posted on May, 23 2006 @ 02:04 AM
The book is always better then the movie. We should not compare the movie to the book, but compare this movie with other movies based on books.
I think that this one turned out great.
Dan Brown's book is loaded with details and it was difficult to chose which ones to shorten or omit entirely and still keep the main plot line going.
They managed to do it quite well, I think. Actually it is one of the best book adaptations I have seen so far.
Sometimes this fails miserably, example: Sum Of All Fears or Timeline. Both books are amazing, specially Crichton's Timeline, fantastic book. Movies
were not that great, some major plot elements were totaly left out.
Another thing I noticed was that people laughed during the movie, just like the all-mighty Cannes Film Festival folks, only they laughed at actual
in the movie, which were quite funny! Maybe Cannes critics didn't even realise those things are supposed to be funny
Ian McKellen's preformance was briliant. He was exactly like I pictured Sir Leigh Teabing while reading the book. Paul Bettany (Silas) was fantastic
I was skeptical about Hanks as Langdon though, but after seeing the movie I think he really did a great job.
So to sum it up, I loved both the book and the movie.