Anyone who’s read the actual book will find the movie very well done. Langdon, played by Tom Hanks did a good job playing the symbologist. As the story unfold they run through Paris then England as their chased by everyone from the Vatican to Opus Dei and Police who were are just trying to tie the murder or a lowly curator to Langdon.

Having read the book in preparation for the movie, I was highly entertained and the movie translated well to film. Of course, like ALL books to movies, there were a few lacking points that I enjoyed more in the book, then in the movie. There were a few minor changes to the story as well, but all in all, was pretty true to the book. The major point on this was Agent Sophie Neveu (Played by Audrey Tautou). She had A LOT to do with the story and unfolding of it. They changed that in the movie, having Langdon come up with a lot of the riddle’s answers. Which, I guess would be fine, if it didn’t make it seem like some kind of Heroic Cliché. In the Book, he was more of a map legend for Sophie. She was the key to the whole story, all he did was guide her and help her understand what was going on.

That aside, there’s one other thing that really didn’t sit well with me. Tom Hanks. What could I say bad about him? I mean, he’s an award winning actor, he made friends with a Volley Ball! Hehehe… I’m no actor, nor could I possibly do any better, but to me, I think Tom could have done better. In the book Langdon was very human, very down to earth and seemed a mortal. In the movie, Tom made him look one dimensional. You really didn’t relate to him a whole lot and to me the acting was sub-Tom Hanks par. This was made even apparent in his scenes with Ian McKellen (Who Played Sir Leigh Teabing) and even, though to a lesser extent Audrey Tautou.

Over all. If your looking for a good movie to watch or enjoyed the book and you love a good suspense movie, then check it out. Defiantly worth the popcorn. 3 ½ Katana’s.