User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 209 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 44 out of 209

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jul 29, 2014
    Though much better than the very similar "Da Vinci Code", "Angels & Demons" is nothing more than a conspiracy-theory-style flick, entertaining to watch but empty of sense and depth. Its premise is undeniably intriguing, some plot twists thrilling, Tom Hanks looks enjoyable, but overall this movie is much less than it promises to be. Merely a good film to pass the time.
  2. Jun 15, 2014
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Angels and Demons: 3 out of 10: Clearly something bad has happened to Ron Howard. I don't know what exactly, but something has gone very wrong.

    Howard has always been a decent workman director. While he will never be mistaken for an artistic savant both Cinderella Man and Apollo 13 were excellent films, Parenthood was pretty good and even Angels and Demons prequel/sequel The Da Vinci Code was a fun romp. In addition none of his films have been downright awful. (Note I have seen neither How the Grinch Stole Christmas nor his newest film Heidi Montag Says No to Plastic.) Whats more Howard managed to hold this quality is such devise genres as star driven Oscar bait (A Beautiful Mind), star driven costume drama (Far and Away), star driven revenge fantasy (Ransom) and comedies about prostitution and mermaids (Night Shift, Splash).

    Angels and Demons is at its center a poorly directed and shot film. Scenes are too dark, camera angles are all wrong, the actors block each others shots and the whole affair is often out of focus. This makes the telling of an already confusing story even more muddled.

    Dan Brown gets picked on a lot but I found The Da Vinci Code a fun readable romp (so sue me). The movie version of the Da Vinci code kept the same where are they going to next vibe of the book and added an attractive cast and attractive location shooting.

    Angels and Demons however takes place in the claustrophobic confines of Vatican City and since Howard wasn't allowed to film in many of the real locations we end up with a lot of running around a CGI back lot. The entire film is as if Rick Steves did a Vatican City special and instead of actually visiting the Holy City and pointing his camera, Rick had to use Lego bricks and a second hand art book with all the **** erased.

    While the Da Vinci code had what I still think is an intriguing central mystery (again sue me), Demons and Angels story consists of a plot by the Illuminati (roll eyes now) to destroy the Vatican. Their idea was to take positions in schools for the deaf around the world and raping every student in the ass repeatedly. Oops my bad; apparently the Vatican doesn't need any help on that one.

    Anyway their plan is to infiltrate Europe's Large Hadron Collider, kill the head priest, and steal three vials of Anti-matter. This begs more than a few questions. Can the Hadron Collider create anti-matter? Can you capture the anti-matter once created? Why is the EU collecting it? (Perhaps they fear a Godzilla attack?). Why is the head of Anti-matter gathering a Vatican priest? Now once they get the anti-matter they are going to use its incredible destructive power to take over the world… no just kidding; unfortunately the Illuminati haven't quite grasped that Pinky and the Brain level of sophistication just yet. Instead the current pope has just died and it's conclave time. The top seeded cardinals for the final four pope tournament are all kidnapped and the Illuminati are killing them one by one Seven style. They being good sports however are leaving clues at every murder like some Latin themed Riddler. Oh and the last kidnapped Cardinal has the anti-matter and if he isn't found in time Rick Steves will have to go straight to Venice next year to see decent frescoes. If only there was some Latin themed Batman to save the day…? Okay the story is truly awful and it is poorly told, but maybe this is one of those films saved by great performances. A true character study… (Okay you know where this is going). Tom Hanks gives an incredibly wooden performance and simply looks awful (he is also to old to play the character by about twenty years. ) his love interest Israeli actress Ayelet Zurer has zero chemistry with either Hanks or the screen. Ewan Macgregor plays the Pope's personal assistant/cabana boy as an Irish man who looks like he is about to break into a musical number at any moment providing no one steals his Lucky Charms.

    On the plus side Stellan Skarsgård puts in a fine turn as head of Vatican Security and as far as we know no deaf children were raped during the making of this film which puts it ahead of its Vatican critics in at least one area.
  3. Feb 4, 2014
    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 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.
  4. Dec 29, 2013
    The movie Angels & Demons pales in comparison to its novel but is nonetheless thrilling, exciting and more compelling than its film predecessor. 7.6/10
  5. Nov 16, 2013
    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.
  6. Nov 4, 2013
    "Angels & Demons" is the sequel to "The Da Vinci Code" and is undeniably an improvement. This one doesn't feel as overlong, it's fast-paced, and has some swift and intense action.
  7. Aug 30, 2013
    Very entertaining and suspenseful!! Ron Howard is a very good director. Watch this movie!! It's obviously very underrated but do not listen to the critics and enjoy it!!
  8. Feb 23, 2013
    Angels Demons is the sequel to the Da Vinci Code, and while it's generally said that Da Vinci Code was better, I disagree. When Da Vinci Code came out, I had just seen National Treasure, and there were so many similarities, that I didn't enjoy it as much as I should have. Angels Demons does what every sequel aspires to do. It takes the characters we like and puts them in a similar but different story. Tom Hanks is once again terrific, bringing an intensity that few others can match. Following the clues lost in time and the twists and turns thrown in by writer, Dan Brown, Angels Demons is most defiantly a sequel that lives up to the first one and also gives you something to talk about. What else could you ask for? Expand
  9. Dec 7, 2012
    More action packed the the first film and just as enjoyable imo. Rather suspensful as well. It just doesn't have what made the first film so good though and that's what hurts it imo. Still a solid film though.
  10. Apr 3, 2012
    Dumb movie. The ending was hilariously stupid. Tom Hanks and that hair deserve to be thrown away. I could care less about this complex piece of dung. No angels could save this disaster of a movie.
  11. Mar 30, 2012
    Angels and Demons is not comparable to The Da Vinci Code. Everything that made the Da Vinci Code good was lost in Angels and Demons. The story was incomprensible with acting that seem that they were going through the motions. Huge disappointment.
  12. Feb 19, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have read the book and I was excepting a thrilling movie. I am completely disappointed, I wanted more I got less. So many basic elements have been skipped. They tried to give action and rush but for me they totally failed. The movie has no pace. I wouldn't recommend this movie. Expand
  13. Nov 23, 2011
    Great 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!
  14. Nov 19, 2011
    The acting was good and it is suspensful and keeps you interested through out. Was no where near as good as the previous film was and I was actually a bit disapointed with it because it abandond the puzzles (which made the first film so good) and had far too much violence.
  15. May 18, 2011
    "Robert Langdon" (Tom Hanks) is back, and he has only a few hours to solve a mystery to save thousands of Catholic faithful, and top candidates for role of pope, before an incident which will kill them all as they await the annoucement of who the new leader of the church will be.

    Now, "Langdon", along with a woman who helped create antimatter in a lab, must figure out the clues and save
    the faithful of the world's largest church.

    Let me say first that this is much better than the original movie, which I barely remember seeing. You really don't need to read the novel that the movie is based upon to enjoy it.

    There are some really good performances in this film, especially from Hanks, who proved himself as a solid leading man many times. Here, he really shines as a leading man.

    There is some serious problems with character development with supporting characters, especially "Dr. Vittoria Vetra" (Ayelet Zurer), whose antimatter is being used as a weapon, and "Camerlengo Patrick McKenna" (Ewan McGregor), who turns an interesting plot twist that I never expected at the end, but isn't seen as much as I would like.

    Another problem with this movie is that it is obvious that they opted for green screen for many scenes depicting Roman Catholic churches within Rome's city limits (the church refused to allow the movie to be filmed at the locations since the church declared the book offesive to the church). A barely trained eye (which I have since I learned TV production back in high school) could see the actors were in front of a green screen. These effects will become noticeable to the untrained eye as the film ages, and special effects advance.

    One thing this movie does pretty well is that it gives very little time for the audience to breathe between action and plot advancing scenes. You get excited as "Langdon" and "Vetra" get closer to the murderer(s) as they discover new clues.

    Despite not being able to shoot on location, and the threat of a strike at the time, Ron Howard did a great job in the director's chair as usual. He was able to use interesting camera angles to help tell the story nicely.

    I can't really say I noticed the soundtrack of the movie, since I barely pay attention to instrumentals since that's not my style I listen to. I do notice that it helped the scenes, and in this movie it did.

    If you see this on any of the movie channels like HBO, or on Netflix, check this one out.
  16. May 9, 2011
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Angels and Demons is the sequel to 'The DaVinci Code' both based on the novels by Dan Brown. Angels and Demons is the first in the novel series but second in the movies and tells a fast paced story about a bomb threat that could potentially wipe out Vatican City. Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) is a representative from Vatican City and is asked to help find the bomb hidden somewhere in the Vatican.

    On top of the general bomb scare, the pope has died two weeks previous and now conclave (where the college of cardinals vote in the next pope) is about to begin. Then to add even further to the plot, the preferiti (those most likely to be voted as the next pope) have been kidnapped by the same people who planted the bomb, the Illuminati.

    Angels & Demons brings you on a fast paced story, which leads you all around the fabulous city of Rome. Not only do you get an amazingly gripping plot, but you also get a history lesson from the brilliant minded, Robert Langdon. You get a sense of history of the Catholic Church in Rome after you see church after church whilst following clues that lead Langdon to the kidnapped cardinals and eventually to the bomb. The movie shows some brilliant acting throughout, whilst running from church to church the actors essentially have to 'walk the walk' and 'talk the talk', especially Hanks who informs you of facts that you might not have known about Rome and the Catholic Church.

    In general, a very interesting movie and very attention grabbing. No matter what age you are (once you can grasp the concept and are remotely interested in religious history) you can enjoy this movie. Sadly though Angels & Demons was not received in the box office as well as The DaVinci Code was, but it is still a good movie.

    Positives: Fascinating and attention grabbing plot with great acting all round.

    Negatives: Doesn't live up to the hype of it's predecessor. Nowhere as good as the novel. I give it a 8/10.
  17. Mar 16, 2011
    I liked that movie. It kept me watching, which is rare these days. I did not read the book, so I have no comparison to that. I was never bored, the action moved along, the acting was good, Rome was nice and authentic. If all movies made these days would have the same caliber, audiences around the world would be happier !
  18. Jan 18, 2011
    Much better than The Da Vinci Code but the subject matter (symbolism and the likeness) is a very hard sell going from book to the big screen. At times Tom Hanks having to explain things felt so out of place, yet it was necessary to keep the plot moving. Angels and Demons might have been ranked a bit higher for me but I was unfortunate (or fortunate depending on how you look at it) and read the book before seeing the movie and as the movie strayed so far from the book I became a bit annoyed thus making my viewing experience not as enjoyable. But if you haven't read the book by all means watch the movie as it will give you a heck of a good thrill ride with some extremely disturbing visuals. Expand
  19. Oct 29, 2010
    its way better than The Da Vinci Code, but the plot was confusing and most of all: implausible

Mixed or average reviews - based on 36 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 36
  2. Negative: 3 out of 36
  1. Reviewed by: Deborah Young
    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.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    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.
  3. Reviewed by: Kim Newman
    More entertaining than "The Da Vinci Code," but still tosh.