Angels and Demons is a strange film. When it was first announced that they were actually going ahead with the sequel to The DaVinci Code I was confused. In my naivety I wondered how – considering the failure of that film both stylistically and at the box office – they could possibly have convinced any studio to fund a goddamn sequel. Despite my confusion I had to just accept the fact that I live in a world where stuff like this happens. Mental.
Then even more inexplicably I found myself, months after this initial confusion, sitting in a movie theatre on a Sunday afternoon waiting for Angels and Demons to wallop me square in the jaw with the ridiculous story of Robert Langdon, Symbologist Extraordinaire.
While the book the film is based on is set before the events depicted in Da Vinci Code, this movie is modified to be a sequel. This evidently wasn’t too hard, just the insertion of a reference to the first film in one of the opening scenes and the writers evidently dusted their hands and high fived each other on a job well done. Money in the bank, boys, money in the bank.
The story follows the same structure as the Da Vinci Code: an extended chase for information that reveals unexpected truths and leaves the protagonists irrevocably changed. This time it’s a dastardly plot to kidnap catholic bishops carried out by the dreaded Illuminati. It’s tighter than the exposition-wrought first film, but only just.
The problem with this film is that it doesn’t know what it is. It’s too much of a stupid American chase-action-twist film that it doesn’t work as a psychological thriller, and it tries too hard to be an intelligent psychological thriller to be a fun popcorn adventure movie. It’s sort of lumbering no matter what it tries to be.
The acting can’t really be described as bad, because it’s not like the actors are given characters so much as facsimiles to begin with. They all play their part, and most of the time it’s watchable, albeit a bit predictable. During the films run time I gazed at their machinations with a sort of disengaged mood and found it to be enough. Not substantive or fulfilling, just enough. On a Sunday afternoon I wasn’t feeling too picky.
I can’t really say this film stank because after it was over I at least felt like something had happened – as opposed to that empty feeling you get when a film is really, truly awful – I just wasn’t sure what that something was and pretty certain I didn’t give a shit enough to find out.
In light of all this, I give you my conclusion: Angels & Demons doesn’t stink.
That’s the best I can say for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment