±«Óãtv

I've just returned from a press screening of The Da Vinci Code, ahead of the worldwide launch tomorrow. Two categories of people will probably be disappointed by the film: those who have read the book and those who have been looking forward to the movie.

For all its flaws, the book is vastly better than the film. And I say that as one who felt sullied after reading the book, which is art history for those who've never been to an art gallery, theology for those who've never read the Bible, and literature for those who've rarely been to a library. Did that sound patronising? Apologies. Some of Harvard religious symbology professor Robert Langdon's lecture style must be rubbing off on me.

After a year of hype-building by the movie-makers, The Da Vinci Code is an utter anticlimax. A murder mystery which makes fugitives of an attractive couple who are strangers to each other -- nothing new there in movie terms. But, unfortunately for us, this is neither The 39 Steps nor North by Northwest, and Alfred Hitchcock is not the director. In place of gripping suspense, we are offered nearly two and a half hours of lunging melodrama. Where is the sense of fear or anxiety in the film? I'd settle for a vague sense of intimidation, but that was absent too. A film with thriller ambitions should surely unsettle the audience just slightly. Right? But no. Even the baddies -- members of the ultra-conservative Opus Dei group -- look like they've leapt off the page of a graphic novel. Should murderous villains really look as irredeemably silly as this? Then there are the members of the Priory of Sion, the protectors of the royal bloodline of Christ, who turn up at the end of the film looking like the Scottish branch of the Countryside Alliance.

Should you go see it? Only if you doubt me. Should churches be worried about the film's potential to undermine their message? Not in a million years. Though you can be sure that won't stop some church-people over-reacting.