Friday, May 15, 2009

I was a naughty boy.

I went to see Angels and Demons this afternoon - I know! And I spied at least one priest in civies in the audience, his companion may have been a priest as well.
.
"How do you know he was a priest?"
.
"I can tell."
.
"How?"
.
"I can just tell. There were also two guys who were probably seminarians. I can spot nuns out of habit too - didn't see any though."
.
"I don't believe you."
.
"I don't care."
.
So anyway - the movie was entertaining - definitely a fun time - precisely because of the hype Catholic Defense League-type people engendered against it. If nothing else, their protests contributed to the improbability factor of the story, which makes for a little added comedy. I caught several lame styling details - especially in the papal apartments - I love spotting that stuff. There was at least one bad cut in the film as well - it appeared that the extras must have heard "Action!" after the principal characters did - few would have noted it though. Oh! Giorgio Armani was an extra in one of the crowd scenes too - very quick glimpse of him walking by. That is funny in itself.
.
The special effects were fun, many of the sets bordering on visually magnificent, but the acting was just okay. Tom Hanks cracked me up a few times - when he wasn't supposed to. I suspended my belief concerning the plot as best I could - which anyone who knows better would have to do anyway - and pretty much enjoyed the film for what it is. It didn't come off especially anti-Catholic, and to be sure, the preposterous premise of the Illuminati conspiracy is just stupidly inaccurate, although it could be a metaphor for the progressive element in the Church. But like every other conspiracy theory, it is fun to entertain.
.
I caught myself only doing 2 or 3 eye rolls during the film. Some of the last scenes were hard to swallow - and one scene in St. Peter's square was especially funny - to me - no one else seemed to be laughing. (It involved Ewan McGregor.) I don't want to spoil the film for you, so I can't say more. I would never have read the book, so I do not know how closely the film follows it, although I doubt Ron Howard departed from the plan. You would have to already be an unbeliever, and fairly stupid, to believe the story - but like I said, it is fun.
.
I just want to say that I believe the most dangerous anti-Catholics are already within the Church, and have been for quite sometime. Do the names Jenkins, Gumbleton mean anything to you? How about Call To Action, Dignity, Women Priests, and other progressive organizations? Don't forget the ardent Catholics we have in Government; the Kennedy's, Pelosi, Biden, etc. Dan Brown is just chump change compared to them.
.

2 comments:

  1. "Dan Brown is just chump change compared to them." He's a coffee stirrer in a cannister of coffee stirrers. The one's using the stirrers - - - those are the ones you have to watch out for.

    I tried to make up an analogy as dumb as the movie to keep in the spirit of the post. How'd I do?

    ReplyDelete


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. Be sure and double check if your comment posted after you do the verification deal - sometimes it doesn't print if you made an error.