Angels & Demons MPAA Rating: PG-13 Entertainment: +2 Content: -2

Tom Hanks, Ewan McGregor, Stellan Skarsgard, Ayelet Zurer, Armin Mueller-Stahl. Political/religious thriller. Written by David Koepp, Akiva Goldsman. Directed by Ron Howard.

FILM SYNOPSIS: Tom Hanks reprises his role as Robert Langdon, a symbologist (he deduces clues by reading ancient symbols), in this sequel to The Da Vinci Code. Yes, I said sequel, for although the book version was written before The Da Vinci Code, the screenplay is set after Langdon’s plodding investigation of a sect bent on hiding church secrets. This time out, he’s tracking down a centuries-old clandestine group determined to destroy the Roman Catholic Church. Or so he thinks.

Forming an uneasy alliance with the papal police, Langdon embarks upon a nonstop, action-packed hunt through sealed crypts, dangerous catacombs, and the 400-year-old Path of Illumination in order to decipher clues that will save four kidnapped Cardinals and locate a destructive mechanism able to destroy the Eternal City.

PREVIEW REVIEW: Tom Hanks is our bosom buddy, the Jimmy Stewart of this era, and Ron Howard is both Ritchie Cunningham and the new Frank Capra. From the days when Opie charmed us by skipping stones with his Mayberry Pa, to his adult profession as a dream-weaver who beguiles us with depictions such as those of Apollo astronauts lost in space, Mr. Howard has become a beloved icon. Indeed, both these men are adored in our culture, and therefore it seems nearly sacrilegious to take the names of Hanks or Howard in vain. But like most filmmakers who address religious-themed storylines, both Hanks and Howard feel safer with exposing the foibles of heads of church than exploring their nobilities. It makes for better cinematic drama. So, once again Hanks and Howard have come acourtin’ Dan Brown, allowing for the possible ill-will caused by the highly successful author’s past Christian bashing. But if you are wondering if all those anti-A&D articles that upon reflection seem more self-promoting than enlightening, were accurate assessments of the film’s intent, the answer is no. There are other problems with this film, but heresy is not one of them.

Angels & Demons is a mix of fast-paced, action-pumped, nonsensical deeds of derring-do, blended with a tug-of-war theme between science and religion. But is it an attack on the Christian faith? Again, I say no.

Yes, it ponders the question of scientific supremacy, but never does it belittle religion – only those who corrupt it. And when asked by a priest if he has any belief in God, the Hanks’ character professes that he hasn’t been given such a gift. That’s as close as he’ll come to admitting the existence of a Divine planner. But at no point does he refute the existence of God. There’s even a statement at the end of the film declaring that the world needs both science and faith. The statement is meant to satisfy those who believe science created God, and those of us who believe it to be the other way around.

Though one must do that whole suspension-of-disbelief thing (to give examples of the film’s silly situations and illogical premises would divulge plot points), if you are able to leave all reasoning at the box office, and if you are forgiving of Dan Brown’s Da Vinci conspiratorial suggestions, then you’ll be able to enjoy its armchair-grabbing thrills, be mesmerized by its gilded Renaissance glow, amazed by a meticulous production design, and subdued by the auteur’s visceral directorial style.

There is one other aspect to consider, however. Overshadowed by the Da Vince debate and ignored by those who equate action adventure with blood and gore, Angels & Demons is excessive in its violent shock treatment. The film does contain several disturbing images, including torture, in-your-face shootings and blood-splattering executions – not to mention one guy setting himself on fire and burning up before our eyes.

Today’s audiences have been numbed into submission, but the deleterious effects of violence in movies has been discussed to death. My violence warning may therefore be met with apathy. So far, no one I’ve discussed the early screening of the movie with has brought up its violence. But I’ll press my luck, here. In a time when such atrocities are reported on nightly news broadcasts, we still seem to absorb the portrayal of human degradation in the name of entertainment. And there seems to be no line the Hollywood community will cross that filmgoers won’t cross with them.

DVD Alternative: The Shoes of the Fisherman.

Preview Reviewer: Phil Boatwright
Distributor: Columbia Pictures