angels and demons is an opportunity lost
Dan Brown’s novels possess tremendous intrinsic speed. The narrative is so fast that the reader is always hooked and his books are always a one go start to finish affair. His books may not have anything profound to convey but there’s a formula to his writing which makes his books such bestsellers. There’s a ticking time bomb in the back ground and there’s a mystery that unfolds at break neck pace. Add to it the tremendous research that he carries out which inter twines science, Christianity and the unfolding compelling mystery, as a consequence, his books are tremendous material for intelligent and stimulating thrillers.
Post “A Beautiful Mind”, expectations from Ron Howard’s work has been sky high. Add to that Tom Hanks and Dan Brown. Some might say it’s quite expected, but to me it has been little disappointing that with “Da Vinci Code” and now “Angels and Demons”, they’ve had two shots at it and it hasn’t quite come off on both occasions.
Among all the work of Dan Brown, “Angels and Demons” arguably is the best celluloid thriller material. “Da Vinci code” was a little sedate in terms of events and the pace. “Digital Fortress” isn’t quite in the same league as his other works. “Deception Point” is also tremendous thriller material. But, “Angels and Demons” just had it perfect. Four hours, four murders, Illuminati, the mad dash across the Vatican, it’s a deadly combo.
The movie itself also had almost everything. The Lancia Delta’s, the Alpha Romeos, the Papal suits, the Vatican archive, Galelio- Bernini- Michelangelo, and of course Robert Langdon. But from start to end, the movie felt like a tepid affair. It felt monotonous, too uniform, unspectacular and predictable. My colleague, who’s not read a single Dan Brown book, inferred less than half an hour into the movie that Camerlengo is the villain. The absence of the elaborate CERN angle and the altered climax would no doubt be biggest let downs for the people who read the book.
But the main reason “Angels and Demons” doesn’t dazzle is because of its pacing and narrative. What one desired out of this movie was when it came to giving the detail, relating the Illuminati, the ambi-grams and the symbols, the audience would be given fair time to grasp the detail and the reasoning. The beauty and the flow of the deductions were done with in the movie in the most boring manner possible. Other than this aspect, it was also desirable that the action sequences will be ones to savor. The Lancias, the Alfa Romeos, the raw pace, criss-crossing the Vatican, some how, in these action sequences, the movie just didn’t attain the acceleration that was only due. Here was the perfect setting where the narrative could have altered between sheer pace of the action and careful passages through the tremendous research detail but alas, the contrast and the much needed acceleration was conspicuous by its absence.
The fact that “Angels and Demons” is still a worth watch is all down to Dan Brown’s story. It hasn’t gained anything in its transition to the celluloid, worse still, is has lost quite a bit actually. The original book is a stimulating thriller.
I had actually really loved the ending sequence of “Da Vinci Code” where blood flows into the wash basin where Robert Langdon is standing and there is this tremendous glimpse of Ron Howard school of film making with the dazzling visual of Louvre and the stars and the voice over on the cryptic poem about the bloodline. I remember coming out of the theater relishing that end and forgiving the rest of the affair. But with “Angels and Demons”, there is this silly wishful thinking at the back of the head, did I miss Tarantino?
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
it was a disappointing fare. interestingly, the indian media on average gave it 3-4*s.
Man, you seriously need to read some good thrillers. Try Alistair Maclean.
Even after two books Langdon is a cardboard cut out who simply runs from point A to point B giving lectures.
That he(Brown) is so popular is a testament to people’s waning taste in good literature.