3132.1: Spirit in the Sky
LAWLLLLLLL
So we did go to see Ewan McGregor tonight, who makes the movie worth watching... barely. Same way Jean Reno made TDVC worth watching... barely. Coming out of the theatre, some guy behind us said, "that'll be seven movies I've slept through."
I guess, as an adaptation, it's decent. Ron Howard cut all the stupid out of it*-- C: "That is what he does!" Me: "Fix Dan Brown?" C: "YES." --but I'm still a bit perplexed that they NEVER used the actual "Angels & Demons" ambigram title =/ Why the hell not? At least it didn't have the stupid "This is what I see in my head!" floaty crap from TDVC [though, they didn't NEED to have it for A&D].
*especially the prime complaint I've had about the book, which--for a story based on accurate historical artifacts--made me annoyed that such a personally-significant historical discrepancy was key to the villain's motive, so yay
--but yes, technically they've made the prequel a sequel, since they make a couple of allusions to TDVC in A&D. Some of the other changes are odd, too, but myeh, okay. If anything, I would've definitely liked LESS SHAKY CAM. About all that makes the movie interesting is the amount of "reality" that's in it: the [mock] Vatican, actual pieces of art, the actual conclave ceremony, antimatter [not left a surprise for long, so LAWL SPOILURZ], etc. So I can see how anyone not interested in that would find the movie dull.
Gonna try to finish reading Watchmen. Yes, I'm a philistine for reading it after the movie, but I think it works a little better since it feels more like reading for insight. [Today I found I kept waiting for X, Y, and Z events, which is something of setting myself up for letdown, or--in this case--astonishment.]
Came home and immediately looked for cat puke--how the fuck much can one cat puke, anyway?! I seriously have to wonder about Squeaky when this happens so much... not helping Dan's blood pressure, to be sure 9_9 [nor C's, but he hasn't had to clean it up nearly as much as D]
So we did go to see Ewan McGregor tonight, who makes the movie worth watching... barely. Same way Jean Reno made TDVC worth watching... barely. Coming out of the theatre, some guy behind us said, "that'll be seven movies I've slept through."
I guess, as an adaptation, it's decent. Ron Howard cut all the stupid out of it*-- C: "That is what he does!" Me: "Fix Dan Brown?" C: "YES." --but I'm still a bit perplexed that they NEVER used the actual "Angels & Demons" ambigram title =/ Why the hell not? At least it didn't have the stupid "This is what I see in my head!" floaty crap from TDVC [though, they didn't NEED to have it for A&D].
*especially the prime complaint I've had about the book, which--for a story based on accurate historical artifacts--made me annoyed that such a personally-significant historical discrepancy was key to the villain's motive, so yay
--but yes, technically they've made the prequel a sequel, since they make a couple of allusions to TDVC in A&D. Some of the other changes are odd, too, but myeh, okay. If anything, I would've definitely liked LESS SHAKY CAM. About all that makes the movie interesting is the amount of "reality" that's in it: the [mock] Vatican, actual pieces of art, the actual conclave ceremony, antimatter [not left a surprise for long, so LAWL SPOILURZ], etc. So I can see how anyone not interested in that would find the movie dull.
Gonna try to finish reading Watchmen. Yes, I'm a philistine for reading it after the movie, but I think it works a little better since it feels more like reading for insight. [Today I found I kept waiting for X, Y, and Z events, which is something of setting myself up for letdown, or--in this case--astonishment.]
Came home and immediately looked for cat puke--how the fuck much can one cat puke, anyway?! I seriously have to wonder about Squeaky when this happens so much... not helping Dan's blood pressure, to be sure 9_9 [nor C's, but he hasn't had to clean it up nearly as much as D]