With a supposed star-studded cast of Tom Hanks, Felicity Jones and Irrfan Khan, you’d perhaps expect Ron Howard’s third instalment of the Da Vinci Code trilogy to be somewhat interesting. In reality, the most exciting part of the film was leaving when it had finished. Dan Brown’s novels, contrived, monotonous and banal, were not improved, and if anything soiled the reputation of the unfortunate actors in the film. Dante himself would have agreed that sitting through two hours of a nauseating storyline with plot holes the size of the sun is beyond purgatory. Forget nine circles of hell, Inferno surpasses them all.
Admittedly, the occasional picturesque Italian backdrop may perk up some of the audience, but not before they’ve all lost the will to live again when the nonsensical plot moves elsewhere. Tom Hanks’ attempts to portray a stimulating, if amnesia-addled, protagonist is admirable considering the anaemic character Robert Langdon presents as a lost professor of iconology and symbology, racing around museums defacing priceless artwork apparently in order to save the world from the threat of a deadly virus.
‘Sitting through two hours of a nauseating storyline with plot holes the size of the sun is beyond purgatory. Forget nine circles of hell, ‘Inferno’ surpasses them all.’
Dr Sienna Brooks (Felicity Jones) is experienced with Dante, which is fortunate considering the entire film relates to his work. Did I mention its convoluted plot? It’s perhaps interesting to note that Felicity Jones is half of Tom Hanks’ sixty years, and slightly worrying if his sidekick is there for her looks and not for her ingenious help dealing with the dangerous bioweapon.
If Hanks and Jones’ mission to save the world resulted in films like Inferno being unshackled to the public, it’s safe to say that they’d have been better off leaving the world and half of the population to be destroyed rather than releasing such a travesty of a film.
(Image courtesy of Columbia pictures)