That is not to say that they don't make anti-matter at Cern. They do and they even trap some of it. When the proton beams of the LHC collide it will indeed produce particles of matter and anti-matter (as so dramatically depicted in A&D. I often wish we physicists had the graphics budget of a Hollywood studio). Physicists from all over the world have joined to build immense detectors (one of which, Atlas, was actually filmed for the movie, another one, called CMS, is led by my colleague Jim Virdee from Imperial College in London), which will study the detailed properties of the debris emitted from these collisions to extend our understanding of the most fundamental laws governing the universe. However, the anti-matter produced in those collisions is much too energetic to trap, so Cern has built another facility, called the Anti-proton Decelerator (or AD), to slow down and trap anti-protons produced from the collision of a proton beam with a target. These are then combined with positrons (the anti-matter equivalent of electrons) to produce neutral anti-matter, which must be cooled to temperatures near absolute zero in order to trap it in a bottle. This is much as depicted in A&D (but without the glass windows and plastic wires in the vacuum chamber), but in reality only a few million atoms can be trapped per day, at which rate it would take longer than the age of the universe to get one-eighth of a gram. The other main difference is the real motivation behind the Cern experiments, which is to make detailed studies of the properties of anti-matter and probe in another way those most fundamental laws of nature. 

One piece of science that the LHC is really built for is mentioned in A&D, which is the search for the Higgs boson. The Higgs is a curious beast that was first proposed to solve a tricky problem at the heart of the Standard Model of Particle Physics, a supremely successful group of theories describing the different forces between particles at the smallest scales we have probed so far. On the surface, these theories appear to suffer from the minor drawback that they predict infinity as the answer to any question you pose, which is not a terribly useful property for a theory since experiments most definitely don't measure infinity for everything. In the 1940s, a way around this problem was discovered, called renormalisation, which removed the infinities and left predictions, which agreed with experiments to an amazing degree of precision. Unfortunately this renormalisation trick only works for forces carried by massless particles (like electromagnetism). For forces like the weak force, which are carried by massive particles, another solution was needed. The Standard Model solves this problem by assuming that the really fundamental particles which we would see at very high energies really are massless, with the mass we see at "low" energies (ie, the energies we see around us in nature today) being a consequence of the particles "sticking" to an all-pervasive field called the Higgs field. This may sound crazy, but one consequence of the model was a prediction that there should exist an entirely new type of force, called the weak neutral current, which had never been seen before. 

Subsequent experiments not only found the weak neutral force but also found that it had exactly the properties predicted for it by the Standard Model, which makes physicists believe that this was not just a lucky guess. However, if the model is right you should be able to make real Higgs bosons if you collide particles with enough energy, and the energy needed must be within the range of the LHC. So we are quite certain that either 1) the LHC will make the Higgs, or 2) the LHC will make something even weirder and more complicated than the Higgs, or 3) we don't know what we are talking about (which would perhaps be the most interesting outcome, although somewhat uncomfortable to explain to the funding agencies).