Jamie and I saw The Da Vinci Code today. I gotta be honest - I don't know if it deserved all the negative critical reviews it's been getting. I've heard other reviewers comment that it moved way too slow and that the acting was sub-par. I disagree. First of all, it's an "intellectual" thriller, not Lethal Weapon. Second of all, I thought Ian McKellan was awesome, Audrey Tautou was good, and Tom Hanks wasn't bad. Hanks just underplayed the role, which is not something we're used to seeing from him. The movie stayed very true to the book.
Movies based on best-selling books are always overly criticized. The only exception to this is The Lord of the Rings. The only reason TLOTR trilogy was so successful is that it DIDN'T stay true to the books. If it would have it would have droned on for days (which you can do in a book, but not so much a movie). So I felt that, for a movie primarily about obscure historical references, The Da Vinci Code was pretty good. That's not to say I agreed with any of the claims - the whole story is still a complete load of BS - but from a critical point of view, it wasn't a bad film.