I was one of those who avidly read all the Harry Potter books. I stumbled upon Harry Potter at a time when it hasn’t created a world craze yet. I love prowling the children’s book section in bookstores, looking for something that might interest me–even stories meant for toddlers. And there it was, the first book. So I bought it. From then on, I got hooked; stuck with it until the last. And after the long wait, finally came, the seventh book.

Prepared for the task Dumbledore left him, Harry waits to come of age. When he turns seventeen, it’s time to face Voldemort and perhaps end his evil plans. So Harry, together with his best friends Ron and Hermoine, embarks on a journey to destroy the remaining horcruxes that will also destroy parts of Voldemort’s soul that’s hidden in each of them. As they find each horcrux, Harry knows that it is only a matter of time and he has to face his enemy.

In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, we see the main character grow up-enter adulthood. We feel the burden that has been put on his shoulder-the task that only him alone must do to save the wizarding and muggle worlds. His strength is tested and how much trust can he put in the people who care about him. We witness more death, lives sacrificed, which make this book the darkest of the seven. We know at last why it’s very important in the story that Harry has his mother’s eyes and the weapon of The Boy Who Lived that the Dark Lord knows not. Finally, Snape’s loyalty is revealed-is he good or evil or neither.

From the very beginning, Harry Potter has always been about the fight between good and evil, love and hate. Author J.K. Rowling concludes this battle in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, instilling the series into a classic. Rowling did not finish the book just to finish it. Instead, she created a seamless saga. All questions, unresolved matters that sprung from the first book are settled in the final installment. Overall, Deathly Hallows is worthy read. All is well, indeed–for J.K. Rowling and the millions of Harry Potter fans.

After much controversy, the screen adaptation of Dan Brown’s best-seller, The Da Vinci Code is in theaters now. The film opens with the bizarre murder of Louvre curator Jacques Sauniere, who, in his dying moments managed to leave behind a number of clues and messages hidden in the artworks of Leonardo Da Vinci. The French police invites Harvard symbology professor Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) to decipher the code they found near the dead body. Langdon concedes not knowing that he has already been considered a prime suspect. With the help of Sauniere’s granddaughter Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou, Amelie and A Very Long Engagement), Langdon is able to escape the police only to be trapped in a more intricate labyrinth. Soon they find themselves on the run from policeman Bezu Fache (Jean Reno), the albino monk Silas (Paul Bettany), and Archbishop Aringarosa (Alfred Molina). Robert and Sophie proceed to Robert’s colleague Sir Leigh Teabing to ask for his help to unravel a secret that–according to Sir Leigh–had been kept from humanity for centuries.

The movie adaptation is not as gripping and exciting as its original incarnation. Although, it remains loyal to the essence of the novel, the movie fails to capture the can’t-put-down quality of the book. The viewers willd have to endure lengthy narrations thus at times, they may find themselves yawning. However, the narrations are necessary to explain facts and speculations about symbols, codes, secret cults, religious history and hidden messages in art. The director pairs these narrations with visual images that somehow lighten the mood of the film.

Tom Hank’s portrayal of Robert Langdon is a bit disappointing. He did not entirely encapsulate the scholarly yet humorous guy that Brown created in his book. Hanks witty remarks in the movie are barely noticeable.

Audrey Totou is charming but the film did not let her shine as the intelligent cryptologist that she is supposed to be (or as described in Brown’s bestselling book).

One character that caught my attention is Silas. Paul Bettany did justice to this character. He emulates Silas’ fearsome on one side and pitiful on the other characteristics. Those who have read the book will appreciate him more. Anyone will feel sorry for him.

I have read the book; naturally, I am partial to the movie. I went to watch the film although not with a fresh eye but without any expectations of grandeur. A movie adapted from a novel can only do so much to capture the essence of the original work.

Despite the flaws, the film in its entirety is still entertaining. After all, it is not just a story of discovering a monumental secret but of family and finding out that despite the time and distance that separate you from them, they had never stopped caring, and some are willing to risk their life just to keep you from harm.

What to look forward to in the movie: the last scenes. Captivating!

___________________________________________________

The controversy that shrouded the book and the film only roused people’s curiosity, raising moral questions and religious issues. On my part, I cannot consider The Da Vinci Code (book and film) as a threat to Christianity or a test of faith, because it is neither. It remains a fictitious work, a mere tale. I must agree with Mike Velarde, we should not underestimate the mental capacity of the Filipino Catholics. We’re too shallow if we do that.