The Da Vinci Code
2006
Drama, Suspense/Thriller
2h 29m
Based on Dan Brown's popular and controversial novel, The Da Vinci Code begins with a spectacular murder in the Louvre Museum. All clues point to a covert religious organization that will stop at nothing to protect a secret that threatens to overturn 2,000 years of accepted dogma. (Sony)
Directed by:
Your probable score
?
The Da Vinci Code
2006
Drama, Suspense/Thriller
2h 29m
Your probable score
Avg Percentile 32.14% from 13191 total ratings
Ratings & Reviews
(13190)
Compact view
Compact view
Show
Sort
Rated 31 Jul 2009
1
1st
A film based upon one of the worst books ever published was always going to be a real shitter. Forget the books subject matter as its totally irrelivant, because most of all this is a dull, excruciatingly boring movie, and the dialouge is (obviously considering its origin) absolutely terrible. Needless to say it's a film for people with less brain cells than fingers.
Rated 31 Jul 2009
Rated 10 Feb 2007
45
17th
Not as bad as the critics make it look, but yeah, it's a total waste of plot. Lets thank Ron Howard and of course the biggest miscast ever: TOM HANKS as Langdon.
Rated 10 Feb 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
90
91st
The Haters(critics) should go sleep with their bibles. Good film.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 18 Sep 2009
56
13th
I was ultimately bored with this movie by the end of it and didn't really care about what was happening in it. Oh no Jesus slept with someone or something? Guess that means this crazy albino monk is going to come after you for finding out.
Rated 18 Sep 2009
Rated 03 Oct 2009
15
4th
Pretty fucking bad
Rated 03 Oct 2009
Rated 30 Dec 2006
40
30th
Angry anti-religion stuff: awesome. Shots of Audrey Tautou looking so forlorn and distressed that I want to hold her and write her love poems so she won't kill herself: awesome. Weird Tom Hanks hair and sort of insane Jesus plot: not awesome.
Rated 30 Dec 2006
Rated 12 Jan 2007
35
10th
I'm not sure what's stupider. This film (which wastes Hanks, Bettany and Molina) based on an absolutely terrible book, or the ridiculous controversy around it. I think it's a tie.
Rated 12 Jan 2007
Rated 26 Feb 2009
36
13th
Awesome, superb, intriguing, very nicely done, great characters and astonishing scenes. So far the book... I wish the film would have been more like it but actually the movie is really bad, some scenes are really bad and Tom Hank is so annoying as Robert Langdon. He really puts nothing into his role. He annoyed me from the firt minute..
Rated 26 Feb 2009
Rated 08 Dec 2006
15
1st
Quite simply, one of the drabbest films I've ever seen. Certainly not amazing, but there's nothing offensively bad here, which eliminates the "so bad it's good" factor. A miscast Tom Hanks, who rarely fails to deliver a quality performance, becomes a black hole of charisma, and none of the on-screen relationships that are set up actually generate any kind of electricity.
Rated 08 Dec 2006
Rated 18 Dec 2006
2
21st
Tom Hanks is so miscast it hurts (never thought I'd say that). The religious controversy that this stirred up is nothing short of laughable. But my God Audrey is sure nice to look at, as always. The movie is a joke but so was the book, what'd you expect?
Rated 18 Dec 2006
Rated 14 Jan 2007
40
9th
SEE how Tom hanks' thoughts are visualised with imaginary neon letters. WATCH the very same letters rearranging themselves to form some stupid anagram. HEAR how he delivers an exciting expostion about the crusader knights. DONT see this movie.
Rated 14 Jan 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
50
11th
While the book was a page turner, albeit a guilty pleasure, this movie is too ponderous and serious. Mckellen and Bettany are very good--Molina's a cartoon villain. Hanks and Tautou are boring, basically. The book is better! The movie is glossily made, with some cool flashbacks to the past. But lighten up!
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
64
28th
Pretty silly overall, but not nearly as bad as the universal critical rejection would lead you to believe. The biggest problems are the arbitrary developments in the story and the formulaic twists, which become unnecessary and cumbersome during the last forty five minutes or so. Ian McKellan is spectacular, as always.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
10
1st
a masterpiece of bad screenwriting. boring as hell
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 12 Sep 2007
30
17th
It's a boring story about Gandalf playing tricks on Forrest Gump.
Rated 12 Sep 2007
Rated 14 Oct 2007
40
6th
Tom Hanks's hair is Da Vinci's only redeeming quality, but damn if it isn't one big fucking redeeming quality.
Rated 14 Oct 2007
Rated 05 Dec 2007
10
7th
atroce
Rated 05 Dec 2007
Rated 28 Feb 2008
40
24th
Well it's not HORRENDOUS like the average review seems to make it sound but that's not to say it's very good either. The flaws are not in the acting or the minor dialog problems (which are there but not of movie-ruining quality) but rather just how absurd the plot twists and riddles get. By the end I felt like it could've been watching the old Adam West Batman with The Riddler as this week's villan.
Rated 28 Feb 2008
Rated 17 Apr 2008
37
18th
For a film with subject matter so taboo, it's a wonder it comes off so dull. Howard, by not wanting to run the risk of offending anyone, never runs the risk of entertaining them either. McKellen is the only reason the film is worth watching. Sure he does a wee bit of scenery-chewing, but his presence manages to single-handedly pump life into this stagnant adventure. The movie dazzles every time he's on-screen, he somehow makes it fun. Too bad it carries on for another 25mins after his exit...
Rated 17 Apr 2008
Rated 05 May 2008
30
12th
Putrescent.
Rated 05 May 2008
Rated 12 May 2008
30
3rd
Dull. Boring. Nothing much happens. The real mystery here is why the hell is this two hours ?
Rated 12 May 2008
Rated 27 Jul 2008
20
0th
The most appallingly idiotic plot ever devised.
Rated 27 Jul 2008
Rated 12 Oct 2008
55
40th
Not nearly as good as the book, and the book wasn't that amazing...
Rated 12 Oct 2008
Rated 12 Aug 2009
10
3rd
Worthless.
Rated 12 Aug 2009
Rated 10 Jan 2010
13
6th
I don't really remember much. Something something Jesus something something. To be honest I was enthralled with Tom Hank's coiff for most of the film.
Rated 10 Jan 2010
Rated 23 Jun 2010
45
35th
Dull and forgettable. Whilst the book was enjoyable, it functioned more like a puzzle than an actual story. Goldsman (who wrote 'Batman & Robin') fails to adapt the story, and basically just jotted down the greatest hits, making all characters paper thin and plot driven. This film won't offend anyone, but it's hard to see it as anything but redundant.
Rated 23 Jun 2010
Rated 02 Dec 2010
10
9th
"Ron Howard's adaptation of Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code is a marriage made in mediocrity." - Nick Schager
Rated 02 Dec 2010
Rated 29 Jun 2011
33
9th
While the novel wasn't exactly Shakespeare, it at least managed to be an entertaining, well-paced lark, unlike this plodding, dull slog of a big-budget movie adaptation. What happened, Mr. Howard?
Rated 29 Jun 2011
Rated 03 Sep 2011
30
12th
After the book this was a disappointment, but not surprising. The book reveals the mystery at a great pace and being that reading takes more time than a film it gave you time to digest it. So it was interspersed with action. The entirety of it goes to fast, but doing it slower may not have been a fix. Some books just don't fit well as films. Also Angels and Demons should have been made first since it actually takes place first.
Rated 03 Sep 2011
Rated 31 Dec 2012
75
37th
Fast-paced, shallow, silly, easy to follow - the film version is everything the book was, but in a shorter and slightly less stultifying experience. Ron Howard is better at working with this kind of material than Dan Brown was, although nothing he does hides the inherent weaknesses in story and character (especially any time bad guys are on screen). On the plus side, the cast is alright, the plot is entertaining enough - all in all I have seen much worse thrillers, and many of them.
Rated 31 Dec 2012
Rated 10 May 2014
20
14th
What is going on with Tom Hanks' hair? This is one of the most distracting haircuts I've seen on an actor... Is it a wig? It's almost as bad as those dreadlocks worn by Travolta in Battlefield Earth. Seriously who decided this was a good look?
Rated 10 May 2014
Rated 07 Jan 2023
25
14th
A badly paced thriller (and way too long), a badly structured mystery (that the audience can't participate in), and a woefully centrist story about religious oppression (that still feels like college freshman levels of "defeated with facts and logic"), with a subdued Tom Hanks in a role that belongs to an over-the-top Nicholas Cage. Christopher Lee does an amazing job giving the audience something to invest in, and his presence makes the runtime bearable, but it's just not worth your attention.
Rated 07 Jan 2023
Rated 12 Dec 2006
72
32nd
It's fun enough for a turn your brain off summer blockbuster. No matter how contrived the conspiracy theory may be, it's still fun to watch and keeps you guessing if you don't take it seriously.
Rated 12 Dec 2006
Rated 15 Dec 2006
85
20th
good, but it could have been better. book was wayy better
Rated 15 Dec 2006
Rated 29 Dec 2006
60
16th
FLAT... very disappointed. Should have been better.
Rated 29 Dec 2006
Rated 05 Jan 2007
65
39th
The visuals and soundtrack worth 50 points.
Rated 05 Jan 2007
Rated 09 Feb 2007
82
47th
Not as bad as many others say. Quite entertaining when Ian McKellen shows up. Definately NOT worst of the year.
Rated 09 Feb 2007
Rated 18 Feb 2007
76
7th
Takes itself WAY too seriously, but McKellan's wicked performance keeps things from being too flat.
Rated 18 Feb 2007
Rated 22 Feb 2007
50
35th
Fairly good made that way by a great cast.
Rated 22 Feb 2007
Rated 05 Mar 2007
78
37th
Way over-rated novel... but an OK movie IF you know the plot well...
Rated 05 Mar 2007
Rated 18 Mar 2007
57
25th
This movie is not terrible but it's certainly nowhere near as good as it should have been. Great actors and an experienced director should have made for an instant win, especially given the subject content. Oh well!
Rated 18 Mar 2007
Rated 19 Mar 2007
38
9th
It's much duller than its ideas, source material, filmmakers (Ron Howard/Brian Grazer) and leading man (Tom Hanks) would have you predict. A big successful blockbuster failure. Odd.
Rated 19 Mar 2007
Rated 24 Mar 2007
50
12th
The whole time, I was thinking "Man, I'd like to be watching Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade." Not sure what that says about this movie.
Rated 24 Mar 2007
Rated 10 Apr 2007
43
22nd
I try and succeed too don't about Dan Brown and his crap about Da Vinci Code. But movie is not better then the story. Too naive and absurd in most of part of movie.... So that money I think now go wasted....
Rated 10 Apr 2007
Rated 16 May 2007
77
26th
They should have made Angels & Demons instead. Makes me think the just made this to cash in on the success of the book.
Rated 16 May 2007
Rated 08 Jun 2007
45
26th
Howard is a skilled craftsman, still flashing a storytelling clarity and attention to key details common to those who emerged from the Corman School. In the service of eye-rolling junk like this, it's purely wasted effort. The only one involved in the film who seems to know it's hogwash is McKellen, who brings a drolly cantankerous quality to his scenes. Everyone else just strides along, solemnly bearing the duty of creating blockbuster entertainment sadly devoid of actual entertainment value.
Rated 08 Jun 2007
Rated 24 Jul 2007
36
10th
I'm not sure what made this movie so bad. Maybe it was the awful book that it was based on. Maybe it was the terrible miscasting of actors. Maybe it was the horrendous screenplay. Whatever it was, this movie is not worth your time.
Rated 24 Jul 2007
Rated 28 Jul 2007
85
10th
Extremely disappointing treatment of the novel by the same name. Too many important scenes were either cut or simply not made.
Rated 28 Jul 2007
Rated 03 Aug 2007
74
32nd
The perfect cinematic equivalent of an airport novel: passes the time, but leaves no lasting impression.
Rated 03 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
75
30th
One of the few books I've read recently, and this looked almost exactly as I pictured it in my mind... The only thing that didn't work for me was the relationship between Hanks and Tautou. They were probably both mis-cast, but 'wow!'; talk about no chemistry...!
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
40
9th
For those that read the book, not nearly as good. For those that didn't read the book, you'll be totally lost. In other words, bad movie idea. Go see National Treasure instead, much more code solving and plot twists.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
30
2nd
I went hoping to be entertained but wound up bored. Ian McKellen's performance adds some needed camp and bounce to a pretty flat movie. That and there are a few moments that are unintentionally funny. Boring.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
60
18th
Did NOT live up to the hype. Tom Hanks did an absolutely horrible job as Robert Langdon, the book is much better.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
62
17th
Rather mediocre. It's not as bad as many of the critics said. I wasn't bored, but I wasn't entertained much either. The story itself is pretty silly and I am amazed at how stupid the church is - they freely advertise and promote the film by asking people not to see it. Really not sure what the fuss is all about.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
72
48th
There is/was entirely too much hype about this movie and book, neither of which are that great. The book is simple Angels and Demons used as a mad libs guideline. However, the movie did entertain slightly for a little
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
45
7th
Good adaption of the book. The problem is that the movie is mainly a (wrong) documentation interrupted by action sequences.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
78
22nd
I had not - and still have not - read this book, so I'm sure there were a lot of ignored juicy bits of set up and tension. But one MUST remember: A book is a great BASIS for a movie story - which is an entirely different style of storytelling. That being said, I enjoyed this movie.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
40
14th
it was entertaining, however silly. I don't see why the church is so uppity about this, it's like a bad indianna jones movie
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
30
14th
tom hanks was a terrible choice; i hate dan brown and his ridiculous plots
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
75
51st
Good enough movie to hold my attention for over two hours, fun and smart
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
72
36th
Audrey Tautou, as pretty as she is, isn't made for English roles. Hanks is losing his touch, McKellan was good, but overall, a "holey" movie. (I should get paid for that)
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
30
14th
Some really interesting ideas that sort of get lost in this insipid treasure hunt thing. Unable to suspend my disbelief with the cute little poems.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
75
60th
Engaging and surprising, this picture met all my criteria for great entertainment: An interesting story, told through great actors, and unpredictable movement to a terrific conclusion. Thumbs up!
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
70
58th
Hm... I loved the book, but not as much as Angels and Demons. I'd recommend picking those up for sure. As for the movie itself... it was 'alright'. I'm going to ignore all of the 'religious significance, WoOoooOooOOo' that everyone keeps rambling about, because I don't care. As a movie, it's worth seeing for sure but don't expect to be rox0rred out of your seat.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
40
7th
Not bad if it was a TV feature but it is not worth seeing on a big screen. You can hardly understand if you didn't read the book and very boring if you did.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
70
65th
Not having read the book, I was entertained by the movie. It had a great premise and backdrop. The writing itself was average but enough to get the point of the story across. My friend who had read the book prior to seeing the film was thoroughly disappointed in it's adaptation. I can only speak as I saw it, and therefore, I give it a decent score.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
40
17th
A movie that's way above the book. Too bad that it still makes it quite bad.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
53
26th
I enjoyed watching it, I guess. I thought the story was silly, and not just because it has bizarro-world implications for Catholicism. The acting was wooden and irritating, especially Jean Reno whose character is about as necessary as the repeated scenes of self-flagellation. The wild goose chase was entertaining until it became unclear who was going where and why and with whom. Probably confusing because there's only so much you can do with a 2 hour movie, but they spent nearly 1/8 of that tim
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
60
50th
The book was much more absorbing.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
75
39th
The film had some slow parts and less suspense than expected. I was looking for a National Treasure like movie where Da Vinci hid clues in his artwork. I have not read the book as you can tell. Maybe score will change when released on dvd.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
75
73rd
I appreciated it overall, Silas could have been better. But the set designer deserves all the credit, the subtle overtones were amazing.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
55
30th
It didn't live up to the book.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
42
11th
If I hadn't read the book, I would have been very lost. It was ok but nothing spectacular. Too long.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
48
32nd
interesting concept but a not so great movie
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
10
5th
Perhaps Akiva Goldsman should just have narration for all of his films, instead of giving the poor actors the job of reciting these lines. Just a terrible, stupid, poorly made film on every single creative and technical level. Ian McKellan chews scenery with an all-you-can-eat coupon. Too many lowlights to mention during an interminable runtime. Stay away.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
30
11th
Like a cinematic accompaniment to the book rather than a film of its own. Empty, slow and what the hell were they thinking with Tom Hank's hair?!?
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
33
11th
It wasn't clever, the characters changed alignment every 10 minutes, Hanks' acting was lazy as hell (and he sounded like he had a cold during some scenes), and Molina was thrown away. Paul Bettany was about the only bright spot. This could've been an amazing, insightful movie, and they even scratch the surface when McKellen's character talks about the hints given by art, but... sigh.
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
44
5th
Having not read the book i expected a massive boredom.Surpsringly it was slightly more enjoyable than i expected.Ian McKellen for emperor!!!
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
40
31st
The Comedy Hit of 2006!
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
3
28th
I love Ron Howard forever for ushering Arrested Development into existence, but this movie does very little for me. Ian McKellan is by far the bright point of the cast. I used to think Tom Hanks had infinite range, but he is either miscast or extremely bored here!
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Rated 14 Aug 2007
35
9th
Probably the worst Ron Howard movie ever (including Grinch).
Rated 14 Aug 2007
Cast & Info
Directed by:
Collections
(42)
Compact view
Show
Sort
Moderated by iconogassed
Last updated on with Girls on the Bus
Moderated by kubricksucks
Last updated on with Perfect Days
Moderated by BeeDub
Last updated on with Kung Fu Panda 4
Moderated by PeaceAnarchy
Last updated on with Faraway Downs
Moderated by td888
Last updated on with Celebrity Hunted: Chasse à l'homme
Moderated by tathiel
Last updated on with Me, bebia, Iliko da Ilarioni
Moderated by Pickpocket
Last updated on with The Great Indian Family
Moderated by fanfic
Last updated on with The Last Witch Hunter
Moderated by PeaceAnarchy
Last updated on with The Help
Moderated by fanfic
Last updated on with Assassin's Creed
Moderated by peyrin
Last updated on with The Lion King
Moderated by QuickyAPI
Last updated on with Ice Age: Continental Drift
Moderated by nauru
Last updated on with Planet Earth III
Moderated by djross
Last updated on with Detective Chinatown 3
Moderated by Ag0stoMesmer
Last updated on with The Killing of a Sacred Deer
Moderated by Phantom Nook
Last updated on with Batman: Assault on Arkham
Moderated by fanfic
Last updated on with Babylon A.D.
Moderated by monocle
Last updated on with Close Your Eyes
Moderated by Roman_Herbom
Last updated on with Bombardier
Moderated by djross
Last updated on with Jumanji: The Next Level
Moderated by livelove
Last updated on with National Treasure: Book of Secrets
Showing 1 - 24 of 42 results
Similar Titles
Loading ...
Statistics
Loading ...
PSI
?