So dark the con of man...

When a movie is made based on one of the most controversial and widely criticized novels in history of mankind, half the battle is already won. No matter what the movie critics say or write, chances are that 50% of the general population will watch the movie "out of curiosity". Another 30% who have actually read the book will want to see the characters and places described in the story being fleshed out on the silver screen. The remaining 20% are the ones who couldn't get a ticket for X-MEN III.

So what's the verdict? It's quite thankful that it's been a while since I read the book, so I forgot some of the twists, such as who is the true identity of the "Rector". So for a plot-driven movie, it holds up well. However, why must they explain everything in words?! At least, there are "recreated" visuals to aid us in imagining the world of the Roman wars and Pagan demise. The direction is messy and bland, with no chance for the audience to connect with the heroes. The scenes are so dark that sometimes I wonder if they decided to turn down the lights just to hide all the flaws of the movie. Even the much anticipated albino self flagelating monk Silas was forgettable. I mean, at least Darth Vader had more character in Star Wars 3!

Anyhow, I think that the story turned out much better on paper than on celluloid. For a plot that relies on the conspiracy theory, the countless explanations and wordiness of the script did not do much justice to the wasted talents of Tom Hanks and Ian McKellen.

TWO out of FIVE stars at most.