Kong: Skull Island (PG-13)
"Ape-ocalypse Now"
1973: A mysterious organization wishes to explore an unknown island in the South Pacific, a recently discharged US Vietnam Helicopter strike team is enlisted to escort them there, and upon arrival are met with more than they bargained for in the re-imagined relaunch of the King Kong legacy, Kong: Skull Island.
Firstly, lets get it on the table that the casting is great; John Goodman, Samuel L. Jackson, Tom Hiddleston, and Brie Larson all populate the movie well. But for every Shea Whigham as a quirky grizzled veteran there is someone like Hiddleston who is left without much to do or act except to be pretty for the camera, or like most of the cast just be unnamed expendable Kong fodder (and boy are they expendable!). The only exception is venerable character actor John C. Reilly (Boogie Nights) as a WW2 flyboy marooned on the island. He steals almost every scene, which isn't to say everything John does is solid improv gold, but it IS to say that the majority of the movie's scenes are stiff bores without him, and since he featured so prominently in marketing for the film the producers probably agreed. The star left to mention is Kong, and he is definitively the strongest version of himself since the golden age. Well rendered and animated without a hint cartooniness, Kong comes off well but he also doesn't have much to do. Stripped of his classically unPC romance with the human female to motivate him, with no urban landscape to show off his gigantism and prowess, he is present just to growl, shout and pound the diminutive jungle around him.
Plot holes are as big as the cracks in Kong's CG nose. Is this an action-comedy or a Monster movie? Can this be called a remake if major plot points of 1933 Kong are ignored? Gone is any romance or sense of adventure. From the get go it's a "let's just see who gets eaten next," instead of a dark mystery. And every character's motivation to go into a potentially deadly unknown situation without proper training or preparation is the movie's biggest weakness, not only by civilians but followed blindly by a squadron of battle hardened Helicopter-jockeys and gunmen just off the front line in 'Nam. It just reeks of the sandbox "because it is cool" reason for film making without a hint of the real politics, ramifications, or artistry of the Vietnam 70s era.
The director Jordan Vogt-Roberts seems to be juggling things that aren't his forte. What was sold by WB marketing as Apocalypse Now with giant apes seems to not even understand what makes a good Vietnam movie, let alone a good Kaiju one. And while the CG monsters and production design hold up well and look great on screen (much improved over Jackson's 2005 remake), there are many scenes of the humans with overly obvious green screening or framed just for the 3d effect and it is jarring. Add to that Zack Snyder's slow-motion heavy DP handling the lens, and you have a slog through digital jungles and pointless fake giant things smacking each other dramatically. Sometimes it looks pretty, but most often than not it looks created. As does the 1970s setting, never once does it ring true. It feels like everyone, both behind and in front of the camera, are making their best bet what the decade was and ending up with a pale imitation.
Now imagine the existential dread of Coppolla's Apocalypse Now, but instead of Kurtz at the end of the river there is a 60 foot tall Ape-like creature fighting skull monsters, with PTSD'ed men refusing to follow orders or civilians turning out to be the true evil or something along those lines, and it could have been epic (and a unique spin on a classic). Instead it ends up "we found giant monsters, they eat us, lets escape or kill them", the end. Sure there are hints that the next movies are going to be crazy; Rodan, Mothra, even King Ghidora is mentioned in the credits and the inevitable Kong vs. Godzilla is just a stones throw away, but what about the movie now, the one you just watched? Comparatively Skull Island falls well short of the experience of the 1933 classic, maybe even of the 1976 version. It turns out to be just as many empty calories as the tub of popcorn you bought, and about as much forethought and love went into it's making.
4.5 Chest Rockwells Saying "WeeWee" out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Showing posts with label MEDIOCRE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MEDIOCRE. Show all posts
Sausage Party (2016)
Sausage Party (R)
A frankfurter and his bun-to-be are thrown into an spiritual (and cuss laden) adventure in the aisles of their grocery store and beyond in the first CGI R-rated animated farce Sausage Party.
Sausage Party, brought to us by Seth Rogan and Jonah Hill, is a stoner movie, and that doesn't just mean the characters hit a bong (which they do, thanks for reminding us you love weed, again, Rogan), no it means it was written and starring people who are literally stoned, and the plot reflects it.
"Let's make Toy Story, except about FOOD!"
"And have a musical number like a Disney movie, about God n shit cuz they are stupid like us!"
"Yeah, and they think we are the Gods, but really we are disgusting monsters who EAT them!"
"God is religion which is bad, so have a Bagel and a whatever-the-fuck Muslims eat hate each other!"
"And the bad guy is a literal Douche, like a Douche from the feminine aisle or some shit!"
"And people that take bath salts, like, lets us dudes see the Food for reals!"
"And at the end they all get to bone! They find freedom and like have a huge food on food orgy!"
The anti-religion, pro-atheism, sex and drugs are freedom message is obvious and too strong, Seth is not awakening us with his comedic wiener movie. The film is also filled with questionable racial stereotypes done by a handful of un-ethnic comedic friends of Rogan and Company. There are only two female characters (both characterized as meat receiving vessels,) although one is Selma Hayek playing a lesbian Taco so there is that. There is some wit, some funny ideas, some laugh out loud moments, some funny cartoon gore but most of it's is just cursing.
Hint. When you make a movie, if the very first line is a curse, if you drop FBombs and Cbombs literally every other word it loses it's impact. Steve Martin's famous FBombing in Planes, Trains works because they speak like normal people up until that moment (i.e., talk normal, curse when necessary, repeat). And then suddenly it earns its R with the huge blue tirade of rage. Sausage Party isn't blue, it's purple in the face from shouting all the bad words constantly and it isn't funny. If it was handled right, a Pixar film that suddenly turned raucous (which on paper is what it intends to be), it would indeed be much funnier. But by the skin of it's sheath Sausage Party stays just enough ahead of its dumb ideas to deliver entertainment, but was it worth the terrible working conditions for it's animators Mr. Rogan?
5.5 Deadpool's Favorite Movie out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
A frankfurter and his bun-to-be are thrown into an spiritual (and cuss laden) adventure in the aisles of their grocery store and beyond in the first CGI R-rated animated farce Sausage Party.
Sausage Party, brought to us by Seth Rogan and Jonah Hill, is a stoner movie, and that doesn't just mean the characters hit a bong (which they do, thanks for reminding us you love weed, again, Rogan), no it means it was written and starring people who are literally stoned, and the plot reflects it.
"Let's make Toy Story, except about FOOD!"
"And have a musical number like a Disney movie, about God n shit cuz they are stupid like us!"
"Yeah, and they think we are the Gods, but really we are disgusting monsters who EAT them!"
"God is religion which is bad, so have a Bagel and a whatever-the-fuck Muslims eat hate each other!"
"And the bad guy is a literal Douche, like a Douche from the feminine aisle or some shit!"
"And people that take bath salts, like, lets us dudes see the Food for reals!"
"And at the end they all get to bone! They find freedom and like have a huge food on food orgy!"
The anti-religion, pro-atheism, sex and drugs are freedom message is obvious and too strong, Seth is not awakening us with his comedic wiener movie. The film is also filled with questionable racial stereotypes done by a handful of un-ethnic comedic friends of Rogan and Company. There are only two female characters (both characterized as meat receiving vessels,) although one is Selma Hayek playing a lesbian Taco so there is that. There is some wit, some funny ideas, some laugh out loud moments, some funny cartoon gore but most of it's is just cursing.
Hint. When you make a movie, if the very first line is a curse, if you drop FBombs and Cbombs literally every other word it loses it's impact. Steve Martin's famous FBombing in Planes, Trains works because they speak like normal people up until that moment (i.e., talk normal, curse when necessary, repeat). And then suddenly it earns its R with the huge blue tirade of rage. Sausage Party isn't blue, it's purple in the face from shouting all the bad words constantly and it isn't funny. If it was handled right, a Pixar film that suddenly turned raucous (which on paper is what it intends to be), it would indeed be much funnier. But by the skin of it's sheath Sausage Party stays just enough ahead of its dumb ideas to deliver entertainment, but was it worth the terrible working conditions for it's animators Mr. Rogan?
5.5 Deadpool's Favorite Movie out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Hardcore Henry (2016)
Hardcore Henry - R
An augmented man with no memory chases after his wife who is kidnapped out of the Russian lab he was created in, rushing through the buildings, streets and rails in a nonstop barrage of violence and first person camera work in the very video-game like Hardcore Henry.
Hardcore Henry is basically the longest (and worst acted) GoPro camera commercial in existence. Yet the footage doesn't have the visual definition usually seen on the big screen for a big release, it can be an unpleasant blurry mess (especially in low light). The acting is atrocious, the main villain has followed the "bad movie actor playbook" as close as possible, shouting lines and gritting teeth and flipping his hair while avoiding actually killing the protagonist at all times. The other extras and leads limp along in his wake.
Hardcore Henry is original in being the first movie to pull this genre off, and yet is wholly unoriginal by not only aping most First Person video games but also not matching them. With high end PCs and PS4s now most games look better than Henry's scummy sunlit scenes. The film's finale is the worst kind of final video game level, with terrible video graphics, long time coming plot twist, easily disposed cannon fodder and hammy acting from your cackling final Boss. But considering how low budget H. Henry must be, how much seat of the pants filmmaking it must have used, you can't help but gain a grudging respect for the project (and quite a bit of fun).
For instance, Sharlto Copley's role as a scientist who has invented Henry's technology is a breath of fresh air from all the mind numbing punching and jumping. Despite a severely underwhelming lead role in Eleysium and being a possible albatross on this production, here his comedic antics make him the only visible actor who has a grasp of how to behave on camera. And he takes it to extremes (much to the filmmakers credit) by playing a plethora of characters ala Peter Sellers, each with their own costumes and funny accents. It is the only part of Henry that took any balls to put to screen, after all the action stunt work and parkour sequences are what we would expect. Add that to a seldom seen peek into the suburban sprawl of life in Russia and it's satellite states, some outstanding action and death defying stunts makes Hardcore Henry not a bad movie, it's just not as violent as the title promised, not as original as it's poster promised, and not as revolutionary as it is entertaining.
5.5 Steel Knuckles out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
An augmented man with no memory chases after his wife who is kidnapped out of the Russian lab he was created in, rushing through the buildings, streets and rails in a nonstop barrage of violence and first person camera work in the very video-game like Hardcore Henry.
Hardcore Henry is basically the longest (and worst acted) GoPro camera commercial in existence. Yet the footage doesn't have the visual definition usually seen on the big screen for a big release, it can be an unpleasant blurry mess (especially in low light). The acting is atrocious, the main villain has followed the "bad movie actor playbook" as close as possible, shouting lines and gritting teeth and flipping his hair while avoiding actually killing the protagonist at all times. The other extras and leads limp along in his wake.
Hardcore Henry is original in being the first movie to pull this genre off, and yet is wholly unoriginal by not only aping most First Person video games but also not matching them. With high end PCs and PS4s now most games look better than Henry's scummy sunlit scenes. The film's finale is the worst kind of final video game level, with terrible video graphics, long time coming plot twist, easily disposed cannon fodder and hammy acting from your cackling final Boss. But considering how low budget H. Henry must be, how much seat of the pants filmmaking it must have used, you can't help but gain a grudging respect for the project (and quite a bit of fun).
For instance, Sharlto Copley's role as a scientist who has invented Henry's technology is a breath of fresh air from all the mind numbing punching and jumping. Despite a severely underwhelming lead role in Eleysium and being a possible albatross on this production, here his comedic antics make him the only visible actor who has a grasp of how to behave on camera. And he takes it to extremes (much to the filmmakers credit) by playing a plethora of characters ala Peter Sellers, each with their own costumes and funny accents. It is the only part of Henry that took any balls to put to screen, after all the action stunt work and parkour sequences are what we would expect. Add that to a seldom seen peek into the suburban sprawl of life in Russia and it's satellite states, some outstanding action and death defying stunts makes Hardcore Henry not a bad movie, it's just not as violent as the title promised, not as original as it's poster promised, and not as revolutionary as it is entertaining.
5.5 Steel Knuckles out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Sicario (2015)
Sicario (R)
"Traffic Jam"
FBI Agent Kate (Emily Blunt) makes a grisly discovery during a raid on an Arizona suburban home believed to be holding hostages. The deadly results lead her into the path of working with CIA officer Graver (Josh Brolin) and his adviser Alejandro (Benicio del Torro, as grim as ever) in drug pushing Mexico to find the real bad guys responsible. What they find south of the border and the Vietnam-ish mess of cause and effect in the Norther hemisphere results in a brooding yet overstated hot button issue that is the literal militarization of the Police-state that is Sicario's core message, brought to us by Director Denis Villenueve (Prisoners).
Sicario is a dark film, about the dark circumstances and business/political practices surrounding the U.S.'s southern border. The lens is once again artfully wielded by Cinematographer superstar Roger Deakins (who also worked on Prisoners), but unfortunately in Sicario there are very few moments of clarity or calamity to bask in the beauty. And where Prisoners got away with some of it's more convenient leaps in logic and plot due to it's very high tension and the rush of Hugh Jackman's parental instincts, Blunt's Kate is often left confused yet capable. Emily does an admirable job, but the character as written barely accomplishes anything, merely allowing herself to be swept along into the further escalation like Hamlet in Afghanistan. Sure the script gives her the option of backing out, but her character for some unspoken reason must heroically go through with it despite all the implied torture/rape/murder that could (and already almost did) befall her. The film makers want a "bad ass female lead" but give her nothing to do but pout and be a damsel in distress most of the movie being led around by the nose by Brolen's CIA jerk (he plays a good jerk FYI). Benicio's silent but deadly hit man plays to his strengths but gives him nothing new or challenging, except not enough screen time. Meanwhile Kate is front and center with nothing but a confused gape as she is told and shown things without context or exposition (we know how you feel Kate). At least with Savages or Traffic or (god forbid The Counselor) there wasn't a feeling of "welp, thats the way it is gringos" *shrug*.
Sicario knows what it wants to say (guns guns guns and drugs) and who it wants to say it about (love and fear thy southern/northern neighbor), it just does it in a disingenuous "how bleak is the future huh?" fashion tinged with backhanded misogyny that it leaves a bad aftertaste. Stick with the Taco Bell instead, it's better for you (just not as much atmosphere).
4.5 Never Trust the Latino Advisor in a White Suit out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"Traffic Jam"
FBI Agent Kate (Emily Blunt) makes a grisly discovery during a raid on an Arizona suburban home believed to be holding hostages. The deadly results lead her into the path of working with CIA officer Graver (Josh Brolin) and his adviser Alejandro (Benicio del Torro, as grim as ever) in drug pushing Mexico to find the real bad guys responsible. What they find south of the border and the Vietnam-ish mess of cause and effect in the Norther hemisphere results in a brooding yet overstated hot button issue that is the literal militarization of the Police-state that is Sicario's core message, brought to us by Director Denis Villenueve (Prisoners).
Sicario is a dark film, about the dark circumstances and business/political practices surrounding the U.S.'s southern border. The lens is once again artfully wielded by Cinematographer superstar Roger Deakins (who also worked on Prisoners), but unfortunately in Sicario there are very few moments of clarity or calamity to bask in the beauty. And where Prisoners got away with some of it's more convenient leaps in logic and plot due to it's very high tension and the rush of Hugh Jackman's parental instincts, Blunt's Kate is often left confused yet capable. Emily does an admirable job, but the character as written barely accomplishes anything, merely allowing herself to be swept along into the further escalation like Hamlet in Afghanistan. Sure the script gives her the option of backing out, but her character for some unspoken reason must heroically go through with it despite all the implied torture/rape/murder that could (and already almost did) befall her. The film makers want a "bad ass female lead" but give her nothing to do but pout and be a damsel in distress most of the movie being led around by the nose by Brolen's CIA jerk (he plays a good jerk FYI). Benicio's silent but deadly hit man plays to his strengths but gives him nothing new or challenging, except not enough screen time. Meanwhile Kate is front and center with nothing but a confused gape as she is told and shown things without context or exposition (we know how you feel Kate). At least with Savages or Traffic or (god forbid The Counselor) there wasn't a feeling of "welp, thats the way it is gringos" *shrug*.
Sicario knows what it wants to say (guns guns guns and drugs) and who it wants to say it about (love and fear thy southern/northern neighbor), it just does it in a disingenuous "how bleak is the future huh?" fashion tinged with backhanded misogyny that it leaves a bad aftertaste. Stick with the Taco Bell instead, it's better for you (just not as much atmosphere).
4.5 Never Trust the Latino Advisor in a White Suit out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)
Avengers: Age of Ultron (PG-13)
"Got no strings, so whats holding it down?"
The heroically rag-tag team from past Marvel films are once again united against a single enemy, this time one accidentally created by their resident tech genius Tony Stark in Joss Whedon's middling follow-up to 2012's Avengers.
Beyond the changes to the convoluted characters from page to screen, the biggest grievances to be leveled at AAOU is the absolutely hackneyed writing. Nearly every action moment comes with a quip of some kind, or a re-quip, or a quip about an earlier quip. It really gets tedious and clunky, Whedon's flippant attitude towards tension really strains the credibility of whether or not anything is in peril. Meanwhile, like most huge sequels, the CGI has become more prevalent and overloaded, while the color palette has been oddly drained. Whole moments of action are obviously stitched together in the computer, but somehow still remain unclear, confused and jumpy. Much is simply unsatisfying to watch.
This is in "stark" (haha) contrast to the original Avengers, where Whedon's writing and structure issues were eventually uplifted by an epic sized brawl in New York where every character had moments of heroicism and bravery, they gelled as a team against a living breathing maniac hell-bent on enslaving humanity. In Age, Ultron is a smart-ass mega-robot voiced by James Spader (with a rather un-robot like attitude), who's evil motivations behind his evil plot are pretty much a shrug "cuz we said so" kind of thing. Spader does lend something to the sinister yet somehow ambiguously malign character (perhaps too much), but his robot army are a rather lame foe and his CGI presence just feels weak. At no time does Ultron seem a threat, and yet the new additions to the team do feel outmatched. Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are introduced on Ultron's side (being X-Foe's Magneto's children and perpetual fence-sitters makes this an alright choice, even if Marvel can't utilize this part of the lore due to Fox's owning the X-Men licence), and yet are somehow easily able to defeat 90% of the team double-handed! Then they are offered up as lame-duck sacrifices by movie's end, for the feels that just don't manifest. Meanwhile Black Widow is irritating fan-boys to even more extremes. Now her femininity and allure can calm down the Hulk because, shipping!!!, and she is now the Avengers den mother, ugh. Now her ultimate spy-stealthiness includes a glowing outfit and matching glowsticks she does kung fu with (!?!?!) because... action figures sell?
Okay, so does anything save this film? Unfortunately this movie is just a baby step for other MCU movies, and is more obvious about it than previous releases. It is less satisfying within the Universe and on it's own than its predecessors, and we can hope that those films it (again) hints at as coming will actually deliver. Despite being excited by mentions of Wakanda or the Vision's wasted potential, we already have been teased to death about the Infinity War and now we need Thor taking his shirt off and jumping in a lake to preview his next film (Ragnarock)? The film is already overlong and underwhelmed with truly great moments, with an anemic amount of amusement and severe lack of immersion, the long runtime for these kind of inclusions could have really been reeled back. As much as I enjoyed the Hulk's rampage or how insufferable Stark is becoming, those kind of moments are few and far between.
The invisible strings from the Disney Exec's indeed seem long. The cult figure of Whedon and his fandom aren't immune to them, pulling this way and demanding that, ending up a puppet for mass-market appeal and humdrum committee decisions. In a world where comic-book movies are now common place and people in capes are socially accepted the MCU has finally shown a chink in it's bright blue armor.
4.5 "The Internet?" "The Internet." out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"Got no strings, so whats holding it down?"
The heroically rag-tag team from past Marvel films are once again united against a single enemy, this time one accidentally created by their resident tech genius Tony Stark in Joss Whedon's middling follow-up to 2012's Avengers.
Beyond the changes to the convoluted characters from page to screen, the biggest grievances to be leveled at AAOU is the absolutely hackneyed writing. Nearly every action moment comes with a quip of some kind, or a re-quip, or a quip about an earlier quip. It really gets tedious and clunky, Whedon's flippant attitude towards tension really strains the credibility of whether or not anything is in peril. Meanwhile, like most huge sequels, the CGI has become more prevalent and overloaded, while the color palette has been oddly drained. Whole moments of action are obviously stitched together in the computer, but somehow still remain unclear, confused and jumpy. Much is simply unsatisfying to watch.
This is in "stark" (haha) contrast to the original Avengers, where Whedon's writing and structure issues were eventually uplifted by an epic sized brawl in New York where every character had moments of heroicism and bravery, they gelled as a team against a living breathing maniac hell-bent on enslaving humanity. In Age, Ultron is a smart-ass mega-robot voiced by James Spader (with a rather un-robot like attitude), who's evil motivations behind his evil plot are pretty much a shrug "cuz we said so" kind of thing. Spader does lend something to the sinister yet somehow ambiguously malign character (perhaps too much), but his robot army are a rather lame foe and his CGI presence just feels weak. At no time does Ultron seem a threat, and yet the new additions to the team do feel outmatched. Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are introduced on Ultron's side (being X-Foe's Magneto's children and perpetual fence-sitters makes this an alright choice, even if Marvel can't utilize this part of the lore due to Fox's owning the X-Men licence), and yet are somehow easily able to defeat 90% of the team double-handed! Then they are offered up as lame-duck sacrifices by movie's end, for the feels that just don't manifest. Meanwhile Black Widow is irritating fan-boys to even more extremes. Now her femininity and allure can calm down the Hulk because, shipping!!!, and she is now the Avengers den mother, ugh. Now her ultimate spy-stealthiness includes a glowing outfit and matching glowsticks she does kung fu with (!?!?!) because... action figures sell?
Okay, so does anything save this film? Unfortunately this movie is just a baby step for other MCU movies, and is more obvious about it than previous releases. It is less satisfying within the Universe and on it's own than its predecessors, and we can hope that those films it (again) hints at as coming will actually deliver. Despite being excited by mentions of Wakanda or the Vision's wasted potential, we already have been teased to death about the Infinity War and now we need Thor taking his shirt off and jumping in a lake to preview his next film (Ragnarock)? The film is already overlong and underwhelmed with truly great moments, with an anemic amount of amusement and severe lack of immersion, the long runtime for these kind of inclusions could have really been reeled back. As much as I enjoyed the Hulk's rampage or how insufferable Stark is becoming, those kind of moments are few and far between.
The invisible strings from the Disney Exec's indeed seem long. The cult figure of Whedon and his fandom aren't immune to them, pulling this way and demanding that, ending up a puppet for mass-market appeal and humdrum committee decisions. In a world where comic-book movies are now common place and people in capes are socially accepted the MCU has finally shown a chink in it's bright blue armor.
4.5 "The Internet?" "The Internet." out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Noah (2014)
Noah (PG-13)
"When it rains it pours"
Director Darren Aaronofsky's (Requiem For A Dream) life long ambition of putting the Bible parable Noah on screen comes to fruition, but comes through quite waterlogged with modern ideas and structure. While not as atheist-centric as some had feared, the tale of Noah is filled with fantasy sci fi trappings along with the strongly mythical ones.
For an epic the story feels quite small, with just a few sets (ash land, rock land, grassy mountain, ark). For an epic there are very few characters, just Noah and his family and the evil Tubal-Cain (played by Ray Winstone), whose armies are just nameless background cannon(golem)fodder. The lack of racial diversity is an eerie throwback to Ten Commandments whitewashing, the fantastical rock giants evoke the LOTR trilogy more than the Holy Bible, the CGI driven time lapse photography that is quite jarring as it promotes evolutionary creationism, human bad guys shoot rocket launchers at those giant golems, and the fauna of the Earth that are saved two by two are strangely unevolved (dogs with armadillo scales?). The casting too lacks a certain finesse, with no performances besides Anthony Hopkins as Methuselah generating much interest. The choices are odd, and when considering the market for a straight laced Bible story is probably dwindling, the cynical might scream that these add-ons are mere tricks to spice up the potential box office gloom.
Yet when the movie plays upon and toys with the themes of this ancient mythology it actually hits some strong (if too modernized) philosophical chords and proves it's artistic forethought. The nature of the relationship between Creator and creations, the fight of good vs evil, sinful human nature versus his wished for ideals, these are inborn to the story of the flood. Stepping then as it does into the sciences of ecology, environmentalism, and conservationism makes the movie more palatable to modern audiences while still keeping its morals, or most of them, intact. When the Earth is being wiped out due to humanity's strip mining and pollution (the evil king is very unPC and therefore very pro-Earth exploitation) it skews it more towards self righteous liberalism. Add that to the mix the freakish rock-creatures and rough old testament miracles, Noah survives the flood of new and old. The added action scenes and family strife pad the overlong runtime to over 2 hours, but really could it be that entertaining of a story without them? Putting at its forefront the idea that mankind was once so technologically advanced and neglectful of the Earth and had to be completely wiped-out doomsday style is a side of the story often unexplored, and is probably just what 9 year old Aaronofsky was attracted to in the first place. Noah then has to wrestle with letting all of humanity die or let it begin again, which does the Creator want and what is it saying about us, the descendants of these men? Interesting ideas, but Noah just interests more than flat out entertains. However if you can forgive the deluge of eccentricity there are worse ways to spend an rainy afternoon.
5 Noah the Hatchet Man out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"When it rains it pours"
Director Darren Aaronofsky's (Requiem For A Dream) life long ambition of putting the Bible parable Noah on screen comes to fruition, but comes through quite waterlogged with modern ideas and structure. While not as atheist-centric as some had feared, the tale of Noah is filled with fantasy sci fi trappings along with the strongly mythical ones.
For an epic the story feels quite small, with just a few sets (ash land, rock land, grassy mountain, ark). For an epic there are very few characters, just Noah and his family and the evil Tubal-Cain (played by Ray Winstone), whose armies are just nameless background cannon(golem)fodder. The lack of racial diversity is an eerie throwback to Ten Commandments whitewashing, the fantastical rock giants evoke the LOTR trilogy more than the Holy Bible, the CGI driven time lapse photography that is quite jarring as it promotes evolutionary creationism, human bad guys shoot rocket launchers at those giant golems, and the fauna of the Earth that are saved two by two are strangely unevolved (dogs with armadillo scales?). The casting too lacks a certain finesse, with no performances besides Anthony Hopkins as Methuselah generating much interest. The choices are odd, and when considering the market for a straight laced Bible story is probably dwindling, the cynical might scream that these add-ons are mere tricks to spice up the potential box office gloom.
Yet when the movie plays upon and toys with the themes of this ancient mythology it actually hits some strong (if too modernized) philosophical chords and proves it's artistic forethought. The nature of the relationship between Creator and creations, the fight of good vs evil, sinful human nature versus his wished for ideals, these are inborn to the story of the flood. Stepping then as it does into the sciences of ecology, environmentalism, and conservationism makes the movie more palatable to modern audiences while still keeping its morals, or most of them, intact. When the Earth is being wiped out due to humanity's strip mining and pollution (the evil king is very unPC and therefore very pro-Earth exploitation) it skews it more towards self righteous liberalism. Add that to the mix the freakish rock-creatures and rough old testament miracles, Noah survives the flood of new and old. The added action scenes and family strife pad the overlong runtime to over 2 hours, but really could it be that entertaining of a story without them? Putting at its forefront the idea that mankind was once so technologically advanced and neglectful of the Earth and had to be completely wiped-out doomsday style is a side of the story often unexplored, and is probably just what 9 year old Aaronofsky was attracted to in the first place. Noah then has to wrestle with letting all of humanity die or let it begin again, which does the Creator want and what is it saying about us, the descendants of these men? Interesting ideas, but Noah just interests more than flat out entertains. However if you can forgive the deluge of eccentricity there are worse ways to spend an rainy afternoon.
5 Noah the Hatchet Man out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Fury (2014)
Fury (R)
"Ideals are peaceful, History is violent"
A ragtag tank crew in the waning years of the European WWII campaign are making the final push into Germany. It's 1945, but the tank finds itself with a new, unwilling recruit. Will they gel as a unit, or will the new blood unwittingly lead to their being "Spam in a Can" in this new war film written and directed by David Ayers (whose biggest claim to fame will still be writing Training Day 2001).
Brad Pitt leads the mostly war-movie-cliche ridden group (Redneck Southerner, Fiery Latino, Piously Religious, Super Green new Guy), while somehow keeping his own Sarge character out of the gutter. He is a calm restrained man who is instantly enraged to murderous "fury" at the sight of enemy SS, cares deeply for his own men whom he physically abuses and feeds day by day and call his tank both home and the best job he ever had. The rest of the cast has Shia LaBeuf using his new found wackiness to fuel his zealotry (and succeeds well), Michael Pena and John Bernthal as the crew vets. but its Logan Lerman (Percy Jackson) as Norman who gets the sub-ripest part as the new guy who soul will soon be stained by warfare. Hesitation and mercy paint his early days in the can, to which his crew mates react without compassion. He cannot understand their willingness for cold blooded killing, but then he hasn't lived through their months of blood and guts, from Africa to France and now into enemy Deutschland, barely surviving together as a rough and tumble family. This is all told through overt actions or reminisces during a calm before the storm, well nuanced and scripted. The action too is a tense, enjoyable affair reminiscent of Das Boot, showing the tank's mechanized machinations from inside out. And yet, despite the thrilling Shermans vs Panzer battle or a couple other nice moments, Fury just can't stay on it's tracks long enough to say or show much of anything important.
First the cinematography is smoky and dull (why go through the effort of smoke strategy in the field of combat when nearly EVERY shot has fog of war and smokepots to create atmosphere?), everything is just dirt and cold steel. When there is a quiet moment of soldiers both forcing themselves onto the civilians and simultaneously being respectful to them, at least the lens has a chance to have a clear line of sight (the visibility in almost every shot is murky as a N64 FPS). It just adds nothing and detracts more. That is doubly true of the soundtrack, a over dramatized, over choir filled affair. The music often is at odds with the scenes, often overrides any subtle emotions the cast was trying to portray, and just plain distracts so often this reviewer was wishing it just wasn't there. The sound design is underwhelming, the realism of living in a steel chambered gunpowder filled deathtrap has almost no audible weight (the tanks in Saving Private Ryan, for instance, were squealing frightening monsters that could be heard for miles). In this regard Fury ist nicht Das Boot, for where are the diesel fumes, the choking smoke, the roaring engines and cramped living conditions? Even the CGI bullet tracers just have a slightly off look to them.
Brad Pitt gives a great performance of an man whose been effected by violence, not by going into shock but by getting angry and perpetrating the cycle. Sure it fits neatly into Pitt's motif of "look at how manly I really am" movie roles, and without Logan's fresh faced Norman to counter balance, the Sarge would be just another example of Pitt takes shirt off, Pitt looks like old dirty photographs, Pitt shaves like the Marlboro man kind of movie. The costume and production design are lovely in a dirt and grit kind of way (Peckinpah would be proud), and the dialogue never traverses into eye rolling tedium and in fact often rings true what with religion and women often coming up in converstaions, but the blah unrealistic visuals and over dramatized soundtrack, the eyes and ears of the piece, drown out the furious steel encased heart of the beast. The man, his machine and his love of destruction.
5.5 Pitt really likes to talk German in WW2 movies out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"Ideals are peaceful, History is violent"
A ragtag tank crew in the waning years of the European WWII campaign are making the final push into Germany. It's 1945, but the tank finds itself with a new, unwilling recruit. Will they gel as a unit, or will the new blood unwittingly lead to their being "Spam in a Can" in this new war film written and directed by David Ayers (whose biggest claim to fame will still be writing Training Day 2001).
Brad Pitt leads the mostly war-movie-cliche ridden group (Redneck Southerner, Fiery Latino, Piously Religious, Super Green new Guy), while somehow keeping his own Sarge character out of the gutter. He is a calm restrained man who is instantly enraged to murderous "fury" at the sight of enemy SS, cares deeply for his own men whom he physically abuses and feeds day by day and call his tank both home and the best job he ever had. The rest of the cast has Shia LaBeuf using his new found wackiness to fuel his zealotry (and succeeds well), Michael Pena and John Bernthal as the crew vets. but its Logan Lerman (Percy Jackson) as Norman who gets the sub-ripest part as the new guy who soul will soon be stained by warfare. Hesitation and mercy paint his early days in the can, to which his crew mates react without compassion. He cannot understand their willingness for cold blooded killing, but then he hasn't lived through their months of blood and guts, from Africa to France and now into enemy Deutschland, barely surviving together as a rough and tumble family. This is all told through overt actions or reminisces during a calm before the storm, well nuanced and scripted. The action too is a tense, enjoyable affair reminiscent of Das Boot, showing the tank's mechanized machinations from inside out. And yet, despite the thrilling Shermans vs Panzer battle or a couple other nice moments, Fury just can't stay on it's tracks long enough to say or show much of anything important.
First the cinematography is smoky and dull (why go through the effort of smoke strategy in the field of combat when nearly EVERY shot has fog of war and smokepots to create atmosphere?), everything is just dirt and cold steel. When there is a quiet moment of soldiers both forcing themselves onto the civilians and simultaneously being respectful to them, at least the lens has a chance to have a clear line of sight (the visibility in almost every shot is murky as a N64 FPS). It just adds nothing and detracts more. That is doubly true of the soundtrack, a over dramatized, over choir filled affair. The music often is at odds with the scenes, often overrides any subtle emotions the cast was trying to portray, and just plain distracts so often this reviewer was wishing it just wasn't there. The sound design is underwhelming, the realism of living in a steel chambered gunpowder filled deathtrap has almost no audible weight (the tanks in Saving Private Ryan, for instance, were squealing frightening monsters that could be heard for miles). In this regard Fury ist nicht Das Boot, for where are the diesel fumes, the choking smoke, the roaring engines and cramped living conditions? Even the CGI bullet tracers just have a slightly off look to them.
Brad Pitt gives a great performance of an man whose been effected by violence, not by going into shock but by getting angry and perpetrating the cycle. Sure it fits neatly into Pitt's motif of "look at how manly I really am" movie roles, and without Logan's fresh faced Norman to counter balance, the Sarge would be just another example of Pitt takes shirt off, Pitt looks like old dirty photographs, Pitt shaves like the Marlboro man kind of movie. The costume and production design are lovely in a dirt and grit kind of way (Peckinpah would be proud), and the dialogue never traverses into eye rolling tedium and in fact often rings true what with religion and women often coming up in converstaions, but the blah unrealistic visuals and over dramatized soundtrack, the eyes and ears of the piece, drown out the furious steel encased heart of the beast. The man, his machine and his love of destruction.
5.5 Pitt really likes to talk German in WW2 movies out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
The Hobbit - The Battle of the Five Armies (2014)
The Hobbit - The Battle of the Five Armies (PG-13)
Much like Peter Jackson's previous Tolkien trilogy, the final Hobbit film redeems some of the mistakes and missteps of it's plodding middle chapter. However, unlike closing-trilogy counterpart and Oscar winner Return of the King, Battle of the Five Armies only tries to satisfy the general public's thirst for mindless fantasy action and avoids both critical and fan acclaim. Unfortunately it also grossed over a Billion at the box office, and sadly that is the only measure of success that the studio heads will really pay attention to.
The loose pace-killing threads from the last film are wrapped up early. The burning of Lake Town and the extinguishing of Smaug are quickly (and loosely) wrapped up, leaving the rest of the 2 hours on the eponymous Battle of the Five armies. It is filled with cringe inducing CGI (poor Billy Connolly) over-wrought and misdirected emotions (the evil comedic relief Wormtongue Jr. has a lot to answer for, as does the made-up cliche-yet-still-under-written dwarf/elf romance) However the thing this Hobbit has to answer for most is the prolonged and yawn inducing, Legolas-stuffed battle scenes. Thousands of elves who robotically move in sync are not impressive when they are CG models simply using the same animations.
For the sake of argument lets compare two fight scenes from the two trilogies. Aragorn vs Lurtz from Fellowship and Thorin vs Azog in this one. In the former, a fantastically paced delightfully violent throw down that takes place in a real wooded glen between two actual actors (one in layers of prosthetic makeup), with desperately thrown weapons and thrown punches, a fight that is as brief as it is realistic with a quick yet satisfying conclusion that ranks as one of cinema's greatest fight scenes. Peter Jackson shot that, wrote that, thought it out before hand. Compare that to the video-game-boss level that is Thorin dodging a CG Orc's rock on a chain weapon on top of a frozen waterfall. The prolonged tedious back and forth, the "surprising" twists and turns, the unsatisfying CGI green screening and whimper of a finish. Peter Jackson decided to do it this way, to figure it out later in the computer, and is as completely devoid of realism as it is of satisfaction. While Five Armies does this sort of thing less often than Desolation, it still shows the differences between the two trilogies, and how The Hobbit has amplified those LOTR problems three-fold. Overabundant use of of CG, ego-fueled changes to Tolkien's children's story that perpetuate even more ridiculous changes, and an apparently flimsy grasp on what made the source material so special. And just like Fellowship before it, the first Hobbit was derided as boring since it hewed closest to the book and embraced singing and dancing over more action scenes, a bold faced lie about future faithfulness to the source material.
Disappointing that this is the last cinematic glimpse into the epic world of J.R.R;s master life-work. It has almost no emotional closure beyond "Well That Happened and can't be undone." Where is the sad longing for more like a the end of King? Replacing it is the profound feeling of "Thank god they can't screw this up any further." Of course, with dangling potential ticket sales and the untapped novel The Silmarillion, who knows what middling film Middle Earth could vaguely inspire next.
4.5 Weeping Dwarfs Tearing their own Beards out of 10 (MEDICORE)
Much like Peter Jackson's previous Tolkien trilogy, the final Hobbit film redeems some of the mistakes and missteps of it's plodding middle chapter. However, unlike closing-trilogy counterpart and Oscar winner Return of the King, Battle of the Five Armies only tries to satisfy the general public's thirst for mindless fantasy action and avoids both critical and fan acclaim. Unfortunately it also grossed over a Billion at the box office, and sadly that is the only measure of success that the studio heads will really pay attention to.
The loose pace-killing threads from the last film are wrapped up early. The burning of Lake Town and the extinguishing of Smaug are quickly (and loosely) wrapped up, leaving the rest of the 2 hours on the eponymous Battle of the Five armies. It is filled with cringe inducing CGI (poor Billy Connolly) over-wrought and misdirected emotions (the evil comedic relief Wormtongue Jr. has a lot to answer for, as does the made-up cliche-yet-still-under-written dwarf/elf romance) However the thing this Hobbit has to answer for most is the prolonged and yawn inducing, Legolas-stuffed battle scenes. Thousands of elves who robotically move in sync are not impressive when they are CG models simply using the same animations.
For the sake of argument lets compare two fight scenes from the two trilogies. Aragorn vs Lurtz from Fellowship and Thorin vs Azog in this one. In the former, a fantastically paced delightfully violent throw down that takes place in a real wooded glen between two actual actors (one in layers of prosthetic makeup), with desperately thrown weapons and thrown punches, a fight that is as brief as it is realistic with a quick yet satisfying conclusion that ranks as one of cinema's greatest fight scenes. Peter Jackson shot that, wrote that, thought it out before hand. Compare that to the video-game-boss level that is Thorin dodging a CG Orc's rock on a chain weapon on top of a frozen waterfall. The prolonged tedious back and forth, the "surprising" twists and turns, the unsatisfying CGI green screening and whimper of a finish. Peter Jackson decided to do it this way, to figure it out later in the computer, and is as completely devoid of realism as it is of satisfaction. While Five Armies does this sort of thing less often than Desolation, it still shows the differences between the two trilogies, and how The Hobbit has amplified those LOTR problems three-fold. Overabundant use of of CG, ego-fueled changes to Tolkien's children's story that perpetuate even more ridiculous changes, and an apparently flimsy grasp on what made the source material so special. And just like Fellowship before it, the first Hobbit was derided as boring since it hewed closest to the book and embraced singing and dancing over more action scenes, a bold faced lie about future faithfulness to the source material.
Disappointing that this is the last cinematic glimpse into the epic world of J.R.R;s master life-work. It has almost no emotional closure beyond "Well That Happened and can't be undone." Where is the sad longing for more like a the end of King? Replacing it is the profound feeling of "Thank god they can't screw this up any further." Of course, with dangling potential ticket sales and the untapped novel The Silmarillion, who knows what middling film Middle Earth could vaguely inspire next.
4.5 Weeping Dwarfs Tearing their own Beards out of 10 (MEDICORE)
Dumb & Dumber To (2014)
Dumb & Dumber To (R)
The Farrelly brothers' Harry and Lloyd return with another dumb adventure set on the road to a tech conference in search of a replacement kidney from a long-lost daughter. Laughs are fewer and farther between, as the leads (Jim Carey and Jeff Daniels) now classic characters have lost their characterizations in favor of just acting like 10 year olds. The troubled production can only be compared to the original, and yes it is dumber than the first, but the aging cast and the creaking dialog can't outrun the few puns (and nutshots) that hit home, not to mention the sequelitis of the plot (hit men, bird boys and *yawn* road trip). You'll soon zip by the prerequisite nods to the original and find some genuine chuckles here, but the fresh/manic energy of the original (wheres the improv?) has not lasted these 20 years and has instead dried up like yesterday's diapers.
5 Appropriate Usage of the Mutt Cut Mobile out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
The Farrelly brothers' Harry and Lloyd return with another dumb adventure set on the road to a tech conference in search of a replacement kidney from a long-lost daughter. Laughs are fewer and farther between, as the leads (Jim Carey and Jeff Daniels) now classic characters have lost their characterizations in favor of just acting like 10 year olds. The troubled production can only be compared to the original, and yes it is dumber than the first, but the aging cast and the creaking dialog can't outrun the few puns (and nutshots) that hit home, not to mention the sequelitis of the plot (hit men, bird boys and *yawn* road trip). You'll soon zip by the prerequisite nods to the original and find some genuine chuckles here, but the fresh/manic energy of the original (wheres the improv?) has not lasted these 20 years and has instead dried up like yesterday's diapers.
5 Appropriate Usage of the Mutt Cut Mobile out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Edge of Tomorrow (2014)
Edge of Tomorrow (PG-13)
"Steal From Groundhog. Crib From Aliens. Repeat"
Tom Cruise stars as a cowardly Major who is thrown unwittingly unto the front line of a final assault against a time-manipulating alien menace in a overtaken Europe. In a twist of fate (and a plot wholly borrowed from the Bill Murray classic Groundhog's Day) he finds himself waking up to the exact same day every time he dies, a time loop caused by the alien invaders which was apparently based on a Japanese novel called "All You Need Is Kill".
Soundly unoriginal yet entertaining, Edge of Tomorrow is made by professionals like writer Christopher McQuarrie (The Usual Suspects) and director Doug Liman (The Bourne Identity), starring a talented cast headed by Cruise, Emily Blunt and Brendan Gleeson, no wonder EOT is tightly made, acted and produced (yet blandly titled) blockbuster. However, burdened with a quite wimpy PG-13 rating, Tomorrow drags itself back again and again to the past. Generously helping itself to the squad dynamic of James Cameron's Aliens (even plagiarizing Bill "Game Over Man" Paxton), leaves the movie's well groomed hands caught red handed in the cookie jar.. The overly macho "Metal Bitch" played by Blunt is, to put it bluntly, tiresome (even more so is the eye-rolling insistence on a romantic angle between the leads), a product of the film's need to differentiate and lean on modern tropes to distract from it's source.
The reason the original Groundhog wasn't itself repeated by other films despite it's enormous success is that the formula is so uniquely tell-tale that if you copy it you'll have no where to hide. Hire the best screen writers and talent to mix in new xenomorphs or finally use the power-armor that was missing from SciFi classic Starship Troopers and still every critic will mention Groundhog's Day.
Shoot, Die, Rewrite. Lure the best screen writers and talent to mix in new xenomorphs or finally use the power-armor that was missing from SciFi classic Starship Troopers and still EVERY critic will mention Groundhog's Day, even though applying it to an action film can be quite satisfying (any genre in fact it would work on, its a fantastic idea that Harold Ramis came up with), Bing!
5.5 Leave the Helmet on Tom out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"Steal From Groundhog. Crib From Aliens. Repeat"
Tom Cruise stars as a cowardly Major who is thrown unwittingly unto the front line of a final assault against a time-manipulating alien menace in a overtaken Europe. In a twist of fate (and a plot wholly borrowed from the Bill Murray classic Groundhog's Day) he finds himself waking up to the exact same day every time he dies, a time loop caused by the alien invaders which was apparently based on a Japanese novel called "All You Need Is Kill".
Soundly unoriginal yet entertaining, Edge of Tomorrow is made by professionals like writer Christopher McQuarrie (The Usual Suspects) and director Doug Liman (The Bourne Identity), starring a talented cast headed by Cruise, Emily Blunt and Brendan Gleeson, no wonder EOT is tightly made, acted and produced (yet blandly titled) blockbuster. However, burdened with a quite wimpy PG-13 rating, Tomorrow drags itself back again and again to the past. Generously helping itself to the squad dynamic of James Cameron's Aliens (even plagiarizing Bill "Game Over Man" Paxton), leaves the movie's well groomed hands caught red handed in the cookie jar.. The overly macho "Metal Bitch" played by Blunt is, to put it bluntly, tiresome (even more so is the eye-rolling insistence on a romantic angle between the leads), a product of the film's need to differentiate and lean on modern tropes to distract from it's source.
The reason the original Groundhog wasn't itself repeated by other films despite it's enormous success is that the formula is so uniquely tell-tale that if you copy it you'll have no where to hide. Hire the best screen writers and talent to mix in new xenomorphs or finally use the power-armor that was missing from SciFi classic Starship Troopers and still every critic will mention Groundhog's Day.
Shoot, Die, Rewrite. Lure the best screen writers and talent to mix in new xenomorphs or finally use the power-armor that was missing from SciFi classic Starship Troopers and still EVERY critic will mention Groundhog's Day, even though applying it to an action film can be quite satisfying (any genre in fact it would work on, its a fantastic idea that Harold Ramis came up with), Bing!
5.5 Leave the Helmet on Tom out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
How To Train Your Dragon 2 (2014)
How To Train Your Dragon 2 (PG)
"Toothless Times Two"
Hiccup and his scaly friends return in Dreamwork's sequel to one of it's most successful films to date (both artistically and financially), but stumbles away from what was new and inventive in the first and falls prey to heavy sequelitis in HTTYD2.
First off, the art has been improved ever so much, so that the small annoying flaws from the first are now gone and so rendering the film gorgeous to behold. The entire voice cast returns, but the entire film has a sense of arrested development. Now that Hiccup has converted his village into a Pro-Dragon land (gee that was easy, but technology often makes such leaps), he is out to convert the world. This return to innocence leads to Hiccups naivety being exploited by the wrong people, a warlord out to enslave all of Dragon-kind for his purposes.
The movie also tries to tie this into the unspoken fate of Hiccup's mother, and here is where the heart goes missing. The mother's disappearance and reappearance does not ring emotionally close to true, even with the great (if overused) Cate Blanchett pouring eccentricity into the role. The Warlord Drago is as one-dimensional as villains come, his lines are growled and shouted and he has absolutely no story beyond "He is evil because that's the way he is". The stupid choices and arrogance displayed by our heroes frustrates, its like the first film never happened and no one learned. And much like other sequels DW has done, anything that worked in the first will work even better in the first! So bit characters that were kind of amusing are front and center now and do too much. Instead of inventing new and interesting characters and scenarios the movie leans on what came before.
As pretty as it is, the movie's tedious retread is in defiance of the first's inventiveness. A more tried and true sequel would have been difficult, but this film reeks of brand control, concession sales and without the care of good story telling and true emotion that so marked the first. Sure the dragons are cute and everyone is 5 years older (and the kids are still not Scottish or lost their now-annoying teenage mannerisms), but when compared to the first HTTYD2 loses more than it's foot this time, and apparently lost due to shooting itself there.
5 Where's The Viking Helmet Bra Continuity out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"Toothless Times Two"
Hiccup and his scaly friends return in Dreamwork's sequel to one of it's most successful films to date (both artistically and financially), but stumbles away from what was new and inventive in the first and falls prey to heavy sequelitis in HTTYD2.
First off, the art has been improved ever so much, so that the small annoying flaws from the first are now gone and so rendering the film gorgeous to behold. The entire voice cast returns, but the entire film has a sense of arrested development. Now that Hiccup has converted his village into a Pro-Dragon land (gee that was easy, but technology often makes such leaps), he is out to convert the world. This return to innocence leads to Hiccups naivety being exploited by the wrong people, a warlord out to enslave all of Dragon-kind for his purposes.
The movie also tries to tie this into the unspoken fate of Hiccup's mother, and here is where the heart goes missing. The mother's disappearance and reappearance does not ring emotionally close to true, even with the great (if overused) Cate Blanchett pouring eccentricity into the role. The Warlord Drago is as one-dimensional as villains come, his lines are growled and shouted and he has absolutely no story beyond "He is evil because that's the way he is". The stupid choices and arrogance displayed by our heroes frustrates, its like the first film never happened and no one learned. And much like other sequels DW has done, anything that worked in the first will work even better in the first! So bit characters that were kind of amusing are front and center now and do too much. Instead of inventing new and interesting characters and scenarios the movie leans on what came before.
As pretty as it is, the movie's tedious retread is in defiance of the first's inventiveness. A more tried and true sequel would have been difficult, but this film reeks of brand control, concession sales and without the care of good story telling and true emotion that so marked the first. Sure the dragons are cute and everyone is 5 years older (and the kids are still not Scottish or lost their now-annoying teenage mannerisms), but when compared to the first HTTYD2 loses more than it's foot this time, and apparently lost due to shooting itself there.
5 Where's The Viking Helmet Bra Continuity out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Old Boy (2013)
Old Boy (R) - Review
"Tooth or Consequences"
A man with a disordered life comes to in a strange hotel room, one that he will not leave for another 20 years. Imprisoned with no clue as to why or where, he finds out he has been framed for his ex-wife's murder and has daughter has been adopted by another couple. Year after year pass (told through his TV as he watches 9/11, Iraq, Hurricane Katrina etc) and the man suffers leagues of loneliness, neglect and conditioning which turns him into a violent psychopath hellbent for vengeance on those that have tortured him and taken his life and daughter from him, even if those same men seem to be goading him onward.
Director Spike Lee (Do The Right Thing) has painted himself into a true Hollywood corner lately, extending his meh streak yet further with this remake of Korea's Cultural Cult hit OldBoy (2003). There is much talk of the Producers taking away final cut and trimming the film in half and it shows. Plot points fall by the wayside along with characterization and pace. What is left is a bare boned retread of the Korean language original with Josh Brolin (No Country For Old Men) now fulfilling the lead role. He is joined by Sam Jackson (in his first collaboration with Lee since Jungle Fever) as the jailer and Elizabeth Olsen as an agent of mercy and tenderness. The stuttering adjustment from the shores of Korea to the United States bemoans attendance expectations, especially when the misery and weird self loathing so rampant in the old version has mostly been lifted and lightened.
The easiest comparison between the two can be made with the hallway fight which made the original so famous. It also exists in the new version, with Brolin beating back an entire Martial Arts fight team for a good five minutes in one continuous shot (though why a company of big tough badguys shrink to acrobatic-sized stuntmen is left unanswered). In a rare decision to try and one up the original, the fight here is now one long steady cam shot that follows the action down levels instead of just laterally. According to rumor this scene was longer than 2003s, but shortened by the producers much to Lee and Brolin's loud chagrin, leaving the fight bloody yet a mere exercise in shadow boxing the original. Whether the entire film's lack of depth and clanging plot holes can be laid at the feet of scene chopping producers will never be known without seeing this supposed 3 hour Director's cut. What can be determined is whether this remake ever needed to be made at all. Spike Lee, who brings his own controversial luggage to any mainstream release, still seems a much better choice than originators Steven Spielberg and Will Smith. Translating the film to english and removing the Asian cinema je ne sais quoi has left the dialogue creaky and unmanageable, the cliches and conveniences glaring, the villain reduced to insufferable mustachio twirling (seriously dragging the entire ending into Vincent Price ham and cheese territory), and for some odd reason the ending changed from its gut-wrenching ambiguity to some unreasonable slice of American machismo that just does not fit the film's tableaux of the taboo.
So what is left on the grill? Brolin's performance is worthy (Sam Jackson's however is debatable, his role feel contractually expanded and overblown), Lee's direction is sharp and professional and his intentions are obviously good, showing the original true love and honor by keeping its bloody fist balled tight. And yet the entire production feels like toys you are now too old to play with, simply going through the motions of play without a real passion, biding until you can put them back on their dusty shelf where you know they belong. The real Oldboy is now a decade older, and it will still be the one you most likely will remember fondly another decade from now, its luster hopefully untarnished by Hollywood's sticky fingers.
5.5 Where Is My Tooth Scene? out of 10 (MEDICORE)
"Tooth or Consequences"
A man with a disordered life comes to in a strange hotel room, one that he will not leave for another 20 years. Imprisoned with no clue as to why or where, he finds out he has been framed for his ex-wife's murder and has daughter has been adopted by another couple. Year after year pass (told through his TV as he watches 9/11, Iraq, Hurricane Katrina etc) and the man suffers leagues of loneliness, neglect and conditioning which turns him into a violent psychopath hellbent for vengeance on those that have tortured him and taken his life and daughter from him, even if those same men seem to be goading him onward.
Director Spike Lee (Do The Right Thing) has painted himself into a true Hollywood corner lately, extending his meh streak yet further with this remake of Korea's Cultural Cult hit OldBoy (2003). There is much talk of the Producers taking away final cut and trimming the film in half and it shows. Plot points fall by the wayside along with characterization and pace. What is left is a bare boned retread of the Korean language original with Josh Brolin (No Country For Old Men) now fulfilling the lead role. He is joined by Sam Jackson (in his first collaboration with Lee since Jungle Fever) as the jailer and Elizabeth Olsen as an agent of mercy and tenderness. The stuttering adjustment from the shores of Korea to the United States bemoans attendance expectations, especially when the misery and weird self loathing so rampant in the old version has mostly been lifted and lightened.
The easiest comparison between the two can be made with the hallway fight which made the original so famous. It also exists in the new version, with Brolin beating back an entire Martial Arts fight team for a good five minutes in one continuous shot (though why a company of big tough badguys shrink to acrobatic-sized stuntmen is left unanswered). In a rare decision to try and one up the original, the fight here is now one long steady cam shot that follows the action down levels instead of just laterally. According to rumor this scene was longer than 2003s, but shortened by the producers much to Lee and Brolin's loud chagrin, leaving the fight bloody yet a mere exercise in shadow boxing the original. Whether the entire film's lack of depth and clanging plot holes can be laid at the feet of scene chopping producers will never be known without seeing this supposed 3 hour Director's cut. What can be determined is whether this remake ever needed to be made at all. Spike Lee, who brings his own controversial luggage to any mainstream release, still seems a much better choice than originators Steven Spielberg and Will Smith. Translating the film to english and removing the Asian cinema je ne sais quoi has left the dialogue creaky and unmanageable, the cliches and conveniences glaring, the villain reduced to insufferable mustachio twirling (seriously dragging the entire ending into Vincent Price ham and cheese territory), and for some odd reason the ending changed from its gut-wrenching ambiguity to some unreasonable slice of American machismo that just does not fit the film's tableaux of the taboo.
So what is left on the grill? Brolin's performance is worthy (Sam Jackson's however is debatable, his role feel contractually expanded and overblown), Lee's direction is sharp and professional and his intentions are obviously good, showing the original true love and honor by keeping its bloody fist balled tight. And yet the entire production feels like toys you are now too old to play with, simply going through the motions of play without a real passion, biding until you can put them back on their dusty shelf where you know they belong. The real Oldboy is now a decade older, and it will still be the one you most likely will remember fondly another decade from now, its luster hopefully untarnished by Hollywood's sticky fingers.
5.5 Where Is My Tooth Scene? out of 10 (MEDICORE)
Under The Skin (2013)
Under The Skin (R)
A mysterious woman drives around Scotland luring strange men into her van and into certain doom in director Jonathan Glazer's newest film, Under The Skin.
The woman is played by blockbuster stunner Scarlet Johansen (Lost in Translation), and in a nice twist she drives about luring men to their visually splendid, yet weirdly ambiguous, demise using her sexuality. It's not the first Horror genre pic to play the "most dangerous gender" card, but it works. However when she flees the situation after meeting a disfigured man and her motorcycle male handlers start combing the countryside for her, the movie takes a sharp turn towards "meh."
Glazer is a master of unsettling visuals (Sexy Beast was his first feature film after excelling in creeping out MTV for years). The abduction scenes were spellbinding, they take place in a dark space that her victims slowly sink through the floor. The music in these scenes is also fantastic and drives home an otherworldy creepy mood that pervades the WTF. And yet the film throws all that mystery away just to begin a drawn out run-away, is she human? plot that centers on rainy cold Scottish scenery and little to no dialog. In the end, the hypnotic visuals and sounds can't overcome the very simple plot. The ending moments elevate it back into watchable, but only by the skin of it's teeth.
4.5 ScarJo's In and Out of Her Lingerie out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
A mysterious woman drives around Scotland luring strange men into her van and into certain doom in director Jonathan Glazer's newest film, Under The Skin.
The woman is played by blockbuster stunner Scarlet Johansen (Lost in Translation), and in a nice twist she drives about luring men to their visually splendid, yet weirdly ambiguous, demise using her sexuality. It's not the first Horror genre pic to play the "most dangerous gender" card, but it works. However when she flees the situation after meeting a disfigured man and her motorcycle male handlers start combing the countryside for her, the movie takes a sharp turn towards "meh."
Glazer is a master of unsettling visuals (Sexy Beast was his first feature film after excelling in creeping out MTV for years). The abduction scenes were spellbinding, they take place in a dark space that her victims slowly sink through the floor. The music in these scenes is also fantastic and drives home an otherworldy creepy mood that pervades the WTF. And yet the film throws all that mystery away just to begin a drawn out run-away, is she human? plot that centers on rainy cold Scottish scenery and little to no dialog. In the end, the hypnotic visuals and sounds can't overcome the very simple plot. The ending moments elevate it back into watchable, but only by the skin of it's teeth.
4.5 ScarJo's In and Out of Her Lingerie out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Pain and Gain (2013)
Pain and Gain (R) - Review
"Goof Fellas"
The real life story of a Florida based gang of weightlifters who operated under the nose of law enforcement for years is skewed by Director Micheal Bay (The Rock), who lies through his teeth to make an entertaining and offbeat Miami-mafia film starring Mark Wahlberg (Boogie Nights) and Dwayne "Also The Rock" Johnson as the meat headed bungling burglers who prey on victims (a shvitzing Tony Shalhoub) who the police probably wouldn't believe. The actual case files are rife with hard to believe moments, but by telling this story from the gang's perspective, no matter how amped up & exaggerated their antics or how Hollywood-abbreviated their convoluted crimes, it becomes a smack in the face of their real life victims and is the bitterest pill to swallow in Pain and Gain. Shalhoub's victim is portrayed as such an terribly unlikable kvetch and braggart that the gang almost seems justified in robbing and then attempting to kill him, a kind of dayglo white-washing of the facts in the name of character motivation that doesn't sit well in the light of day.
This is especially true when scenarios are made up or evidence is distorted just for the sake of a chuckle (the supposed "true story" aspect of the film is reiterated over and over again during its runtime and yet whole plot points such as the severed toe are completely fictional). Luckily Ed Harris' (also also from The Rock) private dick character is there to calm the flames of exploitation and over acting with his aura of Hawaiian shirt fedora excellence.
While Scorsese let us into and be entertained by Henry Hill's amoral gang he never let us forget, cinematically, that these were seriously dangerous men whom the lead character lived in constant fear of. In Pain and Gain (which owes much of its structure to that mafia film) the crew is so inept and goofy from the juice that they almost come off as absolved of their sins, like a 6 year old who broke a vase and can only smile and shrug to everyone's delight. The Coen's great film Fargo also used the "Based on a True Story," gag but was so evenly paced that it didn't detract. Pain and Gain doesn't even give itself that wiggle room as it is so over the top while loudly calling itself true (it's massive fingers crossed behind its back). Oh, but wasn't it a crazy ride and a laugh in the end so let's gloss over real facts like the gangs actual sinister ingenuity, their subsequent trials and death sentences and concentrate on how funny a coked out dumdum Rock is when he's stressing out Marky Mark again.
The film itself? Humorous chitter chatter between the dismemberments and the vain posturing for the camera work well. It looks like a standard Bay action flick, all gorgeous sunshine and sunglasses. The acting is good, the comradery apparent, the film entertains on the surface while underneath boils a riptide of bad intentions that if they had been ironed out would have resulted in a damn good film and instead allow it all to be sucked under. For Bay the film may Gain but The Pain is reserved for everyone else.
5.5 Sleeveless Spandex Tees out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"Goof Fellas"
The real life story of a Florida based gang of weightlifters who operated under the nose of law enforcement for years is skewed by Director Micheal Bay (The Rock), who lies through his teeth to make an entertaining and offbeat Miami-mafia film starring Mark Wahlberg (Boogie Nights) and Dwayne "Also The Rock" Johnson as the meat headed bungling burglers who prey on victims (a shvitzing Tony Shalhoub) who the police probably wouldn't believe. The actual case files are rife with hard to believe moments, but by telling this story from the gang's perspective, no matter how amped up & exaggerated their antics or how Hollywood-abbreviated their convoluted crimes, it becomes a smack in the face of their real life victims and is the bitterest pill to swallow in Pain and Gain. Shalhoub's victim is portrayed as such an terribly unlikable kvetch and braggart that the gang almost seems justified in robbing and then attempting to kill him, a kind of dayglo white-washing of the facts in the name of character motivation that doesn't sit well in the light of day.
This is especially true when scenarios are made up or evidence is distorted just for the sake of a chuckle (the supposed "true story" aspect of the film is reiterated over and over again during its runtime and yet whole plot points such as the severed toe are completely fictional). Luckily Ed Harris' (also also from The Rock) private dick character is there to calm the flames of exploitation and over acting with his aura of Hawaiian shirt fedora excellence.
While Scorsese let us into and be entertained by Henry Hill's amoral gang he never let us forget, cinematically, that these were seriously dangerous men whom the lead character lived in constant fear of. In Pain and Gain (which owes much of its structure to that mafia film) the crew is so inept and goofy from the juice that they almost come off as absolved of their sins, like a 6 year old who broke a vase and can only smile and shrug to everyone's delight. The Coen's great film Fargo also used the "Based on a True Story," gag but was so evenly paced that it didn't detract. Pain and Gain doesn't even give itself that wiggle room as it is so over the top while loudly calling itself true (it's massive fingers crossed behind its back). Oh, but wasn't it a crazy ride and a laugh in the end so let's gloss over real facts like the gangs actual sinister ingenuity, their subsequent trials and death sentences and concentrate on how funny a coked out dumdum Rock is when he's stressing out Marky Mark again.
The film itself? Humorous chitter chatter between the dismemberments and the vain posturing for the camera work well. It looks like a standard Bay action flick, all gorgeous sunshine and sunglasses. The acting is good, the comradery apparent, the film entertains on the surface while underneath boils a riptide of bad intentions that if they had been ironed out would have resulted in a damn good film and instead allow it all to be sucked under. For Bay the film may Gain but The Pain is reserved for everyone else.
5.5 Sleeveless Spandex Tees out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
The World's End (2013)
The World's End (R) - Review
"You can never go home again (and drink 12 pints)"
Gary, an unrepentant substance abuser, attempts to relive the single best night of his life by reuniting with his old school chums and reattempting "The Golden Mile", a pub crawl in their old hometown that they were unable to finish over 20 years ago. However the cadre has all drifted apart and (besides Gary) all grown up. This is especially true of Andy, he is still quite angry with his old best friend due to an incident involving his past drug use and moneys owed. Somehow convinced by their old leader Gary to meet and drink like the old days, the crew bounces from pub to pub while reminiscing about the bad old days as sinister outside forces begin to coalesce against the boys.
The third (and weakest) in the "Cornetto Trilogy" by filmmakers Simon Pegg, Edgar Wright and Nick Frost (responsible for Shawn of the Dead and Hot Fuzz), The World's End has a completely different tone and construction than the other two entries and therefore ends up the black sheep. While certainly humorous in parts and with a good amount of drunken UK kung-fu brawling (which isn't all that convincing), the overall anger and depression seeped into this tale of alcoholics and bad blood between buddies poisons the already tenuous humor of the situation. Throw in the iffy conspiracy movie trope and you end up with a mish-mashy confused film, very unlike its brethren that each had clear cut targets for their lunacy (Zombie flicks and Hollywood Action flicks respectively). The World's End doesn't know whether to choke back emotions or choke down the next beer from scene to scene. While the other entries in the trilogy start off strong and maintain a comedic momentum through their ludicrous pinball-like plots, The World's End starts off with a severely unfunny intro and then takes another 15-20 minutes before the suds start to flow and the comedy starts to show, and by then the movie is certainly crawling through a conspiracy subplot that while the filmmakers have thoroughly interwoven it can never be full accepted as nessecary to the plot.
While Gary (Simon Pegg) definitely becomes more likable and his selfish mannerisms become a tad more endearing by the 6th pint, he is written as a self destructive self centered mildly amusing alcoholic, and as central to the movie as he is the role is removed from the loveable half-slacker or reclusive procedural bad ass he played in the other two films. The darkness inherent to the character bleeds into the humor and relationships, knocking the overall cinematic greatness down quite a few pegs (haha). On top of that bad pun, the filmmakers have thrived on skewering/homaging famous Hollywood genres, and here the Conspiracy source material just isn't ripe enough, doesn't have a cinematic look to ape and doesn't have it's own cliche's or mythologies to mine that it feels very tacked on and quite a bit tacky. The final confrontation, in fact all the confrontations, just seem cheap and almost an afterthought to all the talking, especially in comparison to how razor sharp and beautifully minutiaed the other films were (let's not even talk about how weak the ending is in TWE). The undertow of black depression fights the theme of anti-homogenization of society for which gets in the way of the funny first.
Thankfully, Nick Frost gets the meaty part here as Andy, the wronged former best friend who is seething with rage and unresolved issues. Normally relegated to the off kilter chubby sidekick, once Andy starts downing drinks and WWF Bionic Elbowing the enemy the movie really starts to pick up. He has the best role here, both emotionally and action heroey, and since Pegg's Gary's shadow is so stunted in TWE Frost is finally able to step out of it and become a force to be reckoned with. Single handedly Nick saves The World's End from total oblivion (just as Andy saves his friends), leaving a half and half, black and tan kind of movie where even though its suds are warm and mostly flat, can still be drunk and gotten some kind of buzz from it. Individual tastes may or may not enjoy the resulting hangover.
5.5 Marmalade Sandwiches out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"You can never go home again (and drink 12 pints)"
Gary, an unrepentant substance abuser, attempts to relive the single best night of his life by reuniting with his old school chums and reattempting "The Golden Mile", a pub crawl in their old hometown that they were unable to finish over 20 years ago. However the cadre has all drifted apart and (besides Gary) all grown up. This is especially true of Andy, he is still quite angry with his old best friend due to an incident involving his past drug use and moneys owed. Somehow convinced by their old leader Gary to meet and drink like the old days, the crew bounces from pub to pub while reminiscing about the bad old days as sinister outside forces begin to coalesce against the boys.
The third (and weakest) in the "Cornetto Trilogy" by filmmakers Simon Pegg, Edgar Wright and Nick Frost (responsible for Shawn of the Dead and Hot Fuzz), The World's End has a completely different tone and construction than the other two entries and therefore ends up the black sheep. While certainly humorous in parts and with a good amount of drunken UK kung-fu brawling (which isn't all that convincing), the overall anger and depression seeped into this tale of alcoholics and bad blood between buddies poisons the already tenuous humor of the situation. Throw in the iffy conspiracy movie trope and you end up with a mish-mashy confused film, very unlike its brethren that each had clear cut targets for their lunacy (Zombie flicks and Hollywood Action flicks respectively). The World's End doesn't know whether to choke back emotions or choke down the next beer from scene to scene. While the other entries in the trilogy start off strong and maintain a comedic momentum through their ludicrous pinball-like plots, The World's End starts off with a severely unfunny intro and then takes another 15-20 minutes before the suds start to flow and the comedy starts to show, and by then the movie is certainly crawling through a conspiracy subplot that while the filmmakers have thoroughly interwoven it can never be full accepted as nessecary to the plot.
While Gary (Simon Pegg) definitely becomes more likable and his selfish mannerisms become a tad more endearing by the 6th pint, he is written as a self destructive self centered mildly amusing alcoholic, and as central to the movie as he is the role is removed from the loveable half-slacker or reclusive procedural bad ass he played in the other two films. The darkness inherent to the character bleeds into the humor and relationships, knocking the overall cinematic greatness down quite a few pegs (haha). On top of that bad pun, the filmmakers have thrived on skewering/homaging famous Hollywood genres, and here the Conspiracy source material just isn't ripe enough, doesn't have a cinematic look to ape and doesn't have it's own cliche's or mythologies to mine that it feels very tacked on and quite a bit tacky. The final confrontation, in fact all the confrontations, just seem cheap and almost an afterthought to all the talking, especially in comparison to how razor sharp and beautifully minutiaed the other films were (let's not even talk about how weak the ending is in TWE). The undertow of black depression fights the theme of anti-homogenization of society for which gets in the way of the funny first.
Thankfully, Nick Frost gets the meaty part here as Andy, the wronged former best friend who is seething with rage and unresolved issues. Normally relegated to the off kilter chubby sidekick, once Andy starts downing drinks and WWF Bionic Elbowing the enemy the movie really starts to pick up. He has the best role here, both emotionally and action heroey, and since Pegg's Gary's shadow is so stunted in TWE Frost is finally able to step out of it and become a force to be reckoned with. Single handedly Nick saves The World's End from total oblivion (just as Andy saves his friends), leaving a half and half, black and tan kind of movie where even though its suds are warm and mostly flat, can still be drunk and gotten some kind of buzz from it. Individual tastes may or may not enjoy the resulting hangover.
5.5 Marmalade Sandwiches out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
The Wolverine (2013)
The Wolverine (PG-13) - Review
"Down boy, Down! Heel!"
The Wolverine of the comics is a lovably gruff anti-hero, one of the first and longest lasting (cuz he's the best at what he does). The Wolverine of the movies is a lovably gruff hero, and that sanitization of the characters "anti" is where the fun bleeds out. Based upon the Frank Miller miniseries that first bore his name, The Wolverine mostly takes place in stylish Japan, with the Hairy One being down in the dumps and then becoming enmeshed in a family dispute over succession of business and honor, all the while wearing as few shirts as possible and protecting a lovely Japanese princess, er, I mean daughter, from her blood thirsty family and showing how big your arm veins can get.
Unfortunately Japan is just a set piece for played out and too frantic action sequences that get sliced in every 15 minutes or so. The fact that Logan's healing factor has been neutralized only leads to a scene whose only shock factor is how blatantly they rip off Prometheus. The rest, with silly robotic Samurai and ninja's whose only mystery is their motivation, the bad guy attempts to remove Wolvie's claws for some reason and the Yakuza mindlessly get themselves killed, it is all just thrown at us in a hope that something will please us more than Wolverine Origins (hint, anything would have to be). There are a lot of Wolverine comic stories and themes to choose from (Weapon X would have also been a good choice); this particular one should have been about being an outsider (specifically a "gaijin") in another country, falling in love with culture and its nuances (and ladies), and being a hairy man with kick ass claws in 1970s Japan. Instead we get the same old slice to Hugh Jackman's face that slowly heals sans blood and Adamantium "sharpest/hardest on Earth" claws that a sword can parry that just happens to take place in Japan this time. This isn't the Canuckle Head's best outing, but then again a LOT of his comic stories aren't great either, he's a hard character to get right and not be silly. At least this time around it was bonafide story about Wolverine, even if he was having quite a bad hair day.
5.5 SNICKTs out of 10 (MEDICORE)
"Down boy, Down! Heel!"
The Wolverine of the comics is a lovably gruff anti-hero, one of the first and longest lasting (cuz he's the best at what he does). The Wolverine of the movies is a lovably gruff hero, and that sanitization of the characters "anti" is where the fun bleeds out. Based upon the Frank Miller miniseries that first bore his name, The Wolverine mostly takes place in stylish Japan, with the Hairy One being down in the dumps and then becoming enmeshed in a family dispute over succession of business and honor, all the while wearing as few shirts as possible and protecting a lovely Japanese princess, er, I mean daughter, from her blood thirsty family and showing how big your arm veins can get.
Unfortunately Japan is just a set piece for played out and too frantic action sequences that get sliced in every 15 minutes or so. The fact that Logan's healing factor has been neutralized only leads to a scene whose only shock factor is how blatantly they rip off Prometheus. The rest, with silly robotic Samurai and ninja's whose only mystery is their motivation, the bad guy attempts to remove Wolvie's claws for some reason and the Yakuza mindlessly get themselves killed, it is all just thrown at us in a hope that something will please us more than Wolverine Origins (hint, anything would have to be). There are a lot of Wolverine comic stories and themes to choose from (Weapon X would have also been a good choice); this particular one should have been about being an outsider (specifically a "gaijin") in another country, falling in love with culture and its nuances (and ladies), and being a hairy man with kick ass claws in 1970s Japan. Instead we get the same old slice to Hugh Jackman's face that slowly heals sans blood and Adamantium "sharpest/hardest on Earth" claws that a sword can parry that just happens to take place in Japan this time. This isn't the Canuckle Head's best outing, but then again a LOT of his comic stories aren't great either, he's a hard character to get right and not be silly. At least this time around it was bonafide story about Wolverine, even if he was having quite a bad hair day.
5.5 SNICKTs out of 10 (MEDICORE)
The Counselor (2013)
The Counselor (R)
"What would the BAR Association say?"
The first script from the pen of author Cormack McCarthy (author of the novel No Country For Old Men) is a head scratching affair. Directed by the venerable yet wildly uneven Ridley Scott (Bladerunner), there is the expected energy and pop to the filmed scenes. A-list actors lead by Michael Fasbender, Brad Pitt, Javier Bardem, Penelope Cruz and Cameron Diaz (miscast as a Jamaican femme fatale) culminate in one the years best casts, and yet the words fall flat. The snappy Noir prose style is leaden, the situations preposterous, the outcome dreary. The story? Fasbender plays a successful Texas lawyer, whose shady client base draw him into the south of the border drug smuggling business to maximize his profits. The house of cards is shaken by the backstabbing, golddigging Diaz, a character so over-sexualized, so misplaced, so supposedly evils-of-woman-incarnate/female-of-the-species-is-more-deadly that she could only come from the pen of a mid-life-crisis fever dream. Some scenes work, some shock to righteous effect, most collapse under the heavy weight of pretension. A freak show of many unique sights and sounds, but you may regret the two-bits to get in.
4.5 New Definition of Car Sex out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"What would the BAR Association say?"
The first script from the pen of author Cormack McCarthy (author of the novel No Country For Old Men) is a head scratching affair. Directed by the venerable yet wildly uneven Ridley Scott (Bladerunner), there is the expected energy and pop to the filmed scenes. A-list actors lead by Michael Fasbender, Brad Pitt, Javier Bardem, Penelope Cruz and Cameron Diaz (miscast as a Jamaican femme fatale) culminate in one the years best casts, and yet the words fall flat. The snappy Noir prose style is leaden, the situations preposterous, the outcome dreary. The story? Fasbender plays a successful Texas lawyer, whose shady client base draw him into the south of the border drug smuggling business to maximize his profits. The house of cards is shaken by the backstabbing, golddigging Diaz, a character so over-sexualized, so misplaced, so supposedly evils-of-woman-incarnate/female-of-the-species-is-more-deadly that she could only come from the pen of a mid-life-crisis fever dream. Some scenes work, some shock to righteous effect, most collapse under the heavy weight of pretension. A freak show of many unique sights and sounds, but you may regret the two-bits to get in.
4.5 New Definition of Car Sex out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
The Iceman (2013)
The Iceman (R) - Review
"New meaning to Two Scoops"
Film tries to recount the true story of Richard Kuklinski, a devoted father and family man who also was a prolific mob hitman who claimed to have taken care of over a hundred targets. Starring Michael Shannon (Take Shelter) as the Iceman, the mundane details of the cold blooded murderer life comes out as his boss (the overused Ray Liotta) take him in, give him grisly business and then take it away. This leads to him befriending a co-hitman in an Ice Cream truck played by Chris Evans who he teams up with and splits contracts (a man's gotta work).
The film doesn't have much going for it aside from acting, and reads on screen like the jail cell exaggerations it may very well have been. Shannon carries the piece as the decades pass and his bloodlust and rage grow, ultimately costing him his family and freedom. In the end the coldness of the portrayal effects the audience, a resounding "meh, it's alright" escaping with their last breath.
5.5 Crushed or Cubed Ice out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"New meaning to Two Scoops"
Film tries to recount the true story of Richard Kuklinski, a devoted father and family man who also was a prolific mob hitman who claimed to have taken care of over a hundred targets. Starring Michael Shannon (Take Shelter) as the Iceman, the mundane details of the cold blooded murderer life comes out as his boss (the overused Ray Liotta) take him in, give him grisly business and then take it away. This leads to him befriending a co-hitman in an Ice Cream truck played by Chris Evans who he teams up with and splits contracts (a man's gotta work).
The film doesn't have much going for it aside from acting, and reads on screen like the jail cell exaggerations it may very well have been. Shannon carries the piece as the decades pass and his bloodlust and rage grow, ultimately costing him his family and freedom. In the end the coldness of the portrayal effects the audience, a resounding "meh, it's alright" escaping with their last breath.
5.5 Crushed or Cubed Ice out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
42 (2013)
42 (PG-13)
"Did I see Jackie Robinson hit that ball? Not very often..."
The life and times of race pioneer (and home plate stealing) legend Jackie Robinson is brought to the silver screen with a pandering ad-campaign obscuring a well-meaning film that shys away from delving too deep into the issues, social morays or the game of baseball to satisfy many fans.
Jackie was MLB's first black player, and the racism he faced from fans, players and management is front and center, but Jackie the man is not. He is played well, but written without the repressed fire and anger that is widely considered to have prematurely aged the man. Focusing only on his first tenuous record breaking year (shattering both race barriers and league records for the Brooklyn Dodgers), the movie leaves off much of Robinson's later fights for civil rights and ball players. 42 turns Jackie into more of a sketch, crude yet accurate, but without the humanity and rage the real man must have dealt with. His white sponsor, owner Branch Rickey, gets almost as much screen time and steals many scenes as he is played with growling confidence by Harrison Ford who is allowed to be both altruistic and capitalistic as the Dodgers tenacious owner.
There are good moments (Alan Tudyk's racist midgame tirade is a standout in a mostly bland film that feels like its stepping on eggshells), but the film is just too vanilla for such an astonishing life as Robinson's. Even as a baseball movie the film lets us down, the game is barely shown or its innate spirit goes untapped. 42 doesn't try to swing for the bleachers, but it does reach base on a Walk, so it wasn't a completely wasted at-bat.
5 African-American Movie Trailers must contain Hip Hop out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"Did I see Jackie Robinson hit that ball? Not very often..."
The life and times of race pioneer (and home plate stealing) legend Jackie Robinson is brought to the silver screen with a pandering ad-campaign obscuring a well-meaning film that shys away from delving too deep into the issues, social morays or the game of baseball to satisfy many fans.
Jackie was MLB's first black player, and the racism he faced from fans, players and management is front and center, but Jackie the man is not. He is played well, but written without the repressed fire and anger that is widely considered to have prematurely aged the man. Focusing only on his first tenuous record breaking year (shattering both race barriers and league records for the Brooklyn Dodgers), the movie leaves off much of Robinson's later fights for civil rights and ball players. 42 turns Jackie into more of a sketch, crude yet accurate, but without the humanity and rage the real man must have dealt with. His white sponsor, owner Branch Rickey, gets almost as much screen time and steals many scenes as he is played with growling confidence by Harrison Ford who is allowed to be both altruistic and capitalistic as the Dodgers tenacious owner.
There are good moments (Alan Tudyk's racist midgame tirade is a standout in a mostly bland film that feels like its stepping on eggshells), but the film is just too vanilla for such an astonishing life as Robinson's. Even as a baseball movie the film lets us down, the game is barely shown or its innate spirit goes untapped. 42 doesn't try to swing for the bleachers, but it does reach base on a Walk, so it wasn't a completely wasted at-bat.
5 African-American Movie Trailers must contain Hip Hop out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Only God Forgives (2013)
Only God Forgives (R) - Review
"You wanna fight?"
A quiet man's brother is killed in Thailand after a run in with a local Police hero. The disturbing crimes the brother committed justified his slaying in everyone's eyes except their mother, a brutally crass matron of crime. When her other hitmen fail to extract revenge upon the stoic Cop, she cajoles her youngest son, the quiet man, to avenge the family and protect his own mother from the violence of Thai justice.
Director Nicolas Wendring Refn (Drive) pieces together an almost non narrative film here, less mainstream and much more surreal and violent than his previous hit. There were glimpses of this in Drive, his first real attempt at reaching an American audience without sacrificing his aesthetic. Here, the dark neon alleys, wall patterns, tiles and flowers illustrate Thailand beautifully, a twilight of modern neon at night, a bambooed rusticity during the day. The soundtrack moodily drives the rage, while the characters do not. Indeed, almost the entirety of the cast goes through the entire picture without moving a face muscle. One expression is to be found, like models in a magazine ad. The movie goes by like stills in a movie book, beautiful yet static, a picturebook flipping by. Interesting as it is, it frustrates in equal measure, a bloody revenge picture devoid of emotion.
Long segments of time are spent on eyes and faces, unchanging and unflinching. The lack of dialogue (Thai or English) comes to the forefront, and yet the over expressiveness of a silent picture is removed. Ryan Gosling is reunited with Refn here in almost a repeat of his unblinking character from Drive. Yet instead of a professional with heart of gold here he is a quiet fighter with mommy issues (almost Hamlet's equal in violence, self doubt and psychological complexes). The mother is the most expressive, swearing and flexing her strong Oedipus' issues as she screams for revenge. There are sequences in a red room straight from Lynch's Twin Peaks, they all can't be fantasy sequences. The stoic Police Captain is a surrogate father figure for Ryan (Gosling's real father, we are told, was murdered by him at the request of his mother), worshipped by his men who often are enraptured by their Chief's stunning Karaoke performances, helping him deliver cruel yet fair punishments to foreigners and locals alike, as untouchable in the ring as on the street (as anyone who crosses him finds).
The movie is an unflinching art house canvas that has been painted with vivid arterial sprays by a steady hand at the veins, but being almost devoid of narrative or depth, it becomes simply an exercise in style over substance, part fashion magazine part noir pulp dime novel. These actors are mannequins that move yet do not emote, placed into pretty situations (a karaoke bar, a torture scene in a perverted doll house, back alley restaurants filled with boiling frying pans) by a fetishistic visualist and then photographed simply for his own thrill, not the audience's yet still somehow unforgettable.
5.5 Bowls of Knives out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
"You wanna fight?"
A quiet man's brother is killed in Thailand after a run in with a local Police hero. The disturbing crimes the brother committed justified his slaying in everyone's eyes except their mother, a brutally crass matron of crime. When her other hitmen fail to extract revenge upon the stoic Cop, she cajoles her youngest son, the quiet man, to avenge the family and protect his own mother from the violence of Thai justice.
Director Nicolas Wendring Refn (Drive) pieces together an almost non narrative film here, less mainstream and much more surreal and violent than his previous hit. There were glimpses of this in Drive, his first real attempt at reaching an American audience without sacrificing his aesthetic. Here, the dark neon alleys, wall patterns, tiles and flowers illustrate Thailand beautifully, a twilight of modern neon at night, a bambooed rusticity during the day. The soundtrack moodily drives the rage, while the characters do not. Indeed, almost the entirety of the cast goes through the entire picture without moving a face muscle. One expression is to be found, like models in a magazine ad. The movie goes by like stills in a movie book, beautiful yet static, a picturebook flipping by. Interesting as it is, it frustrates in equal measure, a bloody revenge picture devoid of emotion.
Long segments of time are spent on eyes and faces, unchanging and unflinching. The lack of dialogue (Thai or English) comes to the forefront, and yet the over expressiveness of a silent picture is removed. Ryan Gosling is reunited with Refn here in almost a repeat of his unblinking character from Drive. Yet instead of a professional with heart of gold here he is a quiet fighter with mommy issues (almost Hamlet's equal in violence, self doubt and psychological complexes). The mother is the most expressive, swearing and flexing her strong Oedipus' issues as she screams for revenge. There are sequences in a red room straight from Lynch's Twin Peaks, they all can't be fantasy sequences. The stoic Police Captain is a surrogate father figure for Ryan (Gosling's real father, we are told, was murdered by him at the request of his mother), worshipped by his men who often are enraptured by their Chief's stunning Karaoke performances, helping him deliver cruel yet fair punishments to foreigners and locals alike, as untouchable in the ring as on the street (as anyone who crosses him finds).
The movie is an unflinching art house canvas that has been painted with vivid arterial sprays by a steady hand at the veins, but being almost devoid of narrative or depth, it becomes simply an exercise in style over substance, part fashion magazine part noir pulp dime novel. These actors are mannequins that move yet do not emote, placed into pretty situations (a karaoke bar, a torture scene in a perverted doll house, back alley restaurants filled with boiling frying pans) by a fetishistic visualist and then photographed simply for his own thrill, not the audience's yet still somehow unforgettable.
5.5 Bowls of Knives out of 10 (MEDIOCRE)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
About Me
- Kevin Gasaway via HardDrawn
- Turlock, California, United States
- Media and Reviews by Kevin Gasaway