| IMDB

This is a movie I’ve been looking forward for a long time - when I first heard that The Da Vinci Code was being made into a movie, I started thinking about how great a movie Angels & Demons would make.

Was it great? Maybe, maybe not. But it was good, no doubt. But I’m going to just come clean here and confess that I love movies that involve the Catholic church. Usually I love them even more when there’s a demonic possession involved, but they also appeal to me in general, with or without the demons. However, I did get a secret society instead, so that’s almost as good. I read somewhere that the film crew weren’t allowed to shoot inside the Vatican at all, but you really wouldn’t know it (or at least I wouldn’t) when seeing this movie - the sets are stunning, absolutely stunning.

The story is really fast-paced, happening over a time span of just a few hours. I’d completely forgotten about that part of the book. Actually, I think I’d forgotten everything from the book except that the “baddies” were the Illuminati, and that cardinals ended up dead. So- the story moves fast, and at least to some degree it makes you feel that same rush, the feeling that there isn’t enough time, but on some points I just completely forgot about their time limit until suddenly one of them would mention what time it was, or a bell would sound.

Tom Hanks did a good job, as he always does (seriously, can you name one movie where he hasn’t done a good job? I can’t.), for his return as Robert Langdon. In the movie they make it so that Angels & Demons is set after the happenings of The Da Vinci Code, but I seem to remember from the books that A&D is supposed to be set before the Code? Anyway, this didn’t make any difference, all it did was nix the romantic relations between Robert and Vittoria (again, I seem to remember this happening, if not, that’s just my imagination running wild again), and if it’s one thing I can do without in movies like these, it’s the romance. Seriously, people, you have 20 minutes until the Vatican might explode, there is no time for kissing! So that was a piece of the story I didn’t miss at all.

Ayelet Zurer portrayed Vittoria Vetta, and she did a good enough job, even though she did sort of remind me of the second Ruby of Supernatural, and her I do not like. Sorry, Ayelet. It’s not your fault. I do like it that they cast someone not too famous. They could very well have gone for someone more known to the public, like Eva Green, but I’m glad they didn’t.

Ewan McGregor. Well, when is he not awesome? You’re on my list, Ewan. What list is that? I’m not telling. But you’re on it.

And then of course, the big surprise for me: Stellan Skarsgård! After Mamma Mia I have very much warmed up to him, and it amazes me how versatile that man is. They should try and find a place for him in a Harry Potter movie, he’d fit right in there as well, I’m sure.

All in all, a good movie that didn’t really feel as long as it was. It will inevitably be compared to The Da Vinci Code, for the obvious reasons, and I’m no different: In some ways, I think it was better than its predecessor, but in other ways, I prefer The Da Vinci Code (which I will no doubt have to watch tonight).

Well worth the money, but perhaps not as made of awesome as all the media hype leading up to the premiere would have you believe. Still, I’d go see it for the visuals, and for the play between religion and science - including the message that the two don’t have to be polar opposites, they can work together. A message that appeals to me in so many ways.