MovieChat Forums > Inferno (2016) Discussion > Director's changes were ok in Angels& De...

Director's changes were ok in Angels& Demons, but here......

posted 8 years ago by dragos_matei_serban
3 replies | jump to latest

In A&D they made Langdon an intelligent but needy individual. He had the brains to solve the puzzles, but not the muscles to fight and jump out of helicopters like in the book. And it was a smart and adequate choice, it made the movie serious and believable.

Here, the director and co. (the same ones from A&D) changed something again: the ending. Only that this time the movie fails. It doesn't make sense. It could only make sense if Zobrist had left those clues being certain that his plan would succeed.

All in all, I'm a sucker for movies which have professors and intelligent men trying to solve things which no one else can. I can appreciate the movie for what it was, but I feel greatly disappointed that they didn't use one of the best book endings I've ever known. The movie is not a worthy successor of Angels & Demons, which was sublime in its use of Italian aesthetics, art, biblical allegories and scientific breakthroughs, coupled with an Ewan McGregor who was born for playing Il Camerlengo character.

Here....just a regular "save the world flick".....and it was the same team in charge. I'm disappointed, expected more

My ratings are not always like the IMDB average score because I only enjoy intelligent movies.

[–] vmartone 8 years ago

Agreed. The whole relationship with the head of the WHO was also added and completely pointless.

[–] andymevans_7 8 years ago

Seconded. It's inevitable an adapation has to take certain liberties, and streamline (or remove) certain plot strands from the book, but here the changes complete miss the point and ruin what is a quite a bold and clever climax.

Essentially the Robert Langdon movies are rather vapid, lifeless, and paint by numbers affairs, but this was just extra flat and lazy. Much like the last Jason Bourne, it's just the usual Hollywood dead-eyed production-line banality.

This will obviously bomb, and critically stink, because the studio thinks it's giving the audience what they want - more bubblegum cinema! But a more faithful adaptation would've been a wee bit more daring and given us something slightly off convention.

[–] gbean2397 8 years ago

Wow, they just HAD to change the ending. I can understand their need to change the plot to A&D, but they had to change Inferno's ending?

It was such a great ending, the antagonist succeeds in his plan, but it came with a positive note. The Inferno Virus was the ultimate answer in solving the world's overpopulation problems. And it kept it from being a typical "save the world" story. But noooo, they had to make Zobrist a straight-up villain.