recommend watching the movie and the ending was great when you can actual view the scene instead of visualizing it from reading the book. I loved the way Hanks/Landgon pay respect to the tomb of Mary Madeline. It was very humbling.

dan brown said he originally envisioned landgon to be played by harrison ford

i wouldn't mind ford being in two movies about the holy grail.

The special effects were effective. I wish Ron Howard used more of them... Cinematography and overall feel of the film could've carried a lot more of a mysterious, on-the-edge-of-a-world-changing-discovery feel, though.

dan brown said he originally envisioned landgon to be played by harrison ford

Really? He was considered? Lol.
i wouldn't mind ford being in two movies about the holy grail.

Lol, yeah I remember him playing a similar character like that somewhere..... lecturer, holy grail hunter, faces danger........... :smile1:

I'll have to check out this Aaron Eckhart and Edward Norton.

watched it last night, and I enjoyed it...mostly because of its provocative subject mattere. But was it well done? I'm not too sure.- I think another director with more of a thematic element to his/her work could have took the project. If only Stanely Kubrick was still alive, I would LOVE to see him do this kind of work. It would have been sweet if Kubrick added his technique of natural light for the beginning sequences.

Anyway, I digress. Howard took a story with very dark-subject matter, and could have easily shot the film to match it's themes. Instead, he filmed it with no personality whatsoever. It honestly felt like 'National Treasure,' and for National Treasure to be a ripoff of The Da Vinci Code, it's sad to see the original imitate the imitator. The only exposition scene that dazzled me was the introduction of Ian McKellen's character, the rest of it (which was 99 percent of the movie) was just dull and redundant. Since the whole flick was made up of exposition, I figured out some (if not all) of the puzzle, with the exception of the big reveal of the Holy Grail.

Whatever the case may be, I still enjoyed it. I had my expectations lowered tremendously based on the reviews, and even though I may agree with some of them, I think they were a bit too harsh on it. This should have got at least a 50-60 percent rating on Rotten Tomatoes, but just because it is the Da Vinci Code, critics have higher expectations. Ian McKellen, by the way, is the man.

Ian McKellen, by the way, is the man.

:ntworthy:

well it opened pretty big this weekend... it grossed around 77 million, per IMDb...

well it opened pretty big this weekend... it grossed around 77 million, per IMDb...

I read that too..

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/21/movies/22davincicnd.html?hp&ex=1148270400&en=202a51c0f389120d&ei=5094&partner=homepage

I saw the movie on Friday night and I loved it! The book was so much better, but the movie was still awesome. I thought all the characters were perfect. And Tom Hanks' hair isn't too bad once you've looked at it for 2 and a half hours. ;)

But the big question I want to know the answer to is....

My husband and I always watch Ron Howard films to see where he sticks in the cameo appearance of his "Gentle Ben" younger bother...was he in it?:biggrin:
The book is always better than the movie. I've read the book, haven't seen the movie yet.
Will I be disappointed?

But the big question I want to know the answer to is....

My husband and I always watch Ron Howard films to see where he sticks in the cameo appearance of his "Gentle Ben" younger bother...was he in it?:biggrin:
The book is always better than the movie. I've read the book, haven't seen the movie yet.
Will I be disappointed?
I don't know about the younger brother, but it'll be funny if he is.

The book aka the imagination :biggrin:, lol, I really congratulate a director who can beat the 'read' of a book in a movie.

As for you being disappointed, I don't think you'll be disappointed, you might think it could've been better or such, but from what I've been reading (evident in this thread) you could feel either way, or anyway about the film. :smile1:

Best movie based on a novel so far.. all of the things that i envisioned when I was reading the book was well-interpreted in the movie.. although some of the details were not included and there are also a minor modi. I still love the movie.. and yeah, Ian is the man :clapping:

I don't know about the younger brother, but it'll be funny if he is.

The book aka the imagination :biggrin:, lol, I really congratulate a director who can beat the 'read' of a book in a movie.

As for you being disappointed, I don't think you'll be disappointed, you might think it could've been better or such, but from what I've been reading (evident in this thread) you could feel either way, or anyway about the film. :smile1:

Did you mean have Ron Howard's little brother cameo as Sophie's surprise brother at the end? That would've been hilarious!

Did you mean have Ron Howard's little brother cameo as Sophie's surprise brother at the end? That would've been hilarious!

Lol, yeah I think so, apparently he has a knack for putting his little brother in as cameo appearances in his movies. Would've been funny if he'd done that kinda implement a little bit of 'Adaptation' into his movie, damn that was a horrible movie, interesting but so boring.

Ok I haven't read all the posts on here, but if anyone's seen the film, is it worth it? I'm thinking of going to see it this week, just want to know what people thought, cos it's not getting great reviews, but you cant always go by what the critics say...lol :p

Ok I haven't read all the posts on here, but if anyone's seen the film, is it worth it? I'm thinking of going to see it this week, just want to know what people thought, cos it's not getting great reviews, but you cant always go by what the critics say...lol :p

definitely! We're you able to read the book?

Excellent, thanks. Yeah I've read the book twice, lol. Cool, I'll go see that then... :)

I have yet to see the movie, but have read the book, and Angels and Demons, as well as Holy Blood, Holy Grail and a few others on the same theme. I loved the books- all of them and the way they make you actually think about what may or may not have happened, rather than merely swallowing dogma.
<but then I likes the movie Dogma too, for that very reason>

I will probably go see the movie, although I think it might have worked better without having actors with "names" cast in it, and just rested on the story itself, which was powerful enough in it's own right to carry the film without any help IMHO.

Excellent, thanks. Yeah I've read the book twice, lol. Cool, I'll go see that then... :)

:clapping: twice! lol. me I read once in one day..I was bedridden for a day. I was really sick. I decided to read it.. I couldn't put the book down after the first page..It was fast-paced that my adrenaline was on red alert and my heart was pounding like there's no tomorrow..:biggrin:

o well enjoy! and I'm looking forward to reading your own critique!

later dude!

I loved the movie! I thought it followed the book pretty well..just a few differences..I would highly recommend it!

looks like Angels and Demons is on the move now! :biggrin:

http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/news.php?id=3945

wonder if they'll try to keep Tom Hanks in the role of Robert Langdon to keep the continuity?

looks like Angels and Demons is on the move now! :biggrin:

http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/news.php?id=3945

wonder if they'll try to keep Tom Hanks in the role of Robert Langdon to keep the continuity?
Lol, I read that yesterday. And as for Tom Hanks.......... if they do keep him on I'm hoping he'll learn to get better in touch with his character, imo.

Thanks for the link Stealth.

welcome... and here's another short article talking about it: http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=11441

Ok, so I went to see the movie last weekend with my boyfriend. We both read the book, and while I liked it, he loved it.
Anyway, we were really curious about the movie because of all the critics, but still we decided to drive to Belgium (from The Netherlands... ok, ok, not a big deal... it was a 35 minute drive) to see it in this really big cinema.... well, first of all I have to say I was quite disappointed!
I thought the acting was not very good, the story was slow, the dialogues were forced, and it was overall not taken in the right direction. Although it was quite similar to the book, I don't know, it just didn't seem right to me!
By the end of the film I had to force myself to follow the dialogues, and also had to force myself to stay awake a couple of times(!!). My boyfriend didn't think much of it neither, and we were almost convinced that everyone else would think so too, but then I come here and see that people love it! I don't understand :rolleyes: ! Well, I do know I'm a hard audience... but that much?!?!
Oh well, that's what I have to say... please don't hate me!

wonder if they'll try to keep Tom Hanks in the role of Robert Langdon to keep the continuity?

I kinda picture Langdon to be Nicholas Cage..but that's just me.. Tom Hanks is good though..

I find Angels and Demons better in terms of the ending rather than The Da Vinci..but then again they're equally brilliant!:cool:

I've read part of the book, but I've heard it got more exciting after page 100 or so. I'm thinking about picking it up again. I saw the movie this past weekend with family, despite the fact the priest at my Catholic school advised us to see Over the Hedge instead, though I just graduated and I'm not Catholic so it doesn't matter what they say. I believe that people should believe what they want, not have others tell them. In any case, I thought the movie was pretty good, though I don't necessarily believe all that is revealed is true. Paul Bettany and Ian McKellen were my favorite characters.

I saw TDC Monday. Read the book first. I really cannot understand what the critics and some people expect!!! The movie followed the book remarkably. They made a few changes, but nothing detrimental to the plot. I went there to be entertained, and I was. As a matter of fact, the ending gave me chills, and brought a tear to my eye. It was beautifully done. My review...I REALLY liked the film.

so i went to see DVC again tonight with a friend of mine... i have to say, i liked it a lot more and enjoyed it thoroughly the second time around... Tom Hanks grew on me and i was able to keep my attention on everything since there was no whining kid in the back this time... seriously, who brings their 5 y.o. kid to a movie like this? sheesh... but anyway, they kept to the story pretty closely and i liked some of the additions and changes to the plot... i can't wait until it comes out on DVD... and i can't wait for Angels and Demons... just read a short article that they may try to snag Spielberg to direct Angels and Demons: http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=11464

we'll see though

YAY! I finally saw it! Tom Hanks as Langdon didn't bother me at all and I think he did very well. Actually, they picked great actors for every role! That really made me happy. I'm also very pleased with them not changing any of the plot. I was expecting the movie to move way too fast but honestly, I didn't think that was the case. I really enjoyed it!

I wasn't really entertained much by the movie, because I had already read the book. Everything I saw was pretty much exactly how I imagined when reading it. I did appreciate the fact that it was so close an adaptation.

I liked Angels and Demons better as a book though. If this movie deal is real, I'll be glad to see it.

Urs, I just wanted to say your puppy is adorable. Jack Russel right? Those are such cute dogs. ;)

Oh and I think it would be awesome if they made an Angels and Demons movie. Id totally go see it. :)

Just saw it again, and have to say I enjoyed it much more the second time around.

I think the reason being was; the first time I saw it I had just finished the book 2 days before and so I had created in my mind an idea of what the plot and characters should be and all of the evidence that needed to be included in order for the complete work of Dan Brown to be portrayed. I had also read all of the critics negative views, and so with those and my own idea of the novel still fresh in my mind, I didn't approach the movie with a positive view or with allowance of a slightly different 'telling'.

After a week or 2 though, all of these ideas slightly faded away and it seemed I was 'allowed' to view a different movie.

I even enjoyed Tom Hanks portrayal a little more due to my slight focus loss on what Dans character of Langdon was. Tom did a good job, however imo he didn't capture Dans Langdon. :smile1:

I read the book a while back and greatly enjoyed it. It was a quick, exciting read. The ideas in it were not that new to me but I found Dan Brown did a great job of creating an interesting plot around theories that have been floating around.
I just got back from watching the movie and I was pleasantly surprised. The acting was good and the plot was covered well. It's a different interpretation of the novel but well done. It was respectful and powerful in a quiet way.

It's interesting that the message in both Da Vinci Code and Lost is the power of faith.