All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...

Average User Score: 6 (175 sources)

Submit Movie Review

Review this film

Tell the world what you think of The Da Vinci Code

Your Score:

reset score

Write Your Review:
When writing your review, remember to keep the language clean.

Submit Review Cancel

candycane_24

-1

Agree (1)

Disagree (0)

Very controversial at my place, If you find this movie boring, I guess you people have no interest in solving mysteries.

Report Abuse

Posted aug 22, 2008 3:29 pm pt

joeyissoweird

-1

Agree (0)

Disagree (2)

CONTAINS SPOILERS.
THE DA VINCI CODE was an extremely boring movie. I left this movie right after seeing some insane man whipping himself. Which means I only stayed for about fifteen through twenty minutes, which is a shock because I would...
[+] Read Full Review

CONTAINS SPOILERS.
THE DA VINCI CODE was an extremely boring movie. I left this movie right after seeing some insane man whipping himself. Which means I only stayed for about fifteen through twenty minutes, which is a shock because I would have stayed even if the movie was not good. This movie was just too boring to even pay attention to. I did not wish to stay at the movies any longer to watch a movie that had been criticized so much for plagiarism.

If you have read the book and loved it, do not watch this movie for it will not entertain you, and it will cause yawning in large doses. But that is just my opinion.

[-] Minimize Review

Report Abuse

Posted mar 21, 2008 7:30 am pt

zophar53

-1

Agree (1)

Disagree (0)

It was never surprising that this movie was going to be made, just how it was going to turn out. With a cast that includes Tom Hanks, Ian McKellan, Jean Reno, and Ron Howard as director, I had high hopes. However, as those of you who read the...
[+] Read Full Review

It was never surprising that this movie was going to be made, just how it was going to turn out. With a cast that includes Tom Hanks, Ian McKellan, Jean Reno, and Ron Howard as director, I had high hopes. However, as those of you who read the book know, the subject matter is dense and the book includes much background and imagery that is very difficult to do in film. Not to mention the fact that there is a whole first chapter of the main character’s life (told in the book Angels and Demons) that the film world never sees. While it’s a valiant effort, the film ultimately falls short despite the promising cast and source material.
For those not in the know, the book and subsequent film focus on the basis of Christianity and the secrets of the bloodline of Jesus Christ, mainly through the codes and clues left behind by the group that is responsible for guarding the secret. If this sounds a bit too religious for your tastes, don’t worry. Number one, it’s not meant to be cold hard truth; number two, the problem solving and the story are the focus here. Think the movie National Treasure with a religious twist.
The book sold so well that it wasn’t even released in paperback until about a year and a half later. It was quite a page turner, but the film version is pale by comparison. The book accomplished so much backstory and suspenseful imagery that, even at 2 ½ hours in length, the movie seemed rushed and some points seemed forced. With some of the more complicated imagery, such as the dark and brutal dedication of the main opposing cult and the connections of certain key points, you could tell what they were going for but not quite pulling it off. Sometimes I felt that my knowledge of the book was the only thing that kept me understanding what I was watching or hearing.
And while not Tom Hanks’ best work, the performances were good enough. There are however a lot of subtitles and accented speech which, while adding to the authenticity, I think would hinder things without reading the book beforehand.
It’s not all bad though. The story is still intriguing and if you like puzzles and mysteries then I think you will enjoy it, but don’t expect it to do the book it’s full justice. As disappointed as some of you may be to hear it, I would recommend a matinee, but not full price. Devon thought it was awesome, but she hasn't read the book. If you haven’t read it, but had decided to simply watch the movie instead, it’s definitely your loss! If you watched the movie first, you’ve only gotten half the enjoyment. Bottom line: read the book you lazy bum. It's only been out for two years now!

[-] Minimize Review

Report Abuse

Posted feb 13, 2008 11:35 am pt

Vampjezzc

-1

Agree (0)

Disagree (1)

I didn't read the book and waited for the movie to come out on DVD before seeing it. I am glad I didn't waste my money in the theaters. This is a completely predictable film, the final big twist was obvious and Mckellen was not used to his full...
[+] Read Full Review

I didn't read the book and waited for the movie to come out on DVD before seeing it. I am glad I didn't waste my money in the theaters. This is a completely predictable film, the final big twist was obvious and Mckellen was not used to his full potential. Plus as a student of history it was hard for me to believe any of the leaps the film made.

[-] Minimize Review

Report Abuse

Posted feb 8, 2008 1:01 pm pt

Scofield3

-1

Agree (1)

Disagree (0)

It's strange for most of my friends to understand, but this movie is an act of suspence. I love it.

Report Abuse

Posted dec 28, 2007 8:11 pm pt

Vertibrains

-1

Agree (0)

Disagree (0)

A rarity for me, having read the book, and subsequently caught the movie. It was an enjoyable movie to watch, but one I feel is better to watch if you haven't already read the book. I think the film has a good go at telling the story, but I'd...
[+] Read Full Review

A rarity for me, having read the book, and subsequently caught the movie. It was an enjoyable movie to watch, but one I feel is better to watch if you haven't already read the book. I think the film has a good go at telling the story, but I'd imagined it differently in my mind from the book. So I'm not really slating it, but it appears my imagination had left me expecting much more from the film that we actually got. A reasonable 3 stars for the acting performances though, which were good.

[-] Minimize Review

Report Abuse

Posted nov 16, 2007 3:36 am pt

rezpatriot

-1

Agree (0)

Disagree (0)

Good crime thriller and not as dark as what is seen on BBC but yet it will need a bit more intelligence to understand the script and storyline. A bit of knowledge on religion and Di Vinci is needed, I would not bother showing this to anyone under...
[+] Read Full Review

Good crime thriller and not as dark as what is seen on BBC but yet it will need a bit more intelligence to understand the script and storyline. A bit of knowledge on religion and Di Vinci is needed, I would not bother showing this to anyone under 18. It was quite good, but you have to pay attention to the film for it to be worth it.

[-] Minimize Review

Report Abuse

Posted oct 9, 2007 1:44 am pt

aluminae

-1

Agree (1)

Disagree (0)

My predictions about The Da Vinci Code movie were indeed very true. The book is one of my most favourite reads ever - I've read nothing like it since except Angels and Demons by Dan Brown but that is beside the point ;) I always knew the film was...
[+] Read Full Review

My predictions about The Da Vinci Code movie were indeed very true. The book is one of my most favourite reads ever - I've read nothing like it since except Angels and Demons by Dan Brown but that is beside the point ;) I always knew the film was never going to live up to the expectations of the book and although it was clear that Ron Howard tried his best, it just wasn't good enough. The atmosphere, tension and emotion wasn't as strong as in the book and even Tom Hanks, one of my favourite actors, couldn't ignite the flame for me.

Throughout the film I kept feeling sorry for people who hadn't read the book because it was as if they were telling the story to people who already knew half the facts - missing out major chunks of information as if just getting to the good bit. However, I believe the small facts they missed out were key to the story and its those that make you go, "NO WAY, OMG!" The ending was good and I thought they made it quite sentimental however it didn't make me cry like the book did.

I dunno, its a good film if you've read the book and want to have an image of the characters in your mind, but if you're looking for a film that stays true to the book I'm afraid you'll have to go and see something else.

[-] Minimize Review

Report Abuse

Posted jul 19, 2007 7:16 pm pt

WriterGoddess

-1

Agree (1)

Disagree (0)

Definitely not as good as the book was, but it was an honest attempt at a good movie. It kept me on the edge of my seat instead of lulling me to sleep, for which I was grateful. But I wasn't pleased about how graphic they made the scene where...
[+] Read Full Review

Definitely not as good as the book was, but it was an honest attempt at a good movie. It kept me on the edge of my seat instead of lulling me to sleep, for which I was grateful. But I wasn't pleased about how graphic they made the scene where Silas beats himself - it wasn't nearly like that in the novel.
See this film if you like. It's not a necessary one.

[-] Minimize Review

Report Abuse

Posted may 13, 2007 3:01 am pt

FilipHolm

-1

Agree (1)

Disagree (0)

The book was one of the greatest books i´ve ever read, the movie is a disapointing. Tom Hanks is a briliant actor, and he has given mutch better preformances. And i don´t like that the director changes parts from the...
[+] Read Full Review

The book was one of the greatest books i´ve ever read, the movie is a disapointing. Tom Hanks is a briliant actor, and he has given mutch better preformances. And i don´t like that the director changes parts from the briliant book, but sometimes it´s done well especialy the ending when he tells Sophie that... (i don´t want to say the thing so those peoples who havn´t read the book or seen the film knows how it ends) and the ending scenes when he finds the place where the grail is hidden, those scenes are more dramatic in the movie and that´s pretty good. But still... the film is mutch diferent from the book, but if you like the book you should check it out.

[-] Minimize Review

Report Abuse

Posted may 8, 2007 4:18 am pt

• [+] New York Post
  
  100
  Ron Howard's splendid The Da Vinci Code is the Holy Grail of summer blockbusters: a crackling, fast-moving thriller that's every bit as brainy and irresistible as Dan Brown's controversial bestseller.

  by Lou Lumenick | Read Full Review »
• [+] Charlotte Observer
  
  88
  A crackling rendition of Dan Brown's novel, siphoning off unneeded fat and fancy and leaving us with a streamlined train of a picture that never stops moving.

  by Lawrence Toppman | Read Full Review »
• [+] Seattle Post-Intelligencer
  
  83
  The film has an exciting visual texture that gives body to Brown's bestseller-ese prose, and uniformly strong performances that give dimension, depth and interest to characters that the author never entirely brought to life. In this sense, I found it much more entertaining and satisfying than the novel.

  by William Arnold | Read Full Review »
• [+] Chicago Sun-Times
  
  75
  Dan Brown's novel is utterly preposterous; Ron Howard's movie is preposterously entertaining.

  by Roger Ebert | Read Full Review »
• [+] Dallas Observer
  
  70
  All in all, a respectable and predictable adaptation.

  by Luke Y. Thompson | Read Full Review »
• [+] Portland Oregonian
  
  67
  It adds up to a chatty film of genuine visual interest and occasionally sharp acting but no visceral appeal or satisfaction. It's a movie that plays like a book -- that is, watching it is more like reading than a thriller should ever be.

  by Shawn Levy | Read Full Review »
• [+] Austin Chronicle
  
  67
  If you take this stuff seriously, one way or another, you're sure to be duped. You've got to hand it to Mr. Brown: So dark the con of man, indeed.

  by Steve Davis | Read Full Review »
• [+] ReelViews
  
  63
  Individual scenes are entertaining in their own right, but the production as a whole is a lumbering mess.

  by James Berardinelli | Read Full Review »
• [+] New York Daily News
  
  63
  The movie is so nervous about offending anyone that it's hardly any fun. Hanks delivers a few solemn speeches meant to deflect criticism. Meanwhile, he and Tautou barely hit it off. At least Mr. and Mrs. Smith got hot while doing their jobs.

  by Jami Bernard | Read Full Review »
• [+] Los Angeles Times
  
  60
  While the story plays better on the page than the screen and some of the film's elements work better than others, a proficient Ron Howard version of things is certainly competent if only occasionally thrilling.

  by Kenneth Turan | Read Full Review »
• [+] Christian Science Monitor
  
  58
  The Da Vinci Code is so transparently pitched as pulp entertainment that, in the end, it's about as subversive as "Starsky and Hutch."

  by Peter Rainer | Read Full Review »
• [+] The Onion (A.V. Club)
  
  58
  The Da Vinci Code isn't terrible. Brown's novel presented its concepts seriously, as food for thought; Howard's glossy version is more of a snack, designed to be taken only slightly more seriously than "National Treasure," and with the much the same sense of a puzzle-based thrill ride.

  by Tasha Robinson | Read Full Review »
• [+] Entertainment Weekly
  
  58
  The surprise, and disappointment, of The Da Vinci Code is how slipshod and hokey the religious detective story now seems.

  by Owen Gleiberman | Read Full Review »
• [+] The New Republic
  
  50
  The screenplay is at the start far from lucid in setting forth characters and relationships and intents. And after the film has been barreling along for two hours of its 148-minute journey, it seems to have lost the ability to finish. Three or four times in the last half-hour, I thought the film was over, only to be jarred by more of it.

  by Stanley Kauffmann | Read Full Review »
• [+] Philadelphia Inquirer
  
  50
  McKellen, Hanks and Tautou - and Alfred Molina, as a bishop with an agenda - are no slouches when it comes to emoting, but screenwriter Goldsman's rigorously faithful interpretation of Brown's flatfooted prose stylings is the filmic equivalent of putting big chewy baguettes in the actors' maws.

  by Steven Rea | Read Full Review »