Somewhere in my heart I honestly though that Angels in Demons could be the film that Da Vinci Code tried to be. It looked faster paced and if it was to be shorter than Professor Langdon (greasy haired Tom Hanks) ‘s last adventure than it had the ability to be a completely re-invented film.
That was 3 hours before entering the theater. After a two and a half hour film crawled by this was not the movie I had hoped it would be.
Professor Robert Langdon is back in a thrilling (lie) fast paced (more lies) adventure that has him trying to discover terrorist attacks against the Vatican and the Catholic church. This movie, spoiler alert, is not fast paced OR thrilling. It has its moments of potential intrigue, like when we hear the beautiful orchestral score start racing, and expecting something exciting, we’re left with cars going moderately fast (moderately meaning slow by movie standards, not like Transformers) and then stopping somewhere… and that’s it. Score ends, the movie continues, and grows duller by the minute.
Robert Langdon is a lot like Superman…uninteresting. That will remain a flaw at the heart of this franchise as long as it continues. Angels and Demons has plenty of scenes with Hanks saying weird things we’re intended to follow, and being right…every time. I think that if a hero is 2 steps ahead of the game that it makes for interesting movie going. Robert Langdon isn’t just 2 steps ahead, he already has played the game and is off interpreting symbols in China somewhere. It’s dull, real characters need flaws. They have to be wrong and Hank’s character lacks the emotional investment or depth needed to make Langdon seem remotely interesting.
These issues, while prominent, could’ve been somewhat overlooked until the end. Or what I THOUGHT to be the end. Like its counterpart Da Vinci Code, Angels and Demons and director Ron Howard make a climax, set themselves up for an ending, and then continue for another 20-25 minutes. End the movie, or don’t end the movie, but don’t linger in between wasting everyone’s time.
Angels and Demons doesn’t even fit under the bad-but-entertaining category. It’s just bad. Better than Da Vinci Code (not saying much), Angels and Demons tries to further a franchise that isn’t going to work forever. If I have to give the movie credit for one thing, and I'm only doing this because I feel I need to adress one decent thing, the scenery and beautiful trip around Rome are much more entertaining than I expected, if nothing but irrelivant. Langdon isn’t Indiana Jones, and this movie is the furthest thing from Raiders of the Lost Ark. Grade - D+
That was 3 hours before entering the theater. After a two and a half hour film crawled by this was not the movie I had hoped it would be.
Professor Robert Langdon is back in a thrilling (lie) fast paced (more lies) adventure that has him trying to discover terrorist attacks against the Vatican and the Catholic church. This movie, spoiler alert, is not fast paced OR thrilling. It has its moments of potential intrigue, like when we hear the beautiful orchestral score start racing, and expecting something exciting, we’re left with cars going moderately fast (moderately meaning slow by movie standards, not like Transformers) and then stopping somewhere… and that’s it. Score ends, the movie continues, and grows duller by the minute.
Robert Langdon is a lot like Superman…uninteresting. That will remain a flaw at the heart of this franchise as long as it continues. Angels and Demons has plenty of scenes with Hanks saying weird things we’re intended to follow, and being right…every time. I think that if a hero is 2 steps ahead of the game that it makes for interesting movie going. Robert Langdon isn’t just 2 steps ahead, he already has played the game and is off interpreting symbols in China somewhere. It’s dull, real characters need flaws. They have to be wrong and Hank’s character lacks the emotional investment or depth needed to make Langdon seem remotely interesting.
These issues, while prominent, could’ve been somewhat overlooked until the end. Or what I THOUGHT to be the end. Like its counterpart Da Vinci Code, Angels and Demons and director Ron Howard make a climax, set themselves up for an ending, and then continue for another 20-25 minutes. End the movie, or don’t end the movie, but don’t linger in between wasting everyone’s time.
Angels and Demons doesn’t even fit under the bad-but-entertaining category. It’s just bad. Better than Da Vinci Code (not saying much), Angels and Demons tries to further a franchise that isn’t going to work forever. If I have to give the movie credit for one thing, and I'm only doing this because I feel I need to adress one decent thing, the scenery and beautiful trip around Rome are much more entertaining than I expected, if nothing but irrelivant. Langdon isn’t Indiana Jones, and this movie is the furthest thing from Raiders of the Lost Ark. Grade - D+
No comments:
Post a Comment