Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Here Comes Another Dan Brown / Robert Langdon Movie...

Merrick here...
Unsurprisingly, Sony is ramping up a third Robert Langdon film.
Based on the Dan Brown thriller of the same name, "Lost Symbol" finds protag Robert Langdon summoned to Washington, D.C., where he begins decoding the symbols of the Freemasons.
...says Variety HERE. No word on whether Tom Hanks will reprise the Langdon role he played in THE DaVINCI CODE and ANGELS & DEMONS, although he's expected to do so. Steven Knight (SHUTTER ISLAND, VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER ) will adapt. Notably, the Variety piece makes no reference to Ron Howard's involvement. Although, honestly, nearly anyone could step into his shoes.
--- Follow Merrick on Twitter! ---


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Feb. 4, 2010, 10:49 a.m. CST

    First!

    by DadTimesTwo

    Ha!

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 10:49 a.m. CST

    FIRST

    by PowersBootheForDKR

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 10:49 a.m. CST

    These books are my wife's guilty pleasure. . .

    by Nice Marmot

    . . . and she said this last one made the previous books look like Ulyssess.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Whobert Whangdon?

    by Margot Tenenbaum

    I said that in a wacky Michael Palin accent.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Rahn Hewwerd sux. But so do these boox.

    by all

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 10:51 a.m. CST

    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    by KoozyK

    Whuzzat? Sorry, the mere thought of this made me fall asleep.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 10:51 a.m. CST

    Didn't we know this already?

    by Logan_1973

    I remember a report two days before the book even came out that the movie rights were on the way...

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 10:52 a.m. CST

    Good Book Not Great

    by optimous_douche

    I’ll buy any Dan Brown book because I love the thought of debunking societal pillars and all of the symbology explanations, but there is a prevailing sameness to Brown’s title from a story development stand point.<p> Langdon being mysteriously summoned – check<p> A freak of epic proportions – check<p> The female in need of saving – check<p> Langdon saves the day – check<p> Good as a book, I think they’ll start seeing diminishing returns on the movies though. Then again people are sheep, sheep like sameness and patterns.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 10:52 a.m. CST

    Dangit

    by PowersBootheForDKR

    With so many problems making the third installment of a movie, is it safe to say that this will be the worst yet? ANGELS AND DEMONS was an improvement though.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:02 a.m. CST

    i hate to say this..

    by soup74

    but while the dan brown books can be fun and interesting, the 'national treasure' series translates into film much better.<br><br>its one of the few cases where dumbing down works. da vinci code (movie) couldnt come close to da vinci code (book) because the needed to add some action to all the exposition. (like that ridiculous and unnecessary car chase.) but national treasure knows it's ridiculous and makes a better popcorn adventure.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:04 a.m. CST

    I declare Nice Marmot to be first, as he was the first

    by jim

    to actually comment on the story.<p>I was always under the impression that this last book was written for the sole purpose of creating a movie sequel to the DaVinci Code (even though they adapted Angels & Demons to be that). Am I cynical (sorry Conan) in thinking that his next book, instead of being be art for the sake of art, would simply be a pandering homage to whatever the studio wanted (ie, something like DaVinci Code that could star Tom Hanks again)?

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:05 a.m. CST

    Robert Langdon Vs Ben Gates: Lost National Treasure

    by Vulcan_CSC_Rep

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:08 a.m. CST

    Then Ben Gates investigates the DaVinci Code

    by Vulcan_CSC_Rep

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:09 a.m. CST

    Any movies NOT about Freemasons or DaVinci?

    by Vulcan_CSC_Rep

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:10 a.m. CST

    Not Ron Howard...

    by I_am_Torgo

    ...the DVC was ok, A & D was complete pants....The Lost Symbol story is fast paced, therefore the film should follow suit....in fact give it to Neveldine, and Taylor, and crank it up for gawds sake. You see what I did there???

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:13 a.m. CST

    These Books Are For People

    by Autodidact

    Who don't read books unless it's the "#1 national bestseller" that Oprah jizzes herself about and there is a movie too.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:16 a.m. CST

    Didn't they learn from the first two?

    by SithMenace

    I guess quality doesn't matter when you have a built in fanbase (Ahem Twilight).

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:20 a.m. CST

    Robert Langdon IN SPACE!!!!!

    by F-18

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:21 a.m. CST

    The "lost symbol" is a great big dollar sign.

    by Royston Lodge

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:26 a.m. CST

    HOW 'BOUT SOME *REAL* ILLUMINATI THIS TIME?

    by BringingSexyBack

    The rogue priest was a real letdown.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:27 a.m. CST

    HATEFUL, BORING TO DEATH BOOK

    by The Chosen

    What a big numbminded crap this book is. They will have to re-invent it all to make a decent movie. T'will be the third failure.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:27 a.m. CST

    Please recast, Tom Hanks is so awful in the role.

    by kravmaguffin

    psi

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:28 a.m. CST

    THE LOST SYMBOL IS HIDDEN IN ONE OF CARTUNA'S ANIMATION

    by BringingSexyBack

    Finally Harry assumes his place as secret ruler of the world.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:31 a.m. CST

    Haven't seen any of these films yet

    by kafka07

    really, I just don't care. Although investigating the Freemasons might be interesting.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:31 a.m. CST

    Why not just join the Freemasons?

    by DigitalDong

    Unless they too have an anti-matter bomb.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:32 a.m. CST

    So

    by nilus2k

    Will it be in 3-D?

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:34 a.m. CST

    wouldn't mind seeing what Tom Tykwer

    by skimn

    could do with the material. I thought his handling of action scenes in The International was top notch.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:45 a.m. CST

    angels and demons was...

    by emeraldboy

    junk. but the night scenes at the vatican were stunning. But I lost interest after hanks mentioned the illumati about 100 times in the 20 mins of the movie and there after.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:45 a.m. CST

    this book is horrible

    by Turd Furgeson

    Seriously, I almost couldn't get through it.. This will make for a really bad film, unless they totally change it. I actually started reading another book while I was reading this so I wouldn't get too bored.. Angels and demons was the best book and movie by far.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:49 a.m. CST

    re: Watchmen 2 hah-ha-ha

    by Margot Tenenbaum

    More short-term thinking from the geniuses at DC.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:50 a.m. CST

    These movies are unwatchable...

    by Citizen Sane

    ... how come people are spending money on them? Do they need sleep-aids?

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:50 a.m. CST

    The good news is that Akiva "Batman & Robin" Goldsman

    by RandomWordRandomWord

    won't be scripting.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:51 a.m. CST

    Who watches the Watchmen . . .

    by Nice Marmot

    AGAIN ???

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 11:57 a.m. CST

    So, National Treasure remake then?

    by V'Shael

  • Feb. 4, 2010, noon CST

    "The Watchmen Babies in V for Vacation"

    by jim

    We all laughed at that Simpsons joke but it won't be so funny when it's playing at a theatre near you.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:10 p.m. CST

    So Hanks is in the Nick Cage role?

    by JayLenoTookMyJob

    Just sayin'...

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:10 p.m. CST

    AnglesN'Demons does not exist in this dojo

    by Cobra--Kai

    Saw ANGELS AND DEMONS on Blu last week actually and was suprised that it turned out to be a rather good thriller (I did wash it down with a good meal and a bottle of red - it was most agreeable).<p> Definitely a better movie than the DA VINCI CODE. I should say that I watched the 'extended cut', haven't seen the theatrical so I cant compare but I was impressed how gory it was. One scene the assassin pops a head shot to finish off a wounded cop and I swear you see brain matter mixed in with the blood splat on the marble floor. Wasn't expecting that from 'mr nice guy' Robert Howard!

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:12 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    I meant *Ron* Howard fuck. Not the Conan guy.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:15 p.m. CST

    3 books ,one story,same characters,diffrent names....

    by theDannerDaliel

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:17 p.m. CST

    Angels & Demons was at least watchable...

    by JayLenoTookMyJob

    ...I actually liked it better than the book. Divinely-created antimatter doesn't seem so ludicrous in a movie. Of course they removed all mention of the antimatter being divinely-created which helped, as did the elimination of the Indie Jones-esque underground Roman city/tomb of Saint Peter and Langdon's James Bond-parachuting-with- a tarp stunt.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:18 p.m. CST

    Watchmen 2???

    by JayLenoTookMyJob

    For real, or is "PresidentBaltar" the latest iteration of "JettL93?

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:18 p.m. CST

    This Summer: Symbols Will Be LOST.

    by Flip63Hole

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Ron Howard cannot direct an interesting movie

    by NotVeryFunny

    He's the margarine of directors. Nuff said...

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:35 p.m. CST

    Do Deception Point

    by Crow3711

    Its pretty much the only Dan Brown novel I read that wasn't written for morons.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:49 p.m. CST

    The very definition of bubblegum blockbuster

    by Piratebill

    could have been worse; they hired tom hanks and ron howard which is a lot more than the source material deserved. I wont see it but im sure the fans of the books will love it

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:50 p.m. CST

    I'm a Freemason!

    by thalvar

    Beware, Ron Howard, if you reveal the secrets, we're gonna come after you!

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 12:59 p.m. CST

    I prefer Expensivemasons.

    by Royston Lodge

    Expensive tastes. I have them.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 1:15 p.m. CST

    Is this about LOST?

    by dailysportspages

    :)

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 1:32 p.m. CST

    opie cunningham should stay away from this one...

    by KonkBob

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 1:34 p.m. CST

    Here's hoping the plot is as stupid as ANGELS & DEMONS

    by SpyGuy

    "You know, I really want to be Pope. I think I'll construct this ridiculously-complicated plan that involves assassinating Cardinals according to primal elements, requiring the services of a symbologist, surviving the detonation of antimatter with a parachute, and counting on the masses to think of me as a hero." Even Wile E. Coyote, Sooooooper-Geeeeenyus thinks that was fucked up.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 2:02 p.m. CST

    this will be in 3D, right?

    by celebritydave

    lets do a quick check. Da Vinci code - cost $125mil, bx office was 758mil. Angels & Demons cost 150 and made 485. my guess - 175 to make the new one, it will do 400 at the box office. id greenlight that shit!

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 2:29 p.m. CST

    Bubblegum blockbuster????

    by slone13

    <p>That's the term I use to describe something like Armageddon.</p> <p>Angels and Demons and Da Vinci Code on the other hand are both fucking horribly boring, nigh unwatchable movies.</p>

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 2:32 p.m. CST

    How can anyone say Ron Howard ruined these stories?

    by YackBacker

    These stories sucked to begin with, he just executed what was on paper.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 2:49 p.m. CST

    The "National Treasure Code"?

    by vettebro

    Freemason's rule! <p> But not as much as Girls! ; )

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 3:16 p.m. CST

    Blockbuster Boredom, pt. 3

    by SoylentMean

    The Dan Brown "phenomenon" is so damn infuriating when there are other, infinitely better writers out there with books screaming for the cinematic treatment. James Rollins, Matthew Reilly, Steve Alten, and more. I really thought we were gonna see a James Rollins book turned into a movie after he landed the movie novelization gig for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. <P> Dan Brown writes shit and the masses gobble it up.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 3:16 p.m. CST

    "Do Deception Point"

    by jim

    When I first came across the Whiteout trailer that's what I thought it was going to be (but with a different name). Never did see Whiteout - was it basically Deception Point but with a different name and enough things changed to avoid a lawsuit?<p>I liked Deception Point more than his other books. That, and Digital Fortress, made me come to the conclusion that Dan Brown's books are what you'd get if John Grisham tried to write a Tom Clancy novel (while drunk).

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 3:27 p.m. CST

    The book

    by Defrost

    kinda sucked

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 3:48 p.m. CST

    I still think Brown had pressure put on him...

    by performingmonkey

    to completely pussify what he set out to do with The Lost Symbol. Rumour has it the book should have come out a year before it did, that Brown had to do a rewrite on the last 100 pages or more. To me it feels like he chickened out in the same way that the Angels & Demons movie didn't go anywhere near as far as the book did in terms of the real meaty controversial material. Instead it was just a mindless runaround, which is how the end of The Lost Symbol also felt. One funny part of The Lost Symbol is when the bad guy is threatening to leak to the media footage of the world's elite taking part in extreme Masonic rituals. In reality nothing like that would EVER make it into public domain even if it was emailed directly to any newsgroup editor. Do you realise how many people they would be willing to 'remove' to stop videos of that nature entering public domain? It wouldn't get touched. In the book the leak is stopped by crazy FBI tech that blocks the file, iirc.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 3:50 p.m. CST

    "in reality"?

    by Royston Lodge

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 3:51 p.m. CST

    This movies are like Indy without fun and excitement.

    by Onin Solstice

    I'm sorry, Brown's halfass Indy rip-off is nothing to get excited about. Angels & Demons was a little faster paced, but still not an attention grabber. Browns stylized look at history works in his novels, but failes to get the blood going on film. Ron Howard isn't helping either.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 4:20 p.m. CST

    National Treasure vs Dan Brown movies

    by ThrowMeTheIdol

    The NT series works better because they are family films, the kind of thing a dad takes his 12 year old to. Whereas these Dan Brown books and movies are aimed at adults which makes them look like they don't even know they are stupid and thus are even dumber.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 4:28 p.m. CST

    Those movies were both shit

    by kwisatzhaderach

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 4:32 p.m. CST

    Don't talk about the book unless you've read it

    by andrew coleman

    Can tell some of these guys haven't read the book. Dan Brown "phenomenon" isn't even real. He's just a writer who writes decent books. This blind hatred for him is pathetic at best. This book would actually work as a movie. I agree with other Deception Point needs to be made because that book is great. Also Whiteout is based off of a graphic novel and is not a rip off or anything based off of Deception Point.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 4:34 p.m. CST

    They blew it in Angel and Demons movie

    by Adelai Niska

    That book was a lot of dumb adventure, but the movie was just dumb running and talking. How is removing action scenes that were in the book "more faithful" to the book? If they would just let Hanks jump out of exploding helicopters the movies would be a lot more worthwhile.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 4:46 p.m. CST

    "This movies are like Indy without fun and excitement."

    by jim

    So they're just like Crystal Skull?<p>Ba-Dum-Bump

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 4:51 p.m. CST

    "This summer, symbols will be LOST!"

    by sith_rising

    lol made me chuckle for a while.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 4:53 p.m. CST

    Is Ron Howard Going To Mess It Up Again???

    by Media Messiah

    He is boring and incompetent!!! The last movie was an indifference to entertainment!!!

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 4:54 p.m. CST

    Didn't Steve Knight also write EASTERN PROMISES?

    by palimpsest

    He's one of the guys who created WHO WANTS TO ME A MILLIONAIRE and is thus richer than all the Freemasons put together

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 4:56 p.m. CST

    BE

    by palimpsest

    BE A MILLIONAIRE. Damn this post-pub internet thing. Of course, I'm in England; I'm not a daytime drunk.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 5:04 p.m. CST

    Ron Howard Should Fire Himself!!!

    by Media Messiah

    "Angels and Demons" was embarrassing, and strangely A-sexual--obviously for fear of the Church!!! Films like these need sexual tension and romance, as well as smartly crafted and paced action sequences. The last movie was lazy, boring, overlong repetitive, had no soul, no romance, and thus, no virile pulse? It was entrely emasculated!!! The next movie in the series is badly in need of a damn erection!!! These are suppose to be date night movies, not chastity films. If Ron Howard can't deliver a movie with a nice injection of Viagra, and testosterone, he needs to get the hell out of the way, and let someone who can deliver a healthy hard on, do it!!!!

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 5:08 p.m. CST

    Palimpsest: No...The Freemasons Have Money

    by Media Messiah

    The Bush family are filthy rich Freemasons, and they are poor, compared to some of the other prominent Freemasons.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 5:14 p.m. CST

    RonHowardbot3000

    by SomethingUberGeeky

    When the day comes that they can make a robot or machine that can direct a film it will seem no different that any Ron Howard movie.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 5:25 p.m. CST

    Ron Howard may have little vision, but at least he can frame a s

    by Linguo_IS_Dead

    I'm looking at you, Paul Greengrass!!!

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 5:29 p.m. CST

    ^shot

    by Linguo_IS_Dead

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 5:29 p.m. CST

    Both films were entertaining..

    by CeejayNightwing

    Enjoyed them both for different reasons and are fine examples of adaptations that don't have to follow the book to the "T" just to present an entertaining movie. Most books don't adapt into a movie time-frame, the nature of the two media simply means one can be digested in its own time while the other has to be spoon-fed under a countdown. DaVinci Code was a fine thriller, lots of mystery, a great use of historical flashback sequences, fantastic music score and cool way to present visually the way the main character's mind works. Angels & Demons was a roller-coaster chase, a deadly hitman with a clinical code of conduct, a diabolical plot with a spectacular visual finale. If you find these films boring then you either have no interest in their subject matters or your life is way too exciting in comparison. Roll on a third movie, none of these films are anything like the casualty of format-flicks Hollywood produces that make the big bucks as crowd pleasers. The protagonist is not heroic, square jawed 'always gets the girl' type, the romance is not forced in to the narrative to suck up tot he chicks in the audience and the action is not over the top with jokes and witty punchlines to please the Neanderthals who get off on such things. These films go against the Hollywood grain in terms of format and to me that's always a good thing regardless of how many people complain. The biggest film of the year and now all-time is a rehash of the same story 'A Man Called Horse' told over 30 years ago! The writing is so basic that the villains have one dimension and search for a precious ore called "Unobtainium!" This is crap people got out of their zimmerframes to see simply for visual spectacle and you guys want to shoot down these two adaptations for what? Both TDC and A&D are far more original than James Cameron's simpleton FX show-piece and I'd rather see a trilogy of them than sit through another 2 and a half hours of banal dialogue, videogame villains and painting-by-numbers Visuals of Avatar's perfect world where every beast comes together to fight the invading white-man like some 1940's Tarzan film!

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 5:40 p.m. CST

    Would rather see another 'National Treasure' flick

    by Heckles

    Somehow, that franchise got it right. The Hanks/Opie 'Langdon' flicks are just weak.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 6:10 p.m. CST

    I'm done with brownies!!!

    by LimpdickSherlock

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 6:11 p.m. CST

    Symbolism is for kids.

    by LimpdickSherlock

    and masons are fags in closets.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 6:12 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Ceejay, I was kinda with you for the first half of you post but then you meandered off into a lengthy anti-AVATAR rant?! Wtf that's got to do with a new Dan Brown movie??

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 6:15 p.m. CST

    Linguo_IS_Dead

    by MainMan2001

    hahaha. what a joke?! Paul Greengrass is a master filmmaker of the highest order!!! I mean have you even seen United 93?! It's one of the best movies ever, ever, ever, ever made. Period! I know for a fact, he can compose a shot if he choose to frame a shot in the tradition sense of composing an image but what greengrass does is closer to abstract imagery . He chooses to do this. This is his style. It doesn't mean he can't do it the other way. Ron Howard is a hack who surrounds himself with talented people so he looks good. This is simple. Sorry man.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 6:32 p.m. CST

    Linguo_IS_Dead: Ron Howard Thinks Like A Cameraman...

    by Media Messiah

    ...not a director. There is a difference between a technician and director. Directors are supposed to know how to bring emotion to a script, not take away from it, and that is the problem with Ron Howard. He's a tech who is calling himself a director. He can capture a visual, but doesn't know how to add any depth of emotion to the acting, or the story, on projects that he has had full control over, and that is a major, major, problem with him.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 6:48 p.m. CST

    What is it about Ron Howard. . .

    by heyscot

    I love Ron. I root for him every time I read about him and if I met him I would tell him that, although I'm not too fond of the Robert Langdon movies.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 7:03 p.m. CST

    Heyscot: I Root For Ron As A Person

    by Media Messiah

    He is a nice person, he just doesn't allow any real emotion, that you can connect with, in his movies--that is, when he is in full control of them. "Splash" and "Cocoon", where he was forced to tow the line by his producers, were great films, but now that he is a producer/director, forget it, he does what he wants, and what you get is boring emotionless films. "Angels and Demons" should have had romance in it, and it should have a had some humor, and great action beats, however, it played as an emotionless, boring, humorless, A-sexual, self important, campy...mess?

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 7:57 p.m. CST

    So it's National Treasure but not fun

    by Timstuff

    Wait, that's the Da Vinci Code-- except it took place in Europe instead of Washington DC. While they're at it why don't they just recast Langdon with Nic Cage!

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 8:12 p.m. CST

    Variety is charging to access their content

    by Luci888

    There isn't much point in AICN giving links to Variety website articles, as readers won't be able to read them, since Variety recently started charging to access their content.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 9:04 p.m. CST

    Dan Brown will most likely rot in Hell for his novels

    by Watch_The_Birdie

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 9:14 p.m. CST

    Moar like Robert Longdong, amirite?

    by Anime_is_Dumb

    snerk <br> Bring on the Amelie pr0n

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 9:14 p.m. CST

    Morgan Freeman for Bellamy/The Architect!

    by 3D-Man

    Oops, I mean umm Dan Brown sucks.

  • Feb. 4, 2010, 9:39 p.m. CST

    Deception Point is a must...

    by diseptikon

    And not because im diseptikon. <p>For me, it was definitely the most entertaining of all his books. </p>

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 12:04 a.m. CST

    Hanks signed a three film...

    by The Eskimo

    ...deal, which is kind of standard these days, but I'm sure he has option. I bet if Howard is out, Tom will be to...unless he get's a directors credit on this, which he is too smart to fall for unless they nab a big name director to head this up...my guess is there will be no Howard, but Tom will do it, and we'll never see a Deception Pointe cause it'll fax1!

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 12:06 a.m. CST

    BTW...

    by The Eskimo

    ...along the lines of stretched-thin authors who are out of ideas, yet Holly wood is just now getting on-board: We will see an Alex Cross film in the next two year. Rumors are I, Alex Cross but that it will be a crossover project covering the content of numerous novels. Another "trilogy" vision...

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 12:13 a.m. CST

    ...oh and u know who ispre-cast for Alex Cross don;t u?

    by The Eskimo

    "Down in Philadelphia, born and raised..."

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 2:16 a.m. CST

    Only two lame movies? Why not make another?

    by Knuckleduster

    I hope Ron has moved on. You're better than this, Mr Howard. You made Splash and Apollo 13 and Cinderella Man and Frost/Nixon.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 2:31 a.m. CST

    It did get the Colbert Slam

    by Anything But Tangerines

    Which is essentially a bump. You don't put the book up all pretty for the camera if there isn't some kind of endorsement involved.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 2:39 a.m. CST

    dan brown

    by nightmute

    Get Paul Greengrass! Then the images will be so shaky, we won't have to actually see what the hell is going on. I still say Bourne Identity is the best of the Bourne films. The action has clarity.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 3:10 a.m. CST

    Bring back the Tom mullet

    by Xiphos_2

    That hairdo Hanks was sporting in the first movie was beguiling, like a Nic Cage wig.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 4:50 a.m. CST

    ..and another ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.......

    by FlandersBum

    Horribly written, overhyped, boring. That is all.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 5:57 a.m. CST

    In my undoubtedly valuable opinion

    by HenryVIII

    Da Vinci Code = great book, great movie. Angels & Demons = great book, great movie. Lost Symbol = JUST OK book ... until the last third of the book, when it TOTALLY SUCKED. Climax, and then many pages of overlong preachy history. I'm not a troll - I really read that last two chapters saying WTH. At the time, I remember thinking NO WAY they'll turn this dreck into a movie. Surprised they're even trying - they got their work cut out for them.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 6:05 a.m. CST

    A&D was a big improvement on DaVinci, so I'm hopeful for this.

    by Mr Nicholas

    A lot will depend upon the casting of Malak. He can't just be a meathead.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 6:30 a.m. CST

    Oh great, another one!! That's want we needed!

    by AsimovLives

    Because the two previous movies weren't shitty enough! The only question now is: will it be in 3-D?

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 7:43 a.m. CST

    Mr Nicholas

    by AsimovLives

    not at all, if anything, the second movie is even more retard on account of all that anti-matter mcguffin bullshit in it. People walking around with 5 grams of anti-matter??? Today we spend millions od dollars to get a few hundred ANTI-MATTER SUB-PARTICLES! We can't even create full anti-matter atoms that can over-last more then a fraction of a milisecond. And those ar ejust anti-hydorgen, the simplest atom possible (one proton, one electron, or in the anti-hydrogen case, one anti-proton and one positron). At the progress we today can produce anti-matter sub-atmoic particles, it would take us hundreds of thousands f years to get 5 grams of the stuff. And the pricetag associated is simply unimaginable! There's not enough riches in the world to even pay for a mili-fraction of it. And the least say about the easiness the people in the movie have in carrying all that anti-matter the better. Suffice to say, you need a whole atomic accelerator to create conditions enough to store a few dozen anti-matter subparticles. Five grams of the stuff would demand a type of instalation and energy consuptions we can't even guess how to produce today.<br><br>All that anti-matter bullshit would had been acceptable if that was some SF movie set in the future, like Star Trek. But that Angels & Demons bulslhit is not set in Star Trek time, is it?<br><br>Angels & Demons is even worst then The DaVinci Code, and that was already retard like fuck.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 7:45 a.m. CST

    book was complete shit

    by palooka_boy

    All Dan Brown has going for him is the ability to build suspense. He has a weak mastery of the language, he draws two-dimensional characters, and after his third Langdon book, he's gotten embarrassingly predictable. Books like The Lost Symbol and The Davinci Code are written so people can feel like their reading intelligent literature, when anyone with a half a brain should recognize the incompetence of his prose.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 7:51 a.m. CST

    Will Tom Hanks bring back the mullet?

    by AsimovLives

    His mullet in the first movie was the only thing remotly entertaining in that shitty movie. Well, an albino who can shoot and drive very fast in the dark of night was almost as good.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 8:30 a.m. CST

    The success of these books- and these movies-

    by ScaryWaitress

    is proof that this country is doomed. <P> Pretty ironic, that the role of a guy devoted to bringing down the Church might ACTUALLY get Tom Hanks soul into hell. Who would've thunk?

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 8:57 a.m. CST

    Scorchy

    by ciroslive

    Ryan Leaf was a hugely popular and successful quarterback? Brown may write schlock, but the man sells books.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 9:42 a.m. CST

    Yuck

    by RogueWarrior65

    I assailed my ears with the audio book for this. Boring. I knew who the bad guy was early on. There is nothing super revealing in this one. Why this crap gets made and sequels to The Golden Compass which has more originality in its first few pages is beyond me.

  • Feb. 5, 2010, noon CST

    I once saw a Brit TV show debunking DaVinci Code

    by AsimovLives

    It was hysterical. By just using real researched history and a bit of common snese, everything, and i mean EVERYTHING in Dan Brown's book was proved to be complete bullshit. It was hysterical!

  • Feb. 5, 2010, 9:48 p.m. CST

    Angels and Demons is really good

    by BigTuna

    It's so much better than that bore Da Vici code, which was a thriller with no thrills.

  • Feb. 6, 2010, 11:24 a.m. CST

    Hope they don't leave out the super waterboarding coffin.

    by whatevillurks

  • Feb. 6, 2010, 1:07 p.m. CST

    The Lost Symbol

    by DarthMango

    formerly known as a crappy book

  • Feb. 15, 2010, 7:42 a.m. CST

    what fucking sucks about this whole thing

    by The_Crimson_King

    is that Da Vinci Code was only so successful because of the controversy and all the Christians whining about it, way to go guys....