ROTTEN TOMATOES: Critical Consensus: "The Da Vinci Code" Is Dull

Critical Consensus: "The Da Vinci Code" Is Dull

by Binh Ngo | May 18, 2006

This week, a bunch of furry critters and a mean-looking wrestler playing a homicidal maniac (redundant?) compete with the seemingly unstoppable juggernaut that is "The Da Vinci Code" for your box office dollars. What do the critics have to say about these contenders?

After all the secrecy and anticipation, it's a mystery no more. The big screen adaptation of Dan Brown's novel "The Da Vinci Code" is a major disappointment, with only 16% of the nation's critics recommending the movie as of this writing. One of the problems, critics say, is that the movie is too slavishly faithful to the book, making it a poorly paced, dull, and only occasionally thrilling experience. As to the star-studded cast, only Ian McKellen stands out as the character Sir Leigh Teabing; the others are described either as wooden, one-dimensional, or both. Will the poor reviews affect the movie's box office prospects? Unlikely, but it may make a few fence-sitters wait for it on DVD.

Bruce Willis, Garry Shandling, William Shatner, and even Avril Lavigne lend their voices for DreamWorks' latest CGI feature "Over the Hedge." Poking fun at us two-legged creatures and our eccentricities, the movie centers on RJ the raccoon, voiced by Willis, as he cons some woodland animals, led by a turtle (Shandling), into helping him steal food from humans living on the other side of a hedge. While not on the level of, say, "The Incredibles" or "Shrek," "Over the Hedge" is successful on its own terms. Critics say that while it's unexceptional, it's a fun movie with some solid laughs. The movie now stands at 65% on the Tomatometer.

Critics ought to be thankful. "See No Evil" joins the growing list of movies not screened for them this year. We all know how those turn out. The movie stars World Wrestling Entertainment wrestler Kane as a crazed murderer terrorizing a group of teens (who else?) serving community service in a hotel. Try not to think too hard about that premise.

Other Recent Novel Adaptations:
---------------------------------------
75% -- Nanny McPhee (2006)
35% -- Memoirs of a Geisha (2005)
76% -- The Chronicles of Narnia: The Witch, The Lion, and The Wardobe (2005)
76% -- Zathura (2005)
85% -- Pride and Prejudice (2005)

Related Items

Movie:	The Da Vinci Code
	See No Evil
Celeb:	Tom Hanks
	Ian McKellen
	Garry Shandling
	William Shatner
	Bruce Willis
	Audrey Tautou

(1-20 of 43 posts) | Reply

puablo writes:
on May 18 2006 07:09 PM

What a disappointment. And yet, somehow, in hindsight, we should have been better prepared for this to happen. After all, a lot of people also thought Michael Crichton's Timeline was destined to make a great movie... and, well, we all know how that turned out.

I guess the worst part is all the effort that was put into it, with a big-name director, big-name actors, probably more than enough money needed to do the job... just a shame.

(Reply to this)

BrokebackYoda writes:
on May 18 2006 08:09 PM

Yes but "Timeline" wasn't a GIANT controversial novel. "The Da Vinci Code" is. And I hate how critics are saying that its faithful to the book, but its "lavishly dull" and boring. And then they turned around and say they love the book. How is that possible, if its SO faithful, wouldn't that make then extreamly similar?

(Reply to this)

TheIceGhost writes:
on May 18 2006 09:01 PM

Books and movies translate differently. I can think of plenty of books that were made into movies, and the books prevailed as being better. It's like the whole deal with the Harry Potter movies. When The Sorcerer's Stone came out in the theaters people realized that eventhough it had a lot of things going for it, it felt like the movie was being crippled by such a faithful recreation. The book is certainly a much more enjoyable ride than the movie is. And you can see as the Harry Potter movies go on, with the length of the books getting bigger, the directors are taking more liberties and the end result is the movies are getting better. It's finding that healthy medium that a lot of directors and writers struggle with, and in this case Ron Howard (according to the critics anyways) failed.

If I see it all though, it's going to be for Jean Reno, because Jean Reno is awesome.

(Reply to this)

renny2077 writes:
on May 18 2006 10:05 PM

' One of the problems, critics say, is that the movie is too slavishly faithful to the book'

That's good news for me. Now I know I don't have to read the book! Hope I can catch it this weekend.

(Reply to this)

sokiveta.com writes:
on May 19 2006 12:05 AM

In reply to this comment (#836169)
Books and movies may translate differently, but books have always been better than the movie version.

Either way, in the example of Harry Potter, at least that movie was good.

How did so many talented people take a an already successful book and make such an awful movie?

(Reply to this)

CenoBiteMe2000 writes:
on May 19 2006 01:57 AM

Prime example of PR hype. Mediocre book. Maybe Singer and Opie can collaborate on "The DaVinci Code 2: Jor-El Returns" next, where Steven Segal crash-lands on earth as an overweight, over-the-hill Green Lantern searching for a vehicle to revive his already decomposing career. Oh, wait-- they've already done it. It's called "Rocky Balboa," I believe...

(Reply to this)

jeanpaul writes:
on May 19 2006 03:36 AM

[b]Great!! It deserves no better.[/b]
The Jewish-controlled Hollywood deserves no better. It's like a slap to thier faces-- (but this slap is brought on to themselves-- by themselves!). Isin't this two-faced behavior? When (Gibson's) "The Passion of the Christ" released-- the ultra-sensitive Jewish string-pullers in control of Hollywood, went beserk with claims about it being anti-semitic-- when actually many of the few positive characters in that movie are Jews(!!)-- like the person who helps Christ carry the Cross, and the ones in the Jewish council who protest against the late-night trial against Christ...

This "Da vinchi hoax" desreved to fail. Hollywood needs to learn-- that like they wouldn't hurt and bash the beliefs of ANY OTHER RELIGION-- they have NO right to hurt and bash and insult the feelings and beliefs of Christians also-- like Dan Brown did with his book and insulting assumptions-- a wagon, sadly, jumped-on by the likes of Howard and Hanks.

Get your head around this: Same as would NOT dream of hurting and insulting the beliefs of Hindus, Muslim & Jews (who simply wouldn't let you, in "this free world"), Buddhists and whoever-- You have NO right to do the same with the beliefs of Christianity! No right.

"When you spit into the wind (like Dan Brown has), the Wind will simply bring it back to land on your own face".

(Reply to this)

Hieremias writes:
on May 19 2006 05:11 AM

"Books and movies may translate differently, but books have always been better than the movie version."

That's not always true. Jaws and Jurassic Park had pretty bad endings (in the books). I thought the movies were better. But these were books that were easily converted to film; something like The DaVinci Code may not be (dunno, haven't read it).

And to BrokebackYoda; a movie can be "faithful" to the book while losing all of its suspense or charm if the person defines "faithful" as "having all the major plot elements". Perhaps the movie very closely follows the plot of the book, but does so in a way that seems lifeless and uninspired.

Anyway, what little interest I had in this movie has been completely squashed by these reviews. I won't be throwing my money at it.

(Reply to this)

Hieremias writes:
on May 19 2006 05:12 AM

Okay, I think everyone of all faiths and backgrounds can join hands and agree that jeanpaul is crazy.

(Reply to this)

puablo writes:
on May 19 2006 09:11 AM

In reply to this comment (#836175)
[b]Agreed[/b]
Yes, this movie just makes the crazies come out of the woodwork. Heaven forbid hey actually realize it was a popular book that read like a movie, thus people wanted to make it into a movie.

Literary critics don't like the book, but most people who read it loves it. I've not personally met (online boards don't count!) anyone who has read that book and not thought it was great. And because it read like a movie, everyone just presumed it would make a great movie. But we had blinders on, and since a lot of book-to-film translations fall flat, we should have expected this possible outcome, but we didn't and thus are disappointed.

(Reply to this)

lovelykeira writes:
on May 19 2006 03:13 PM

Who cares, bring on the X-Men.

(Reply to this)

haelohm writes:
on May 19 2006 07:34 PM

[b]i saw it[/b]
and i thought it was great! i mean it wasnt amazing but it was entertaining and i liked it for all the reasons i loved the book. The book is better but the movie is still good. The critics are just bashing this so hard because they were expecting something better and are not fairly critiquing this as they would another movie.

And yes...BRING ON X-MEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Reply to this)

Jofo1185 writes:
on May 19 2006 09:29 PM

I saw it loved it, and now i'm ready for x-men 3

(Reply to this)

drebay40 writes:
on May 19 2006 09:53 PM

[b]Me too![/b]
I liked it too! I mean it wasn't my favorite of the year, but much better than critics would have you believe. I don't really understand why it reviewed so poorly.

(Reply to this)

synergyred writes:
on May 19 2006 10:35 PM

I just saw it and found it to be pretty good. Yes, the characters were wooden and one-dimensional, but at least the actors and director attempted to give them some semblances of personalities. Ian McKellan and Paul Bettany did very well with their roles. Tom Hanks and crew did the best with what they were given.

Also, the movie was not weighed down by horrible writing.

(Reply to this)

SozeStrangelove writes:
on May 19 2006 11:30 PM

[b]Me Three![/b]
I really liked it. The critic in me had a few gripes about some part (Deus ex Machina anyone?) It deserved better treatment by the critcs.

Oh, and jeanpaul, how did this movie "hurt and bash and insult the feelings and beliefs of Christians"? IT IS A WORK OF FICTION!!!!!!! It just provides an interesting look at the foundations of Christianity. If you hate this movie that much, just ignore it. Stop thinking about it and ignore it.

(Reply to this)

rpggamer26 writes:
on May 19 2006 11:41 PM

I agree with the others on this board because I just saw it in theater it is a entertaining movie, not the best but I recommend it to anyone who has read the book or even have slight interest, just keep an open mind and take the movie for what it is, an entertaining summer movie with a little controversy in it.

(Reply to this)

Dacritic4 writes:
on May 20 2006 12:12 AM

[b]Good Movie[/b]
The movie was good...... but i just felt that it was sugar coated just a bit from the book so not to create such controversy.....But all in all it did what it was suppose to do and it entertained me.....

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on May 20 2006 12:17 AM

It seems unfair 'Da Vinci Code' has such a low tomatometer, because the score only reflects that the movie was a let down and not as good as it could have been.. by no means is it a BAD movie in the way most other 10-20% rotten movies are on this site (Uwe Boll films etc.)

Has anyone seen the movie who hasn't read the book? Just wondering what their take is, as they wouldn't have been going in with any bias.

(Reply to this)

RT-Actaphu writes:
on May 20 2006 01:03 AM

In reply to this comment (#836185)
I believe Tim didn't read the book and he posted his review earlier. Click [url=http://www.rottentomatoes.com/news/comments/?entryid=324955]here[/url] for his review.

(Reply to this)

RottenTomatoes.com