Comments on: Angels and Demons — mindless and mild

By: Seraph

Seraph — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 01:35:33 +0000

First off, it wasn’t a sequel. It was a prequel. Antimatter does exist. It is made in a supercollider at CERN. CERN is real. I haven’t seen the movie. After the way DaVinci was butchered I didn’t even bother with Angels and Demons. If you do the research instead of just criticizing you would have probably come across as not being so blindly critical.

By: margaret

margaret — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 21:49:49 +0000

I get the point, but all we ever do is stay silent and never complain. Catholics are taught to be tolerate of it all. That’s why we get walked all over all the time. If we consistently speak up then people will think twice about how they mention Catholics in bad movies!!! Show me where the protest is!!!

By: Andrea

Andrea — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:01:32 +0000

Before either movie came out, I read both books to see what all the hype was about. Angels & Demons is actually the 1st book, so the fact that the story seems a little more half-baked than DaVinci Code isn’t surprising. Dan Brown poked at the Church a little bit in his 1st book, and didn’t get a reaction, so he poked a little harder and got the uproar he was likely hoping for. If this is his pattern, I’m truly afraid of what random conspiracies a 3rd book might present…but I’m sure it’ll be another relatively entertaining work of fiction.

By: cathyf

cathyf — Thu, 28 May 2009 14:31:58 +0000

Highly recommended is Dave Barry’s sendup of The DaVinci Code:
http://www.readliterature.com/R_davincicode.htm

I also agree with amanda about debating from a position of knowledge. But I would note that you can be just as knowledgeable (if not in quite so timely a manner) by borrowing the book from the library and/or waiting for the movie to come out in video.

By: amanda

amanda — Mon, 25 May 2009 01:42:44 +0000

i agree with jim with respect to “thou doth protest too much” and how that makes the Church look and i agree the movie/book are works of fiction to be seen as such. however, i feel that when it comes to matters of church. faith and religion in a world so confused, so lost – even angry about same, we must be careful what we condone. i admit, i DID see the movie and was happy that it had LESS anti-catholic/christian sentiment as the first – that there was an attempt, albeit meager, to debate both sides rather than attack one.

i went to see this movie because when i enter a conversation, i prefer to be knowledgeable about the subject matter i am going to refute or debate – i find it makes me a better advocate for my beliefs if i understand from where another is coming. but at the same time, it is disheartening that so many people – those who have not found Christ or those who have run from Him – will find this not as fiction but as testimony to their fears and suspicions.

i want to say that is IS just a movie but given the times we are in and the importance of God in all times, i instead hesitate… all i can do is pray that if nothing else, it brings more Christians together to defend the truth & ultimately God.

By: Jim

Jim — Sun, 24 May 2009 21:26:11 +0000

I agree with one of the comments, a lot of the anti-Catholic stuff in the book was left out of this one. The science is semi-true, but again, it’s a work of fiction. The danger of the last statement, though, is that since the books and movies are so popular, people sometimes don’t understand that it is fiction. Rather than getting all worked up about it, I think it depicts the differences in being able to publish fiction about the Church…if someone would write a book or make a movie that was perceived as anti-Muslim…I’m not sure the author or those involved wouldn’t need security details. :) I was amazed at the back lash about DaVinci because again, the work is fiction…meaning not true…end of story. If you defend yourself against someone/something that is right out stating they are saying not-true things…you can start making people wonder if there might not be some truth there. But that’s my opinion, I could be and probably am wrong…

By: Phil

Phil — Thu, 21 May 2009 08:23:16 +0000

I thought the movie was ok as an action thriller. A lot of the anti-Catholic agenda present in the book version was left out, making the movie more enjoyable for me. I don’t think that Ron Howard shares the anti-Catholic agenda of Dan Brown- he was just trying to adapt the story into a good screenplay. I do agree that many Catholics are getting a little too worked up over a shallow work of fiction with very little substance, though. In my opinion: overall, a thrilling but shallow movie with very little substance, better than its predecessor. Worth seeing if you enjoyed the National Treasure films or other history thrillers.

By: ml

ml — Thu, 21 May 2009 01:34:53 +0000

If it makes you feel any better (It didn’t me), the science in the book is as wrong as the religion in the book. I haven’t seen the movie, as I refuse to pay $10.50 to see something that will probably bore me.