So pretty much Angels and Demons was everything that I expected it to be: your typical summer movie with a few cool effects, little character development, sub par acting, highly improbable plot line, and over all worthy of a 'meh' on my part.
The movie differed from the book greatly at some parts, which is something to be expected when you go to see a movie. If you haven't figured this out already folks, let me assure you: The book is usually better than the movie, 99% of the time, anyway. And also, the movie is always different than the book is. Period. I mean, we've seen what happens when a movie stays too true to the book (COUGH COUGH Da Vinci Code COUGH COUGH).
But moving on: The parts of the book that were taken out are exactly the parts that would've made the movie better: the fact that Vittoria's father was murdered, the Hassasin being Arabic (as oposed to some bespectecled nerd with a laptop), the weird, random love connection between Langdon and Vittoria, and yes, even THE LEGS (also known as: my main complaint and grievance).
I think that all of the aformentioned are all things and elements to the story that are better suited to the big screen: it's my belief that Dan Brown speficially writes his books with a movie in mind. The quick chapter changes, the 'everyman' protagonist, the over played characters: it's obvious that Brown is a fan of films, and has seen a few of them.
So pretty much Angels and Demons was everything that I expected it to be: your typical summer movie with a few cool effects, little character development, sub par acting, highly improbable plot line, and over all worthy of a 'meh' on my part.
All of the things that this movie tries to do have already been done, and they've been done better. It's a good try on Howards part to make a summer block buster, and aparently he's done that, seeing as how A&D is the highest grossing film of 2009 (it's done really, really well internationally as oposed to domestically). But for someone like me, who's seen this typical movie a hundred times before, it just falls under average. As a fan, it was interesting to see the source material brought to life, but other than that, the film held no real interest for me. For the average movie goer, I'd say that its a movie to pay $2.00 to go and see during a matinee during the summer, to waste an afternoon and escape the heat.
One last word: was it just me, or did anyone else have Forrest Gump flashbacks thanks to Tom Hanks?
'Mama always said life is like a box of Cardinals!!'
'Swin, Forrest, Swim!!'
' I love you, Vit-tor-i-a!!!'
. . . yeah, the list goes on and on.
No comments:
Post a Comment