BOTTOM LINE: “Angels & Demons” works surprisingly well as a piece of popcorn entertainment; far better than its poorly made predecessor The Da Vinci Code but still manages to descend in to the absurd in the final act, leading one to question how Oscar winners Ron Howard and Tom Hanks could still make something so average given their pedigree.

THE GOOD: “Angels & Demons” works far better as a film than The Da Vinci Code simply because the overarching story follows a classic running-out-of-time thriller plot while sprinkling conspiracy theories on top of it as a windows dressing. This time, lead character Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) is called in by the Vatican to use his knowledge of the ancient secret society “The Illuminati” to find four kidnapped cardinals who are all the preferred candidates to be the next Pope. Time is running out as the kidnapper’s letter indicates that each cardinal will be killed one per hour until midnight, after which an anti-matter bomb will explode and wipe out the Vatican. It’s all over the top but these particulars do not matter as finally a sense of urgency has been instilled in to the franchise by director Ron Howard who manages to stage scenes that engross you in Langdon’s quest to decipher the codes in time to save the cardinals. It may be that the original novel by Dan Brown lended itself better to a silver screen translation than The Da Vinci Code, or that Ron Howard shows off a little more directorial flair in this instalment, but whatever the reason, “Angels & Demons” actually works well as a film by using clever devices that put the characters in jeopardy, setting them tasks to solve with very little time, and introducing a sense of mystery and intrigue about who is responsible for setting all these events in motion, all factors which its predecessor failed to deliver. Hanks is good as the anchor in the cast, even though he still looks like he is sleep-walking through the role. Ewan McGregor is quite good as the Carmerlengo who is temporarily in charge of the Vatican after the Pope dies, except for his final scenes. Ayelet Zurer has a far better lead female character to play than poor Audrey Tatou did in the previous film. Ron Howard manages to create some more visually rich images this time around, particularly with the use of blurred images becoming focused and unfocused through lens flares which add some layers of visual texture to the film. Overall, “Angels & Demons” manages to work well as a piece of popcorn entertainment which will not waste your time.

THE BAD: Although the film is far better than The Da Vinci Code, one has to wonder that with Oscar-winning talent like Howard and Hanks helming these films that something far better did not result. The Da Vinci Code was a bad film period. “Angels & Demons” feels like a first-timer’s effort done right, or a student who delivers a decent piece of work after learning from their mistakes. The film works well as a standard genre entertainment, but you would expect a hell of a lot more from Ron Howard given his previous efforts, not a by-the-numbers thriller that uses standard conventions to move things forward. To be fair, the first ninety minutes uses these conventions quite effectively, however the last thirty minutes descend in to absolute absurdity. Poor Ewan McGregor ends up with the brunt of it as the plot, through his character, goes through a number of quick and poorly constructed twists that by the time they conclude with the Carmerlengo’s death, you will be laughing more than feeling the supposed tragedy unfolding. The revelations in the Final Act feel almost like a cheat. The film sets up the mystery of the Illuminati only to take it away in the end by a character whose motivations never really seem to make sense, at least for the story. At the end of the day the film is good and will entertain, but Howard and Hanks are capable of delivering far better work than this and it is from this point that “Angels & Demons” is still a disappointment.