I'll try and keep it brief to avoid any spoilers...
As much as I loved Audrey Tautou's hair in Amelie, I loved it more in this film. Compare:
In term's of the actual movie - ehm, yeah. As I'm sure you'll
hear see many bloggers say: myeh
I mean, it was okay... I've read the book four times (twice normal, twice illustrated) and preferred the illustrated version - to be able to see some of the stuff that was being talked about really helped me with a lot of it. Mebbe what I'd gained from the illustrated version took away some of what I could have got from the film?
But on the other hand - I have terrible memory for stories. So a lot of the twists and turns did still grip me, but it still didn't seem like it gripped me enough for me to really enjoy it as much as I felt I should. I think that all the talking up of it, then all the putting down of it has just taken the sparkle off the film - I wanted to go see it because I wanted to see the story, not because I felt I had to find out if it was any good or not.
There were a few small changes (I think, remember: terrible memory) but it wasn't too much of a big deal.
And although I can't think of anyone better to do it, I don't really like Tom Hanks that much.. That said, Robert Langdon isn't supposed to be the likable hero.
So after that poor attempted ramble: all in all, I enjoyed 'V for Vendetta' better, but still glad to have seen it.Does anyone else who has seen it want to comment?