Showing posts with label adventure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label adventure. Show all posts

Monday, May 07, 2012

The Avengers (2012)

(Image from IMP Awards)

The Avengers (2012)

Joss Whedon has gone and done it. He has cracked the barrier that existed between the insanely OTT superhero comic and the silver screen. Whedon, who wrote and directed 'The Avengers', has made what feels like the first near perfect superhero comic adaptation, one that perfectly encapsulates the tone and spirit of 'Earth's Mightiest Heroes'. His film has demolished box office records and good for him - having done his time in TV land and gotten screwed over time and again by studios, mainstream success is a long overdue just desert.

The story boils down to this - the evil demigod Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is setting out to take over the Earth with an alien army at his command. The threat is so great that Agent Nick Fury (Sam Jackson) is forced to set the Avengers Initiative into action, which involves bringing the greatest of Earth's heroes together. These are Iron Man / Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), Captain America / Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), and Hulk / Dr. Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo), and they are supported by Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) and Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson). The problem - they all each have their own baggage and aren't exactly keen on working together. There's more to the plot than that of course, but that's the gist of it.

Marvel laid the foundation for this movie with the five individual outings of the main heroes, so in a sense this movie is the culmination of those early adventures; indeed it doesn't work on its own without at least some passing knowledge of those earlier films, which were admittedly of varying quality and never quite attained greatness. Still, it's worth watching those in order to experience this, and I'm actually keen to revisit all of them with the foreknowledge of what they lead up to. And while they weren't perfect, they each (bar The Incredible Hulk) did one major thing right - they achieved near perfect casting.

Robert Downey Jr is the biggest name, and he continues his limelight hogging, charismatic turn as Tony Stark. Hemsworth is imposing, regal and cocky as the 'godlike' Thor. Evans is stoic and noble as Captain America, donning the star spangled tights without a hint of irony. Renner made a brief and uninspiring appearance in Thor, but he's incredibly badass here as Hawkeye, and I can fully understand how he was chosen to headline the Bourne Franchise. There are two surprise packages as well - Johansson is terrific as Black Widow - cool and crafty but with guilt bubbling under the surface, she's more than just eye candy (though she does that well too). The biggest surprise though is Mark Ruffalo, who almost steals the show as the nerdy but oddly charismatic Bruce Banner, struggling to keep his dark passenger under control. Also deserving of praise is Hiddleston who, improbably, comes across as an effective and menacing villain despite being a whiny pawn in a grander scheme. Sam Jackson is, well, Sam Jackson; he could do this in his sleep, but he does it well.

Great actors need great words to work with, and the Whedon touch truly comes to the fore here. Despite being marginally Stark-centric, the script balances the characters perfectly and gives all of them their moment to shine while imbuing them with depth and personality. It's full of humour through both dialogue and action, and there are loads of laugh out loud moments. The interplay between the protagonists is fast and witty and conveys familial bickering to a T. There is a lull in the action in the middle, but this is more than made up for by all the banter!

Which brings me to the action, which is the one area where Whedon hasn't exactly established his expertise. Well, consider him established now as the action is, to put it mildly, spectacular! It helps that there is a great deal of variety in terms of the characters and their powers, but to envisage scenes utilising them in ways that make sense, with each hero fighting according to their abilities without giving anyone the short shrift is no small achievement. It's all coherent and flows without resorting to insane close ups and quick cuts, and everyone gets their moment of glory. It's truly epic in a way that no other superhero movie has achieved, and it's also unabashedly comic book like with wave after wave of aliens being dispatched by our heroes in imaginative ways. It helps that the special effects are nearly flawless - not once was I taken out of the film by a dodgy effect. The Hulk steals the whole show during the climactic battle with some of the funniest and most memorable moments.

Recommended? Hell yeah! I loved this movie and will almost certainly catch it again on the big screen (in 2D). It's the second Whedon film this year that I can say that of - the man's on fire! Avengers is a near perfect superhero comic book film and a bloody good action/adventure film to boot. It is a shame that you need to do some prep work before watching it, but that's a small price to pay in this instance. The Avengers 2 has a lot to live up to!

Sunday, April 08, 2012

The Hunger Games (2012)


Image from IMP Awards

The Hunger Games (2012)

Films that are better than the book are, apparently, an almost mythical breed - a supposed truism that I take objection to, and one that the film adaptation of the first of Suzanne Collins' 'Hunger Games' trilogy goes some way towards disproving. I picked up the book with a little reluctance, worried that it would be another shallow Twilight-esque phenomenon; I was pleasantly surprised to discover that it was a genuinely interesting and compelling science fiction story, as is the film.

It's the future, and the United States is no more. What's left is a nation state composed of a totalitarian Capitol and 12 subservient 'Districts', each at a varying level of economic prosperity. Katniss Everdeen, played by the terrific Jennifer Lawrence, is a teenage girl in the poverty ridden district 12 who illegally hunts game to provide for her mother and younger sister. From the outset we see that she is resourceful and possesses a steely eyed determination, attributes Lawrence captures perfectly without appearing cold or aloof. The story's complex protagonist and her portrayal are without question the film's biggest strength (so much so that the NY Times did an interesting piece on her here).

Day to day survival in District 12, depicted as a stark and hopeless commune by director Gary Ross in the film's early scenes, isn't the only problem its denizens face. Every year, as punishment for a failed uprising against the Capitol, each District must offer a randomly picked teenage boy and girl as 'tributes' to take part in the 'Hunger Games', a televised rules free battle to the death within a large controlled environment where only one can emerge victorious (this gladiatorial spectacle is one of several allusions to ancient Rome). When her sister is picked, Katniss volunteers to take her place and is whisked off to the opulent Capitol together with fellow tribute Peeta Mellark (a bland but adequate Josh Hutcherson) to prepare for the games... and certain death.

The first half of the film is the lead up to the games themselves and takes place primarily in the Capitol, which is depicted as garish, gaudy, and full of excess. The designs are outlandish and the lifestyle is luxurious, the complete opposite of the suppressed Districts - an unsubtle but nonetheless effective depiction of a society of extreme inequality. Our primary representative of the Capitol is Effie Trinket, played to perfection by Elizabeth Banks, the shrill and shallow escort for District 12's tributes. Effie is part of the tributes' support team, which also includes their stylist Cinna - a solid Lenny Kravitz - and their trainer Haymitch, a former Games survivor from District 12, brought wonderfully to life by Woody Harrelson as a gruff and comical but ultimately caring ruffian.

Collins' novel and her screen adaptation don't stop at being an allegory for the injustices of inequality, they also lampoon a culture of excess and superficiality, and this is highlighted perfectly in the way the Games are treated as a reality TV show. The tributes have to take part in a training regimen and impress potential sponsors who may provide them with resources during the games. Part of the likelihood of sponsorship rests on how popular the tribute is, where popularity is gained by being fashionable, extravagant, likable and willing to tell personal stories to endear themselves to viewers. Katniss is forced to compromise who she is to entertain the masses for the sake of her family and her District as well as her life, a recurring theme that is handled with admirable subtlety by director, write, and actor.

When the Games proper begin the film dips slightly as the second half, taking place as it does almost entirely in nondescript woods, can't quite match the variety and depth of the first. It's a battle for survival, mildly reminiscent of Battle Royale (which I reviewed here a few years ago!) but lacking that films nuanced portrayal of minor supporting characters.

Gary Ross's elegant and restrained style gives way to a little too much shaky camera work and quick cut editing, presumably necessitated by the requirement to minimise the child against child violence displayed on screen. When it works it's effective, such as the opening of the Games where a bloodbath occurs as the tributes fight for resources. Ross constructs scenes that take their time and are fleshed out, with actors given the opportunity to convey thoughts and emotions without dialogue. This is a real film and not a cheap cash in, although its 'relatively small for a blockbuster' budget does show in the so-so special effects.

The Games are a case of surviving against the elements as much as they are about combat and strategy - a real game of cat and mouse in the woods, as it were, where finding food, water, and shelter are as important as surviving encounters with other tributes. This segment of the film is exciting and brutal, well paced while still leaving time for character moments and plot twists along the way.

The screenplay diverges from the book at points but only slightly, excising unnecessary prolonged sequences during the Games that frankly would have been uncinematic. It also - thankfully - tones down the faux/real romance between Katniss and Peeta and the potential love triangle involving her hunting partner back home, Gale (a bland Liam Hemsworth). The character interplay between the two District 12 tributes is subtler and less cringe inducing than in the book.

Despite minor deviations, and the screenplay is incredibly true to the source material, even when it sometimes amalgamates different moments and transposes others. There are some additions to the book as well, ones that serve to elevate the material to the realm of socially relevant sci-fi. These include goings on behind the scenes involving the menacing President (Donald Sutherland) and the naive showman running the games, Seneca (Wes Bentley) as well as certain events in other districts that are triggered by Katniss' defiance in the arena.

While the film doesn't end with a sense of finality - unsurprising since there are two more books in the trilogy - it is still fairly self contained and satisfactory. I'm not sure how this story continues and am a tad trepidatious as the first act has a lot to live up to. As it stands, however, 'The Hunger Games' is intelligent and exciting science fiction that marries ideas, action, spectacle, and human drama together to create a rewarding cinematic experience, one that is anchored by a star making central performance.

Sunday, March 25, 2012

John Carter (2012)


(Image from Imp Awards)

John Carter (2012)

Critics have been unkind to this one and audiences have been indifferent. Their loss, as this adaptation of Edgar Rice Burroughs' seminal pulp book directed by Pixar alumnus Andrew Stanton is an above average adventure film.

Taking place in the American Civil War era, the film follows vet John Carter (Taylor Kitsch) as he goes in search of a fortune in gold. An encounter with the military leads to him going on the run and finding a mystical cave where he encounters an alien being. A brief tussle leads to Carter being 'transported' across space to the planet Mars; here he encounters a veritable menagerie of strange creatures and people, from the war like giant four armed green Tharks to giant white apes to the red skinned tribal humanoids of Mars.

The plot involves a war between two 'human' tribes, progressive Helium and barbaric Zodanga. The Zodangan leader, Sab Than (Dominic 'Jimmy McNulty' West), is being steered by powerful manipulators known as Therns (let by Mark Strong's Matai Shang) - empowered by Thern technology, he brings Helium to its knees and then offers them peace in the form of a marriage between himself and the feisty Princess of Helium, Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins). John Carter's presence on the planet introduces a new unexpected element into the equation as his earth gravity bred body is super strong on Mars, making him a fearsome warrior and thus a potential weapon/threat for the various factions, including the Tharks (led by Tars Tarkas, played by Willem Dafoe via motion capture).

Phew, and that's just the first 30 minutes or so of a two hour plus film which features copious amounts of adventuring and combat and various twists and turns!

Which is part of the problem with the film - it has an overly convoluted (though not overly confusing) plot, and it drags in places. Also a weakness are the sketchily drawn characters. Both of these flaws are true of the source material as well, so in that sense it is a faithful adaptation! The biggest weakness however is Taylor Kitsch who makes a disappointingly bland John Carter; this coupled with his two-dimensional characterisation in the script makes the eponymous hero something of a disappointment.

You'd think the collection of criticisms I've listed would derail the film, but fortunately its strengths manage to compensate.

First, the visuals and designs. It's about to become one of the biggest flops of all time, but the money is definitely there on the screen in the grand realisation of an alien world and creatures that may not take CGI to a new level but certainly represent it at the top of its game. Second, the tone - this isn't a serious movie and it knows it, and it tells its story with a level of campy seriousness (except for Kitsch, admittedly) coupled with silly goofiness. There are some genuinely funny and even endearing moments, Third, the action and adventure have a sense of fun and energy that matches the tone; this perhaps derives from Stanton's animation background as it wouldn't seem out of place in a Pixar film (not a bad thing). And finally, there's the rest of the cast, most of whom are in tune with the material. Lynn Collins in particular is terrific as the Princess, the one fleshed out character in the story (ironic since she was among the more superficial ones in the book) who drives proceedings while Kitsch falters. And yes, she is very easy on the eyes to boot!

The folks I watched this with were lukewarm towards it, so perhaps I'm in the minority on this one, but I dug it and would definitely watch it again. It's a fun adventure film that does what it says on the tin and to my mind is far superior to many of the other sci-fi/adventure films that have come out in recent times. One last thing, John Carter's weird alien dog companion Woola is an absolute hoot!

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Movie Roundup

I've been watching way too many movies lately to review them all properly, so I'm going to take the easy, lazy way out by doing a brief recap.


(Image from IMP Awards)

First up, High Fidelity (2000), based on yet another book I haven't read. John Cusack plays Rob Gordon, a music aficionado who ekes out a living running his own little record shop with his friends/employees. The tale starts with Rob being dumped by his girlfriend, after which he proceeds to list the top 5 breakups of his life (top 5 lists being a recurring gag in the film) while struggling to make sense of why his relationships keep ending badly. Cusack's excellent in the role and the film itself is witty and more than a little insightful, making Rob sympathetic while also being up front about his (serious) character flaws. It's partly a rom com for guys with a male perspective on relationships, and partly a look at geekery and fandom (in this case, music geeks). An excellent supporting cast (Jack Black is surprisingly great) and musical choices make it worth seeing.



(Image from Imp Awards)

Arrietty (2010), the latest animated film from Miyazaki's Studio Ghibli, lacks the grandeur and depth of some of their previous masterpieces but is still an excellent, if slight film. Based on Mary Norton's children's book 'The Borrowers', it tells the story of a family of tiny people (think Lilliputians) who live in secret within the walls/floorboads of a rural home, surviving by 'borrowing' food and supplies. When Arrietty, the daughter, starts becoming friends with a frail, ill boy who moves into the house, she inadvertently puts her whole family in danger. The animation is gorgeous as always with the trademark Ghibli attention to detail and inventiveness on full display, making full use of the protagonists' ultra-diminutive size in relation to ordinary household objects. Captivating and sometimes moving, the film marks another worthy entry in a long line of excellent Japanese animated films that are worth watching regardless of your age.



(Image from Imp Awards)

It's always tricky explaining this film. Brotherhood of the Wolf (2001) is a French period drama/action adventure/martial arts/horror/fantasy film, and it's one of my favourites. I suspect it's one of those films you'll either love or hate. Told with somber seriousness, the story (partly based - very loosely - on true events) is fairly preposterous, as is the mish mash of genres. A creature, believed to be a giant wolf of sorts, is terrorising the countryside of the French province of Gévaudan. The King sends his Royal taxidermist Grégoire de Fronsac (Samuel Le Bihan) to investigate and kill the creature. Accompanied by his Iroquois 'brother' Mani (Mark Dacascos),  de Fronsac finds romance, aristocratic snobbery, and potential conspiracy afoot in what at first seemed a straightforward assignment. And there's plenty of martial arts violence to boot! Visually quite sumptuous and let down only by some dodgy effects, the film exudes cool from beginning to end and easily overcomes its inherent silliness. There's a strong supporting cast including the luscious Monica Belucci (who features in one of the film's most memorable scene transitions) and the forever sneering Vincent Cassel. Tremendously good fun, I loved every minute of it!


(Image from Imp Awards)

From one outrageous movie I love to one I merely enjoyed. Drive Angry (2011) is a rare Nicolas Cage movie that I enjoyed watching, and not just because of the pleasing (and trashy) eye candy provided by co-star Amber Heard. Cage plays Milton, a dead man who escapes Hell to avenge the murder of his daughter and save the life of a baby kidnapped by a mad cult led by a ruthless maniac (Billy Burke). Accompanied by the aforementioned Heard whom he picks up early on in the film and pursued by Hell's  'Accountant' (a devilishly good William Fichtner) who is 'hell bent' (sorry!) on returning him to the afterlife penitentiary (Satan is the warden), Milton blazes a trail of sordid destruction as he pursues the cult. It's over the top in a similar way to Shoot 'Em Up was, and unapologetically so - there's a scene where Milton kills baddies in the midst of intercourse! Trashy, forgettable, but entertaining while it lasts, if you're OK with this sort of thing.

(Image from Imp Awards)


Every Thing You Always Wanted to Know About Sex * But Were Afraid to Ask (1972) is surely up there amongst the list of film's with the longest titles ever. One of Allen's earlier efforts, it's an adaptation of a novel that apparently has very little in common with its source material. The film is divided into several short sketches, each one entitled with a chapter of the book, such as 'What is Sodomy' and 'What Happens During Ejaculation'. As is the nature of sketches, some are far better than others, and this general rule of thumb makes the film a mixed bag in terms of quality. Having said that, none of them are bad, and the good ones are truly hilarious; the one featuring Gene Wilder as a doctor who falls in love with a sheep and the aforementioned 'goings on during ejaculation' tale are side splittingly funny. All of the sketches are related to sex in some way or the other; don't expect to be educated by any of them, but do expect Allen's trademark wit on display as he explores sex and sexual obsession through the prism of bizarre comedy.

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Attack the Block (2011)


Image from IMP Awards

Attack the Block (2011)

It's interesting thinking about this film post London riots. The protagonists are after all a bunch of inner city gang youths! It doesn't make me re-evaluate my take on the film mind you, but the timing of the film having come out just pre-riots is a tad amusing.

Running at a snappy 90 minutes, Attack the Block is an old school horror-comedy about an alien invasion of London, and more specifically a council housing estate (i.e. 'the projects'). It begins with a gang of kids from the building led by Moses (John Boyega) mugging a young woman, only to be interrupted mid crime when an alien crash lands mere metres away. They kill it, but it ends up being the first of many and soon the group are fleeing for their lives and forced to take up arms to defend their turf.

The film is superbly crafted on what seems to be a modest budget. It has a lean and focused script that, coupled with frenetic editing, relentlessly hurtles from one scene to the next, stopping only to set up characters and situations before the next set-piece It's economical storytelling, but no less effective for it. And the characters, despite being archetypal, are very well defined and funny, thanks in no small part to the excellent cast which is spearheaded by Boyega's charismatic performance.

It's funny but not campy - the horror sequences are genuine horror sequences, and there are gruesome deaths aplenty. Writer/director Joe Cornish, making his first feature film, strikes the perfect tonal balance between these elements in much the same way films like Hot Fuzz and Shaun of the Dead do. It's got story, characters, excitement, and humour, with a smattering of social commentary thrown in for good measure.

By making the most of dimly lit hallways and dark run down city streets, the film maintains an atmospheric visual style. The creature designs deserve a special mention as they are creepy and alien looking without seeming derivative or fake. The effects used to bring them to life belie the modesty of the film's budget; truly impressive stuff! It's all rounded off with an energetic soundtrack by Basement Jaxx, the aural icing on the cake.

Fans of horror comedies are in for a treat with Attack the Block. There's nothing particularly original about it but it's very well made and features an unconventional setting and characters, particularly for a genre film. It's definitely on my blu-ray list!

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Where the Wild Things Are (2009)


Image from IMP Awards


Where the Wild Things Are

Maurice Sendak's book upon which this film is based is a very slight one indeed, featuring only a few sentences of text to accompany its illustrations. The film adaptation by Spike Jonze, which is equal parts energetic and leaden, isn't exactly heavy on story either but does by necessity have more content than its source material.

Max (Max Records) is a young boy living with his single mum (Catherine Keener) and sister. He's a little wild and imaginative, and clearly feels alienated and is thus prone to moody tantrums and outbursts. When his mum brings a boyfriend over for dinner he has a particularly wild reaction and runs away, jumps into a boat and sails off to a strange land filled with large, furry creatures - the eponymous 'Wild Things'. The wild things are a familial community full of bickering and fighting but also affection and caring. Max enters their world and convinces them that he is a king (they're not to bright) and proceeds to lead them in various 'fun' activities.

The true substance of the film is the interplay between the creatures. They each appear to represent different aspects of Max's personality and family, and as he attempts to lead them he begins to discover the complexity inherent in all 'human' feelings and interactions. Yes, it's a 'growing up and learning about life' movie, but done like no other. It isn't a cutesy film by any means, with the creatures often being quite menacing and dangerous (whether intentionally or, as is often the case, accidentally).

Tonally it varies much like Max's moods, from the exuberant joy of just running through the woods to the bitter anger of having strangers being brought home; it does feel a little too dour at times though. The music by Carter Burwell and vocals by the Yeah Yeah Yeah's Karen O add to the dreamlike atmosphere.

The visuals are stunning and often surreal, and real credit must be given to the way the creatures have been designed and realised. They are actors in costumes with CG used to animate their faces, and the end result is a physical and digital performance that feels completely believable. You simply forget that you're seeing an effect and accept the creatures as, well, creatures!

The top notch cast who wore the suits and voiced the characters contribute immensely to pulling off the illusion, particularly James Gandolfini as Carol, the wild thing who most closely mirrors Max's feelings of isolation and anger. Speaking of Max, the performance by Max Records (yeah they found a Max to play Max!) is superb and absent any of the 'mature beyond their years' personality traits that too many precocious child actors possess.

It's a very good film but isn't a wholehearted thumbs up. As I said sometimes it feels way too downbeat, and while it does attempt to reflect Max's own dynamic personality I'm not sure it fully succeeds. It also drags a little, probably because of its random non narrative nature. These caveats aside though, it does capture the feeling of being a kid and an outsider incredibly well, as well as the simplistic child logic understanding of the way the world works. I wouldn't really call this a film for kids - it's more like a peek into the mind of a child that is intended for adults.

Saturday, February 11, 2012

The Brothers Bloom (2008)


Image from IMP Awards

The Brothers Bloom (2008)

If I had to use one word to describe this film, it would be 'whimsical'. Adrien Brody and Mark Ruffalo play two brothers, Bloom and Stephen, who are con men. Bloom is the chief protagonist in the cons who has to go out there and execute them, with Ruffalo being the 'storyteller' who chiefly works his magic behind the scenes. Also alongside them during their capers is the enigmatic Bang Bang (Rinko Kikuchi), their demolitions expert.

After a brief and charming prologue covering their itinerant childhoods and how they got in to the con business, the story proper begins. They've been at it for a while and Bloom wants out of the business; he's tired of the phony life he's leading, but Stephen convinces him to stick around for one last job. That job is Penelope (Rachel Weisz), a rich eccentric loner. Stephen creates a narrative for Bloom to act out - it's a long con designed to sweep Penelope off her feet and make her feel like part of an adventure, and in the process part her from her money. The con takes them globe trotting and along the way Bloom starts to actually fall for Penelope.

Rian Johnson's last film, 'Brick', was his breakthrough, a high school noir with snappy dialogue that deservedly earned him major kudos. His sophomore effort is radically different - it's bright and vibrant and quirky, but it still has the same genuine sense of danger and high stakes that made 'Brick' so engaging. It also has a similarly twisty plot, with cons within cons that approach head spinning levels. Plot heavy though it may be, characters are the film's focus, and in that respect Johnson succeeds admirably in giving his larger than life protagonists a sense of believability that transcends the quirkiness of the premise (much like a Wes Anderson film).

Brody is decent in what is ostensibly the lead role - I'm not a fan but he acquits himself well. Mark Ruffalo is terrific as the elder brother, appearing fun and relaxed and in complete control while possibly capable of violence if and when required. Rachel Weisz's role as Penelope isn't as well developed as the brothers but she infuses the character with a sense of enthusiasm and charm that is endearing.

It's a fun film that has a sense of melancholy about it, and also an element of darkness and danger simmering beneath the surface. The con is implausible but that's the nature of the story, and if you're willing to give in to the film's style there is much to appreciate and enjoy. Johnson proves himself to be more than a one hit wonder and I'm looking forward to his future offerings.

Sunday, August 21, 2011

Troy (2004) - Director's Cut


Image from IMP Awards

Troy (2004)

Since this is a fairly mainstream and well known film I'm going to make this quick. Director Wolfgang Peterson released a very compromised version of this film theatrically back in 2004. Based on Homer's 'The Iliad', it told the story of the Trojan War, of the armies of King Agamemnon with the heroic Achilles as his trump card battling against the Trojan armies of King Priam led by his son Hector, and of the war sparked off by Priam's younger son Paris stealing a Queen, Helen of Sparta. It was a historical epic that depicted a massive battle and larger than life characters fighting for territory and power, for personal glory and immortality, and for love and honour - it was grand in scale, epic and operatic.

The original film was certainly well made with magnificent sets and costumes and an impressive cast, but it was marketed on the back of some massive and thrilling battle sequences. As a result the film was heavier on the action than the drama. This version restores many of the character moments while also making it bloodier and more brutal, resulting in a significantly better film than the already pretty good theatrical version. Brad Pitt and Eric Bana are both superb as Achilles and Hector, and the supporting cast including Peter O Toole, Brian Cox, Sean Bean, Orlando Bloom, Rose Byrne and Diane Kruger are all very good (yes, even Bloom).

The storyline ignores the Gods of the source material and is, in my opinion, better for it. I'm not certain how accurate it is as an adaptation - certainly the length of the war is significantly reduced from a decade to what seems like a few weeks - but it works on its own terms. It is broad and theatrical and not very subtle, but it never pretends to be anything more than it is, and the end result is a very satisfying film that is entertaining without being stupid and full of mindless action. The re-edited score, sadly, is still severely lacking and remains the main weakness of the film, but it isn't too offensive - just bland and derivative.

If you hated the original this version won't change your mind but if you thought it was passable but could have been better, then the Director's Cut makes the film worth revisiting. For people who've never seen the film before this is the version to watch, and if the genre is of even a passing interest then you can do far worse than spend three hours watching an excellent interpretation of an ancient tale.

Monday, August 17, 2009

Inglourious Basterds (2009)



(Image from IMP Awards)


Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Woah! This is the first Tarantino film that I've actually been blown away by, and is easily my favourite of his films (knocking Jackie Brown off the top spot). The film is, without giving anything away, a new take on World War II; and by that I mean an alternate history, one that is outrageously funny and enthralling from start to finish, with quite a few shocks thrown in for good measure.

Taking place 'once upon a time in Nazi occupied France', the film is divided into 5 'chapters' that follow several different interweaving story threads and characters. The titular 'Basterds' are a team of Jewish American soldiers led by Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) who drop in to France to dish out bloody vengeance upon the Nazis, taking no prisoners and causing Hitler a major headache. Col. Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz) is a rather clever Nazi put in charge of hunting down the remaining Jews in France, a task he is exceptionally proficient at. Mélanie Laurent plays a Jewish woman, Shosanna, who survives the massacre of her family and hides in plain sight in Paris as the owner of a cinema, one that through fortuitous circumstances draws the Basterds, the Nazi top brass, and Col. Landa together.

One thing 'Inglourious Basterds' is not - despite outward appearances - is an action film. Sure, it's got some action in it and it is a violent revenge story, but for the most part it is a very dialogue heavy film that is made up of protracted conversations. That shouldn't be a put off because it's a Tarantino film, and the way these chapters and scenes are written as almost stand alone self contained mini stories that still gel together as part of a cohesive broader narrative, together with the snappy dialogue, is simply brilliant. It's sometimes tense, sometimes funny, and always engaging, with every character being layered and distinctive, even the very minor ones who pop into the film for a scene or two. And some of these scenes are nerve wracking, ratcheting up the tension minute by minute and keeping you on the edge of your seat. While the plot seems there to serve the characters, it's still excellent, albeit one that clearly takes place in an alternate, slightly surreal reality.

Of course, a great script doesn't equate to a great film without performances to go with it, and in this case the ensemble cast is uniformly excellent, with the standout being Waltz's ruthlessly brilliant and oddly amusing (and occasionally laugh out loud hilarious) and foppish Col. Landa. Sure, he gets the best lines in the film, but the delivery is simply fantastic. The rest of the cast is also in tune with the writing, playing it straight or slightly OTT as appropriate. Brad Pitt is great as Raine, a character that is unabashedly comical in nature, while at the other end of the spectrum Laurent's Jewish survivor is a much more serious and tragic character. There are also terrific minor standouts littered throughout the film, too many to really list out. The only weak link is a jarring appearance by Mike Myers, but I suppose it's only a problem if you're familiar with Mike Myers.

Everything about this film is praiseworthy, from the stylish visuals and editing to the music. One could argue that it runs a bit long, and in truth many of the scenes could easily be trimmed without detracting from the overall story, but part of the joy of watching this film is to witness these characters interacting and engaging in verbal combat, so in my mind the length is more a strength than a weakness! Inglourious Basterds is irreverent, occasionally extremely violent, and overall flat out brilliant and almost certainly unlike anything else you've seen before! Like I said, it's my favourite Tarantino film and among the most enjoyable cinematic experiences of the year for me. It makes me want to go back and re-watch all of his films again, just to reassess them!


[I'm not sure if I've come out of retirement here or not - this might be a one-off. Man, I'm rusty!]

Thursday, November 27, 2008

Rabbit-Proof Fence (2002)


(Image from IMP Awards)


Rabbit-Proof Fence (2002)

A true story about three mixed race Aboriginal girls who were taken from their homes and who subsequently escaped their settlement and headed home - a 1500 mile journey along one of Australia's so called 'rabbit proof' fences. The film is credited with igniting debate on the issue of the 'stolen generations', mixed race children who were forcibly 'resettled' away from their families for various misguided reasons. The narrative is about as straightforward as it gets - the three girls are grabbed from their home in one of the film's early and most powerful scenes, and are transported to a settlement for mixed race children; they promptly escape and head for home, and are pursued first by a skilled Aboriginal tracker, and later by the police. Their story becomes something of a sensation throughout Australia, and as a result the girls are given aid by helpful strangers along the way.

It's a simple but emotionally evocative tale - I can't think of a basic narrative that is more immediately engaging than the quest for freedom against improbable odds and the struggle for survival such a quest entails. The cast is full of unknowns - apart from the jarring appearance of Kenneth Branagh - and all of the actors do terrific work, particularly the three girls the story revolves around. The writing hits all the right emotional beats; the characters might be a bit sketchy, but are sufficiently fleshed out for the story they are in. I have one major complaint about the film - the storytelling feels somewhat ordinary, with scenes rarely creating a sense of fear or hopelessness or of awe at how remarkable the girls' journey is. This is probably due more to the somewhat ordinary directing rather than the writing. There are some stunning visuals in there, however, particularly of the desolate and oppressive Australian outback (much like 'The Proposition'!)

'Rabbit Proof Fence' is a well made, inspirational film that falls short of being something truly special, but still packs quite a punch. The fact that it's based on true events does, as is often the case, give it some added gravitas, especially in the epilogue which features some of the real individuals portrayed in the film.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Hellboy 2: The Golden Army (2008)



(Image from IMP Awards)

Hellboy 2: The Golden Army (2008)

I remembered enjoying the first 'Hellboy', which is based on a relatively obscure comic, quite a bit back when it first came out, so it came as a bit of a surprise when, upon rewatching it in preparation for the sequel, I discovered that while it was still a good (but not great) film, it doesn't have much appeal on repeat viewings. And Guillermo del Toro's follow up, 'Hellboy 2: The Golden Army', seems to fall into the same category.

It starts off interestingly enough with an animated intro explaining the truce between the warring humans and the supernatural world, and of the unstoppable Golden Army that was hidden away at the end of the war. Cut to the present, and the BPRD (Burea for Paranormal Defense) - comprising demon Hellboy (Ron Perlman), fire starter Liz Sherman (Selma Blair), aquatic Abe Sapien (Doug Jones), and plain 'ole human boss Tom Manning (Jeffrey Tambor) - is having PR trouble thanks to Hellboy's grandstanding. These problems soon fade into the background when Prince Nuada (Luke Goss) decides that man has broken the truce and goes about trying to locate the Golden Army in order to wipe out mankind. Hellboy and the BPRD, joined by new leader Johann Krauss (James Dodd / Seth MacFarlane), engage in a race to get to the Army first and stop Nuada, and they encounter various mythical friends and foes along the way.

Despite being a tad cliched and predictable, del Toro's script makes the story fairly engaging. The biggest problem for me is the dialogue and character interactions, as well as the humour, which fails to inspire; this seems to be a problem with all of del Toro's English language efforts to be honest. Having said that, however, the best scene in the movie for me is one of the quieter moments where Hellboy and Abe get drunk, have a chat, and start singing!

Another problem I have with the film is the action, which is conceptually imaginative but in execution feels clunky and staged, and far too often I found myself unable to suspend disbelief. Where del Toro really excels is in the visual department and in imbuing his films with atmosphere - often menacing - and in making the world and creatures wholly believable. Scene after scene features supernatural creatures and awe inspiring locales (see the Troll Market scene) that are so fantastic and fully realized and that you can't help but be mesmerized. The movie really is nearly flawless in this department. The performances from Perlman and Jones as Hellboy and Abe are very good, but once again Selma Blair is a real drag as the dour Liz. Seth MacFarlane's voicing of Johann Krauss is excellent and very funny, and Luke Goss makes for a fairly sympathetic villain as Prince Nuada.

On the second time out del Toro once again delivers a good superhero movie that doesn't quite cross the threshold into 'great' territory, though it comes close on several occasion. The tone, look, and performances are spot on and just right for the material, but some of the writing and action scenes left me cold - I just don't think they're good enough. Worth watching for those who enjoyed the first one, but it won't convert any non believers!

(As an aside, I'm now a little concerned about del Toro's Hobbit adaptations, but at least Peter Jackson and his crew will be involved in the writing of those movies.)

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Shoot 'Em Up (2007)


(Image from IMP Awards)


Shoot 'Em Up (2007)

I'm a fan of Clive Owen, an actor who I think has an interesting and varied filmography; he tends to bring a cocky presence to all of his films (except, perhaps, Children of Men), and in 'Shoot 'Em Up' he really gets to crank that persona up to 11! Owen plays 'Smith', a man who at the start of the film reluctantly gets caught up in a shoot out, one in which he gets to deliver a baby amidst a hail of bullets! These opening scenes prepare you for what to expect from the film, which just continuously escalates its madness level. Entrusted with taking care of the baby, Smith turns to a lactating prostitute (yes, really) named DQ (Monica Bellucci) for help while running from the villainous decent family man Hertz (Paul Giamatti), who represents a group with a vested interest in killing the baby. Hertz always arrives on the scene with a seemingly endless army of thugs who obligingly provide target practice for the uber badass and completely unstoppable Smith.

Seriously, the action in here is so over the top that words cannot do it justice - if the baby delivery shootout sounds over the top, wait till you see the shootout / sex scene combo! This really is a live action cartoon, a fact alluded to by the completely overt references to Smith being Bugs Bunny (he eats carrots all the time, and in one scene says 'What's up doc?'). In between quarreling with DQ and dodging the scheming Hertz, Smith triest to find out why the baby is important enough for someone to expend so much effort to kill him. The revelation, when it finally arrives, is as fittingly goofy as everything else in the film!

Owen is great in the role, naturally. He's angry, violent, and completely badass. Monica Bellucci is sleazier than I've ever seen her, but still hot, and does a decent job in a fairly crude role. Paul Giamatti is every bit Owen's equal, the intellectual Elmer Fudd to Owen's arrogant Bugs (tell me you don't see it, go on!), and his calm scheming is every bit as enjoyable as watching him lose his cool every time Smith slips through his fingers.

The film is generally on overdrive all the way through, and is very much in the vein of Crank in that it is unabashedly crude, violent, and made purely for thrills. If you're not hooked within the first 10 minutes, then I can safely say it's not for you. The trailer, if I recall correctly, was a fair representation of the final film. There's nothing brilliant about 'Shoot 'Em Up' but it's quite good at doing what it says on the tin, and worth seeing if you're into this burgeoning sub-genre of insane action! I for one dug it, it's one of those films where I found myself grinning the whole way through!

Monday, October 20, 2008

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)


(Image from IMP Awards)


The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)

Since I reviewed the first two, I feel compelled to finish my trilogy of reviews by writing this one up. It's going to be brief, however.

The first two Mummy films weren't exactly masterpieces of cinema, but they got a lot right - they were simple, straightforward stories with charming characters, humour, a sense of adventure, and an epic scope backed by a surfeit of (admittedly cheesy) special effects. Despite being derivative, they had an identity of their own and, surprisingly, managed to be quite memorable. Sadly this latest installment rounds out the series (I hope) with an attempted bang that comes across as more of a whimper.

Set some years after 'Mummy Returns', 'Dragon Emperor' finds Rick (Brendan Fraser) and Evey (Mario Bello standing in for Rachel Weisz) O'Connell reluctantly retired from adventuring while their son Alex (Luke Ford) is out secretly digging up mummies in China when he's supposed to be getting an education. Naturally, when the mummy of Emperor Han (Jet Li) is accidentally awakened and tries to take over the world, Rick and Evey come out of retirement and join Alex in China to stop him, and drag Evey's brother Johnathan (John Hannah) along. Aiding our heroes in their quest are two mysterious Chinese women (played by Michelle Yeoh and Isabella Leong) who seem to know a lot about what's going on.

Alright, I haven't really gone into much detail about the plot, but it's mostly irrelevant so that's all you really need to know. In films like these it's mostly the execution that counts - the characterization, the writing, the set pieces, the music, and so on. And in most respects 'Emperor' is decent, but suffers from feeling wholly derivative of not just the previous Mummy films but also of so many other classics of the genre; watching it is akin to watching some sort of retrospective 'Best Adventure Films' documentary. This series of films has never felt particularly original or consequential, but they never before felt quite as light and superfluous as this one either (though I can't really remember all that much of 'Scorpion King', truth be told). And while they were predictable, the first two parts had a whimsical charm that only occasionally crops up here, and this is largely because of the absence of the wonderful Rachel Weisz (who worked so well with Fraser) and the presence of the now strangely annoying John Hannah.

What about the action and adventure elements then? In addition to being derivative - not a fatal flaw in itself - they just aren't all particularly engaging. I wasn't expecting a sense of genuine danger here, mind you, just some inventiveness and humour, but alas, it doesn't even deliver enough to meet my moderate expectations. The effects and production values are fine, however, and are about par for the course. The cast is fairly decent but lacks the spark that made the earlier films - where even very minor roles were well cast and acted - such good fun. Admittedly, part of the reason is that the characters aren't written as well, and have little in the way of a personal story that fits in to the bigger picture.

I don't mean to sound too negative, as this is actually a fairly decent film and I think in many respects superior to the borderline bad 'Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull'. It's just that while I enjoyed it, it didn't make me want to revisit it any time soon. I must of course confess at this point that I didn't like 'Returns' the first time I saw it either, but that was more a reaction to the wanton excess of that film than to any serious failings on its part (though, wanton excess can be a serious failing as well, I suppose!). Recommended for completists of the series only, or those who somehow avoided Dr Jones.

Thursday, October 09, 2008

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)


(Image from IMP Awards)


The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

Paul Greengrass returned to direct the second sequel in the Bourne series, the follow up to his excellent 'Supremacy', and he picks up virtually exactly where the last one left off... well, sorta, since the epilogue from the last film takes place in the middle of this one (not as confusing as it sounds). Anyway, if the first film was about Bourne (Matt Damon) discovering what he was, and the second about changing and trying to atone in some small way, then the third is about Bourne trying to discover his origins and bring to an end his involvement with the CIA. Through a newspaper reporter (Paddy Considine), Bourne learns of a new organization within the CIA, Blackbriar, that runs the programme he was a part of. Blackbriar is run by a man named Noah Vosen (David Strathairn), and when it learns of Bourne's presence it enlists Pamela Landy (Joan Allen) to help capture him. Landy is, however, suspicious of Blackbriar and sympathetic towards Bourne based on their past encounters. Bourne's journey leads him to various locales in Europe, Africa, and the US, and he once again encounters operative Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles) in the course of events. Of course, his visits to these places don't stop at mere sightseeing, but instead entail car chases, foot chases, spying, bullets aplenty and some old fashioned fisticuffs.

All of the elements that made the first two films so great are now honed to perfection - 'Ultimatum' really fires on all cylinders. It's storytelling style is incredibly economical, and it hurtles along at a relentless pace from start to finish. Admittedly some of the finer plot points don't really hold together that well, and it could be argued that Bourne has now ascended into a wholly robotic action machine. I don't think this is a bad thing though; from a characterization point of view I can see why Bourne might be colder and more inured to his life and past, and there are still some key moments where his feelings on what he has done and what he is peek out. For the most part the atmosphere sticks to the unshowy, perfunctory style that is a hallmark of these films, one that makes it much easier to suspend disbelief when required. There's a grounded in reality feel throughout, from the stark photography and locales to the look of the offices and the people populating them, right down to their wardrobes. There's rarely a sense that choices in this movie were made purely to appear cool.

Matt Damon is again terrific as Bourne, both physically and in terms of demeanour. There's an unwavering confidence about him now, and in the action scenes he is completely believable as an unstoppable super agent. The supporting cast is also excellent, with Joan Allen, Strathairn, and Stiles delivering in key roles and Paddy Considine making his bit part into something compelling and memorable. Greengrass once again employs his pseudo documentary style to good effect in his directing of the film; it's not going to win over people who hated it in Supermacy, but I reckon it's one of those choices that elevates these films above its ilk. Greengrass also does well to make everything hold together despite the ludicrous pace and sheer number of incidents that come flying at the viewer. There's always cohesion and a sense that it all clicks despite appearing that it might fly off the rails at any moment!

Bottom line, great performances and storytelling make for a great film, one that takes the character to new places (including a startling revelation!) and ups the thrills and action; it feels true to the earlier films without feeling overly familiar. The thematic throughline of the lone man against the oppressive and corrupt system is always compelling, and the Bourne series does it about as well as it has ever been done, at least in terms of action thrillers. 'Ultimatum' makes for a fitting conclusion to the story arc started in 'Identity' so I'm not sure where they'd take it from here in another sequel, but if Greengrass and Damon return for another Bourne outing (they're currently working together on 'Green Zone') you can bet your bottom dollar it'll make my 'must see' list!

Thursday, July 31, 2008

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)



(Image from IMP Awards)


Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

The latest, probably last, and mostly unnecessary installment in the Indiana Jones franchise arrived this summer and made more of a whimper than a bang. I'm not going to waste time summarizing the plot on this occasion. Oh hell, scratch that - here goes. Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) and a young whippersnapper named Mutt (Shia LaBeouf) become embroiled in a race with evil commie Russians led by Col. Spalko (Cate Blanchett) to acquire a mysterious crystal skull that will unleash the arcane powers of a mythical ancient civilization. Also entangled in their adventure are old flame and mother of Mutt, Marion Ravenwood (Karen Allen), new Indy ally Mac McHale (Ray Winstone) and nutty Professor Oxley (John Hurt). Sure, there's more to the story than that, but in a nutshell, that's about it.

The biggest question mark regarding this film when it was announced was Harrison Ford's ability to sell the idea of an adventurous archaeologist at his age. And yes, Ford is too old for the role, truth be told, but despite that he manages to hold the film together and even impresses physically. This is his best performance in years and there are moments when that old Indy charm shines through. Not a patch on the Indy from the original trilogy mind you, but still, surprisingly good stuff. As for the rest of the cast, well, this film excels at wasting good actors - Blanchett and Hurt in particular really should have been used better. Blanchett is actually fairly good given the material, grating accent aside. Hurt just dodders throughout the film. The increasingly ubiquitous Ray Winstone just blurts out some lines every once in a while like some sort of video game sidekick. The surprise package is the promising Shia LaBeouf, who is actually pretty great as an up and coming adventurer. As for Karen Allen... she just seems happy to have been invited to the party, if her eternally giddy expression is anything to go by (or is it botox?)!

The basic premise of the film is sound, and could have been quite interesting. The plot is of course nonsense, but that is a given with this type of film. The problem is that the overall narrative suffers from modern action movie-itis: an indestructible hero who seems to know that he's indestructible (refer Die Hard 4.0); an excess of characters, none of whom have enough screen time or memorable moments; a dearth of quiet character moments; and an overly complicated narrative with too much dull incident and exposition.

To add insult to injury, the film violates established character continuity - for instance, Indy actually helps the Russians along the way, something the Indy of old would never have done, and for the most part he just seems to be getting dragged along during the adventure in a film in which he is purportedly the protagonist! Despite its failings, the film is still above average for the genre, and the fact that it features an established - and quite iconic - hero in a new adventure gives it some cachet.

Despite all of the original bigwigs behind the original films being involved, this one feels strangely incongruous. It feels inconsistent with the original films; even the look is weirdly different! The action is fairly typical for modern adventure films - it never feels like anything is at stake, with the heroes just going through the motions. There's a nonchalant feel to the whole film. And worst of all, some sequences are ridiculously over the top and way beyond anything featured in the original films (except perhaps Temple of Doom's plane crash) - witness the nuclear explosion at the start of the film, or the scene that features a car jumping off a cliff and onto a tree branch. Even the music - which is occasionally rousing - doesn't jump out and grab a hold of you like it did in the original trilogy. It's just there and it sounds familiar, as if it expects to simply coast on the reserves of good will we have towards its predecessors.

I've seen the movie twice now, and I have to admit that I liked it better the second time round - lowered expectations and all that! As an Indy movie it's well below par, but as a modern adventure film, it's actually fairly decent. The production values, action, drama, and comedy, are wrapped together nicely by Spielberg's natural storytelling abilities; his touch makes this better than most summer fare. Having said that, perhaps there's just a little too much George Lucas in there as well! At the end of the day 'Crystal Skull' is entertaining enough to be worth the price of admission, but it is also fairly forgettable. Ah well, they can pry my original trilogy boxset from my cold, dead hands!

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

The Golden Compass (2007)



(Image from IMP Awards)


The Golden Compass (2007)

Last year's adaptation of the first part of Phillip Pullman's much lauded (but somewhat overrated) blasphemous fantasy trilogy was met with indifference by audiences and apparently pretty much sunk New Line Cinema as an independent studio. The marketing didn't really sell the story too well, focusing as it did on the films visual aspects. And that's probably because the film itself doesn't sell its story particularly well either.

'The Golden Compass' (aka The Northern Lights) takes place in a parallel universe and tells the story of Lyra Belacqua (Dakota Blue Richards), a young orphan girl living in Oxford's Jordan College. This universe is somewhat like ours, only here people's 'souls' exist in physical form alongside them as talking animal 'daemons', and society and technology are reminiscent of the 19th century but with steampunk sensibilities. Lyra's uncle, Lord Azrael (Daniel Craig), is a scientist looking into the nature of a mysterious substance called 'dust' and its relationship to parallel universes, but he is opposed by the powerful Magisterium (i.e. the Church).

Meanwhile children are being grabbed off the street by the so-called 'Gobblers'. When Lyra is invited by the alluring but sinister Mrs. Coulter (Nicole Kidman) to join her in London and mingle with high society, she begins an adventure to rescue her friend Roger from the Gobblers, an adventure that sees her hooking up with the nomadic 'Gyptian' people and traveling to the north where she meets the mighty polar bears and Witches - including bear king Iorek Byrnison (voiced by Ian McKellan) and witch Seraffina Pekkala (Eva Green), as well as the charismatic aviator Lee Scoresby (Sam Elliott). Lyra has one very handy tool to aid her on her quest - an alethiometer, an arcane device that tells its user the truth.

That piss poor summary only scratches the surface. Needless to say it's considerably more complicated and eventful than that, but hopefully the words above will provide some idea of what this movie is about.

As an adaptation, 'Compass' falls short, coming across as a breezy summary of the source material, which truth be told isn't very cinematic (at least in terms of structure) to begin with. The story stumbles from one scene to the next without much cohesion, and is never all that gripping as a narrative. On the one hand, it feels rushed; on the other, the book admittedly has lots of leaden bits that probably wouldn't have been all that compelling on screen! Taken on its own terms as a film, I can't imagine the storyline being all that clear to neophytes, and the very clunky introductory narrative (attempting to channel Fellowship of the Ring) doesn't work all that well. And yet, despite not being particularly accessible it's not exactly awash with thematic depth either, with the religious elements being toned down - direct references to the church are absent - and the importance of dust never being rammed home (though, I'll have to concede that they could have been planning on doing this in the sequels).

The screenplay isn't the only thing that's middle of the road however. The film is generally devoid of atmosphere and key moments seem to lack any real dramatic punch. The production values are adequate but generally unimpressive - sets and costumes don't have that lived in, "real world" feel that separate the great fantasy films from the also-rans. It doesn't exactly transport you to another world because it all feels fake. The effects are also a mixed bag, generally bland and unimpressive. I'm also really tired of lame CGI animals; did they really have to be CGI in every shot? The few action sequences present are decent but barely get the pulse racing - there's a big battle at the end that is short and mildly exciting, but that's about it. It's all tied together by a fairly generic and forgettable musical score.

Dakota Blue Richards was a casting coup as she impresses throughout and perfectly captures the impertinent and sharp tongued spirit of the character in the book. Sam Elliott is spot on as the aviator Lee Scoresby (strange that Pullman apparently imagine Samuel L. Jackson in this role!). It's also great fun to hear Ian McShane (from Deadwood, cocksucker!) as the evil polar bear Ragnar Sturlusson. The other major polar bear character, Iorek Byrnison, is quite well played by Ian McKellan, though it does seem to be a paycheck performance. Eva Green is stunning and physically just right (wink wink) for the role of the witch queen Serafina Pekkala, and she also has an appropriate 'otherworldly' quality about her. Nicole Kidman is a natural for the icy Mrs. Coulter, though hers also seems to be a half hearted performance for the most part. As for Daniel Craig, he's barely in the film and never really registers.

Overall, a decent film but nothing to write home about. I can't imagine fans of the book being too pleased. Despite the stronger source material, it's a step down from say "The Chronicles of Narnia", and falls well short of its New Line stablemate. The anti climactic ending is really a slap in the face as well given that the prospect of the sequels coming to fruition seem somewhat remote at this point.

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Into the Wild (2007)



(Image from IMP Awards)


Into the Wild (2007)

I expected to find 'Into the Wild' to be a good film, but I was surprised at just how good Sean Penn's latest directorial effort is. His other films that I've seen - 'The Pledge' and 'The Indian Runner' - were pretty good but just shy of being truly great. This film, however, is at another level and is absolutely terrific.

Adapted from the non-fiction book by Jon Krakauer (which I now must read!), it centres on Christopher McCandless (Emile Hirsch), a young man with promising career prospects who upon graduating from college decides to leave his life behind, assume the name Alexander Supertramp, and journey to Alaska to live in the wild. He gives away all of his money to charity and moves from place to place by hitchhiking or sneaking rides on trains while doing odd jobs to get by. He also befriends various interesting people along the way. The film cuts back and forth between his journey to Alaska and the story of his subsequent life in the Alaskan wilderness. The different threads are bound together and given context by the narration from his sister Carine (Jena Malone) that explains his troubled childhood. There's also the occasional scene where we witness his parents (William Hurt and Marcia Gay Harden) trying to cope with his disappearance.

I was captivated by the film from the start. There isn't much meat to the story, which is surprising given its 150 minute runtime, and at its core it's simply a journey - but what a journey! There are some stunning visuals and unforgettable moments that bring McCandless' adventure to life - many scenes are devoid of dialogue and rely on visuals and sound alone, and they bring to the fore the solitude and beauty of the environments he passes through. It's also very much a character study that attempts to explain his behaviour, to allow us to understand him and his past and how it affected him and drove him to find meaning outside of society and people (though ironically his journey brought him into contact with many interesting people along the way). Despite his actions being borderline insane, the manner in which he tried to push himself to the limit somehow comes across as strangely romantic. The film is only successful in explaining McCandless upto a certain extent though; at some level there's something about his actions that really defies logic and explanation, and Penn almost seems to be mythologizing the man and his adventure. Ignoring his love of adventure, McCandless character also embodies the undercurrent of contempt towards modern society and consumerism that permeates the film as well, but fortunately this isn't too heavy handed and as a thematic element never overwhelms the film.

Emile Hirsch is simply brilliant, disappearing into the role and really becoming the character (cliched, I know, but so true here!). McCandless was intelligent and good natured, and perhaps a little quixotic and foolish as well, but always fascinating, and in many ways his audacious recklessness was inspiring. Hirsch really brings these traits to life without making the man ever seem bonkers or too detached from reality; he's relatable and sympathetic. His interactions with the supporting cast are also terrific, and while there is at times a sense of over-earnestness to them they serve to show how he affected the people he met, and how he himself grew and changed as a result of meeting them. All of the cast are terrific, but Hal Holbrook's much lauded performance as the lonely old retiree Ron Franz is worthy of the praise and accolade it has received.

On paper this film could have been repetitive and dull, but it ends up being incredibly varied and with its intercutting timelines and sense of progression it never comes close to being boring. It's a bit long but, I think, quite well paced. I found it to be exceptionally well made in every way; the performances I've already mentioned, but there's also the awesome photography and soundtrack that add so much to the mood and enhance the overall experience. Despite being overlooked during awards season, I'm fairly confident when I say that 'Into the Wild' is one of the best films of 2007.

Sunday, June 22, 2008

The X-Files - Fight the Future (1998)



(Image from Wikipedia)


The X-Files - Fight the Future (1998)

I'm the key figure in an ongoing government charade, the plot to conceal the truth about the existence of extraterrestrials. It's a global conspiracy, actually, with key players in the highest levels of power, that reaches down into the lives of every man, woman, and child on this planet, so, of course, no one believes me. I'm an annoyance to my superiors, a joke to my peers. They call me Spooky. Spooky Mulder, whose sister was abducted by aliens when he was just a kid and who now chases after little green men with a badge and a gun, shouting to the heavens or to anyone who will listen that the fix is in, that the sky is falling and when it hits it's gonna be the shit-storm of all time. - Fox Mulder


Ah, Fox Mulder - if ever there was a geek character who made the big time on television, it's him (though, I guess Dale Cooper comes pretty close!). And then there's his "skeptical beyond belief and in the face of overwhelming evidence" partner Scully. What a team they were, in a show that brought sci-fi and the supernatural to the mainstream without compromising good, intelligent writing and edgy thrills. The movie version of 'The X-Files' came out between the show's fifth and sixth seasons and was a pretty high profile release (despite it's modest box office), and watching it again after all these years it strikes me as a very strong extension of the show that remains faithful while being reasonably accessible to people going in cold.

The byzantine plot involves a conspiracy by Federal Agency FEMA (yeah right, after Katrina I doubt these guys could conspire to pull off a surprise birthday party) to hide the existence of extra terrestrials, whom they have been working with for decades towards sinister ends. When an alien virus hidden on earth for millennia gets out and results in a massive cover up, FBI Agents Fox Mulder (David Duchovy) and Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson) get on the case and start digging. Mulder is aided by a possibly deluded conspiracy theorist named Alvin Kurtzweil (Martin Landau) as he searches for answers. Time is not on our heroes' side as an FBI Committee investigates the two of them, which prompts Scully to consider resigning; things don't get any better when their lives are placed in jeopardy as they start to get some answers. Along for the ride in this cinematic outing are a host of regulars from the show, such as the Lone Gunmen, Director Skinner (Mitch Pileggi), and of course everyone's favourite villain, the Cigarette Smoking Man (William B. Davis).

The film really does feel like a lengthy episode of the show, only with a bigger playing field. It's actually a pretty good balancing act in terms of style, never feeling too big or grand until the massive finale, which truth be told doesn't work all that well. For the most part it sticks to the dark alleys, autopsy rooms, secret meetings between old men, exploration of strange locations, and banter between Mulder and Scully, and the storytelling is fairly gripping when it does. It's hard to say if a non fan will find any of this engaging, but the script goes some way towards making the plot as standalone as possible. The relationships between characters and their history, however, are obviously not reintroduced and may be confusing to newbies, but I think the gaps can be filled in reasonably well by the astute viewer. The dialogue style is as strong as on the show, with no pandering, and the plot twists and turns without slowing down and without any dumbing down either. The story picks up on elements from the series but fortunately doesn't rely on them, and I think overall the story is momentous enough to justify a cinematic outing; there are some impressively big moments in here, like the building explosion at the start, the cornfield chase, and some of the alien stuff towards the end.

The production values are raised above those of the show, as are the set pieces, but the performances are perfectly in tune with what was established in the series. Duchovny and Anderson wear Mulder and Scully like second skins, and they play the material to perfection. As do all of the regular supporting actors, even if their presence is perfunctory and adds very little to the story besides being fan service. Martin Landau was inspired casting as the odd, paranoid, but trustworthy man in the know, and his scenes with Duchovny are great. William B. Davis as the Smoking Man is, well, his usual nonchalant self - I was never that big a fan of the character, but he plays the role well.

As a film on its own, it's not mind blowing, but for fans it's as good a TV to big screen transfer as could have been hoped for. It works reasonably well on its own but is best viewed as something complementary to the series. The denoument is perhaps frustrating in that it presents limited closure, instead serving as a launching point for the sixth series, and it's also somewhat jarringly grand in scale for the X-Files; I can let that slide because it's not bad per se and because everything leading upto the finale is pretty good. Overall the film is worth watching for X-Files fans, especially those in anticipation of the forthcoming sequel, 'I Want to Believe'.

Saturday, June 14, 2008

Beowulf (2007)



(Image from IMP Awards)

Beowulf (2007)

The most ancient of English language tales is tweaked and brought to life quite spectacularly by director Robert Zemeckis and screenwriters Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary in this performance capture based computer animated 3-D adventure film. The classic tale tells of the heroic Geat warrior Beowulf (Ray Winstone), who arrives in Denmark to rid King Hrothgar's (Anthony Hopkins) lands of a beast named Grendel (Crispin Glover) who has terrorized their Great Hall. Beowulf, accompanied by friend Wiglaf (Brendan Gleeson) and a band of Geats, makes boastful promises and wins the admiration of Queen Wealtheow (Robin Wright-Penn) but fails to convince the King's adviser Unforth (John Malkovich), who openly mocks him. When Grendel arrives to wreak havoc, an intense battle ensues that leads to the discovery that there is another monster waiting in the midst - Grendel's mother (Angelina Jolie).

I can only remember the original story vaguely from many years ago, and a little research reveals that a lot has been changed from the original narrative despite the most basic elements still being in place. The changes serve to tie the disparate narrative together, and taken as a whole they work despite changing the nature of the story. Beowulf was originally a virtuous hero, whereas here he's a flawed character. The monster Grendel is less pure evil and has his own motivation for attacking humans. I'm not going to sit around comparing the two (I'd have to read the story again first), but I will say that I thought this adaptation works quite well in presenting a compelling story with some intriguing variations on the original. Some of this dialogue misses on occasion, but the writing is generally of a high standard, even if the characters lack much in the way of depth. As a heroic adventure epic, the story is more than satisfying.

The real big deal about 'Beowulf' is the fact that it's a 3-D performance capture film. Now, I obviously wasn't fortunate enough to see this in 3D (I hear it's stunning), but what I viewed on my puny monitor was pretty stunning in its own right and easily the most visually impressive film of this type. I was quite skeptical about the need to perfectly capture the actors' performances like this - why not just make it live action? - but now that I've seen it I can understand how it allows for some very impressive camera work and spectacular visuals while also allowing the many disparate scenes to achieve a uniformity that is nigh on impossible to achieve in live action (think of how often even the best special effects heavy films have moments that stand out jarringly). The 3D aspect is also exploited time and time again, with things pointing towards or flying at the camera. The quality of the performance capture is a mixed bag, sometimes stunningly realistic but at other times decidedly ordinary; still, overall the film avoids that distracting plasticine look and after the first 15 minutes or so I was completely immersed in the world that was created and stopped noticing the animation - a good sign that it was effective.

Zemckis, a filmmaker I really like who was responsible for some of my favourites (Back to the Future, Contact) hasn't made a particularly noteworthy film in some time, so I was surprised at how entertaining this was, and also how brutal. The film is littered with strong visuals, and the action is spectacular with the dragon battle in particular being a standout. None of this is 'realistic' mind you, instead it's done in an outrageous style, and I wouldn't have it any other way. The drama aspects of the film are not as strong, but for this type of film one doesn't expect a Merchant-Ivory style of storytelling, though the scenes between Beowulf and Grendel's mother were definitely captivating. There are also some pretty funny moments, and while most of those come from the script the scene in which Beowulf fights Grendel in the nude is hilarious in the way his manhood is creatively blocked, Austin Powers style! I'm not sure this was intentional, but it resulted in an action sequence that managed to be as humourous as it was exciting!

The cast is pretty good, though I have to say no one really stands out. It's awesome that Ray Winstone is the main star of the film though - Will Scarlett off Robin of Sherwood headlining a big budget Hollywood Epic? It's like bizarro world! - and his performance, while initially jarring (he's the only guy whose 3D facsimile doesn't look anything like him; instead, it looks somewhat like Sean Bean) what with a heavy Cockney accent coming out of the lips of a Scandinavian hero, eventually grows on you and by the end of the film his casting seems completely appropriate. Angelina Jolie also weilds a weird accent, somewhat reminiscent of her work in Alexander, but it works and that coupled with her CGI nakedness makes for an, erm, captivating performance! I would say that Crispin Glover is the scene stealer as the crazed creature Grendel - crazed seems to be a natural for this guy! Hopkins, Wright-Penn, and Gleeson are all fine, with Malkovich being the most memorable of the supporting characters as the scheming advisor.

'Beowulf' is surprisingly good. I didn't anticipate liking it as much as I did, and to be honest I think I'm being a bit generous in understating some of its flaws, but I think it works better than a lot of people give it credit for. It's a terrifically entertaining adventure film, and offers the type of visuals that you really won't have seen anywhere else. Sure, this type of thing will grow old fast, and later films will obviously eclipse this one in terms of technology, but I think it'll stand the test of time as a good movie even when the CGI work looks antiquated. It's the best Robert Zemeckis movie in a long time!

Friday, May 23, 2008

Iron Man (2008)



(Image from IMP Awards)


Iron Man (2008)

The superhero genre has become a part of the menu of cinema, with at least a couple of funny pages based movies having come out every year since X-Men scored a slam dunk back in 2000 (speaking of which, I really need to revisit those X-Men films). I have to confess to having felt just a little bit blase about the endless stream of superhero comic book adaptations, including those still on the horizon. How many more origin stories could we stomach? Well, having now seen Jon Favreau's Iron Man, I say plenty more! I hate to toot my own horn (yeah right), but I had a good feeling about this way back in April last year when I reviewed Favreau's Zathura:
The film confirms that Favreau is a very talented filmmaker who can handle effects heavy films with ease without sacrificing story and character, which bodes well for Iron Man.

This feeling was confirmed by the trailer, of which I said:
Robert Downey Jr. seems like genius casting as a cocky, self-centred multi-millionaire arms dealer. I'm glad this isn't going for an overly dark or dour approach and has some humour thrown in. It may be another origin story, but this origin actually seems a little more interesting than most. The glimpses of Iron Man in action, although it was mostly of the first bulky suit that he creates, looks spectacular! And the actual costume... wow, it looks stunning!

Just call me the prognosticator! Enough copy pasting, onwards with the review!

Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is a genius engineer and billionaire who runs Stark Industries, the world's leading arms supplier. Stark is brilliant and he knows it, and he walks around with an arrogant swagger and an air of amused indifference towards the world. His indifference extends to what his weapons are used for as well, until he is captured by a rebel group during a weapons demonstration in Afghanistan and forced to assemble a missile for them. A chest injury during his capture forces Stark to build an electromagnetic device based on his own revolutionary 'arc reactor' technology to keep himself alive. Together with another prisoner, Dr. Yinsen (Shaun Toub), Stark spends his months of incarceration secretly building a suit of armour - instead of the missile - to be powered by his reactor, while being lectured by Yinsen about the evil deeds his company's weapons have been used for. He uses the suit of armour to bust his way out the cave prison and destroy the terrorists' weapons stockpile (all manufactured by Stark Industries), but Yinsen is killed in the process.

Shaken by his brush with death and the realization of the actual impact his company has on the world, Stark returns to the US a changed man and immediately vows to stop making weapons, a move frowned upon by his mentor and partner Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges) and his military friend Jim Rhodes (Terence Howard). He immediately sets to work refining his armored suit to create something revolutionary. When he becomes increasingly frustrated with the lack of impact he has via Stark Industries, he decides to take the fight to the bad guys using his new sleek, super powered armoured suit... and Iron Man is born!

The plot isn't going to set the world on fire, but there are some elements here that set 'Iron Man' apart from the typical superhero origin story. For one thing, the main character is far removed from the usual burdened, angst ridden sad sack type. Throughout the movie, even after his rough experience, Tony Stark is a carefree individual with a magnetic personality. Another departure is the lack of a major villain stealing the limelight - there is one but he really only pops up at the end. The focus is almost solely on Stark from start to finish, and in many ways the conflict is driven mostly by Stark trying to atone for what he himself has helped inflict upon mankind. The superhero mechanics of Iron Man are also fairly unique, with the protagonist having only one real power - his intelligence - that he uses to engineer himself into a superhero, a superhero who is incredibly cool in a flashy sports car kind of way! The screenplay is pretty good, with Stark being well fleshed out and equipped with plenty of great lines and humour. Even the relatively underdeveloped villain's incorporation into the story feels organic and works well. The commentary on weapons and war seems a bit muddled, with the US military coming out looking squeaky clean, but I'll let that pass as the underlying message about the impact of arms suppliers is still valid and topical.

John Favreau's filmography demonstrates a proclivity for character driven fare that isn't overly serious, and this is something he brings along to Iron Man - a sense of fun and storytelling that focuses largely on character. The best stuff in this movie isn't the material involving Iron Man battling, it's the stuff with Tony Stark and the journey he goes through, and his interactions with people around him. The stuff with Stark designing and experimenting with his suits are also fantastic standout moments. This is not to say that the Iron Man scenes aren't great either, because they are, and Favreau's tendency to eschew CGI in favour of models and real, physical elements brings a sense of tangibility to many scenes (though I must confess the line is starting to blur - CGI is really getting there!). The final battle is quite well done even if it does feel a little small scale for a fight between men in super powered armoured suits. But hey, that's what sequels are for - to up the ante! The production values are stellar, with excellent special effects throughout and gadgets and technology that are truly droolworthy without looking too far fetched.

Which brings me to the key piece in the puzzle - in much the same way that Tony Stark is the heart and soul of Iron Man, Robert Downey Jr. is the heart and soul of this movie, and I can't imagine too many other actors pulling this off with such aplomb. It should come as no surprise though, as Downey's always been great (see 'Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang' for recent proof), and his charisma and brilliant comic timing make the character of Stark eminently watchable. If you consider for a moment the fact that despite the character being a spoilt asshole on paper he still comes across as human and sympathetic on screen throughout, you'll realize what Downey brings to the role. The rest of the cast are also pretty great. Jeff Bridges is cold and bald and more than a little sinister; Gwyneth Paltrow as Stark's assistant Pepper Potts (!) is surprisingly endearing; and of course there's Terence Howard, who's great but underutilized for an actor with enough presence to star in his own superhero film (and who may yet at least play one, if the comic book's story is anything to go by). There are also memorable turns by Shaun Toub as Dr. Yinsen (love the crazed shooting in the caves!) and Faran Tahir as the leader of the Afghan rebels.

'Iron Man' is an excellent film, and particularly exceptional as a superhero origin story. I think it has reinvigorated the genre to some extent by avoiding those now all too familiar trappings while still staying true to the overall formula of the classic superhero yarn. It's fun, funny, and offers enough action and excitement to make the two hours fly by while offering a wee bit of commentary about the business of war and personal responsibility. The sequel is already in the pipeline, and with Downey Jr. and the rest of the crew on board it's not unreasonable, based on how terrific 'Iron Man' part one is, to expect something good a couple of years from now!