Angels and Demons

[Movies205]

The book, Davinci Code, was not a good book and the movie showed that. If A&D is better source material, than bring it on, but I'm not wasting my time reading it.

 

[Gonking]

The Person who wrote the screen play should change.

you are right, the screenwriter should be changed too.

 

[Rez]

At least you're not being a jerk about it.

Hey, I'm just citing from my own personal experiences... back in High School I did a piece for the paper on it, where myself and a few others went around asking everyone's favourite book(roughly 3000 people). Nearly everyone said either Harry Potter or Da Vinci Code. When asked if those were the only books they'd read outside of required school readings, some rediculously high number said "Yes" or "one of very few." I don't feel like getting out my old copy, but it was something in the high 80s, percentage wise.

Is it wrong, considering it's best seller status, to assume that many other schools and places wouldn't follow the same pattern? The fact that a novel is one of the best sellers of all time is proof enough that plenty of people who read it haven't read a whole lot else- otherwise we'd have more books selling in high numbers.

 

[BeserkerHilf]

Angels and Demons will be a better movie than the Da Vinci Code. The book is excelent. I hope Tom Hanks keep his role as Langdon but the director should change.

again, akiva goldsman is writing. so it will suck.

 

[OtepApe]

Well Angels & Demons should have been done first, in the first place.

The book is much better, it's more of a thrill ride and will translate to screen much better I would imagine. However, I don't think it should be a movie, it should be a television series of some kind. There's way too much stuff in there so the movie will be either boring, or have to cut a lot out.

Tom Hanks should be replaced as far as I am concerned. Hanks is a great actor, but he's all wrong for Langdon. In Angels & Demons his background as a diver is important in some situations. Hanks looks nothing like a diver, or someone who used to be one.

But I would love to see an Angels & Demons tv series, it would probably translate best from the books.

The Da Vinci Code would have been better suited for the same, but Brown opted for Hollywood big bucks.

 

[Makeshift Celebrity]

I agree with Rez. The only reason it is so widely read is because it is not difficult to read (ie the writer puts no true artistic flourish in his writing) and because of the concept of the book (ie the fact that at first people thought it was REAL).

People who liked The Da Vinci Code generally do not like anything else with two hard covers and 400 pages inbetween.

 

[CConn]

Hey, I'm just citing from my own personal experiences... back in High School I did a piece for the paper on it, where myself and a few others went around asking everyone's favourite book(roughly 3000 people). Nearly everyone said either Harry Potter or Da Vinci Code. When asked if those were the only books they'd read outside of required school readings, some rediculously high number said "Yes" or "one of very few." I don't feel like getting out my old copy, but it was something in the high 80s, percentage wise.

Is it wrong, considering it's best seller status, to assume that many other schools and places wouldn't follow the same pattern? The fact that a novel is one of the best sellers of all time is proof enough that plenty of people who read it haven't read a whole lot else- otherwise we'd have more books selling in high numbers.

Do you waste this much time thinking about everything you hate, or is DVC just special?

 

[Rez]

DVC is especially piss poor, yes, but I assure you I don't spend much time dwelling on it.

 

[Bishop2]

Okay, what bugged me most about The DaVinci Code was how they turned Langdon into such a total pansy. All of the situations where he did anything truly heroic in the book were cut out, and instead we get loads of added material where he's flipping out due to his claustrophobia. Lovely.

In Angels & Demons, Langdon is even more of a badass. He pulls some really cool stuff and even proves to be a decent fighter. Are they going to cut all of that out next? Because I can't imagine how that will work.

 

[Reek]

Langdon isnt supposed to be a bad ass. But they did cut out pretty significant parts in the movie, hell the beginning was even different. not to mention there is only one cryptex in the movie, where there is 2 in the book.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

Okay, what bugged me most about The DaVinci Code was how they turned Langdon into such a total pansy. All of the situations where he did anything truly heroic in the book were cut out, and instead we get loads of added material where he's flipping out due to his claustrophobia. Lovely.

In Angels & Demons, Langdon is even more of a badass. He pulls some really cool stuff and even proves to be a decent fighter. Are they going to cut all of that out next? Because I can't imagine how that will work.

I thought Langdon in the Da Vinci Code was still badass. I loved how he stood up to Leigh, even when Leigh had a gun and was threatening to kill him and Sophie.

You mean to tell me he didn't look badass as he stood over Leigh? Hanks is right for Langdon and I hope they use him again for Angels and Demons.

 

[Makeshift Celebrity]

Hanks is a very good actor.

Unfortunately, he can't act his way out of a horrible script. Also, he can't help it if his acting style and look just do not fit the character. It was a poor casting choice on the part of the director.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

Hanks is a very good actor.

Unfortunately, he can't act his way out of a horrible script. Also, he can't help it if his acting style and look just do not fit the character. It was a poor casting choice on the part of the director.

You do realize that there isn't much to Langdon, right? He's just a regular joe who is a genius in symbology and other educational aspects. Langdon isn't a super-hero or a magician. He's just a regular guy and I feel Hanks fits that role perfectly in my opinion.

 

[OtepApe]

Langdon is apparently a pretty good looking guy, with a decent physique for someone of his age, due to his diving background. He is a very intelligent man who has morals and will stand up for what he believes in. That may not make him a super hero or magician, but I would certainly say he has a certain presence in material. I don't think Hanks really grabbed that, or is even right for that. In Angels & Demons it is required so much more then DVC. I think a recasting is needed.

Plus, apparently wasn't Hanks pretty pissed at all the bad press the movie was getting? I think a question is if he actually wants to return to that.

 

[Gonking]

Howard, Hanks, Akiva Goldsman and Release Date Confirmed!

Angels & Demons

Release Date: December 12, 2008
Studio: Columbia Pictures
Director: Ron Howard
Screenwriter: Akiva Goldsman
Starring: Tom Hanks

http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=17591

 

[Bishop2]

Howard, Hanks, Akiva Goldsman and Release Date Confirmed!

Angels & Demons

Release Date: December 12, 2008
Studio: Columbia Pictures
Director: Ron Howard
Screenwriter: Akiva Goldsman
Starring: Tom Hanks

http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=17591

Just because it's in the Coming Soon database doesn't mean it's been officially announced or confirmed. The only official announcement is the release date. The rest is logical conjecture and that's all.

 

[Prognosticator]

I'm watching the Da Vinci Code on DVD right now, at before it starts, it says Angels and Demons is currently in production...any one have info on this, both books are good, A & D is terrific, better then Da Vinci IMO. hopefully Tom Hanks will reprise his role as Robert Langdon.

If they don't get Tom Hanks back, then this is guaranteed to be a Direct-to-DVD release, in which it'll lose all credibility as a movie.

...Or even worse, they'll cast Ben Affleck as a "young Langdon" and Morgan Freeman as his "advisor".

 

[Bishop2]

If they don't get Tom Hanks back, then this is guaranteed to be a Direct-to-DVD release, in which it'll lose all credibility as a movie.

Not a chance of that happening with a property this hot.

 

[Elisha Cuthbert]

****ING AKIVA GOLDSMITH WILL DIE. Someone went up to me and was talking about the Da Vinci Code, and I had to stop myself from ranting about this *****ebag. My god, why is he allowed to adapt such awesome books like Da Vinci Code and I Am Legend, only to turn them into complete ****turds?

 

[Bishop2]

****ING AKIVA GOLDSMITH WILL DIE. Someone went up to me and was talking about the Da Vinci Code, and I had to stop myself from ranting about this *****ebag. My god, why is he allowed to adapt such awesome books like Da Vinci Code and I Am Legend, only to turn them into complete ****turds?

Bastard got lucky ONE TIME, when he A Beautiful Mind, and suddenly everyone forgets that he also wrote Batman & Robin and Lost in Space...

 

[green]

http://www.cinematical.com/

Goldsman Offered $4 Million to Write Da Vinci Sequel?
Posted Nov 24th 2006 7:01PM by Erik Davis
Filed under: Drama, Deals, Mystery & Suspense, Sony, Scripts & Screenwriting, DIY/Filmmaking
I don't care how well-known you are or how many scripts you've written, for a writer to be offered $4 million -- heck, that's pretty damn impressive. And it's great for screenwriting in general. No, you're not reading that wrong (though, trust me, I had to read it more than once myself before it became believable) -- apparently, Akiva Goldsman has been hired to write a $4million script: Angels & Demons.

As most of you are well aware, Angels & Demons is a book that was written by Dan Brown, author of The Da Vinci Code. Demons follows the same main character as Da Vinci, Robert Langdon (as played by Tom Hanks in the film), as he once again finds himself all wrapped up in a bizarre life-altering mystery that involves the church. Pic is currently on target to be released at some point in 2008, and in order to make that date, Sony is willing to throw an enormous amount of dough (the most ever offered to a screenwriter for a script) at Akiva Goldsman. And for a script based on a book, no less. (You think Goldsman wore his Superman costume to Thanksgiving dinner, or what?)

What does this mean for screenwriting? Well, writers now have a new bargaining chip. Up until this point, the most amount of money offered for a script (usually an original piece of work) has been between $2-2.5 million. Sure, you have to be a writer with a hefty set of balls (and be represented by an agent with an even heftier set) to demand that kind of moolah. But the stakes have been raised, and it's nice to see people realizing just how valuable the writer really is.

Holy Moly...

 

[Riven]

I think the studio making the next Dan Brown book into a movie is gonna take a BIG fall. People went to see Da Vinci Code in droves, just because the book is so popular. Nobody liked the film though and that'll reflect in ticket sales for the next movie they market as "from the writer of the Da Vinci Code"...

 

[Cosmic]

I see people reading Angels & Demons literally everywhere I go. Doesn't matter which city, which airport, or even on the bus or at the store. I see this book all the time. There's a huge audience out there for this material.

 

[Abaddon]

didn't "The Da Vinci Code" bomb at the box office?

 

[Riven]

didn't "The Da Vinci Code" bomb at the box office?

Domestically, it did nearly $218 million, internationally another 538 million. That's a hit.