Angels and Demons (2009)

Better than The Da Vince Code, but they edited some steamy scenes between Mr Hanks and Ms Zurer.


Overall they edited some part but still its worth the watch. A 6.8

Angels and Demons (2009)

*spoilers below*

First of all, this movie was much, much better than The Da Vinci Code.

[Plus, Tom Hanks looks much, MUCH better. Thank goodness!]

Plot-wise, they made a lot of changes to the beginning (and a bit with the ending), which I can accept, because it'll be formulaic if they'd kept the book's, as in Guy Gets Mutilated -> Langdon Gets Called In -> Guy's Adopted Daughter Wants Revenge -> Whole Shebang -> Seemingly Evil Character Is Proven To Be Good.

Here's what I liked about the movie:

• Ewan McGregor. I loved the Camerlengo in the book, and I thought that Ewan McGregor would be spot-on, which he was. 'Cept he wasn't Italian in this one.
  

• The Assassin. They probably didn't go into that whole Illuminati business with the guy due to time constraints, but he's much more mellow in the movie, which surprisingly, I liked. He didn't take pleasure in killing the Cardinals; he did it 'cuz he was getting paid. He doesn't like prolonging death. I was a bit pissed at first, because I was looking forward to the sadistic bastard in the book and not a more human one.
  

[Plus, he was cute with a really nice pair of spats.]

• PAOLO FROM FRIENDS!! Even though he died.
  
• Anti-matter-go-boom part. Looked way cool.
• Ewan McGregor. Excellent casting. Love the guy.
  

Secondly, though I've come to terms that the word 'adaptation' means 'creative liberty with source material', I'm still gonna nitpick:

• Misdirection in the movie seemed forced and very obvious, since EVERY OTHER SCENE with Cardinal Strauss made him look power-hungry and possibly-evil. The different-named Cardinal in the book (only one prominent Cardinal) was a very decent and nice person. That aside, if they'd followed the book, the fourth Cardinal wouldn't even be alive. I miss Maximilian Kohler.
  

[Plus, how many times is Armin Muehller-Stahl going to be THE morally-questionable character of a story?]

• In the beginning, why was there blood on the rest-thingy on the outer door if the dead guy and his eyeball was inside the entire time? Yes, the murderer would need his eye to bypass the security system to get to the anti-matter, but there was no mention of another dead man with a missing eyeball, so there shouldn't be any blood on that chin-rest that was on the outside of the lab.
  
• They totally changed the character of the guy who died at the beginning. This makes Vittoria's presence moot. She didn't have much of a point in the movie, except to look pretty and run around with Tom Hanks change the battery of the anti-matter canister. In the book, the man in the beginning was her father. That's why she was along for the trip.
  
• Was looking towards the "WTBloodyF" moment of the book, but it wasn't in the movie. Which brings me to this: Why "Patrick McKenna"? Why not keep "Carlo Ventresca"? Don't tell me Ewan McGregor can't do an Italian accent.

[They also changed the names of every other character that is not Robert Langdon and Vittoria Vetra. Like, why, man?]

[The Camerlengo is Irish. Isn't McKenna a Scottish name?]

• Where in the world is the Illuminati Diamond? Oh noes, Carmen Sandiego stole it!

Another thing I didn't like was the ending. The one in the book had much more of an impact, and explains the 'why' of the Camerlengo's actions in way more detail. It is more profound in the book, hence the overwhelming guilt which eventually led him to his end, and in no way, looked like, "Oh I've failed, quick way out, please," as in the movie. I love how the book portrays him as a very sympathetic character, one who strongly believed that he could and needs make a difference, albeit misguided in his methods, unlike in the movie, where he just comes off as old-fashioned.

[They probably could've taken a minute or so out of the water-rescue scene and devoted it to this.]

All in all, good movie. Could do a bit less with the Tom Hanks ego bits. Just don't read the book before you watch the movie; you'll love it more.

8/10.

Camerlengo Patrick McKenna?

What, Ewan McGregor can't do an Italian accent or something? I thought he was very versatile.

[Please don't tell me this is an attempt at diversity. That would be lame.]

I hope this changes NOTHING in the storyline.

New Angels & Demons clip.

Also about a minute-long, this one has Tom Hanks arguing with Stellan Skarsgaard, who doesn't want to allow him into the Vatican archives to look for clues onto the Illuminati trail.

[I don't seem to remember this bit in the book. The weebitcocky bit at the end of the vid, I mean.]

Enjoy :)

Moar Angels & Demons clips!

The first one (entitled "God Particle") basically explains why everyone's in a hubbub, while the second one ("First Marker") shows the scene where Tom Hanks and Aylet Zuhrer follow up on the first clue that will lead them to the anti-matter.

Good to see that Tom Hanks'd managed to tame his fly-away hair from the last movie. Although, since this is a prequel, ONE significant event (read: this movie) was probably the cause of it standing on end for the entire The Da Vinci Code.

Oh well, enjoy :)

New Angels & Demons TV spot

About a minute-long, most of the scenes already shown in the trailer. There are a few new (but short) ones, particularly of Ewan McGregor, who plays the late Pope's closest aide in the movie. Enjoy :)

New Angels & Demons poster!

Love the art for this one. The reds are the kidnapped Cardinals.

Angels & Demons may face Vatican boycott.

According to the Hollywood Reporter, the Vatican may call for an official boycott of Angels & Demons, the movie adaptation of Dan Brown's best-selling novel, although negative publicity may turn out to be publicity anyways for the movie, and get more people to go to the theatres.

New Angels & Demons clips!

[About a minute-plus in length, but eh.]

There's no embedding option, so I'll have to link you to the article instead:

'Angels & Demons': Exclusive New Scenes!

Enjoy :)