Angels & Demons - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Angels & Demons Reviews

Page 1 of 1767
½ January 17, 2017
This is being unfairly maligned by critics. This is at once more thrilling and more involving than The Da Vinci Code was, and Ron Howard's direction is more surefooted and fast-paced here. Visually gorgeous. By streamlining the novel's narrative, the film loses much (but not all) of the science vs. faith dichotomy that gave the book its weight. As it is, the film version ofAngels and Demons makes for a very entertaining thriller.

Some of the dialogue is poor, you have to suspend disbelief the way you would for a James Bond or Indiana Jones movie, and keep in mind that this is historical fiction (emphasis on fiction). If you can do that, this is a blast. Ewan McGregor rocks. Be warned, it is violent and intense, and pushes that PG-13 boundary. My grade: B+
½ January 3, 2017
It's good movie to watch
January 1, 2017
Tom Hanks vai ajudar a desvendar a morte do Papa, porém no fundo foi tudo armado pelo Carmelengo para tomar o poder e assumir a posição do papa!
½ December 18, 2016
Really loved this film - not sure why the ratings are so bad, only reason could be the fact some feel this movie puts the Catholics and the Vatican in a bad light... Everything was fantastic!
Super Reviewer
December 16, 2016
A very good prequel not as hard to understand and follow than The Da Vinci Code and it's a little bit better aswell, After a slow start I didn't think it was going to be as good as it was, A must watch for lovers of The Da Vinci Code.
December 15, 2016
No one actually enjoy these movies, right?
November 21, 2016
really good movie. love the series.
November 15, 2016
This is the best of the Dan Brown films. And it's still bad. Heavy-handed sacrificial love themes, lame twists, church cover-up motifs, lazy CGI, under-written characters, and little-to-no actual filmic flourish. At least the helicopter explosion is kinda cool.
November 12, 2016
it was ok not the best
November 11, 2016
Angels and Demons is the second Dan Brown movie adaptation by Ron Howard, even though in terms of the novels Da Vinci Code came second. But, since Da Vinci Code was more well-known they decided to adapt that first. In this case it doesn't matter since both stories are standalone entities starring the same character. Like Da Vinci Code, this film was panned by critics and most audiences. I personally thought the Da Vinci Code was alright, saved by its beautiful visuals and great casting. Angels and Demons I actually like a bit more.
Da Vinci Code was just Tom Hanks running from the police trying to find an ancient artifact. Seen it. The first half I found rather lackluster. Angels and Demons however, starts off strong and keeps going. There more going on and the stakes are higher, thus the tension is raised.
Like with Da Vinci Code I have not read the source material so I won't make any comparisons there. In this film an unknown assailant steals a bomb from a top secret facility and plans to blow-up the entire Vatican with said bomb. However, this is no ordinary bomb. The film goes into Sci-Fi territory by making the device an anti-matter bomb.
I don't know if that was in the book or if that's a movie only addition. I honestly don't know why they added this plot element. The anti-matter aspect does not influence the plot in any way. They could have just used a nuclear explosive and the film would be no different.
As with Da Vinci Code, the movie looks gorgeous, as is the music. Tom Hanks returns and is once again on-point. Ian McKellen does not return, but here we have Ewan McGregor as a priest. He does an excellent job as well. I find Ewan McGregor to be a fairly underrated actor.
Overall, Angels and Demons, while not a great film, is still a fun mystery/thriller. I think this is better than Da Vinci Code, and I liked that film okay. The mystery I felt was more engaging as were the puzzles Tom Hanks had to solve to find the answers. Plus, the tension is higher with the threat of the Vatican getting blown off the map.
½ October 29, 2016
thrilling until the over the top self immolation ending, but definitely better than the previous installment & a better storyline & action sequence.
½ October 28, 2016
2eme film de la tetralogie de Dan Brown. Je l'ai trouve moins interessant que le 1er. La poursuite au meurtrier ne m'a guere interesse, les evenements se deroulent les uns apres les autres sans aucune conviction
Super Reviewer
½ October 26, 2016
It is very rare that a film gets a sequel that is completely detached from its original premise and improves on it. While these films will never be Oscar winners, there is a certain charm to them that I admire. Angels & Demons marked the second novel to film adaption from this book series, and this one is a much more fleshed out story. While there is nothing all that remarkable about either film, a mystery needs to keep you interested and entertained throughout its entire duration. While I do have quite a few of the same complaints that I had the first time around, this is without a doubt the superior film. Here is why Angels & Demons works much better and still holds up to this day, in my opinion.

In the first film, the plot relied on the fact that everyone who is religious will love the clever puzzles. While Angels & Demons definitely dives further into the Catholic religion, directly placing the death of a pope at the centre of the story, it does expand its horizons a bit, making itself a little more accessible to average viewers. Following Robert Langdon once again, he tries to solve the murder of the pope, which also sets him on a plot to find an explosive device that may just incinerate all of Vatican City, Rome. While the plot does escalate fairly quickly and it does require audiences to be paying full attention, this is a much more exciting puzzle, through and through. That being said, as mentioned above, it does share many of the issues that the first one admittedly has.

Once again, this film dives far too deep into the Catholic religion, making it hard for non-believers to have a good time at the movies. Normally, films like this have a nice balance between its religious aspects and its open mindedness. Sadly, this film, like the first, goes all out in terms of trying to impress its Catholic audience; However, compared to the first, it is not quite as manipulative. Instead of beating you over the head with it, it uses bible elements and shares them with character actions throughout this picture, masking the fact that it truly is for a specific audience. This was a much better tactic than I believe the first one slightly failed on.

While The DaVinci Code was known for its puzzles and slow-pacing, this film focusses more on setting up plot twists and keeping its audience entertained. There are far more action sequences here and the puzzles lead to life or death situations. This provided many more stakes, which the first one kind of failed to do as well. Still, the biggest selling point of these films is the fact that Tom Hanks is the leading man. His charm and charisma that he brings to this character is unparalleled. I truly believe that these films would become pretty boring without the presence of a star like Tom Hanks. Does this film hold up as a whole after seven years?

Over the years, films begin to wear off when it comes to sequels. People tend to remember the original, due to the fact that is spawned lacklustre sequels. In my opinion, when I look back on this series of films, I will definitely be remembering Angels & Demons over The DaVinci Code. It provides more puzzles, more stakes, and a climax that is enthralling to say the least. There are moments that I do call manipulative and the direction of this film (like the first) feels a little too kinetic at times, which is Ron Howard's style, but it is odd for these films. There are plot holes galore and I know I have not read these books, but I feel that they would be more fleshed out that these films. In the end, Angels & Demons is a pretty fun and engaging ride, albeit very messy.
October 26, 2016
No DaVinci Code but still worth a look.
October 26, 2016
Surprisingly engaging thanks to Tom Hanks and Ayelet Zurer. The plot constantly changes and the conclusion is not as great as it could've been.
½ October 23, 2016
I think I preferred the Da Vinci Code as a film, the cast was just as good again and Tom Hanks continues to play the role well, however slightly predictable - although some of the mystery and puzzles were pretty clever
½ October 16, 2016
This film was so fucking boring.
½ October 14, 2016
The Da Vinci Code waz better..
But this was good too..
October 11, 2016
"Angels & Demons" la continuación de "The Da Vinci Code", es un trabajo supremamente mediocre, si se compara con la magistral "Frost/Nixon" del director Ron Howard, pero si se ve como lo que es (algo así como un largo capítulo de "The X-Files"), puede alcanzar a disfrutarse. Lo que no se entiende es como Robert Langdon, el personaje encarnado por Tom Hanks y protagonista de las novelas de Dan Brown, siendo un distinguido "Simbologista" (no semiólogo), se demora tanto en llegar a una conclusión que inclusive una ama de casa católica y aficionada a las novelas de misterio lograría resolver en 5 minutos. Ese es el principal problema tanto de las obras de Dan Brown como de sus adaptaciones.
October 7, 2016
For a movie that advertises itself as a film about the Illuminati, it sure doesn't explore the Illuminati legacy. Also, I don't really get the title. Is it a play on the whole argument of religion vs. science and whether or not they both can co-exist? I'm not too sure, but what this film really is, is a not-so-exciting easter egg hunt through Rome with Tom Hanks and some random scientist lady. Seriously, I know nothing about her. Not her name, her relevance to the story, to even her accent. I think it's Italian? The movie does take place in Rome after all. I also hate when sequels/prequels totally forget their own character's traits. In The Da Vinci Code, Professor Langdon is claustrophobic and does believe in God and Jesus Christ. In Angels and Demons, he walks through narrow corridors and caves and catacombs no problem. In the first film, he was afraid to go into an elevator! Also, there is a scene where Ewan McGregor asks Tom Hanks if he believes in god to which he replies, "I'm an academic" ... Guys, if you are going to give certain characters certain characteristics, have them keep them from sequel to sequel. So as you can probably tell, I wasn't that big of a fan of this movie. What I did enjoy was Ewan McGregor's performance. He does have some great moments to shine and some great speeches. This film also had a major plot twist that I couldn't see coming at all. Other than that, this film didn't give me what I was hoping for. I wasn't hoping for an extremely realistic adventure or an oscar acted film, I was just hoping for some cool clever detective work from Tom Hanks and I didn't really get that. Unfortunately, I would have to recommend that you pass on this one.
Page 1 of 1767