Metascore
48

Mixed or average reviews - based on 36 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 36
  2. Negative: 3 out of 36
  1. 75
    This kind of film requires us to be very forgiving, and if we are, it promises to entertain. Angels & Demons succeeds.
  2. Reviewed by: Deborah Young
    70
    Plucking the same violent, occult strings as "Da Vinci" while avoiding its leadenness, Angels keeps the action coming for the best part of 139 minutes.
  3. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    70
    As transparent as this device is, Angels has elemental satisfactions in its blend of movie genre that could appeal to wide segments of the audience.
  4. The movie includes some tony philosophizing about the conflict between science and faith, but it's mostly a beat-the-clock chase through Rome (nicely evoked in Salvatore Totino's lush cinematography).
  5. The new movie is an opulent-bordering-on-hysterical mass of chitchat and chase scenes.
  6. An OK action film, but only the humorless will find it heretical – or educational.
  7. 63
    The movie can be enjoyed for the hell-raising hooey it is.
  8. 63
    It's got enough going on to sustain five blockbuster thrillers. That is its blessing and its curse.
  9. A far sight nimbler than its plodding predecessor, where the Holy Grail turns out to be a Holy Girl. The sequel is a little like CSI: Vatican City.
  10. Reviewed by: Patrick Parker
    63
    There are so many facts presented that many of them feel forced and trivial. We were also a little disappointed with the twist ending.
  11. Despite the overlong running time, the action moves smoothly and swiftly.
  12. Reviewed by: Ella Taylor
    60
    Angels & Demons is still no more than another treat for whacked-out male conspiracy theorists.
  13. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    60
    Less turgid and aggravating than its predecessor, this cleverly produced melodrama remains hamstrung by novelist's Dan Brown's laborious connect-the-dots plotting and the filmmakers' prosaic literal-mindedness in the face of ripe historical antagonisms, mystery and intrigue.
  14. 50
    Technically a prequel to "Da Vinci" but could also pass for a two-hour episode of "24," rarely stands still long enough for anyone to deliver a monologue.
  15. Reviewed by: Amy Binacolli
    50
    Preposterous.
  16. Reviewed by: Cammila Albertson
    50
    Whatever Howard's reasons for keeping things so stale, it was a bad choice, but lucky for viewers, some stories are just too crazy for even the dullest storytelling to completely ruin the fun.
  17. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    50
    Angels doesn't know when to quit: Just when you think it's over, it continues.
  18. 50
    Watching what Howard has done with the book - covering up the lewdness, blunting the snobbery, and spackling the amazing plot holes - is dismaying. This adaptation has the stink of superiority about it.
  19. Though complete redemption of Brown's fiction may not be possible, Howard's new film at least represents an upgrade from a mortal to a venal movie sin.
  20. 50
    Unlike Nicolas Cage in "National Treasure," Hanks lacks the game for it. The surface seriousness of these Dan Brown movies obstructs his affability and easy, attentive way with romance.
  21. Reviewed by: Scott Mendelson
    50
    One of the more cheerfully dumb thrillers I've seen in a good long while.
  22. 50
    Perhaps this is what fans want from a movie like this: to sit back as if in a Jacuzzi and get a quick impression of history and Rome and such. If so, Howard, Brown and company likely have another monster hit on their hands.
  23. Reviewed by: Betsy Sharkey
    50
    Ultimately everything wilts under the weight of the complicated story lines of its many saints and sinners.
  24. 50
    This movie, without being particularly good, is nonetheless far less hysterical than "Da Vinci."
  25. 50
    At half the length, and with half of Hanks' sneering pretension, this would make a pretty terrific action film.
  26. Reviewed by: Bob Mondello
    40
    Presumably in response to criticism that "The Da Vinci Code" was static and talky, director Ron Howard has made Angels & Demons frantic -- and, well, talky.
  27. Reviewed by: Kim Newman
    40
    More entertaining than "The Da Vinci Code," but still tosh.
  28. The only thrill here comes from the adrenaline kick of the chase. Alas, it's an empty, Pavlovian kick at best.
  29. 40
    Might have been classy, entertaining junk -- if only it were entertaining.
  30. A shapely, stylish, white-knuckle horror-thriller that hits its marks with blood and thunder. It stinks to heaven, too, but it isn't lame. The streets of Rome haven't run this red since the Inquisition.
  31. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    40
    In its last 20 minutes, Angels does attain the status of good bad movie, with a transcendently absurd climax that's great fun to rehash later over burgers.
  32. Angels & Demons is a serious slog. Still, it's an odd kind of a slog that manages to keep you partially engaged, even at its most esoteric or absurd.
  33. Reviewed by: John Anderson
    40
    What the movie is supposed to accomplish -- laying out a fairly complex mystery in a way that creates suspense -- is precisely what it doesn't do.
  34. Astonishingly, Angels & Demons IS the same sort of lumbering mediocrity.
  35. 38
    Of course, the problem with Angels & Demons is that to get to the final 40 minutes, it's necessary to endure the first 90, and that would be defined as cruel and unusual punishment.
  36. 30
    Brown and now Ron Howard have added an incendiary element to trash--open hostility toward the Catholic Church.
User Score
6.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 210 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 54 out of 97
  2. Negative: 30 out of 97
  1. Nov 23, 2011
    10
    Great movie, very entertaining with a thrilling story. Again same as Part 1 the "Da Vinci Code" pretty much setup story but...who cares. TheseGreat movie, very entertaining with a thrilling story. Again same as Part 1 the "Da Vinci Code" pretty much setup story but...who cares. These are the movies you go to the cinema for.... I love such mystical thrillers of which you unfortunately nowadays can only find so few.....Watch it! Full Review »
  2. Feb 4, 2014
    0
    This is the only film I have ever walked out of. Sat there confused by what the hell was going on we struggled to keep up with it and had toThis is the only film I have ever walked out of. Sat there confused by what the hell was going on we struggled to keep up with it and had to keep turning to each other to ask why and what had just happened. We walked out just as a helicopter exploded. It was the final straw in a ridiculous and hideous film. Full Review »
  3. Nov 16, 2013
    2
    Angels & Demons is pure hell to watch.
    A very poor adaption of a good book. The plot holes are painfully prevalent, and Tom Hanks can't save
    Angels & Demons is pure hell to watch.
    A very poor adaption of a good book. The plot holes are painfully prevalent, and Tom Hanks can't save the terrible script he is handed. The movie has artificial suspense leaving viewers without a care for whats going on. By the ending you will have no idea why or how any of the prior events happened, and for that reason the film fails.
    Full Review »