ROTTEN TOMATOES: Ron Howard Prepares to Unleash Angels & Demons

Ron Howard Prepares to Unleash Angels & Demons

Filmmakers scramble to get script in place pre-strike.

by Jeff Giles | October 25, 2007

One of the many high-profile productions being affected by the looming writers' strike is Angels & Demons, the follow-up to The Da Vinci Code -- but if director Ron Howard and his fellow filmmakers have anything to say about it, their sequel's progress will be unimpeded.

Variety reports on the last-minute preparations behind the scenes of Angels & Demons, which will find Tom Hanks reprising his role as Robert Langdon from The Da Vinci Code, the $758 million-grossing adaptation of Dan Brown's bestselling book. Angels is scheduled to start filming in Europe next February, but with the writers' strike coming as early as November 1, Howard's team has to move quickly. From the article:

Producers Brian Grazer and John Calley, Columbia, Howard and writer Akiva Goldsman are seeking to finalize the shooting script before next week's deadline. Meanwhile, the "Angels" team have begun casting around Tom Hanks, who will reprise his role as Robert Langdon.

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.

Variety's report goes on to note that, although the Angels & Demons novel was written before -- and takes place before -- The Da Vinci Code, the film will be a sequel.

Source: Variety

Related Items

Movie:	The Da Vinci Code
Celeb:	Tom Hanks
	Ron Howard
	Brian Grazer
	John Calley
	Akiva Goldsman
	Dan Brown

(1-20 of 31 posts) | Reply

TheNextReel writes:
on Oct 25 2007 06:58 AM

I love how the new synopsis could also be applied to The DaVinci Code. Dan Brown is certainly not known for branching out...

(Reply to this)

Elixor writes:
on Oct 25 2007 07:11 AM

I have no doubt that the book is great, but I personally thought The DaVinci Code was a bad movie. I have no interest in seeing a sequel.

(Reply to this)

arpeggio191 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 07:50 AM

The DaVinci Code book was decent... Angels and Demons was a much better book... better story line and symbolism. I'm actually semi-looking forward to this movie for a few reasons....

1. I liked the story better.
2. The DaVinci Code movie was such a colossal piece of trash, they really can't go anywhere but up.
3. I feel like they'll have more time to make the film, instead of shot gunning the crap out of it like the last one. DaVinci was made in about 5 minutes which was extremely evident in its poor editing and blatant attempt to include every single book plot detail in the film. They forgot that half the fun of the book was reading about him figuring it out. In the movie Langdon comes across the answer in 3 seconds completely alienating the audience. Hopefully they'll take the time to make this one better. My recommendation: fewer puzzles, more thought process!

And yes TheNextReel, that synopsis is friggin terrible. His next book, The Solomon Key, or whatever it's called now, will probably have the same plot! ha! (at least it's better than Digital Fortress... that was a piece of ****!)

(Reply to this)

Ender7406 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 07:50 AM

Really it's not a sequeal, Elixor. It's a story using the same character, Robert Langdon, that centers around a completely different event and set of circumstances. That said, this film is going to ****ing blow.

(Reply to this)

Ender7406 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 07:50 AM

*sequel

(Reply to this)

Baccus83 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 07:55 AM

Boo.

(Reply to this)

kruss writes:
on Oct 25 2007 07:59 AM

Its not a sequel because Angels and Demons was actually written before The DaVinci Code.

(Reply to this)

Warheart1188 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 08:04 AM

The Da Vinci code was a very interesting novel. It was one of the few books where I excitedly wanted to get the next chapter. The ending was a bit of a let down, though. I personally liked the movie but I thought that many elements of the book really didn't fit into the film very well. I have a feeling A & D will be a much better film, even though they're taking a "sequel" approach rather than a "prequel" approach.

(Reply to this)

Man_Of_Iron8905 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 08:07 AM

Love Ron Howard, he gave us Cinderella Man, but the da vinci code was weak and this isnt going to be much better.

(Reply to this)

phoenixphire24 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 08:40 AM

Da Vinci code ia an ok book that was made into an ok movie. Angels and Demons is a better book, so I can hope for a better movie.

(Reply to this)

puablo writes:
on Oct 25 2007 08:51 AM

I agree with phoenixphire24, I think Angels & Demons has the possibility of being a better movie. The real problem is, when you compare the two, they are really very similar, so I fear a lot of people are going to just knee-jerk compare this as a copy of the DaVinci Code movie, no matter what. But I'm looking forward to it.

(Reply to this)

blank blank writes:
on Oct 25 2007 08:52 AM

arepggio, i dont know why you " feel like they'll have more time to make the film", especially since the subtitle of the article reads "Filmmakers scramble to get script in place pre-strike."

personally, the da vinci book was a nice quick read, the movie was a long terrible bore, and i expect jack from this new A&D book, even though that book was ok.

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on Oct 25 2007 09:00 AM

Having read 'DaVinci' and 'Digital Fortress' but not 'Angels'-- which from reading the book jacket sounded to me like almost EXACTLY the same plot as DaVinci (I'm told I'm wrong about that)--

Brown's strength is in pacing, much like Warheart alluded to; he makes you want to turn the page because he creates a pretty good sense of urgency. His characters? Feh. His Plots? Standard. It's just when he gets 'em running that sh#t starts to groove.

And I tend to agree with Arpeggio about DaVinci the movie, mostly BECAUSE the pacing in the movie blew solid Yak Chunks. I must've looked at my watch about seven times. Ron Howard is usually a MUCH Better director than this, when he doesn't sacrifice his own skills and vision for those of someone else (want to see Howard succeed at creating a sense of urgency? Rent 'Ransom').

...and this adds fuel to my fire of 'BAN AUDREY TAUTOU FROM MOVIES FOREVER'.
This movie was a creative black hole and 'Amelie' was the most painful experience of my natural born life. They both have only one thing in common. BAN HER.

(Reply to this)

zgberg writes:
on Oct 25 2007 09:19 AM

A&D is much less philosophical and much more action packed. However, I think the gory deaths of 4 priests might cause some controversy in itself.

Hanks is a great actor - one of the best over the last 20 years or so. However, I think he missed the mark in his portrayal of Langdon.

(Reply to this)

taran72 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 09:33 AM

Everyone who has read the books (I've only read A&D), thinks Hanks was a bad choice. I thought The DaVinci Code was a decent movie, and people tell me that's because I didn't read the book.

(Reply to this)

andygates23 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 10:42 AM

A&D was a better book than its sequel and hopefully it'll be a better movie. I agree Hanks is a great actor, but he was a bad choice for Robert Langdon. Langdon is supposed to be a suave, good looking ATHLETIC professor. I thought George Clooney would have been a lot better. Hopefully, hopefully the screenwriter will have the sense to take out the helicopter scene towards the end. It was just too over the top and totally unbelievable.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Oct 25 2007 10:56 AM

The plots in Angels & Demons and The Da Vinci Code are almost identical. Dan Brown really isn't a very creative writer. About the only thing he has going for him is his ability to write in a compelling way. Unfortunately, I cringed all the way through those 2 books.

(Reply to this)

witherwings writes:
on Oct 25 2007 11:02 AM

The book was okay, the movie was terrible. Not interested in a sequel. I like Ron Howard, too, I don't know why he's wasting his time on this.

(Reply to this)

jaqu7 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 11:36 AM

Dan Brown is not a good writer. The book was a success because the chapters were short and quick to read, and because the plot was provacative. But there are few writers as stylistically drab as Brown.

(Reply to this)

ehmalo01 writes:
on Oct 25 2007 11:57 AM

In reply to this comment (#1220764)
Yeah---I agree. Angels and Demons is a much better book than the Da Vinci Code. The Reason that DVC did so well was because of the "earth-shattering" revelation about Jesus and Mary Magdelene. That rumor has been around for centuries, and it's nothing but trash.

Anyway, A&D is far superior, and more original. Brown weaves a great story around the death of a pope, and leads the reader in a race through Rome--using art (again) to provide the clues. I think this movie has a much better chance of being decent.

(Reply to this)