Angels and Demons

Having read the book years ago, I was thrilled to see the trailer for the new film. Tonight I made my way over to the cinema and settled in an aisle seat to fully appreciate the whole film (aisle seat neccesary for comfort and therefore concentration). The film began. The film ended. A disappointment to say the least. I expected much more from a film based on such a brilliant novel. The foundations were there, but what went wrong with the main build?

For a start, there is no way this film should be rated a 12. If men being branded and burning alive isn't enough to up the rating, what is? Well thats obvious to those who have read the book. In the novel the two central characters develop a 'more than just friends' kind of relationship which was notably absent from the big screen. Had just one sexual scene made it in the final edit, the film would have been allocated it's more suitable rating of 15. The second point to note with regard to the rating is this: apart from the twisted violence and squemish moments (e.g. a Cardinal having his eye chewed by a rat) what 12 year old could possibly even begin to grasp the conspriacy theories, understand what the Illuminati is or know the significance of the Vatican City, or even where it is? It's a clever novel, but the film just seems like a dumbed down counterpart.

Much of the film consists of either a) cars and sirens and screeching brakes or b) Tom Hanks mm-ing and aah-ing over numerous statues around Rome. I know the stautes are the basis of the paper trail, but the whole film seemed to be lacking a certain depth which I think would have been overcome had it gotten more personal. There's no reason to care for Robert Langdon or the woman scientist, what was her name? Vittoria?

Although the quality of acting cannot be disputed and some of the special effects are pretty good, Angels and Demons on the big screen is not a patch on the book. It was, is, a fantastic novel, and I fear that's where it's journey should have ended.