After the murder of Italian physicist Leonardo Vetra, Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon's (Tom Hanks) investigation with Vetra's daughter (Ayelet Zurer) leads to a secret society, the Illuminati, and a quest for the world's most potent -- and deadly -- energy source. Ron Howard directed the crime thriller, which is based on The Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown's novel and co-stars Ewan McGregor and Stellan Skarsgård.
| 2 hr 18 mins |
This movie has not won and has not been nominated for any awards.
You have not reviewed this movie yet. Register to write a review »
With these Dan Brown novels, Ron Howard has just about the sweetest gig in Hollywood: a veritable cash cow franchise not dependant on anything but some controversial Vatican-bashing. “The Da Vinci Code” was a pulpy novel to start, which, to the surprise of everyone, including the author, became the must-read of 2004. Even I, a casual fiction reader at best, read it and was unimpressed. The movie was a middle-of-the-road thriller in every aspect of its production. So how can anyone get jazzed by “Angels and Demons”? Not a sequel, or a prequel really, just another adventure for Robert Langdon, the Harvard symbologist and puzzle-solver-for-hire.
In this episode, Langdon is brought in the Vatican to help locate four kidnapped monks who happen to be the leading candidates for the vacated Papal office. The infamous Illuminati, another subversive organization bent on taking down the Catholic Church, have taken credit, and since Langdon knows their historical trajectory, he’s the best man for the job. He and his scientist partner, Vittoria Vetra (a stunning Israeli actress, Ayelet Zurer) scour the archives of the Vatican deciphering codes seeking to discover the location of each monk. Oh yeah, there’s also some stolen anti-matter from a local French science base which threatens to blow up Rome. [ show more ]
“Angels and Demons” goes so far off the deep-end, it makes “The Da Vinci Code” look like social realism. The opening sequence establishes a ticking clock device which would have seemed ridiculous in a Pierce Brosnan Bond Picture. Anti-matter? Huh? A lame attempt to incorporate a scientifically plausible theory of creationism – after all, one of the running themes of the series is creating controversy around the steadfast Catholic beliefs. There’s nothing profound in anti-matter, just bubble gum dramatics.
The attraction of “The Da Vinci Code” was the connection of religious history, sacred works of art and historical science. To give Dan Brown some credit, the core ideas were intriguing and his historical connections actually seemed plausible. In "Angels & Demon" the puzzles are hastily told to us by Langdon without the time to linger on the historical context of what he’s discovering. Even the puzzles in “National Treasure” are more interesting.
The action is episodic and seems to serve only to break-up the boredom. Langdon’s near death experience in the locked down archive basement is out of disaster-movie 101, adventure without conflict, just a contrived sequence of false jeopardy without any impact of the story.
There’s a couple of twists, which are telegraphed too accurately by Howard. As soon as the real baddie shows up on screen, we know what’s going to happen – in fact, I guessed it already from the trailer.
The saving grace of the film is the casting of Nikolaj Lie Kaas as the hitman heavy who kills with great proficiency. Kass is a Danish actor, who is largely unknown outside of his own country, but anyone who knows the work of Susanne Bier and Anders Thomas Jensen knows Kaas is a casting coup waiting to happen. Howard knows it and it’s the only inspired aspect of the film.
As with "The Da Vinci Code", everyone here ‘phones it in’ – but going by the success of Da Vinci, only the bare minimum is required to make these films successful. [ show less ]
Angels & Demons, while not in any way a sequel to The Davinci Code, plays on much of the best about the characters from the first film. Dr. Robert Langdon heads to Rome, this time to help the Vatican stop a plot to assassinate four Cardinals during Conclave. The story holds together very nicely, stays true to the book and keeps you guessing and on the edge of your seat throughout. For those who love Rome (as I do) the snippets of the city that hide around every corner and the movies' ability to show you insights that you've otherwise never noticed is really entertaining.
I really enjoyed the movie, but wouldn't suggest that it's in anything other than a fun thriller with a bit of intrigue and mystery thrown in for good measure.
Tom Hanks returns as Dan Brown's symbologist Robert Langdon in his first adventure Angels & Demons, which Hollywood decided to make after The Da Vinci Code, given the latter's more controversial subject striking a raw nerve on the faith itself. The Catholic Church was up in arms over the first film, but seemingly nonchalant about this one. And it's not hard to see why, considering Ron Howard had opted to do a flat-out action piece that serves as a great tourism video of Rome and Vatican City, and would probably boost visitor numbers given the many beautiful on-location scenes, save for St Peter's Square and Basilica which was a scaled model used.
So I guess with the bulk of the budget going toward the sets, the ensemble cast had to be correspondingly scaled down. Ayelet Zurer tried to step into the female void left by Audrey Tautou, but given Tautou's character then having a lot more stake in the film, Zurer's scientist Vittoria had a lot less to do other than just waiting in the wings to change some batteries on a canister filled with anti-matter. In the book she's the fodder of course for Langdon to converse his vast knowledge of the Vatican, the Illuminati and the great feud between the two, but here she's neither love interest, nor his intellectual equal. [ show more ]
Ewan McGregor on the other hand, chews up each scene he's in as Camerlengo Patrick McKenna, who is temporarily taking care of the Papal office while the other prominent cardinals are in the Sistine Chapel to elect a new Pope. And he plays Patrick with that glint in the eye, with nuances enough to let you know there's more than meets the eye. There's no surprises here for readers of the novel, but McGregor's performance here is one of the highlights of the film as Hanks plays well, Tom Hanks.
The book itself is rich with arguably accurate content as always, and had a lot more plot points on science versus religion, and a wealth of information that Dan Brown researched and linked together in an engaging fictional piece of work. While reading the book some years ago, I thought that should a film be made of it, it's easy to lapse and dwell more on the set action pieces. Sadly, that's what this Ron Howard film did, with a pace that doesn't allow a temporary breather. Unlike the first film where you had the characters sit down for some "discussion time" over a cup of tea, this one moved things along so quickly, it's like reading the book all over again, page after page being skipped just to get to the thick of the action.
Catholic reviewers have called Angels & Demons harmless, because I guess it didn't dwell on its many controversies, unlike The Da Vinci Code which struck a raw nerve at the centre of the faith. And if anything, this film served as a great tourism promotional video with a nice showcase of the many prominent touristy landmarks that would entice many around the world to go pay a visit. Naturally certain areas like the catacombs beneath St Peter's Basilica, and the Vatican archives remain out of bounds, but the walk along the Path of Illumination, now that's almost free.
Nothing new for those who have read the book other than to see it come alive, but for those who haven't, this film may just compel you to pick up Dan Brown's novel just to read a bit more about the significance about the landmarks, and characters such as Galileo, Michelangelo and Bernini who are intricately linked to the plot, but much left unsaid. Satisfying pop-corn entertainment leaving you with nothing spectacular. [ show less ]
