Angels & Demons

For all of those DaVinci Code haters out there, let me offer a brief disclaimer: when it comes to The DaVinci Code, my personal opinion is that the book was just okay and the movie was not. Dan Brown writes good Scooby Doo-esque art mystery novels - a race across Paris! a race across Rome! What is there not to love about that? Unfortunately, he sprinkles in a bit of his pseudo-religious, pseudo-academic, fiction meets fact craziness. The DaVinci Code film adaptation reminds me of the 4th Indiana Jones movie - both made me think, "who thought that plot sounded sane?" Audrey Tatou as the last descendant of Christ? Really? The saving grace of the movie is that they were allowed to film in the Louvre. That's pretty cool! However, Jumper got permission to film at the Coliseum and that didn't stop the movie from being total crap. I fear that The DaVinci Code likewise wasted what was a golden opportunity. And finally, what was going on with Tom Hanks' hair?!? Who thought that was a good look?

In Angels and Demons, Hanks' Robert Langdon gets a hair cut. Director Ron Howard also cuts out the fat from Dan Brown's novel. The novel of Angels and Demons is roughly 400 pages: 300 pages of Robert Langdon's cheesy genius as he searches for the four altars across (a cross) Rome. The last 100 pages, however, taking a running leap off the deep end of the pool. In the case of Angels and Demons, Ron Howard adapted the novel to film in almost the opposite style as his adaptation of The DaVinci Code. In The DaVinci Code, Ron Howard cut a lot of the cheesy art drama in favor of ramping up the religiosity. In Angels and Demons, he scaled back the craziness of the last 100 pages and the character of the Carmelengo had fewer layers to explore (who knew that was a good thing!). Ron Howard, I thank you. As a result of those decisions, Angels and Demons was fun! It's not going to shake anyone's faith in science or G-d and it clearly wasn't meant to. The pacing was solid and the characters were compelling. And, thanks in no small part to that hair cut, the character of Robert Langdon was truly a-dork-able.

A.O. Scott (who, let's face it, I almost always agree with) summed it up best when he said, "The utter silliness of 'Angels & Demons' is either its fatal flaw or its saving grace, and in the spirit of compassion I suppose I’d be inclined to go with the second option. The movie all but begs for such treatment. 'When you write about us,' an erstwhile nemesis says to Langdon near the end, 'and you will write about us, do so gently.' It was as if he were looking right into my soul. And how could I refuse such a humble, earnest petition? Go in peace."

Yes, indeed.