Angles and Demons

[aquarium444]

The movie was somewhat different than the book, because there was more confrontation between Langdon and the villain that abducted the priests and I wanted to see that in the movie, but the thing that got me asking questions, was when the main antagonist rescued the Vatican and jumped out of the airplane, wouldn't you think that they should take it easy on him. Well as far as literature is concerned, this modern book, and the movie industry seems to take a position on religious people. I am surprised at the courage of these villains. I think that I would trust such a villain even if he was not qualified. Dan Brown plays science and religion but not politics, because nobody plays politics except for the ancients. He is missing one or two elements, but when he and Clive Cussler get together.....

[kelby_lake]

I think you mean ANGELS.

[AuntShecky]

The AOL welcome screen had a similiar error on their welcome screen some time ago. After I posted this on the LitNet in the "Light and Humorous Verse" thread it was changed to "Angels." Of course, it was just coincidental; the little ditty had nothing to do with it. But I hope you enjoy it anyway.



'Believe in Angles and Ghosts? '
[ Actual headline on the AOL welcome screen.]

I've never met a ghost,
but even if I did,
I'd wonder he fibs or boasts,
or if he likes to kid.

In reality there is no dearth
of lines, parallel or perpendicular.
I've believed in them since my birth
and through my life's long circular.

I can't touch an ectoplasmic particle,
but angles? Those I'd buy.
I take 'em as the genuine article
be they rect or quad or tri.

They lay the truth right out
making their points A, B, and Cs.
So, yes I believe in angles
and not just by degrees.

[aquarium444]

This happens frequently to me, because of my inability to use proper grammar. I git the meaning though. I'm waiting for old Cuss to get his teeth into those novels, beforein I read em. How about you all, agreed?

[Nietzsche]

I thought the book was entertaining but the film improved on some aspects of it.

One of the things I disliked about the book was the amount of time it spent talking about the reporters standing around, and the scenes about what the assassin was doing. I felt it interrupted the rest of the story. Otherwise, the book had a very good thought provoking plot, lots of interesting details and good storytelling. The movie cut down on the reporters & assassin "screen time" , and allowed the rest of the story to flow much more naturally. The ending was also more believable and better.

While I prefer the DaVinci Code book to its movie, I must say I liked the A&D Movie better than the book for those reasons. Needless to say, both the DVC movie and A&D book were great. I'm proud to say I own both movies and all of Dan Brown's novels.

[applepie]

All too often I find that books are more enjoyable than the movie. That said, these books have adapted fairly well into movies. The DaVinci Code moved over a little better, in my opinion, but Angels and Demons was alright. The movie was entertaining, but I think the book was a better study in complexity. The movie just left me feeling like something was lost, but I couldn't likely put my finger on it without watching the movie again ;)

[aquarium444]

I actually liked the assassin character in the book. He was a big man, and rugged. They exempted the fight scene in the movie between the assassin and Robert Langdon.

I watched the movie in blu-ray, and that was very nice because the colors were vivid and the scenes were very huge. I almost want to visit Vatican City.

[prendrelemick]

The AOL welcome screen had a similiar error on their welcome screen some time ago. After I posted this on the LitNet in the "Light and Humorous Verse" thread it was changed to "Angels." Of course, it was just coincidental; the little ditty had nothing to do with it. But I hope you enjoy it anyway.



'Believe in Angles and Ghosts? '
[ Actual headline on the AOL welcome screen.]

I've never met a ghost,
but even if I did,
I'd wonder he fibs or boasts,
or if he likes to kid.

In reality there is no dearth
of lines, parallel or perpendicular.
I've believed in them since my birth
and through my life's long circular.

I can't touch an ectoplasmic particle,
but angles? Those I'd buy.
I take 'em as the genuine article
be they rect or quad or tri.

They lay the truth right out
making their points A, B, and Cs.
So, yes I believe in angles
and not just by degrees.

Very acute.

[aquarium444]

In the old tongue, that is how it is spelled.