The Da Vinci Code
5/23/2006

I've only read the first three chapters of the book (about five pages in).  From watching the movie, I get a sense of what made the plot of the novel compelling, but no idea of what made the main character in the novel compelling.  In the movie, Tom Hank's character is along for the ride, offering interpretations of symbols but rarely personally involved in the action.  Toward the end of the film another character suggests that Hank's character was now involved in history rather than a passive observer of the past.  At the end of the film an issue of faith pops up.  The result is that while the film offers resolution of what happened to the grail, there's almost no fulfillment of a story promise that connects to the main character. Oddly enough, just about everyone else in the film is defined by what they want and what they are willing to do to get what they want. 
 

The film reminded me of the first Harry Potter movie, which was like a coffee table edition of the book.  Similarly, The Da Vinci Code looks good and is probably faithful to the plot and basic outlines of the characters, but lacking the narrative tension of the novel.
 
 The movie also would have benefited from a thoroughly creepy albino and a Catholic bishop with a face that embodied all the pain and weariness of this world, in  place of the competent actors playing the roles.
 
In the end I think people who've read the book will enjoy the movie more than others, and some people will enjoy the historical sweep of the film.  Overall it's  well done, but slowly paced.