It may have earned box office hosannas on opening weekend (the hoped-for result) and the reflexive scorn of the Catholic Church (the prayed-for result), but Angels & Demons remains guilty of the artistic sins of mediocrity and sapping power from its predecessor. Author Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code stirred great interest and ire, both in book form and its easier-does-it Tom Hanks/Ron Howard-ified movie version. But the follow-up, Angels & Demons, is a more muted sensation. Suddenly, it seems that Brown turned what could have been a semi-revelatory project into the gilded, secret passageways of shtick.
So goes the inevitable movie version. Presumably, the material tosses a variety of elements into the narrative cauldron, including science, religion, academic inquiry, and on-the-spot detective work, each element feeding off of, while inducing friction with, another. Instead, the film plays like a breathlessly paced pastiche of Indiana Jones and the Bourne Supremacy franchise, with the intrigue and antiquity of Rome and the Vatican City as a playground. Pass the popcorn and stifle the yawn, please.
Hanks, the scholar-turned-irreverent-whistleblower on the Catholic Church’s dirty history, is once again drawn into a crazy fray, like the would-be bookish Indiana. There has been a cardinal-napping in Rome, reportedly by the nasty anti-Vatican Illuminati, and a potentially catastrophic anti-matter device has been set to blow at midnight. Hanks has a harried busman’s holiday, chasing all over Rome’s ancient sites and secret byways, while trying to suss out who inside the Vatican might be the mole. To spice up the multicultural stew, the casting director picked on standard non-Americans—the Scottish Ewan McGregor, German Armin Mueller-Stahl, and Swedish Stellan Skarsgård.
On some level, Angels & Demons could be seen as a heaven-sent tourist teaser, an invitation to the exoticism of Rome for a good time (barring anti-matter matters). But the cheesy back lot feel of the film might also make it a plug for Universal Studios, which, under this summer’s lean economic conditions, might be a likelier travel option. Cheaper yet, head down to the multiplex to take in this mildly entertaining new epistle in the Hollywood gospel according to Hanks and Howard.
Related Links
For showtimes, check the Independent's movie listings, here.
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.

Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
Previous Month


Comments
Discussion Guidelines
"But the follow-up, Angels & Demons, is a more muted sensation. Suddenly, it seems that Brown turned what could have been a semi-revelatory project into the gilded, secret passageways of shtick."
You understand that even though the Da Vinci Code was made into a movie first, Brown wrote and published Angels & Demons before it, right? Sure when compared to its sequel, the Da Vinci Code, Angels and Demons is more muted, but to say that Brown suddenly gave this let down after writing the Da Vinci code is backwards; he is ramping up over time, not down.
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 1 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 1
trpt8ball (anonymous profile)
May 19, 2009 at 5:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Good point 8ball,
Something else I would like to add. Hanks, is a miscast (in my opinion) for the De Vinci Code.
When I think of the professor I think Ben Afleck. He is the right age and carries himself better and possesses a more believable physique and strength to carry out the leaping and running that Hanks did in that movie.
Hanks, is powerful in other roles but not as this character. Which brings me to another additive. Opie is loved by all and he really has a good eye for directing movies.
Splash, Cocoon, Gung Ho, Willow (my favorite of his) was all fun and entertaining. Far and Away, was probably his best drama, thanks in part to Cruise and Kidman.
The DeVinciCode was his biggest so far, even with Hanks but I wonder what it would have done if the church had not told everyone not to see it.
Ron Howard is a really good director but has yet to achieve greatness. I’m still holding out for his smashing BLOCKBUSTER film. I do believe, I do, I do...
Just my opinion.
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
Jhern (anonymous profile)
May 22, 2009 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Jhern says: "I’m still holding out for his smashing BLOCKBUSTER film. I do believe, I do, I do..."
Dude, "The DaVinci Code" made over 3/4 of a BILLION $$ since its release. Your definition of Blockbuster is quite lackluster.
---
And the amount of great films directed by Howard you left out eclipses the ones you praise:
- Cinderella Man
- Night Shift
- The Missing
- Gung Ho
- A Beautiful Mind
- How the Grinch Stole Christmas
- Parenthood
- Frost/Nixon
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
binky (anonymous profile)
May 22, 2009 at 12:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment