Inferno

2016

Action  Adventure  Crime  Drama  Mystery  Thriller  

Synopsis


Uploaded By: OTTO
January 6, 2017 at 6:18 am

Director

Cast

Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon
Felicity Jones as Sienna Brooks
Ben Foster as Bertrand Zobrist
Irrfan Khan as Harry Sims
720p 1080p
911.96 MB
1280*720
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
2hr 1 min
P/S 1,148 / 4,741
1.87 GB
1920*1080
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
2hr 1 min
P/S 1,236 / 4,065

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by zeki-4 9 / 10

Empty calories, mainly due to poor direction

Imagine if Spielberg had directed 'Godfather' and Coppola had directed the Indiana Jones movies. Both great directors, but it wouldn't have worked.Same thing applies here. Like the first two in this franchise, 'Da Vinci Code' and 'Angels and Demons', there's just something terribly wrong with the direction. Yes, the Langdon movies are suppose to be fast paced, but if almost no scenes are allowed to breathe, does it matter? And why do director Ron Howard keep on insisting insulting my intelligence? Like in the first two, many things are explained twice, so even the dumbest one in the audience knows what's going on.Then there's the blatant mistake of shooting the movie in standard widescreen, instead of cinemascope, like the first two. When you make a movie with several visually looking fantastic locales around the world, it SCREAMS cinemascope. And the best park of the book? They completely changed it. Guess they wanted to avoid any controversy.Hans Zimmer's score was great, as usual, though.The first two Langdon-movies are hovering at 6,6 on IMDb. So will this when the dust settles.If the studio decides to make 'Lost Symbol' and - for once - have a Langdon movie getting great reviews, they should probably hire another director.

Reviewed by jordanando 9 / 10

Inferno, just not bright enough

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Reviewed by James De Bello 9 / 10

7/10

For what was meant to be another smash hit in the franchise, Inferno certainly did not live up to expectations. The main reason behind this was the length of the movie, too much was crammed into such a short amount of time that it just wasn't possible to visually create as good a story on film as was in the book. Everything was not explained clear enough in the movie, take that extra half an hour to do that, just to give people an ending they deserve to see. The whole saga about the pointer dragged on too much, but seemed relatively easier for Langdon to solve in the movie than it did in the book. The puzzles in the movie were nothing like what they were in the book. It took Langdon about a minute to solve every riddle in this movie, whereas in the book it took a good twenty pages. The whole love interest between Elizabeth Sinskey and Langdon just wasn't needed, Langdon is meant a guy who only worries about his work and not women. It seemed rather odd watching this happen and it just made me feel uncomfortable because this is not the Robert Langdon we are used to. The love interest however between Sienna and Bertrand was exaggerated in the movie and Howard spent too much screen time on focusing on the pair. As a book, inferno was a hit, as a movie, inferno was dull. There was too much of knowing what was going to happen. Take the scene for example where Brooks leaves Langdon and admits she was a lover of Bertrand's. In the book, Sienna leaves not of her own accord but after being chased and Langdon being dragged away by Bouchard. This scene killed the whole suspense about Sienna's really identity and at a moment where the movie could have possibly been saved, it just didn't deliver. For those that would rather watch a movie than read the book, yeah sure Inferno is a good movie to watch but to the book lovers, this movie was just not the movie that we should be expecting from Howard. But the score from Zimmer is possibly the best in the series and makes up for the lack of visual engagement in parts.Hollywood got too much of a grip on this movie, changed the story to suit a typical movie ending, leave out some key plot points and kill one of the characters because we can, these are certainly not the ingredients that make a Hollywood Blockbuster.I don't know if this film warrants doing another one in the series, but if they were to do that, 2 things must be done: 1. make sure it is the original story on screen and 2. make sure the gap isn't seven years I am giving this movie seven out of ten purely because it would be visually appealing to someone who hasn't read the book before, to someone who has read the book, this movie probably rings more of a 3-5.

Reviewed by tranceformer13 9 / 10

Finally, a worthy Dan Brown adaptation!

Based on the book by Dan Brown, "Inferno" finds professor Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) in Florence as he wakes up in a hospital being taken care of by doctor Sienna Brooks (Felicity Jones) and he does not remember anything of the past two days. Quickly details start to emerge, Langodn is hunted down at the hospital, he escapes with Sienna and discovers he is on the run and the only clue he has is a map of Dante's Inferno.Ron Howard is one of my personal filmmaking heros, still that does not keep me from calling "The Da Vinci Code" what it is: a bloated, interminable mess of a film with some little charm to it. On the contrary I actually was one who really enjoyed "Angels & Demons" and in the same way I had my fair share of fun and enjoyment with "Inferno" and stand proud of such no matter how many times you call upon me how dumb some of the stuff they say in these movies can sound: it is part of the fluff this entertainment is designed to be.Look does this plot make sense for even two seconds when you strip it down with character motivations and internal logic? No. I don't think neither David Koepp nor Ron Howard believe this thing makes sense to the core. It is ludicrous and it is meant to be so, that's what makes it so effortlessly fun, there is no way you can ground a conspiracy theory between renaissance artists and the contemporary destruction of the world keeping a straight face, at least not that I know of, so the film knows what it is and succeeds in giving us two hours of solidly crafted entertainment without making you feel stupid, but treating the whole ordeal seriously enough for you to be engaged, but rarely so dramatically to loose the audience.What makes Ron Howard a great director is the fact that he is an instinctive storyteller, this guy's a natural phenomenon at telling stories and when we see "Apollo 13", "A Beautiful Mind" or "Rush" we just are effortlessly engrossed by these larger than life stories thanks to a flow and a grit in the filmmaking that immediately distinguish a Ron Howard picture. "Inferno" might be different in regards to story and plot, but the same sharp filmmaking is displayed, the same confidence in every edit is shown here. Howard is a director that knows this medium by heart and even when the weakest of story points is being developed he will find a way to make it come through to an audience.What it basically comes down to is that the filmmakers intention here is to take you by the hand and make you jump into the fun, the film is basically saying to you: "come on, lets go and have ourselves an adventure", one of those adventures that just feels like a wild ride. That's what this film is. Of course it has a couple of stumbles in it of itself: a shoehorned in romance, a slightly predictable plot twist, a couple of plot points that get left behind.Still, no matter how nonsensical everything is, how completely insane the plot manages to go to, how every character seems to be a mastermind of chases and action, not even Tom Hanks' haircut matters, all of this is fitted into a package that manages to hold the strings together and give an audience a ride, it won't be one like "Terminator" of course, but it will be a ride that respects the audience and entertains them."Inferno" walks the fine line between making you laugh at the ridiculousness and engage dramatically perfectly, it is a technically impeccable film with powerful and energetic directing behind it that manages to overcome story and plot inconsistencies also thanks to what at the heart of it is a nice character, portrayed as always perfectly by Tom Hanks. I entered the theater and left it perfectly conscious I was not getting the new, hot Oscar contender, but the experience I had was filled with a pleasant tension and sense of fun.

Read more IMDb reviews