I wouldn't say sucked as in actorish, I quite like him as an actor, he just wasn't suited to the part of Rob Langdon..
His look suits the part, but I think Tom Hanks is too good of an actor than to play Rob Langdon. IMO, Tom should've turned down the movie. I wont remember this as a high point in his career.
I dont think it was Tom Hanks best but i dont think it was his worst ether.(Random Fact id you know Tom Hanks is related to Aberham lincon )
Is he really? You're right. We could've had a repeat of "You've got Mail" (And yes, I really didnt like that movie.)
It isnt the casting that affected it, it had the potential to be a really good follow up for the book. And it just killed it, personall I would not have used the Da Vinci code, but rather Angels and Demons...gives a lot better oppurtunities for film action scenes etc.
OK well I didnt get to read the book yet (I'll probably read it soon tho) , but I did get the background info on the book, and know whats real and whats not from that History Channel thing which I watched for like 6 hours haha. Anyways, having not read the book, I thought the movie was very good. Maybe some of the acting could have been betetr, and some of the characters were extremely annoying, but overall the move had a very good feel to it, and i didnt lose my interest in the movie, through the 2+ hours o it.
Can anyone tell me the rough outline of what its about? Im a christan but I still might see it, to see what all the fuss is about.