Ron Howard: MSN Interview

In the books, Angels and Demons comes first. How have you made this a sequel?

Many people wound up reading Angels and Demons second, and I felt for film audiences it was very strange to go back. Tom’s character, Robert Langdon, evolves and grows because now he gets to carry into this new adventure the experience of living through that other very bizarre mystery. I felt that was important and it definitely influenced his performance in ways that were very human and very entertaining.

 

Did you actually film in the Vatican?

Formally no. We never even asked and yet using all the technological advantages that filmmakers have at their disposal, I feel very confident saying that we’re able to take the audience on a very realistic, authentic journey behind the walls of the Vatican. But could we bring a film crew in and shoot? No.

 

Describe how you adapted the novel into the movie.

The Da Vinci Code was so much at the epicentre of the cultural zeitgeist that I felt a bit restricted in terms of the adaptation. Looking back on it, I still feel very good about the choices that were made but I definitely felt liberated with Angels and Demons, which is also a wildly popular novel but it doesn’t carry with it quite that degree of scrutiny and focus. Dan Brown said to me that as a director I should feel free to make it my own and do what I think needs to be done to make it modern and entertaining. There are changes that will be interesting for people who’ve read the book. So far people in our test screenings who know the book are really pleased by the choices that we made - it’s always a point of discussion and that’s part of the fun of going to see a movie that’s been adapted.

 

Angels & Demons Video Special

The movie was postponed because of writers’ strike. What’s changed from that first idea of the movie to what we see now?

Because it’s such a complicated story it kept evolving and at that point we had to change writers because of previous commitments. So when David Koepp came in he also brought another perspective and certainly some ideas that I considered really interesting and exciting. That said, it was always an adaptation of the Dan Brown novel and we always knew what the great twists and turns were that I wanted to put on the screen. It was delayed, but in retrospect I’m so happy it was. This is my twentieth feature film and about half way through I remember being glad I had the experience of the other 19 before making this movie - the combination of all the elements probably made it the most complicated film I’ve undertaken.

 

How has your experience at CERN changed your view of science?

It hasn’t really changed my view but it’s certainly deepened my understanding of the ways in which human beings are trying to explore the universe. I was reminded of NASA, where I worked on Apollo 13, when I came here. In this case, the exploration is not about hurtling yourself upward, it’s about looking inward and understanding the world on the most microscopic level.

 

How do you deal with the “antimatter” that appears in the story?

I came here, I did research, I had some terrific sit downs with physicists who explained to me what was feasible, what was good science fiction versus utterly impossible science fiction. What we have in our film is really an environment and an understanding that some very dangerous material has been taken from CERN. The movie doesn’t go to great lengths to explain the science or the history. In fact the rhythm of this movie doesn’t allow for that. It’s a ticking bomb story. Directorially I ended up using a whole other set of muscles.

 

Surely you can’t see the antimatter. So how do you deal with it on film?

You think you see it. You’ll see! But I will say that the production designer spent a good amount of time here and he was in conference with physicists. We did try to construct props and things that were inspired by the information we were getting. It’s fiction, but it’s pretty good, well informed science fiction.

Angels & Demons Video Special