Angels & Demons surpasses the lackluster 2006 The Da Vinci Code in almost every way, and yet it still finds itself in the category of mediocrity. It’s a continuous escapade of non-stop explanations and blandness, and lacks the excitement it strives for.
After the murder of a physicist, professor Robert Langdon (Hanks) embarks on an adventure to uncover a terrorizing society, The Illuminati. With the help of scientist Vittoria Vetra (Zurer), they are lead all throughout Rome, trying to track down an assassin who works for the Illuminati and has kidnapped four cardinals. Robert and Vittoria also must hunt down a stolen device that could cause mass destruction to not just the vatican, but to the surrounding area of Rome.
> ” />
Despite the efforts of trying to make this much faster paced than the treading The Da Vinci Code, it still moves at a sluggish speed. Scene after scene is filled with needless exposition, similar to the first film. It becomes pandering and incomprehensible, many of those parts seem to add nothing authentic to the story. It runs at about one hundred and thirty eight minutes, twenty of those minutes could have easily been cut which would have helped trim down the pacing issues. It’s inept of keeping a consistent tone and coherence, running too long and never revealing any depth. It’s hard to even talk about the story, because it’s absolutely ridiculous with some elements on the edge of parody. The twist and turns even come across as laughable and predictable, which leads to most of the suspense falling flat.
Coming off his critically acclaimed Frost/Nixon, Ron Howard delivers a thrillless follow up. Ron Howard has proven himself before with a number of exceptional films, leaving one to wonder how he can be so uncapable of delivering a decent thriller. His heavy reliance on CGI, which is blatantly apparent, is one of the film’s many problems. He obviously wasn’t able to shoot on some locations, but his extreme use on CGI comes across rather lazy. Howard is trying to capture historic landmarks, and with the knowledge that he wouldn’t be able to shoot on some of these locations he should have re-tooled the story to work around this problem. On the upside, his camera work at times is impressive, many famous locations are shot beautifully. Also contributing to this factor is the lavishing production design, which is the only real highlight of the film.
Returning to the role of Robert Langdon is the always reliable Tom Hanks (Charlie Wilson’s War), but despite his efforts, he is neither engaging nor aspiring. It’s not Hanks fault that Langdon isn’t an appealing character. The material only allows him to deliver history lesson speeches. He doesn’t need to be an action hero, but he also doesn’t have to be a total bore. Stuck playing the Langdon side-kick job is Ayelet Zurer, and just like Hanks, she’s given nothing to do. She constantly babbles non-stop needless exposition that adds no depth to the story and likewise her character. Zurer is respectable in the role, but it’s a bland character that isn’t even necessary for the story. The only real interesting characters are played by Stellan Skarsgård (Mamma Mia!) and Ewan McGregor (Cassandra’s Dream). When onscreen the film becomes mildly watchable, only to invetabily retreat in mediocracy.
With Ron Howard behind the camera, a fantastic cast, and a lavish production design, Angels & Demons should have been much better. With a sharper script and with heavier editing, this could have been an entertaining thriller instead of a tediously mediocre summer affair.