I think you're overestimating this one a bit. Who's the market? It definitely doesn't have wide appeal unless your a big Tom Hanks fan..........

NEWS FLASH!!! The www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/ site has just crashed under the weight of all those tomatoes!!!

Cache:http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:...a&ct=clnk&cd=1

You are kidding, right? 40 million copies of the book sold. That's the market. Whether it's a good movie or sucks, it'll definitely have at least $50 million opening weekend. Long term, who knows, but the movie certainly has a wide appeal.

Not to mention the huge, untapped market for mullet merchandising...

Many book readers hate movie adaptations.. They also lose most of the teen to early 20's group as many won't even know the hell this flick is all about. Granted it will have a big opening week due to Hanks but I'd expect it to fall hard and fast. The reviews thus far have been brutal..........

The opening of Over the Hedge (good or bad) will steal some of TDC's take as well.........

I'm reading the book right now and enjoying it so I hope to catch the film too However the reviews I've read so far in England have been pretty crap too.
I've seen Paul Bettany on posters and in clips - doesnt he look a bit like Palpatine in Revenge of the Sith?

Rate it a 6.5 or B-

It's a treasure hunt picture along the lines of National Treasure with religous overtones.(Though I liked National Treasure and it's fun energy more than Da Vinci Code film) I read the book 2 years ago and the movie is very much faithful to the book except for some details(needlessly changed). I'm not sure but the movie lacked a certain sense of energy or emergency, a certain vitality. It was a workman like movie but not great. It was not a page turner like the novel It was good but.... felt slightly self important.
Maybe because I read the novel and knew the story and outcome the movie lost some of it's effect. Good, not as good a movie or as fun as MI3 or Poseidon. Runs a little long at 2:29, Howard could have chopped 10-15 minutes from the story.

What kind of overtones?

I'm going to see this later today, and I can say for certain that my expectations are definitely lowered. At this point, I'm more curious to see what is so bad about it rather than being excited to see what they did right.

I'm not going to see this. This movie isn't getting bad reviews because of being religious/anti-religious, hype, or because it's not as good as the book. It's getting bad reviews because it sucks. Frankly, I'm tired of these big overblown Hollywood productions.

I never read the book and I'm wondering why it's getting really bad press. I think it's a better film than that. Yes, the acting is a bit flat, but the plot is overtly serious in nature. Everyone is supposed to be brooding. From the nature and tone of the story, I expected this kind of flat acting. What, would it be more in tone if Will Smith was cast in the lead and does his usual, "OH HELL NO", when he comes across a dead body or something?

I enjoyed it but I didn't find anything bad about it, yet at the same time I didn't find it spectacular. It was good, plot cliches aside.

You saved me some typing. And I'll throw in the "Hanks is still a big movie star" addition.

I don't think Over the Hedge is going to steal any of DaVini Code's audience though, unless 6 year olds are interested in a religious thriller.

HAHAHAHAAHAH i bet NOBODY thought this would get worse reviews than Get Rich or Die Tryin' but alas! Go 50!!!

i think he meant:
overtones

Here is a quick video review:

The guys who will really have it tough this weekend are the albino mullets, also known as mullbinos... already a misunderstood minority, now terminally undecided about seeing "The Da Vinci Code"...

It's really a guess, but I would say it makes around $25m opening weekend. So many people I speak with that are regulars in the movies are skipping this one.

Well I was certainly disappointed. I wasn't letting the negative reviews disuade me from seeing this, because I thought the book was a fast paced fun piece of pop fiction and was hoping for the same thrilling, fun of a movie...but somehow, in sticking TOO CLOSELY to the book, they managed to make a movie that isn't nearly as fun, thrilling or interesting as IT thinks it is.

I think had they condensed some things, streamlined events and exposition and beefed up the action a bit (or at least better mine the action out of the few scenes in the film) it could have been a great 100min thrill ride. But instead, they chose to be slavishly true and lost all the "essence" of what made the book great in the first place.

It's tough to see Tom Hanks and Audrey both turn in ridgid, stiff and dull performances, but somehow, Howard manages to turn both leads into the cinematic equivalent of carrots dangling on a string, leading the audience along on a ride that seems to think the destination is more important than the journey. I'm sure anyone who hated the book is going to LOATHE the movie. I thought Paul Bettany was pretty good (although, I know 2 albinos, and they got the eyes wrong) and Ian McKellan was the films saving grace.

I think if the film had been in the hands of another creative team, we could have had something really special. Howard is in his element with stuff like "Cinderella Man" but like "The Missing" action/thrillers are not his fortay - both Missing and DaVinci are great eye candy, but they manage to take excellent ideas and dilute them with overlong running times, stiff acting and lackluster pacing.

The first real bitter disappointment of the summer for me. Hopefully X3 next week will put things back on track.

MATT

p.s. I find it funny how critics/audiences all called "National Treasure" the lite version of DaVinci Code...and now that both films are here, "National Treasure" ended up being the one that ACTUALLY delivered.

I'm thinking it makes close to that today.

I never read the book and I enjoyed the movie. I cant believe so many people hate it. I may give the book a try eventually.

Well, it looks like Roeper liked it too. So, two thumbs up from Ebert & Roeper.

Saw it. Thought both the book and the movie were pretty good, but nothing more than that level. I agree with the claim that they were too faithful to the book; did we really need to have Silas' backstory, not to mention so much background on both Langdon and Sophie? Akiva Goldsman sure didn't have problems tinkering with some of source material for A Beautiful Mind, wish he had done so in this case. Like I said, entertaining, but paint by the numbers at best. Action/Thriller really isn't Ron Howard's strong point as a director, as most of his attempts at darker material like Ransom and The Missing are rather lackluster IMO. This movie seemed like he was trying to be Brian DePalma, which is like Spielberg trying to be Kubrick.
So in a nutshell, and I hate to say this, I am counting on a movie directed by Brett Ratner to kick my summer movies into high gear. How scary is that? The movies thus far have not been that bad (well, Poseidon was), but none of them have floored me like the days of Gladiator, Indiana Jones, or the Star Wars movies did in summers past.

I guess I'm one of the few who really liked it. Never read the book, so I don't have anything to compare it to.

16% at Rotten Tomatoes

First box office reports

I just got back from seeing this. I enjoyed it and it was very very close to the book. A little slow I admit, but it doesn't deserve the negative feedback either from the public or the church. Get over it people!!