![]() ![]() The story here appears much weaker than the novel, as does some of its characters, especially the reworking of Irrfan Khan's "Provost". There's inconsistencies and obvious inaccuracies with the book and I wonder how much power Dan Brown had as executive producer. ![]() It's unfortunate that the more I think about it, the more silly the elaborate idea becomes. Hanks, slips into Langdon mode totally as expected and the delightful Felicity Jones plays the Bond-girl style sidekick very well as we watch them try to figure out the same puzzles and twists Langdon is usually pitted against. It shows that they struggled with cramming as much as the butchered novel into the 121min runtime, missing possible reshoots as some of the performances are really not up to scratch, namely Sidse Babett Knudsen and Omar Sy. Howard's direction, or the editing seems sloppy and rushed with noticeable out-of-sync audio. ![]() Though we seem to be ironically missing, The Lost Symbol where Langdon tramples over Washington's Masonic history, which is currently in development but with Howard only sitting in a producers chair. So, Ron Howard, Tom Hanks and Hans Zimmer return for the third movie adaptation of Dan Brown's bestselling symbolist and iconology professional, Robert Langdon. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |