Recently i wrote an article for our school newspaper. I wrote a film review in the style of everyone's favourite psychotic (yes you've guessed it) Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw. Please don't rag on me too much for being unoriginal, but any comments or criticisms (constructive or destructive) are welcome. P.S. i have an email adress, if anyone cares enough you can contact me at: wannabeyahtzee@hotmail.co.uk.
(Spoiler warning. The following review contains spoilers from both the book and film Angels and Demons. If you do not know and do not wish to know several important and exciting plot twists please look away SNAPE KILLS DUMBLEDORE! now)
Angels and Demons is the thoroughly inquisitive and informative prequel to the Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown. Quite easily as controversial as its sibling, the book tackles one of the world's biggest issues; science vs. religion. Including frightening technologies ancient brotherhoods and dark secrets, it digs as deep and asks as many, if not more questions that The Da Vinci Code. On the 15th of May, we saw the film version sail into celluloid harbour, gleaming, dazzling and blinding all within sight. With Illuminati ambigrams adorned on the side and the antimatter annihilations imminent, it promised all fans of the books, myself included, a stunning vision the nonstop thrills, action and intrigue of the book. It was only when you have paid the fee and boarded this Magical Golden Wonder Ship that you realise that the old girl is a hollow shell with most of the original ornaments thoroughly broken or missing completely, and that the Magical Golden glow about it was simply that it was very much out of breath and sweaty.
My first alarm bell started going off when I realised that they had changed things so that Robert Langdon never went to CERN and was instead sent for by the Vatican. At the time I though, alright I guess they needed to condense things for the film, I could let that go. Warning lights then started flashing when I realised that the character Maximillian Kohler had been completely omitted. Although quite annoyed at the loss of a rather stunningly written character, again I thought okay, if they didn't do the CERN sequence his part was rather minimal and could be easily filled. My brain finally went into meltdown when rather than dying in the fountain; Cardinal Baggia was pulled from the brink of death by Langdon and several bystanders. I suddenly thought OH CHRIST I'VE SEEN THIS ALL BEFORE!!! You see Angels and Demons; or as I like to call it: An Idiot's Guide to Roughly Understanding the Gist of Angels and Demons; seems to be suffering from a very serious case of "Stormbreaker syndrome." You see, Anthony Horowitz's Alex Rider book, Stormbreaker made for an enjoyable movie but one that was very little like the original book. Angels and Demons however seems to have moved on to stage two of the disease, and is not even that good a movie. The pant-wetting desperation evident in the book left me frustratingly dry in the movie and two intense fight sequences between Robert and the Hassassin were non-existent. More than half the character names are changed; rather than Italian Camerlengo Carlo Ventresca we have Ewan McGregor as a strangely Irish sounding Patrick McKenna the sage and wise, and yet again Italian, Cardinal Mortati has been replaced by someone with a German accent claiming to be a Cardinal Strauss.
Also they have made a completely unnecessary and confusing change, in that they have; using some sort of magical, blue, wooden, police box that can travel through time and space (we didn't mention any names so you can't sue us BBC); placed the entire movie's events after those of the Da Vinci Code. Why they did this is a mystery as it has very little effect other than some people referring once or twice in an undertone to Langdon's "falling out" with the church, and that his claustrophobia is suddenly gone. It just makes me want to cry "WHAT THE F... nelly!?" Now some of you may now be yelling in triumphant glee that you've found a loophole in my logic; "Well if it makes no difference why are you complaining about it?" To these people I hold up a dictionary from which they back away shrieking and hissing like a vampire before a crucifix. I then say to them "It's just such a mind-bogglingly pointless change that all it does is to add yet another metaphorical toilet flush into the equally metaphorical sewer." And with that I swiftly turn that loophole into a noose.
Also Vittoria Vetra, the scientist from CERN whose father created the antimatter which threatens the Vatican, has a weirdly compressed part. In the book she was a sexy, smart, love interest who got straight into the action and would throw a punch as quickly as she would disprove one of Einstein's theories. Now however she is quiet and shy little thing, who doesn't so much as boil an egg and would rather stay behind and read some books while the men go out and do all the cool stuff. I don't know what happened, maybe director Ron Howard thought people would like her more than him and surgically removed her coolness gene. One enormous sucker punch of a move is the baffling extraction of the final twist, the big secret and driving force behind the events of the film. Just why this was taken out when another ten minutes of filming could have brought a much more satisfying end to the film.
However the biggest kicker is not the altered characters or plotline, instead it is this: an extravaganza of frustrating pointless; the exclusion of one of the world's greatest wonders: "a flawless diamond, born of the ancient elements with such perfection that all those who saw it could only stare in wonder." The Illuminati diamond. It's a central theme to the book and a marvel of artistic genius and so easily made once you have the design. The design is clearly shown in the book and yet for some unfathomable reason the film saw fit to replace it with the crossed keys of the Vatican City. Although this is supposedly the final clue.
After having read several other reviews from major newspapers, I have come to a truly startling (sarcasm) discovery. They're all pants on heads retarded! For example Richard Corliss of Time magazine gave the film a positive review stating that "Angels has elemental satisfactions in its blend of movie genre that could appeal to wide segments of the audience". "What audience?" I find myself asking, the audience of stupid and homeless people that make up 85% of the movie going public? And what elemental satisfactions are you talking about? Because I couldn't see any! Maybe you were wandered into the wrong movie theatre by mistake and ended up watching something better like a live bowel surgery. Even the Vatican City has given good comments and when they refused to even acknowledge Da Vinci Code's existence. If the Vatican itself can call it a good film then it's lost the book's power to make you question your religious and scientific values and is now just another bog-standard terrorism/ historical treasure hunt movie.
To sum up, a below average movie for those who've never read the book and a slap in the face with a cactus on fire for those who have. Now while there are a thousand other criticisms squabbling in my mind, my remaining word count is running low and my editor is getting very cross so I shall close by saying for all I care angels and demons can...
By Alex "neither angelic or demonic" Lawler
(Spoiler warning. The following review contains spoilers from both the book and film Angels and Demons. If you do not know and do not wish to know several important and exciting plot twists please look away SNAPE KILLS DUMBLEDORE! now)
Angels and Demons is the thoroughly inquisitive and informative prequel to the Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown. Quite easily as controversial as its sibling, the book tackles one of the world's biggest issues; science vs. religion. Including frightening technologies ancient brotherhoods and dark secrets, it digs as deep and asks as many, if not more questions that The Da Vinci Code. On the 15th of May, we saw the film version sail into celluloid harbour, gleaming, dazzling and blinding all within sight. With Illuminati ambigrams adorned on the side and the antimatter annihilations imminent, it promised all fans of the books, myself included, a stunning vision the nonstop thrills, action and intrigue of the book. It was only when you have paid the fee and boarded this Magical Golden Wonder Ship that you realise that the old girl is a hollow shell with most of the original ornaments thoroughly broken or missing completely, and that the Magical Golden glow about it was simply that it was very much out of breath and sweaty.
My first alarm bell started going off when I realised that they had changed things so that Robert Langdon never went to CERN and was instead sent for by the Vatican. At the time I though, alright I guess they needed to condense things for the film, I could let that go. Warning lights then started flashing when I realised that the character Maximillian Kohler had been completely omitted. Although quite annoyed at the loss of a rather stunningly written character, again I thought okay, if they didn't do the CERN sequence his part was rather minimal and could be easily filled. My brain finally went into meltdown when rather than dying in the fountain; Cardinal Baggia was pulled from the brink of death by Langdon and several bystanders. I suddenly thought OH CHRIST I'VE SEEN THIS ALL BEFORE!!! You see Angels and Demons; or as I like to call it: An Idiot's Guide to Roughly Understanding the Gist of Angels and Demons; seems to be suffering from a very serious case of "Stormbreaker syndrome." You see, Anthony Horowitz's Alex Rider book, Stormbreaker made for an enjoyable movie but one that was very little like the original book. Angels and Demons however seems to have moved on to stage two of the disease, and is not even that good a movie. The pant-wetting desperation evident in the book left me frustratingly dry in the movie and two intense fight sequences between Robert and the Hassassin were non-existent. More than half the character names are changed; rather than Italian Camerlengo Carlo Ventresca we have Ewan McGregor as a strangely Irish sounding Patrick McKenna the sage and wise, and yet again Italian, Cardinal Mortati has been replaced by someone with a German accent claiming to be a Cardinal Strauss.
Also they have made a completely unnecessary and confusing change, in that they have; using some sort of magical, blue, wooden, police box that can travel through time and space (we didn't mention any names so you can't sue us BBC); placed the entire movie's events after those of the Da Vinci Code. Why they did this is a mystery as it has very little effect other than some people referring once or twice in an undertone to Langdon's "falling out" with the church, and that his claustrophobia is suddenly gone. It just makes me want to cry "WHAT THE F... nelly!?" Now some of you may now be yelling in triumphant glee that you've found a loophole in my logic; "Well if it makes no difference why are you complaining about it?" To these people I hold up a dictionary from which they back away shrieking and hissing like a vampire before a crucifix. I then say to them "It's just such a mind-bogglingly pointless change that all it does is to add yet another metaphorical toilet flush into the equally metaphorical sewer." And with that I swiftly turn that loophole into a noose.
Also Vittoria Vetra, the scientist from CERN whose father created the antimatter which threatens the Vatican, has a weirdly compressed part. In the book she was a sexy, smart, love interest who got straight into the action and would throw a punch as quickly as she would disprove one of Einstein's theories. Now however she is quiet and shy little thing, who doesn't so much as boil an egg and would rather stay behind and read some books while the men go out and do all the cool stuff. I don't know what happened, maybe director Ron Howard thought people would like her more than him and surgically removed her coolness gene. One enormous sucker punch of a move is the baffling extraction of the final twist, the big secret and driving force behind the events of the film. Just why this was taken out when another ten minutes of filming could have brought a much more satisfying end to the film.
However the biggest kicker is not the altered characters or plotline, instead it is this: an extravaganza of frustrating pointless; the exclusion of one of the world's greatest wonders: "a flawless diamond, born of the ancient elements with such perfection that all those who saw it could only stare in wonder." The Illuminati diamond. It's a central theme to the book and a marvel of artistic genius and so easily made once you have the design. The design is clearly shown in the book and yet for some unfathomable reason the film saw fit to replace it with the crossed keys of the Vatican City. Although this is supposedly the final clue.
After having read several other reviews from major newspapers, I have come to a truly startling (sarcasm) discovery. They're all pants on heads retarded! For example Richard Corliss of Time magazine gave the film a positive review stating that "Angels has elemental satisfactions in its blend of movie genre that could appeal to wide segments of the audience". "What audience?" I find myself asking, the audience of stupid and homeless people that make up 85% of the movie going public? And what elemental satisfactions are you talking about? Because I couldn't see any! Maybe you were wandered into the wrong movie theatre by mistake and ended up watching something better like a live bowel surgery. Even the Vatican City has given good comments and when they refused to even acknowledge Da Vinci Code's existence. If the Vatican itself can call it a good film then it's lost the book's power to make you question your religious and scientific values and is now just another bog-standard terrorism/ historical treasure hunt movie.
To sum up, a below average movie for those who've never read the book and a slap in the face with a cactus on fire for those who have. Now while there are a thousand other criticisms squabbling in my mind, my remaining word count is running low and my editor is getting very cross so I shall close by saying for all I care angels and demons can...
By Alex "neither angelic or demonic" Lawler
