I just saw the Da Vinci Code and I liked it. It was quite hard for me to actually watch as a movie because I have read the book and knew all the twists and turns (it was as if somebody was reminding me of a the book I have already read - 'remember this bit?' 'Oh yeah') but all in all I think it was good. One thing I must say is that all the locations (not just the real ones like the Louvre, but for example the interior of Teabring's home) were exactly as I imagined while reading, which I suppose is a compliment to both Brown as a writer and Howard as a director. It was also very cool to see London again (I was at temple church just over 2 weeks ago and the finale of the movie where teabring is arrested was filmed on the street I worked on).

And, despite the naysayers (myself included) Hanks was good as Langdon. He may not look the way I imagined him, but he played him well.

The only thing I wonder is would I feel differently about the movie if I hadn't read the book? Lots of things were merely skimmed over, which didn't bother me because I have already read the 'extended version', but I'm not sure you get the whole story buy just watching the film. Plus, the feeling of code breaking and mystery solving, the role of symbology in the historical world we live in, and Langdon's symbology background wasn't explored as much in the movie as is was in the book, and neither was the importance of Da Vinci - apart from a brief appearence by some of his paintings, he was hardly mentioned (according to the book he was a one time grand master of the priory of sion and a key player in the history of the world with regard to the grail). Of course, cuts need to be made when adapting a book to the screen, but for me these were the things that made the book such a good read.

Overall though, thumbs up from YIYF.

Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Neither did The Godfather, even though it was an awful book.

The Godfather isn't about the Knights Templar.