The latest cinematic adaptation of author Dan Brown’s work is the religious thriller, Angles & Demons (PG-13). Tom Hanks once again is prominent symbologist Robert Langdon and this time around he’s investigating several murders and kidnappings at Vatican City that are linked to a secret society. Ron Howard once again directs and Ewan McGregor, Stellan Skarsgard, and Ayelet Zurer costar in the movie.
Andy: I have not read Angels & Demons, or any of Dan Brown’s work. And even though I watched and reviewed The DaVinci Code here, I honestly don’t remember it very well at all. Like a cheap piece of gum, it lost its flavor almost immediately and was quickly forgotten. My first impression of Angels & Demons is that although it has some decent moments, it is not as good as the DaVinci Code, and that is not a good sign.
Ryan: I’ve read Brown’s Angels & Demons and it was a fun read. It doesn’t have the allure of The Da Vinci Code but in a lot of ways it’s just as thrilling as a read. The Da Vinci Code was an immensely successful film—in terms of it’s box-office success (750+ million dollars worldwide)—but it was a film that failed to resonate with many moviegoers. I didn’t think it was too bad of a movie and I don’t think Angels & Demons is too bad of a film either.
Andy: At its best, Angels & Demons is an entertaining, cerebral action flick. For about ninety minutes of the film, Professor Langdon is on the clock. He is frantically running from one historic church to another, solving puzzles, catching up to bad guys, cheating death, and eventually saving lives. This is when the movie is at its best, and it is quite entertaining during this middle segment. The action is solid, the plot is interesting, the suspense is high, and there’s little reason to not enjoy it.
Ryan: Part of the problem with Angels & Demons is the same problem that plagued The Da Vinci Code movie. Brown’s writing is difficult to translate to the silver screen. The allure of his books isn't his prose and consequently that hinders the cinematic translation (although the pacing of Angels & Demons is far superior to that of The Da Vinci Code). Nevertheless the action portrayed in the movie does not measure up to the backdrop of the grandiose themes being unraveled. Some of the charm of the book is lost in the translation to the big screen.
Andy: My biggest problem with Angels & Demons is that it is way too long. At the beginning of the movie we see a small group of scientist harnessing particles of antimatter in thermos-like containers. The whole sequence is ridiculous, and the use of the antimatter in the rest of the movie proves only to remind viewers of how absurd the whole premise is. Furthermore, the movie takes an extra fifteen minutes at the end to add another twist to the plot that is unnecessary and feels tacked on. This is an okay movie, but the beginning and end both miss the mark, significantly weakening the movie in the process.
Ryan: There's been some controversy regarding Angels & Demons and everyone has a right to voice their opinion. The only thing I would say is that Angles & Demons is a work of fiction. It's based on certain historical people, places and ideas but the leaps and connections that Brown develops are not based on hard scholarship. The appeal of the book and movie is that Brown wraps together fact and fiction in a believable manner. He's a storyteller and he's good as what he does. But all-in-all the book as well as the movie is just contemporary historical fiction.
Angels & Demons has some pretty entertaining aspects going for it, but its many flaws hold it to a C+.
No comments:
Post a Comment