Angels, Demons, and Tom Hanks in a Speedo

Angels and Demons is a really good thriller. It’s got an amazing setting with all of Vatican City to run around in. It has a “race against time” plot narrowing the events down to one 4 hour period pseudo “24” style, giving it a really fast pace which is something it’s predecessor sorely lacked. What it does not have unfortunately, is an interesting lead.
The pope dies, and the four obvious runner ups are all immediately kidnapped. The villain states that one will die every hour, on the hour, starting at 7 pm, at which point a bomb will go off in st. Pete’s square, which just so happens to be where the entire world has shown up to see who the Vatican appoints the next heir to the throne. The culprits seem to be members of the illuminate, whose’ checkered history with the Catholic Church is gone over in painstaking detail in the film. It’s up to Tom hanks to solve everything of course, with the help of the Vatican itself. I guess it’s nice to know the church doesn’t hold a grudge since that whole “Jesus had a kid, and now his direct descendents deserve the real power” shenanigans that went down last time. Obviously things do not go really well, and that’s where things get good. The death sequences are each more elaborate and graphic, reminding me of the Dario Argento thriller or “Gallo” style Italian films from the 70’s and 80’s (go rent Susperia or Deep Red or The Bird with the Crystal Plumage right now, those three back to back will blow your mind).
The problem is our main character. Hanks really kind of wanders around from place to place with no real sense of urgency, and he’s not a leader. He’s a follower. This I’m sure is how it would be in real life, but in cinema, we want our lead actors to take charge of the situation. It would be no fun watching Indiana Jones follow Short Round through the jungle for two hours. It’s not fun watching Hanks fumble from one point to another, at one point aided by a tour guide squawking at a bunch of tourists. Why not make the tour guide the lead of the film? That being said, the elaborate death sequences, coupled with the stunning locations and the frequent history lessons makes up for the uninteresting lead. I found myself very involved in the plot despite the lack of a relatable character, which is a testament to how much fun the story and cinematography is. Mention must also go to the music, which is like that creepy “Omen” theme only pumped up to borderline techno pitch, which fits nicely with the religious imagery and brutal mayhem.
In the end it was a very handsomely mounted film with tons of interesting history lessons fit into a quick and efficient thriller plot. The lead isn’t all that interesting, which means this will probably be the end of the Robert Langdon adventures, on film anyway. It’s also MUCH more exiting than The Da Vinci Code, which was probably one of the most controversially boring movies ever. It’s slightly more intelligent summer thriller fair than usual, and in a summer filled with Saturday morning cartoon remakes, that can’t be a bad thing. Oh, and Tom Hanks in a Speedo is a really bad idea. Who in god’s name (pun intended) got that idea? It made me wish for his mullet from the first one. I’d take Hanks in a mullet any day over that Speedo.