Half-Assed Movie Reviews

May 31, 2009:  Angels and Demons

The faithful Half-Assed Movie Reviews reader will know that at times in the past I’ve asked in frustration why I bother with all this, and I think we all know that I’ll ask again in the future.  At present, the sentiment applies to Angels and Demons, an ostensible sequel to the controversial and storied The Da Vinci Code which was released in 2006 to big worldwide box office business and massive religious controversy, although I got a curious sense of a missed opportunity for greater success.  Still, a grossing half a billion dollars is a good way to ensure a follow-up.  Both The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons are based on novels by Dan Brown, and both stories involve the character of Professor Robert Langdon, played in the films with a dash but not a full dose of gravitas by Tom Hanks.

I’ve read and seen The Da Vinci Code, but decided not to bother reading the earlier Angels and Demons.  I suspect that was a wise choice.  The reason for my suspicion is because while I actually found the story arc in The Da Vinci Code to be fascinating, the writing style was very frustrating, and based on the adaptation of Angels and Demons, I probably would have disliked both the story and style in that novel.  The plot involves some intrigue concerning stolen anti-matter, with preposterous science behind the action set-pieces, primarily focusing on a battery-powered canister keeping the anti-matter from destroying everything around it.  Professor Langdon needs to dig into the Vatican archives in order to solve the mystery of who did whatever was done, and we set off on an adventure in which the professor spends as much time focusing on the details of his profession as Indiana Jones usually spends on archaeological preservation efforts.

I really couldn’t get into the story, the imprecision of the clues and research was frustrating (statues pointing vaguely in the direction to go for the next clue), and temporal shifts such as flashbacks were shoddily used to maintain tension.  Angels and Demons is also way too long, and even at that, if I thought the previous film was oversimplified, I wouldn’t be shocked if this one has taken it a notch further towards discarding details and subplots.  I like director Ron Howard, but he’s here for a paycheque rather than for solid art or even solid entertainment.

Sequel or not?  I don’t care.