Angels & Demons (the movie)

[ThunderAeroI]

So what did you think of the movie?

What about it vs. the book?

I'll go first...

It was a good movie, nothing great about it really. I wish I had not read the book before hand because altough the movie follows the same basic plot I really wanted to see alot of the scenes in the book that never made it into the movie.

First the entire intro is vastly different, there is no Kholer, no Vertas father, the CERN stuff is so glossed over it hardly in the movie. They play it as a sequel to Da Vinci Code rather than a prequel, and the ending is cut short with the Chamberlan not killing himself outside like he changed his mind but rather into St. Peters tomb.

 

[Emher]

I'd give the movie a solid 3. Definetly some changes from the book, but overall they work to keep the story going and I like that they kept the pretty graphic executions from the book.

Somehow dissapointed that they cut the whole Langdo/Vittoria romance plot, but it doesn't hurt the story. Did think the casting of Vittoria was very solid, even though the actress is a bit older the Vittoria is supposed to be.

 

[ThunderAeroI]

I wanted to see the Mach 12 CERN jet too, but I'll live without it. The action did kep going so in that respect the movie works. Too bad the BBC crew wasn't there, although the media action was rather funny.

 

[Miss Chicken]

]I gave it a three but I would have preferred to give it a 3 1/2. It was better than the Da Vinci Code. I haven't read the book.

 

[Kelso]

Please describe the free food.

 

[ThunderAeroI]

It certianly was better than the DaVinciCode, I am not sure I even recall watching it. I think i blocked it from my memeory

 

[ThunderAeroI]

Please describe the free food.

Whatever your heart desires

 

[chardman]

I enjoyed it. It didn't seem nearly as contrived as many on the BBS seemed to believe it would be. And what was the Church's problem with the film? Save for a few corrupt individual character within in the clergy, I thought Catholicism and the Holy See were depicted in a very positive light.

 

[Winged Victory]

I gave it a 2. The book is so much better (what a page-turner!); with the movie I was struggling to stay awake. Stay away! I will say that I loved Rome's look in the movie. Looks very good at night.

 

[FemurBone]

I thought it was pretty good. Nothing special, but it was reasonably enjoyable.

It's been a few years since I read the book, but I was under the impression that Vittoria had shoulder length curly hair. In the movie she had long straight hair.

Also, in the book I remember her wearing kacki shorts and hiking boots through the whole story. In the movie she's wearing a black evening gown with high healed boots. A bit of an odd choice of attire if you ask me; especially considering Vittoria was supposed to be a scientist.

And the explosion at the end was a bit weak. It was the same old fire and smoke type of explosion seen in movies since Star Wars. I would have thought an explosion like the one seen at the end of Forbidden Planet would have been more appropriate. A ball of bright light.

 

[miraclefan]

I voted this, You could not drag me there with free food to see it .

 

[Nardpuncher]

I thought it was pretty good. Nothing special, but it was reasonably enjoyable.

It's been a few years since I read the book, but I was under the impression that Vittoria had shoulder length curly hair. In the movie she had long straight hair.

Also, in the book I remember her wearing kacki shorts and hiking boots through the whole story. In the movie she's wearing a black evening gown with high healed boots. A bit of an odd choice of attire if you ask me; especially considering Vittoria was supposed to be a scientist.

And the explosion at the end was a bit weak. It was the same old fire and smoke type of explosion seen in movies since Star Wars. I would have thought an explosion like the one seen at the end of Forbidden Planet would have been more appropriate. A ball of bright light.

Were you serious about that stuff with her hairstyle being different from in the book?

I thought the movie suffered the same problems as the first one...it felt like a Discovery Channel documentary hosted by Tom Hanks. Too much exposition.
I recall it being a good book though, it does make you want to learn more about art history. Though I admit i don't remember the female leads' hair style.

 

[ThunderAeroI]

I had a big sobbing grin on my face when Hanks would just tell us stuff and not actually do anything. I found that annoying

 

[FemurBone]

Were you serious about that stuff with her hairstyle being different from in the book?

Its Been a few years since I read the book, but I just pictured her looking different.

another thing I just thought of was Langdon's trip to Rome. In the book they put him aboard a top secret space plane that transported him from New York to Rome in less than an hour. I thought that part of the book was cool and was looking forward to seeing it in the movie. Unfortunately it wasn't there.

 

[Nardpuncher]

Were you serious about that stuff with her hairstyle being different from in the book?

Its Been a few years since I read the book, but I just pictured her looking different.

another thing I just thought of was Langdon's trip to Rome. In the book they put him aboard a top secret space plane that transported him from New York to Rome in less than an hour. I thought that part of the book was cool and was looking forward to seeing it in the movie. Unfortunately it wasn't there.

I read the book also, but I think having that plane would have been out of place in the movie. A plane that fast is for an X-Men or G.I Joe movie.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

the plane went to CERN first. Haven't seen the film, but I heard he doesn't even go to CERN

 

[ThunderAeroI]

the plane went to CERN first. Haven't seen the film, but I heard he doesn't even go to CERN

Nope, all the CERN stuff is jacked and vastly different. The plot is there I suppose, but its just done so differently that the only thing the same is the missing eye.

 

[Skywalker]

I thought it was pretty good, certainly an improvement over The Da Vinci Code (much like the books). Was it a masterpiece? No. But it was fairly entertaining and moved at a much better pace than DVC. I'm actually glad they skipped over all the CERN stuff and got straight to Rome, when I read the book I thought the super space plane and all that was a little hokey.

 

[Captain Craig]

My g/f and I may see this movie with my buddy and his wife this weekend. I notice that stateside its made a modest $106m but like DVC before it is kicking ass overseas. Its WW total is at $358m, and will likely hit $400m WW by the time its all done.

This movie has fallen off the radar here, did that many really not see it?
I liked DVC fairly well and I know Dan Brown just released or is releasing a fourth novel starring Langdon. Seems we will get a few more of these.

 

[Jayson]

I haven't read the books and I hadn't even seen "The Da Vinci Code" but I went to see it because my friend wanted to go and see it. We picked that because "Drag Me to Hell" is Pg-13 and we don't trust PG-13 horror movies.

Anyways I liked the movie. It was a intresting look into the beuarcracy of the Vatican church and and good relagious mystery is a intresting idea. You never go wrong either in those relgion vs science debates. Tom Hanks is likeable and his hair isn't silly looking. It did though start to feel like the most serious Doctor Who episode of all time to me. Hanks and his trusty female campanion would run from one place to another. Everyone around them dies or gets murdered but they always find away out of a pickle. He is a action star that doesn't kill people.

Jason