[Assumes that reader has read the book]
Rating: 3.5 stars
Let me begin by saying, the movie simply doesn’t come close to the book, a good movie nevertheless. And that the two of the most amusing parts of the movie are the disclaimers shown at the beginning and the end.
Jokes apart, This was the movie which boasted of double Oscar winner Tom Hanks as a cast member and double Oscar winner Ron Howard as Director. Tom Hanks doesn’t fit into the role of a learned professor, esp. with the long hair. Clearly, the role belonged to Harrison Ford, George Clooney, or Nicholas Cage. The movie follows the outline of the the book quite closely with certain details missed. For those Indian audience who haven’t read the book, the French accent might put a considerable strain on the ears to grasp the dialogues. The movie, being set in the dark, might make you uneasy at times.
The book explores the past of Sophie for quite a few pages. The fact that Sophie was one who should have been cracking anagrams, given her experience in the past, and Langdon had to play a significant role only later formed the solid reason for Langdon to stick to Sophie in her trail. The movie hardly uncovers the past of Sophie which i thought was pretty important. Description of Architecture is unmatched in the book which no movie can ever come close to. The movie has omitted the first cryptex which opens with *****. In my opinion, the this could have easily been included in the movie without consuming much time. The details of pagan rituals and practices have also been overlooked. Perhaps, a three hour movie instead of a two and a half hour one would have sufficed for a reasonably comprehensive coverage of the book. The topic on golden ratio wasn’t even brought up in the conversation. The book , at least for me, aroused interest in knowing history. To quite an extent, it made Langdon look ‘cool’ with all the knowledge he had and with his interpretation of symbols. The movie fails to do so (but that’s not what a movie is for anyway).
Silas’ role was portrayed to perfection. The zeal in him was well displayed by Paul Bettany. Some of the scenes involving him bring you to the edge of the seats. The movie is fast paced, Just right to keep the attention of the viewers for 150 minutes. Thought the movie doesn’t give enough time to comprehend the difficulty of the clues and the lateral thinking involved in solving it, it does provide a good weekend entertainment value. Teibing’s assertion about Jesus Christ’s life is also worth a mention. Thankfully, the movies doesn’t get into the romance between Sophie and Langdon. It has also carefully avoided the Hindi movie ending of the book and made it a lot less sentimental.
Bottom line: It is worth a movie ticket. It is watchable only once (if one has read the book or not).
Do comment if you have anything else to say.