I can’t say I was ever bored, which is the most important part in a mystery/thriller film. The Da Vinci Code, which runs just about 2 and a half hours (almost three if you watch the extended cut), kept me engaged throughout, with only very short periods where I started to lose focus. At these times, the exposition got to me, despite still being interesting.
The plot involves a key murder that ends up in conspiracy regarding the Catholic Church. A man who is only referred to by his last name, Saunière (Jean-Pierre Marielle) is killed in an opening sequence that resembles many a horror film. His killer isn’t hidden from us though; we get to see enough of him to recognize him later on with relative ease. His name is Silas (Paul Bettany), and after the murder, he chastises his body in an attempt to resolve himself of his sins. He strips down naked and beats himself with a whip. It’s unpleasant to watch, but the film shows it to us regardless. It wants us to see the dedication that this man has to his faith.
A police captain named Fache (Jean Reno) interrupts a book signing by the famed Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks). He’s brought in to decipher a possible code that the deceased left beside his body, but while the investigation is going on, a woman named Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou) shows up claiming there’s a message for Langdon on a cell phone she gives him. It’s from her, and it claims that he’s in grave danger. It turns out that Fache is certain the Langdon committed the murder, and he’s determined to put the good professor away for a crime that he clearly didn’t commit.
So the two end up faking out the police and go on the run, all while trying to determine what exactly the old man wanted to tell them. They encounter a bunch of people who either aid or hinder them in their goal, including Silas, Langdon’s old friend Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen), and a Bishop named Aringarosa (Alfred Molina) — who I suppose they never technically meet, but whose presence is felt nonetheless.
They go through a multitude of contrivances during their journey. Do you expect anything else? This is primarily a mystery film, and everything has to fit into place or else the movie won’t function properly. Sure, it’s preposterous that everything just happens to be falling into place now, but that comes with the territory. However, that’s not the only thing that’s only somewhat difficult to believe.
The entire plot, which is more or less revealed to us in a 20 minute spiel given to us by Teabing, involves the Holy Grail, the child of Jesus Christ, Opus Dei, and the Priory of Sion. Apparently, there has been a war going on for thousands of years that hides a secret that could potentially dissolve all faith in the Catholic Church. It’s crazy when you step back and think about everything that’s going on here, but if you do that, you’re missing the point. It doesn’t matter if it’s possible, it matters that characters in the film believe these myths and that they’re willing to kill one another over them. (In fact, I think Langdon says something similar early on in the film.)
Since these characters all believe it, or at least, the villains do, it all feels real during events of the movie. At the end of the day, as long as we believe it in the moment, it will work when we watch the film. I think I’ve seen The Da Vinci Code three times, and every time I was drawn in. Skeptical as I may be — although you certainly don’t have to be a skeptic to doubt the events that transpire here — I find myself engaged in the story to the extent that I almost forget I’m watching a work of fiction.
However, I was occasionally taken out of the film thanks to the overlong periods of exposition. Characters take ten, fifteen and sometimes even twenty minutes simply explaining what’s either happening or what happened hundreds or thousands of years ago. Sophie is the character that rarely has a clue what’s going on, so everything has to be explained for her (but really our) benefit. It seemed to me that there were times when unnecessary explanation occurred, containing points that didn’t have an impact on the story. A little trimming might have been beneficial in these areas.
The Da Vinci Code also plays out somewhat odd in that it has moments of action and thrills, but then comes to a sudden halt to give us these exposition segments. Instead of progressing into them organically, we are jarred by how suddenly the action stops and then picks up again after we’ve been overloaded with information. Granted, that information is interesting and absorbing it all might take more than one viewing which gives the film replay value, but the way the film moves from action to exposition doesn’t flow the way I would suggest that it should.
I should mention for the one or two of you who don’t know that this is an adaptation of a novel by the same named written by Dan Brown. It follows the novel closely, so I suppose that its two main problems are directly attributed to the book. But if you enjoyed Dan Brown’s bestseller, then you’ll probably really enjoy the movie as well, because it’s a genuinely thrilling experience that certainly drew me in.
The Da Vinci Code is a wonderful escapist film, one where I lost myself in the story and forgot to care whether or not it could actually be true. Obviously, at least in my eyes, it cannot be, but while the film plays, I forgot that. It’s a mystery film that has the ability to draw you in and take you through an enjoyable journey full of revelations and twists — at least, whenever it isn’t explaining itself to you. Regardless, I had a lot of fun with it and would recommend it to anyone willing to pay attention throughout.