Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

stjohn1253 "OK, Pa, I will."And he did. The rich visuals, intriguing plot, haunting soundtrack, European setting, and convincing characters add up to just that: a terrific movie. Yes, it's rife with absurdities, speculations and falsehoods, but they simply can't ruin the experience. Critics who won't allow fiction to be fictional will always be disappointed. I'd bet that if he could, Andy would say: "You done good, boy! You done good."

Karan Mahajan Well, when we look at the movies which were made on the novels of Dan Brown i.e. Angels and demons and Inferno; The Da Vinci code is the best. The problem with Angels and Demons and Inferno was that these movies altered the story of the main novel and that's why if you have read the book and then you are watching the movie, the movie fails to impress you to the extent the book did. This is not the case with The Da Vinci code as the story line of the book and that of the movie are nearly same. The movie shows the history very beautifully with apt illustrations. The acting of Tom Hanks is commendable. The albino Silas also plays his role very smartly as is his role in the book. The background music in the movie is is very appealing to the audience and people feel as if they are in the movie ,as if everything is real. Do not go with the 6.6 rating on IMDb. It could have been that people who follow Christianity did not like this movie as it raises questions on their religion.However if that fact is ignored. there is no reason for not liking this movie.

EBJ *I will try not to include spoilers but if I see the need will notify you priorGood: It is very interesting and the mystery behind it is intriguing. The acting is great. I like the way the music is very quiet at the start but as the story progresses to its climax, the music gets louder and more aggressive. The cinematography is quite mixed with some great shots but some that are just an eyesore. Interesting and compelling main protagonist with 'the descendant of Jesus' doing decent as well. Despite this, Ian McKellen steals the show with his obsessed, conniving villain.Bad: Some shots and majority of the lighting is very off putting and sometimes contradict their better counterparts. Once such example is an elevated shot of a castle which should look great but the lighting makes it appear to be very murky and it drastically obscures your vision. There are so many twists and turns which would normally be great and interesting but, for the most part and excluding the grand twist, they just seem to be there to add drama. It is also needlessly long and could be cut back a bit by about 30 minutes or so. There are a lot of scenes just dedicated to exposition and explaining every little fine detail about something. These are annoying and shows lack of directed storytelling. The monk, Silas, is just stupid as a character.they try to make us feel sympathy for him but he is clearly delusional. Insane villains can be compelling (The Joker, John Doe, Hannibal Lecter etc) but this is just sick and twisted and just uninteresting.*Potential Spoilers!!!Best Part: This is a movie without any particularly stand out scenes but the grand reveal of the true villain was more pop up than the rest of the movie.MVP: Ian McKellen as Sir Leigh Teabing7/10

Mace Tom Hanks behind Ron Howard's direction has led to some success in the past such as the entertaining, albeit super corny, Apollo 13. Here, Ron Howard has tackled a subject that few other mainstream directors would even think to. But the controversy over the subject matter seems unnecessary as even the characters within the story don't seem to believe the far-fetched and incredibly bogus plot. To begin, the acting is surprisingly dull. Tom Hanks, a legendary actor, never had "the scene" is this movie, making his performance distractingly off. At times, it looked like he didn't even want to be there, which only attributed to the sleepy tone of the film. Any actor could have portrayed Tom Hanks' character, making his presence feel like a waste of true talent. That being said, Ian McKellen was actually great. His introduction to the story and his deciphering of The Last Supper painting was among the films brightest moments. He brought a much needed pop of character to the story. Still, it was funny to see the lack of emotion within a group of people who were unfolding a secret that would lead to the most important discovery of all time. Now I do think that the story is completely stupid and rarely makes sense, but the film in it's entirety is admittedly entertaining. I can't say I was ever bored watching The Da Vinci Code as the story moved quickly from puzzle to puzzle and the group made new discoveries. This is where the movie shines and some fun can be had. But when we left our main characters, the story began to drag considerably. The parallel story lines just simply weren't intriguing and while they did provide the conflict and tension, motives were not clear and the sub-characters just weren't interesting. Watching our three main characters decipher ancient codes and riddles was actually quite interesting. While most of it is totally wack, these scenes did manage to hold my attention, resulting in some fun enigmas and hidden secrets. It's just too bad that the surrounding characters and atmosphere feel so insignificant, which makes the clues uncovered feel unimportant. The film also went on for way too long. The main story was done at the 2 hour mark, but it felt the need to continue for an extra 20 minutes where nothing was really accomplished. This extra 20 minutes did give us the answer to our main question, but it really felt unnecessary at that point as even our main characters had seemingly gotten over solving the mystery. And at that point, I imagine the audience has as well.Ron Howard tried so hard to piece together an alternate path in history, one in which we have to suspend our beliefs so high to a point where it feels artificial and clumsily manufactured. While it was entertaining to watch at times, the matter never felt pressing and the tension never felt real. The characters were just as believable as the ludicrous story, but if they had been even half as interesting, it would have been a much more memorable experience.