TRON: Legacy (2010) Directed by Joseph Kosinski Length: 127 minutes Rated PG for sequences of sci-fi action violence and brief mild language
In 1982, Disney released TRON - a film that became a cult classic for its futuristic graphics and concepts. Though the film has been loved by geeks and fanboys alike for many years, the film largely remained a relatively unknown member of Disney's extensive vault. With the popularity of 3D films and the amazing capabilities of graphic designers and programs, the highly anticipated sequel has finally arrived to capture a new generation of TRON fanatics.
TRON: Legacy centers on Sam Flynn, played by Garrett Hedlund (Country Strong, On the Road), son of the original film's protagonist Kevin Flynn. After receiving a mysterious page from his father's old arcade, Sam discovers his father's secret lab that transports him to The Grid, a digital city where programs and users can interact and anything is possible. Though Sam's father shared tales of the majestic beauty of The Grid, Sam soon discovers his father identical clone Clu has assumed control and seeks to escape to the real world.
The film relies heavily on nostalgia and impressive graphics to make up for a lackluster and incredibly predictable plot. Hedlund does a serviceable job as the protagonist; though his character lacks any real depth, this good looking newcomer has a bright future ahead of him. Jeff Bridges (True Grit, Pablo) once again resumes his role as Sam's father Kevin Flynn, the creator of The Grid. Additionally, Bridges pulls double-duty as the tyrannical renegade program Clu a la a digitally rendered version of a younger Bridges. Bridges is one of the best actors in Hollywood today; however, it often felt as if his character was simply The Dude from The Big Lebowski with a glowing robe.
Beyond the main actors, the film boasts an impressive support cast, namely the beautiful Olivia Wilde (HouseM.D., Cowboys & Aliens) as Quorra and Michael Sheen (Alice in Wonderland, The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Parts I & II) as Castor/Zeus. Quorra is Kevin Flynn's new protegee, equally deadly as she is sexy. My favorite character of the film is Sheen's Castor/Zeus, an eccentric night club owner known for his ability to procure things. Though Sheen is essentially the digital version of the Mad Hatter from Alice in Wonderland, his zany hi-jinks and mannerisms provide several humorous moments.
Perhaps the most important aspect of TRON: Legacy is the graphics. Though the original may not hold up to the test of time, it is often cited as a film ahead of its time if not solely for its concepts. Needless to say, Disney spared no expense in creating the magnificent digital landscape of The Grid. From the towering sky scrapers, to fan-favorites like the light cycles, the graphics alone make the film worth seeing in the theater. Though the film uses a relatively muted color scheme throughout, the amount of detail and imagination required to develop the sprawling landscape of this film is breathtaking. While it is hard to tell how much the 3D experience assisted with the graphics, this is one film worth the extra few dollars, as opposed to the epic failure that was Clash of the Titans.
Additionally, what would a futuristic movie set in a digital world be without an impressive electronica soundtrack? Thankfully, Disney made a great call selecting the legendary and mysterious French electronica duo Daft Punk to develop the score of the film. While Daft Punk fans may lament the soundtrack as very un-Daft Punk like, for a movie soundtrack it is one of the years best. One could still argue both The Social Network and Inception boast more impressive compositions, but from a music lover's perspective, this has been one of Hollywood's best for film scores in several years. Additionally, be sure to note the cameo by the band during the night club scene as the pair DJ an impromptu battle.
Ultimately, several non-TRON fans may not appreciate the ingenuity found in this long awaited sequel as the story is a bit convoluted yet predictable and the action a bit hokie. There is no denying the impressiveness of this digital wonderland. Boasting incredible graphics, a killer soundtrack, and some fun action sequences, TRON: Legacy is a successful sequel that lives up to both fan and newcomer's expectations. Definitely be sure to check this out in the theater while you still can!
Final Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: Kevin Flynn: "You're messing up my zen-thing...man."
Oscar Nominations: Best Achievement in Sound Editing
Predators (2010) Directed by Nimród Antal Length: 107 minutes Rated R for strong creature violence and gore, and pervasive language
Another science-fiction film, another disappointment. Understandably, the sci-fi/horror genre has long been known for the campy B-movies, Saturday night Syfy special, adolescent scripts, bad acting, etc. But for every Inception, it seems we get twenty films like Predators - a snoozer of a story, type-cast acting, and a sorry ending that leaves you feeling used and unfulfilled.
Featuring the alien hunters made famous in the Arnold Schwarzenegger 1987 classic Predator, Predators is an attempt to return to what made the original so popular - focusing on a highly skilled group of soldiers being hunted in the jungle by an advanced and efficient killing machine. The film begins with eight strangers awakening to find themselves stranded on a mysterious planet. But something is hunting them, threatening to kill them if they don't work together.
However, instead of featuring an endearing group to root for, we are left with the United Nations squad of type-casting: a Mexican drug enforcer, a Japanese Yakuza, a Russian soldier, an African death squad member, etc. Leading our merry band of misfits? The guy who peaked on his first movie (The Pianist), Adrien Brody (The Experiment, Splice) as Royce, the rugged mercenary who speaks in the Batman voice. Make no mistake, Brody is a talented actor; he just needs a new agent who doesn't pick every shitty sci-fi/horror film in production. Regardless of who the actors are, it ultimately makes no difference. The dialogue consist of the general action movie bravado and low-brow testosterone fodder that plagues so many action films today.
While I found the concept intriguing, the delivery falls flat. How can you have a movie called Predators and not show a single alien until thirty minutes have passed? Additionally, the death scenes are relatively anti-climatic, and the final showdown is predictable and underwhelming. As a fan of the Alien/Predator saga, I was quite excited when I heard Robert Rodriguez, the genius behind Planet Terror (of Grindhouse) and Sin City, was developing a script for a new Predator movie. Unfortunately, any fanboy sentiment was quickly eradicated upon pressing play on my DVD player.
The film is not very good, and honestly I never expected it to be. But it would have been nice to have a decent return to a cherished sci-fi franchise. Unfortunately, it seems that would be asking too much. Cool concepts alone cannot save a film when the more important elements like a decent ending, engaging dialogue, decent acting, etc. are all lacking. Hopefully Ridley Scott's Alien prequel will redeem the franchises. If you are in the mood for a mindless action flick, you could do worse. Just expect to be a stoic zombie for an hour and a half.
Robin Hood(2010) Directed by Ridley Scott Length:140 minutes Rated PG-13 for violence including intense sequences of warfare, and some sexual content
I have voiced my frustrations with director Ridley Scott's films in past blogs (see Body of Lies), mainly over his lack of consistency. For every great film Scott directs, he delivers one to two terrible films. I will admit, my initial perception of Robin Hood was DOA, especially considering the tremendous amount of turmoil and turnover encountered during production. But I wanted to give one of Hollywood's legends the benefit of the doubt. While the film certainly does not reach the heights of success reached by classics like Alien or Gladiator, Scott's latest effort is a decent medieval war epic with a fresh perspective on a classic tale.
If you aren't familiar with your 13th century English history as well as the basic Robin Hood tale, you may be a bit lost. Scott's rendition of the noble thief takes a much different turn than any previous attempt. Russell Crowe (The Next Three Days, State of Play) plays the titular hero, an English archer named Robin Longstride. Longstride? I thought Robin was usually Robin of Loxley from Nottingham? And this is where the differences begin. Without going into too much backstory, Robin assumes the identity of Robert Loxley of Nottingham, a noble, in order to gain passage back home from the Crusades. Soon Robin is pretending to be Sir Robert amongst the people of Nottingham, even taking Robert's widowed wife Maid Marion, played by the always talented Cate Blanchett (The Last Time I Saw Michael Gregg, Hanna). You may be wondering how someone could simply assume another's identity, but the movie will do a better job of explaining this detail than I can. Soon Robin is caught up in the potential battle between the French and newly crowned King John who faces potential civil war at the hands of his barons.
The film covers a lot of ground and can admittedly be a bit hard to follow at times. Understanding the political power plays between King John of England and King Phillip of France can be a bit confusing; but if you have some semblance of a working knowledge of European history, you should be okay. Additionally, the Robin Hood tale may be tweaked, but the traditionally important characters are still present - Little John, Friar Tuck, etc. The film does add a few too many layers to the mix by adding a group of orphan boys (a la Peter Pan) that raid Nottingham. The inconsistent stories or confusing plot could be attributed to the fact the screenplay was changed mid-filming on several occasions.
The battle scenes are the true strength of the film. Scott's talent as a director is on full display as epic battles between the English and French consisting of archers, horse fighting, and swordplay all capture the carnage of the battlefield. The fights feel well rehearsed and flow smoothly, truly creating the perfect vibe needed for a film of this type. The actors also do a solid job of supplementing the action with their performances, blending dialects and mannerisms appropriate to the times.
If not for the twisting attempt at a history lesson, Robin Hood may have outperformed expectations. Ultimately, however, the film falls a bit flat. The action is solid and the acting decent, but a confusing story dooms the film to mediocrity. While I can't say I hate the film, I certainly don't love it. Robin Hood is worthy of a rental, but anything beyond a single viewing is simply a waste.
Final Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: Friar Tuck: "So why do they call you Little John?" Little John: "What are you tryin' to get at? I'm proportionate (in reference to his penis)!"
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010) Directed by Edgar Wright Length: 112 minutes Rated PG-13 for stylized violence, sexual content, language, and drug references
Before going through the usual dialogue of why I love or dislike a movie, let me just begin to list the ways in which I love Scott Pilgrim: Michael Cera, Jason Schwartzman, Edgar Wright, "Under My Thumb" by The Rolling Stones (my all-time favorite Stones song), the soundtrack, the idea, the awesome blend of Japanese anime style manga with American humor, Ramona Flowers, gay roommate Wallace, vegan police, and the list goes on and on...
Now for the more traditional approach. Edgar Wright has built a huge cult following after his instant classics Spaced: The Series, Shaun of the Dead, and Hot Fuzz. In his latest efforts, Wright decides to adapt the Bryan Lee O'Malley graphic novel series Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, in which the titular character must defeat the seven evil exes of Ramona Flowers, the girl of his dreams. This mash-up of Japanese anime style action and storytelling from the perspective of the hipster social scene is pure genius and translates well to the screen. And let us not forget the incredible casting job.
Perhaps the poster child of an actor capable of balancing mainstream success with indie cred, Michael Cera (Youth in Revolt, Arrested Development) as Scott Pilgrim is the perfect choice. Not only a native of the film's locale in Toronto, Cera posses that effeminate yet "cute" quality that makes you want to cheer for him. Equally awesome are Mary Elizabeth Winstead (The Thing, Live Free or Die Hard),as my future wife and Scott's love interest Ramona Flowers, and Ellen Wong (Unnatural History) as Knives Chau, Scott's scorned ex-girlfriend. Both capture the essence of their characters and really add an extra dimension to the film. Of course, I would be a terrible fanboy if I didn't mention Jason Schwartzman (Bored to Death, The Fantastic Mr. Fox) in his role as Gideon, the leader of the League of Seven Evil Exes. One of my favorite actors, Schwartzman continues his reign as the ultimate "funny even when I'm not being funny" actor - just see his incredible work in Rushmore, The Darjeeling Limited, and even here - he's that perfect arrogant yet mysteriously appealing cool guy. While I would love to talk about each of the seven evil exes, I'll leave it to these parting thoughts: Anne Hog and vegan police = pure gold. Bonus points for those who get the Anne Hog reference.
The over-the-top style of Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is well done, successfully mixing the gaming community and their nostalgic cliches with the noisy fury of the hipster indie scene and the over-exaggerated style of anime manga. Coupled with a raucous sonic boom of a soundtrack as well as enjoyable kung-fu esq battles, the film contains most every element needed for a geek to feel right at home.
While this review is a complete and total mess, it's simply because, like the film, one cannot help but constantly jump from thought to thought in attempt to retrace the spectacle just witnessed. By commercial measures, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World will be deemed a complete failure due to its poor box office performance; but it would be unfortunate if the bottom line dictates the fate of similar films. A gust of fresh air breathed into the stale movie scene, Edgar Wright's latest film is a complete fun-fest and certainly should be enjoyed. While most people will not care for this highly stylized and frantically paced film, it is a shame that most people will pass on seeing Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. I certainly feel the film deserves a trip to the theater, but I acknowledge the film isn't for everyone. So at least send the film industry a message and rent this original and refreshing film so we fans can see more good movies.
Final Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: I had a lot of favorite quotes, but I'll just say anything involving the vegan police rocked my world.
Every year it seems Hollywood releases more and more apocalyptic-themed films about dystopian society. In the past few years we have seen the big-screen release of Cormac McCarthy's modern masterpiece The Road, craptastic Legion, the amazing videogame Fallout 3, and many more. While all usually feature a bleak future brought about through some terribly destructive means, each has its own specific theme or concept that makes it unique (no duh, I know). The Book of Eli unfortunately chooses a surprising theme and misses out on a golden opportunity to usher in the future of apocalyptic westerns.
Set some time in a future where the earth has been burned and destroyed, society struggles to survive, fighting over every day blessings like water and music and books. Eli, played by the always reliable and charming Denzel Washington (Unstoppable, The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3), wanders westward bearing a mysterious book he believes will save humanity. Armed with his weapons and faith, Eli defends the book against murderous raiders and over zealous tyrants, specifically Carnegie, talented Gary Oldman (Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows; Guns, Girls, and Gambling), who hopes to use the book to control the remaining population.
Many of you can probably figure out what the "mysterious" book is based simply on the title; but without revealing too much, the Hughes Brothers really missed a golden opportunity. Making the focus of the film religion, they have essentially created a film Kirk Cameron wishes he could. I kept thinking the Baptist should be showing this to people when trying to convert the masses. While the apocalyptic western is not a new concept, it is still relatively new. If the film had chosen to mimic the Japanese classic Yojimbo, I feel as if the Hughes Brothers may have had something refreshing and engaging. The idea of a stranger passing through the local saloon, only to then save the town would have been a much more enjoyable film.
Considering the drab backgrounds, it's hard to comment on the aesthetics of the movie, but they certainly succeeded in creating a dreary backdrop for the film. I also enjoyed having a character from the "old times" armed with one-liners about pop culture and an iPod trading barbs with his female "sidekick" Solara, sex appeal booster Mila Kunis (Black Swan, Family Guy). While Kunis does not really add anything to the film beyond looking good, I liked the hapless sidekick concept but wish it had been managed a bit better - perhaps some actual training or knowledge transfer between Denzel and Kunis instead of just going to the next scene where she's automatically a bad ass.
The Book of Eli is not a great movie, nor is it terrible. Featuring an interesting twist, the film is worth a view just for that "Aha!" moment. However, I still argue the Hughes Brothers dropped the ball by making this a religious movie. If your target audience was the extremely conservative, fundamentalist Christian audience, then you nailed it. But considering the last movie these two directed centered on Jack the Ripper, I find that hard to believe. Check it out and see for yourself the power of reading.
Final Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: Solara: "They're in the middle of a gunfight with Carnegie's men. You know that voice you heard; did it say anything about this?" Eli: "We'll get out, both of us." George: "What about us?" Eli: "Didn't say anything about you."
Iron Man 2 (2010) Directed by Jon Favreau Length: 124 minutes Rated PG-13 for sequences of intense sci-fi action and violence, and some language
Of all the superheroes in existence, Iron Man is without a doubt my personal favorite. I've never liked Superman, Batman is cool but a little moody, Spider-man has some awesome powers and even cooler villains but again a little emo, etc. Tony Stark aka Iron Man is just a cool guy - a billionaire playboy that boast an MIT education. Yet he also exhibits everyman problems like narcissism, alcoholism, and general disregard for others, creating the perfect blend of hero and antihero. While most traditional comic book heroes struggle to conceal their secret lives, Tony Stark's metallic alias is known to the world, presenting problems concerning fame, notoriety, government intervention, and expectations on not only the hero but the man acting as the hero. While Iron Man 2 can never be considered the cinematic masterpiece that The Dark Knight is, it is a awesome ride with an nontraditional hero that certainly fulfills its obligation to entertain the audience.
Picking up where the 2008 original left off, Iron Man 2 finds Tony Stark, portrayed to perfection by the amazing Robert Downey, Jr. (Sherlock Holmes, Due Date), struggling to balance his multinational corporation, superhero alter-ego, personal life, and friendship. Complicated by the fact that the arc reactor keeping him alive is also slowly killing him, Tony begins to crumble under the pressures of the media and government and sinks deeper into an alcohol induced hazed. As if the personal demons were not enough, the vengeful Ivan Vanko aka Whiplash, Mickey Rourke (13, The Expendables) with a Russian accent, and industry competitor Justin Hammer, the neurotic Sam Rockwell (Moon, Betty Anne Waters), are out to ruin the Stark empire.
Put simply, there is a lot going on in Iron Man 2. Multiple plot threads and movie tie-ins aside, director Jon Favreau does a good job of keeping the pace quick but allowing enough plot development to avoid feeling too much like a cliched action movie. As I stated previously, without Robert Downey, Jr., this film does not work: he brings the character of Tony Stark to life just as Stan Lee imagined so many years ago hitting the right amount of charm, impulsiveness, and self-destruction that make Iron Man such a great character. Additionally, replacing Don Cheadle (Brooklyn's Finest, The Guard) as Lt. Col. James Rhodes aka War Machine for Terrence Howard worked out well. Cheadle, an accomplished actor capable of performing in a plethora of roles, does a good job of matching Downey, Jr.'s strong personality. When Tony is on screen, it is easy for the characters around him to quickly find themselves drowned out due to his impetuous nature, but Cheadle is able to keep his character relevant.
One of the coolest aspect of Iron Man 2, as was the case in the first, is the technology utilized by Tony. Virtual computing, robots with emotions, a talking AI...Jesus I want his tech! While Bruce Wayne may be able to match Tony Stark in terms of bank account and gadgets, Tony wins every time in terms of coolness and wow factor. Speaking of Bruce Wayne, inevitably this film, like all future comic book films, will be compared to The Dark Knight. However, one should remember that Christopher Nolan's 2008 masterpiece is a once-in-a-lifetime type of film, closer in nature to The Godfather and other serious crime dramas than its superhero brethren. So while Batman may win the awards, Iron Man knows what it is and does a damn good job doing it.
Will Iron Man 2 win an Oscar? Unless its for visuals, sound, etc. than the answer is likely no. But Favreau continues to blend enough drama with a lot of kick-ass to create a incredibly fun and enjoyable film. It may be cheesy, but this movie just makes you smile. The charm and witty dialogue capture the essence of a superhero unlike any other. Definitely make sure you check this one out in theaters in order to truly enjoy the great action sequences (even better if in IMAX). So cue the AC/DC and enjoy the thrilling ride.
Final Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: Justin Hammer: "Ms. Everhart is doing a spread on me for her magazine." Tony Stark: "Ms. Everhart did a spread on me last year...and an article."
Oscar Nominations: Best Achievement in Visual Effects
Kick-Ass (2010) Directed by Matthew Vaughn Length: 117 minutes Rated R for strong brutal violence throughout, pervasive language, sexual content, nudity, and some drug use - some involving children
This is definitely not your traditional, knight-in-shining armor super hero movie. Kick-Ass is the everyman perspective on what would happen if the average person decided to fight crime; what ensues is a lot of, well, ass kicking, typically at the expense of the movie's namesake. While you won't go buy the action figures for your kids, Kick-Ass is a refreshing perspective on what is more often a stale and repetitive genre.
The titular character is your average high school, comic collecting geek Dave Lizewski, played by Aaron Johnson (Nowhere Boy, Chat Room). Sticking to your traditional storyline, Dave decides to don a costume and fight crime under the moniker "Kick-Ass". Instead, it seems Dave can only succeed in getting his ass kicked. I really enjoyed the anti-superhero in the fact that Dave isn't some normal guy that is bitten by a radioactive spider or born with mutant powers: he is just a normal guy dreaming of bigger things. Soon, Kick-Ass's antics and internet popularity lead to the attention of the local drug syndicate who believe he is killing the group in hopes of cleaning up the streets.
However, the trues heroes behind these heroic deeds are the awesome duo of Big Daddy and Hit-Girl, respectively played by Nicolas Cage (The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Season of the Witch) and Chloe Moretz (Let Me In, (500) Days of Summer). I'll admit, I've never been a big fan of Nicolas Cage; but he truly is one of the brightest spots in this film. His quirky demeanor and vengeful tutelage of his 11-year old daughter all make for some great scenes - in particular one scene involving Cage's character shooting his daughter repeatedly so she can learn to handle the pain...let's just say it really sums up the movie. But beyond all else, Chloe Moretz is AMAZING! As the 11-year old, foul mouthed, deadly and lethal Hit-Girl, Moretz creates an original anti-hero that announces her presence to the world with a memorable performance. Hit-Girl is Rambo, a dictionary on expletives, The Matrix, and a little girl all rolled into one: very lethal indeed!
Before I get to the negative parts, I want to emphasize that I really enjoyed Kick-Ass; it is a fun movie with lots of laughs and some good action scenes. I left the film entertained and satisfied; however, I did feel that the movie fell short in some regards. The whole idea behind Kick-Ass, based on its graphic novel roots, is an average guy trying to be a super hero and failing, failing majorly hardcore. While Kick-Ass never really does achieve any success in fighting crime, he still gets the girl, he still defeats the villain, he still lives to see another day. As hard as Kick-Ass tries not be just another superhero movie, well, it still is. After reading about some of the differences between the graphic novel the movie is based on, I was even more frustrated by the film. Without going into too much detail at the sake of ruining the story, the book does a much better job of keeping the "heroes" flawed and average as opposed to the film which ultimately just creates another superhero franchise. I realize book-to-movie translations are never perfect, but if you want a better example of anti-heroes, I'd still recommend Watchmen.
In the end, Kick-Ass isn't flawless, but it is a damn good time. It's refreshing to find a superhero movie that avoids being overly serious without being too campy at the same time. Striking the right balance allows the film to transition from comedy to the more dramatic bits with relative ease. As the summer blockbuster season begins to heat up, I seriously hope you'll take the time to check out Kick-Ass...just leave the kids at home for this one.
Final Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: Kick-Ass: "How do I get a hold of you?" Hit-Girl: "You just contact the mayor's office. He has a special signal he shines in the sky; it's in the shape of a giant cock!"
2012 (2009) Directed by Roland Emmerich Length: 158 minutes Rated PG-13 for intense disaster sequences and some languages
Let's start this review off with a little game of Mad-Libs:
This (past) summer, Roland Emmerich brings his latest destruction-filled, CGI-intensive, mayhem-ensuing, end-of-the-world thriller. This time around, the world is threatened by (blank) who/that will destroy civilization as we know it. There will be scenes involving people/cars/planes/etc. running from falling buildings. There will be at least one scene involving a (blank) destroying the White House. One of the main characters will have a broken relationship with his wife that will be repaired as a result of the destruction. And in the end, some brave soul will sacrifice himself by (blank), sparing the fate of humanity.
As you can see from the above attempt at humor, famed king of destruction Roland Emmerich has a formula he likes to stick to when it comes to making a movie. Not simply a MO or similar themes/content consistently present in his films, Emmerich simply reuses the same script for all of his movies, with the major "change" being what is causing the destruction. Look at his track record: Independence Day - aliens, Day After Tomorrow - global warming, 10,000 B.C. - warlords?, so on and so on. Just how many different ways can you destroy the White House on screen? I dare say Roland Emmerich will film them all.
This go around, 2012 focuses on the Mayans and their mysterious calendar that ends on December 21, 2012; a date some believe will mark the end of the world when the planets align. What ensues is a heavy handed attempt to play on your emotions and sense of perseverance and pride in humanity as people around the world band together to survive their imminent demise. There really is no point in summarizing the plot beyond this as I am sure you are familiar with Emmerich's previous works; trust me, nothing is different. The "twist" are predictable, any attempt at symbolism is shallow and laughable, the dialogue is literally laugh-out-loud funny at times, and the "heart-wrenching" moments will once again incite more laughs than tears.
Don't get me wrong, when I watch an action movie or summer popcorn flick, I don't always expect an Oscar-caliber plot or award winning performances. I will in fact give 2012 props where they are due: 1) the science, whether accurate or not, is believable and relatively explained in full, 2) the CGI is pretty good, and 3) there are some chuckles to be had, whether intended or not is another question. That being said, I truly believe I may have enjoyed the film more without dialogue; on multiple occasions I found a scene was ruined or negatively affected by the terrible commentary or pathetic attempt at acting. For a film full of quality actors and actresses, it is hard to see the luster of their star power through all the flies buzzing around this pile, and trust me, I will usually like anything including John Cusack.
All things considered, 2012 is not the worst movie ever, nor is it even close to being considered a good movie. The film relies on caricatures and stereotypes to a fault, the destruction is over-the-top, the dialogue is laughable, so on and so on. The bottom line is, this is just another mindless popcorn thriller aimed at the summer audiences looking for a cheap thrill. Unfortunately, those with a more mature palate will be left with the awful taste of stale popcorn.
Final Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: President Thomas Wilson: [seconds before the White House is destroyed] "I'm coming home, Dorthy."
Clash of the Titans (2010) Directed by Louis Leterrier Length: 118 minutes Rated PG-13 for fantasy action violence, some frightening images and brief sensuality
Anytime you include ancient mythology in a film, I get a little excited. Granted, my personal interest was always more in Egyptian mythology than Greek/Roman (I blame Stargate for this). So you can imagine my excitement when I saw the initial previews for Clash of the Titans: gods, mythical creatures, CGI battle sequences, hell even 3D! After wasting $14 to see this garbage in 3D on opening night, I can only say I'm thankful we now have a foil to the beautiful 3D and CGI that was Avatar.
A remake of the 1981 campy classic, Clash of the Titans is the story of demigod Perseus who must embrace his "godness" in order to defeat the monstrous Kraken threatening to conquer man. There is really no point in covering the plot since the movie doesn't bother to either. It's one thing to quickly get to the action and keep the pace fast, after all many action films do so quite well. However, it is another thing to make the story seem as if the projectionist is fast-forwarding through any semblance of story in order to cram in more "action" scenes; and by action scenes I mean jerky camera shots that jump so quick you can't tell what you are looking at!
Now is a good time to review the popular money-making phenomenon that is sweeping theaters across the country: 3D. This is a perfect example of what is not acceptable when it comes to the third dimension, and how Avatar (sorry Daniel, it's true) got it right. Clash of the Titans, like Alice in Wonderland and many more 3D films to come, was originally filmed in 2D like most every movie currently is. After filming is completed, the studios decide to convert the film to 3D post-production, all in order to cash in on the 3D craze. Unfortunately, this often leaves the film a bit hazy and skews the colors and contrast. Compare that with Avatar, which was completely filmed in 3D. The images in that film seem crisper, smoother, and more organic. The colors are more vivid, and the extra dimension adds more depth and texture as opposed to simply popping out. Clash of the Titans makes me seriously consider boycotting all 3D films not filmed exclusively in 3D. If you must see this film, I would recommend saving the extra cash and suffer in 2D.
Let's be honest, I don't watch action films for the acting or plot. But dear god, I can't stand when the dialog is so campy that it would be better suited as a B-movie on the Syfy channel! I'm pretty sure I've seen better acting in a 4th grade passion play! The film is just bad. Period. It almost reaches the point of being so bad that it is good. If Mystery Science Theater 3000 still roasted movies, this would be contestant #1! I don't know how else to say it, this film is AWFUL!
So after spending millions of dollars on a piece of crap covered in tinfoil, is there anything good to say about the film? Well, the creature designs are decent for the most part, and the settings are "cool." But for the most part, the film is a giant cesspool of bad acting, one line dialog meant to make 8th graders giggle, jerky action shots, terrible 3D presentation, hazy/blurry visuals that make me feel as if I need to get tested for cataracts, etc etc etc. If you just must see this film, I implore you to save your money and just rent it. Unfortunately, this film will probably be number one at the box office after this weekend; so do us all a favor and don't support such an epic failure. I've never done this before, but I'm pulling it out for this film. I give it a whopping...zero stars!
Final Rating: 0 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: "Calm your storm." (Use your 8th grade hormone imagination)
Sherlock Holmes (2009) Directed by Guy Ritchie Length: 128 minutes Rated PG-13 for intense sequence of violence and action, some startling images and a scene of suggestive material
I'll admit that I am not a huge Holmes aficionado; I have never read the mysteries concerning the famous detective. However, I am familiar with the past works of Guy Ritchie (Rock'n'Rolla; Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels) the former husband of musician Madonna and VERY BRITISH film director. Famous for his British sense of humor and slow paced action, many wondered how Ritchie's stab at the famous detective would turn out. What will undoubtedly turn into a multiple sequel franchise (no detective needed for this conclusion), I can only hope the initial effort is not a reflection of things to come.
Immediately thrust into the adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson, played by Robert Downey, Jr. (The Soloist, Iron Man 2) and Jude Law (The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus, Repo Men) respectively, Sherlock Holmes waste little time in showcasing the deductive reasoning employed by Holmes. After arresting and executing an occult following murderer know as Lord Blackwood, said murderer returns from the grave attempting to overcome all attempts by Holmes to reason his return and in turn stop him once again. And that's about it. Unfortunately, for a mystery movie, the story is bland, often relying on deus ex machina ("God in the machine" or any artificial or improbable device resolving the difficulties of a plot) to resolve any discrepancies. I had trouble caring about the characters or really enjoying the development of the plot. Instead of a coherent flow from one scene to the next, I felt like each scene was a different story within itself, leaving me saying "so what" at the end. Mirroring the dark, dirty, and demoralizing setting of industrial England, the story simply lacks flashes of color. While I did not enjoy the plot or most of the characters, RDJ (Robert Downey, Jr. if you dig) does do a great job as the eccentric detective. RDJ has long had success portraying characters "not quite there", displaying multiple ticks and oddities that provide the right balance of humor and seriousness to almost any role. In fact, the movie was at its best whenever it relied on dialogue generated between Holmes and Watson, often lagging any other time. The playful, bromantic banter between the two "friends" often provided the most chuckles and enjoyment. I have never been a huge Jude Law fan, but the chemistry between Holmes and Watson is hard to deny. Both employee the right balance of comfort and edginess that allow the two to work; if only the rest of the characters (including villains and love interest) could add more depth to the film.
While I did not hate this movie, I certainly had a hard time enjoying it. Considering many fans of Sherlock Holmes initially worried the movie would be more summer action blockbuster and less detective movie, I have to admit I found the movie quite boring. For an action movie clocking in at about two hours, I lost interest from almost the opening minutes. Though I thoroughly enjoyed RDJ's performance, it was not enough to overcome the shortcomings of Holmes's initial voyage. While there will most likely be a sequel, I can only hope Sherlock is able to learn from his shortcomings and develop a more enjoyable experience the next go around. Guess we will have to wait for the "other" Sherlock Holmes film starring Sasha Baron Cohen and Will Ferrell, now.
Final Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: Sherlock Holmes: [naked and handcuffed to a bed] "Madame, I need you to remain calm and trust me, I'm a professional. Beneath this pillow lies the key to my release."
Oscar Nominations: Best Achievement in Art Direction Best Original Score
Avatar (2009) Directed by James Cameron Length: 162 minutes Rated PG-13 for intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language, and some smoking
For movie fans and science fiction fanboys, Avatar has been one of the most anticipated movies of the past decade. Long an enigma with scant details, director James Cameron (Aliens, Titanic) has long tried to develop his vision, only to be limited by the nonexistent technology needed to film his latest epic. After almost a decade of attempts to film, Cameron has finally delivered his masterpiece, an unforgettable experience that will impact the future of movies in the years to come.
Let's get this over with so as to address it now: is Avatar the most original or complex story ever? No, but I personally never felt handicapped by this factor. I have heard people complain that the movie is a "rip-off" of everything from Braveheart to Pocahontas to Fern Gully. Essentially, these people rely on the argument that anytime a movie has any elements of a "native" tribe that is in tune with nature, it must be a straight copy. While I will not deny similarities, it isn't the point. Avatar provides a great look at man's (or woman's) capability to consume and destroy.
Set in a future in which we have depleted our natural resources, humans seek out new worlds in which to mine and obtain valuable resources to use for fuel. In the search for unobtainium (WHICH IS A REAL TERM, DAMMIT!), the humans come to the distant moon of Pandora, a lush tropical moon inhabited by a native species known as the Na'vi. Because the atmosphere of Pandora is inhospitable for humans and previous relationship attempts with the Na'vi have failed, a program known as avatar is implemented, in which a human controls a genetically engineered version of the Na'vi developed from the human host's DNA. Don't worry, none of the science in Avatar is overly complex. From there, I'm sure the preview (which can be viewed by clicking on the title at the top) can fill in the rest of the details. As I said, is this the most complex and original story? No, but simplicity can be good if done well. There are plenty of movies with a brain dead plot that leave me wishing I had not wasted my time, but Avatar never feels stale. Though you know what will happen, the sense of predictability does not ruin the movie. This rare feat allowed me to enjoy the movie even if I knew the beginning, middle, and end before sitting in the theater.
Now let's talk about the real star of the show, the incredible graphics and visual effects. Yeah, yeah, yeah...it's a bunch of "smurf" people running around in a CGI world. Why would I ever be impressed by this? Well, just take a moment to really take in everything you are seeing: every detail of Pandora, from the trees, to the birds, to the way the blades of grass move, to the water glistening down a mountain side...all computer generated. The sheer magnitude should begin to set in as you take in the breath-taking world. I know on several occasions, I was mesmerized by the lush and vivid jungle that turns into a living black-light at night. Cameron and his team succeeded on every front in developing this world; I for one want to visit. The 3D element really added to the movie as well (PLEASE do not waste your time by seeing this in 2D). Instead of relying on the gimmicks often employed by 3D movies (i.e. objects coming at the audience), Avatar used the third dimension to add depth and shape to everything, allowing you to really develop a sense of height/altitude as the characters dive off a cliff on the back of a winged creature.
Though what the movie really is simply boils down to a love story, the deeper themes had me hating humans at the end. It is almost embarrassing to witness the destruction we are capable of at times. Throughout history, our species has destroyed the land we rely on, consumed and demanded more and more to satisfy our insatiable appetite, and even killed our own kind in the name of gain. It pains me to think that our future will very easily mirror the one showcased in Avatar. The story found here may be a simple one, but the layers within Avatar serve as warning to our species: learn to coexist with not only the natives but also nature...otherwise we may just get our asses kicked by a bunch of "smurf" people.
Final Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: I'm voting for the graphics as my favorite "quote"
Oscar Winners: Best Achievement in Cinematography Best Achievement in Art Direction Best Achievement in Visual Effects Oscar Nominations: Best Motion Picture Best Achievement in Directing - James Cameron Best Achievement in Editing Best Original Score Best Achievement in Sound Mixing Best Achievement in Sound Editing
District 9 (2009) Directed by Neill Blomkamp Length 112 minutes Rated R for bloody violence and pervasive lanugage
People are often inclined to complain about the state of movies today, specifically concerning the lack of originality and quality. Thankfully, what started as the film adaptation of the popular video game Halo quickly turned into one of the most original and best movies to come out in a long time. Making his directorial debut, Neill Blomkamp has delivered a powerful movie that has you leaving the theater not only commenting on the special effects and gore but also on the immense social commentary found throughout the film. Bolstered by these powerful themes, District 9 is the rare combo of action and drama that truly succeeds in making a meaningful impact.
The plot of District 9 is easy enough to understand and is established in a documentary style. Roughly twenty years ago, an alien mothership broke down over the city of Johannesburg, South Africa, a region with a rich history of segregation, hatred, and misunderstanding. Instead of attempting to establish a meaningful first contact with the aliens, known by the humans as "Prawns" for their shrimp-like appearance, they are soon gathered in ghettos guarded by a corporation attempting to utilize the alien technology to develop new weapons. The protagonist of the story Wikus Van De Merwe, played by Blomkamp's real life friend and new comer Sharlto Copley, works for the corporation as a director of alien affairs (essentially). While serving eviction notices, Wikus is exposed to an alien substance that begins to cause him to transform into one of the Prawns.
The real star and driving force of District 9 is Wikus. Mirroring the transformation process of Jeff Golblum in David Croneburg's adaption of The Fly (an obvious influnce on Blomkamp), the emotional and physical pain Wikus experiences is felt by the audience. I know I personally found myself on the verge of tears numerous times as Wikus struggled with losing his wife. Particularly powerful are the scenese involving the experiementation on Wikus. In the clearest definition of the term, Wikus is a tragic hero, not only physically transforming but also mentally and emotionally transforming from the true monstrosity of a human into the misunderstood Prawn.
Beyond simply being gory, District 9 is a haunting movie that forces you to question your irrational fears of the unknown. Living in unfit conditions, the concentration camps housing the Prawn are dirty, dangerous, and disturbing. It is known by urban developers that a poor environment can lead to bad behavior in the form of gangs, crime, and prostitution, all of which are found in the ghettos of district nine. It's amazing to witness the level of detail in terms of social commentary Blomkamp fit into this movie, not only concerning segregation but also on poverty and society as a whole.
Perhaps the most prevalent theme throughout the film is the control corporations wield in today's society. The corporation that Wikus works for, MNU, attempts to garner new technologies from the aliens, specifially weapons. The problem with the alien's technology is that it only works when used by someone possessing alien DNA. I'm sure you can realize based on my plot summary the interest MNU has in Wikus and his new found transformation. Truly, the scenes involving Wikus being forced to fire the alien weapons will leave your jaw dropped and on the verge of tears.
What is being helmed as a great summer action movie succeeds in delivering on many more levels than initially anticipated. For a first film, Blomkamp has hit a home run. Not only will the thrill seekers be satisfied with the blood and explosions, the most ferocious filmgoers will all find something in District 9. It truly is disturbing to watch the depths the human race will sink to. In a time still plagued by hatred and war, we need more films like Blomkamp's masterpiece that force us to ponder the bigger issues as well as those we may not be comfortable facing.
Final Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: I couldn't really remember one particularly quote, but there are numerous scenes that will stick out and leave a lasting impression on you.
Oscar Nominations: Best Motion Picture Best Adapted Screenplay Best Achievement in Editing Best Achievement in Visual Effects
Terminator Salvation(2009) Directed by McG Length: 130 minutes Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action, and language
When I was younger, I wanted to be a terminator when I grew up. I tried my best to dress, talk, and act like Arnold Schwarzenegger. Needless to say, my childhood ambitions never really panned out. But perhaps you'll understand how excited I was upon hearing about the production of a new terminator flick; then imagine my horror upon hearing the infamous McG was behind the helm. The guy famous for Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle would be directing my beloved franchise into the ground...or would he? After anxiously awaiting the release of the latest chapter in the Terminator franchise, I can honestly say that, while not great, McG has delivered an enjoyable movie that will satisfy fans and non-fans alike.
Unlike the previous three films, Terminator Salvation takes place after Judgment Day, the day Skynet (a highly sophisticated AI) became aware and unleashed a war upon the human race filled with death and destruction. Amongst the bleak and ashy remains of the world, we find the prophesied savior of humanity John Conner, played by Christian Bale (Public Enemies, The Dark Knight), struggling to lead the remainder of humanity in opposition of the machines bent on our destruction. The mission to stop the machines becomes murky upon discovering Marcus Wright, played by newcomer Sam Worthington (Avatar, Rogue), a seemingly normal human, with one exception...Marcus is actually a new prototype machine equipped with organs and memories of the donor's previous life.
Let's start with the bad and build from there. Traditionally, I feel that a good cast can do wonders for bad directing, plot, writing, etc. True, an actor is only as good as the material, but good/great performances can go a long way towards redeeming a film. Unfortunately, the acting in Terminator Salvation lacks substance and emotion. Even with a good cast toting the likes of Bale, Bryce Dallas Howard (The Look of Real, Spider-man 3) as Kate Conner, and Anton Yelchin (Memoirs of a Teenage Amnesiac, Star Trek) as Kyle Reese, the dialogue feels stilted and devoid of any emotion. I understand the movie takes place during an apocalyptic future where we are constantly at war; if the scenes only centered around fighting, then I would accept this as a reason. But the scenes involving human interaction left a lot to be desired. The few scenes between Bryce Dallas Howard and Bale felt rough and a bit put on. Yelchin, a young actor with a bright future, even fails to really deliver a good performance. Of all of the actors and actresses, Sam Worthington provides the best example of stoic heroism in the face of danger with a dash of emotion at the right times. But even his performance is flawed as his Aussie accent pops up on a few occasions.
Now for the good. The special effects and scenery are amazing. The machines look their best as they hunt for humans to eradicate. Another interesting but welcome change is the introduction of different models of the terminators. Not only do we have the traditional humanoid models, but we have water-based ones, motorcycle scouts, herders, etc. A lot of praise should go to the set designers who developed an impressive landscape. You truly get a sense of the mass destruction that blankets the earth in a pile of rubbish and ash. In an ironic sense, this is the most beautiful film in the series yet.
A lot of reviews and opinions have blasted the script, an element I was initially cautious of. However, I found the plot to be original, creative, and believable. I don't think the script will be winning an Oscar for best original screenplay, but it certainly provides for an easy to follow yet enjoyable action movie scenario. It also was enjoyable to see not just one or two terminators duking it out over John Conner, but an entire legion of deadly machinery.
So, all said, is it better than Terminator or T2: Judgment Day? No, but that doesn't mean the movie is a failure. McG has thankfully placed the series on the right track as the focus has shifted from preventing Judgment Day to stoping the machines in the future. Having already signed the cast on for two more sequels, I eagerly await the explosions, scenery, and development of the future films. Let's just hope that Bale and the rest of the cast remember why they are considered "good" actors in time for the sequels.
Final Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: Kate Conner: "What should I tell your men when they find out you're gone?" John Conner: "I'll be back."
Star Trek (2009) Directed by J.J. Abrams Length: 127 minutes Rated PG-13 for sci-fi action and violence, and brief sexual content
Space, the final frontier...admit it: most of you are probably laughing at the sheer nerdom being exhibited by all of the fanboys starting from the time this new Star Trek film was announced. Damn Trekkies, right (or to be politically correct to the diehards Trekkers)? While I grew up watching Star Trek: The Next Generation with my parents, I have never labeled myself as a true Trekkie; however, I was eager to see this new adaption since it was being helmed by one of sci-fi's current gurus J.J. Abrams (Lost, Fringe). After witnessing what is easily the best Star Trek film ever, you can easily see this isn't your parent's Star Trek.
Credit Abrams for realizing how difficult it would be to try and follow the tremendous amount of mythology concerning this classic series. After numerous television programs and several movies, it would next to impossible for Abrams to cover every last detail. However, that being said, the plot here stays true to the fanboys while welcoming a new generation of fans. Set around the time of the initial voyage of the USS Enterprise, Star Trek allows all viewers, new and old, to become acclimated to the characters and understand their origins. You see how James T. Kirk came to be the womanizing, kick-ass captain aboard the Starfleet vessel, how the half-human/Vulcan Spock came to be the famous character that he is today, and so forth. Though fans from the old days may have some complaints about new relationships or character differences, Abrams largely does a great job staying true to the script and selecting a great cast to fill the legendary roles.
The basic premise of Star Trek centers around an angry Romulan named Nero, played by Eric Bana (Funny People, The Time Traveler's Wife) who travels back in time on a mission to destroy the Federation affiliated planets that allowed Romulus to be destroyed. Ultimately, it is up to the crew of the Enterprise to stop Nero. I know, I know...time travel? Relax, it is explained and is way more believable than I would be able to explain in this blog. If I was to try, I would simply ruin the movie. So just accept the basic plot synopsis and you'll enjoy. I'll admit that I was initially a little skeptical when I heard Eric Bana was playing the evil villain. While I do not think Bana is a terrible actor, I simply worried that he may have been to much of a "softie" to play a bad guy. But I am happy to report that Bana does an excellent job in providing the evil antagonist for the real stars of the show...that's right, Kirk and Spock.
The selection of Zachary Quinto (Heroes) as Spock and Chris Pine (Quantum Quest, Smokin' Aces) as Kirk are perfect! Quinto is able to pull off that logical scowl made famous by Leonard Nemoy (who makes a cameo if you didn't hear), while also introducing a more human/emotional side to the famous Vulcan. This is a much younger and unpredictable Spock; you really get to see a side of the character never before truly portrayed in the past. With Pine, he nails Kirk. Full of bravado and swagger, Pine will seek a fight one second and whistle at the nearest alien babe the next. Though Kirk was always a bit of a joke (i.e. find alien, have sex, kick ass, leave, repeat), this new young and inexperienced Kirk reeks of confidence; you never once doubt that Kirk has a plan that is going to save everyone from the face of danger.
Now what good is a summer blockbuster without the special effects; never fear, the graphics here are set to stun and will leave your jaw dropped. The opening scene alone far surpasses anything previously seen in any other Star Trek film. I have to say, the coolest scene has to be the periolous sky dive down to the drill threatening to destroy the planet Vulcan. You will be breathless at the sheer awesomeness on screen.
Some fans may scream foul at the privileges taken by Abrams, but let's be honest: there is/was no way he could have covered every little detail within the Star Trek realm. Any changes seen within the film are explained as changes brought about by Nero traveling back in time. This alteration to the space time contiuum may leave you searching for Stephen Hawking on your speed dial, but it allows Abrams the freedom to develop a new and incredible series. While Star Trek is not a flawless movie, it is a great start to a new series and a highly entertaing film that should be enjoyed by all, not just Trekkies/Trekkers.
Final Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: Instead of a quote, I thought I would include this classic video!
Oscar Winners: Best Achievement in Makeup
Oscar Nominations: Best Achievement in Sound Mixing Best Achievement in Sound Editing Best Achievement in Visual Effects
Watchmen (2009) Directed by Zack Snyder Length: 163 minutes Rated R for strong graphic violence, sexuality, nudity, and language
Considered one of the most anticipated movies of the year, if not the decade, the movie Watchmen has finally arrived. Based on the graphic novel by Alan Moore and considered one of the greatest novels of all time, many wondered if this classic could ever truly be adapted for the big screen. Having read the novel, I can attest to the concerns that many had going into the film: there are so many details and plots woven together throughout the story that it is almost impossible to cut any thread loose. After finally seeing the movie that almost never made it (check out the stories on the lawsuits between Fox & Warner Brothers), Watchmen delivers in every aspect imaginable.
Watchmen is set in 1985 in a parallel, yet similar time in the United States. The Soviet Union and America are still engaged in a bitter cold war with the imminent threat of nuclear strike at any moment. However, in this world, it's the infamous Richard Nixon leading the charge as masked crusaders protect the streets and the country from criminals and danger. That would be the basic summary of the plot, and I mean basic. There is so much going on in Watchmen that it can be a bit much at times. I have to admit, if I had not read the book in advance, I might have been lost during the film. It can take a bit of time to digest all that is and has happened, but overall the story is amazing and heart wrenching.
Let me start by commending the directorial job of Zack Snyder (300). Snyder has quickly established himself as the go-to-guy for graphic novel adaptations; many fanboys were hesitant when Snyder was announced as the director. Yeah, he had success directing 300, but let me be very clear that the two are miles apart in terms of quality of material. Watchmen, contrary to many tags, is not a superhero movie. Yeah there are people in capes and a blue guy with superpowers, but that's not the point. This film is a commentary on society as a whole: an analysis of the weakness of humans and how we hide behind masks, the beauty of relationships of all kinds, and the depths to which humans are capable of sinking. That being said, you can see why some may have been hesitant to laud the naming of Snyder as the director. Ask any fan of Moore's novel, and their number one priority had to be that the director truly has a passion for the series; I can safely say that Snyder wears his love for the story and characters of Watchmen on his sleeve for all to see. You can tell that this is a film where the director put every ounce of energy and passion into making the most accurate and realistic adaptation of an amazing book; I really hope Snyder will branch out into more original material and will have a chance to showcase his talents.
The acting for the most part is excellent. Jackie Earle Haley (Little Children, Shutter Island) continues to prove he is a very talented actor that has the deranged characters down to a science, in this case as the masked Rorschach. Rorschach is the most loved character from the series and is seen as the narrator throughout both the film and book. While he is more prone to breaking fingers to obtain answers and brutally murdering a criminal, Rorschach is a man of principles and ideals who strives to uphold the laws of society. I'll go on to say that I would not be surprised if Haley draws serious Oscar consideration this year; his portrayal of Rorschach fulfills every image I had of the character as I read the book and ultimately provides for some of the best scenes of the movie. Billy Crudup (Almost Famous, Public Enemies) also delivers an excellent performance as the god-like Doctor Manhattan, the blue guy that can control matter. Manhattan is a tough character in that he really has no emotions considering he is immortal as well as detached from human concerns, yet he is a compassionate man who cares for those around him. Crudup does a good job of staying emotionless yet conveying that glimmer of concern that really sells you on Manhattan's character.
Now what would an action "superhero" movie be without the CGI graphics and explosions. I was fortunate enough to see Watchmen in an IMAX theater and highly recommend the same for you if you have the chance. The action is intense; the punches hurt; the sounds of bones snapping are disturbing; the flames raging are intense...it really is a gorgeous looking film that should be enjoyed on the big screen. I'll warn you that the fight scenes can get a bit graphic (as mentioned, bones snapping, blood splattering EVERYWHERE), but the sounds capturing the fights are amazing. With every punch, I felt as if my jaw was being beaten.
Speaking of sounds, Watchmen is one of the few movies I have seen incorporating music so well into its presentation of the story. Very rarely do we care about the opening credits, but the one for this film is classic. To the tune of "The Times They Are A-Changin'" by Bob Dylan, Snyder is able to provide the back story of the original costume fighters and the evolution to the new crime fighters that roam the streets today. The funeral scene for The Comedian is set to "The Sound of Silence" by Simon & Garfunkel and is one of the most beautiful and touching scenes in an action movie in a long time.
As I stated before, this is not a superhero movie. Many of the themes from Watchmen, while written during the 1980s, are still very relevant today. Consider this the thinking man's action movie. Yeah you can enjoy it for just the explosions and fights, but to really get everything out of Watchmen, you have to appreciate the themes and analysis behind every story and relationship. Many serious fans may notice the ending is different from the book, but Snyder has remained very true to the novel. For a majority of the film, it was as if I was reading the book page for page. Snyder has truly captured the essence of the Watchmen in an amazing film that many thought would never be possible. I truly hope all of you will look past the close to three hour length and graphic nature to appreciate this fine piece of art that truly transcends the "superhero" genre.
Final Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars
Favorite Quote: Rorschach:[to prisoners] "I'm not locked in here with you! You're locked in here with ME!"
Wanted (2008) Directed by Timur Bekmambetov Length: 110 minutes Rated R for strong bloody violence throughout, pervasive language, and some sexuality
Usually I like to start these off with a little intro about the movie, summarize the plot, comment on the acting, comment on something else in the movie, and then close it up. But I'm not going to waste time or mince words about this movie - it's a straight up action movie, period. You should not watch Wanted expecting Oscar winning performances or profound/life-changing plot. If you want an entertaining popcorn movie that has plenty of "Oh shit! That just happened!" moments, then Wanted is an excellent choice.
James McAvoy (The Last Station, Atonement) plays Wesley Gibson, a disgruntled office worker who is struggling to accept his pathetic life, when he learns he is actually the son of a skilled assassin that belongs to an ancient group known as The Fraternity. As Wesley undergoes his training to help him unlock his innate abilities, he finally becomes a true ass-kicking assassin like his father. That's about it...as in that's all you really need.
What really makes Wanted enjoyable are not the characters or the plot, but the action sequences and creativity behind a lot of the stunts. This movie doesn't try to claim realism but is able to avoid crossing the line of absurdity. If you enjoy a good car chase, fight sequences, and explosions, then Wanted will most definitely deliver.
My only real complaint with the movie is the ending. I figured it would be open ended, leading to the inevitable sequel. While work has already begun on the new script, once you see the ending, you'll understand my dilemma with the ending. Also, the "Loom of Destiny" (I know it's from a comic) is a bit of a reach for me to accept as justification. I know this review is certainly much shorter than normal, but trust me, there's not much to surmise. Definitely check out Wanted if you enjoy good action movies, just keep your expectations low.
Final Rating: 3 out of 5 Stars
Favorite Quote: Wesley: [voice-over] It's my anorexic boss' birthday. This means there's a certain amount of inter-office pressure to stand around the conference table, eating crappy food and pretending to worship her. Acting for five minutes like Janice doesn't make all our lives miserable is the hardest work I'll do all day. My job title is account manager. I used to be called an account service representative, but a consultant told us we have to manage our clients, and to not service them. I have a girlfriend who I neither manage or service. That's my best friend Barry fucking her on an Ikea kitchen table I picked up for a really good price. I'm finding it hard to care about anything these days. In fact, the only thing I do care about is the fact that I can't care about anything. Seriously, it worries me. My name is Wesley Gibson. My dad walked out on my mom when I was seven days old. Sometimes I wonder if he ever looked into my baby blue eyes and asked himself "did I just father the most insignificant asshole of the twenty-first century"?
Oscar Nominations: Best Achievement in Sound Best Achievement in Sound Editing
Taken(2009) Directed by Pierre Morel Length: 91 minutes Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence, disturbing thematic content, sexual content, some drug reference, and violence
Before I saw this movie, one of my roommates (whose opinion I often disagree with) proclaimed that this is the best movie of 2009, so far. While we are certainly just beginning 2009, such a claim seems worth an investigation. After now seeing Taken twice, I remember why my roommate and I often disagree on our taste in movies.
This movie is just plain average: nothing extraordinary, nothing terribly damning. The movie starts with old Qui-Gon Jinn himself, Liam Neeson (Lincoln, The Chronicles of Narnia) playing the role of Bryan Mills, a retired CIA operative who is attempting to rebuild his relationship with his seventeen year-old daughter before she leaves for college. You really get an idea how out of touch with his daughter Bryan is when he buys a karaoke machine for his daughter's birthday, believing that she is still the little girl who wants to grow up to be a singer one day.
Just as it seems Bryan is beginning to regain his daughter's love, she asks for his permission to travel to Paris for the summer with a friend. As I'm sure you have gathered from the preview, things don't go according to the plan. Bryan's daughter Kim, played by Maggie Grace (Lost), and her friend are soon abducted and sold into the world of sex trafficking. So what would any good former CIA operative do if his/her daughter was captured? Why travel to Paris to kick some ass, torture some Albanians, and save the girl of course!
For those fans of Jack Bauer and his 24 torture/stop the "bad guys" adventures, this is your movie. For those of you that like a good movie, then you might be out of luck. Liam Neeson does a respectable job as the father possessed with finding and saving his daughter. His daughter Kim is a different story. Is it bad that I almost wanted her to be deflowered and taken by the sex slave traders? I know teenagers are emotional, moody, and needy; but Jesus, would someone take the silver spoon out of this girl's mouth and just say no! What parent thinks it's a good idea to send their daughter to Europe unattended, when she can barely even act like a mature adult. For someone who is actually twenty-seven, I'll give Maggie Grace her dues; she truly is believable as a seventeen year-old. But dear God did I want her to not be rescued. I can only pray I don't have a daughter like this.
My ranting about annoying children aside, the action is ultimately on the dull side. When your whole basis is as an action movie, dull does not bode well. You never feel like Mills is in danger of not succeeding. I know he is a trained CIA agent, but even James Bond gets his ass kicked every once in a while. I have trouble believing that an older, albeit experienced, agent can demolish so many people and come out with minimal damage. Not to mention, you would think his judgment would be clouded by emotions. I mean, this is his daughter that is being sold into sex slavery; not just some stranger.
If you are looking for a decent popcorn flick, then by all means rent Taken. I can't recommend spending the cash to see the movie in the theater, but it could not hurt to rent/Netflix it. As long as you don't expect the Bourne trilogy, then I feel like you will find an easy to watch, entertaining, yet average movie.
Final Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
Favorite Quote: Bryan: "Now's not the time for dick measuring, Stuart!"
