As the saying goes, "everything old is new again." It seems every other film to be unleashed from the Hollywood machine is a remake (or "re-imagining" as producers like to call them) of a classic (?) movie or television show. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't, but whenever a studio is in need of a hit, it's quite easy to look to what worked before.
It came as little surprise that a new film in the Predator franchise was commissioned. The original 1987 flick starring Arnold Schwarzenegger is a cult action classic...a jungle war movie turned sci-fi creature fest. There was a forgettable sequel and two mildly tolerable mergings with the Alien franchise (how long until we get a new one of those, too?) that has kept the deadly hunters on the silver screen, but the concept had worn thin.
Producer Robert Rodriguez apparently felt by adding an "s" to the flick, he could capture the same brand of magic James Cameron did with Aliens. I'm hesitant to compare this movie in total with what may be the best sci-fi actioner of all time, but the extra consonant isn't all that Rodriguez and director Nimrod Antal lifted. Predators is filled with believable characters, smart action pieces and avoids as many cliches as possible en route to delivering a movie that's actually a worthy sequel.
Unlike the original, the action gets underway pretty quickly in this film. We're thrown into the story with a free-falling Adrien Brody moments before a chute opens and he's deposited in a jungle. Brody quickly finds other souls plummeted into the same situation; all well-trained military, criminals and mercenaries. They have weapons and they're ready for action.
Of course, we the audience know they're here to be hunted by the Predators and they quickly and violently discover that as well. Naturally, everyone gets picked off one by one and their hunters are eventually revealed. The odds of survival would seem slim.
I don't suppose the plot is particularly challenging, but it doesn't need to be. Brody, not known for such roles, lends some gravity to the cast (a fun cameo from Laurence Fishburne doesn't hurt either). No one overacts and sharp directing keeps everything in the realm of believability. Who lives and who dies isn't necessarily shocking, but I enjoyed the hunter/prey games and some of the showdowns are on par with Arnold's faceoff with the original Predator. I was also quite pleased to hear many of the original music cues throughout.
You could do a whole lot worse for genre action. Maybe there's something to pluralizing films.
Rating: B
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Saturday, July 3, 2010
The Last Airbender
If you're like me and have followed the career and films of M. Night Shyamalan since the beginning, you might feel a little like you've been in a trying relationship that makes you wonder how many times you can foolishly keep coming back. Personally, I may have found the final reason to break it off forever...only to indulge on a late night if I'm properly intoxicated and desperate.
Everyone knows how it began...The Sixth Sense was a smart, suspenseful film and even though I figured out the "don't tell" twist ten minutes in, I was pleased with how deftly the whole premise was executed. Shyamalan's next film, Unbreakable, was an underappreciated spin on comic book origins. The ending was a bit tacked on, but it didn't hurt the movie. With Signs I was officially hooked. I loved the idea of an alien invasion plot that didn't bother with the worldview...only how it would affect your average citizen. I was genuinely creeped out at several moments...a feat few films elicit for me.
At the peak of this "romance," I fully anticipated each time I got to see this director's name on screen. The Village still kept the mood, but the plot felt a little weak...the "twist" this time wasn't as interesting or a natural extension of the story. Things took a nasty and very disappointing turn with Lady in the Water, a "fairy tale" that was neither magical nor provocative. But hey, everyone is allowed a misstep, right? We could work through this...I'm sure it would get better. Then, it happened...or rather, The Happening, a movie about killer plants and breezes apparently. It looked great...cinematography like a slinky black dress that promised so much, but the actual deed and the climax? Phoned in...uninspired and boring. The cinematic equivalent of faking it...
Sexually charged analogies aside, a once promising filmmaker akin to Spielberg had strayed far from the path of entertaining. His screenwriting got progressively sloppy...twists and deus ex machina becoming his crutches. I still enjoyed his films visually...he set mood and tone with the best, but everything else felt forced.
I give all this backdrop to build to the review for The Last Airbender, an adaptation of a popular cartoon. While "A Film By M. Night Shyamalan" no longer thrills me as it once did, Airbender looked like a step back in the right direction. The trailers seemed like epic fantasy in the style of LOTR or Harry Potter.
The actual result is closer to an expensive direct to DVD production. Airbender throws us into the story immediately, following the adventures of Aang (Noah Ringer), a tattooed monk-like child with the power to "bend" air and use it combined with martial arts. He's the only surviving airbender in a world at the throes of the Fire Nation (guess what they bend) and hooks up with a young water-bender and her brother. They speak of destiny and Aang's apparent role as an "Avatar" who can learn to bend all of the elements and restore peace, etc... These details are thrown out as either random voiceovers or overwrought exposition.
What immediately becomes apparent in Airbender's flaws are rushed, gap-filled plotting and atrocious dialogue. I'm not a fan of the show on which it's based, but apparently this film covers the first season which lends itself to the scattershot story beats. What is supposed to be a globe-trotting adventure instead comes off as a highlight reel of a broader tale with the parts that would connect the dots left out.
In between set pieces and action sequences, the mostly youthful cast speaks in generic lines that might have been written by the actors themselves...they would sound forced on Saturday morning programming, too. Character development is practically non-existent, save perhaps for Aang's nemesis, Prince Zuko (Dev Patel), a disgraced fire-bender seeking the Avatar to get back in his father's graces. Aang himself mostly looks confused and whiny. Shyamalan has taken flack for casting white actors in roles that were Asian in the cartoon, but really, he should be critiqued for picking wide-eyed kids that haven't even been through Acting 101.
What saves The Last Airbender from complete waste are the "bending" battle scenes. Watching these intricate dance/kung fu moves whipping water, ice, fire, air and earth about is fascinating and well choreographed, but it can't make up for the stale moments between. Planned as the first of a trilogy, I can't imagine the other two films will be coming soon to your local theatre. I can also safely say that M. Night Shyamalan will not get me in one again, either, no matter how many times he drunk dials me.
Rating: C-
Everyone knows how it began...The Sixth Sense was a smart, suspenseful film and even though I figured out the "don't tell" twist ten minutes in, I was pleased with how deftly the whole premise was executed. Shyamalan's next film, Unbreakable, was an underappreciated spin on comic book origins. The ending was a bit tacked on, but it didn't hurt the movie. With Signs I was officially hooked. I loved the idea of an alien invasion plot that didn't bother with the worldview...only how it would affect your average citizen. I was genuinely creeped out at several moments...a feat few films elicit for me.
At the peak of this "romance," I fully anticipated each time I got to see this director's name on screen. The Village still kept the mood, but the plot felt a little weak...the "twist" this time wasn't as interesting or a natural extension of the story. Things took a nasty and very disappointing turn with Lady in the Water, a "fairy tale" that was neither magical nor provocative. But hey, everyone is allowed a misstep, right? We could work through this...I'm sure it would get better. Then, it happened...or rather, The Happening, a movie about killer plants and breezes apparently. It looked great...cinematography like a slinky black dress that promised so much, but the actual deed and the climax? Phoned in...uninspired and boring. The cinematic equivalent of faking it...
Sexually charged analogies aside, a once promising filmmaker akin to Spielberg had strayed far from the path of entertaining. His screenwriting got progressively sloppy...twists and deus ex machina becoming his crutches. I still enjoyed his films visually...he set mood and tone with the best, but everything else felt forced.
I give all this backdrop to build to the review for The Last Airbender, an adaptation of a popular cartoon. While "A Film By M. Night Shyamalan" no longer thrills me as it once did, Airbender looked like a step back in the right direction. The trailers seemed like epic fantasy in the style of LOTR or Harry Potter.
The actual result is closer to an expensive direct to DVD production. Airbender throws us into the story immediately, following the adventures of Aang (Noah Ringer), a tattooed monk-like child with the power to "bend" air and use it combined with martial arts. He's the only surviving airbender in a world at the throes of the Fire Nation (guess what they bend) and hooks up with a young water-bender and her brother. They speak of destiny and Aang's apparent role as an "Avatar" who can learn to bend all of the elements and restore peace, etc... These details are thrown out as either random voiceovers or overwrought exposition.
What immediately becomes apparent in Airbender's flaws are rushed, gap-filled plotting and atrocious dialogue. I'm not a fan of the show on which it's based, but apparently this film covers the first season which lends itself to the scattershot story beats. What is supposed to be a globe-trotting adventure instead comes off as a highlight reel of a broader tale with the parts that would connect the dots left out.
In between set pieces and action sequences, the mostly youthful cast speaks in generic lines that might have been written by the actors themselves...they would sound forced on Saturday morning programming, too. Character development is practically non-existent, save perhaps for Aang's nemesis, Prince Zuko (Dev Patel), a disgraced fire-bender seeking the Avatar to get back in his father's graces. Aang himself mostly looks confused and whiny. Shyamalan has taken flack for casting white actors in roles that were Asian in the cartoon, but really, he should be critiqued for picking wide-eyed kids that haven't even been through Acting 101.
What saves The Last Airbender from complete waste are the "bending" battle scenes. Watching these intricate dance/kung fu moves whipping water, ice, fire, air and earth about is fascinating and well choreographed, but it can't make up for the stale moments between. Planned as the first of a trilogy, I can't imagine the other two films will be coming soon to your local theatre. I can also safely say that M. Night Shyamalan will not get me in one again, either, no matter how many times he drunk dials me.
Rating: C-
Monday, June 28, 2010
Lost
It's been a month since the series finale of Lost and it's taken me at least that long to collect my thoughts on the series and that final episode (a second viewing didn't hurt either). I've also rewatched the entire series in recent months (and I give a huge thumbs up to seeing it on Blu-ray...those gorgeous island scenes are perfect for the format). If you've never seen the series and want to without foreknowledge...some spoilers ahead.
When Lost premiered in 2004 I didn't have high expectations. I'd seen the ads, heard some buzz and decided to check it out. The name J.J. Abrams didn't inspire as much excitement or "must-see" status. He'd produced the charming Felicity and thrilling but overly complicated Alias. Lost's pilot, directed by Abrams, thrilled immediately, easily one of the best produced, most exciting series openers ever. It had a theatrical feel, strong characters and enough mystery to beg any viewer to return in coming weeks. Producers Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof get all the credit in the world for continuing the excellence.
The first season of Lost was without a doubt the best thing on television at the time. There was an unseen monster in the jungle, terrifying "other" island inhabitants, 16 year old French distress calls and a mysterious hatch to who knows what. Lost was the show that you talked about every morning after with friends and colleagues. "Did you see...?" "What did that mean...?" "I think they're..." Theories abounded, questions piled on questions.
Always character driven at heart, the central conceit was a weekly focus on one of the passengers of Oceanic Flight 815, following them in their island adventures while also flashing back to their lives before, up to and/or including their doomed flight. As the show twisted on, we started seeing connections in their lives, characters and places weaving in and out of their histories. Did it mean something? Were they all here for a reason?
Though there were many beloved characters, a handful became the core...led by Jack and Locke, whose reactions to island enigmas were often opposing and embodied by their own designations as men of science (Jack) and faith (Locke).
As season two unfolded, the intricacies of the island--its power and history--compounded. We learned more about the "Others" and a scientific exploration of the island by the Dharma Initiative. New characters entered the fold, including Desmond (one of my favorites), Henry Gale (later revealed to be on and off baddie Ben) and more crash survivors from the tail-section of the plane. Shocking deaths proved that no one was entirely safe on the island (or the series in general) and new wrinkles like the hatch and it's "push the button" urgency further added to the water cooler fodder.
Season 3 was a crucial turning point for the show in many ways. After a slow and not terribly exciting run of six episodes (much easier to digest on DVD, though), the show went on hiatus for several months before finishing the season in nearly consecutive installments. Fans were disgruntled (I admit my own frustration was at a peak)...answers were not forthcoming and for a series anchored by its characters, new additions like Nikki, Paolo and Juliet (who eventually would become a fave) weren't winning anyone over.
After the return from hiatus, the producers bore down and committed to a solid conclusion to the series after six seasons. Fueled by an endgame now in sight, the writers got down to business. Subsequent seasons would start in late winter but air without reruns and in compressed, heavily-plotted arcs. We had to wait longer, but the results were worth it. By the end of season three, Lost was as strong as ever and the season finale changed the show forever by altering the flashback format to present a surprising flashforward, unveiling a new revelation that at least some of our heroes had made it off the island. If I ever had any doubts about the show, they were completely erased when a scruffy, dour Jack screamed at a departing Kate outside of airport grounds "We have to go back!" I had to know how this happened.
Season four answered that question with more flash forwards revealing the identities of six survivors who escaped the island and the subsequent three years of their lives. How they escaped and how they told their story after the fact were now tied into intrigue surrounding multiple parties trying to protect, exploit and comprehend the island. This season might have been the best after the first.
By Lost's penultimate season, the producers had pulled the wool over the audience's eyes long enough. The series turned into full-on science fiction with a time travel plot that sent several regulars bouncing through several eras on the island before landing in the late 70s and the Dharma Initiative. On the flip side, the six who escaped were working to return to the island to save those they left behind. Paradoxes and mystical elements abound and little did we know that one of our favorite characters had been forever compromised. It was the lowest rated season of the series, but also one of the most brilliant and firmly built around pleasing the fans that had stuck it out at a time when audience attention was shifting back to more easily digested fair (I'm looking at you, episodic shows like CSI/NCIS/Law & Order)
Lost's final year was a bit uneven and has drawn mixed opinions for leaving a lot of the challenging aspects of the plot open to interpretation and drawing attention more to the characters, their connections and a new story-telling device dubbed a flash-sideways, depicting a reality where Oceanic 815 did not crash. But how did this world relate to that of the island, where a desperate attempt to reset their woes appeared to have failed? What could we make of the epic good vs. evil battle commencing with the sinister unnamed Man in Black, now wearing a familiar face? What was the island, why did it need protecting and who would do so?
Some of those questions linger still and answering them really isn't the point. As the final episode unfolds, we must face the fact that this show was never really about the hows and whys (though they were fun), but about the amazing people we grew to love, hate, sometimes both and developed all these emotional ties to. More importantly, the series itself turned out to be about those relationships as well...their desire to escape the island and reset what got them there betrayed the fact that they all found something better from the experience. The final fate of our castaways finds them in an ethereal other world of their own making, where they can all meet in the "afterlife" to re-establish their connections before "moving on." Admittedly, it seemed a bit out of the blue as a plot point a perhaps a little deus ex machina mumbo-jumbo, but the emotional resonance behind it made up for the conceit. I daresay no Lost fan wasn't openly weeping as our heroes and heroines sat in their faux church/airplane, interwoven with images of Jack stumbling through the jungle and that final shot of an eye closing (I called it about 10 minutes before but it was no less satisfying). Cue the fantastic, swelling cues of composer Michael Giacchino one last time and that final frame placard...LOST.
Lost was a series that probably couldn't have survived before or after its time. While densely plotted shows with sharply written characters aren't going away entirely, they may not reach the zeitgeist and mania that Lost did. How many other shows inspire such fanaticism? You could make a case for Star Trek but when has Trek ever needed complex blogs and deep knowledge of film, fiction, temporal physics and religious parable to analyze each and every episode? Lost was very much a product of the new instant media and internet age. It inspired fervent discussion in ways that some sports can't even aspire to. For much of the last two seasons, I held weekly court with coworkers seeking answers and help making sense of the latest episode. It was smart television that didn't talk down to its audience at any point. Rewatching the series, I chuckled at how many red herrings I mentally followed, how many theories I clung to and how many open-ended stories I may never understand.
I will miss Lost immensely, but I'm quite content with how and when it concluded. Few shows truly go out on top and even fewer reside in that place where I feel the need to continue singing their praises and helping make new fans.
Namaste.
When Lost premiered in 2004 I didn't have high expectations. I'd seen the ads, heard some buzz and decided to check it out. The name J.J. Abrams didn't inspire as much excitement or "must-see" status. He'd produced the charming Felicity and thrilling but overly complicated Alias. Lost's pilot, directed by Abrams, thrilled immediately, easily one of the best produced, most exciting series openers ever. It had a theatrical feel, strong characters and enough mystery to beg any viewer to return in coming weeks. Producers Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof get all the credit in the world for continuing the excellence.
The first season of Lost was without a doubt the best thing on television at the time. There was an unseen monster in the jungle, terrifying "other" island inhabitants, 16 year old French distress calls and a mysterious hatch to who knows what. Lost was the show that you talked about every morning after with friends and colleagues. "Did you see...?" "What did that mean...?" "I think they're..." Theories abounded, questions piled on questions.
Always character driven at heart, the central conceit was a weekly focus on one of the passengers of Oceanic Flight 815, following them in their island adventures while also flashing back to their lives before, up to and/or including their doomed flight. As the show twisted on, we started seeing connections in their lives, characters and places weaving in and out of their histories. Did it mean something? Were they all here for a reason?
Though there were many beloved characters, a handful became the core...led by Jack and Locke, whose reactions to island enigmas were often opposing and embodied by their own designations as men of science (Jack) and faith (Locke).
As season two unfolded, the intricacies of the island--its power and history--compounded. We learned more about the "Others" and a scientific exploration of the island by the Dharma Initiative. New characters entered the fold, including Desmond (one of my favorites), Henry Gale (later revealed to be on and off baddie Ben) and more crash survivors from the tail-section of the plane. Shocking deaths proved that no one was entirely safe on the island (or the series in general) and new wrinkles like the hatch and it's "push the button" urgency further added to the water cooler fodder.
Season 3 was a crucial turning point for the show in many ways. After a slow and not terribly exciting run of six episodes (much easier to digest on DVD, though), the show went on hiatus for several months before finishing the season in nearly consecutive installments. Fans were disgruntled (I admit my own frustration was at a peak)...answers were not forthcoming and for a series anchored by its characters, new additions like Nikki, Paolo and Juliet (who eventually would become a fave) weren't winning anyone over.
After the return from hiatus, the producers bore down and committed to a solid conclusion to the series after six seasons. Fueled by an endgame now in sight, the writers got down to business. Subsequent seasons would start in late winter but air without reruns and in compressed, heavily-plotted arcs. We had to wait longer, but the results were worth it. By the end of season three, Lost was as strong as ever and the season finale changed the show forever by altering the flashback format to present a surprising flashforward, unveiling a new revelation that at least some of our heroes had made it off the island. If I ever had any doubts about the show, they were completely erased when a scruffy, dour Jack screamed at a departing Kate outside of airport grounds "We have to go back!" I had to know how this happened.
Season four answered that question with more flash forwards revealing the identities of six survivors who escaped the island and the subsequent three years of their lives. How they escaped and how they told their story after the fact were now tied into intrigue surrounding multiple parties trying to protect, exploit and comprehend the island. This season might have been the best after the first.
By Lost's penultimate season, the producers had pulled the wool over the audience's eyes long enough. The series turned into full-on science fiction with a time travel plot that sent several regulars bouncing through several eras on the island before landing in the late 70s and the Dharma Initiative. On the flip side, the six who escaped were working to return to the island to save those they left behind. Paradoxes and mystical elements abound and little did we know that one of our favorite characters had been forever compromised. It was the lowest rated season of the series, but also one of the most brilliant and firmly built around pleasing the fans that had stuck it out at a time when audience attention was shifting back to more easily digested fair (I'm looking at you, episodic shows like CSI/NCIS/Law & Order)
Lost's final year was a bit uneven and has drawn mixed opinions for leaving a lot of the challenging aspects of the plot open to interpretation and drawing attention more to the characters, their connections and a new story-telling device dubbed a flash-sideways, depicting a reality where Oceanic 815 did not crash. But how did this world relate to that of the island, where a desperate attempt to reset their woes appeared to have failed? What could we make of the epic good vs. evil battle commencing with the sinister unnamed Man in Black, now wearing a familiar face? What was the island, why did it need protecting and who would do so?
Some of those questions linger still and answering them really isn't the point. As the final episode unfolds, we must face the fact that this show was never really about the hows and whys (though they were fun), but about the amazing people we grew to love, hate, sometimes both and developed all these emotional ties to. More importantly, the series itself turned out to be about those relationships as well...their desire to escape the island and reset what got them there betrayed the fact that they all found something better from the experience. The final fate of our castaways finds them in an ethereal other world of their own making, where they can all meet in the "afterlife" to re-establish their connections before "moving on." Admittedly, it seemed a bit out of the blue as a plot point a perhaps a little deus ex machina mumbo-jumbo, but the emotional resonance behind it made up for the conceit. I daresay no Lost fan wasn't openly weeping as our heroes and heroines sat in their faux church/airplane, interwoven with images of Jack stumbling through the jungle and that final shot of an eye closing (I called it about 10 minutes before but it was no less satisfying). Cue the fantastic, swelling cues of composer Michael Giacchino one last time and that final frame placard...LOST.
Lost was a series that probably couldn't have survived before or after its time. While densely plotted shows with sharply written characters aren't going away entirely, they may not reach the zeitgeist and mania that Lost did. How many other shows inspire such fanaticism? You could make a case for Star Trek but when has Trek ever needed complex blogs and deep knowledge of film, fiction, temporal physics and religious parable to analyze each and every episode? Lost was very much a product of the new instant media and internet age. It inspired fervent discussion in ways that some sports can't even aspire to. For much of the last two seasons, I held weekly court with coworkers seeking answers and help making sense of the latest episode. It was smart television that didn't talk down to its audience at any point. Rewatching the series, I chuckled at how many red herrings I mentally followed, how many theories I clung to and how many open-ended stories I may never understand.
I will miss Lost immensely, but I'm quite content with how and when it concluded. Few shows truly go out on top and even fewer reside in that place where I feel the need to continue singing their praises and helping make new fans.
Namaste.
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Toy Story 3
Considering how successful Pixar's films are, it's somewhat surprising they haven't tried more sequels. The fact that they keep putting out new material (and all of it good) is a testament to the creative powers within the animation studio.
Toy Story is the only exception so far (Cars and Monsters Inc. sequels are supposedly in the works)...their first feature spawned a follow-up in 1999 and now, 15 years after the original, Toy Story 3.
Our favorite toys, led by Woody (Tom Hanks) and Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen), are back with a new problem...their kid, Andy, isn't a kid anymore. He's preparing to head to college which means it's time to put away toys and move on. After nearly being thrown away, the gang decides that moving on to a daycare center might be the best thing for them. Sunnyside looks to be a toy paradise...where new kids replace any that outgrow the toys and everyone can live out their playtime dreams.
Of course, there's a twist to "paradise" which I won't divulge, but it kicks off a new adventure that tests the toys' ingenuity and speaks once again to the kid in all of us...the test of time on our once cherished playthings, the passing of tradition and the bonds of friendship when reality gets in the way.
The animation is typically top-notch...after watching the first two films last weekend, it's obvious how much the technology, talent and budgets have grown. I didn't see the film in 3D (sorry, but I'm not a fan), but I doubt I lost anything. Everything is still flawlessly rendered and beautiful. The script is equally funny, adult-pleasing clever and poignant.
The ending would strongly imply this is the final Toy Story (and it should be) and as a complete tale it's incredibly satisfying. I'll miss revisiting these characters, but I'm happy that every installment improved on the last and kept me smiling and enthralled. Pixar, you've got a friend a me.
Rating: A
Toy Story is the only exception so far (Cars and Monsters Inc. sequels are supposedly in the works)...their first feature spawned a follow-up in 1999 and now, 15 years after the original, Toy Story 3.
Our favorite toys, led by Woody (Tom Hanks) and Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen), are back with a new problem...their kid, Andy, isn't a kid anymore. He's preparing to head to college which means it's time to put away toys and move on. After nearly being thrown away, the gang decides that moving on to a daycare center might be the best thing for them. Sunnyside looks to be a toy paradise...where new kids replace any that outgrow the toys and everyone can live out their playtime dreams.
Of course, there's a twist to "paradise" which I won't divulge, but it kicks off a new adventure that tests the toys' ingenuity and speaks once again to the kid in all of us...the test of time on our once cherished playthings, the passing of tradition and the bonds of friendship when reality gets in the way.
The animation is typically top-notch...after watching the first two films last weekend, it's obvious how much the technology, talent and budgets have grown. I didn't see the film in 3D (sorry, but I'm not a fan), but I doubt I lost anything. Everything is still flawlessly rendered and beautiful. The script is equally funny, adult-pleasing clever and poignant.
The ending would strongly imply this is the final Toy Story (and it should be) and as a complete tale it's incredibly satisfying. I'll miss revisiting these characters, but I'm happy that every installment improved on the last and kept me smiling and enthralled. Pixar, you've got a friend a me.
Rating: A
Jonah Hex
The comic book film genre is still a potent money-making tool for Hollywood. The Dark Knight became one of the highest gross films in history two years ago, Iron Man 2 continued paving the way for the cohesive Marvel film-verse and Green Lantern will soon be a household superhero.
Still, for every blockbuster release and those that make comic fans proud that their nerdy addictions are becoming mainstream (or at least less taboo), there are plenty of "lesser" comic properties and failures proving that not every book combining pictures and word balloons should make the transition to the big screen.
Jonah Hex isn't exactly a well-known comic...the ongoing tales of a disfigured cowboy who can talk to the dead and often has supernatural adventures has it's fans (admittedly, I'm not one of them) and has been kicking around DC for nearly 40 years. I'd venture to say his relative anonymity won't be threatened by this film.
Okay, enough dancing around the point...Jonah Hex is a terrible film. After a brief telling of his origin (altered from the comic, I believe), we're quickly thrown into an adventure fueled by vengeance. Hex (Josh Brolin), a bounty hunter who can resurrect the dead by touching them, learns that the man (John Malkovich) who killed his family, scarred him and left him for dead is alive and planning a vicious attack during the country's centennial celebration. After a series of unbelievable gunfights, vision quests and pyrotechnics, victory is had and the country is safe.
This movie truly is that simple and stunningly uncomplicated. Fortunately, it's bare-minimum running time doesn't prolong the boredom with such things as plot, character development or structured story beats. I admired that the filmmakers allowed Brolin's face to be so scarred and Malkovich always plays a decent lunatic. Megan Fox has a glorified couple scene cameo as a prostitute who beds and assists Hex, but for you guys who think she might be worth the time to see this film, you'd be better off browsing through her photos on Google image search.
Rating: F
Still, for every blockbuster release and those that make comic fans proud that their nerdy addictions are becoming mainstream (or at least less taboo), there are plenty of "lesser" comic properties and failures proving that not every book combining pictures and word balloons should make the transition to the big screen.
Jonah Hex isn't exactly a well-known comic...the ongoing tales of a disfigured cowboy who can talk to the dead and often has supernatural adventures has it's fans (admittedly, I'm not one of them) and has been kicking around DC for nearly 40 years. I'd venture to say his relative anonymity won't be threatened by this film.
Okay, enough dancing around the point...Jonah Hex is a terrible film. After a brief telling of his origin (altered from the comic, I believe), we're quickly thrown into an adventure fueled by vengeance. Hex (Josh Brolin), a bounty hunter who can resurrect the dead by touching them, learns that the man (John Malkovich) who killed his family, scarred him and left him for dead is alive and planning a vicious attack during the country's centennial celebration. After a series of unbelievable gunfights, vision quests and pyrotechnics, victory is had and the country is safe.
This movie truly is that simple and stunningly uncomplicated. Fortunately, it's bare-minimum running time doesn't prolong the boredom with such things as plot, character development or structured story beats. I admired that the filmmakers allowed Brolin's face to be so scarred and Malkovich always plays a decent lunatic. Megan Fox has a glorified couple scene cameo as a prostitute who beds and assists Hex, but for you guys who think she might be worth the time to see this film, you'd be better off browsing through her photos on Google image search.
Rating: F
Monday, May 17, 2010
Iron Man 2
I apologize for being away so long. I'm making a renewed commitment to update more often and I'm going to do more than just write reviews. Occasionally, I'll spill some commentary on entertainment in general, maybe report some news and/or trends. But for now, let's get to a review of the biggest movie of the year thus far.
The first Iron Man was about as close to perfect for a comic book adaptation as you could ask for. Robert Downey, Jr. brought a believeable mix of cocky, comic and charismatic to the role of Tony Stark and what made the movie is it truly was about Stark, not Iron Man. Tony is a "hero" because it suits his own personality needs...he's the anti-Batman...wealth and the desire to use it for good without the guilt or parental issues (well, not in the "they're dead" sense, at least).
As the keystone of the new Marvel film universe, a sequel demanded some expansion to Stark's world and the fans demanded a bit more of the suit, effects and explosions than Downey's snark. Iron Man 2 does a nice job of fulfilling demands without sacrificing too much of the first film's character driven charm. "Too much," I emphasize, because something is lost, but not enough to complain.
As the sequel opens, it's been some time since Tony told the world he is Iron Man and turned superheroics into a bankable commodity (and a government issue, shades of the comic world's Civil War there). He's a rock star (heavy metal?) in the public eye and he's living it up.
Naturally, enemies are waiting in the woodwork and they take two forms in the film...Iron Man's battle ready nemesis, Whiplash, a Russian scientist with a grudge against the Stark family and the technology to match...and Justin Hammer, Stark's business rival willing to dance with devils to get ahead. Whiplash is played with sneering menace by Mickey Roarke (anyone else think he doesn't really "act" is roles like this?) and Sam Rockwell takes on Hammer with his oft repeated manic angry dork act.
Tony's biggest enemy is himself, though, and the movie mirrors some classic comic book storylines regarding his alcoholism (which really could have carried the movie by itself), vanity and the "iron wars" sparked by his creation. Add in some intrigue regarding his place in the bigger picture, symbolized by Nick Fury (ah, Sam Jackson, your cred just gets better and better) and the Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson, sexy but where's the accent?) from S.H.I.E.L.D., and IM2 certainly feels like a piece of a broader canvas. At times it's a bit too much (but not in the Spider-Man 3 sense) and the final act of the film turns into a pretty emotionless actioner, but all things considered, the sequel does nothing to detract from the first or future films in the franchise and Marvel U in general. Next year features Thor and Captain America films further paving the way for The Avengers where all of these characters will unite. I admit, I'm excited.
Rating: B+
The first Iron Man was about as close to perfect for a comic book adaptation as you could ask for. Robert Downey, Jr. brought a believeable mix of cocky, comic and charismatic to the role of Tony Stark and what made the movie is it truly was about Stark, not Iron Man. Tony is a "hero" because it suits his own personality needs...he's the anti-Batman...wealth and the desire to use it for good without the guilt or parental issues (well, not in the "they're dead" sense, at least).
As the keystone of the new Marvel film universe, a sequel demanded some expansion to Stark's world and the fans demanded a bit more of the suit, effects and explosions than Downey's snark. Iron Man 2 does a nice job of fulfilling demands without sacrificing too much of the first film's character driven charm. "Too much," I emphasize, because something is lost, but not enough to complain.
As the sequel opens, it's been some time since Tony told the world he is Iron Man and turned superheroics into a bankable commodity (and a government issue, shades of the comic world's Civil War there). He's a rock star (heavy metal?) in the public eye and he's living it up.
Naturally, enemies are waiting in the woodwork and they take two forms in the film...Iron Man's battle ready nemesis, Whiplash, a Russian scientist with a grudge against the Stark family and the technology to match...and Justin Hammer, Stark's business rival willing to dance with devils to get ahead. Whiplash is played with sneering menace by Mickey Roarke (anyone else think he doesn't really "act" is roles like this?) and Sam Rockwell takes on Hammer with his oft repeated manic angry dork act.
Tony's biggest enemy is himself, though, and the movie mirrors some classic comic book storylines regarding his alcoholism (which really could have carried the movie by itself), vanity and the "iron wars" sparked by his creation. Add in some intrigue regarding his place in the bigger picture, symbolized by Nick Fury (ah, Sam Jackson, your cred just gets better and better) and the Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson, sexy but where's the accent?) from S.H.I.E.L.D., and IM2 certainly feels like a piece of a broader canvas. At times it's a bit too much (but not in the Spider-Man 3 sense) and the final act of the film turns into a pretty emotionless actioner, but all things considered, the sequel does nothing to detract from the first or future films in the franchise and Marvel U in general. Next year features Thor and Captain America films further paving the way for The Avengers where all of these characters will unite. I admit, I'm excited.
Rating: B+
Sunday, March 7, 2010
2010 Best Picture Nominees - Part II
Up - B+
Still not the best of Pixar's films, it is a heart-tugging adventure that gets underway quickly and never bores. Should win Best Animated Feature easily.
A Serious Man - B+
The Coen Brothers strike again! Quirky humor, an opening that seemingly has nothing to do with the rest of the film and an ending that left most of the audience grumbling (I was laughing). Following the life of a put-upon Jewish man, his bizarre family and comically failing marriage, the laughs come easily and, like many Coen films, don't look for dramatic payoff.
The Hurt Locker - B
The military/war film formula hasn't altered much over the decades. The wars and technology change, but themes of alienation, brotherhood, finding oneself in life-or-death situations and soldiers unable to reaclimate don't. The Hurt Locker doesn't add anything new to the formula, but it's tense, well-directed and quickly paced.
An Education - A-
Probably the most surprising of the Best Picture nominees, this movie shouldn't be pigeon-holed with a simple English girl coming-of-age tag. It's remarkably witty, thanks to strong performances by fresh-faced Carey Mulligan and seasoned Alfred Molina. Mulligan plays a teenage girl compelled to choose between her intellect and the affections of a charming playboy (Peter Sarsgaard).
District 9 - A-
I admit to being shocked this was nominated (one of the perks of the expanded field of nominees), but the sci-fi premise is only the means to tell a gritty, action-filled allegory of apartheid and racial tension.
If you're watching the awards tonight, enjoy and if you want a drinking game, take a shot every time someone thanks their agent, a nominee obviously fakes a smile after losing and someone cracks a painful Avatar joke.
Still not the best of Pixar's films, it is a heart-tugging adventure that gets underway quickly and never bores. Should win Best Animated Feature easily.
A Serious Man - B+
The Coen Brothers strike again! Quirky humor, an opening that seemingly has nothing to do with the rest of the film and an ending that left most of the audience grumbling (I was laughing). Following the life of a put-upon Jewish man, his bizarre family and comically failing marriage, the laughs come easily and, like many Coen films, don't look for dramatic payoff.
The Hurt Locker - B
The military/war film formula hasn't altered much over the decades. The wars and technology change, but themes of alienation, brotherhood, finding oneself in life-or-death situations and soldiers unable to reaclimate don't. The Hurt Locker doesn't add anything new to the formula, but it's tense, well-directed and quickly paced.
An Education - A-
Probably the most surprising of the Best Picture nominees, this movie shouldn't be pigeon-holed with a simple English girl coming-of-age tag. It's remarkably witty, thanks to strong performances by fresh-faced Carey Mulligan and seasoned Alfred Molina. Mulligan plays a teenage girl compelled to choose between her intellect and the affections of a charming playboy (Peter Sarsgaard).
District 9 - A-
I admit to being shocked this was nominated (one of the perks of the expanded field of nominees), but the sci-fi premise is only the means to tell a gritty, action-filled allegory of apartheid and racial tension.
If you're watching the awards tonight, enjoy and if you want a drinking game, take a shot every time someone thanks their agent, a nominee obviously fakes a smile after losing and someone cracks a painful Avatar joke.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)