I think it suffers from the fact that everyone who's reviewed the movie has read the book. It's kind of a can't win situation.

It also suffers from the fact that the book is so bad nothing associated with it could ever turn out good.

I decided I wasn't going to see this movie.


A rating of 10% does not help change my mind...

I read the book. As a novel, it was okay, but no where near as good as to deserve all this hype.

<3

Too bad rottentomatoes is wrong about every movie I've ever looked up (It always has an opinion opposite of mine).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060517/ts_nm/leisure_cannes_davinci_dc

blam.

Poor ratings won't stop me from seeing this movie. The critics are mostly Christian, you know... Something tells me most of the ratings are given because of Christian bias.

Or because it does in fact suck?

Ha ha.

Or, let's see it and decide for ourselves instead of trusting rottentomatoes. It's my opinion that their reviews are always biased to some degree. :p

I'm still amped to see it on friday

Ian McKellan is a bad ***.

Neither the book or this movie has ever interested me, glad to see godbotherers matching my expectations totally, though.

you stole my word you horrid finland man

Yup.

It's NOT a cinimatic story. They're also putting it into the category of a summer blockbuster, assuming it's flashy, bright and explosive. It's not going to be any of those things.

Why is it wrong/annoying for people who hold a set of beliefs to diss something that skews fundamental parts of these beliefs candy-coated with corporate/Hollywood glitz?

If someone made an otherwise terribly filmed movie about George Washington being gay, would Americans have an "American bias" when watching it? Should people not be allowed to comment on a movie because it deals with something personal to them?

When someone reviews a movie, they do not do so with the intent of saying "DO OR DO NOT WATCH THIS," it is merely a report of how they reacted to the film and a suggestion to a common-denominator audience who might have the same taste in film as the reviewer.

Quoted for sheer, absolute, positive, unadulterated truth. I don't trust critics when it comes to whether a movie is good. I trust family and friends' opinions.

Where the heck do you get this!? Most people were complaining that it wasn't as good as the book.

The book sucks, therefore the movie cant be any better...

I still don't think that this movie should have been made at all. At no point in my reading of the novel, did I say to myself, "I'd like to see this on the big screen." As Kirby said, it is not a cinematic story. So to hear that it might not be the best film really isn't a surprise. I also didn't want it made into a movie because I knew from Day One that when this film was released, it would start up the annoying controversy about its content all over again. I got sick of it when the book came out, and I'm sick of it again.

OOOOH WOW!! A total of 30 reviews have been logged. Big ****in deal.

When there's over a hundred, then I'll start taking the average seriously.

That, and I'll wait until more reviews come infrom people who aren't critics. I have yet to come across a movie critic that can say that a movie is enertainining even if i isn;t as oscar winner.

People forget that it's a piece of fiction! Just a novel like any other idea.

Described by Stephen Fry as "A discrace to modern literature" as it is indeed poorly written.

To call it expect it to be literature is just plain silly. It never set out to be literature.

Jesus does not approve?

Uh, what did it set out to be? Music?

I think SOMEBODY wants to be in my sig!

If it entertains me and captures my imagination, its good enough for me.

Literature, in my opinion, ends up being read in English Lit. classes a hundred years from now because the book is a classic. The Da Vinci Code wouldn't fall into that category.

I think most Christians realize this book is a work of fiction.

a trash novel then.

This is why I hate reviews:

"Way too long and duller than watching Da Vinci's paint dry...takes away the book's little credibility and makes the flaws more obvious."

Basically, he hated the movie before he even saw it.

Everything I've heard (From independent sources) about the movie says that Tom Hanks is absolutely horrid, and the movie is all hype, which doesn't convert the book well to the screen.

I would hope so, but there are always those few that make me scratch my head:

[quote=The article MB linked to]Even before its general release on May 18 and 19, The Da Vinci Code generated controversy as Christians around the world called for it to be banned.

The novel has enraged religious groups because one of its characters argues that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and had a child by her, and that elements within the Catholic Church resorted to murder to hide the truth.

In Thailand on Wednesday, a police-run censorship board overturned an earlier decision to cut the last 10 minutes of the film, but insisted the distributor add disclaimers stating it was fiction.

A Vatican cardinal has called for a boycott of the picture, and the Indian government said it would show the movie to Christian groups before clearing its release. In the mainly Catholic Philippines censors gave it an "adult only" rating.[/quote]

Dumb story, claimed to be fact by idiots. Now it will turn into a 7 page argument.

I have never read the book, nor have I seen the movie (though I plan to do both in the near future). However I was told by my Art History Proffessor (I'm an Art History Major) that the book was very poorly researched (in terms of the Art History). My teacher has very little respect for Dan Brown's work because she finds flaws in his scholarship. As a rule I'm inclined to give credence to the opinions of a published Doctor of Art History.

My Art History teacher said that too.

Does not interest me, therefore I shall not read nor see either the book or the movie.