If you find yourself sitting in a movie theater this weekend watching “Inferno” it’s probably because a) you read the books or b) you love Tom Hanks. Tragic, I must say, for any newcomers to the franchise, as there are hardly any preludes which can clue you into the world you just entered. A world that screenwriter David Koepp seems passionate about, but fails to use simple logic when needed. I wasn’t the biggest proponent of, “The DaVinci Code” or, for the sake of argument, “Angels & Demons.” They were good movies, but often seemed joyless with many of the actors phoning in their performances for the sake of a good paycheck. Still - they had a weird hook that managed to snag audience's attention (include me in that bunch), as here we are with “Inferno” the third film in Ron Howard’s sensation of blockbusters based off Dan Brown's bestselling novels, about the mis-adventures of symbologist Robert Langdon (Hanks). The ads suggest “Inferno” is the film the series has been leading up to, which, if you buy into that premise, it perhaps will be an easier sell on how silly the movie actually is.

Much of the material is left to Hanks, who must breathe whatever life he can into this cooky materiel, and you can tell by his, somber, stoic presence, he didn’t want to make this movie. After all, the last time we saw Langdon was in 2009, to which I have to wonder why it took so long to resurrect this character to begin with. Already a long time in Hollywood years that gap seems even longer, as we are now past the pop-cultural relevance of the original books, and the storytelling seems dated. What the film lacks in that department, makes up for in the refreshingly diverse international cast to help spice things up a bit, and with Hanks leading the pack, much of this is an easy sell.

Howard kicks things off with a crazed billionaire geneticists Bertrand Zobrist (Ben Foster) who falls to his death from the top of a bell tower in Florence. We already understand his intentions and how he is a crazed maniac: A pre-credits sequence helps tune us inside his mindset. As he fears the evils of “overpopulation,” in which he advises that “pain can save us.” The fact anyone would listen to this zealot is beside me, but at least it’s Foster (in his normal bearded chiseled like intensity) playing the part. A few days past, and across town we are right back in the middle of the action with Langdon strung to a hospital bed with a grazed gunshot wound to his skull. Langdon can’t remember anything that has precluded over the last 48 hours, let alone why the Carabinieri are seemingly out for his blood. He finds solace in a Sienna Brooks (Felicity Jones) an early-millennial doctor with a history in philosophy and symbols much like Langdon. The two make for the token couple of the film, who are sent across many different countries, attempting to solve the paper trail left behind from Zobrist, who plans to release a deadly, worldwide pandemic in order to ensure the salvation of humanity.

Such clues wind up leading Langdon to start possessing his memories again, as they slowly start to trickle symphonically throughout the movie. He also has many crazed, and copious amounts of CGI like hallucinations that help pave the way for the climax of the movie. While there was a time when that type of storytelling would be effective, after two movies, it’s starting to become tedious. The first half of the movie plays out like a videogame, with poor cut shots-and jumpy edited splices that make the first 30 minutes a headache more than plot progression. There is a reason that editing technique works for virtual reality and not movies.

There are more characters that stumble on the trail of our leads, as they follow a blood-soaked trail in the vein of Dante’s Inferno, but none of them are interesting enough to hold your attention. Most of them are characters designed around one trait, and that’s all. World Health Organization director, Elizabeth Sinskey (Sidse Babett Knudsen) is supposed to have some history with Langdon, but it’s hard for me to see the conviction in that relationship.

Koepp’s script has sprinkled in lines like “he is lying through his teeth” or, and this one is always my favorite “that’s impossible!” - when clearly it never is. Wherever your preference for over-the-top jargon stands, “Inferno” has plenty of it. I will say the film, once it kicks into gear, seems to have a slight manor of focus, that helps heat up the action. As any fans of the book will know, there are a slew of twists that usually come encompassed with this material, so, while I commend the execution of the plot twist in the end, I can’t say I was necessarily that suppressed. Will it do the job for those just going out to see a movie, for the sole purpose of seeing a movie? Absolutely. But true fans might be slightly buzzed by the notion of cheap thrills. And with Howard directing and Hanks at the wheel, I think the fans, and general audience members, deserved better. C-