The Da Vinci Code [2006] [DVD] [2007]

I never read the book as I've tried reading Dan Brown before and find his writing somewhat laboured.

The film however (when not compared to the book) was simply a good mystery yarn.

The special effects were nicely done and I have to say that I loved the incidental music by Hans Zimmer.

Maybe not for the purist historian but for a couple of hours of escapism, I thought it was great.

Having never read the book I cannot draw a comparison to it, however I did enjoy this movie. I thought it was visually stunning at times and a solid performance from most if not all actors involved.

The action was fast paced and you tell it was building to something but not quite sure what until all was revealed! Exactly how a movie of this type should be presented!

If you're about to buy or watch The Da Vinci code without having read the book, I would advise you to put it back on your shelf, read the book first, and then see the DVD. Just my opinion of course, but this film bears a huge similarity to the Harry Potter films in that I would hate to try to make head or tail of the stories by watching the films without having read the books. The screenplay (by necessity, I expect) chops too much from Dan Brown's book (and changes a few vital details en route) for the film to be judged as great as a stand-alone experience.

However, if you have read the book and can ignore the omissions and changes, I really enjoyed the film; partly for the casting and partly for the stunning locations. Tom Hanks sounds as if he had a cold for the entire film but apart from that made a convincing Robert Langdon; pleasant looking, unassuming, kind and clever. I loved Audrey Tautou as Sophie Neveu; yes, she looked a little young but I could forgive that. Ian McKellen gave a predictably fine performance as Sir Leigh Teabing, even if he could have done with some padding around his middle, and the supporting cast were fabulous.

The locations were beautiful but I would have liked the film to focus more on the visual codes used in the book; i.e. Da Vinci's paintings. Dan Brown goes into such great detail about the symbolism in the "Mona Lisa", "The Last Supper" (which was visually touched upon but not enough) and in particular the "Madonna of the Rocks" that I felt the filmmakers really missed a great opportunity to bring to life these fascinating theories.

So all in all, as a stand-alone film it just seems a little rushed and muddled, but a really nice visual accompaniment to the book.

I'm looking forward to the forthcoming "Angels and Demons" but this time I hope the team stick more closely to Dan Brown's book which in my opinion is an even better story than "Da Vinci Code" - let's hope they get this one right.

Having read the other reviews on here I was rather sceptical about watching this. Having read the book and thoroughly enjoying that I was not expecting the film to be up too much. However I was engrossed in the film from start to finish I found the film to be a good account of what I had read and on several occasions it felt like déjà vu as the film re played out what i had imagined from reading the book and that i think makes this a special film. The film left me feeling rather "spooked" which the book did and that is also a good thing as it is a film that encourages the viewer to think unlike a lot of films out there. I enjoyed this and would thoroughly recommend it.

Like most of the world, I read the book first, And found it highly enjoyable. It isn't Dan Browns best book, but it was a good read none-the-less. The book doesn't exactly transfer to the big screen like i'd have hoped it would, and found that as the book was quite descriptive, the film, as a result slowed down a bit. The first hour is fairly hard going, but it does pick up a little as Robert and Audrey fly in to the UK.

The casting i feel was a bit iffy. Hanks should never have been cast as Langdon, and i don't think he quite pulled it off. Reno was the only good casting, in that I saw him as the Fache character staight away when i read the book. Ian McKellan was ok as teabing as was bettany as silas. Both, however i felt weren't the ideal people to play the characters..

Overall, the film was ok, but it's certainly no where near as good as the book. I just hope they do a better job of Angels and Demons.

I am writing this having ONLY seen the film- I have not read the book. It was an intruiging and interesting film. I really enjoyed it. It was complicated at times, grasping who everyone was and what their stance was.

I can appreciate that if you have previously read the book there will be alot that had to be skimmed over i guess! But lets not all get up on our cultural high horses, its a really good watch.

Having read the book a couple of years ago, I had to read it again before seeing the film. This may or may not have been a good idea! If I hadn't, I think I would have found the film more enjoyable for what it is, but an average film all the same.

It does follow the narrative, but the things I found interesting about the book were omitted from the film. Pivotal moments were laughable in the film and I was sourly disappointed to find the Sophie Neveu character to be reduced to French eye candy when in the book she was sassy and intelligent (she's supposed to be a cryptologist for crying out loud!), as well as attractive. I believe that this changed the dynamics between her and Robert Langdon in film and not in a good way. It quite possibly ruined it. A lot of the book revolved around the chemistry between the two and how they bounced ideas off each other but this wasn't reflected in the film.

I think the script was always going to be a problem to transfer to film, but the performances didn't help. The only characters I felt were believeable were Teabing (even with the unbelievable name)and Aringarosa, however all the characters were true to stereotypical type which was a disappointment. Yes, I know Tom Hanks was in the film.

I did find this watchable but that does not a good film make.