Film Critics

[ehowton]

I saw Angels & Demons this weekend, and was greatly disappointed. I found the book far better than The Da Vinci Code in its pace, excitement, and suspense. And while the book reached just as deep into ancient mythology and origins of our modern-day surroundings, unlike Code where they were able to build up that suspense through well-paced revelations, A&D was an ill-placed...action flick? Code was a much better movie than it was a book, and A&D was a much better book than Code. Had they stayed with creating a drama, using the same careful unveiling of the past and how it predicated the very foundations of what we believe to be true, it should've far surpassed that of the previous movie. But they didn't. They cashed in on a well-developed character now that they had a following, using the events in the book only as a vehicle for an action-packed movie in which the story was lost. In doing so, it lost that which would've made the book a great movie. The novel was filled with so much architectural knowledge and history that immediately afterward I bought a book on Rome, to see the sculptures and buildings which were so very integral to the storyline. And while its true that many of the scenes in the movie were shot in buildings, their significance was omitted completely. In that regard, it was a dismal failure as an adaptation. It lost all suspense.

I know this because I both read the book and saw the movie. I feel that makes me qualified to give my opinion on the film. But what about those who feel entitled to review the film with no point of reference on its literary source? Sure the acting was superb - the score rousing and the cinematography breathtaking! But without a story, what's the point? I'm not saying a review couldn't be written on what transpires in the film alone, just...why? What would the focus of such a review be? There really seems to be no point to it.

There are lots of movies which come out, and I'm interested in what some people have to say about them. I'm just not sure someone who has no knowledge whatsoever of what they're watching should be considered a good source. They have no point of reference. In short, they really don't even know what they're watching. Nothing they have to say will therefore inspire me one way or the other because of that omission. I simply don't care what they thought about it, or why.

Comments

[irulan-amy.livejournal.com]

Bummer. I share your opinion on the book. Maybe I'll wait to rent this one!

[ehowton.livejournal.com]

Solid plan.

[ehowton.livejournal.com]

That must be it exactly. Escapism without a care to what they're watching, in essence. So...one could say to the individual who wrote the glowing review of the film, "You'd hate it if you read the book." Interesting.

Thanks for the perspective. And welcome back!

[thesweetestnote.livejournal.com]

I've not seen nor read either of the installments. All I heard was a bunch of Christians bitching about it. Them thinking that this book and movie was a HUGE threat to the church. Therefore, now I MUST see them. I could try to read them but... shit, I haven't even finished The Hobbit. And don't think I'll ever touch Lord of the Rings. But the movies were superb! I keep my reading very selective. Mostly biographies and Punisher, Batman and Superman. LOL.

Great, now I feel stupid.

[ehowton.livejournal.com]

Nothing like loudly and publicly discrediting something to make it the focus of attention, huh? You'd think the Catholic Church would've learned that by now.

[thesweetestnote.livejournal.com]

Them and Madonna ;P

OH! and lest not forget Sinéad O'Connor. lol

[catttitude.livejournal.com]

So, when I fell asleep, I didn't miss much?

[ehowton.livejournal.com]

Not a whit.