THE DA VINCI CODE (2006)

Directed by Ron Howard. Starring: Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Ian Mckellen, Alfred Molina, Jean Reno, Paul Bettany. Drama/Mystery/Suspense.Synopsis: A suspense thriller based on the best selling novel of the same name. An American professor who is an expert in ancient symbols is drawn into the investigation of a murder while visiting Paris, where he teams up with a young French woman who is related to the victim.  They are drawn into a far reaching and dangerous web of hidden agendas and secret societies that soon have them searching for the Holy Grail and potentially revealing a secret that has been kept for two thousand years and, if revealed, would shake the very core of Christianity. 

I treated myself to this one over a Holiday weekend on the big screen a while back. First, let me get a few things out of the way. I have not read the book. I've heard people who have say that the film is not as good as the book. I figure I've seen about two dozen films in my life based on novels that I've read, and the next one that I think is actually better than the book will be the first. So, if you have read the book, you are not going to get any comparison to the book from here.

Next, I have no interest in the "controversy" of this movie, and feel it to be a little silly on all parts. This film is clearly fiction, based on a real life theory (Hidden messages in Da Vinci's Last Supper) that has been kicked around for a while, but is itself a bit on the silly side and, in my opinion, viewing this movie should not, in any way, bring up any serious questions of faith or interpretation of historical theology, nor is it in any rational way a slam on Christianity or the Catholic Church.

 Yes, I am a Christian and believe in Christ. No, I do not believe Jesus was married nor am I aware of any credible historical evidence that would point to that, which does not mean there is none. No, I don't buy the Da Vinci theory, seeing as how the famous rendition was painted over a thousand years after the Last Supper, incorrectly shows the men dining at a table (history teaches us that, at that time, the accepted way to dine would be laying down) , and the popular  image of Jesus is not even close to the only, brief, physical description of him in the New Testament.

Now that all of those disclaimers are out of the way, here is what I thought about the movie.

Pretty  good.

Nothing to write home about, but a good popcorn/summer/big budget flick. The story line is intricate and, I think, presupposes some historical knowledge to be fully appreciated, but, when I think about it, almost any movie dealing with history or its interpretation does. It is a long movie, but starts off quickly and Howard does a fair job of keeping us "guessing" until the end as to the identity of some of the unknown players as well as the underlying theme of the film. I say 'fair" because, people like me who have not read one word of the novel have probably heard and read so much about it from other sources, that it is hard to imagine someone being taken totally by surprise as to the plot.

As for the plot, as I alluded to earlier, since its based on a theory interpreting some historical facts and conspiracy theories that I, personally, don't buy, its hard for me to say its a great script or plot, however, judging it from a purely movie standpoint, it does do its job of keeping you intrigued throughout and there are several plot twists along the way. The movie is long and, though it drags in a couple of places, is never dull. 

The acting , overall, is very good. Tom Hanks (Big) and Audrey Tatou are the lead characters and, though neither steals the show so to speak, they are both good  and believable in their roles. I saw Hanks as a long haired academician in this movie with ease, just as I have previously seen and believed him as a dying homosexual attorney, a lovable mentally challenged savant, and a broken down, boozing ex-baseball player, among other things. The mark of a great actor.

I am not familiar with Tatou's previous work but she acquits herself well here. I know some may say there was little "chemistry" between the two leads, but, to me, when this is said with regard to a lead actor and actress, the real thing that is being said is some kind of romantic attraction. Thankfully, we are spared this in the film as it would have seriously detracted from the main plot and was unnecessary. There are some of us who still believe it is possible for a man and a woman to be involved in things together in life without having to go to bed.

The two actors that really stand out are Ian Mckellen  and Paul Bettany. Bettany's character Silas, is so over the top that it took a lot of energy and passion for us to believe and buy his maniacal actions. We do, and its because of Bettany.

Also strengthening an impressive cast are Alfred Molina (The Hoax) as the Bishop and Jean Reno (The Pink Panther) as the lead detective hell bent on capturing Tom Hanks (Robert Langon) as if he is the worst criminal in history. When you see the film, you will understand why he thinks this way, though you might not agree.

Some of the videography is stunning. I especially loved the flashbacks to ancient Rome and the way in which the history was told. Howard deserves special praise for this, and it is hard to imagine a more visually pleasing movie in terms of matching the majesty of the story to what you seen on screen.

I will especially be interested to get this on DVD, since there is absolutely no excuse for the special features to be anything less than outstanding and fascinating. So, although I generally wait for things to come out on DVD, going to the movies still has a place for me, but it has to be more of an event, either in the film or things surrounding it.