Skip to main content

‘Inferno’ review

Despite Tom Hanks and a volcano of talent, 'Inferno' has no fire

Everyone loves a good mystery.

On the other hand, for every film that takes you on a compelling journey to the truth, there are a dozen movies that simply fall flat for one reason another. Sometimes the mysteries just aren’t very interesting, or the film gets too bogged down in its own secrets to make any sense. And in some cases, the answers to the big questions posed by the film are too easily found.

Most frustrating, though, are the films that just end up spoiling all of the big secrets before the show has even begun.

Recommended Videos

And therein lies the biggest problem with Inferno, the third installment of Ron Howard’s trilogy of films that began with the 2006 adaptation of Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code.

Directed by Howard from a script penned by David Koepp, Inferno brings Tom Hanks back to the role of Robert Langdon, a Harvard University professor of religious iconology and symbology who – for a third time now – finds himself caught up in a globe-spanning mystery that only his particular expertise can solve.

Inferno is a love letter to the art and iconography of the ages long past.

The mystery this time around involves a deadly virus set to be unleashed on the world that draws inspiration from Dante Alighieri’s Inferno – the 14th century poet’s vivid description of Hell. With only a series of clues pertaining to Dante’s famous poem to guide Langdon to the virus’ hidden location, he’s forced to contend with both a debilitating head injury and various parties competing to unleash the virus, stop it, or sell it to the highest bidder as he attempts to save the world.

Like its predecessors in Howard’s trilogy, Inferno is a film that has all the ingredients for a bona fide blockbuster. Not only does it have the infinitely bankable, two-time Academy Award winner as its star, but it also has Howard (another two-time Oscar winner) behind the camera, a script from the writer who penned the Jurassic Park and Mission: Impossible screenplays (among other mainstream blockbusters), and the next Star Wars star – Rogue One: A Star Wars Story actress Felicity Jones – as its female lead.

Sadly, the biggest mystery to be found in Inferno just might be how a movie with all that talent ends up being so forgettable.

Despite the usual, high level of on-screen work from Hanks and a few standout sequences and performances from the supporting cast, the third film in Howard’s trilogy never finds its footing. The story that propels the characters from one part of the world to the next frequently feels disjointed, with each plot point connected to the next by awkward leaps explained away by either Langdon’s brilliant, Sherlock Holmes-esque deductive abilities or swept under the narrative rug thanks to his amnesia – a plot point established early in the film and used far too often.

Inferno also suffers from having its central mystery – what all these Dante-related clues are pointing to – established well before the film even begins.

The film’s official plot synopsis, trailers, and marketing all identify the mysterious “Inferno” as an apocalyptic virus, and many of those same trailers and sneak peeks reveal the clues that get him from the early stages of the mystery to its final, frustratingly predictable conclusion. The film’s promotional trailers are its most egregious plot-spoiler.

Inferno never quite manages to find its footing.

Knowing so much about the movie’s plot ahead of time makes you feel like a tourist as it propels its main character from one point to the next instead of an involved participant in the story, experiencing the mystery through Langdon. This contributes to a general sense that Inferno is more concerned with showing off the places the characters go and the art they encounter than telling a compelling story.

Inferno is not a complete disappointment. For a film that spends its first two acts (and the majority of its running time) getting to the bottom of a mystery that the film’s trailer already revealed months ago, Inferno does indeed give its audience a lot of amazing things to look at along the way.

Shot on location around Florence and Venice in Italy, Inferno takes full advantage of the local scenery and provides some breathtaking visuals certain to stoke the fires of wanderlust for anyone eager to see the famous cities where the story unfolds. Like its predecessors, Inferno is a love letter to the art and iconography of the ages long past, and the camera lingers appreciatively on each famous painting, statue, structure, or sculpture that plays a role in the movie.

Howard also offers up a few surprises with long, nightmarish sequences – a product of Langdon’s hallucinations – that have the director flexing filmmaking muscles we haven’t seen him use all that much in the past. Sequences featuring a group of people with their heads twisted 180 degrees around, walking down a street bordered by rivers of blood filled with amputated limbs, isn’t the sort of thing one expects to see from the filmmaker responsible for Apollo 13 and A Beautiful Mind – but to Howard’s credit, he channels his inner horror auteur well.

Inferno movie review
Image used with permission by copyright holder

There’s little unexpected about Hanks’ performance, but the actor seems more than comfortable in the role of Langdon and provides no less (or more) than what you would expect. Jones does a serviceable job in a role that feels underdeveloped for the Oscar-nominated The Theory of Everything actress, while Jurassic World and Life of Pi actor Irrfan Khan plays one of the film’s most memorable parts as the eccentric head of a mysterious private security agency. The former Bollywood actor adds a nice amount of texture to a character that could’ve been just another plot device, and it says a lot – both good and bad – that he is occasionally the most interesting character in the entire film.

The most surprising thing about Inferno is its conspicuous lack of surprises.

Offering little in the way of unspoiled mystery and a story that feels far too fragmented, the film tries to paint over its flaws with some fantastic visual elements that can only go so far to distract the audience. Although it doesn’t feel like a franchise-ender, Inferno doesn’t elevate the series, either. What the audience is left with is a globe-spanning, clue-hunting adventure with the fate of the entire world at stake that somehow manages to be, well… really boring.

Rick Marshall
A veteran journalist with more than two decades of experience covering local and national news, arts and entertainment, and…
Operation Seawolf review: nice Nazis? No thanks!
Dolph Lundgren holds onto a pipe inside a U-Boat in a scene from Operation Seawolf.

At a time when anti-Semitic extremists are storming the U.S Capitol, running for office, and declaring war on Jewish people via social media, it might not be the best time for a movie that expects you to sympathize with Nazis. And yet, that hasn't stopped Operation Seawolf from sailing into theaters and on-demand streaming services this month.

The film, which follows the crew of a German U-boat during the waning days of World War II, casts Dolph Lundgren (Rocky IV) as German war hero Capt. Hans Kessler, who's ordered to lead the Nazis' remaining U-boats on a desperate (and likely fatal) mission to attack the U.S. on its own soil. As he and his crew make their way toward New York City in one final bid to turn the tide of war, Kessler finds himself struggling with both the internal politics of the ship and his own sense of duty as the Third Reich crumbles around him.

Read more
Conversations with A Killer: The Jeffrey Dahmer Tapes review: killer’s words yield little insight
A superimposed image of Jeffrey Dahmer in Conversations with a Killer.

It’s spooky season this month, and that means the atrocity mine is currently being plundered by content creators across America. The three-episode docuseries Conversations with a Killer: The Jeffrey Dahmer Tapes, directed by noted documentarian Joe Berlinger (Brother's Keeper, Paradise Lost), is Netflix’s second project tackling the infamous cannibal/necrophiliac/serial killer to debut in a matter of weeks. It follows Ryan Murphy’s 10-hour miniseries drama, Dahmer-Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story. This Dahmer double dose mirrors the barrage of Ted Bundy content that Netflix put out in early 2019, following up the Zac Efron-led drama Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile with the docuseries Conversations with a Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes (also directed by Berlinger). 

As was the case with Bundy, Netflix is convinced that a multipronged examination of Dahmer could lead to a better understanding of his psychology and motivations, teaching viewers warning signs or expanding our capacity for empathy. Or maybe they recognize that people are addicted to unspeakable tragedies and will do anything they can to maximize viewers’ compulsion for true crime? Attempting to satisfy on all accounts, The Dahmer Tapes oscillates uneasily between character study, social commentary, and pure shock value, landing somewhere in between all three.
In Dahmer's own words

Read more
Amsterdam review: An exhausting, overlong conspiracy thriller
Christian Bale, Margot Robbie, and John David Washington walk through a lobby together in Amsterdam.

Amsterdam could have been forgiven for being a lot of things, but dull is not one of them. The new film from writer-director David O. Russell boasts one of the most impressive ensemble casts of the year and is photographed by Emmanuel Lubezki, one of Hollywood’s premier cinematographers. Beyond that, its kooky premise and even wackier cast of characters open the door for Amsterdam to be the kind of screwball murder mystery that O. Russell, at the very least, seems uniquely well-equipped to make.

Instead, Amsterdam is a disaster of the highest order. It’s a film made up of so many disparate, incongruent parts that it becomes clear very early on in its 134-minute runtime that no one involved — O. Russell most of all — really knew what it is they were making. It is a misfire of epic proportions, a comedic conspiracy thriller that is written like a haphazard screwball comedy but paced like a meandering detective drama. Every element seems to be at odds with another, resulting in a film that is rarely funny but consistently irritating.

Read more