Hm.
While I was watching the movie, I tried my best to forget that I have read the book so that I can experience it as if I was one of many moviegoers who might see what the fuss is all about for the first time. An hour-and-a-half into it, I still found myself intrigued and transfixed, wondering what the next revelation will be. By two hours, I was starting to look at my watch. After two hours-and-a-half, I came to the conclusion that I really would not have appreciated this movie without having read the book to begin with.
The book itself was fast-paced - each revelation and cliff-hanger came in very fast (and short) bursts and really propelled the book along. Of course, the book had the luxury of not having a two-hour-and-a-half constraint. The movie, on the other hand, had to cut out a whole whack of the puzzle-solving - which was the fun thing about the book. What made it on screen, therefore, was a watered-down version of the mystery, preserving only the key plot points.
My hubby and I agreed that everyone else was cast perfectly. Tom Hanks, on the other hand....whatever we each visualized as Robert Langdon in our minds, Tom Hanks wasn't it. Marc suggested Pierce Brosnan. I thought Ralph Fiennes (or his younger brother Joseph) would have done it. Of course, barring their accents - but I think both of them managed to pull off an American role in the past. If you ask me, Tom Hanks seemed to be sleepwalking through the movie.
At any rate, if you want to see what the controversy and the fuss is all about, by all means, go! Knowing myself, I'd probably buy the DVD anyway just because. But just bring your expectations down - despite what the trailer shows, this is not a chase movie. This one has a lot of talking heads.
No comments:
Post a Comment