Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

micheal-ballack-y This is the worst I've ever seen. If you read the book , try not to watch this movie. 1.the characters are nothing as described in the book, many as well not even in the movie! Where the hell are they? 2.what the fuuuuuuu just happened to the ending?????? Why changing it so much!!! The ending has nothing to do with what the writer described in the book, why did the hell they changes it and made it too easy and not even fun? 3.WORST THIS I'VE EVER SEEN! STOP DESTROYING THE PEOPLE'S FAVORITE BOOKS JUST TO GET THE DAMN MONEY! 4. So many scenes are not even close to the book. This is just some poor production , and bad acting, everyone seems to be just want to finish the damn movie.

paulancheta I expected much more thrill from the double-crossings and intrigues that define Dan Brown's novels, but that isn't here. The secret corridors, passages, and doors of Florence are regrettably shot like a travelogue, and not as sources of suspense. Even the hellacious flashbacks--portrayed darkly in the novel--were uninspired. Sidse Babett Knudsen--andTom Hanks' haircut--saves the movie from being forgettable.

Raymond I haven't read the books, but have liked the first two movies to a point. Not my favorite stuff by any means, but I enjoy a good cinema experience with good story, cinematography and acting. In the first two movies I felt that they put too little emphasis on the story and figuring out clues, there was never a true revelation of figuring out something great, but the movies looked good and there was a feeling of big budget blockbuster.Now with this third movie even the cinematic feel is gone. They've decided to shoot this very differently with constant moving/shaking camera and the editing is so fast paced that there is no sense of being there at all. It's a mind boggling choice, because to me a lot of what makes this kind of movies good is the detachment of your daily surroundings and "visiting" all the gorgeous places they go to. Churches, palaces, museums, different countries. The cinematography is so damn ugly in this movie that it really makes me wonder what the hell were they thinking. Cheap fx shots of "being dizzy", flash backs etc. The camera doesn't stay still for a second.One of the worst "big" movies I've seen lately.

davechef We all know Hanks & how he loves to 'edge' it, but i was really hoping for a win-win where humans (in the millions) die to preserve the race ! which must happen anyway !. all in all a great piece of chewing gum. Why was the cop a good looking girl ? titillation,why was the 'baddie' black ? perception.