[jtrek79]

what a waste of my time,what a complete nonsense,my wife druged me to watch this piece of crap , the funny part is,its everywhere in my country,every street

i wanted tom hanks to be part of the star trek franchise as a fan he is , instead he plays some blah blah blah professor talking mambo jumbo

dear members,my friend trekkies,this is truly inferior to davinci code , an other pathetic movie

i threw my money away,i could have eaten 3 sis kebap extra hot instead

if u re gonna see this......thing....take with u a plastic bucket to vomit

[kevin]

Well, I know I'm going to end up seeing it anyway - 'bad movie' hype always gives e a case of curiosity killing the cat.

Though if it's worse than DVC, that is a genuinely impressive achievement. Though the problem probably lies in the fact that Dan Brown can't write anything other than airport pulp.

His novels aren't deep or meaningful, so how can a film version be. There is no substance, so any attempt to make it so fails due to the paucity of the source book.

That was where DVC went wrong, so perhaps this adaption does the same.

[jtrek79]

both books are unreadable,but they would do nicely if u would throw them to the fireplace to feed the fire

if this ....movie surpasses trek.....i am gonna scream........................THERE IS NO GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sir num nums]

Well, if you read the books, then you know that is what the author was trying to say.
But, I am sure this movie will be a dud at the box office.

The first movie created such hype and controversy by the churches, it made people want to go see it. This time, no one seems to care. I guess because it is such a horrible movie, they have nothing to worry about.

[jerhanner]

I loved the books - maybe they weren't Nobel finalists, but they were a "ripping good yarn." They're just tough to make into movies, I guess... either way, I'll have to see A&D when it comes out on DVD just for a sense of continuity.

[jtrek79]

seriously,i dont care what the author is trying to say,i dont care about priests or the affairs of the church,i am a believer in my own way , i dont want a stupid book to tell me whats right or wrong.

bottom line , the movie stinks , i should have seen star trek for a fifth time

[jerhanner]

Yes, you should have! Go see it a 5th time anyhow.

[buffs79]

Personally, if a book or movie has the ability to make you question your faith, the faith wasn't strong in the first place.

In my opinion, I really liked the Da Vinci Code. I found it to be a nice book to just pick up and read. When it comes to the fact that it does give some rather extreme views on the church, the fact is that this is just fiction, Dan Brown isn't really claiming that Opus Dei is full of crusading, self-mutilating and murderous people.

And no offense to anyone, I defiantly respect all beliefs. As far as Angels & Demons... meh. I liked Da Vinci better.

Also jtrek, what about it was bad? No offense, but I'm not a very religious person, but even so, is this any good at all? Could you give us a detailed review?

[sraviik]

Personally the Da Vinci code and Angels and Demons takes their place right next to the Great Gatsby in my heart as THE most unreadable, dull, and quite sadly boring books in the history of the universe. i'm sure as my life continues I will be able to add to that list but quite frankly i could barely get past the first page of any of them. Its not really the religious aspects of the two books (angels&demons, davinci) but rather the fact that they go absolutely nowhere & do nothing. The Scarlet Letter was better then those and i loathed reading that book.

[Livingston]

Originally Posted by kevin

Well, I know I'm going to end up seeing it anyway - 'bad movie' hype always gives e a case of curiosity killing the cat.

Though if it's worse than DVC, that is a genuinely impressive achievement. Though the problem probably lies in the fact that Dan Brown can't write anything other than airport pulp.

His novels aren't deep or meaningful, so how can a film version be. There is no substance, so any attempt to make it so fails due to the paucity of the source book.

That was where DVC went wrong, so perhaps this adaption does the same.

I'm reading Angels and Demons right now and you can say that again Kevin. DVC reads like Joyce's Ulysses compared to this contrived crap. Insert bizarrely mutilated corpse here, insert Langdon here, insert religious hocuspocus here, insert fanatic here and there you have it. So far it's exactly like DVC but instead of Christ, it's antimatter.

I hear he's writing a third Langdon book, hopefully it'll be better, it's the same old stuff, just different details. But I'll go see the movie anyway.