Movie News

Send to a Friend



To: (email)


To: (name)


From: (name)


Message:



Tom Hanks returning for "Angels & Demons"?

By: Karl Schneider
Date: Wednesday, April 11, 2007

According to Cinema Blend, Tom Hanks has signed on to reprise his role as Dr. Robert Langdon in the sequel to Da Vinci Code, Angels & Demons.

The site also mentions that the salary it took to get Hanks to sign on is the “biggest salary ever paid to an actor in the history of Hollywood.”

The sequel would pick up after The Da Vinci Code with Dr. Robert Langdon on the trail of the Illuminati and engaged in a frantic quest to find some sort of powerful energy source.

More Content By Karl Schneider
Dark Knight, The
(Tuesday, May 29, 2007)
"Crank" sequel on the way
(Monday, April 30, 2007)
Carter Smith to direct "Come Closer"
(Monday, April 30, 2007)
Darren Aronofksy talks "Noah"
(Monday, April 30, 2007)
Lambert Wilson joins two films
(Monday, April 30, 2007)
Madonna and Guy Oseary producing "Digger"
(Monday, April 30, 2007)
Ridley Scott to direct "Nottingham"
(Monday, April 30, 2007)
"Everyone's Hero" Contest Winners
(Friday, April 27, 2007)
Blockbuster’s Ultimate Entertainment Experience Contest Winner
(Friday, April 27, 2007)
David Goyer will direct "Magneto"
(Friday, April 27, 2007)
Fandango Logo
Comments/Responses
1 2 3 > >>
craigtnelson • Apr 11, 2007, 01:55am •
craig's take: Let's hope it's better than the dismal Davinci Code!

exfan • Apr 11, 2007, 02:05am •
exfan s take : How much ??? biggest salary ever paid to an actor in the history of Hollywood.” In memory of salary i remenber 30 millions for arnold when he agree to make terminator 3, so how much higher could it be 40 millions, 50 millions ?

stormkane • Apr 11, 2007, 02:10am •
A&D was a better read than The Da Vinci Code I.M.H.O.

Still cant picture Hanks as Langdon though....

wasradone • Apr 11, 2007, 03:24am •
You'd think he learn from the first one but no he's back for more. Besides, how can they justify paying anyone so much after the dismal result that was 'the Da Vinci Code'?

Sure, the book was good but the hype/controversy surrounding it was the only thing drawing people into the theater...up until word got out of how crap it was. Then it just faded away into obscurity tp the bargain bin at Blockbuster. Seriously you'd think it was a Van Damme flick.

TheWickedOne • Apr 11, 2007, 04:34am •
yeah because $756,236,138 is a dismal result. Regardless of the quality of the film, this is all hollywood looks at... $$$

TheWickedOne • Apr 11, 2007, 04:35am •
yeah because $756,236,138 is a dismal result. Regardless of the quality of the film, this is all hollywood looks at... $$$

ponyboy76 • Apr 11, 2007, 04:37am •
Angels & Demons was a way better story and read then the DaVinci Code. I wish that they would have done the books in sequence because DaVinci sucked and while Hanks looks like I think Langdon would, he doesn't pull off his character well enough. Langdon, especially in A&D is supposed to be a bit more dashing and kind of cool. Hanks has never played cool in his career.
As far as salary, weren't they going to pay Pitt like 40 mil to do the next Mission Impossible, making him the the highest paid actor for a single movie in history?

wessmith1966 • Apr 11, 2007, 07:41am •
I agree with you ponyboy76, A&D was a much better read than DaVinci Code. I can see the studio paying Hanks a ton of cash to reprise his role as Langdon because the first movie made so much money. I understand Brown's working on his next Langdon adventure. Imagine how much money Hanks would bank if the publisher and the studio put their heads together to premiere the next movie and book out at the same time. Fans would be rabid to see the movie and grab the hardcover at the same time. Do a cross promotion with Borders and have them sell the book at the movie theater opening weekend. Hanks could pull in a $50 million paycheck for a stunt like that, and it would be fun for the audience too I think.

dragon261 • Apr 11, 2007, 08:49am •
The first movie should have been called The DaVinci Load of Crap.

raulendymion • Apr 11, 2007, 09:04am •
I agree that A&D was a much better read and I also think it will translate to the big screen much better then DaVinci Code, which, let's face it, isn't saying a lot. The question remains, will it draw people in the way Davinci did given that it's not nearly as controversial? I hope it does because there are some important points in A&D about religious opression of science, which is relevant, at least to me.

1 2 3 > >>
Login to post a comment!