You probably remember how, after all of the hype, The Da Vinci Code opened to enthusiastic cries of “Underwhelming!” and “Boring!”
Yes, after all of the fright and hubbub amongst Christians who thought the movie might lay waste to the Christian church internationally, it turned out that all moviegoers needed to do was read the reviews to learn that the movie was a jumbo-sized, deep-fried turkey.
“So, heck,” say the brilliant minds at Columbia Pictures, “why not round up the same team for a prequel?” I mean… it’s the money that matters, not whether or not the film was any good, right? (Da Vinci Load drew in exactly one zillion dollars internationally.)
Yep, it’s finally official. Here come Dan Brown and director Yawn Howard with Angels and Demons, and Tom Hanks is returning to play Robert Langdon. The immediate question burning at the front of all moviegoers’ minds is obvious: Will Langdon sport the same ridiculous hairstyle?
And in case you didn’t know, the story involves (gasp) a scandal in the Catholic Church.
Hanks’ character, a Harvard-based expert on religious symbols, this time sleuths a mystery that involves a secret society and a conspiracy that leads to Vatican City and threatens the future of the Catholic Church.
Now, if Christians want to ensure that this film gets all of the publicity it needs, they’ll start fashioning picket signs and organizing boycotts as fast as they can. That’ll help moviegoers see that frequent big-screen depiction of churchgoers as reactionaries is right on the money.
I liked The DaVinci Code when I read it and was really excited for the film. I even had envisioned in my mind exactly how I would interpret the novel on film.
My version was better than Howard’s.
Angels & Demons is a much better novel, IMO. We’re talking about commercial fare here … not deep, meaningful literary works. I thought A&D was a real thrill ride of a novel that had a more compelling story than DaVinci and could make for a really great action/adventure film if “Yawn” doesn’t botch it up too much.
I don’t see how this film could raise the same kind of stink that The Da Vinci Code raised. Among Catholics, it might, but because it concerns the role of Renaissance and/or Baroque thinkers and/or artists in shaping the modern Vatican City, it just doesn’t have the sort of pan-Christian potential to offend that The Da Vinci Code had. Plus, it’s a sequel, and the original book didn’t sell all that many copies until the follow-up, The Da Vinci Code, had become a hit — so I wouldn’t expect the same degree of pop-culture hype or scrutiny for this film, either.