"I was nicely surprised."
It is nice to be surprised every now and again by a film. I was half expecting this film to be as bad as the first, but it is actually quite good. Probably fair to say when you have an actor of Tom Hank's calibre you should be onto a winner straight from the beginning. But that isn't always the case as we saw with the Da Vinci Code. Amazingly it does appear they have learned their lessons from the first film - which I found quite surprising.
This film is faster paced no doubt, and it needed to be, I would say more action orientated than the first - or at least so it seemed. In fact considering the circumstances the pace should have probably been a little bit quicker, or at least everybody should have had the same sense of urgency as Langdon. I wonder about the classification, some of the scenes seemed a bit tame - obviously done to keep the classifications boards happy and make sure it had the widest possibly appeal. But does that work in its favour - not so sure.
Having never read any Dan Brown books in my life, I don't know if this is a good representation of the book or the style of the writer. It came across well to me, making me half wonder if I should read his books. Which I was adamant I wouldn't do after seeing the first film, just believing everybody had got caught up in a load of hype about nothing.
Only real issue I have with this film is casting. I thought it was wrong because I see big star names and know they have a lot more to do with the plot than initially it appears. Otherwise they wouldn't be there - it is kind of obvious. Some films this doesn't matter, but with thrillers and anything which has a twist or supposed 'surprise' ending. It just gives the game away, which I thought in this instance was a pity.
I twigged early on what is was all about and who was behind it all, which I find annoying, but I only grasped this due to casting. If a few unknowns had been used then I might not have come to such early conclusions. But I suppose with a film like this they probably think everybody has read the book anyway, so they know the plot and the outcome. *Waves hand in the air* I hadn't read the book and it could have been a better thriller with some better casting.
Tom Hanks came across well I thought as Harvard symbolist 'Robert Langdon'. I did like his part in the first film, I didn't think the first was let down due to Hanks it was all to do with pacing.
Ewan McGregor as 'Camerlengo Patrick McKenna', seemed out of place to me. I just didn't think he suited the part at all. Don't get me wrong he played it well enough, it just didn't feel right. It was like most of the other actors fitted their part, but he just didn't give me that sense.
Stellan Skarsgard, another wonderful actor, plays a good supporting part as 'Commander Richter' head of the Swiss Guard. Casting wise I might have liked to see him play McGregor's role. Though perhaps age wise it wouldn't have been right, I think he would have suited the role better overall.
I liked the Hitman/Assassin in this (Nikolaj Lie Kaas); he certainly got straight to the point. That is how I like these types of characters to be, blunt.
Ayelet Zurer as Vittoria Vetra I wasn't bothered about at all. It was a pretty dull role I thought personally. Apart from being the scientific brain which obviously filled in the parts Langdon didn't know. It was a rather superfluous role in its entirety. The most exciting thing she does is tear a page out of an ancient manuscript.
Armin Mueller-Stahl is another actor I like; he played 'Cardinal Strauss' and was the only one I was unsure about through the entire film. I couldn't gauge which way he was leaning at all, one moment I thought he was good next moment bad. His role did actually throw a little doubt into the mix, which I think made it a better film.
There were some odd moments, like the bookcase in the vault that I thought was a bit off. I couldn't see somebody moving such a heavily weighted 'bolted down' item without some serious muscle. I also wondered as well if the vault was filled with pure oxygen, to a degree, as was mentioned. Would firing a gun ignite the oxygen? I had it in the back of mind that pure oxygen was explosive, but I may be wrong.
Overall this film was a nice surprise, certainly better than the first. I just wish they had taken a more detached view on the casting, with people who hadn't read the book in mind. Then I think the film would have been even better. But then I am probably in a minority when it comes to Dan Brown books!
Movie News
1 Comments
2 Comments