.
Full-size cathedral version (1,200 words)
“What a relief, the symbologist is here!”
- Stellan Skarsgård's Commander Richter
Even as the plenitude of corporate logos are appearing at the very beginning of this film, the music – by Hans Zimmer – is telling us that this is going to be a huge, important, MASSIVE experience! Then we hear the male-voice choirs - à la Miklós Rózsa’s Ben-Hur (1959) and King of Kings (1961) – and we realise we are being told that this isn’t just an epic … it’s a Biblical epic!!
But no, no dimple-chinned Americans in togas and sandals here. As anyone who’s slid effortless through Dan Brown’s book will know, it addresses the Religion versus Science dilemma in a very modern setting (and, as such, should really be called Angels and Antimatter, I suppose). Director, Ron Howard addresses this binary opposition early-on, very succinctly, through a simple lap-dissolve from a communion wafer to the entrance of CERN, connecting and contrasting them in a simple, elegant stroke that shows just what a skilled, mature film-maker little Ritchie Cunningham has evolved into.
Although CERN, Europe’s premier mad-professor-emporium, plays a far greater role in the book than in this film, the immense amount of publicity that was generated earlier this year by the Large Hadron Collider’s brief cough and splutter of life was, if you’ll pardon the pun, a God-send for this film. For that matter, Pope John Paul’s shuffling off this mortal coil so recently will have reminded a whole new generation of the process of replacing Popes. It’s fair to say this film has found its moment.
Story-wise, it’s a race against time as the apotheosis of Science – the creation of Antimatter – threatens to destroy the capitol city of the Catholic Religion on the day that its Cardinals are voting for a new Pope. Hanks’ Langdon is brought in for … well, no clearly discernible reason … but proves invaluable since he’s seemingly the only person in Rome who understands the place and, fortunately, is completely indestructible, as his escape from many implausible certain deaths clearly attests.
One has to give credit to Howard and his crew for the visual exuberance of this film, a lot of work has been put to good purpose finding and fabricating stand-ins for the Vatican City locations (I don’t imagine the Catholic hierarchy will have welcomed them in with open arms after all-but declaring war on them over The Da Vinci Code – 2006). I can hardly think of a more picturesque locale for a film about running around and shouting.
The book is a really quite interesting alternative-travelogue, delving into the reasons that the Vatican City and the capital city around it evolved, drawing into play the personalities, beliefs and conspiracies of the Artisans and Architects (ooh, there’s another alternative title) who built it. The film ejects all but the barest bones of that and concentrates on the running and shouting.
Never-the-less, Hanks and Howard are old hands at this and bring a real lightness of touch and even a wry sense of humour to events. The former manages to make a hair’s-breadth escape from certain death in a library (yes, really) delightfully funny through his mime acting (it’s easy, these days, to forget that he spent the first ten-or-fifteen years of his career as a comedian); while the latter even finds time for a few moments of subtle commentary … such as the wonderfully humanising moment when all the cardinals are handing over their mobiles and cigarette packets before entering Conclave; or a close-up of a tea strainer being squeezed by the bad-guy, which deliberately reminds one of censers used by the bishops in their ceremonies; or the cutaway which shows the perfect, alabaster skin of a devotional statue whose pious, peaceful face melts away in a fire, to reveal the rough-hewn stone beneath. In all the decedent splendour of Rome, it is worth remembering that even the saints have feet of clay.
But all of this subtlety and nuance is undermined every time Hanks et al open their mouths. For the film’s first thirty minutes or so, they rarely speak save to tell each other things they already know, purely for the audience’s benefit, and the plethora of historical terms they employ are always followed by a word or twelve of explanation. Seriously, guys, I didn’t need twice telling that The Preferiti are the preferred candidates for Popedom. It’s kinda obvious.
Equally obvious is why they persuaded Ewan MacGregor to get off his motorbike and back onto a film-set to play the Camerlengo, the man who is caretaker of The Church in-between Popes (as they explained to us several times), because he radiates pious, wide-eyed innocence convincingly, even if his supposedly Irish accent was a tad cosmopolitan.
With the CERN scenes mostly missing, Langdon’s companion, Vittoria (Ayelet Zurer) serves no purpose at all, save that of, say, a Doctor Who companion; namely to be the sounding-board to whom the know-it-all protagonist patiently explains everything, so that we, the audience, can feel like we’re still in the loop.
And yet, ironically, there are so many things that are only partly explained. Where the book could develop tension and had the time to explain in great detail the intricacies of the conspiracies, here we have little time, so the explanations are incomplete, the leaps of logic Langdon makes are inexplicable and , with the cat-and-mouse game ranging all over Rome, the film lacks focus. Maybe they should have played a little faster and looser with the novel’s text, carefully filleted out some of the layers of conspiracy and concentrated all their attention on the Vatican itself. Maybe that would have made it a more successful, more satisfying adaptation.
So, all in all, I feel this film is more successful as a piece of cinema than The Da Vinci Code was, possibly because it lacks the weight of expectation and reverence that film bore; but, ultimately, Angels & Demons is a less satisfying yarn than the novel on which it is based.
Even as the plenitude of corporate logos are appearing at the very beginning of this film, the music – by Hans Zimmer – is telling us that this is going to be a huge, important, MASSIVE experience! Then we hear the male-voice choirs - à la Miklós Rózsa’s Ben-Hur (1959) and King of Kings (1961) – and we realise we are being told that this isn’t just an epic … it’s a Biblical epic!!
But no, no dimple-chinned Americans in togas and sandals here. As anyone who’s slid effortless through Dan Brown’s book will know, it addresses the Religion versus Science dilemma in a very modern setting (and, as such, should really be called Angels and Antimatter, I suppose). Director, Ron Howard addresses this binary opposition early-on, very succinctly, through a simple lap-dissolve from a communion wafer to the entrance of CERN, connecting and contrasting them in a simple, elegant stroke that shows just what a skilled, mature film-maker little Ritchie Cunningham has evolved into.
Although CERN, Europe’s premier mad-professor-emporium, plays a far greater role in the book than in this film, the immense amount of publicity that was generated earlier this year by the Large Hadron Collider’s brief cough and splutter of life was, if you’ll pardon the pun, a God-send for this film. For that matter, Pope John Paul’s shuffling off this mortal coil so recently will have reminded a whole new generation of the process of replacing Popes. It’s fair to say this film has found its moment.
Story-wise, it’s a race against time as the apotheosis of Science – the creation of Antimatter – threatens to destroy the capitol city of the Catholic Religion on the day that its Cardinals are voting for a new Pope. Hanks’ Langdon is brought in for … well, no clearly discernible reason … but proves invaluable since he’s seemingly the only person in Rome who understands the place and, fortunately, is completely indestructible, as his escape from many implausible certain deaths clearly attests.
One has to give credit to Howard and his crew for the visual exuberance of this film, a lot of work has been put to good purpose finding and fabricating stand-ins for the Vatican City locations (I don’t imagine the Catholic hierarchy will have welcomed them in with open arms after all-but declaring war on them over The Da Vinci Code – 2006). I can hardly think of a more picturesque locale for a film about running around and shouting.
The book is a really quite interesting alternative-travelogue, delving into the reasons that the Vatican City and the capital city around it evolved, drawing into play the personalities, beliefs and conspiracies of the Artisans and Architects (ooh, there’s another alternative title) who built it. The film ejects all but the barest bones of that and concentrates on the running and shouting.
Never-the-less, Hanks and Howard are old hands at this and bring a real lightness of touch and even a wry sense of humour to events. The former manages to make a hair’s-breadth escape from certain death in a library (yes, really) delightfully funny through his mime acting (it’s easy, these days, to forget that he spent the first ten-or-fifteen years of his career as a comedian); while the latter even finds time for a few moments of subtle commentary … such as the wonderfully humanising moment when all the cardinals are handing over their mobiles and cigarette packets before entering Conclave; or a close-up of a tea strainer being squeezed by the bad-guy, which deliberately reminds one of censers used by the bishops in their ceremonies; or the cutaway which shows the perfect, alabaster skin of a devotional statue whose pious, peaceful face melts away in a fire, to reveal the rough-hewn stone beneath. In all the decedent splendour of Rome, it is worth remembering that even the saints have feet of clay.
But all of this subtlety and nuance is undermined every time Hanks et al open their mouths. For the film’s first thirty minutes or so, they rarely speak save to tell each other things they already know, purely for the audience’s benefit, and the plethora of historical terms they employ are always followed by a word or twelve of explanation. Seriously, guys, I didn’t need twice telling that The Preferiti are the preferred candidates for Popedom. It’s kinda obvious.
Equally obvious is why they persuaded Ewan MacGregor to get off his motorbike and back onto a film-set to play the Camerlengo, the man who is caretaker of The Church in-between Popes (as they explained to us several times), because he radiates pious, wide-eyed innocence convincingly, even if his supposedly Irish accent was a tad cosmopolitan.
With the CERN scenes mostly missing, Langdon’s companion, Vittoria (Ayelet Zurer) serves no purpose at all, save that of, say, a Doctor Who companion; namely to be the sounding-board to whom the know-it-all protagonist patiently explains everything, so that we, the audience, can feel like we’re still in the loop.
And yet, ironically, there are so many things that are only partly explained. Where the book could develop tension and had the time to explain in great detail the intricacies of the conspiracies, here we have little time, so the explanations are incomplete, the leaps of logic Langdon makes are inexplicable and , with the cat-and-mouse game ranging all over Rome, the film lacks focus. Maybe they should have played a little faster and looser with the novel’s text, carefully filleted out some of the layers of conspiracy and concentrated all their attention on the Vatican itself. Maybe that would have made it a more successful, more satisfying adaptation.
So, all in all, I feel this film is more successful as a piece of cinema than The Da Vinci Code was, possibly because it lacks the weight of expectation and reverence that film bore; but, ultimately, Angels & Demons is a less satisfying yarn than the novel on which it is based.
You see, the script only works intermittently because it is written by one of the patchiest genre script-writers working in Hollywood today, David Koepp (The Shadow - 1994 - and Jurassic Park: The Lost World – 1997 - both excellent, Snake Eyes - 1998 - War of the Worlds - 2005 - both shockingly poor) teamed with Akiva Goldsman, a man who should have a restraining order keeping him at least one hundred yards away from any kind of word-processing equipment. He it was who inflicted the legendarily awful Batman Forever (1995) and Batman and Robin (1997) on us and he it is who bears sole responsibility for the atrocity that was (shudder) Lost In Space (1998). When it comes to the inevitable film version of The Lost Symbol, the new Dan Brown / Robert Langdon adventure, please, please, please leave these guys at home unravelling a ball of wool and get a Steven Zaillian or a Frank Darabont on board, y'know, someone who's proven they can adapt. Prosecution rests, m’lud.
Dir: Ron Howard
Dir: Ron Howard
Stars: Tom Hanks, Ewan McGregor, Stellan Skarsgård, Ayelet Zurer
Dur: 138 mins
Cert; 12A
More modest parish church version ( 500 words)
Anyone who’s slid effortless through Dan Brown’s book Angels & Demons, will know it addresses the Religion versus Science dilemma in a very modern setting (and, as such, should really be called Angels and Antimatter, I suppose).
Story-wise, it’s a race against time as the apotheosis of Science – the creation of Antimatter – threatens to destroy the capitol city of the Catholic Religion on the day that its Cardinals are voting for a new Pope. Hanks’ Langdon is brought in for … well, no clearly discernible reason … but proves invaluable since he’s seemingly the only person in Rome who understands the place.
One has to give credit to Howard and his crew for the visual exuberance of this film, a lot of work has been put to good purpose finding and fabricating stand-ins for the Vatican City locations. I can hardly think of a more picturesque locale for a film about running around and shouting.
Hanks and Howard are old hands at this and bring a real lightness of touch and even a wry sense of humour to events. For example, they make a hair’s-breadth escape from certain death in a library (yes, really) delightfully funny through Hanks’ mime acting (it’s easy, these days, to forget that he spent the first ten-or-fifteen years of his career as a comedian).
The problems arise every time Hanks et al open their mouths. They rarely speak save to tell each other things they already know, purely for the audience’s benefit, and the plethora of historical terms they employ are always followed by a word or twelve of explanation. Seriously, guys, I didn’t need twice telling that The Preferiti are the preferred candidates for Popedom. It’s kinda obvious.
Ironically, there are so many things that are only partly explained. Where the book could develop tension and had the time to explain in great detail the intricacies of the conspiracies, here we have little time, so the explanations are incomplete, the leaps of logic Langdon makes are inexplicable and , with the cat-and-mouse game ranging all over Rome, the film lacks focus.
You see, the script only works intermittently because it is written by one of the patchiest genre script-writers working in Hollywood today, David Koepp (Jurassic Park: The Lost World – 1997 - excellent, War of the Worlds - 2005 - shockingly poor) teamed with Akiva Goldsman, a man who should have a restraining order keeping him at least one hundred yards away from any kind of word-processing equipment. He it was who inflicted the legendarily awful Batman Forever (1995) and Batman and Robin (1997) on us and he it is who bears sole responsibility for the atrocity that was (shudder) Lost In Space (1998). When it comes to the inevitable film version of The Lost Symbol, the new Dan Brown / Robert Langdon adventure, please, please, please leave these guys at home unravelling a ball of wool and get a Steven Zaillian or a Frank Darabont on board, y'know, someone who's proven they can adapt. Prosecution rests, m’lud.
I've got a ball of wool that really needs to be unravelled and I can't be bothered to do it, going to have to give David Koepp and Akiva Goldsman a call.
ReplyDelete