The Da Vinci Code had a 46 average on Metacritic, and 0 Oscar noms. Angels & Demons doesn’t look destined to do much better, with a 50 on Metacritic so far. And that’s not even counting Stephanie Zacherek’s Salon review:
“Angels & Demons,” Ron Howard’s follow-up to the stiff, stately 2006 “The DA Vince Code,” might have been classy, entertaining junk — if only it were entertaining.
Time‘s Richard Corliss liked it alright… or did he?
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.
That sounds like code for something, but I’m not gonna touch it. Roger Ebert tries to be nice, and as a result his review is so tame I can’t find anything worth quoting. He does offer us a second-hand opinion from the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, which says Angels & Demons is a “harmless entertainment which hardly affects the genius and mystery of Christianity.” And that’s one of the favorable reviews. I’d excerpt something from the worst one, but I imagine the worst is yet to come.