[MOVIE] Angels and Demons coming next year...

[Guest Emperor]

According to The Hollywood Reporter, The Da Vinci Code director Ron Howard and star Tom Hanks are in final talks to return for the prequel Angels & Demons.

 

The trade says that Columbia Pictures, which benefited from "Da Vinci's" $758 million worldwide box office earnings, has set an early January start date and has hired A-list casting directors Jane Jenkins and Debbie McWilliams to fill out the thriller's supporting roles.

 

Akiva Goldsman is adapting Dan Brown's novel, in which Harvard professor Robert Langdon tries to solve a murder and unravel a plot by an ancient group, the Illuminati, to blow up the Vatican during a papal conclave.

 

The studio is eyeing a December 19, 2008 release.

 

Really? Weren't we all a little disappointed with Da Vinci Code?

[SBoydW]

Ehh... DaVinci Code was entertaining... I didn't think that it was anything special though.

[Vemynal]

as a book both were astronomical, i loved them, they kept me entertained better then a book has in awhile.

 

As a movie, the code rather sucked if u had read the book...and was "meh" if u hadn't.

 

 

i'm scared what u quoted by "adapting the book"....

[Guest Barmacral]

I actually thought they did a decent job at staying true to the book when they did the Davinci Code movie.

 

Now the sum of all fears on the otherhand... on its own the movie was really good, however, after reading the book (I sawt the movie first) I can safely say that I very much hate the movie now. They twisted the plot on it so bad that they should have just given the movie its own name.

[reyler]

I actually thought DaVinci Code was a terrible book, and even a perfect translation of it could only be bad. I've heard that A&D was a better book, but even then, Hollywood has a history of destroying the good things in novels in adaptations. Just look at what they did to Sphere!

[Tenshin_Xo]

The problem with the Code was they stayed too true to the book*yawn*. The book and movie were both over sedentary and highly predictable.

 

A&D, has the potential to be a touch better is more sci-fi.

*spoiler*

Anti-matter bombs ala Star Trek, but blackmailing Rome is neat idea.

[Corki]

The Da Vinci Code was much better as a book than a film. The book always had me turning the page wanting to read what happened next. The film was good, but it wasn't inspiring.

 

However...

 

A&D is a superior book to the Da Vinci Code, I feel. Therefore, hopefully, the film will be much better. And I just hope that people understand that everything Dan Brown writes is fiction, especially when the film is released. What he writes might not be true, but there is nothing to say that it is actually correct. People can believe what they want and what they don't want from his writing. It's just a book, afterall.

[Niamh Sedai]

It was a good film but the book was a lot better. I know as novels go, it probably isn't the best ever written but the one thing that can be said for Brown is that he knows how to make the book fly by. The film but to be honest (and this is a rarity) Tom Hanks sort of annoyed me :?

[Faile]

The movie was okay. I'd say it was somewhat entertaining. The book on the other hand was crap. I read halfway through it and nearly puked. It sounded like it was written by a 14 year old who got a wild hair up their butt and decided to attempt writing.

 

I haven't read A&D though. Maybe I'll give it a try.

[Tenshin_Xo]

This wasn't a grat book to try and translate to film, the directors shot themselves in the collective foot by keeping true-ish to the book.

 

The book is one of the pioneers of the genre 'faction' that is a serious pet peeve of mine. I thought is was predictable and shallow, but I tend to think the same thing about Chrichton who is pretty decent(or so I am told), although to his credit Prey was pretty good.

 

A&D is by far a better book than DaVinci Code, and Digital Fortress is by far one of the worst books I've had the mispleasure to read. :shock: