Inferno

Inferno, the book, is actually one of my favorites -- I'd place it within my Top 5 or Top 10 depending on the day. 

It's a terrific page turner, as most of Dan Brown's novels usually are, and the underlying motivation behind it is one that truthfully concerns me greatly. 

Its villain and ending (assuming I'm remembering them correctly) are shocking, but yet brilliant and the notion of the world's population being out of control is realistic and quite frightening. 

Couple all of this with the typical Robert Langdon fare of ancient treasure hunts and deciphering clues in exotic locales and you have a great return to form after the somewhat disappointing The Lost Symbol. In fact, I enjoy Inferno so much that it has provided a smidgen of inspiration for the sequel to my own novel -- but I won't go into that detail any further [such a tease, I know]. 

Unfortunately, the should-be-winning combination of Tom Hanks and Ron Howard has resulted in some mildly entertaining, but forgettable adaptations. I never wholly expected The DaVinci Code to be an amazing film as I felt the book was overhyped in its own right. But when Angels & Demons also failed to impress (another favorite book of mine), I think it became quite clear that these stories worked significantly better on the page than the screen. Inferno was ultimately inevitable -- though I'm not quite sure why they skipped The Lost Symbol -- but I didn't get too excited for it. 

I'm glad I didn't hold it to the same regard that I held the novel because I would have been devastated, but for 90% of the film, it's Howard and Hanks' best attempt thus far. 

The fear you experience after seeing DAVID S. PUMPKINS!  ^^^

To its credit, Inferno has probably one of the stronger stories of the series to work with. It's still wildly outlandish, but Brown's novels are just that way. Tom Hanks could never really be bad in anything (proof: David S. Pumpkins!) and he's once again a strong lead as Professor extraordinaire, Robert Langdon. Felicity Jones, who's likely going to have a tremendous 2016 once its all said and done, fits right in as Langdon's co-chaser. They have some decent chemistry but are a bit of a dull pair. Ben Foster plays the villain, who kills himself in the trailers, and given the little screen time he has, he's equal parts menacing but convincing of the problem of overpopulation. The secret scene-stealer is Irrfan Khan as a private security firm executive. Saying too much about his character wouldn't be fair, but he has some funny and badass moments. 

"Who is this David Pumpkins you speak of?"

The plot moves right along without ever really letting up, to both the benefit and detriment of the film. It keeps things exciting, but it also means that the viewer, especially those who haven't read the book, are left in the dust with some connections. In the books, an explicit explanation by Langdon as to the clues and history can easily be researched further via Google, but in the setting of a theater, you kind of have to take him at his word through his rushed, winded explanations. It's what we're used to by now, but it's probably the key example as to why the bulk of these stories are best as books. Inferno is still a fun romp through Europe though, with several locales and amusing setpieces. Nothing will blow your mind by any means, and the rush to stop a sinister pathogen from "thinning the herd" is nothing new, but it's competent film making. Langdon has some "hellish" visions throughout that I could have done without; they were cheesy and completely overdone both in quantity and substance.

As is typical with the Langdon film adaptations however, there seems to be something missing...that special something that makes it feel truly epic. These stories are dealing with the end of the world (most of the time) and they feel rather disinterested with living up to the gravity of that plot point. Other than a handful of scenes, Hans Zimmer's score is uncharacteristically forgettable and generic, which doesn't help matters, but it's more than just the music, and it has been ever since The DaVinci Code. There's something significant missing in these films; I can't quite put my finger on it, but it forces them to remain in the average/good territory despite their paperback versions existing in the amazing/iconic realm. 

One of the biggest sins of Inferno is its complete refusal to adapt the ending of the book. Again, assuming I'm remembering this correctly, the book's ending is brilliant and ballsy. Like...really ballsy. There's not really a nice tidy bow on everything and I remember closing the cover being shocked that I didn't necessarily disagree with what happened. I won't spoil anything, but it was one of the greatest tragedies of the film that they changed the ending as much as they did. It really disappointed me and I think it led the film to be just that much more forgettable. 

"We HAVE to find him! I have so many questions!"

Saying that Inferno is the best of the Langdon films isn't saying all that much. None of them are outright terrible -- I'd probably give relatively similar scores to each of them -- but they're not nearly as special as the books they're based on. Given the talent involved, that's pretty surprising. I truly think Inferno could have stood further above the pack if it had the guts to accept its own ending, but alas, it did not. That results in a fun romp, but one that you won't remember a few weeks from now. 

CONS:

• Generic original score
• There's a lot lost in translation here. Many of Langdon's explanations don't have the same sense/detail in the film as the novel
• One of those can't-put-your-finger-on-it reasons, but Inferno, like it's brethren, is missing that special something to make it more memorable
• Man oh man did they b***h-out on the ending
• Too many "hell" visions and they were over dramatic

PROS:

• Strong cast. None of them are working with the most challenging material, sure, but they're certainly not part of the film's problems
• Strong and realistic villain motivations  
• Fun, fast-paced trip through Europe with some entertaining segments 

Rath's Review Score | 6.5/10