The injection of pace and energy makes it much better than the first film even if it is only "reasonably good"

Rating: Null/10 (26 July 2009)

The Pope has died and the four favourites to replace him have been kidnapped by someone who threatens to kill them one by one. Meanwhile a canister of anti-matter (the "God particle") has been stolen from the CERN project – a canister that is not only highly destructive if used incorrectly but also will becoming increasingly unstable and eventually cause great destruction at midnight. Those behind these crimes claim to be the Illuminati, the organisation of science that was thought to have long since been destroyed. The nature of the mystery and the pressure of time causes the Vatican to turn to measures they would not have considered in any other situation – bringing in Professor Robert Langdon to lead the race against time.
The sequel to the Da Vinci Code was not something that particularly appealed to me given that I struggled to care or even stay awake through that first film. Angels & Demons though manages to address some of the key problems with the first film – although it cannot address them all because of the source material. What I mean is that it cannot make the plot into something that seems less silly than normal and the storyline does feel a little daft at times. What helps both the film and the plot is the biggest and best improvement that the makers have made – the pace. Where the first film was full of seriousness and worthy to the point of tedium, this film has energy and pace to it that makes the whole thing seem a lot more interesting than it is.
We race from clue to clue, we have action sequences and so on and the speed to it helps cover up the weaknesses in the plot, with talking minimised to what is required to have the next running sequence. This is a bit weaker than one would have hoped though, because it does give the film a very episodic feel at times – with a talky bit, then speeding cars and action, then a bit more talking and then more running. Despite this though, it does work pretty well as long it is doesn't hang around too long between action parts and doesn't spend too long on serious religious imagery. When it does do this it flags surprisingly quickly and does start to feel a little heavy but Howard wisely keeps this from happening too often, making it more accessible and with the air of a more enjoyable film.
The cast work with this well enough. Hanks spends more of this film doing a traditional "action hero" type role with lots of shouting and less theorising – perhaps to the annoyance of some but it is what the film calls for. McGregor is so-so here, his accent is odd and his character clear but he is another star in the film so taken as such by me. Zurer fills the Tatu role with not a lot to do or offer beyond her easy looks. Skarsgård, Mueller-Stahl and others give their usual performances to good stead but this is never an actors film so much as that of Howard. As director he doesn't exhilarate but he is a professional man with a lot of resources so he makes the film look good and uses the camera well to provide pace – hardly Bourne stuff but still good.
Angels & Demons is an OK film, which may not sound like praise but it does represent a real improvement on the dreadfully dull first film. It has the same core problems but the pace covers a lot of other sins and makes the film feel more engaging and exciting than it probably should have done. I'm not sure I want a third film in this mould but this sequel at least manages to raise itself to be "reasonably good", for which it (sadly) deserves mention.