The Da Vinci Code

The Da Vinci Code presents a bold and controversial story rooted in religious conspiracy, sparking debate while delivering a gripping mystery with solid pacing and visuals. Though some scenes lack urgency and logical consistency, the film remains compelling through its unpredictable plot and atmospheric tension. It's an intriguing watch for mystery-thriller fans open to layered storytelling. Read the full review here: (Indonesian version : alunauwie.com) and (English version : uwiepuspita.com)

This had all the ingredients and even a self-flagellating Paul Bettany so what happened? Well it all started strongly enough with the aforementioned man perpetrating a mysterious killing in the Louvre museum. It turns out that the victim is one of the museum’s curators and when the police discovers that his body has been defaced with ancient symbols, they call in “Sophie” (Audrey Tautou) to investigate. She, in turn, invites acclaimed American professor “Langdon” (Tom Hanks) to help find out what this might all mean, and swiftly there are embroiled in the machinations of a legendary society that has it’s roots stretching back to the very beginnings of Christianity. Indeed, as they try to stay one step ahead of these people who would have them dead, too - and who have a multitude of connections throughout French society and government - they begin to suspect that the Holy Grail might be the ultimate goal here as their travels take them, ably assisted by “Sir Leigh Teabing” (Sir Ian McKellen), to a burial site in London reputedly connected with the crusades. The supporting cast includes Jean Reno and Alfred Molina and the story itself is thick with religiosity and controversy, but the end product is really a bit of a damp squib. I think that’s probably because Hanks hasn’t the gravitas to anchor this well enough. Even his looks of panic lack any credible sincerity and there’s precious little by way of chemistry with the adequate Tautou. Bettany does better, he does manage to exude a little of the maniacal zealot and Reno always manages to play the slightly dodgy French cop convincingly but for the most part this is just dialogue heavy with too many clues transcribed straight from the text of Dan Brown’s novel without Ron Howard seeming to remember that this is a visual medium and sometimes it’s more fun for us to be given a few detecting tasks of our own to figure out. It’s long, but that needn’t have mattered had we been more involved in the unravelling of this intriguing mystery. We were not, though, and that makes it a little too ploddingly descriptive for me, sorry.

Writing this review might be considered an act of vanity. Until recently I was among the very few who hadn’t seen The Da Vinci Code, or even read the book. But now I have done so — watch the movie, that is. I still have no plans to read the book. But is there anyone left out there who might benefit from a review? Mostly I thought the movie was rather silly. Oh, I know that the book was researched about as well as your average documentary, and that the plot is intricate and suitably complex for a thriller. Like a spy thriller, it develops that the two heroes can never be sure who they can trust. In fact, the short answer seems to be “No one!” There are plenty of plot twists, reverses and surprising revelations, some nifty but others that are utterly predictable. But it lost some of its credibility for me near the beginning when the female lead drove her car at a high rate of speed in reverse in and around traffic, faster than most drivers could manage driving forward. Really? There is a lot of action in the movie, but it lacks the exuberance and humor of a classic like Raiders of the Lost Ark. I guess religion is a serious business.