Better than Da Vinci, but still not great

Rating: 5/10 (15 October 2013)

Is anyone else increasingly tired of Ewan McGregor's trite mannerisms and being stuck with his own brand of non-acting in film after film? Unfortunately, he's a major presence in ANGELS & DEMONS, Ron Howard's follow-up to his DA VINCI CODE. Tom Hanks returns as Professor Robert Langdon, and this is based on another Dan Brown novel.
The good news is that it's better than the awful DA VINCI CODE, but then it couldn't exactly be worse. ANGELS & DEMONS has pace in the first hour and style in places, and some interesting snippets of historical information thrown into the mix, although it's still saddled with the same problems as its predecessor; namely, that the clever-clever plot which tries to be so intricate all the way through actually turns out to be incredibly simplistic and naive come the end. It's also incredibly overlong, and dull in places.
It's admirably vicious for a family film, with all manner of nasty deaths that in some ways recall the SAW franchise, a clear inspiration here. Tom Hanks is also better, more relaxed and at the same time more believable in his role. However, the shonky script wastes the talents of the likes of Stellan Skarsgard and the other cast members like Armin Mueller-Stahl, and it gets increasingly ludicrous as it goes on, reaching a nadir with the ridiculously cheesy effects of the helicopter finale. As a result, I can't really say I'm looking forward to the next in the series...