It is a popcorn flick. Nothing more than that. But lightyears better than The Da Vinci Code which is dull, tedious and flat-out bad. I have read the book more than 5 years ago and although most of the parts kind of escaped me, I still feel that the plausibility of the plot far exceeds the preposterousness of its supposed sequel. I might have to agree with Stellan Skaarsgard's claim of Dan Brown's inability to write, and the film obviously compensated for the majority of the novel's drawbacks. Certainly, compressing an 300-page/11-hr book into a 2-hr film have to go through arduous process of truncating specific scenes, omitting characters and probably rewriting the overall flow, but astonishingly I agree with it as being somewhat effective. Although Ron Howard's camerawork and the penchant for that Michael Bay technique is not necessary and perhaps gives the movie the impression of being...well, just a popcorn flick.
