Movie Reviews: "Angels & Demons" - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

JamesG · 05-15-2009, 04:05 PM

Movie Reviews: Angels & Demons
15 May 2009 2:41 AM, PDT

Clearly there are far more demons than angels among the ranks of critics reviewing Ron Howard's Angels & Demons, the sequel to his The Da Vinci Code (which most of them also condemned).

Claudia Puig in USA Today comments that the dialogue in the movie "reeks of cliché."

Michael Sragow in the Baltimore Sun describes it as "glib and hollow."

And John Anderson in the Washington Post says that the whole plot "is such a slab of cheese it ought to come with a box of crackers."

Damning it with faint praise, A.O. Scott in the New York Times writes, "This movie, without being particularly good, is nonetheless far less hysterical than Da Vinci. ... Mr. Howard's direction combines the visual charm of mass-produced postcards with the mental stimulation of an easy Monday crossword puzzle. It could be worse."

Similarly Liam Lacey says in the Toronto Globe & Mail: "Angels & Demons is no less preposterous than The Da Vinci Code, but it's a serviceable summer action movie."

But Tom Maurstad remarks in the Dallas Morning News: "Saying that Angels & Demons is a lot better than its predecessor, The Da Vinci Code, is like saying that this swine flu outbreak isn't nearly as bad as the last. It is better, but that still doesn't necessarily make it good."

And Wesley Morris comments in the Boston Globe: "Asking whether the new movie is better than the first is natural if moot. Would you prefer to drown in a swimming pool or an ocean?"

On the other hand Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times awards the film three stars and remarks that the movie unspools "at breakneck speed, with little subtlety, but with fabulous production values."

And Kyle Smith concludes in the New York Post: "Angels & Demons has some exciting sequences, a spectacular ending with a terrific twist and a grounding in the debate about science versus religion that could hardly be more timely. It's got enough going on to sustain five blockbuster thrillers. That is its blessing and its curse."

-IMDB News

isiahthomas · 05-15-2009, 04:10 PM

Tom Hanks has done lots of boring movies after the 80's hahahahahahaha. I didn't like Da Vinci Code he did with Ron Howard that looks just like this new flick. It was very boring.

JamesG · 05-16-2009, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isiahthomas

Tom Hanks has done lots of boring movies after the 80's hahahahahahaha. I didn't like Da Vinci Code he did with Ron Howard that looks just like this new flick. It was very boring.

To me, this series is the National Treasure of religion.

I thought Da Vinci Code was alright; I found the book to be way better.

I'm interested in seeing Angels & Demons but not as interested as I was for Da Vinci Code.

05-15-2009, 04:05 PM	#1
JamesG Freakshow Moderator Forum Icon Join Date: Feb 01, 2008 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 57,136	Movie Reviews: "Angels & Demons" Movie Reviews: Angels & Demons 15 May 2009 2:41 AM, PDT Clearly there are far more demons than angels among the ranks of critics reviewing Ron Howard's Angels & Demons, the sequel to his The Da Vinci Code (which most of them also condemned). Claudia Puig in USA Today comments that the dialogue in the movie "reeks of cliché." Michael Sragow in the Baltimore Sun describes it as "glib and hollow." And John Anderson in the Washington Post says that the whole plot "is such a slab of cheese it ought to come with a box of crackers." Damning it with faint praise, A.O. Scott in the New York Times writes, "This movie, without being particularly good, is nonetheless far less hysterical than Da Vinci. ... Mr. Howard's direction combines the visual charm of mass-produced postcards with the mental stimulation of an easy Monday crossword puzzle. It could be worse." Similarly Liam Lacey says in the Toronto Globe & Mail: "Angels & Demons is no less preposterous than The Da Vinci Code, but it's a serviceable summer action movie." But Tom Maurstad remarks in the Dallas Morning News: "Saying that Angels & Demons is a lot better than its predecessor, The Da Vinci Code, is like saying that this swine flu outbreak isn't nearly as bad as the last. It is better, but that still doesn't necessarily make it good." And Wesley Morris comments in the Boston Globe: "Asking whether the new movie is better than the first is natural if moot. Would you prefer to drown in a swimming pool or an ocean?" On the other hand Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times awards the film three stars and remarks that the movie unspools "at breakneck speed, with little subtlety, but with fabulous production values." And Kyle Smith concludes in the New York Post: "Angels & Demons has some exciting sequences, a spectacular ending with a terrific twist and a grounding in the debate about science versus religion that could hardly be more timely. It's got enough going on to sustain five blockbuster thrillers. That is its blessing and its curse." -IMDB News

05-15-2009, 04:10 PM	#2
isiahthomas Member Forum Fanatic Join Date: Aug 20, 2002 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 10,704	Tom Hanks has done lots of boring movies after the 80's hahahahahahaha. I didn't like Da Vinci Code he did with Ron Howard that looks just like this new flick. It was very boring.