Directed by:
Ron HowardScreenplay:
Akiva GoldsmanCinematography:
Salvatore TotinoComposer:
Hans ZimmerCast:
Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Ian McKellen, Jean Reno, Paul Bettany, Alfred Molina, Jürgen Prochnow, Jean-Yves Berteloot, Jean-Pierre Marielle, Seth Gabel (more)VOD (3)
Plots(1)
The murder of a curator at the Louvre reveals a sinister plot to uncover a secret that has been protected since the days of Christ. Only the victim's granddaughter and Robert Langdon, a famed symbologist, can untangle the clues he left behind. The two become both suspects and detectives searching for not only the murderer but also the stunning secret of the ages he was charged to protect. (official distributor synopsis)
(more)Videos (5)
Reviews (9)
When the book came out and I was lucky enough to get it very early and read it, I was thrilled. Brown's deductions were almost unbelievable, it all made sense. Only now, over time, do I see that the boy excels mainly in research, which he takes great care with, and then the story crystallizes from it on its own. Let's be honest, without that research, there wouldn't be any story; it would just be a classic treasure hunt. He can write it (i.e. use the information he finds) and that is appreciated. Ron Howard's take on the film is Hollywood-esque and quite boring. The chase for riddles here sometimes comes across as almost childish. However, that doesn't change the fact that it works quite well and is a film that entertains.
()
Howard is innocent here. The plot, which is primarily about talking and talking, probably couldn't be filmed better. Even the actors do a solid job considering what the script allowed them to do (both Hanks and Tautou were fine, not to mention McKellen). And those two and a half hours did go by pretty quickly. Why 2* then? The problem is the rambling source material and, logically, the script. Brown confuses apples with pears, history with myths, creates conspiracy theories as a skillful manipulator, which are nice to listen to (and read), but at their core they are pulled from the proverbial ass and are closer to stupidity rather than controversy (but what can you expect from a man who confuses bits with bytes in his “Digital Fortress”, right?). How am I supposed to enjoy such a film when what it presents - from the premise to the unbelievable characters - is one big pile of nonsense? At the end, when the twist is revealed, I was just waiting for Monty Python to show up and sing a song. I can understand the big sales, a hearty media and advertising campaign can do wonders ("Film of the Century!" etc.), but I wonder, did this "poor man’s Daniken" really sell 60 million copies? Well, to each their own, but everyone gets what they deserve, of course.
()
Like the book, the picture is rather “naive" and rather than quality, we get solid craftsmanship instead. Thanks to the flatness of the characters, the actors have very little acting to do, which is highlighted by it being rather garrulous and so the entire movie relies on vocal performances. Although this could easily be cut down a good few minutes, in the end it is watchable without great damage to your health. But the only actually positive side of the whole Code is Zimmer’s soundtrack, which makes even the most boring dialog scene seem as if it is something fundamentally important for the story. The creators tended toward the secrecy storyline, which is therefore given the most space and so only a fraction of the movie is devoted to cracking the code and this becomes just a necessary evil with no power behind it, which is a great shame. OST score: 4/5
()
A boring source material that is even more boringly adapted, not to mention the inability to create at least a small dose of tension and dynamics. The screenwriter mixes together truth with myths and legends and creates is an unspeakable mess for the viewer, especially if they haven't read the book and are not familiar with religion. Tom Hanks doesn't do special and Audrey Tautou is there just for show. Only Paul Bettany, who is properly weird, is somewhat good. Ron Howard also completely fails to handle the more action-packed sequences. I haven't seen such muddled and restless cinematography during a nighttime chase in Paris in a long time. In the last ten minutes, we can see maybe five twists in short intervals, which completely demolished it for me. The most muddled and incomprehensible blockbuster of this year.
()
A suspenseful and sufficiently intricate piece that was dangerously fashionable to criticize at the time. Traditionally excellent performances by Tom Hanks, the beautiful Audrey Tautou, and the devilish Paul Bettany in a story that is attractive in both historical and contemporary terms, as well as relationship and religious aspects. Without knowledge of the source material, it is demanding of the viewer's attention on the first viewing, and it is only during the second viewing that you can calmly fill in the context.
()
Ads