Thursday, June 4, 2009

angels in demons

*it's not everyday that i get to go home at nine. so today's a gift. *

last weekend, i had the pleasure of catching "angels and demons" on the big screen. i will admit that i haven't read the book. i tried. a good three years ago. but somewhere, somehow i shelved the book for other readings. for less serious readings. i was thinking the "da vinci code" will do as far as dan brown is concerned.

but curiosity encouraged me to see the movie based on the dan brown book i hardly read despite how i didn't quite enjoy the movie translation of his first book which had the same director as "angels and demons".

again, curiosity encouraged me to pay. i wasn't disappointed much. "angels and demons" is a way better movie that the "da vinci code". now i feel the need to read the book. let's see if i'll be disappointed (on the book or the movie).

it helped that i didn't know what to expect...who the perpetrator is. so i was glued to the theater seat. the movie turned out to be the suspense whodunnit it was trying to be. although subtle clues -- who stands behind a shadow the first time he appears, the reason for a character's existence -- gave away the bad guy even before he revealed himself.

i shall no longer talk about the point the movie tries to put on the table. i leave that to dan brown, his collaboration with ron howard and the viewer's opinions and whatnots. at this point, i find it redundant to discuss such matter. i will not be the expert a lot of people pretend to be.

let it be known, however, that although i very much appreciate ewan mcgregor's presence in the movie, he was rather distracting. i got lost in the middle of his speech for the members of the conclave. i didn't understand a thing he said. not because he did not enunciate his words well enough. i was preoccupied with one thought. one poignant thought that circled the confines of my skull...

how the hell could one think dirty thoughts of the gorgeous ewan mcgregor when he is wearing a priest's suit?!

yes. it is easier to fantasize about him if you stare at him on that men's perfume ad that caught my attention in the airport a year ago.

yay! i should have called this entry "demons in angels."

No comments: