If Angels & Demons, the follow-up to 2006's The Da Vinci Code, has convinced me of anything it's that the Illuminati are idiots. Some enlightened ones they turned out to be. Did they learn nothing from the way expert symbologist and all around religion fiend Robert Langdon(Tom Hanks) ripped through that Priory mess? So what do they do? They decide to kidnap a bunch of Vatican cardinals, kill them while branding each with fairly obvious clues on their chests, then hold the coup de grace at a spot that can be found by following a bunch of statues which all seem to point literally in the direction to go. Don't they realize that the smartest way to not get caught by Langdon is just do their business at a random motel or something?
Angels lacks the controversy that Code perpetuated and molded into a huge worldwide box office. The story this time around is much simpler, less grandiose, and relatively straight forward. It starts with the theft of a vile containing anti-matter, the likes of which could cause the destruction of an entire city. Discovering that the anti-matter is going to be used to destroy Vatican City by a group calling itself the Illuminati, Langdon finds himself once again the #1 Draft Pick for stiff religious zealots to solve the case. Only this time things are a bit testier, as Langdon is basically an unwanted interloper. The Church does not want his help so much as need it.
Langdon is aided in his quest by head scientist, Vittoria Vetra(Ayelet Zurer). She and Langdon lack the chemistry and spark that he and Sophie Neveau cultivated in the first film. The relationship here is much clinical, with the exception of a few glances that perhaps last a moment too long. It feels like there's more to their partnership than the film has time to expound upon. Perhaps that's due to this film actually being a prequel in the novelization. The result is something that's neither friendship nor more than that, and it feels strangely off when they appear so close in the final act.
That seems to be the problem with the entire film, in fact. Nothing ever feels developed enough. Ewan McGregor plays Patrick McKenna, the Camerlengo who basically fills in for the recently deceased Pope. McKenna is young, seemingly altruistic, and charismatic. A stark contrast to the senior cardinals, or the Conclave, who are tasked with selecting their next leader. The always reliable Arnim Mueller-Stahl plays their head elector, a man with greater aspirations than perhaps he's allowed to let on.
I'd have been more impressed if it felt as if Langdon had a real enemy to deal with, or a real mystery to solve. Everything just feels like a distraction, or a momentary roadblock rather than a real threat. For instance, the Swiss Guard, who function as the Vatican police of some sort, are both incredibly helpful and hughe stumbling blocks depending on the needs of the moment. It's the Illuminati who are supposed to be the big bad boogeymen of this caper, and yet they feel like more of a plot device than anything else. With the exception of a couple throwaway comments from Langdon, we learn precious little about this legendary group. They aren't at all shadowy or mysterious. In fact they are a little boring.
Which is ultimately how I felt about everything. Although I do like this film better than Da Vinci, that's not exactly saying a whole lot. I appreciate that there is a greater emphasis on action, rather than tons of flashbacks that serve nothing other than to slow the pace. Angels beats pretty steadily from scene to scene, carried as always by the charismatic Hanks. His Langdon is a little testier, a bit sharper with the tongue, a bit harder edged. It's a natural evolution for the character considering what he went through previously. Gone are any doubts, replaced by a dogged determination and assuredness not seen in the previous film. I just wish he had a better mystery to solve. Perhaps they are saving that for the inevitable third film.
6/10
