MediaBox 9: Angels & Demons
Let me get on my high-horse for a second. On the subject of novel-to-film translations and comparisons: It is almost universally unfair to judge the resulting film against its literary counterpart. It’s nonsensical and wrong and bad.
That being said, I really wish Angels & Demons were more like Dan Brown’s novel. At least then there may have been some depth of character, some sense of compassion and concern for Tom Hanks and friends as they’re forced to witness brutal murder after brutal murder. Or maybe it would be nice to understand why the bad guy is so bad (is he really just a hired thug?). Or maybe the media’s role should have been included, as it lends itself to a beautifully redemptive scene for the Church. That all sounds like a OK movie.
Or you could go the Ron Howard way. Give us lifeless characters, smug dialogue, a convoluted-but-still-too-linear plot, and an unearned sense of epic scope. That sounds fun.
This is seriously flawed film. Hanks’ doughy Robert Langdon comes off more as an overly intellectual plot propeller than a hero. There is no on-screen chemistry between any of the actors, and you begin to care less and less as various cast members are offed by the tragically vapid killer. Howard plods through Dan Brown’s narrative gracelessly, a stark contrast to the timeless beauty of some fantastic set-pieces. Rome is unsurprisingly beautiful, and while this film’s recreations are stunning, they are discovered and abandoned too quickly for the audience to drink them in.
No 1square Seal of Approval here. Look at the bright side:
At least Hanks’ foppish mullet is gone.
Tyler
PS: Anybody with some skills want to draw me an official Seal of Approval? I’ll give you a mad shout-out…
PPS: Keep voting for the book. Results will be revealed on May 28.
PPPS: Did you notice that I killed the Mae widget? Check their site for more info on their cause.
