The Da Vinci Code (2006) Other movies recommended for you
The Da Vinci Code (in Hollywood Movies) The Da Vinci Code (2006) - Download Movie for mobile in best quality 3gp and mp4 format. Also stream The Da Vinci Code on your mobile, tablets and ipads
Plot: A murder inside the Louvre and clues in Da Vinci paintings lead to the discovery of a religious mystery protected by a secret society for two thousand years -- which could shake the foundations of Christianity. Runtime: 149 mins Release Date: 19 May 2006
Great Movie... For Intelligent, Unbiased People (by kajmel)
First off, I'd just like to say that this movie is based on a fictional story. FICTION. Why people need to express hatred over this because of their religious beliefs is so mind-boggling. No one is saying that Christianity is wrong, and that this story is right. The book is classified as FICTION, not THEOLOGY! I should also note that my extremely religious Christian friends don't find this movie at all "disturbing" or "wrong". The fact is that if you believe in something, nothing -- including a movie, or story -- should be able to deter you from that belief. If you <more>
feel threatened by this movie or any other story like this, you have serious problems regarding the foundations in which you believe.Now, to the review... I'm not here to give you any spoilers or story info, since that's all been done in the other reviews.I have never read the book. I went to see the movie with my boyfriend, who read the book recently, and some friends one of whom has read the book at least twice, and is so into the story that he has researched the symbols and meanings thoroughly and participates in Da Vinci Code games, forums, etc . So we actually had at least 3 differing perspectives here.I really loved the film. Having no story to compare it to, I didn't feel like I had to have read the book to understand the story. Nothing felt missing or incomplete. I came out of the theater ready to add this list to my favorites, and wanting to read the book to compare it to the movie.My boyfriend also thought the film was great. He said they did a great job adapting the book to film, and although not everything was there, they did the best that they could with the time they had, and he was impressed.My friend was so excited throughout the movie, he kept wanting to talk to us about it. He pointed out some things from the book that weren't there as well, but he understood it couldn't all be there. He also said that watching the film put a new perspective for him on the movie, since he imagined things looking and feeling different in his head. Seeing the movie allowed him to look at it differently, which made it exciting all over again.So, in summary, this seems to be a great movie no matter how deep you are into the Da Vinci Code. I normally wait for movies to go on DVD to rent, but this is one that I'd recommend you see in the theater... the atmosphere makes it more fun and also you can talk about this with others after seeing it, instead of catching up to everyone later and possibly getting spoilers before you watch. Again, I highly recommend this movie! A+
Loved the book? It's hard not to love this. (by toddt85)
Okay, let me start off by saying that I absolutely loved the book - it had me hooked more than Harry Potter - and that's saying something and no I'm not a 10 year old child ! After hearing about the critics' mainly negative views of the film, I approached it without high expectations, and for that, I was rewarded. What I got was an action-packed film that didn't let up until the dying minutes. This film is incredibly faithful to the book I'm looking at you, Girl With a Pearl Earring!! to the point where hardly anything is left out, and only minor things have been <more>
changed. The visuals are stunning, the acting of Hanks and Tautou is great - and contrary to certain critics opinions - I felt the emotional connection between them. As always, McKlellan is fun to watch, effortlessly bringing Teabing to life, and Reno suffices as Fache. Bettany is fantastic as Silas. The musical score was as good as the visual look of the film - it paired perfectly with the storytelling. Overall, I left the cinema feeling satisfied, because a great book had been turned into a really good film. Approach this film with little expectation, and you will enjoy the ride. Bravo Ron Howard, for doing such a good job.
It's Easy to Unlock This "Da Vinci Code": Ron Howard's Film Is a Winner! (by lavatch)
Dan Brown's international bestseller "The Da Vinci Code" has enjoyed phenomenal success because it taps into a wellspring of so many different and fascinating topics. The novel touches upon the early history of Christianity, the mysteries of the medieval Knights Templar society, numerology, and, above all, the archetype of the Grail Quest. The strength of Ron Howard's film lies in its integrity of striving to be faithful to Dan Brown's novel. The fidelity is apparent in each of the following areas:SCREENPLAY: Akiva Goldsman's script includes nearly all of the major <more>
scenes from the novel. To his credit, Goldsman provides dialogue on the Knights Templar, Mary Magdelene, Leonardo's "Last Supper" mural and other details from the novel. DIRECTION: Ron Howard's stylish approach to the film includes interesting camera angles, especially in the aerial shots of such great location sites as the Louvre in the Paris and the Rosslyn chapel in Scotland. It was clear that Howard wanted not merely an action picture, but a leisurely paced retelling of Dan Brown's story. There was also the thoughtful use of close-ups in the more intimate moments with a brilliant analytical scene dissecting the controversial "chalice" apparent in Leonardo's "Last Supper."CINEMATOGRAPHY: Overall, the film was appropriately dark and moody. The flashback sequences were shot in a grainy style that contrasted with the action-packed story of Robert Langdon and Sophie Neveu. Salvatore Totino deserves the highest praise for his tasteful yet imaginative camera work.ACTING: Tom Hanks was not overly charismatic as Robert Langdon. But that is precisely the bookish Everyman who is the protagonist of Dan Brown's novel. As Sophie, Audrey Tatou was more dynamic than Robert, as appropriate to her character as well; there was a sparking and even radiant quality to this young performer. The supporting cast was solid with Jean Reno especially successful in developing multiple layers of characterization in the morally conflicted detective Bezu Fache. Perhaps most memorably, Ian McKellen delivers a star turn as the scholar Leigh Teabing.Over twenty years ago, Umberto Eco's novel "The Name of the Rose" was the equivalent in its time of Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code." The subsequent film version of Eco's story was a disappointment in its attempt to equal the success of the novel version of "The Name of the Rose." In the case of Ron Howard's film version of "The Da Vinci Code," however, not only does the film do justice to the novel, but in many respects it is better!
I'd never read the book but now I have.... (by fluffy_orange_monster)
When I heard that they were bringing out a movie of the best selling book I decided I would see the movie first as I always enjoy books more and didn't want to be disappointed. It's not easy for a film to grip an audience and I thought Ron Howard did an excellent job with his film. It's quite a long movie and every time I thought it was going to end something else happened.Ian McKellen was fabulous in this film and stole the majority of the scenes he was in delivering some excellent one-liners along the way. I loved his passion for England and was very pleased to see he hasn't <more>
lost his talent. Paul Bettany was also tremendous in this film and it made me see him in a different light. After Wimbledon I wasn't sure of his acting skills but The Da Vinci Code proved him worthy of many of the actors in Hollywood today.Tom Hanks is one of my all-time favourite actors but I have to say he just didn't seem comfortable in the role of Robert Langdon. He wasn't terrible but he just didn't come up to par with some of his previous roles which I felt was a shame. Audrey Tatou was very good in her role and I couldn't have imagined a better actress for the role.Overall I felt the film was great, even with Ron Howard's inevitable cheesy scene...'Godspeed' from Tom Hanks. After seeing the film I decided to read the book and I can see why some people prefer the book. However I think it is much harder for a film to grip then it is a book and so for that reason I gave The Da Vinci Code 9/10. I would say anyone should go and see it, just accept it as a film, not as an adaptation of a book.
True to the book; a strangely beautiful film (by bonnie91)
The Da Vinci Code, directed by Ron Howard, is an excellent adaptation of Brown's novel that leaves you with an odd mixture of quizzicality, wonder and contentment by the time the movie is over.All the actors put in an excellent performance, but Audrey Tautou, the actress who plays Sophie Neveu, is exactly how I imagined her when I was reading the book and practically steals the show with the interpretation of her character.As those who have read the book know, the plot goes into very controversial subject-matter, and that atmosphere of intrigue, mystery, religious zeal and hermeticism <more>
that keeps you in its grip from the first page to the last is expertly conveyed in the film. Lavish production, beautiful sets and locations the Louvre! and an ending that pretty much left me in a daze I enjoyed the ending more watching the movie than when I read the book make for a truly magical movie-going experience.
If you didn't like it, you'll never get it. (by empirenyc)
It was absolutely a great go-see-it movie. I actually thought it was better than the book in certain aspects. I wish they could have gotten more into the art/tie-ins of DaVinci, but such is time space in a movie. Even though there were a lot of well known actors, I didn't feel that any of them took away from the characters by being so.I wasn't expecting to like Tom Hanks as Langdon. He surprised me with his characterization. Very well done.I truly think that those that are bashing the movie are solely doing it for their own political beliefs and not because of the movie itself. I <more>
highly recommend it to all - fans of the book and fans of movies in general. Open your mind.
A Nutshell Review: The Da Vinci Code (by DICK STEEL)
This movie is becoming as controversial as the book. Since the day it was announced that it's gonna be made, there were protests against it being done, and it has escalated to calls for boycotting, or banning the movie altogether. I'll not waste time and go into its controversies, nor discuss what's real and what's not. Neither will I explain in detail the plot, as I believe most of you readers would already have some vague idea of what it's about, or have read the book, since it's on the bestsellers list for months.Rather, I'll evaluate the movie as it is, on how <more>
well it entertains. Those who wish to preach in my comment box, prepare to have those comments deleted, at my discretion. This is the stand I shall take, that this movie is entirely fictional, based on events which are used loosely, for the sole purpose of weaving a storyline that tries to be believable. I think some have already mentioned it's too successful in doing that, and may mislead people into thinking its theories presented, are real. However, don't take it too seriously, and if you wish to, use another proper platform to debunk the myths, not my movie review blog.The structure of the movie, is exactly the same as the book. There is no change to the ending, despite some rumours that it will be different. Naturally, some of the detailed explanation that's given in the book, especially many three-way dialogue between Sophie- Robert-Leigh, have to be summarized in order to pace this movie into 2 1/2 hours. Herein lies the challenges. For those who've read the book, the movie offers nothing new, other than the gratification of watching events and characters play out on the big screen. For those who haven't read the book, the movie version should be decent enough to make you want to pick up the novel and read more into the controversial theories explained.However, having being familiar with the plot and how the story unfolds, red herrings, character motivations, twists and all, it may leave those who've read the novel, a page-turner in every sense of the word, a bit wanting, that the pace could've been improved. Undoubtedly the pacing sags when it's time for some dialogue heavy moments, but I suppose that is unavoidable when you're revisiting material.However, its presentation of these controversial dialogue moments coupled with special effects, that will make you go wow. Truly, the technique is nothing original, and some of the visuals used looked like Return of the King and Kingdom of Heaven rejects, but as a whole, combined with the narrative, it helps to present the controversies in a more palatable manner.Casting, I felt, was spot on. Tom Hanks makes Robert Langdon pretty accessible, given Hanks' everyman demeanor, and Audrey Tautou makes a believable Sophie Neveu. Ian McKellen, probably THE actor with 2 summer blockbusters back to back the other being X- Men 3 , is convincing as the rich grail hunter Sir Leigh Teabing. Paul Bettany is chilling as the albino killer Silas, and Jean Reno and Alfred Molina round up the star studded cast as the detective Captain Fache and Bishop Aringarosa.Much is said about the haunting soundtrack, but as far as I'm aware, there's nothing scary about it. Silas, in his scene of self-cleansing, is horrid enough though, as are some scenes of unexpected on screen violence that hit like a sack of potatoes falling from the sky.In the end, in spite of all the controversies, perhaps Robert Langdon's line is poignant - if given a chance, would you rather destroy faith, or renew it? The book and the movie have provided an opportunity for the faith to renew itself, to debunk the myths and theories which were developed loosely to make the story flow of course , and to generally point the curious to the direction and light the faith wants to show.Otherwise, this Ron Howard movie makes a good summer popcorn flick, with the usual thrills and spills you'd come to expect with its superb production values.
An entertaining, yet not spectacular movie about the book that made the World talk. (by marta-63)
I just watched the film, and even though I liked it, I must confess, I too expected more. I can't precisely point out what was missing and what I was expecting, but some it has some details that weren't there, some small imprecisions, some little things could have been better.Nevertheless, a pleasant movie to watch. I confess I need to see it again, since I saw it from 3 to 6 am, with very few hours of sleep on the night before. I suggest the ones who read the book to re-read it before they go see it - to add a little bit more perspective. To those who haven't, I wish you a lovely <more>
time at the movies - it really is pleasant to see.Praise to Audrey Tautou, a beautiful splendid actress, and all the other actors that don't need any more praise, like Ian McKellen, Jean Reno and Tom Hanks, who I didn't see fit the part at first, but who grew on me half-way through the movie, if not sooner. A huge praise to Paul Bettany too, for his astonishing and disturbing performance as Silas.I give it an 8, because it's one of the first movies made from books that did not make me go 'Oh, this was not like this in the book' every five seconds. I never saw Ron Howard as the ideal director for this movie - but he pulled it off decently, though a bolder choice would have been in order.
This is a review from a person that has NOT read the book. The critics were never more polarized: some said it was the best film ever and some said it was a horrible film. The most disturbing part was that most of these critics uttered these claims without ever having seen the film. Even the "journalists" who saw the first show in Cannes were negative in a way that was almost unheard of. In fact, I have read so many negative reviews too long, too narrative, boring, predictable, laughable, Tom Hanks ashamed, Ron Howard ashamed, public not amused. etc. that I was almost tempted not <more>
to collect my 2 premiere tickets to the nearby cinema, saving me 20 euro's in the process. My companion who did read the book, by the way however insisted and we went. Good, so now I can write about it first hand. Yes, it's a long time to sit with your face directed upwards to the big screen two and a half hours, plus 15 minutes commercials . Granted, and it contains lots of talking and here and there, some plot movements were indeed incredible and it was quite predictable in certain parts remember, I did NOT read the book nor did I know the plot , but in whole, it was a fascinating film indeed. Of course, it was a fascinating novel to begin with and personally I found the direction of the film, as well as the parts of most notably Tatou, McKellen and Reno, excellent. I am well aware that, although some points are right on, a considerable part of the story is fiction and some of the facts in the film are dead wrong unambiguously and easily ascertainable , but most stories, if not all, are. Nothing special about that. Why do many people find exactly this story bad? Simply because of the fact that it is believed to undermine these same people's religious beliefs. But religion itself is based on beliefs, and never the whole truth. This lies within the fundamental definition of what we call religion. Myths are not seldom more true. But that is all irrelevant. Religion itself brings that people will always bend the truth or intermix truth with facts, even facts which are out of place, out of time, or both. Nothing new or spectacular about that. What is spectacular, that this is possibly the most interesting time in recent history in a way that many people start to rethink the whole Christian beliefs. And the fact that the Judas gospel was published also this year, helped tremendously in the process. That process of rethinking belief, that alone is valuable. Many critics wrote from this belief: if you are a fundamentalist Christian, you will most likely hate Brown's book, the film and its message. And if you hate the church, chances are that you love it I can't think of another reason why over half 616 of the 1176 voters to this instant I write this review, valued this film with a 10 out of 10 no film in history is worth this . But both opinions don't count for much, if you ask me, because they are prejudiced ans biased and nothing good ever came from those sentiments. And I can really do without critics who claim you go to hell if you go out and see the film. Hey buddy, I know about hell, I live in The Netherlands... -spoilers after this- Was the a historic person called Jesus the Christ? Probably, but not certainly. Was Jesus the Christ married with Maria Magdalena? Possibly. If yes, did they have children? Possibly. And is Maria Magdalena buried under the Louvre? Unlikely. And is Tatou a direct descendant of Maria Magdalena and Jesus? Very unlikely. Did the Catholic church try to hide Christ's bloodline? I don't think so. Does the church know much more than they say? Certainly. Did the church commit genocide over and over for unholy reasons? Absolutely. Is the new testament complete? Most certainly not - even the translations contain dreadful mistakes. Were there indeed more than 100 gospels instead of 4? Very likely. Is half of Dan Brown's book fantasy? Most likely, yes, but also half is most likely true. but that is again not the issue here. The issue is that if you do have a sufficiently long attention span, if you do have an open mind and if you do have more than half a brain, you may very well enjoy this film. And never stop thinking, no matter who informs you: The Priest, The Politician, The Legislator, The Judge, The Scientist, The Teacher, The Novelist, Mr Gates or the critic. Just never stop thinking...