I saw the movie today and I really liked it. It's getting lots of negative reviews where the main gripe is that the story is too implausible (it's a thriller, not a documentary) or that it strayed too much from the book. Of course one of the main complaints about The Da Vinci Code was that it stayed too close to the book. I guess Howard and company are damned if they do, damned if they don't.
It definitely seemed that most people's mindset at the theater I went into is that they hated this movie and they were just going to see it to find out why. I liked most of the changes made from the book, I felt it was necessary to simplify the plot somewhat by merging characters. The movie was a bit too long as it was, it would have been unbearable if they had stayed as close to the book as they had with The Da Vinci Code. Unsurprisingly Ewan McGregor turned in the best performance, it was fun to watch his character slowly transform.
Spoilers from here on out.
I was happy not to witness Robert Langdon free-falling from a helicopter, although that scene was still a bit over-done. Mostly I think they over-did the explosion of the anti-matter, one big fiery explosion starting with a tiny point of light would have been fine but they had to lay the special effects on thick with several stages of explosions and sound effects that sounded more like they belonged in Star-Trek.
I also liked how they rescued the last Cardinal and had him point them to the killer's hideout, much simpler than trying to follow symbols and whatnot. The killer's death caught me off guard a little, I knew he didn't die the way he did in the book but for a second I thought he might actually escape in one piece. I realized what was going to happen about a moment before it did.
The things I didn't like; I didn't like that they changed the 5th ambigram (it wasn't even an ambigram). I see how it made sense in the context of the film but I still see it as a shortcut taken by the writers to advance the plot faster. As I said before I didn't like the Anti-matter explosion, and I didn't like the complete lack of chemistry between Langdon and Vettra.
Another thing I noticed during the movie is that there is A LOT of music played during the movie that isn't in the soundtrack (I've listened to it all the way through 3 or 4 times a day since it came out so I should know). I feel bad for anyone who shelled out for the score released a few days ago because there will probably be an extended version out sometime soon.
As I said in my other post I thought the movie felt rushed in story telling,but yet it felt so damn long.
I agree Langdon and Vettra had no chemistry whatso ever and whatever they had seemed forced. I actually enjoyed the Anti-matter explosion I just thought it was a cool effect. I did miss not having any special effects to show any history of the plots like in DaVinci Code,but I guess don't want a similar movie. As I start remember tid-bits of the book I think I did like the changes they made from book to movie.
I wonder if they are gonna do any of Dan Brown's other books or not. Though it wont include the Langdon character I can still see them convert one of his other books to a movie. I strike that, I just read his website and the book 'The Lost Symbol' has the Langdon character in it. So, I guess we can see this being made sometime soon
Saw the movie yesterday. I never read any of the Dan Brown books, but I did walk in with somewhat low expectations, which I'm glad I did. I LIKED the film, but I really wanted a bit more better execution in some areas. There were a few cliches here and there that didn't settle all that well for me, the pacing was a bit too fast in some areas, and a few of the plot twists were hinted very early in the film and didn't seem very surprising to me.
All in all, it was still a very well shot, entertaining film with good performances, beautiful photography, and really good special effects. The movie isn't perfect, but I think it's still worth watching at least once. 7/10
Overall I liked it give it an 7/10. I thought the beginning moved a little to quick. I would liked them to talk about things a little more but that's what a lot of people didn't like about Da Vinci Code so I understand why they did that. I would of liked Vettra to discover more clues like she did in the book and not have Langdon discover pretty much everything. I did like the ending, I starting to get very excited when they found the canister and everything after that played out well.
Not surprisingly it only pulled in a little over half of what The Da Vinci Code did on it's first day but it still made more than Star Trek.
Friday's numbers according to Hollywood Insider:
1. Angels & Demons -- $16.6 mil
2. Star Trek -- $11.9 mil
3. X-Men Origins: Wolverine -- $4.3 mil
4. Ghosts of Girlfriends Past -- $2.1 mil
5. Obsessed -- $1.5 mil
Angels & Demons is projected to make just under $50 mil over the weekend and take Star Trek's place as number 1 at the box office. Of course they're all going to be blown away next week by Terminator.
Or night at the Museum, it's a sequel to a 250 million dollar movie, so I'm not counting it out completely. Sony must be very disappointed with A&D's domestic numbers.
Unlike that film, this one contains the goofy moments, has a good pace, the plot is much more interesting, the actor's don't embarrass themselves, and the movie kept me awake. The only bad things for me was Stellan Skarsgaard's very annoying character, and the last 20 minutes. Other wise, no problems.
This was very...meh. It never slowed down to really explain the Illumnati. Like the villian was just there. The assassin in the first one actually had a personality, the one in A&D was there to move the plot forward and take up space. There was also no chemistry between anyone in the cast. All Langdon's and Victoria's scenes together entailed running really fast with exciting music. I felt no connection between the two, unlike TDC where I actually felt connected to the two leads. Although it kept me entertained, nothing really stuck with me except for the amazing Hans Zimmer score.
This was very...meh. It never slowed down to really explain the Illumnati. Like the villian was just there. The assassin in the first one actually had a personality, the one in A&D was there to move the plot forward and take up space. There was also no chemistry between anyone in the cast. All Langdon's and Victoria's scenes together entailed running really fast with exciting music. I felt no connection between the two, unlike TDC where I actually felt connected to the two leads. Although it kept me entertained, nothing really stuck with me except for the amazing Hans Zimmer score.
just got back from the movie, i have no complaints, great detective story, tom hanks has another winner on his hands and cant wait to see him do a third, cause u know a third is comin
Or night at the Museum, it's a sequel to a 250 million dollar movie, so I'm not counting it out completely. Sony must be very disappointed with A&D's domestic numbers.
True. WHile the domestic BO always seems to be the deciding factor to greenlit a sequel , i think Sony is also paying a close eye to the international BO.
Da Vinci Code performed extremely well internationally . A 540 million dollar foreign cume is a very good number . By comparison here are the foreign numbers of movies:
Iron Man $264,000,000
Casino Royale $429,000,000
The Dark Knight $466,900,000
last Harry Potter movie $646,464,126
POTC 2 $642,344,000
Spider-man 3 $554,341,323
Star Wars Epd 3 $468,728,300
I will say that I have never read any Dan Brown book and 'The Da Vinci Code' was mediocre (The only reason I watched that movie again was for Ian Mc Kellan's engaging performance).
Angels and Demons... was entertaining. I enjoyed the more streamlined story this time around, the film was shot beautifully and the special effects were great. Technically the movie is sound.
Pacing was occasionally a problem and some reveals could have been handled better. Any problems the movie may contain is simply down to the source material. Would people really want this proposed third Robert Langdon thriller?
Oh... the music was also great at times!
Overall... 6.5/10 (Fun, enjoyable, but nothing to shout about - It will pass a night for you... just don't expect it to change you life).
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The Tom Hanks religious thriller "Angels & Demons" took the No. 1 spot at the weekend box office in North America after selling a respectable $48.0 million of tickets, its distributor said on Sunday, trailing its much-hyped predecessor "The Da Vinci Code."
Box office pundits had expected the latest movie to open in the $40 million to $50 million range, and Columbia Pictures said it was thrilled with the result.
In 2006, "The Da Vinci Code" opened to $77 million on its way to a domestic haul of $217.5 million. It was even bigger internationally, earning $540.7 million.
Both films are based on best-selling books by Dan Brown. But Columbia said the first book sold twice as many copies as the second one, a clear indication that the second movie would not match the first. The first film also generated a firestorm of controversy with its assertion that Jesus was married.
Hanks returns as a Harvard professor on a mission to save the papacy, and director Ron Howard is also back. The films have one other thing in common: Critics hated both, the new one a little less.
"Angels & Demons" also earned $104.3 million from 96 countries, which Columbia said was the biggest international opening for a film since "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" last year.
Angels and Demons has an interesting foundation to start with.The question if there will ever be a uniting of religion and science?,can the two walk hand in in hand?
Unfortunately these interesting questions are bogged down by drawn out chase scenes that dont really go anywhere,and AAD is definitely not involving as The Da Vinci Code (2006).
Tom Hanks returns as Robert Langdon,and in one of the films short but interesting scenes he's asked if he believes in God.This is why TDC was a much more interesting film,questions of God,faith,Christ.AAD just feels like one big chase or watching your dog chase his tail for 2 + hours.
All of the actors do their best with the repetitive script.A romance between
Ayelet Zurer (Vittoria Vetra) and Langdon is bypassed they share a few nice moments together but thats it,and this film could have used a little romance.
AAD is not a total bore,Ewan McGregor (Camerlengo Patrick McKenna) and
Armin Mueller-Stahl (Cardinal Strauss) add some much needed flavor.
I also liked how the film displays how far some will go to keep church and science separated forever.
AAD actually picks up in its last half hour,which offers the films most exciting moment
Dont run out and see AAD in the theatres unless your a Tom Hanks mega fan,wait for the dvd so you can stop and come back in case you fall asleep.
Scale of 1-10 a 6
7. It not nearly as bad as critics are acting, but this is the trendy movie to trash this year, so they're going to trash it regardless of quality. It was okay. The plot was a bit contrieved at times but it is a good detective story IMO. The biggest criticism I have is that Hanks just doesn't have much to work with. Robert Langdon is a very dry character. There is only so much you can do with him. Hanks' talent goes to waste on such a character IMO. Plus the movie as a whole suffers from such a dry protagonist. They need a character to give the film some heart and lighten things up. I felt Audrey Tautou's character does that in Da Vince Code but there isn't really anyone to fill that role here.
It'll have legs. The rest of the summer is geared towards the younger set, i.e; the age ranges of 5-34. The older folks will go see this periodically over the summer, and it'll always be in the top 10.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
