Of the two Dan Brown novels I've read, I liked Angels & Demons the best. So I was quite eager to check out this movie, especially considering the (limited) access Ron Howard was given to the Vatican. Plus, I thought he did a commendable job of bringing The Da Vinci Code to the big screen, despite Tom Hank's horrific hair. But unfortunately, Angels & Demons is a mess. Granted, this might be one of those unfilmable books. For most of the film Robert Langdon's mental process is expressed through dialogue, helping fill the audience in at a rapid pace as he describes the significance of statues, symbols, and minutiae of church history. Much of the insights offered in the book are totally lost in these heavily abridged dissertations. Beyond that, the entire premise is completely ridiculous, something I was willing to overlook in the book. It's one of those movies where the bad guy goes out of his way to drop clues so the protagonist has a fighting chance at thwarting the dastardly scheme. Sure, it makes for good drama as Langdon and crew ping pong all over Rome looking for the next clue. But when you apply logic to the narrative, it just doesn't work. However, I do give the movie credit for one improvement over the novel. We were spared the scene of Langdon plunging out of the helicopter and creating some sort of MacGyver-style parachute mid-air before splashing down in the Tiber without a scratch. That's the point in the novel where I totally gave up. I gave up on this movie long before that omitted scene.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Angels & Demons
Of the two Dan Brown novels I've read, I liked Angels & Demons the best. So I was quite eager to check out this movie, especially considering the (limited) access Ron Howard was given to the Vatican. Plus, I thought he did a commendable job of bringing The Da Vinci Code to the big screen, despite Tom Hank's horrific hair. But unfortunately, Angels & Demons is a mess. Granted, this might be one of those unfilmable books. For most of the film Robert Langdon's mental process is expressed through dialogue, helping fill the audience in at a rapid pace as he describes the significance of statues, symbols, and minutiae of church history. Much of the insights offered in the book are totally lost in these heavily abridged dissertations. Beyond that, the entire premise is completely ridiculous, something I was willing to overlook in the book. It's one of those movies where the bad guy goes out of his way to drop clues so the protagonist has a fighting chance at thwarting the dastardly scheme. Sure, it makes for good drama as Langdon and crew ping pong all over Rome looking for the next clue. But when you apply logic to the narrative, it just doesn't work. However, I do give the movie credit for one improvement over the novel. We were spared the scene of Langdon plunging out of the helicopter and creating some sort of MacGyver-style parachute mid-air before splashing down in the Tiber without a scratch. That's the point in the novel where I totally gave up. I gave up on this movie long before that omitted scene.
No comments:
Post a Comment