[Ron Howard] Angels and D e m o n s

[uberfoop]

Eh, just saw it like a week ago. Pretty horrible IMO. Cinematography was pretty typical, and suspension of disbelief was completely impossible. Simply too much coincidence and complexity going on to take it seriously. Granted, that's due to the source material, but that is never an excuse for garbage.

Spoiler

Also, the explosion was one of the most idiotic I've ever seen. This is an instance where either going for realism (ie a nuclear-esque blast involving a bright flash, a large shockwave, and a big fireball) would have been far superior. Or just a classic chemical blast. Anything would be better than that random gimmicky, flashy, fake, ugly blue crap.

It seems as though since the western films of Sergio Leone, people have forgotten how to make an explosion in a film decent/meaningful/beautiful/not incredibly stupid looking.

 

[Jimpy]

ME: Well, this looks better than The DaVinci Code in my opinion.

Sequels in action/suspense/mysteries tend not to be better then the first, and as a Hollywood film is jingoism for "milking". I personally was not looking forward to this when it was new.

I think I like DaVinci Code a bit better, but this is still well pretty awesome. Da Vinci Code seemed more I guess enjoyable. This one was more dark, heh.
This one was surprising and good, took me longer than usual to figure it out.

Spoiler

Sad with Obi. Anyways, who was the new pope at the end?

DaVinci code had more humor and sex appeal if I recall correctly, aswell as the villains were less ambiguous overall. I felt this one had far too many red herrings aswell, and random eureka moments that only made sense to the protagonist when he decided to reveal some 'new knowledge' that only he had all along.

Spoiler

The new pope is the 4th remaining Cardinal who was nominated by the others to replace the Pope. He was the one that the Illuminati attempted to drown.

Eh, just saw it like a week ago. Pretty horrible IMO. Cinematography was pretty typical, and suspension of disbelief was completely impossible. Simply too much coincidence and complexity going on to take it seriously. Granted, that's due to the source material, but that is never an excuse for garbage.

Spoiler

Also, the explosion was one of the most idiotic I've ever seen. This is an instance where either going for realism (ie a nuclear-esque blast involving a bright flash, a large shockwave, and a big fireball) would have been far superior. Or just a classic chemical blast. Anything would be better than that random gimmicky, flashy, fake, ugly blue crap.

It seems as though since the western films of Sergio Leone, people have forgotten how to make an explosion in a film decent/meaningful/beautiful/not incredibly stupid looking.

I'm in general agreement with all of this except for the comment on cinematography. While the filming is done in an area rich with art and culture and whatnot tht makes looking pretty easier; the shots and techniques used I felt were highly dynamic and visually surpassed the average movie. The only reason I found this film tolerable other then imagining Tom Hanks as still playing Forest Gump, was the visually pleasing footage. The one down side to the cinematography was that there were points where there was too much ping ponging panning, Also alot of the acting in relation to where people were facing compared to teh camera pretty much set up who was good and who was bad. IE: Someone looks towards camera, their honest, and good. Someone talks looking way from the camera, their veiled. Someone looks at camera with a shadow cast on their face, they seem good now but turn out evil. If you watch it again, I pity you, but look out for this, every character's alignment coincides with how they look at or away from the camera.

Spoiler

The explosion near the end and the whole priest who conveniently earlier in the movie said he can fly a helicopter floating around I found just retarded.

 

[punwisp]

The movie is pretty good

 

[Dakho]

The only character I really liked was Ewan McGregor's character. He was interesting. Robert Langdon was annoying and boring, and the woman with him was nothing more than something to look at.

The plot, on the other hand, was compelling and the setting was great; it absorbed me in to the point that I went and bought Assassin's Creed II immediately after, so I could enter that same type of world again (ancient secrets, mysterious orders, cryptic puzzles, etc.).

Oh, and that one assassin was a badass. It was fun to watch him.