New Set Photos for DA VINCI Prequel

I wondered when looking at the pictures, was Tom Hank's hair going to be the same as in the other movie. He had that long hair in Da Vinci Code, and it was made fun of in Epic Movie. So seeing the pictures, I was suprised that his hair is shorter this time. The pics, too, are nothing big. Just some behind the scenes shots and other stuff. But I'm
sure the movie will be good when it comes out.

This has been so disapointing. The DaVinci/Angels books were written to be made into movies, so... how could Ron have gone soooooo wrong.

Starting with Langdon, who should be a forty-something that could pass as a twenty-something because he is a committed athlete (not Tom Hanks). In the books, the leading ladies are as smart as Langdon but in different knowledge fields, but in the movie the perfectly cast Tautou was a brainless pretty girl that just came along. The original story was very controversial and had great storytelling that could make you question if the book was indeed fiction; but in the movie they removed all the significance of the events, and milded it until there was no impact to the final revelation.

There are many other reasons why I was disapointed, but since the movie made money the lack of fidelity does not matter. National Treasure had more similarities to The DaVinci Code book than the DaVinci movie.

Just to let know I am not a book purist. A book that was changed a lot in the movie adaptation was "The Shinning", but the changes did not change the subject matter of the original book. Both movie and book stories have an equivalent impact while the storytelling is different.

Oh! And I Love Tom Hanks in everything else.

she didnt JUST come along... she was Jesus' daughter!

you guys are really going ot have to sit down and decide on a consistent way to link news photos to stories, sometimes its within the news story then somethings its up at the top in the link bar. do things consistency.

Angels is ten times better than The Da Vinci Code. The Da Vinci Code movie was horrible. So Angels will be....worse?

I am looking so forward to this. I never read the book, thank goodness or I would have hated the movie just like you guys I'm sure, but I'll probably read it someday, but only when I'm tired of watching the movie.

Oh and yes his hair looks so much better this go around.

Just to clear the spoiler, she was not Jesus' daughter... think about it... not there yet?.... add a couple great and one grand to it....

And in the book, she could actually think, and talk (in several languages), and solve puzzles. Crazy! No girl (not even the you know what of you know who) can do that in real life! In the movie she just went along like a fembot until the "reveal".

The movie was a Tom Hanks show, and the book was worth reading even after knowing "the final twist". I can't wait for the next Langdon adventure (bookwise I mean).

I agree that Tom Hanks can play just about anything, but when I heard he was cast, I immediately thought it was a bad fit. But inconsistency seems to hurt more than help, so little sense in changing it now.

Yeah, The Shinning was one of the great Treehouse of Horror skits... Oh wait, you meant The Shining, didn't you? My bad. ;-)

Dang! one letter and I'm roadkill.... I'll be watchin' you!