Review: Angels and Demons

Angels and Demons is the follow–up to Dan Brown’s epic The Da Vinci Code, at least as far as movies go. In literary history, Angels and Demons takes place and was written before The Da Vinci Code, and while the latter takes on religion in France, the former takes place in Vatican City. Though The Da Vinci Code was still a box–office success despite its many problems (critics were definitely mixed on the film), I believe the film rode on the books gargantuan success. In coming weeks, we will see if its counterpart can do the same.

Having read The Da Vinci Code (as there are now few that haven’t), I found the film version quite disappointing, mainly because I felt that the most fascinating aspect of the book couldn’t be translated to film. Most of the wonder in the story revolves around the historical analysis of artifact, something that is compelling to read, but immensely boring to watch acted out. The character either has to be in a setting where the lecture like analysis is appropriate, or the film has to simply toss out dialog that suffers from failing both its masters — it neither fully covers the intricacies that the book explored to make the pieces of the puzzle fit, nor does it fit the scene or seem appropriate in the context of a movie where two characters are talking. Sadly, Angels and Demons falls victim to this yet again.

As you may have gleaned from the trailer, there is an issue in Vatican City, where our venerable hero Dr. Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) is called upon to help the religious institution with which he has had somewhat of a colorful history with, if you will. Luckily, the film assumes that you know Langdon’s particular gift, so the audience is saved from long classroom scenes and expositions about the importance and meaning of symbology. Overall, the film doesn’t dwell on Langdon’s awesomeness, which I think helps make it a better film as far as fitting things in and being efficient. There isn’t 20 minutes of wasted time giving you background to establish things, and that’s good because you honestly don’t need it. The problem however, is that this notion seems to be extended in the wrong kind of way, and I feel like the whole endeavor was dumbed down a bit for the sake of trying to make it a more watchable film.

I admit, I have not read the first book, but I cannot imagine it to be a stark contrast from Brown’s later work, especially when it comes to the detail and analysis, because quite simply, that’s the best part. In the film, we still get these moments where Langdon will awkwardly try to give an abridged version of what I can only imagine to be a very intelligent and detailed interpretation of an ancient artifact in the book, however it seems they put a new strategy in place to help with the story pacing and to cut down the number of these clumsy exchanges. In Angels and Demons, a bulk of the clues are greatly simplified, in fact, oversimplified to a fault. Langdon’s amazing interpretations don’t seem nearly as profound, and what must have been truly enlightening analysis of Vatican relics in the novel becomes reduced to cinematic sleuthing of a Where’s Waldo variety.

Though flawed, Angels and Demons is still very watchable, but just don’t expect much from it. The actors are solid, with the likes of Tom Hanks, Ewan McGregor, and Stellan Skarsgård, but the story is going to let down anyone expecting a brilliant experience. If you can be entertained by a rather simple thriller story with an interesting backdrop of Rome, then you will enjoy the experience. If you are expecting to sharpen your brain or match wits and sleuthing skills with the Langdon in the novels, you will be disappointed with what you see. It’s not his fault though, he simply doesn’t have the right tools, time, or format to amaze you.

Semi–Spoiler/Annoyance: I really don’t like it when movies have scenes where characters are granted access to historical items and artifacts in these ultra secure compounds, and they don’t wear gloves. These people are academics, scholars, and to be as great as they often are, semi–obsessed fanatics. They should know how destructive the elements and oils on the hand are to ancient artifacts, and whenever they manhandle them for the sake of time or urgency, it always bothers me. It’s always a “This was created hundreds of years ago… only one left in existence” situation, too. The relic is kept in a vacuum sealed vault with maximum security to preserve it for as long as we can, and you have to pick it up with your bare hand?

Find More Information: Movie Site, Apple Trailers, IMDb, Amazon