Vatican will boycott Tom Hanks film ‘Angels & Demons’

In May, Angels & Demons, the latest Tom Hanks film, will be released. It’s based on The Da Vinci Code prequel book (of the same name) by Dan Brown, only the film will be set as a sequel to The Da Vinci Code events. Hanks will once again be playing Professor Robert Langdon, and for those who have read the book, Ewan McGregor plays the counsel priest to the murdered pope, which is totally a brilliant character for him.

I read both Angels & Demons and The Da Vinci Code a few years ago, and even though they’re not “great literature”, they’re both fun, easy reads that don‘t sugar-coat some of the historical shenanigans The Vatican was up to. Both books are huge bestsellers, despite much grumbling from religious groups and, specifically, The Vatican.

When the film adaptation of The Da Vinci Code was released in 2006, it got tepid reviews and a semi-organized backlash by the Catholic Church. None of that really mattered though, because the film went on to gross more than $700 million. Some people even thought that with priests sniping at the film and at Dan Brown, the film and books got even more publicity and more people went to see it. Now it looks like The Vatican might be making the same mistake all over again:

Tom Hanks has been busy finishing up the sequel to The Da Vinci Code and may be facing part two of a showdown with the Vatican. The organization, which railed against the first film, may be readying itself to be up at arms against the newest one Angels & Demons.

On Friday, the Vatican’s official newspaper Awenwire ran a story saying the Church “cannot approve” of the film. Another Italian daily La Stampa, echoed the idea saying the Vatican would soon call for a boycott.

However, Archbishop Velasio De Paolis was quoted as warning against a boycott in case it gives the film even more attention, making it that much more popular. Producers of the film were also denied access to film in parts of the Vatican.

The Church’s railing against the first installment didn’t hurt the box office. The Da Vinci Code raked in $760 million. Angels & Demons is set to open on May 15.

From Radar Online

I really believe that The Vatican is so out-of-touch that they would call for a boycott. I suppose there is no one in The Vatican press or media offices who stops and says “Hey, we’re about to give this film millions of dollars of free publicity. Why is that again? For a piece of fiction?”

This news came out just as Pope Benedict was getting hammered internationally for saying that condom use was not the answer in the fight against AIDS and could make the problem worse. The Pope said this Tuesday, while he was traveling to Africa for a formal multi-national visit, and pretty much every HIV/AIDS advocacy group, health organization and national health minister or secretary has bashed him for it. Perhaps this nice, safe, official Vatican boycott against a film is a way of changing the subject away from international disaster.

Photos are stills from Angels & Demons, thanks to Allmoviephoto.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

32 Responses to “Vatican will boycott Tom Hanks film ‘Angels & Demons’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Best of British says:

    I thought the movie version of Da Vinci code was ok except for Tom Hanks limp hair do.

  2. Pont Neuf says:

    Actually, The Vatican should call a boycott on the film based on the premise that the book is, just the ‘The Da Vinci Code’, an awfully written suspense novel with lots of self-important ‘revelations’ about religious themes. In short, pretension and bad writing don’t make a good combination.

    Regarding the ex-Inquisitor’s addition to his endless list of embarrassing moments, what can I say? The church stopped being progressive in the 9th Century, when it was decided that trading with the salvation of souls and threatening discontent peasants with excommunication was more profitable than, you know, engaging in acts of Christian charity and all those silly things.

    Anyhow, I hope the film is a success. If only, because that would annoy fundamentalist Catholics.

  3. eternalcanadian says:

    pffft, the vatican is an outdated, patricarchial dogma that is the cause of many “isms” in the world (sexism, racism, ableism, etc.). the latest being the whole condom thing. why would a 70-plus year old caucasian male virgin (the pope) have any idea or experience with the realities of life outside the clositered golden walls of the vatican? of course they’re going to say boycott the film. pffft again.

  4. daisy424 says:

    Politics and religion.

    What has happened to this celebrity gossip website?

  5. viper says:

    Like anybody cares what the vat says. That insitiution is outdated and even more redundant than the British royals.

  6. HashBrowns says:

    Mmm….Ewan. I don’t care how bad this movie is or how bad the book was or what the Vatican has to say about it: Ewan McGregor is in it. I want to see his gorgeous face on a huge screen.

  7. Tia says:

    eternalcana, VERY WELL SAID.. I second that.. high five !!

  8. Madelyn Rose says:

    Pont Neuf – I totally agree. The book was very poorly written. It reminded me of a Nancy Drew book and I could only get through 30 pages without giving up. I could not understand why people thought it was the best book ever! I think that as long as a person is a good writer, he/she can make any story readable. A book is not “good” because of an interesting plot, it’s good because it is well written.

    That being said – I will go to see ANYTHING with Ewan in it!

  9. me says:

    I think as long as something is anti Chrisitan or anti right wing politics websites like this will be all for it. Hollywood loves to bash Christians. I”m not Catholic so I’m not protective of the pope, and Jesus doesnt need me to defend him.

  10. viper says:

    ME- pleeeeease thats B.S. Hollywood isnt anti christian and neither is celebitchy.

  11. michellle says:

    There is the obvious celebrity connection, ie. the film.

    Still, I love when CB brings up politics & religion.

  12. me says:

    okay “viper” sure

  13. daisy424 says:

    @Michelle, sure, you can spin just about anything to fit that profile, no matter how insignificant the connection to the original subject is.

  14. KateNonymous says:

    I’ll boycott it, too. Not because of any “messages,” but because the book was just so bad! It moved along fairly briskly as a thriller, but the ending was ludicrous.

    It’s too bad they didn’t cast Ewan as Langdon in the first movie. He’d get closer to the idea of the character than Hanks, who was miscast.

  15. Mairead says:

    It’s times like these that only quotes from Father Ted can fully deal with the complexities of the issues

    Q – Should we avoid political/ religious-themed posts and thereby deny ourselves many images of Ewan McGregor? (;-) @ Daisy)

    A – “That would be an ecumenical matter”

    “Down with this sort of thing!”
    “Careful now”


  16. michellle says:

    No spin daisy, the issue at hand is the film. Hardly insignificant as the subject matter is the boycott of a “film”.

    My comment was not meant to belittle yours, just an opposing view. I for one enjoy the political & religious discussion.

    In fact, I really enjoyed your AIG donation list of politicians, thought it very informative, seriously.

  17. the original kate says:

    wait – the catholic church’s biggest problem is a movie? call me crazy, but i think the vatican has much bigger fish to fry than this non-issue! maybe the pope could have a piece of duct tape put over his mouth when he goes out in public.

  18. mE says:

    Please to note. This “mE” is not the same “me” as me. Get it?

    I am Catholic by the way. Personally I don’t care if they boycott it. I am also one of the most devout Catholics I know and I have never even heard of the book (the one this movie is based on), nor a boycott against it until this posting here.

    I don’t think it is as simple as saying Hollywood = lefty commie pinko. Also neither does Catholic church = child molesting priests.*** Seldom is anything in life that black and white.

    ***=(Please note also that the Catholic Church is the largest private organization providing care to the people of Africa. The Pope’s statement when taken in context is very sensible. I’ll let you fine folks google the whole statement yourselves.)

  19. Anni says:

    really…religion and politics on a gossip site? you really want people to fight, huh? it used to be fun here…

  20. daisy424 says:

    @Anni, I agree.

    Michelle, Thanks.

  21. Samantha says:

    The thing that I can’t understand is why they are so darn uptight. Its a MOVIE, and any true church goer is going to see it just as that – a movie. When you draw more attention to it, that is when you bring the crazies out who claim “Conspiracy! Conspiracy!” So why not kick back, watch the movie and say, “haha, that was a pretty good movie, wouldn’t it be totally awesome if it were true!?”

    Nah, I guess they have better things to do…like little boys. :-O Whoops.

  22. Judy says:

    Hey Me, maybe they should get a movie out about all the child molestation??
    Thi site is not anti Christian or anythin g else ..any excuse to defend a church that has made a mockery out of religion.

  23. mE says:

    Is it not creepy to anyone else that someone posts a VERY similar name to mine and posts inflammatory comments like that?

    Just sayin’…

  24. michellle says:

    daisy – any time.

    annie – On the contrary, I happen to enjoy thoughtful discussins about interesting subject matter. Politics & religion are fascinating. History, human nature, faith, corruption, government … are these subjects taboo simply because some can’t or work discuss them rationally?

    The beauty of this site is multitude of seemingly thoughtful & intelligent people participating. Refreshing when so many sites cater to the twisted & immature. Sure the average Brangelina thread brings in the numbers & yes this is “celeb”itchy but come on. Does that really mean we must limit ourselves to fluff only? Afterall, many a celeb has crossed the line into politics.

    In a society based on freedom of religion & the right of dissent, the opportunity to have open discussions on such matters is both a right & a privlege. No one’s saying it has to be a blood sport.

  25. daisy424 says:

    @mE, I do see your point. Maybe you should sign up for a gravatar, you won’t have that problem. It’s pretty easy to do, scroll down.

    Michelle, I do agree with some of what you said, but I go on political & news websites for that.
    I liked the easy going atmosphere of CB for its snarky celeb stories. Politics & religion are a personal and it tends to get vicious. I get enough of that with the relatives. *wink*

  26. mE says:

    Thanks Daisy. I think I just might.


  27. michellle says:

    Yeah daisy, good point. I’ve to come to enjoy the personalities here but I’ve had my fill of celeb goss at least for the time being. Perhaps the news sites would be more suitable.

  28. the original kate says:

    @ mE: i had someone who was posting under my old name, too, and starting big fights. i asked him/her to change their name, as i had been posting for months, but i was ignored. when it continued, i just changed my name and am signing up for a gravatar. some people like to just stir up shit, don’t take it personally.

  29. vaticanboy says:

    Boycott is stupid. Dan Brown is stupid. End.

  30. Davin says:

    So many people here miss the point of why the vatican discourages movies like DaVinci Code and Angels/Demons. Dan Brown is no theologian, but his fiction has a way of raising unnecessary doubts and fabrications about Christianity and religious.
    They are not out of touch, they recommend a boycott to “take a stand”, and we all can be saddened when that encourages viewing of a slow plodding movie like I found “DaVinci” – when I viewed it for free.

  31. Hey, cool tips. Perhaps I’ll buy a glass of beer to the person from that chat who told me to go to your site 🙂

  32. Интересно, кто обьяснит девушке как добавить этот блог в избранное?