Latest Entertainment News Headlines

Hanks gets his Angel

04.24.2008
100%

Move over Naomi Watts and make room for Ayelet Zurer. Entertainment Weekly is reporting the Israeli born actress (perhaps most famous in the US for her role in MUNICH) has signed on to play Vittoria Vetra in the DA VINCI CODE sequel ANGELS AND DEMONS. Zurer beat out Naomi Watts and a number of other A-list actresses who were interested in the role. Zurer will star alongside Tom Hanks in the film which was retrofitted to become a sequel (the Dan Brown novel actually takes place before the events in THE DA VINCI CODE). If it gives you any indication into the substance of ANGELS AND DEMONS, I read it about two years ago and can't remember a lick about it (other than it features words that can be read the same way upside down). But a quick Google search reminds me it has to do with a plot to destroy Vatican City with antimatter. ANGELS was one of the first high-profile projects to be delayed because of the writers strike last year. Pre-production is now well underway with filming set to begin this June. Sony has already locked up a May 15, 2009 release for the film. Ron Howard will return to direct with a script by Akiva Goldman.

Extra Tidbit: Ayelet's middle name is July.

RECOMMENDED MOVIE NEWS

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

+0
8:03AM on 04/25/2008
I actually read DVC before A&D, and ended up liking A&D better.

And as far as 'theotherness' goes - he's always bitching and moaning about something, with never anything positive to add. The books are not "dull on the mind" or "pedantic." They're well written historical fiction pieces. And the DVC movie blew my ass. It was about 80% faithful to the book, but the other 20% RUINED the rest of it. Here's hoping the better of the two books makes a better movie.
I actually read DVC before A&D, and ended up liking A&D better.

And as far as 'theotherness' goes - he's always bitching and moaning about something, with never anything positive to add. The books are not "dull on the mind" or "pedantic." They're well written historical fiction pieces. And the DVC movie blew my ass. It was about 80% faithful to the book, but the other 20% RUINED the rest of it. Here's hoping the better of the two books makes a better movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:57PM on 04/24/2008
Hopefully that dead possum that played Hanks' hair will return as well.
Hopefully that dead possum that played Hanks' hair will return as well.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:30PM on 04/24/2008

A&D better than DVC

The only reason studios jumped onto the bandwagon for the DaVinci Code was the fact that they knei it would generate tons of controversy. Angels and Demons is a better book. And, yes, both books are pretty much the same. I do enjoy, though, how Dan brown marks out the Path of Illumination in the book. I wonder how many people went to rime and started looking for the obelisks.

Let's hope this "sequel" will do well on it's merits of a great story instead of cashing in on a controversy.
The only reason studios jumped onto the bandwagon for the DaVinci Code was the fact that they knei it would generate tons of controversy. Angels and Demons is a better book. And, yes, both books are pretty much the same. I do enjoy, though, how Dan brown marks out the Path of Illumination in the book. I wonder how many people went to rime and started looking for the obelisks.

Let's hope this "sequel" will do well on it's merits of a great story instead of cashing in on a controversy.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:52AM on 04/24/2008

agree with foxgate

lol yes i remember reading that line and laughing at how obvious the setup was, BUT without saying too much here, if he had just learned that specific knowledge, and used it later without the obvious hint to the reader, there really is no objection to it.
hmm.. if you havent read it you likely have no idea what that vagueness meant..
--SPOILER WARNING--
i always thought A&D would make a better movie than DVC, its a much more cinematic story, in that da vinci's twists were mostly cerebral
lol yes i remember reading that line and laughing at how obvious the setup was, BUT without saying too much here, if he had just learned that specific knowledge, and used it later without the obvious hint to the reader, there really is no objection to it.
hmm.. if you havent read it you likely have no idea what that vagueness meant..
--SPOILER WARNING--
i always thought A&D would make a better movie than DVC, its a much more cinematic story, in that da vinci's twists were mostly cerebral (ohhh.. mary magdeline and jesus got married!), whereas A&D is very plot-based. i wont give away too much, but there are two main plot lines... one is an incredibly dangerous bomb made of antimatter hidden somwhere in vatican city than langdons gotta find, and the other involves the death of the pope, and his 4 possible replacements being kidnapped; clearly langdon's gotta save them too.
-------

ive found that ppl like whichever book they read first more.. probably because the structure is pretty similar and if you read them back to back, its easier to see things coming in the second book, whichever order you go in. personally i got two chapters into davinci before i stopped and read angels first, being the prequel. DEFINITELY enjoyed the final twist in angels more, the big reveal when the villains motives come out.. after the angels ending, davinci let me down.

well this seems like a rather long message when all i really had to say was "ditto foxgate".. meh, whateves.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:06AM on 04/24/2008
80,000+ words in the novel and the only thing I hear about when it's discussed is that ONE LINE. Personally, I enjoyed A&D way more than DVC and think it'll make a much better film than the previous adaptation (though I'm wary of making it a sequel, but whatever). It was a pretentious line, yeah, and it just really feels like nitpicking at this point. But that's just me.
80,000+ words in the novel and the only thing I hear about when it's discussed is that ONE LINE. Personally, I enjoyed A&D way more than DVC and think it'll make a much better film than the previous adaptation (though I'm wary of making it a sequel, but whatever). It was a pretentious line, yeah, and it just really feels like nitpicking at this point. But that's just me.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:26AM on 04/24/2008
"Little did he know that (this information would later) save his life."

Wow, way to be subtle there, Mr. Brown. Dan Brown puts the "Dan" in pedantic with his books. That's why no matter what the movies don't take from them, they're a million times less dull on the mind.
"Little did he know that (this information would later) save his life."

Wow, way to be subtle there, Mr. Brown. Dan Brown puts the "Dan" in pedantic with his books. That's why no matter what the movies don't take from them, they're a million times less dull on the mind.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
View All Comments

Latest Entertainment News Headlines


Top
Loading...

Featured Youtube Videos

Views and Counting