Sign in to follow this  
JJT

Angels and Demons

Recommended Posts

Anyone actually see this?

If so, did anyone else notice that all that Langdon does in this story is f@#$ up and get people killed?

Worst protagonist ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you and I watch the same movie? If anything Langdon tries to prevent people from dieing. To my recollection, he only screwed up once. The rest happened out of his control. And for the record, he's a pretty realistic protagonist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, trying to prevent people from dying != preventing people from dying.

SPOILERS ABOUND:

1) Langdon is manipulated (easily I might add) by the Carmelengo for most of the story until Richter (who solves the puzzle ages before Langdon does) feeds him the answer in his last, frustrated living act.

2) Did I mention that Langdon's bumbling gets Richter killed right just before he is able to bring the Carmelengo to justice?

3) Add to that the scores of Swiss Guardsman Langdon blindly leads to an untimely, horrific death.

I'm sorry. Langdon may be a realistic protagonist, but there is just nothing compelling about the man. He gets lead around by the nose for 90% of the movie. Stimulus/response: feed him a religious symbol and watch him hop in a Fiat and drive across town to whatever Catholic shrine happens to face east towards the rising sun or whatever ridiculous clue you want to infer from the writings of Archimedes.

I have no idea what it is about this movie that makes me so passionate, but boy does it piss me off the more I think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He gets lead around by the nose for 90% of the movie. Stimulus/response: feed him a religious symbol and watch him hop in a Fiat and drive across town to whatever Catholic shrine happens to face east towards the rising sun or whatever ridiculous clue you want to infer from the writings of Archimedes.

Did you honestly expect anything else from this movie?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the record, trying to prevent people from dying != preventing people from dying.

SPOILERS ABOUND:

1) Langdon is manipulated (easily I might add) by the Carmelengo for most of the story until Richter (who solves the puzzle ages before Langdon does) feeds him the answer in his last, frustrated living act.

2) Did I mention that Langdon's bumbling gets Richter killed right just before he is able to bring the Carmelengo to justice?

3) Add to that the scores of Swiss Guardsman Langdon blindly leads to an untimely, horrific death.

I'm sorry. Langdon may be a realistic protagonist, but there is just nothing compelling about the man. He gets lead around by the nose for 90% of the movie. Stimulus/response: feed him a religious symbol and watch him hop in a Fiat and drive across town to whatever Catholic shrine happens to face east towards the rising sun or whatever ridiculous clue you want to infer from the writings of Archimedes.

I have no idea what it is about this movie that makes me so passionate, but boy does it piss me off the more I think about it.

All I remember of the character was how, in the first movie, he stands there getting all sweaty and panicked in front of a cop, which, of course makes him look suspicious, and then, when asked if he's okay, just makes himself look even more suspicious by not replying at all. He's a professor, it shouldn't be to difficult for him to spit out "I'm claustrophobic."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you honestly expect anything else from this movie?

I didn't see the da vinci code, so I guess my answer is....maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan Brown is the new Michael Crichton. He writes terrible books specifically intended to be turned into movies. Brown writes about religion while Crichton wrote about science; both murder their subject material in order to warp it into something remotely interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how IS the movie compared to the book? I'm a masochist, and have actually read all of Dan Brown's books (up to this point; I know a fifth is due out this year). So I'm curious.

I wish they'd make movies of the other two books though. If I have to sit through flicks riddled with inconsistencies, I'd prefer them to have a lot of surplus military grade weaponry firing at people.

Though admittedly, the typhoon at the end of Deception Point might be hard to CGI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Langdon was pretty much the only character with his head on straight. But he does kind of come across as being dragged around, but what do you expect with a story about Vatican conspiracy?

I dunno, I guess it was alright. I never read the book but I hear Langdon does even crazier things in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loved the book. Hated the movie.

"Hey guys, let's strip out every major subplot and instead spend the whole movie throwing the camera around while the filmmakers suck up to the Vatican because of how 'damning' da Vinci Code was! What a great idea for a movie!"

No. No it wasn't. I was bored to tears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this