Angels and Demons

hmm.. once this infernal grant of mine is submitted, I can think of downloading that..

Okay just saw a documentary ILLUMINATING ANGELS & DEMONS. You can download it from mininova.org. It provides a sound analysis of all things Dan Brown wrote but is a bit of a bore because it dwells too much on the origins of the illuminati when all I wanted to see were the surroundings and the art work. Guess I can see them in the film as well but then Hanks and Bernini don't seem to mix well :p

Scott lacks the erudite appeal in my eyes.. I'd stick with Gere.:P

Re: # 9
Exactement :)

I personally found the 'Angels and Demons' to be a better and more captivating read than 'the Da Vinci Code' ... but that opinion could be biased since I always revered Rome to be far superior a city to Paris ... 'all roads lead to Rome' as far as I am concerned!

as a film, I found that neither did justice to the 'original', i.e., the books ... A & D being a bigger let down than its predecessor, in my humble opinion :)

I don't think I will spend money to see this movie

Re: # 6

Yaar Richy is too handsome for it; Ford too old. Ralph F again rather forced. How about Dougray Scott? He cuts out nicely.

Fouz

I can't agree with you more.. Tom Hanks is so not Langdon, in my minds eye, I had always envisioned Richard Gere for that role.. or Harrison Ford if he was younger, even Ralph Fiennes, but Tom Hanks- no way!

Thought the film was fair enough, though the script was pretty dreadful. I found it less exhausting to watch than the DVC film which seemed to try to cram too much. I'd read both books before seeing the respective films and found them both entertaining reads - and also quite thought-provoking. The A&D film was, to me, surprisingly sympathetic to the Roman Catholic Church so I reckon that most of the criticism from that particular quarter comes from those who haven't seen the film. There was, though, one particular oddity that struck me. - Towards the end of the A&D film there is a general clamour to raise to the Papal post a certain character. But it is said that he is ineligible because he is only a priest, not a cardinal. When I was being educated (by Marist priests) we were told that the only qualifications required to become Pope is that one must be male and he must have been baptised into the R.C. Church. Theoretically, even a man who wasn't a priest could be elected. I would have therefore thought that even I qualified. (Perish the thought!) Or is this yet another case of the Catholic Church slowly changing its position on theoligical matters, though in this case in the 'wrong' direction?

I remember reading TDVC late at night and shuddering like anything since I had the paintings right with me and could look at them while reading. That was dramatic and scary. The Movie was NOTHING compared to the book. SO seems to be the case with AAD which I shall not watch and not only because of my disapproval of Hanks as Langdon. He just does not cut it, old or otherwise. Besides, in his quest to make Book-based films more comprehensible, the director tries to make it a cross between a Peshawar TV Drama and a Bond movie; and he usually succeeds.

haven't seen this yet, but pretty lousy reviews it has been getting.. particulaly in rottentomatoes, which I regularly use.. not to mention some of my friends who saw the movie say they wasted their money.. so I'd be apprehensive about going to a theatre! may be I'll watch it from home.. :P

Am yet to see a movie that can do justice to the book it is based on. Borne Identity and Da Vinci Code were the biggest disappointments. The Firm was a notch better.

Though the final twist in the tale was a bit too much to digest in case of Angels and Demons, hope the movie does a bit of the justice to the suspense and drama that oscillates the storyline.

It does not come as a surprise that the church opposes it. The havoc raised at the TDVC is enough to forecast this.

Personally, I found Angels and Demons to be a more interesting read than TDVC. Probably because of its topic i.e. universal nature of the science Vs religion debate, or because TDVC seems to be a replica of the format adopted in the first book, AAD. The same twists and turns; the same highs, THE same kind of heroine, etc. (by the way, its the TDVC that is the sequel because the book itself quotes a few instances that 'have happend' in AAD). However, just like the basic format, the shortcomings too, remain the same.
Can't wait to see Tom Hanks play Langdon though.