The plot is so universally well known at this point, that I will condense it and focus the majority of this review on those questions. Harvard Symbology Professor Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) is summoned to The Louvre in Paris to help decipher a serious of clues left by the curator, who has been mysteriously murdered. Before long, Langdon discovers that the Parisian police believe him to be the murderer, and he joins forces with the curators granddaughter, Sophie Noveau (Audrey Tatou) to get to the bottom of the mystery and, after meeting up with historian Sir Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellan), discover that the murder involves a secret the Catholic Church will kill to suppress, going all the way back to the time of Jesus.

Religious leaders have had nothing but contempt for the film and the novel, objecting to the very notion that Jesus may have had more Earthly aspects to his life than we have ever known. They insist the film is completely fiction, and maintain that the Catholic Church, and Opus Dei in particular, are not really like what they are depicted as in THE DAVINCI CODE. To them I say, there is a Chinese proverb, that goes like this:

The guilty always proclaim their innocence the loudest.

As to the controversy in question, I have this simple quote from Tom Hanks in the film that speaks for me and I believe, most Christians: "Why couldn't Jesus have been a Father and still been capable of all those miracles?"

To me, Jesus experiencing sexuality and having an actual life actually strengthens faith. It shows what he lost by giving his life on the cross: his wife, his child(ren), the life of a simple man, uninterrupted by significance and martyrdom.