Are you an angel or demon?
I guess as human, we are neither. In fact, we could be both.
In fact, the demon/devil/satan, whatever you call it, was originally an angel...am I right?
So what I'm saying is, there's no such thing as absolute.
There is no such thing as the perfect angel. Even angels fall sometimes.
There is no such thing as an evil demon (please don't tell me this is because all demons are evil). Well, some demons are demons for a reason. Without evil, what is good, right?
I wonder why are all the 'angels' on the left?
Hmmm...maybe because all lefties (ahem, yours truly) are angelic...
Must be, no better explanation hehe
Anyway, why am I crapping here about angels and demons, right & wrong?
Wait for it...wait for it...
I'm leading the discussion to the sequel to the movie 'The Da Vinci Code' based on Dan Brown's book, with the same grand title - The Da Vinci Code.
I'm leading the discussion to the sequel to the movie 'The Da Vinci Code' based on Dan Brown's book, with the same grand title - The Da Vinci Code.
So apparently, Angels and Demons is the first book but then The Da Vinci Code was given the privilege to go first as the movie, well, for obvious reasons...because it was controversial and controversies SELL! Well, I mean if the first movie sucked, who would watch the second one right? If the first movie rocks, it doesn't matter if the second sucked because people would pay to watch the second one...just to find out if it sucked. Hehe...very 'theoretical'.
Anywayz...
Anywayz...
After watching the movie (after SO SO LONG, I know, I have tears in my eyes for the chance to finally watch it) I knew the first thing I have to do is read J.T.'s review on his movie blog on this movie to get some inspiration.
J.T. writes some of the BEST movie reviews and honestly, I only read his movie blog, no other bloggers, at least for now, only he can provide a great review. He looks deep into the movie content and comes out with some of the most amazing analysis ever. Well, enough promoting him, JT - PAY ME LATER!
Anywayz, J.T. didn't disappoint.
"Angels and Demons" carries the distinctive themes of:
Religion vs. Science.
The Roman Catholics vs. Illuminati
Angels vs. Demons (or the other way around)
Good vs. Evil
Good vs. Evil
The implicit theme is basically the indistinct lines between good and evil and also faith and believing.
Sometimes, what makes us good and evil depends on our faith and our believes.
Religion is very vague - an indeterminate subject. No right no wrong, because it's based on subjectivity and faith and beliefs.
Why do we have religious war or holy war?
Did God condone that? Under what circumstances? Who decide? Again...it's up to our own perceptions and interpretations as humans.
There are so many ridiculous acts that are done all in the name of God.
We have martyrs who claim to die because of God. We have 'holy' people who does 'holy' things like kill gays for their abnormality or set those discriminating rules that control women.
The question I always wonder is, 'gays' or any other people who are perceived as different are also created by God. God created them because it is part of a plan...So, why can't we accept them as God's creations?
Sometimes, their obsessive faith blinds them. I think it's not just with God. Sometimes, a faith in a particular leader makes us do crazy things ya. And then, it seems like we do things that we ourselves can't explain, but we just think that it is God's will. Is it?
Truth is, there is one fine line between right and wrong. Wisdom is the key. I don't know. Even sometimes I question my own beliefs.
Anyway, I'm drifting to New Zealand AGAIN! Back to the movie.
I love the fact that 'Angels and Demons' plays with this notion of faith and beliefs and the ambiguity between right and wrong. I love how the writer use the 'angels' as clues in the movie, which leads Professor Langdon to the resolution of the murder and the whole mystery.
Cleverly done is the way it relates Science and Religion into the picture. See, science is all about FACTS and solid proof - therefore making it seems like RIGHT...correct. But then, there is always the subjectivity in things or events or phenomenon...something 'spiritual' about things - thus religion.
I think the movie is trying to point out that, science and religion are interdependent. World phenomenon are explained using the theories of both. I guess at certain times, science cannot explain things - for example, I believe there is no scientific explanation for the power of faith in God. I mean, I've seen people survive Cancer because of their faith in their Gods. Though personally, there were also many times where I've been let down. 2 of my most beloved people died of cancer. But whatever it is, what can't deny that there is some 'power' out there that goes beyond science alone. Yet, we also cannot deny the impact of science within our society.
Like I mentioned before, Science versus religion or rather, science and religion complement each other. In "Angels & Demons", Professor Langdon represents 'religion' while our gorgeous Ayelet Zurer, who plays the scientist, Vittoria Vetra represents 'science'(I believe J.T. has also mentioned this). See how both of them work together to solve the case?
To be honest, I have a very poor background on the Roman Catholics and the religion and the whole concept of the history between the science and the Catholic Church. But, one thing I do know is the story about Galileo, which is brought in in the movie quite often.
I think to fairly comment on this movie and whether or not it is loyal to the original creativity of Dan Brown, one must read the book. From J.T.'s review and the comments there, the movie hasn't done the book enough justice - well as expected, just like the Harry Potter series.
I think while the theme of the movie could be intact, I believe the delicate details of the book can only be found in the book. As much as the director wants to, there are always certain limitations when it comes to translating text into film.
Like J.T. mentioned, the solving of the whole plot because of the CCTV is pretty ...well... off-standards for such a clever writer. Have to agree on that. I guess I was pretty lost when it comes to the whole unraveling of the clues. I mean, I believe it's due to the lack of knowledge on the historical elements of religion and the Catholic beliefs and legends/myths. If it were in text form, I'd have a chance to mull over it and you know, maybe do some research.
J.T. feels that Ron Howard had learned from the past - improving 'Angels & Demons' by making it faster in pace. I personally prefer things slow when it comes to this movie though. I mean, too fast, too confusing for me. I find myself rewinding certain scenes just to get the idea. I mean, forgive me but I was practically struggling through the movie since it has NO SUBTITLES and the sound system on my laptop, well, let's just say, is not really working to my advantage.
Personally, as popular as the movie may be due to publicity, I still think this movie is forgettable. Either because I wasn't fully focusing or it is just plain forgettable. I believe the book would be more memorable than the movie itself because it will definitely give me a clearer idea on the whole story and the characters will be more developed.
Due to limitation of time, I think certain characters in the movie lack development, which I hope to find in the book. I believe that Vittoria Vetra has more character in the book than just being a beautiful scientist. Oh, in fact, in the book, I think the Vetra scientist is a male character, not a female.
To give a better review I think one must already read the book.
So, based on the movie alone, one can only rate the movie in itself. We can't judge it by comparing to the book. If we do, we'll be disappointed hehe.
In terms of the movie's storyline, it wasn't exactly extremely engaging. There were moments that I was pretty lost...I think because I just suck in those Catholic terms or ya, maybe I'm just bad in English. I actually have to pause and search for the meanings of certain challenging words etc etc. I think part of me predicted that Ewan McGregor plays the villain. But then there were certain parts in the movie that convinced me differently.
Conclusion:
Someone that is nice on the outside doesn't mean that they are good on the inside. Everyone does something for a reason. Whether it is justifiable or not, well, it's really up to that particular person to judge. I think sometimes we do things when we are so blinded by our beliefs, and only people who are standing on our point of view can understand. So in the end, though there are things that are downright wrong, there is always another side of looking at things. Without one thing, there won't be another.
My favourite line from the movie?
"Are you anti-Catholic Professor Langdon?
- No, I'm anti-vandalism...."
TC-My Rating:
I think to fairly comment on this movie and whether or not it is loyal to the original creativity of Dan Brown, one must read the book. From J.T.'s review and the comments there, the movie hasn't done the book enough justice - well as expected, just like the Harry Potter series.
I think while the theme of the movie could be intact, I believe the delicate details of the book can only be found in the book. As much as the director wants to, there are always certain limitations when it comes to translating text into film.
Like J.T. mentioned, the solving of the whole plot because of the CCTV is pretty ...well... off-standards for such a clever writer. Have to agree on that. I guess I was pretty lost when it comes to the whole unraveling of the clues. I mean, I believe it's due to the lack of knowledge on the historical elements of religion and the Catholic beliefs and legends/myths. If it were in text form, I'd have a chance to mull over it and you know, maybe do some research.
J.T. feels that Ron Howard had learned from the past - improving 'Angels & Demons' by making it faster in pace. I personally prefer things slow when it comes to this movie though. I mean, too fast, too confusing for me. I find myself rewinding certain scenes just to get the idea. I mean, forgive me but I was practically struggling through the movie since it has NO SUBTITLES and the sound system on my laptop, well, let's just say, is not really working to my advantage.
Personally, as popular as the movie may be due to publicity, I still think this movie is forgettable. Either because I wasn't fully focusing or it is just plain forgettable. I believe the book would be more memorable than the movie itself because it will definitely give me a clearer idea on the whole story and the characters will be more developed.
Due to limitation of time, I think certain characters in the movie lack development, which I hope to find in the book. I believe that Vittoria Vetra has more character in the book than just being a beautiful scientist. Oh, in fact, in the book, I think the Vetra scientist is a male character, not a female.
If all scientists were this hot...(I mean, a guy version hot) I'd pay attention in science class and be a scientist!!
To give a better review I think one must already read the book.
So, based on the movie alone, one can only rate the movie in itself. We can't judge it by comparing to the book. If we do, we'll be disappointed hehe.
In terms of the movie's storyline, it wasn't exactly extremely engaging. There were moments that I was pretty lost...I think because I just suck in those Catholic terms or ya, maybe I'm just bad in English. I actually have to pause and search for the meanings of certain challenging words etc etc. I think part of me predicted that Ewan McGregor plays the villain. But then there were certain parts in the movie that convinced me differently.
Conclusion:
Someone that is nice on the outside doesn't mean that they are good on the inside. Everyone does something for a reason. Whether it is justifiable or not, well, it's really up to that particular person to judge. I think sometimes we do things when we are so blinded by our beliefs, and only people who are standing on our point of view can understand. So in the end, though there are things that are downright wrong, there is always another side of looking at things. Without one thing, there won't be another.
My favourite line from the movie?
"Are you anti-Catholic Professor Langdon?
- No, I'm anti-vandalism...."
TC-My Rating:
Love,
TammyC
No comments:
Post a Comment