ron howard is a great director, tom hawk is a great actor, this movie is really bad, so boring, bad logic, full of loop holes and junk
why?
2007-01-14 11:08:13 · 15 answers · asked by MiKe Drazen 4 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
someone said it was too hard to follow, I haven't read the book, but knows my history, it was too easy to follow, it felt like a kid movie, I know the book is spose to be great, I shoulda read it and not watch the movie, now I can't do anything
2007-01-14 11:40:43 · update #1
There was way too much hype and controversy with the movie. The book was a great fictional read, but the Catholic church, and all those fuddy duddy's took it all too seriously, that the book went from a story, to a headline. Unfortunately, all that publicity couldn't hide the fact the movie was, in fact, crap. If you hadn't read the book, you were probably expecting it to be a whole lot more than it was, and if you had, you already new all the twists and turns. I also agree Tom Hanks wasn't a very believable Langdon, I would have rather seen someone more manly, more ruggid as he is portrayed in the book. And someone with not such a BAD receding hairline line fluffy up-do.
2007-01-14 11:27:07 · answer #1 · answered by pjveddergirl 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Books are always better than the movie. you can only squeeze so much into a movie. I think Ron Howard did a great job as a director, However I think the screen play could have been much better. The movie isn't bad. No bad logic. It takes Historical theory's facts and dates and pits them against a modern world. It is no different than War of the worlds. How odd would it be knowing aliens have been here for years? The Church made the book number one (and believe me the book was much better). You don't see them protesting the Omen when it came out do you? The movie did have holes, the book doesn't that isn't Ron Howards fault, it is the screen writers fault. After reading the book, I do not think Tom Hanks was the right man for the lead. That didn't fit.
2007-01-14 15:38:26 · answer #2 · answered by danielle Z 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Suck Is As Suck Does!
Sometimes a great Director can save a bad script.
Sometimes an incredible actor can save a bad script.
Sometimes the script sucks so bad that neither one can save it.
Whoever Produced this crap probally had the names 'Ron Howard & Tom Hanks' along with 'dollar signs' flashing through his little pea brain. It clouded his decision and he didn't pay attention to the 'script' he was spending all his money on. Now, he's sitting somewhere actually reading the next script he might produce, because those visions of big hollywood bucks boil down to weither or not the script is good in the first place. :-)
2007-01-14 11:18:37 · answer #3 · answered by Army Of Machines (Wi-Semper-Fi)! 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think the biggest problem was it moved too fast for people who didnt read the book. Me and my dad had a difficult time following the whole storyline throughout the film, and we both never read the book. However my step-mom read the book and found it easier to follow.
On the other hand, it wasnt the best written script. But also takes in to the factor of the controversy between the factuality of the events that are described in the movie to reality.
2007-01-14 11:29:08 · answer #4 · answered by B-Rock 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because the book was so extense and they tried to squeeze all the book in just two hours and that made the movie boring because if you didn't read the book there are a lot of things that you wouldn't understand just by watching the movie.
2007-01-14 11:32:42 · answer #5 · answered by Alma V 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I thought it was an excellent movie. It's a FICTIONAL movie and I think the big fuss is that people are saying it's real. It had really funny parts too. I mean some of the 'historical facts' were hilarious. I was sitting with a history buff and a religious buff when I watched it and we had a lot of fun finding the inaccuracies and boy were there a ton of them.
2007-01-14 11:17:14 · answer #6 · answered by Ms. H 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The book was great, and the movie stuck to it really well, but Langdon should have been played by an unknown actor. tom Hanks was to big a star for it, and he did an okay job but he is a distracting presence in that kind of movie.
I like d the movie but it could have been better.
2007-01-14 11:14:59 · answer #7 · answered by Niki C 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
nicely, its type of a difficult question to respond to because for sure no one has study all the books interior the international and ought to't decide which e book is amazingly the worst. For me, the e book I disliked the most replaced into The Lord of the Flies by technique of William Golding, notwithstanding it replaced into by technique of no skill the worst e book ever written, I in simple terms truly disliked it.
2016-11-23 18:33:49 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that Tom Hanks isn`t really believable as Langdon.
Also, the story as such has too many somewhat impossible leaps and twists.
It`s amusing, true.. but not worth all the fuss.
2007-01-14 11:19:08 · answer #9 · answered by U_S_S_Enterprise 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To many people read the book so all the excitement was lost since every knew what was going to happened
2007-01-14 11:45:53 · answer #10 · answered by Bo V 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋