Haven’t read the book so didn’t know what to expect. Thought the film was good, I was engrossed til the end, especially with Bettany and Hanks who were both v.good.

Of course the book was better but it was still a good movie. They did a good job condensing it (even though it was still long) but staying true the main points of the story.

The book was definately better than the movie. The movie was actually really bad!

It was alright…not my favorite. However, the location, history and puzzles throughout the movie is what fascinated me and entertained me. I’m a sucker for history. Tom Hanks is one of my favorite actors so I’m sure that biases the opinion a bit.

This edition has a special feature that goes over the “Codes of the Da Vinci Code” which is really good…except that Janus was about more than being two-faced. And some of them are a little annoying, and the last one is backwards.

I liked this movie. It was a little disjointed (and I’m pissed they don’t mention that her brother is alive, which seemed the only redeeming item in this whole awfulness that poor Sophie has to go through and learn), and the ending seems to come out of nowhere, with everything wrapping up too neatly too fast.

But, again, I liked it. The photography is amazing, the cuts and the overlapping of footage was really nice.

I do feel as if I missed a lot, some of the symbols, like Landon’s water glass as he tells us that symbols have meanings, and Teabing’s canes being lain on the table.

I thought Audrey Tautou was an interesting, and rather inspired, choice. She was strong in a very feminine way. I liked that she wasn’t “strong” in the masculine way we normally assume female detectives will be. Not that there’s anything wrong with being strong and masculine as a woman, but it is a bit cliche. She was neither a damsel in distress, nor a femme fatale, nor the manly detective I had expected after reading the book.

Hanks was perfectly cast, which is saying something since I don’t normally like him.

It was fun and worth watching. Not high cinema, but a good movie.

Okay, it was not as good as the book, but it was good. The locations/cinematography alone made it worth watching. Tom Hanks was his usual great self. The casting in general was excellent. I thought the pace was actually a bit slow compared to Dan Brown’s text, and I knew that with Hanks in the film, the director would have to make the character of Sophie, the French female detective, weaker. Nor was Silas (the albino) quite as scary as I’d envisioned him. But well done overall.

Now here’s my question: Why was there so much outrage about this film before it came out? I saw nothing in it to get out of joint about.

A lot of people are sort of critical about this movie, but for someone who has not read the book and who has very little investment or knowledge in the subject matter discussed, I enjoyed it a lot!! Great story.

though there were a few changes from the book… the movie was a good transition… I enjoyed audrey tatou… mmm :)