So surprised that yesterday my blog stat reached 164 views per day [hahahaha], well, usually my blog viewed around 30 views daily. One plausible cause: newbie viewer continously read most of my posts.

Okay, so now I am going to write again about Angels and Demons. Please have no offense, I write this based on my personal reference, since I read the book and adore it, and the movie has lots of differences from what written in the book.

I just mentioned some minor parts that I felt annoying when watching the movie. Another important point is the changes in character name. Silvano Bentivoglio, existed in the film as the developer of antimatter, originally named Leonardo Vetra in the novel, and is Vittoria Vetra adopt father. Camerlengo Patrick McKenna, the papal court official in Vatican City, should be Carlo Ventresca [it is said that the name was changed because the actor is a Scottish -- the director changed the nationality of camerlengo from Italian to Northern Irish]. Well, I am a bit curious when watching the movie. Why the camerlengo called by Patrick and not Carlo? Then I realized it .

Next, the ending is different. I would like to say , mmmm, how the assassin died [in the movie he died due to car bombing, in the novel he was killed by Langdon and Vittoria], how Cardinal Baggia managed to live [the last cardinal of preferiti, a term to called favourite cardinal to be pope, which was drowned and died in the novel] and became pope [who is Cardinal Saverio Mortati in the book, or Cardinal Strauss in the movie ----arrrggghhh so confusing], how camerlengo Patrick McKenna rode the helicopter alone [in the book, camerlengo and Langdon got into the helicopter, where the camerlengo then use ejection seat to save himself, while Langdon must struggled with a kind of fabric and fell down to a river], how it was not taking into account that the late pope is the real father of camerlengo, and how the Vatican lent Langdon Diagramma Della Verita and not Illuminati’s brand like in the novel. Oh well, like I am watching different story. Come to me if you do not read the novel and curious .

But, the most essential part that I think gives a very significant differences between the novel and the movie is how the movie did not emphasize the fundamental reason on what was going on. How so? Let me tell you this. The chaos situation in Vatican City, particularly, and Catholic Church as written in the novel, it is because old war between science and religion [or church, I would say], and how the camerlengo cannot accept the effort on bridging both of them. It was the conflict between himself which triggered the serial killings. I did not feel it in the movie, in fact, I do think there is no such reason existed in the movie. The late pope was so interested in science, and because of science he can get the happiness of participating in regeneration part of human being without breaking his swear as a priest [why did I write like that *sigh* so complicated -- so the pope is in love with a nun and they want child but they do not want to break their swear and then they do in-vitro fertilization -- that's it ]. But the child, the camerlengo, did not want science intrude the church. He murdered the pope and the preferiti. Read the novel and you will get it .

Anyway, with so much notes, what do I like from the movie? I do like how the production team created the scenes, since there is no way they can shoot in the real places. How they recreated St. Peter Basilica, or Sistine Chapel. I heard they used greenscreen also to develop the scene digitally. Well done .

That’s it. Do not hesitate to watch . My friends said it was good, for you who do not read the novel.

Ciao,

Citraningrum, Taipei.