When Sam Witwicky (Shia LeBeouf) buys his first car, he inadvertently is recruited into an ancient extraterrestrial civil war from a dead planet. His car, a classic Chevy Camaro, is not your typical clunker. In fact, he's been around for a while, and his name is Bumble Bee, an Cyborobotic organism from the planet Cybertron. Along with Mikaela (Megan Fox,) a girl from his class, he agrees to help search for the Allspark, the building block of all life on Cybertron. Along with Optimus Prime (Peter Cullen) and his team, the Autobots, Sam, a special forces squad, a secret government division and a pair of computer hackers work together with the Secretary of Defense (Jon Voight) to hide the Allspark from Megatron (Hugo Weaving) and his band of Decepticons.
When I first saw the trailer for this one, fifteen months before its release date, I was thrilled to the point of goosebumps because I loved the cartoon as a child. I remember sneaking Transformers, X-Men, Spiderman, GI Joe and Batman on Saturday mornings when my parents were not home and loving the action and the simple idea that simple items like cars and trucks and tanks that change into robots. This film met all of my expectations for what the Transformers looked like, their vehicle choices, the action and the hybrid nature of a human-based story with computer generated characters. The pacing is upbeat, lively and inspiring. The fight between the Scorpion Decepticon and the US Forces is especially memorable with its hybrid special effects (physical and CGI,) music, authenticity and editing. Gives me goosebumps every time, inspiring me to love our military and making me so incredibly patriotic. A beautiful sequence!!
I am amazed with the realism portrayed in the effects of this film. And I am impressed by the art department's work on each of the Cybertronians. Barricade, the police car, is my favorite. He has everything from the 911 Emergency Response decal to the Decepticon police badge symbol, including sinister embellishments such as the motto "To Punish and Enslave" on the body of the police car. And the subtle irony that one of the bad guys is a police car. As I understand from the special features, the animation required a special algorithm the decide where each part of the automobile would be stored and displayed in the body of the robot when in "Transformed" mode. For instance, Barricade's tires become fists and shoulders and Bumble Bee's are elbow joints and shoulders. Also, due to Bumble Bee's muteness, he talks through the car's stereo using a digital radio. And Optimus Prime's cab becomes his chest and pectoral muscles. The results are stunning and add to the realism of the piece, authenticating it, drawing us in engaging us completely.
Not only does the technology draw its audience to engage, but the performances inspire loyalty, friendship, honor, duty and sacrifice. The cast was perfectly picked from newcomer (at the time) Shia LaBeouf to veteran Voight and the brilliant comedic cadence of John Turturro. The chemistry between the audio cast, as with the live actors adds to the smoothness and personality of the piece. The geek in me, of course, is tickled to hear the tones of Peter Cullen, the original performer for Optimus Prime. I enjoy LaBeouf's performance especially, he has the balance of the cute boy with the emotional depth of an up and coming power-actor including some comedy to balance.
A beautiful package; absolutely brilliant!!
*****
Coming Soon: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Friday, February 18, 2011
Legion
Again grieved by mankind, God has willed that the world's population be wiped out wholesale so that Earth might begin anew. One child could change all that, the problem is, he's not been born yet. And so, the Heavenly Host is dispatched to Earth to destroy his mother, a waitress named Charlie (Adrienne Palicki) who tends a diner called Paradise Falls along with Jeep (Lucas Black) and his father, Bob (Dennis Quaid). The situation is dire and hope is nowhere, and the diner is besieged. Reluctant to carry out his Master's plan, Michael (Paul Bettany) rebels and stands with the band of misfits for one last stand. As time comes down and the baby is born, God sends a replacement, Gabriel (Kevin Durand,) the only one who can destroy the child.
Apocalyptic stories come in all forms. And my collection has a fair share of those: Resident Evil, The Happening, The Day the Earth Stood Still, 28 Days Later, Terminator, Cloverfield, Planet Terror and Daybreakers. And Legion is one of those. The typical formula for an Apocalyptic film is that there is a pestilence that comes to wipe out mankind, sometimes supernatural (as in this case and in The Happening) and sometimes viral (Resident Evil, 28 Days Later, Daybreakers, Planet Terror.) And rarely, it's a creature (such as is the case with Cloverfield.) This pestilence is fought by a small group of humans, such as our diner patrons. Someone usually shows up, like Resident Evil's Alice, who knows everything about what's coming and has a short time to recruit, train and fight with the small band against the onslaught. The film usually spans the time of a day or a night and the small band overcomes the creatures attacking with the help of a secret weapon of sorts. In this case the baby is the secret weapon: when he's born, the lesser Host cannot come near. But there's a last "Big Bad" who's got all the advantages and none of the weaknesses of the horde, in this case Kevin Durand's Gabriel. In one last battle with the believer (the one who equips our heroes to fight,) the most experienced warrior is usually killed fighting The Big Bad, leaving the real hero to prove himself.
This film follows the formula to the letter; however, the story itself is weak. Its main concern is a slam and slander upon the Christian Christmas story and a perversion of the Christian God where He is the villain and his Host is as well. So concerned were the writers to be overly preachy, that they failed to construct a tightly woven plot. The action is routine, the mechanics capably executed, but the story lags and, as my Dad would say, is "flopping around like a dead fish" whereupon one of my college roommates would remind me that "dead fish don't flop." However, a dying fish does, and so does this plot.
So where is the excellence? Every film has a redeeming point, and this one is in the performances brought by Kevin Durand and Paul Bettany and their chemistry as reluctant enemies. After his stunning stint on ABC's Lost, Kevin Durand has become someone I am inclined to follow. His physicality hides a soulful creature, passionate in performance. Here, with one of my favorite method actors, his Gabriel doesn't want to kill his brother; in fact he's grieved that he must. But he must; thus pushing his will to achieve his Master's purpose. And Bettany, always brilliant from ship's doctor to intelligent mainframe, brings a wisdom to Michael who accepts he's not to survive; as long as the baby does. And is willing to let his brother, Gabriel, kill him to prove his faith as righteous. And this brilliance between our two angels comes from pristine preparation by our two performers, whose work boosts the overall performance of the piece to a tolerable level, despite the material provided. This film is a fantastic example of great acting, despite bad writing.
****
In: Paul Bettany
Out: Tyreese Gibson
Coming Soon: Transformers and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Apocalyptic stories come in all forms. And my collection has a fair share of those: Resident Evil, The Happening, The Day the Earth Stood Still, 28 Days Later, Terminator, Cloverfield, Planet Terror and Daybreakers. And Legion is one of those. The typical formula for an Apocalyptic film is that there is a pestilence that comes to wipe out mankind, sometimes supernatural (as in this case and in The Happening) and sometimes viral (Resident Evil, 28 Days Later, Daybreakers, Planet Terror.) And rarely, it's a creature (such as is the case with Cloverfield.) This pestilence is fought by a small group of humans, such as our diner patrons. Someone usually shows up, like Resident Evil's Alice, who knows everything about what's coming and has a short time to recruit, train and fight with the small band against the onslaught. The film usually spans the time of a day or a night and the small band overcomes the creatures attacking with the help of a secret weapon of sorts. In this case the baby is the secret weapon: when he's born, the lesser Host cannot come near. But there's a last "Big Bad" who's got all the advantages and none of the weaknesses of the horde, in this case Kevin Durand's Gabriel. In one last battle with the believer (the one who equips our heroes to fight,) the most experienced warrior is usually killed fighting The Big Bad, leaving the real hero to prove himself.
This film follows the formula to the letter; however, the story itself is weak. Its main concern is a slam and slander upon the Christian Christmas story and a perversion of the Christian God where He is the villain and his Host is as well. So concerned were the writers to be overly preachy, that they failed to construct a tightly woven plot. The action is routine, the mechanics capably executed, but the story lags and, as my Dad would say, is "flopping around like a dead fish" whereupon one of my college roommates would remind me that "dead fish don't flop." However, a dying fish does, and so does this plot.
So where is the excellence? Every film has a redeeming point, and this one is in the performances brought by Kevin Durand and Paul Bettany and their chemistry as reluctant enemies. After his stunning stint on ABC's Lost, Kevin Durand has become someone I am inclined to follow. His physicality hides a soulful creature, passionate in performance. Here, with one of my favorite method actors, his Gabriel doesn't want to kill his brother; in fact he's grieved that he must. But he must; thus pushing his will to achieve his Master's purpose. And Bettany, always brilliant from ship's doctor to intelligent mainframe, brings a wisdom to Michael who accepts he's not to survive; as long as the baby does. And is willing to let his brother, Gabriel, kill him to prove his faith as righteous. And this brilliance between our two angels comes from pristine preparation by our two performers, whose work boosts the overall performance of the piece to a tolerable level, despite the material provided. This film is a fantastic example of great acting, despite bad writing.
****
In: Paul Bettany
Out: Tyreese Gibson
Coming Soon: Transformers and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
The Young Victoria
From Alexandre Dumas' The Count of Monte Cristo to the horrors of the opera house in Phantom of the Opera to ABC Television's Alias and the WB's Buffy the Vampire Slayer and within the pages Shakespeare and JK Rowling's Harry Potter, the love triangle has been one of the most effective tools for drama utilizing manipulation, politics and seduction. Of course, the most controversial and fought over love triangles of our time comes from the pages of Stephanie Meyer's Twilight Saga. Defined, it is a situation involving three people in an emotional relationship involving a couple and a third person with whom one of them is involved. For instance, in Alias' season two finale, Michael Vartan's Vaughn goes to retrieve Jennifer Garner's Sidney from a yet unknown location after a vicious fight that knocked her unconscious for an as of yet unrevealed period of time. She wakes and calls in, meeting him at a safe house. And, in one of the series' most shocking points, he reveals his left hand and on the ring finger clearly sits a wedding ring. And so, for season three, she finds her world rocked to her discontent and the drama is so brilliantly stretched that their love triangle is one of the most memorable on television in the last decade.
And for Victoria, young queen of England, an unconventional love triangle brews for the novice queen. After the death of her uncle, the King of England, Victoria (Emily Blunt) is crowned queen with little to no experience. Seduced by the sitting Prime Minister, Melbourne (Paul Bettany), into trusting him alone, her choices seem all controlled. However, she is being advised by Prince Albert (Rupert Friend), a poor prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha who must wait for her to decide whom she will choose.
Granted Melbourne is not in love with her, nor does he compete with Albert in the same way that Albert competes with Melbourne. Nor is Victoria aware of this behind-the-scenes competition, waiting to wisely make the choice of her lifetime, which history tells us lasted only 20 years of her 64 year reign, the longest in British history. And they were so in love. And for this film, Albert does not seduce; he serves and provides a balance to her work that supports her in every way. He is exactly the counter to Melbourne and makes for a smart match for her, providing wisdom and confidence that makes him the clear choice for her trust, winning her over completely.
And for this piece, this story, the love triangle serves its purpose well, creating a beautiful love story against a very turbulent and dark time in the historical landscape of England. The rich colors speak the passion of the story as the perfect counter to the times. The music is emotional, as are the performances. And the calculating coolness that is the British style of cinema sculpts the emotional landscape with richness and depth, recalling the exact reason why I love British Films. The creative way that the writers utilized the Love Triangle paints a beautiful way to balance personal and political choices, making for a wonderful and stunning love story. And, as you may recall, I am very picky whenever I engage a love story; The Young Victoria is one of the best I've encountered in the last five to ten years.
****
IN: Mark Strong
OUT: Paul Bettany
Coming Soon: Legion
And for Victoria, young queen of England, an unconventional love triangle brews for the novice queen. After the death of her uncle, the King of England, Victoria (Emily Blunt) is crowned queen with little to no experience. Seduced by the sitting Prime Minister, Melbourne (Paul Bettany), into trusting him alone, her choices seem all controlled. However, she is being advised by Prince Albert (Rupert Friend), a poor prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha who must wait for her to decide whom she will choose.
Granted Melbourne is not in love with her, nor does he compete with Albert in the same way that Albert competes with Melbourne. Nor is Victoria aware of this behind-the-scenes competition, waiting to wisely make the choice of her lifetime, which history tells us lasted only 20 years of her 64 year reign, the longest in British history. And they were so in love. And for this film, Albert does not seduce; he serves and provides a balance to her work that supports her in every way. He is exactly the counter to Melbourne and makes for a smart match for her, providing wisdom and confidence that makes him the clear choice for her trust, winning her over completely.
And for this piece, this story, the love triangle serves its purpose well, creating a beautiful love story against a very turbulent and dark time in the historical landscape of England. The rich colors speak the passion of the story as the perfect counter to the times. The music is emotional, as are the performances. And the calculating coolness that is the British style of cinema sculpts the emotional landscape with richness and depth, recalling the exact reason why I love British Films. The creative way that the writers utilized the Love Triangle paints a beautiful way to balance personal and political choices, making for a wonderful and stunning love story. And, as you may recall, I am very picky whenever I engage a love story; The Young Victoria is one of the best I've encountered in the last five to ten years.
****
IN: Mark Strong
OUT: Paul Bettany
Coming Soon: Legion
Friday, February 11, 2011
Stardust
In the sleepy town of Wall, so named for the mysterious wall that separates the world of fact and the world of fantasy, a land called Stormhold, a boy named Dunstan Thorne (Ben Barnes) crosses the forbidden border and has a one-night stand with a salve princess: his son, Tristen, is delivered to him by the keeper of the wall shortly after his birth. Futilely trying to woo the object of his affection, Victoria (Sienna Miller), he promises to catch the falling star they see fall and bring it back before her birthday in order to ask for her hand. He journeys into Stormhold in search for the star; little does he know that the star is a beautiful girl, Yvane (Claire Danes,) and not just a rock. And he's not the only one looking for it, Prince Septimus of Stormhold (Mark Strong) and a witch, Lamia (Michelle Pfiffer,) are also hunting for her, intending to kill her and remove her heart to consume it. Befriending a queerish pirate called Shakespeare (Robert Di Niro,) Tristen discovers what love is all about, having the adventure of a lifetime and becomes a man along the way.
Seasoned with rock-solid performances and a wickedly hilarious cast (including a sidesplitting performance by Mark Williams (of Harry Potter fame) as a literal man-goat), Stardust is truly a fantastic story, in every way. Fairy tales are tricky stories as they require a formula, adhere to genre rules, have a great cast of characters, as well as coming up with something unique with a clever twist. This one has it all, including blue blood for our royal family. This one has sword fights, lightning pirates, witches, magic and murder most foul. And it's brilliant, captivating from the beginning 'til the flourish of the plot twist.
The storytelling is done so well in this film, with brilliant filmmaking trade-craft. Especially good is the pirate ship montage at the midpoint, confidently shot, cropped and scored to keep the pacing of the story, relieving the boredom that happens in the midpoint of most movies. Also helpful is the ballistic nature of Mark Strong's Septimus, creating a percussive force that rocks the boat in a violent and dramatic pulse. I'm also tickled by the humor afforded Robert Di Niro's Captain Shakespeare. This character development deepens the plot and adds depth to the setting and credibility to the land created; like Tolkein's MIddle Earth, it's a place believable and attractive to visit and making all the characters real. Fantasy worlds must be carefully created and each inch and surface must be planned out and calculated; Stardust is constructed with the greatest care in development, creating a timeless story which delights and moves its audience.
Stardust is beautiful, stunning, fabulous and performs with finesse. It ranks high on the my list of the greatest fairy tales in film. In the top ten alongside Beauty and the Beast and Sleeping Beauty. It's the kind of tale that could come out of The Arabian Nights or Grimm's Fairy Tales. I'm impressed every time I pop it in the DVD player. And I highly recommend it to anyone who borrows movies from my library, it's just so much fun!!
****
IN: Claire Danes
OUT: Mark Strong
Coming Soon: The Young Victoria
Seasoned with rock-solid performances and a wickedly hilarious cast (including a sidesplitting performance by Mark Williams (of Harry Potter fame) as a literal man-goat), Stardust is truly a fantastic story, in every way. Fairy tales are tricky stories as they require a formula, adhere to genre rules, have a great cast of characters, as well as coming up with something unique with a clever twist. This one has it all, including blue blood for our royal family. This one has sword fights, lightning pirates, witches, magic and murder most foul. And it's brilliant, captivating from the beginning 'til the flourish of the plot twist.
The storytelling is done so well in this film, with brilliant filmmaking trade-craft. Especially good is the pirate ship montage at the midpoint, confidently shot, cropped and scored to keep the pacing of the story, relieving the boredom that happens in the midpoint of most movies. Also helpful is the ballistic nature of Mark Strong's Septimus, creating a percussive force that rocks the boat in a violent and dramatic pulse. I'm also tickled by the humor afforded Robert Di Niro's Captain Shakespeare. This character development deepens the plot and adds depth to the setting and credibility to the land created; like Tolkein's MIddle Earth, it's a place believable and attractive to visit and making all the characters real. Fantasy worlds must be carefully created and each inch and surface must be planned out and calculated; Stardust is constructed with the greatest care in development, creating a timeless story which delights and moves its audience.
Stardust is beautiful, stunning, fabulous and performs with finesse. It ranks high on the my list of the greatest fairy tales in film. In the top ten alongside Beauty and the Beast and Sleeping Beauty. It's the kind of tale that could come out of The Arabian Nights or Grimm's Fairy Tales. I'm impressed every time I pop it in the DVD player. And I highly recommend it to anyone who borrows movies from my library, it's just so much fun!!
****
IN: Claire Danes
OUT: Mark Strong
Coming Soon: The Young Victoria
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Romeo + Juliet
In perhaps the best known romantic tragedy of all time, passion flows as the heat rises in love and war while weapons flash and blood pools; two erstwhile enemies put their parents feelings aside to romance each other. And while the enmity rises, and lives fall on both sides, their love affair is cut short and no side passes through unscathed.
This film's cousin, we've already seen and we've studied its seduction and sorrow. And while Moulin Rouge is Baz Luhrman's magnum opus, this one's charm is no less beautiful; its direction to cause the sigh within my soul for deep feeling to move and heave is effective and so brilliant. Regardless that the package's soul lies in better form than its counterpart from the 1960's, the emotion is drawn out and given a younger feel complete with modern costumes and upgraded weaponry and transport: I'm forced to compare the opera that is Moulin Rouge to Romeo and Juliet's rock-epic and say that I'm not as deeply affected by the passage of this film as I am of its cousin. But the package is deeply beautiful on its own, still giving me goosebumps at the pinnacle of each plot point, remaining in my sentiment one of the best adaptations of the story.
As far as the story goes, the presentation is beautifully done. The language fits well with the setting and the actors are very comfortable, all of them, with its complexity and meaning. I enjoy the banter between the Capulet and Montague boys, Romeo (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Mercutio, and Tybalt (John Leguizamo) and Mercutio (Harold Perrineau). The casting is very well done, each are very comfortable with their characters, pouring the full measure of themselves. Leguizamo's Tybalt posesses everything needed for a hot-headed, arrogant master duelist, including stance and swagger and poise. DiCaprio's Romeo has the perfect balance of passions in love and in rage and in sorrow; his energy equally spent with each, proving even at this point his dedication to the art. And Perrineau's Mercutio has a bright flourish of righteous madness, my favorite scene being the fight that leads to Mercutio's end.
The only fault lies with the position of the strongest emotional release. It's found in the circumstances that separate Juliet (Claire Danes) and Romeo when it should fall to the suspense in the passing and near miss of their ending, and with the missing vicious duel and brutal death of Paris the Rival (Paul Rudd) which, if it weren't so hasty, might have saved our lovers. While the desperation remains, the personal touch is lacking; we do not fear for him as much. His only peril lies in the lawful manhunt by the prince's men and of course arriving too early to poison himself. All of the personal emotion is therefore transferred to Pete Postlethwaite's Friar Lawrence and his failed message delivery. As well, the final monologues are missing or truncated, failing to assist the suspense of the finale. As is the choice to have Juliet's suicide be with a gun, for it buries the pain of her despair; the climax is too quick, robbing us of the explosion of catharsis.
My affection still remains for this film, regardless: because of its comprehensive understanding of the dialogue, the performance and the cinematography, production design and the musical choices. The package itself is still beautiful, despite the story development and transmogrification from the play proved to be the least cared for. The story itself is still one of the most beautiful, suspenseful and tragic love stories of all time.
****
IN: Leonardo DiCaprio
OUT: Claire Danes
Coming Soon: Stardust
This film's cousin, we've already seen and we've studied its seduction and sorrow. And while Moulin Rouge is Baz Luhrman's magnum opus, this one's charm is no less beautiful; its direction to cause the sigh within my soul for deep feeling to move and heave is effective and so brilliant. Regardless that the package's soul lies in better form than its counterpart from the 1960's, the emotion is drawn out and given a younger feel complete with modern costumes and upgraded weaponry and transport: I'm forced to compare the opera that is Moulin Rouge to Romeo and Juliet's rock-epic and say that I'm not as deeply affected by the passage of this film as I am of its cousin. But the package is deeply beautiful on its own, still giving me goosebumps at the pinnacle of each plot point, remaining in my sentiment one of the best adaptations of the story.
As far as the story goes, the presentation is beautifully done. The language fits well with the setting and the actors are very comfortable, all of them, with its complexity and meaning. I enjoy the banter between the Capulet and Montague boys, Romeo (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Mercutio, and Tybalt (John Leguizamo) and Mercutio (Harold Perrineau). The casting is very well done, each are very comfortable with their characters, pouring the full measure of themselves. Leguizamo's Tybalt posesses everything needed for a hot-headed, arrogant master duelist, including stance and swagger and poise. DiCaprio's Romeo has the perfect balance of passions in love and in rage and in sorrow; his energy equally spent with each, proving even at this point his dedication to the art. And Perrineau's Mercutio has a bright flourish of righteous madness, my favorite scene being the fight that leads to Mercutio's end.
The only fault lies with the position of the strongest emotional release. It's found in the circumstances that separate Juliet (Claire Danes) and Romeo when it should fall to the suspense in the passing and near miss of their ending, and with the missing vicious duel and brutal death of Paris the Rival (Paul Rudd) which, if it weren't so hasty, might have saved our lovers. While the desperation remains, the personal touch is lacking; we do not fear for him as much. His only peril lies in the lawful manhunt by the prince's men and of course arriving too early to poison himself. All of the personal emotion is therefore transferred to Pete Postlethwaite's Friar Lawrence and his failed message delivery. As well, the final monologues are missing or truncated, failing to assist the suspense of the finale. As is the choice to have Juliet's suicide be with a gun, for it buries the pain of her despair; the climax is too quick, robbing us of the explosion of catharsis.
My affection still remains for this film, regardless: because of its comprehensive understanding of the dialogue, the performance and the cinematography, production design and the musical choices. The package itself is still beautiful, despite the story development and transmogrification from the play proved to be the least cared for. The story itself is still one of the most beautiful, suspenseful and tragic love stories of all time.
****
IN: Leonardo DiCaprio
OUT: Claire Danes
Coming Soon: Stardust
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
Inception
When subconscious thief Dominick Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) fails his recent assignment, his mark offers one last job to square things. Initially refusing, Saito (Ken Wantanabe) sweetens the pot by fixing the charges against Cobb, allowing him to return home to his family. Along with Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt,) Ariadne (Ellen Paige,) and Eames (Tom Hardy) the team sets out to plant and idea inside their mark, Robert Fischer (Cillian Murphy,) a concept, Cobb explains, is called Inception. Cobb harbors a dark secret, however, that threatens the job and everyone involved.
While this film is deeper than the typical heist film, it shares the basic elements: employment, intelligence, construction, execution and resolution. The key to creating a great heist movie is chemistry, conflict, casting and execution. These components, when properly utilized, fill the piece with meaning and make it memorable. And a memorable movie always lasts.
Inception has great chemistry between the cast and the mechanical elements, as well as the characters with each other. For instance, Dicaprio's voice and performance coupled with the sound editing, the feeling and the emotion inside the dream world emotes the sensation felt when waking suddenly from a deep sleep: hearing is enhanced sound louder, the atmosphere is drier and surroundings are disorienting. The characters and their actors are perfectly comfortable with each other, leading the audience to relax and engage easier. Even the relationship between the Villain of the piece, Moll (Marion Cotillard) and Cobb, our protagonist and hero. She offers, not evil deeds or practices, but shirking responsibility and giving into the freedom of the dream, driving the pain within to manifest within her husband which threatens the security of the mission.
The conflict, construction and execution is done with finesse, with well-planned development and care. Most memorable is the kick sequence, including the fight scene which Entertainment Weekly called "Zero Gravity Fisticuffs." Also the tension in the pacing and editing draws out the desperation as each level is completed, entered and exited. Part of the execution is in the performance, including the humor most of which comes from Hardy and Gordon-Levitt and some from Paige, each who turn in flawless, real and emotional performances. Also the execution, whether in a comic or tragic story, emotional release is necessary connecting the audience to the action and the characters. Especially potent is the emotional resolution played between Maurice Fischer (Pete Postlewaite) and his son, that scene is incredibly lovely; gives me goosebumps every time.
This package is deserving of the credit it earned. It brilliantly helps the audience in its escapism, allowing us to live different lives for a while. The colors and atmosphere are rich and emotional and deep. The casting is pristine and attractive...and I love a great cast. This film is wonderful in all its components; it's gonna be an ageless film.
***
In: Marion Cotillard
Out: Leonardo Dicaprio
Coming Soon: Romeo and Juliet
While this film is deeper than the typical heist film, it shares the basic elements: employment, intelligence, construction, execution and resolution. The key to creating a great heist movie is chemistry, conflict, casting and execution. These components, when properly utilized, fill the piece with meaning and make it memorable. And a memorable movie always lasts.
Inception has great chemistry between the cast and the mechanical elements, as well as the characters with each other. For instance, Dicaprio's voice and performance coupled with the sound editing, the feeling and the emotion inside the dream world emotes the sensation felt when waking suddenly from a deep sleep: hearing is enhanced sound louder, the atmosphere is drier and surroundings are disorienting. The characters and their actors are perfectly comfortable with each other, leading the audience to relax and engage easier. Even the relationship between the Villain of the piece, Moll (Marion Cotillard) and Cobb, our protagonist and hero. She offers, not evil deeds or practices, but shirking responsibility and giving into the freedom of the dream, driving the pain within to manifest within her husband which threatens the security of the mission.
The conflict, construction and execution is done with finesse, with well-planned development and care. Most memorable is the kick sequence, including the fight scene which Entertainment Weekly called "Zero Gravity Fisticuffs." Also the tension in the pacing and editing draws out the desperation as each level is completed, entered and exited. Part of the execution is in the performance, including the humor most of which comes from Hardy and Gordon-Levitt and some from Paige, each who turn in flawless, real and emotional performances. Also the execution, whether in a comic or tragic story, emotional release is necessary connecting the audience to the action and the characters. Especially potent is the emotional resolution played between Maurice Fischer (Pete Postlewaite) and his son, that scene is incredibly lovely; gives me goosebumps every time.
This package is deserving of the credit it earned. It brilliantly helps the audience in its escapism, allowing us to live different lives for a while. The colors and atmosphere are rich and emotional and deep. The casting is pristine and attractive...and I love a great cast. This film is wonderful in all its components; it's gonna be an ageless film.
***
In: Marion Cotillard
Out: Leonardo Dicaprio
Coming Soon: Romeo and Juliet
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
Public Enemies
In the golden era of bank robberies, a crack batch of gangsters gave birth to the Federal Bureau of Investigation under the controversial leadership of J. Edgar Hoover (Billy Crudup.) The planner and kingpin of the group, a man of charisma, fashion, and prowess, confounds law enforcement until Hoover appoints Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale) an expert lawman and visionary investigator. Purvis' team hunts down and captures or kills every one of their targets' friends and associates while climbing their way to the top of the organization. It's the time of Tommy Guns and fedoras, a time where money was tight and crime was high. It is the time of the Public Enemies, and John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) is Number One.
Warm is how I'd describe this film. The photography, coloring, costumes and film score are beautiful; the acting, fluid; the action smart and savvy creating a comfortable and full tone granting the audience a savory and hearty emotional experience. Even the famous 1930's gray suits offer a warmth in their authenticity, fit and color coordination matching each character's portrayer perfectly. The lighting offers a classic feel as do the acting styles of our lead six actors. The package is seductive, charismatic, comfortable and real, everything John Dillinger personifies.
Mr's Depp, Bale, Crudup and Ms. Cotillard all perform with exceeding finesse, providing the film with great emotional content, making you wish the chase never ended. And the romance between Marion Cotillard's Billie Frechette and Depp's Dillinger is heartbreaking, a tribute to their immersion into the characters and their work into the brilliant chemistry between Frechette and Dillinger. Mr. Depp's sadness as he must leave her and escape speaks edges of sorrow and is quite wonderfully done. As is the horror of Billie's interrogation. And there's the obsessive hunter, Purvis, who history says took his own life after the end of his famous pursuit, is soulfully but coldly embodied by Mr. Bale to perfection. And Mr Crudup's Hoover is perfectly slimy, only wishing for the political gain the rise of the FBI brings him.
However, it's Dillinger and Purvis' seconds which caught my eye. The tactical and duty-bound Special Agent Winstead (Stephen Lang) is ironclad and comprehensively rock-solid. He's hardened, the perfect soldier and he's a soul-filled, making him human especially the scene where he tells Billie that Dillinger is dead, passing on the last thoughts. Red Hamilton (Jason Clarke) seems to be Dillinger's conscience, balancing out the clinical and efficiency that is his friend. He's soft, soulful and wise, everything Dillinger is not.
As I understand, at least three of the locations used are the actual locations where the events of the film took place and each feels different from each other. The prison at the beginning is bright and open and free: no pressure, no one hunting. The inn in the woods is a maze, where the chase could lead anywhere. And the alley, where Dillinger is tracked down to and eventually shot, offers no way out.
Overall, Public Enemies is brilliant, beautiful and cinematically stunning. The tension expands fantastically, keeping the audience appropriately on edge. Each shootout is performed with little to no music accompanying the furious gunfire, presenting an edge to the action removing the silliness of stylistic gun-fighting, giving off an air of authenticity and enhancing the experience of the piece.
****
In: James Russo
Out: Marion Cotillard
Coming Soon: Inception
Warm is how I'd describe this film. The photography, coloring, costumes and film score are beautiful; the acting, fluid; the action smart and savvy creating a comfortable and full tone granting the audience a savory and hearty emotional experience. Even the famous 1930's gray suits offer a warmth in their authenticity, fit and color coordination matching each character's portrayer perfectly. The lighting offers a classic feel as do the acting styles of our lead six actors. The package is seductive, charismatic, comfortable and real, everything John Dillinger personifies.
Mr's Depp, Bale, Crudup and Ms. Cotillard all perform with exceeding finesse, providing the film with great emotional content, making you wish the chase never ended. And the romance between Marion Cotillard's Billie Frechette and Depp's Dillinger is heartbreaking, a tribute to their immersion into the characters and their work into the brilliant chemistry between Frechette and Dillinger. Mr. Depp's sadness as he must leave her and escape speaks edges of sorrow and is quite wonderfully done. As is the horror of Billie's interrogation. And there's the obsessive hunter, Purvis, who history says took his own life after the end of his famous pursuit, is soulfully but coldly embodied by Mr. Bale to perfection. And Mr Crudup's Hoover is perfectly slimy, only wishing for the political gain the rise of the FBI brings him.
However, it's Dillinger and Purvis' seconds which caught my eye. The tactical and duty-bound Special Agent Winstead (Stephen Lang) is ironclad and comprehensively rock-solid. He's hardened, the perfect soldier and he's a soul-filled, making him human especially the scene where he tells Billie that Dillinger is dead, passing on the last thoughts. Red Hamilton (Jason Clarke) seems to be Dillinger's conscience, balancing out the clinical and efficiency that is his friend. He's soft, soulful and wise, everything Dillinger is not.
As I understand, at least three of the locations used are the actual locations where the events of the film took place and each feels different from each other. The prison at the beginning is bright and open and free: no pressure, no one hunting. The inn in the woods is a maze, where the chase could lead anywhere. And the alley, where Dillinger is tracked down to and eventually shot, offers no way out.
Overall, Public Enemies is brilliant, beautiful and cinematically stunning. The tension expands fantastically, keeping the audience appropriately on edge. Each shootout is performed with little to no music accompanying the furious gunfire, presenting an edge to the action removing the silliness of stylistic gun-fighting, giving off an air of authenticity and enhancing the experience of the piece.
****
In: James Russo
Out: Marion Cotillard
Coming Soon: Inception
Thursday, January 27, 2011
The Ninth Gate
Dean Corso (Johnny Depp,) an unscrupulous rare book hunter, is hired by a wealthy occultist (Frank Langella) to authenticate a book reputably written by the Devil having the power to open the gates of hell, raising the Prince of Darkness himself. And he's not the only one chasing the myth, a dark order is seeking to use the book and will stop at nothing to obtain it. Corso soon finds that he's out of his depth when the mystery surrounding the book manifests and he both fears for his life and considers damning his soul.
Dry, dusty and slow is how I would initially describe the tenor of The Ninth Gate. The film's setup and introduction lacks a hook to draw in the audience, relying on its musical score, photography and main star to draw attention rather than a compelling story: it's blase, simply. The action, meant to thrill and heighten interest, fails to do so, coming off campy. And the characters, with whom we're to connect, are strangely "cardboardy," failing to have the real depth that allows for the emotional release needed at the climax.
And granted he's fantastic in every role he's played (it's really a puzzlement why he keeps being passed over for the Oscar Podium) and here is no different: Mr Depp's work fails to stir me as he usually does . It's really not his fault, the sufficient material to work from is lacking. The photography and framing is exquisite; a frozen frame from any part of this film might be printed for any photo collection or created into a fabulous coffee table book. The production designer is the best part of the whole picture. The film score, is above average--not inspiring, nor boring--simply filling in the necessary silence in dialogue with a delicate efficiency. The mechanics of the package aren't to blame.
And while I haven't read the book upon which this film is based, I'm guessing something was lost transmogrifying the story to screen; not all stories belong on celluloid, perhaps this one should have remained in the pages where inspiration breathed.
***
In: Johnny Depp
Out: James Russo
Coming Soon: Public Enemies
Dry, dusty and slow is how I would initially describe the tenor of The Ninth Gate. The film's setup and introduction lacks a hook to draw in the audience, relying on its musical score, photography and main star to draw attention rather than a compelling story: it's blase, simply. The action, meant to thrill and heighten interest, fails to do so, coming off campy. And the characters, with whom we're to connect, are strangely "cardboardy," failing to have the real depth that allows for the emotional release needed at the climax.
And granted he's fantastic in every role he's played (it's really a puzzlement why he keeps being passed over for the Oscar Podium) and here is no different: Mr Depp's work fails to stir me as he usually does . It's really not his fault, the sufficient material to work from is lacking. The photography and framing is exquisite; a frozen frame from any part of this film might be printed for any photo collection or created into a fabulous coffee table book. The production designer is the best part of the whole picture. The film score, is above average--not inspiring, nor boring--simply filling in the necessary silence in dialogue with a delicate efficiency. The mechanics of the package aren't to blame.
And while I haven't read the book upon which this film is based, I'm guessing something was lost transmogrifying the story to screen; not all stories belong on celluloid, perhaps this one should have remained in the pages where inspiration breathed.
***
In: Johnny Depp
Out: James Russo
Coming Soon: Public Enemies
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Nightmare on Elm Street
A killer stalks the neighborhood children in the quiet suburbs of a sleepy town. He tortures before he kills, playing with his prey before finally savoring his kill; nobody can stop him and nobody is looking, because he's hunting on his turf. His prey come to him every night in their dreams while they sleep fast in the silence on Elm Street.
This film, and its subsequent series, fought the box office turf war in the '80's and has a few distinctions. First, it saved New Line Cinema from bankruptcy, leaving us to wonder where Lord of the Rings would have turned to had Freddy not saved New Line. The second being that it gave rise to the career of last decades People's Choice winner for Actor of the Decade, a little known performer named Johnny Depp, who's death called for a geyser of stage blood to rise from his bed in a very memorable scene after it has swallowed him whole. Also, Robert Englund, who portrays Freddy Kruger, held the longest-running slasher villain for two decades, regardless of the Friday the 13th series having more films because Jason is played by several actors.
Wes Craven, our director, is the master of drawing tension with long cuts and employing a contemplative and minimalist score. The dreamscape sets are brilliant with their metallic, industrial, sewage-caked and dilapidated states against idyllic suburbia, so bright, clean and and innocent. The film's jump-cuts and ballistic action scenes create the ideal adrenaline rush for the time period. Today, however, it's ludicrous in its hysterical unintentional comedy. I actually have trouble not laughing at most points.
The recent remake, starring Jackie Earle Haley, who coincidentally lost out on a role in this film, has a bit smoother and darker run. And whose madness is felt a bit more keenly. In the remake, Freddy's attacks and revenge are personal and perverse and we don't want to connect, not really, because our skin, and our soul, crawls to think of his reasons and we turn away. The tension mastery is still ever present, with quality performances unlike the original (even young Johnny Depp, despite him being one of my boyz: now and forever) and presents a better package.
So you may wonder: why oh why did I watch this film before bed last night? Well, it was next, for one, and because it's pretty hysterical, with its overacting and comical performances all around, so it's easy to detach my thoughts from the subject, regardless of the quality had for its time. Also because I engaged in something else between the viewing and sleeping: something I recommend when seeing something that is outside your usual comfort zone.
****
In: Fail-safe choice
Out: Johnny Depp
Coming Soon: The Ninth Gate
This film, and its subsequent series, fought the box office turf war in the '80's and has a few distinctions. First, it saved New Line Cinema from bankruptcy, leaving us to wonder where Lord of the Rings would have turned to had Freddy not saved New Line. The second being that it gave rise to the career of last decades People's Choice winner for Actor of the Decade, a little known performer named Johnny Depp, who's death called for a geyser of stage blood to rise from his bed in a very memorable scene after it has swallowed him whole. Also, Robert Englund, who portrays Freddy Kruger, held the longest-running slasher villain for two decades, regardless of the Friday the 13th series having more films because Jason is played by several actors.
Wes Craven, our director, is the master of drawing tension with long cuts and employing a contemplative and minimalist score. The dreamscape sets are brilliant with their metallic, industrial, sewage-caked and dilapidated states against idyllic suburbia, so bright, clean and and innocent. The film's jump-cuts and ballistic action scenes create the ideal adrenaline rush for the time period. Today, however, it's ludicrous in its hysterical unintentional comedy. I actually have trouble not laughing at most points.
The recent remake, starring Jackie Earle Haley, who coincidentally lost out on a role in this film, has a bit smoother and darker run. And whose madness is felt a bit more keenly. In the remake, Freddy's attacks and revenge are personal and perverse and we don't want to connect, not really, because our skin, and our soul, crawls to think of his reasons and we turn away. The tension mastery is still ever present, with quality performances unlike the original (even young Johnny Depp, despite him being one of my boyz: now and forever) and presents a better package.
So you may wonder: why oh why did I watch this film before bed last night? Well, it was next, for one, and because it's pretty hysterical, with its overacting and comical performances all around, so it's easy to detach my thoughts from the subject, regardless of the quality had for its time. Also because I engaged in something else between the viewing and sleeping: something I recommend when seeing something that is outside your usual comfort zone.
****
In: Fail-safe choice
Out: Johnny Depp
Coming Soon: The Ninth Gate
Friday, January 21, 2011
The Nightmare Before Christmas
Bored by the lull of the same thing every year, Jack Skellington (Chris Sarandon, sung by Danny Elfman) tires of his job as The Pumpkin King, ruler and leader of Halloween Town in the land of Holidays. He dreams of doing something more, and by chance he finds what he's looking for when he stumbles across Christmas Town. Seeing it as a sign, he decides to take over the preparations for Christmas. And while it makes him feel better, he remains ignorant of the true meaning of Christmas and the great responsibility on Santa's shoulders; and of a prophecy which foretells a disaster if he persists.
The Nightmare Before Christmas presents as a cross-genre masterpiece having all the components of horror, musicals, dark comedy and family films. It flaunts all the conventions of Halloween and equally all those of Christmas presenting a brilliant irony that works so cohesively, it's difficult to locate anything in its tightly wound plot and brilliant mechanics that can derail and destroy the performance. In its era, this film debuted on the cusp of the genesis of our current animation king, Pixar. However, this one's technique (stop-motion) is so antiquated, it's pure genius; a classic.
The central conflict is so well plotted: Jack is uncomfortable with who he is and is unwilling to find satisfaction in himself, that disaster is sure to strike if he fails to realize that being the Pumpkin King is who he is and what he's meant to be. And causing us to think about who we are and examine our destiny while we watch him find his, all wrapped in a fun package. The songs, with their wit and wisdom invite us to sing along and entertains while we learn the lessons this film is teaching us. Danny Elfman, our composer and the singing voice for Jack, completes a shining performance that can be simply described as brilliant.
My father and I watched this film when I was home recently for Christmas: he said that he'd wanted to see it for years. And, while he said it wasn't his type afterwards, he did acknowledge that the film was done well, understanding why I, my sister-in-law and my brother like it so much. Not for everyone, sure; but a great film nonetheless.
****
In: Danny Elfman
Out: This is the first time I'm unable to connect this film to another through performers. Therefore, the fail-safe (alphabetical selection) is needed...and I'm sure we'll use it again very soon.
Coming Soon: Nightmare on Elm Street
The Nightmare Before Christmas presents as a cross-genre masterpiece having all the components of horror, musicals, dark comedy and family films. It flaunts all the conventions of Halloween and equally all those of Christmas presenting a brilliant irony that works so cohesively, it's difficult to locate anything in its tightly wound plot and brilliant mechanics that can derail and destroy the performance. In its era, this film debuted on the cusp of the genesis of our current animation king, Pixar. However, this one's technique (stop-motion) is so antiquated, it's pure genius; a classic.
The central conflict is so well plotted: Jack is uncomfortable with who he is and is unwilling to find satisfaction in himself, that disaster is sure to strike if he fails to realize that being the Pumpkin King is who he is and what he's meant to be. And causing us to think about who we are and examine our destiny while we watch him find his, all wrapped in a fun package. The songs, with their wit and wisdom invite us to sing along and entertains while we learn the lessons this film is teaching us. Danny Elfman, our composer and the singing voice for Jack, completes a shining performance that can be simply described as brilliant.
My father and I watched this film when I was home recently for Christmas: he said that he'd wanted to see it for years. And, while he said it wasn't his type afterwards, he did acknowledge that the film was done well, understanding why I, my sister-in-law and my brother like it so much. Not for everyone, sure; but a great film nonetheless.
****
In: Danny Elfman
Out: This is the first time I'm unable to connect this film to another through performers. Therefore, the fail-safe (alphabetical selection) is needed...and I'm sure we'll use it again very soon.
Coming Soon: Nightmare on Elm Street
Monday, January 17, 2011
Battlefield Conditions
It's been a while!! Christmas really zapped my willingness to continue this project, but I'm a fighter and I'm prepared to continue the journey and fight filmwatching fatigue. I received and purchased several new films for my collection which I'm looking forward to seeing what they can teach filmmakers and filmwatchers (especially this watcher) and storytellers when they pass through the queue.
I'm tired: physically, intellecually and emotionally due to the events of the past two months and it reflected in my last entry. As a result, I'm going to share some tips on preparing the best conditions for the art of watching films. These will be brief, I'll cover the details in future essays.
Be Prepared (great song from the Lion King, by the way!!) -- whenever you engage a film, prepare you mind, body and soul for what the film will do to you. I can't count how many times I've tried to engage with a film while tired, vulnerable or ill prepared to take the spiritual (the damage done from lacking discernment) consequences. Last entry, for instance, I wrote from home at 1:30 in the morning at the beginning of my trip there. My usual theater rests at an elevation of 500ft above sea level and my hometown rests at 3000ft. So I was oxygen deprived and not accustomed to the fatigue it would give me. Plus it was 1:30 in the morning and I was tired anyways. Therefore I failed to be at my best and the response suffered the consequences.
Pay attention. Nothing should distract you. If you are planning to engage critically, it's best that you are alone, fed, and physically well when you do so. However, if you are going to share the experience, talking with your companions will ruin your concentration and also distract them from their journey through the story. In my experience, thus far, I've found it difficult to critique while talking on the phone, as the hearing is impaired and attention elsewhere. Illness also will impare your concentration as you are distracted by the disease of your body. Be sure you eat, either before you begin or during in a non distracting manner. If your filmwatching lab, like mine is, is located at your home, and hunger finds you, getting up to fix yourself something disengages you from your object of study and destroys any concentration you've had up to this point, so remember to eat. If anything does distract you, go back a few chapters on your DVD until you are past the point of the distraction, then reengage.
These "battlefield conditions" will give you the best watching experience. Happy watching and I'll see you sometime this week with Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas!!
I'm tired: physically, intellecually and emotionally due to the events of the past two months and it reflected in my last entry. As a result, I'm going to share some tips on preparing the best conditions for the art of watching films. These will be brief, I'll cover the details in future essays.
Be Prepared (great song from the Lion King, by the way!!) -- whenever you engage a film, prepare you mind, body and soul for what the film will do to you. I can't count how many times I've tried to engage with a film while tired, vulnerable or ill prepared to take the spiritual (the damage done from lacking discernment) consequences. Last entry, for instance, I wrote from home at 1:30 in the morning at the beginning of my trip there. My usual theater rests at an elevation of 500ft above sea level and my hometown rests at 3000ft. So I was oxygen deprived and not accustomed to the fatigue it would give me. Plus it was 1:30 in the morning and I was tired anyways. Therefore I failed to be at my best and the response suffered the consequences.
Pay attention. Nothing should distract you. If you are planning to engage critically, it's best that you are alone, fed, and physically well when you do so. However, if you are going to share the experience, talking with your companions will ruin your concentration and also distract them from their journey through the story. In my experience, thus far, I've found it difficult to critique while talking on the phone, as the hearing is impaired and attention elsewhere. Illness also will impare your concentration as you are distracted by the disease of your body. Be sure you eat, either before you begin or during in a non distracting manner. If your filmwatching lab, like mine is, is located at your home, and hunger finds you, getting up to fix yourself something disengages you from your object of study and destroys any concentration you've had up to this point, so remember to eat. If anything does distract you, go back a few chapters on your DVD until you are past the point of the distraction, then reengage.
These "battlefield conditions" will give you the best watching experience. Happy watching and I'll see you sometime this week with Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas!!
Friday, December 17, 2010
Corpse Bride
Arranged to marry, Victoria (Emily Watson,) the daughter a penniless aristocrat and Victor (Johnny Depp) the son of a wealthy merchant are both nervous of their circumstance. When the wedding rehearsal is a disaster, Victor flees to the woods in order to practice his vows. He mistakenly concludes his vows placing the ring on the finger of the Corpse Bride, Emily (Helena Bonham Carter) becoming cursed to marry her and join her in the land of the dead. In his absence, Black Widower and Gold-Digger Lord Barkus (Richard E. Grant) makes a pass at Victoria and Victor must find a way around the curse in order to return to wed Victoria.
In typical Tim Burton fashion, this witty musical is chock-full of twisted humor and appropriate dark themes. The characters are well written and the story and themes are quite touching. The story is a touching romantic fling full of potent meaning about how marriage should be, being who you're supposed to be and loving the right person and finding true love.
Emily's heartbreak after her brutal murder by her former lover is well handled as is Victor's intended sacrifice as he's accepted his fate. And Emily also sacrifices her happiness with Victor in order to secure his happiness. And this speaks to what marriage is: sacrifice. And this one has it in spades.
And it's also very cute, I find.
***
In; Helena Bonham Carter
Out: Danny Elfman
Coming Soon: Nightmare Before Christmas
Friday, December 10, 2010
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Charlie Bucket (Freddie Highmore,) a poor and simple, but kind, boy whose imagination and love of chocolate alongside his loyalty to his family create enough wealth to sustain him, finds within a chance piece of chocolate a golden ticket and the chance to tour Willie Wonka's (Johnny Depp) Chocolate Factory. WIth the chance at a special reward, Charlie and his companions are tested as they tour the factory together. And, meanwhile, Willie Wonka recalls his childhood and finds he's missing something.
Usually Tim Burton is known for his uses of the many shades of the color black as evidenced in Sleepy Hollow, Nightmare Before Christmas and Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. He's known for his twisted sense of humor and for the brilliant tour he gives into the realm of darkness. But here, it's color that reigns richly from the costumes to the sets and each Oompa Loompa sequence. Most memorable for the set designers is the candy garden. And the characters are well fleshed out by their acting counterparts, so beautifully cast. Not to mention the complete joy that is the compilation of Johnny Depp, Tim Burton and Danny Elfman (architect of each of the Oompa Loompa musical numbers.) Their performances and story craftsmanship apply an agelessness which will stand as excellent for years to come. And this three-way marriage is so poetic and perfect that the other elements (especially the multi-facial Deep Roy as the Oompa Loompas) make for a great family inside this great family film.
I am impressed also by the social commentary as each child succumbs to their vices, reaping appropriate comeuppance as we travel through the Chocolate Factory. The stage for Agustus' gluttony is equally horrific and cartoonish allowing an audience of any age to understand completely. And each number, wickedly performed by Deep Roy's Oompa Loompas, speaks with a cautionary voice and strikes a chord entertaining us and teaching us at the same moment. And this is why the story will remain ageless.
****
In: Edward Fox
OUT: Helena Bonham Carter
Coming Soon: Corpse Bride
Usually Tim Burton is known for his uses of the many shades of the color black as evidenced in Sleepy Hollow, Nightmare Before Christmas and Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. He's known for his twisted sense of humor and for the brilliant tour he gives into the realm of darkness. But here, it's color that reigns richly from the costumes to the sets and each Oompa Loompa sequence. Most memorable for the set designers is the candy garden. And the characters are well fleshed out by their acting counterparts, so beautifully cast. Not to mention the complete joy that is the compilation of Johnny Depp, Tim Burton and Danny Elfman (architect of each of the Oompa Loompa musical numbers.) Their performances and story craftsmanship apply an agelessness which will stand as excellent for years to come. And this three-way marriage is so poetic and perfect that the other elements (especially the multi-facial Deep Roy as the Oompa Loompas) make for a great family inside this great family film.
I am impressed also by the social commentary as each child succumbs to their vices, reaping appropriate comeuppance as we travel through the Chocolate Factory. The stage for Agustus' gluttony is equally horrific and cartoonish allowing an audience of any age to understand completely. And each number, wickedly performed by Deep Roy's Oompa Loompas, speaks with a cautionary voice and strikes a chord entertaining us and teaching us at the same moment. And this is why the story will remain ageless.
****
In: Edward Fox
OUT: Helena Bonham Carter
Coming Soon: Corpse Bride
Thursday, December 09, 2010
A Bridge Too Far
General Horrocks (Edward Fox) begins what may be my favorite pre-mission briefing, thus: "This is a story you will tell your grandchildren, and mightily bored they'll be." The story is of a vast and multi-layered nature, it's the tale of Market-Garden, the largest airborne operation mounted. It is the operation designed to take and hold the bridges running from Holland into Germany across the Rhine River. It was big and ambitious and severely costly.
In true seventies fashion, in a story told by a British director (Academy Award Winner Richard Attenborough,) the story unfolds slowly and stiffly, but has its moments. The landscape is salted appropriately with humor and bad accents, but it remains something likened to one of today's four-hour epic tales, the kind you need to purchase the special edition to experience. Unfortunately humorous in tone, however littered with some of the best actors of the time including Sean Connery, Edward Fox, Michael Caine, James Caan, Elliot Gould, Robert Redford, Gene Hackman, Anthony Hopkins and Laurence Olivier. Have I ever mentioned how much I love a great ensemble cast? Well, let me say again, then: I LOVE A GREAT ENSEMBLE CAST and this one is one of the best.
After having the rug pulled from beneath my feet by HBO's Band of Brothers, this one is a bit watery, but considering the time and the fact that the social climate was still recovering from Vietnam, this one is still very well written, charging forward until brutally stopped in Arnham, Holland, the tragedy slowly taking its toll on the men in front of the lens. And the layers, each individual plot line, grant the viewer a sort of episode by episode series of events which allow us to choose our favorites and be fans. I am fond of Robert Redford's charge across a part of the river, the line involving James Caan's character and the bit with Elliot Gould's 101st Airborne's rebuilding of the Son Bridge. They highlight beautifully what an ensemble piece is supposed to be, a blending.
My problem is that there is too much set dressing and not enough substance; during this viewing, either because of my fatigue after the events of this week at work or simply because of the length of this film, I fell asleep in the middle of the slump between hours one and two. And its not because a three hour film is incapable of keeping my attention (because it did for four consecutive Christmas Eve afternoons with films by Peter Jackson at the beginning of this decade,) I simply am able to better devote my attention during an epic-sized film when the pacing is quicker. A friend of mine is fond of perusing Jackson's epic trilogy by leaving out half of the plot, the one involving two hobbits and a parasite named Gollum. This film-watching tactic may be applicable here, as well. But in order to get the scope, I'm afraid I watch all of it all the time.
The opening narration breaks down the hope of the operation as "so many plans in so many wars." And, like some of the best laid plans, this one fails to the cost of thousands of lives. The desperation is keenly felt in each place, but none as severe as the razing of Arnham. Mr. Attenborough presents a very realistic level of cost of life, not glorifying nor criticizing war and war efforts, but simply presenting the facts, almost to the level of a documentarian. The film is cut and dry and simply honest; a bit long, but true to its nature. A fine example of a well-constructed film presentation.
****
In: Gene Hackman
Out: Edward Fox
Coming Soon: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
In true seventies fashion, in a story told by a British director (Academy Award Winner Richard Attenborough,) the story unfolds slowly and stiffly, but has its moments. The landscape is salted appropriately with humor and bad accents, but it remains something likened to one of today's four-hour epic tales, the kind you need to purchase the special edition to experience. Unfortunately humorous in tone, however littered with some of the best actors of the time including Sean Connery, Edward Fox, Michael Caine, James Caan, Elliot Gould, Robert Redford, Gene Hackman, Anthony Hopkins and Laurence Olivier. Have I ever mentioned how much I love a great ensemble cast? Well, let me say again, then: I LOVE A GREAT ENSEMBLE CAST and this one is one of the best.
After having the rug pulled from beneath my feet by HBO's Band of Brothers, this one is a bit watery, but considering the time and the fact that the social climate was still recovering from Vietnam, this one is still very well written, charging forward until brutally stopped in Arnham, Holland, the tragedy slowly taking its toll on the men in front of the lens. And the layers, each individual plot line, grant the viewer a sort of episode by episode series of events which allow us to choose our favorites and be fans. I am fond of Robert Redford's charge across a part of the river, the line involving James Caan's character and the bit with Elliot Gould's 101st Airborne's rebuilding of the Son Bridge. They highlight beautifully what an ensemble piece is supposed to be, a blending.
My problem is that there is too much set dressing and not enough substance; during this viewing, either because of my fatigue after the events of this week at work or simply because of the length of this film, I fell asleep in the middle of the slump between hours one and two. And its not because a three hour film is incapable of keeping my attention (because it did for four consecutive Christmas Eve afternoons with films by Peter Jackson at the beginning of this decade,) I simply am able to better devote my attention during an epic-sized film when the pacing is quicker. A friend of mine is fond of perusing Jackson's epic trilogy by leaving out half of the plot, the one involving two hobbits and a parasite named Gollum. This film-watching tactic may be applicable here, as well. But in order to get the scope, I'm afraid I watch all of it all the time.
The opening narration breaks down the hope of the operation as "so many plans in so many wars." And, like some of the best laid plans, this one fails to the cost of thousands of lives. The desperation is keenly felt in each place, but none as severe as the razing of Arnham. Mr. Attenborough presents a very realistic level of cost of life, not glorifying nor criticizing war and war efforts, but simply presenting the facts, almost to the level of a documentarian. The film is cut and dry and simply honest; a bit long, but true to its nature. A fine example of a well-constructed film presentation.
****
In: Gene Hackman
Out: Edward Fox
Coming Soon: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Friday, December 03, 2010
Superman II
Before the destruction of Krypton, Genreal Zod (Terrence Stamp) and his followers were caught in an act of sedition and sentenced to imprisonment for eternity in the Phantom Zone, an alternate reality floating in space. When Superman (Christopher Reeve) detonates a terrorist group's hydrogen warhead in space far from earth, the shock-wave causing the portal to shatter releasing Zod who comes to Earth seeking revenge against Kal-El's family for condemning him to the Zone. Meanwhile, the romance between Clark Kent and Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) is heating up and Clark wants to reveal his secret to Lois, who is torn between her love of Superman and starting a life with Clark. And Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) has discovered The Fortress of Solitude.
Superheroes' lives hinge on choice. Every possible path is measured and weighed: whether to expose or hide the extraordinary abilities granted by chance or design, to walk away from the fight surrounding them, to fold themselves completely in the arms of the person they've chosen to love or to live in solitude and fight the fight alone. And these are the choices a warrior must make in order to succeed in the task placed before them. As a result, the life of most superheroes is littered with loss, as well as a gaping hole they can never fill, they can never have what they desire most: a normal life.
This film is a prime example of this motif. Here, Kal-El choses to be with Lois and choses a mortal life in order to be with her, giving up on his calling and being unable to fight the good fight when called out. And, so he has the choice to run and be normal with her or to give up his chance at a normal life, reopening the hole in his being and embracing the task placed before him. And it has been so for most of this archetype. For instance, Buffy (of Vampire Slaying fame) is unable to be a normal high school (and later college) girl: to be homecoming queen, go to parties and date the quarterback. She can't, because she's a hero with a great work to do, something she dies for twice. For Superman, Clark Kent and Kal-El, the defense of Earth is a great work which requires an even greater sacrifice which he willingly gives in the fact that he'll never settle down because he's needed to not look back and never to back down. And so that normal life superheroes desire is not possible and the hole is what drives them. and that sacrifice is what makes us love them so much.
****
IN: Terrence Stamp
OUT: Gene Hackman
Coming Soon: A Bridge Too Far
Superheroes' lives hinge on choice. Every possible path is measured and weighed: whether to expose or hide the extraordinary abilities granted by chance or design, to walk away from the fight surrounding them, to fold themselves completely in the arms of the person they've chosen to love or to live in solitude and fight the fight alone. And these are the choices a warrior must make in order to succeed in the task placed before them. As a result, the life of most superheroes is littered with loss, as well as a gaping hole they can never fill, they can never have what they desire most: a normal life.
This film is a prime example of this motif. Here, Kal-El choses to be with Lois and choses a mortal life in order to be with her, giving up on his calling and being unable to fight the good fight when called out. And, so he has the choice to run and be normal with her or to give up his chance at a normal life, reopening the hole in his being and embracing the task placed before him. And it has been so for most of this archetype. For instance, Buffy (of Vampire Slaying fame) is unable to be a normal high school (and later college) girl: to be homecoming queen, go to parties and date the quarterback. She can't, because she's a hero with a great work to do, something she dies for twice. For Superman, Clark Kent and Kal-El, the defense of Earth is a great work which requires an even greater sacrifice which he willingly gives in the fact that he'll never settle down because he's needed to not look back and never to back down. And so that normal life superheroes desire is not possible and the hole is what drives them. and that sacrifice is what makes us love them so much.
****
IN: Terrence Stamp
OUT: Gene Hackman
Coming Soon: A Bridge Too Far
Thursday, December 02, 2010
Superman
On a small red planet in the distant blackness of space, a family prepares for the destruction of the world they called home. And from the eruptions from the planet core, a small escape pod is launched against the orders of the high council carrying the son of Jor-El (Marlon Brando) of Krypton, Kal-El (Christopher Reeve,) toward Earth in order save him. Crash-landing in Smallville, Kansas, he is raised by a childless and compassionate couple as Clark Kent. Discovering as a young man when he is called by the power of a crystal Jor-El packed in the pod which contains the building materials for The Fortress of Solitude, he begins his education into his true nature. Returning to civilization, he takes a job at the Daily Planet, Metropolis' long-running newspaper. Partnered with tenacious reporter Lois Lane (Margot Kidder,) he discovers who he's meant to be as he saves lives and rights the injustices and terrors of criminal mastermind Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman.)
I must say this: they don't make superhero movies like this anymore. The closest anybody came recently was Iron Man a few years back. Audiences lack the patience involved with engaging with a genuinely great superhero backstory and first adventures. These classic films either tend to cause us to digest the story slowly and get to know the package intimately, including all of their charms or they bore us, we who are used to instant gratification in a world where the news is uploaded to the internet on the fly and we can send videos of our activities by text, email and post them to YouTube. Superman never bores me, it's charms, wit and the strange way it allows us to time-travel back to the polyester era. And I really don't mind the strange geek bravado because of its quality emotional sculpture. With John Williams' iconic score and Christopher Reeves' brilliant dual performance both as the stuttering Clark Kent and the suave and (without needing to say it, but I will anyways) heart-stoppingly gorgeous Superman, everything is presented with finesse and class. I can't say that for most of the superhero movies today.
And I must mention Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor, he's charming enough to soothe the edges of his malice. But he is nowhere close to my favorite for the role. I am quite attracted to Michael Rosenbaum's performance as Luthor on the CW's Smallville. His presentation is seductive, conflicted and brazenly blunt and as I am fond of saying: 49% good, 51% evil, the perfect villain. Hackman's Luthor fails to toe the line; his malice overcomes his charm making him less of an antagonist and more akin to furniture for the plot. The real antagonist is Jor-El's principle of meddling with history, because there is a finite amount of time for Kal-El to save the girl and the rest of the lives in jeopardy. And, while I understand the romantic reason for saving the girl, despite breaking that principle, the violation also makes Superman a bit soiled in the annals of superheroes, as the persona of the hero must remain spotless. But it also makes him one of us: human in every way, with all our flaws. Therefore, it does make him relatable to the audience, allowing us to love him for all he is, as is required for an enduring devotion to any character.
This film is in my top twenty favorite films of all time, if for nothing more than it makes me fall in love, giving me hope that mankind is better than the news presents. That we have a "capacity for good" and we're worth the fight for justice and truth. And this film touches that spot in my soul that makes me wish that superheroes existed during my lifetime and that, by some lucky coincidence, one of my childhood daydreams became true and I am one of them.
****
Coming Soon: Superman II
I must say this: they don't make superhero movies like this anymore. The closest anybody came recently was Iron Man a few years back. Audiences lack the patience involved with engaging with a genuinely great superhero backstory and first adventures. These classic films either tend to cause us to digest the story slowly and get to know the package intimately, including all of their charms or they bore us, we who are used to instant gratification in a world where the news is uploaded to the internet on the fly and we can send videos of our activities by text, email and post them to YouTube. Superman never bores me, it's charms, wit and the strange way it allows us to time-travel back to the polyester era. And I really don't mind the strange geek bravado because of its quality emotional sculpture. With John Williams' iconic score and Christopher Reeves' brilliant dual performance both as the stuttering Clark Kent and the suave and (without needing to say it, but I will anyways) heart-stoppingly gorgeous Superman, everything is presented with finesse and class. I can't say that for most of the superhero movies today.
And I must mention Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor, he's charming enough to soothe the edges of his malice. But he is nowhere close to my favorite for the role. I am quite attracted to Michael Rosenbaum's performance as Luthor on the CW's Smallville. His presentation is seductive, conflicted and brazenly blunt and as I am fond of saying: 49% good, 51% evil, the perfect villain. Hackman's Luthor fails to toe the line; his malice overcomes his charm making him less of an antagonist and more akin to furniture for the plot. The real antagonist is Jor-El's principle of meddling with history, because there is a finite amount of time for Kal-El to save the girl and the rest of the lives in jeopardy. And, while I understand the romantic reason for saving the girl, despite breaking that principle, the violation also makes Superman a bit soiled in the annals of superheroes, as the persona of the hero must remain spotless. But it also makes him one of us: human in every way, with all our flaws. Therefore, it does make him relatable to the audience, allowing us to love him for all he is, as is required for an enduring devotion to any character.
This film is in my top twenty favorite films of all time, if for nothing more than it makes me fall in love, giving me hope that mankind is better than the news presents. That we have a "capacity for good" and we're worth the fight for justice and truth. And this film touches that spot in my soul that makes me wish that superheroes existed during my lifetime and that, by some lucky coincidence, one of my childhood daydreams became true and I am one of them.
****
Coming Soon: Superman II
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Daredevil and Elektra
Matt Murdock (Ben Affleck,) blind since childhood has fought for justice all his life, inspired by his accident and his father's death at the hands of a mafia enforcer. During the day, he's a talented lawyer, using his blindness to sense the truth of those he questions. During the night, he's something else: a dark avenger who cleans up the streets when the court fails. His blindness leaves him stronger in his other senses, and he's almost able to see again. And now, someone wants him dead, the new power in town, Wilson Fisk aka The Kingpin (Michael Clarke Duncan) who is in the middle of cleaning house. And Matt's finally met someone, Elektra Nachios (Jennifer Garner,) a wealthy socialite who's father has ties to The Kingpin. When Daredevil fails to protect her father from the assassin Bullseye (Colin Farrell,) Elektra goes hunting and ends up in deeper that she expected, fighting for revenge and for her life. But will Daredevil be able to save her from herself and from Bullseye?
The expectations of comic book movies today is that they be smooth, sensual and stylistic. Although recently, with the new Batman series, more visceral and harder styles are "the norm." However, for a superhero who's weapon is his senses; smooth, sensual and stylistic is precisely what is called for in this film. Emotional is also something that describes it, too. As with most superheroes, Daredevil has sorrow in his heart painted with rage, passion and righteousness. But it's the sorrow that is the soul of Daredevil and his alter ego, Matt Murdock, because his love is deeper than that of some of the others, both for his father and for Elektra; so when he loses them both his pain is what triggers true justice and he joins the few superheroes who leave their antagonists alive in the denouement.
And I've said, sorrow drives this one, just as it did The Punisher. This is highlighted by solid soulful performances by Ben Affleck (who usually fails to stir me, but succeeds this time) and Jennifer Garner with support from wonderfully chosen music, including breakout (at the time) Indie Band Evanescence, who's track "Bring Me to Life" personifies both Elektra's sorrow and the danger she's in, as well as a call to arms for Daredevil. The attention given their love story as well as Daredevil's back story and his devotion to his father and to the cause of justice tilts the balance away from the darkness and malice that is brought brilliantly by Farrell and Michael Clarke Duncan. Not an opera like The Punisher, but well done regardless.
However, it's not over for our love interest, Elektra...
Revived straight after her encounter with Bullseye by the head of an ancient warrior order (Terrence Stamp) and trained to sense the future, Elektra is now a contract killer escaping her past and filled with rage. She is contracted to find and kill the warrior capable of tipping the balance between the fight of good versus evil. When she finally sees her target, she notices something about her and decides to save her instead of killing her. Meanwhile, the army of darkness calling itself The Hand, is searching for this warrior and has connections to Elektra's past.
Whereas the emotional journey of the last film saturates and drives the plot forward, there's nothing here but an episode by episode spectacular piece of eye candy. The story is hectic and badly constructed, like the writers wanted to piece together a collection of fan favorite episodes and characters. I don't feel for any of the characters, including the little girl. In fact, the little girl drags the film and interferes with the emotional connection, as there really is nothing sympathetic about her. I cannot connect with Elektra's character as well as I did in Daredevil either, the beauty in her character and in her performance simply is missing.
Sequels and spin-offs are difficult to pull off. This one struggles greatly, as its parent film was a knockout. Spin-offs have a harder time succeeding because their parent's success was a fresh, breakthrough piece. Daredevil fits this bill because all the pieces fit so beautifully. Elektra lacks sufficient development, freshness and care, displaying ill-deserved bravado and failing to inspire.
***
IN: Michael Clarke Duncan
OUT: Terrence Stamp
Coming Soon: Superman/Superman II
The expectations of comic book movies today is that they be smooth, sensual and stylistic. Although recently, with the new Batman series, more visceral and harder styles are "the norm." However, for a superhero who's weapon is his senses; smooth, sensual and stylistic is precisely what is called for in this film. Emotional is also something that describes it, too. As with most superheroes, Daredevil has sorrow in his heart painted with rage, passion and righteousness. But it's the sorrow that is the soul of Daredevil and his alter ego, Matt Murdock, because his love is deeper than that of some of the others, both for his father and for Elektra; so when he loses them both his pain is what triggers true justice and he joins the few superheroes who leave their antagonists alive in the denouement.
And I've said, sorrow drives this one, just as it did The Punisher. This is highlighted by solid soulful performances by Ben Affleck (who usually fails to stir me, but succeeds this time) and Jennifer Garner with support from wonderfully chosen music, including breakout (at the time) Indie Band Evanescence, who's track "Bring Me to Life" personifies both Elektra's sorrow and the danger she's in, as well as a call to arms for Daredevil. The attention given their love story as well as Daredevil's back story and his devotion to his father and to the cause of justice tilts the balance away from the darkness and malice that is brought brilliantly by Farrell and Michael Clarke Duncan. Not an opera like The Punisher, but well done regardless.
However, it's not over for our love interest, Elektra...
Revived straight after her encounter with Bullseye by the head of an ancient warrior order (Terrence Stamp) and trained to sense the future, Elektra is now a contract killer escaping her past and filled with rage. She is contracted to find and kill the warrior capable of tipping the balance between the fight of good versus evil. When she finally sees her target, she notices something about her and decides to save her instead of killing her. Meanwhile, the army of darkness calling itself The Hand, is searching for this warrior and has connections to Elektra's past.
Whereas the emotional journey of the last film saturates and drives the plot forward, there's nothing here but an episode by episode spectacular piece of eye candy. The story is hectic and badly constructed, like the writers wanted to piece together a collection of fan favorite episodes and characters. I don't feel for any of the characters, including the little girl. In fact, the little girl drags the film and interferes with the emotional connection, as there really is nothing sympathetic about her. I cannot connect with Elektra's character as well as I did in Daredevil either, the beauty in her character and in her performance simply is missing.
Sequels and spin-offs are difficult to pull off. This one struggles greatly, as its parent film was a knockout. Spin-offs have a harder time succeeding because their parent's success was a fresh, breakthrough piece. Daredevil fits this bill because all the pieces fit so beautifully. Elektra lacks sufficient development, freshness and care, displaying ill-deserved bravado and failing to inspire.
***
IN: Michael Clarke Duncan
OUT: Terrence Stamp
Coming Soon: Superman/Superman II
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Planet of the Apes
In a remote space station, researchers are developing genetically enhanced chimps, under the direction of Captain Leo Davidson (Mark Wahlberg.) When an electromagnetic storm approaches and his chimp goes missing, Captain Davidson launches an unauthorized flight to rescue him and get the readings they need for their studies of the storm. Caught in the storm, he spins out of control and crash-lands on the nearby planet which is inhabited by talking primates who've enslave the humans they hunt. Befriending his new master's daughter, a Human-Rights Activist Named Ari (Helena Bonham Carter), and making an enemy of General Thade (Tim Roth) who intends to marry her, he tries to find a way home and reluctantly becomes the hope for humanity's freedom from the apes.
Like the original, the social commentary on human and animal rights exists here. As does the macro-evolution angle. The original spoke more on the rights of different races co-existing as equals and the science fiction angle on an alternate universe where the evolutionary ladder was climbed by something else. Whereas this one speaks more on the animal rights angle, leaving the prejudicial angle to the side. Ari speaks about the mistreatment of humans lowering the dignity of themselves and demeaning the level of respect for themselves, an argument made toward the treatment of animals and people considered animals. This is a theme well-visited in science-fiction and fantasy. And it is spoken very clearly.
The themes are spoken clearly, but the story is a bit commonplace, enhanced by brilliant makeup, beautiful costumes and rich special effects. The acting is above average with some of the best names in cinema today: Helena Bonham Carter, Paul Giamatti, Mark Wahlberg, Michael Clarke Duncan and an extremely menacing Tim Roth. The stunts are well done, as well, with the ape motions producing a very authentic look. I am reminded very clearly of the movie Congo and its infamous monkey costumes. Here, the actor becomes part of their costume instead of the other way around. The prosthetic work is superb, allowing for individual characteristics to show through on the hero characters of the humans underneath.
Of all the love triangles (or shall I say squares, as there are three angles which are unrequited) in cinema, this film has the most absurd. Firstly, we've got Davidson, who's loved by the human he's caught with as well as Ari. Then we've got Thade, who loves Ari without any hope of being loved back. It really is ridiculous. And this major subplot cripples any hope of credibility. And it is truly sad, for Tim Burton is a quality director and all of the performers are all top notch, too. Remakes are tricky creatures; sometimes the material cannot be duplicated or transposed. In this case, the freshness wore off with Charlton Heston's prime days. And Planet of the Apes should remain a classic.
****
IN: Mark Wahlberg
OUT: Michael Clarke Duncan
Coming Soon: Daredevil/Elektra
Like the original, the social commentary on human and animal rights exists here. As does the macro-evolution angle. The original spoke more on the rights of different races co-existing as equals and the science fiction angle on an alternate universe where the evolutionary ladder was climbed by something else. Whereas this one speaks more on the animal rights angle, leaving the prejudicial angle to the side. Ari speaks about the mistreatment of humans lowering the dignity of themselves and demeaning the level of respect for themselves, an argument made toward the treatment of animals and people considered animals. This is a theme well-visited in science-fiction and fantasy. And it is spoken very clearly.
The themes are spoken clearly, but the story is a bit commonplace, enhanced by brilliant makeup, beautiful costumes and rich special effects. The acting is above average with some of the best names in cinema today: Helena Bonham Carter, Paul Giamatti, Mark Wahlberg, Michael Clarke Duncan and an extremely menacing Tim Roth. The stunts are well done, as well, with the ape motions producing a very authentic look. I am reminded very clearly of the movie Congo and its infamous monkey costumes. Here, the actor becomes part of their costume instead of the other way around. The prosthetic work is superb, allowing for individual characteristics to show through on the hero characters of the humans underneath.
Of all the love triangles (or shall I say squares, as there are three angles which are unrequited) in cinema, this film has the most absurd. Firstly, we've got Davidson, who's loved by the human he's caught with as well as Ari. Then we've got Thade, who loves Ari without any hope of being loved back. It really is ridiculous. And this major subplot cripples any hope of credibility. And it is truly sad, for Tim Burton is a quality director and all of the performers are all top notch, too. Remakes are tricky creatures; sometimes the material cannot be duplicated or transposed. In this case, the freshness wore off with Charlton Heston's prime days. And Planet of the Apes should remain a classic.
****
IN: Mark Wahlberg
OUT: Michael Clarke Duncan
Coming Soon: Daredevil/Elektra
Friday, November 12, 2010
The Italian Job
After a successful heist of millions in gold bars in Venice, Steve (Edward Norton) betrays his team, kills his mentor, John Bridger (Donald Sutherland,) leaves the rest for dead in the glacial waters on the Italian border, and disappears with the gold. One year later, having survived, Steve is found in Los Angeles; and the others are looking for some payback. Teaming up with Stella (Charlize Theron), Bridger's daughter, Charlie (Mark Whalberg,) Lyle (Seth Green,) Left Ear (Mos Def) and Handsome Rob (Jason Statham) plan on stealing the remaining gold left from the heist, thus avenging John's death and finally earning their share from the original job. The only problem: Steve knows all of them and what they'll do.
Format is a major choice to make in screenwriting. Where do the breaks come in? Should there be a time format? Is there a formula I should be following? Is there a simple way for me to tell my story? All of these are great questions to ask when formulating a plot in general.
In his essay "Poetics," Aristotle postulated that a plot needs only three simple things: a beginning, a middle and an end. And whereas every plot has these things, some need a road map. And one of these ways is the 30-60-30 configuration combined with the Three Act map. This structure follows that Act One concludes after thirty minutes of play, Act Two is sixty minutes in duration and the final, Act Three, lasts no longer than thirty minutes after the last plot point. The Italian Job is a near text-book model of this plot structure.
In this model, plot point one (the precursor to the change in action between Act One and Two and concurrently before the switch to Act Three) occurs a few minutes, give or take, around 25 minutes into the plot. Plot Point One is the pitch to Stella with her decision to join the crew is the switch to Act Two. That switch occurs within five minutes of the half-hour mark. Act Two, using this structure is typically twice as long as Act One, in this case, it should be sixty to seventy minutes in length. Act Two contains the body of the film, the small cause and effect episodes that build character and enhance the plot, and, in the case of a heist movie like this one, it details the preparations for the main job.
A halfway point changes the direction of the action and puts it into a downhill motion driving it toward the end. Three events create the bridge that propels this film over the hill and down toward the second plot point. First, Steve kills his fence. Then, when the team goes to pull the job, they discover a party at the neighbors, forcing Stella to keep her date with Steve. Steve's already in a heightened state of suspicion, and he figures out who she is, tipping the others to reveal themselves. This occurs ten minutes after the hour mark, like clockwork.
Plot point two includes the "call to action," a leap of faith the heroes take which will change their fortunes entirely. And for this film, it takes place when the team hears that Steve is moving his gold and begin the setup for the final takedown. This clocks in around twenty minutes after the hour mark. The Third Act is where the payoff occurs, all plot elements are tied up tight, no loose ends remain and the release is done. In this case, a comedic release: the good guys get paid and the bad guys are served their comeuppance. Everything is resolved in the end of the Third Act, which concludes anytime between one hour and forty-five minutes to two hours in the 30-60-30 format.
The third act also contains the second half of a set of pinches, insignificant motifs that are introduced in Act One and bear significance in Act Three. For this, it's the fact that Stella's father always cracked all of his safes by touch and she's forced to crack Steve's safe by touch in the end. She cracks it minutes before the famous Mini Cooper chase scene through the LA River toward the conclusion at the railway yard.
It's text-book accurate. Following a proven plot structure is not a lame action to take; usually, a plot structure fosters a comfortable atmosphere for the audience allowing us to easily engage with the story unfolding on screen. We're still pulling for Charlie and his team, in the end, and we surely hope that Steve has his gold stolen. We don't care that something has a formula, but as writers, it does help. As for The Italian Job, it helps writers to see that plot structures do work, because this is a tightly written film and it follows the format to the letter.
****
IN; Charlize Theron
OUT: Mark Whalberg
Coming Soon: Planet of the Apes
Format is a major choice to make in screenwriting. Where do the breaks come in? Should there be a time format? Is there a formula I should be following? Is there a simple way for me to tell my story? All of these are great questions to ask when formulating a plot in general.
In his essay "Poetics," Aristotle postulated that a plot needs only three simple things: a beginning, a middle and an end. And whereas every plot has these things, some need a road map. And one of these ways is the 30-60-30 configuration combined with the Three Act map. This structure follows that Act One concludes after thirty minutes of play, Act Two is sixty minutes in duration and the final, Act Three, lasts no longer than thirty minutes after the last plot point. The Italian Job is a near text-book model of this plot structure.
In this model, plot point one (the precursor to the change in action between Act One and Two and concurrently before the switch to Act Three) occurs a few minutes, give or take, around 25 minutes into the plot. Plot Point One is the pitch to Stella with her decision to join the crew is the switch to Act Two. That switch occurs within five minutes of the half-hour mark. Act Two, using this structure is typically twice as long as Act One, in this case, it should be sixty to seventy minutes in length. Act Two contains the body of the film, the small cause and effect episodes that build character and enhance the plot, and, in the case of a heist movie like this one, it details the preparations for the main job.
A halfway point changes the direction of the action and puts it into a downhill motion driving it toward the end. Three events create the bridge that propels this film over the hill and down toward the second plot point. First, Steve kills his fence. Then, when the team goes to pull the job, they discover a party at the neighbors, forcing Stella to keep her date with Steve. Steve's already in a heightened state of suspicion, and he figures out who she is, tipping the others to reveal themselves. This occurs ten minutes after the hour mark, like clockwork.
Plot point two includes the "call to action," a leap of faith the heroes take which will change their fortunes entirely. And for this film, it takes place when the team hears that Steve is moving his gold and begin the setup for the final takedown. This clocks in around twenty minutes after the hour mark. The Third Act is where the payoff occurs, all plot elements are tied up tight, no loose ends remain and the release is done. In this case, a comedic release: the good guys get paid and the bad guys are served their comeuppance. Everything is resolved in the end of the Third Act, which concludes anytime between one hour and forty-five minutes to two hours in the 30-60-30 format.
The third act also contains the second half of a set of pinches, insignificant motifs that are introduced in Act One and bear significance in Act Three. For this, it's the fact that Stella's father always cracked all of his safes by touch and she's forced to crack Steve's safe by touch in the end. She cracks it minutes before the famous Mini Cooper chase scene through the LA River toward the conclusion at the railway yard.
It's text-book accurate. Following a proven plot structure is not a lame action to take; usually, a plot structure fosters a comfortable atmosphere for the audience allowing us to easily engage with the story unfolding on screen. We're still pulling for Charlie and his team, in the end, and we surely hope that Steve has his gold stolen. We don't care that something has a formula, but as writers, it does help. As for The Italian Job, it helps writers to see that plot structures do work, because this is a tightly written film and it follows the format to the letter.
****
IN; Charlize Theron
OUT: Mark Whalberg
Coming Soon: Planet of the Apes
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Aeon Flux
The world has been nearly annihilated by a virus in the year 2011. A cure is created by Trevor Goodchild (Marton Csokas) and the five million survivors are confined to one of the last virus-free zones, a city called Bregna. The Goodchild dynasty rules for 400 years, and, in the year 2415 a resistance fights against the government's control; they're called Monicans. Their top operative, Aeon Flux (Charlize Theron) fights in the name of the sorrows of centuries past and for the disappeared, those taken by the government who cannot be found again and also in revenge for the murder of her sister, Una. Meanwhile, a change is coming for the Goodchild regime. Trevor's brother, Oren (Johnny Lee Miller,) has been planing to overthrow his brother's leadership. But something strange lies in the history of Bregna; and it touches everyone, but especially Trevor and Aeon...and it complicates everyone's carefully laid plans.
As any dystopian story, a certain coldness permeates the tone of Aeon Flux. From the color scheme to the cast, a metallic child resonates through each layer of production. Marton Csokas, Johnny Lee Miller and Charlize Theron are perfectly cast as their performances are as restrained as their characters need to be. And they each register a different level of cold. Csokas' Trevor is calm, soothing, like swimming in a cool pool of water; massaging and therapeutic. It's quite relaxing to watch, quite different to his usual roles which are full of acid and malice, in this he's compassionate, loving and seductive. Miller's Oren, like Csokas, shows a different side for him, too. He's usually the charismatic, cute boy that makes all of us girls swoon. Here, he's brazen, malicious and hot in a dull, destructive way. He's willing to damage whomever and whatever he can to achieve his objectives. And Theron: she's sharp, sleek and shaped like a sword; a warrior to the core, trained only for her mission and unwilling to feel anything else.
As far as the story goes, it knit quite loosely. Between the action sequences (which are top notch, by the way,) the story looses a bit of its steam and becomes very cliche, supported only by the production design, and we're left only with a few interesting visuals. The film is extremely lacking in emotion, keeping us at arm's length with the characters we're to be connecting with; this is not a quality good stories are supposed to have. The affection I have for this film is primarily nostalgic, as it reminds me of my brothers (as we watched the animated series this movie's based upon,) and I thoroughly enjoy the cast.
****
In: Pete Postlethwaite
Out: Charlize Theron
Coming Soon: The Italian Job
As any dystopian story, a certain coldness permeates the tone of Aeon Flux. From the color scheme to the cast, a metallic child resonates through each layer of production. Marton Csokas, Johnny Lee Miller and Charlize Theron are perfectly cast as their performances are as restrained as their characters need to be. And they each register a different level of cold. Csokas' Trevor is calm, soothing, like swimming in a cool pool of water; massaging and therapeutic. It's quite relaxing to watch, quite different to his usual roles which are full of acid and malice, in this he's compassionate, loving and seductive. Miller's Oren, like Csokas, shows a different side for him, too. He's usually the charismatic, cute boy that makes all of us girls swoon. Here, he's brazen, malicious and hot in a dull, destructive way. He's willing to damage whomever and whatever he can to achieve his objectives. And Theron: she's sharp, sleek and shaped like a sword; a warrior to the core, trained only for her mission and unwilling to feel anything else.
As far as the story goes, it knit quite loosely. Between the action sequences (which are top notch, by the way,) the story looses a bit of its steam and becomes very cliche, supported only by the production design, and we're left only with a few interesting visuals. The film is extremely lacking in emotion, keeping us at arm's length with the characters we're to be connecting with; this is not a quality good stories are supposed to have. The affection I have for this film is primarily nostalgic, as it reminds me of my brothers (as we watched the animated series this movie's based upon,) and I thoroughly enjoy the cast.
****
In: Pete Postlethwaite
Out: Charlize Theron
Coming Soon: The Italian Job
Friday, November 05, 2010
The Serpent's Kiss
Bored aristocrats hire landscaper Mineer Chrome (Ewan McGregor) to remodel the back acres of Thomas Smithers (Pete Postlethwaite) and his wife Juliana's (Greta Scacchi) estate. But not everything is what it seems, for Mineer is not who he says he is and the business is not just business, the whole event plays from an angle. Along the way, Chrome forgets his place as he is enchanted by his patrons' enchanting daughter.
This film is an interesting study in character. Ewan McGregor's Mineer Chrome is constructed as a bit of a dreamer and a pure artist, but a compassionate soul who cares for everyone, especially Smithers' daughter, Thea (Carmen Chaplin.) It is for her that he upsets the scheme and throws down the whole house of cards, and he teases everyone just for her. Mineer's con-man handler Fitzmaurice (Richard E Grant) is a perfect weasel, performed brilliantly by Grant. He is human in every way, choosing the darker side of the human soul, full of malice and jealousy willing to harm anyone in the way of his mark. I am rather fond of Smithers' daughter, Thea. She's brimming with wit, feeling and wisdom and a certain wicked sense of humor. She's performed with poise and silence pristinely and gracefully.
As far as the writing goes, I'm not sure what the story is really saying. Usually I'm very keen on this, however, this one is elusive. The story has got everything it needs: credible characters, story arch, genre, and structure (a beginning, middle and an end.) But I'm not entirely sure exactly what's going on. In fact I watched it with a friend and she was clueless, too. But there is some attraction to me, perhaps because it is elusive and highly artistic. I also enjoy the overbearing sadness throughout the story, as destruction is rampant. As to the ending, we're left with vindication and hope, a comic ending in the classic sense of the phrase.
An acquired taste, true; but thought-provoking, if attention is maintained and the soul is engaged.
****
IN: Ewan McGregor
OUT: Pete Postlewaite
Coming Soon: Aeon Flux
This film is an interesting study in character. Ewan McGregor's Mineer Chrome is constructed as a bit of a dreamer and a pure artist, but a compassionate soul who cares for everyone, especially Smithers' daughter, Thea (Carmen Chaplin.) It is for her that he upsets the scheme and throws down the whole house of cards, and he teases everyone just for her. Mineer's con-man handler Fitzmaurice (Richard E Grant) is a perfect weasel, performed brilliantly by Grant. He is human in every way, choosing the darker side of the human soul, full of malice and jealousy willing to harm anyone in the way of his mark. I am rather fond of Smithers' daughter, Thea. She's brimming with wit, feeling and wisdom and a certain wicked sense of humor. She's performed with poise and silence pristinely and gracefully.
As far as the writing goes, I'm not sure what the story is really saying. Usually I'm very keen on this, however, this one is elusive. The story has got everything it needs: credible characters, story arch, genre, and structure (a beginning, middle and an end.) But I'm not entirely sure exactly what's going on. In fact I watched it with a friend and she was clueless, too. But there is some attraction to me, perhaps because it is elusive and highly artistic. I also enjoy the overbearing sadness throughout the story, as destruction is rampant. As to the ending, we're left with vindication and hope, a comic ending in the classic sense of the phrase.
An acquired taste, true; but thought-provoking, if attention is maintained and the soul is engaged.
****
IN: Ewan McGregor
OUT: Pete Postlewaite
Coming Soon: Aeon Flux
Thursday, November 04, 2010
Moulin Rouge
Heart-broken Bohemian bard Christian (Ewan McGregor) tells the tale of his first love, Satine (Nicole Kidman) a Courtesan at The Moulin Rouge, an exotic dancing paradise in the center of the slums of Paris. Passing himself off as a successful playwright, he is commissioned to write a play for the Moulin Rouge's investor, The Duke (Richard Roxburgh) who also falls for Satine and won't share her with anyone. As they fall for each other, tragic secrets are kept, betrayals rage and someone will never leave The Moulin Rouge alive.
Boldness readily describes this rock opera. The colors are rich and deeply emotional, reflecting the passion that drives the plot and the tragedy playing within. The musical arrangements, both borrowed and new, swell and drive breaking through the resistance of knowing the fact of fiction, seducing us to fall in love and breaking the dam built in the corner of the eyes, gutting us, leaving us heartbroken and destroyed. This film, every time it passes through a screen, renders me helpless as the story buries itself inside my heart. It's comprehensive in brilliance, reflecting a perfectly executed plot.
And it's not all tragic. There are brilliantly funny parts as well. Zidler and the Duke's rendition of Madonna's "Like a Virgin" is absolutely rib-splitting, as well as horrific in the right way. As is Christian's insinuation with the Bohemians, in rehearsal of a scene reminiscent of The Sound of Music's "The Sound of Music."
I remember my first time seeing this, a movie night with my college roommates. It was their choice, and I, the "chick-flick hater" was not willing to sit through another mushy romance film. And I was wrong, so wrong. I fell for Moulin Rouge, heart and soul. Ewan McGregor's Christian's "Your Song" showed up the original, raising goosebumps and this film became part of the shortlist that are my favorites. And this time through serves as a reminder of why it belongs there.
I adore the cast, particularly Ewan McGregor and suprisingly, Nicole Kidman. Their love story is brilliantly portrayed, she's perfectly smoking and tragic and he's so beautifully hopeful, faithful and love-able allowing for the perfect fall when she betrays him. Jim Broadbent's a virtuoso, perfectly duplicitous, comical and paternal, as Zidler truly loves Satine as a teacher and father figure. And Richard Roxburgh's Duke is wonderfully slimy.
The musical is a fickle genre, either it works well or doesn't at all. And this one, with its many song references, both in dialogue and within the musical numbers is stunning. Most memorable is a tango version of Sting's "Roxanne" with the only sound effect being the steps of the dance. It brilliantly montages with the Duke's seduction as Satine attempts to save everyone from destruction by going to him. Also notable is the "love medly" atop the elephant. I am nearly always touched by the tragic ending, moved to tears (something that is not easy to do) and leave with a profound sadness that causes me to sigh, expelling the deep emotion within that has surfaced as a result of this film's having its way with me.
Like I said, boldness; brazen boldness, pulling no punches, consuming all with love, tragedy and music. And, despite my proclivities, I always fall in love with this film; it will remain one of my favorites for life.
****
In: Jim Broadbent
Out: Ewan McGregor
Coming Soon: The Serpent's Kiss
Boldness readily describes this rock opera. The colors are rich and deeply emotional, reflecting the passion that drives the plot and the tragedy playing within. The musical arrangements, both borrowed and new, swell and drive breaking through the resistance of knowing the fact of fiction, seducing us to fall in love and breaking the dam built in the corner of the eyes, gutting us, leaving us heartbroken and destroyed. This film, every time it passes through a screen, renders me helpless as the story buries itself inside my heart. It's comprehensive in brilliance, reflecting a perfectly executed plot.
And it's not all tragic. There are brilliantly funny parts as well. Zidler and the Duke's rendition of Madonna's "Like a Virgin" is absolutely rib-splitting, as well as horrific in the right way. As is Christian's insinuation with the Bohemians, in rehearsal of a scene reminiscent of The Sound of Music's "The Sound of Music."
I remember my first time seeing this, a movie night with my college roommates. It was their choice, and I, the "chick-flick hater" was not willing to sit through another mushy romance film. And I was wrong, so wrong. I fell for Moulin Rouge, heart and soul. Ewan McGregor's Christian's "Your Song" showed up the original, raising goosebumps and this film became part of the shortlist that are my favorites. And this time through serves as a reminder of why it belongs there.
I adore the cast, particularly Ewan McGregor and suprisingly, Nicole Kidman. Their love story is brilliantly portrayed, she's perfectly smoking and tragic and he's so beautifully hopeful, faithful and love-able allowing for the perfect fall when she betrays him. Jim Broadbent's a virtuoso, perfectly duplicitous, comical and paternal, as Zidler truly loves Satine as a teacher and father figure. And Richard Roxburgh's Duke is wonderfully slimy.
The musical is a fickle genre, either it works well or doesn't at all. And this one, with its many song references, both in dialogue and within the musical numbers is stunning. Most memorable is a tango version of Sting's "Roxanne" with the only sound effect being the steps of the dance. It brilliantly montages with the Duke's seduction as Satine attempts to save everyone from destruction by going to him. Also notable is the "love medly" atop the elephant. I am nearly always touched by the tragic ending, moved to tears (something that is not easy to do) and leave with a profound sadness that causes me to sigh, expelling the deep emotion within that has surfaced as a result of this film's having its way with me.
Like I said, boldness; brazen boldness, pulling no punches, consuming all with love, tragedy and music. And, despite my proclivities, I always fall in love with this film; it will remain one of my favorites for life.
****
In: Jim Broadbent
Out: Ewan McGregor
Coming Soon: The Serpent's Kiss
Friday, October 29, 2010
Hot Fuzz
After a record-breaking arrest record, Police Constable Nicolas Angel (Simon Pegg) is promoted by his superiors (Bill Nighy, Martin Freeman) to Sergeant of a tiny precinct in the country town of Sanford-Glousteshire, a model village that mysteriously is free of crime. Heading up the station is Frank Butterman (Jim Broadbent) assisted by the rest of the officers including his son, Danny (Nick Frost,) with whom Angel forms a friendship. Shortly after his arrival, Sanford experiences a series of grisly murders which the rest of the police force writes off as simple accidents. What he eventually uncovers turns out to be something truly odd and even a bit disturbing.
Hot Fuzz is an adrenaline rush even in the calming moments. The quick edits and close angles bring the film's pacing into close-quarters, along with well-used jump-cuts and appropriate scoring appropriately cause the adrenaline to flow generously and efficiently. Every action movie convention is used, including the impassioned speech by our hero to the bad guys before the big showdown. It's an excellent combination leading to a well-written and heartfelt film. And I love the British Comedy!!
This is one of my favorite films; I could seriously watch it over and over and over again, and still have room for one more time after that. The construction of action, drama, comedy and thrills builds a brilliant piece of cinema. The casting with Pegg, Frost, Broadbent and Timothy Dalton rounds out a quality performance of all involved. The sets are brilliant, together with beautiful color and great costumes, rounding out a beautiful package.
I particularly enjoy the monologuing, particularly Simon Pegg's Angel's. He is the perfect balance of sensitivity and ice-cold calm with a bit of in-your-face swagger. He's got that stiff, British charm I love so much which is another reason why this is one of my favorites. He's cast perfectly against Broadbent's disturbing geniality and Dalton's wickedly hilarious menace. Also well-done is Nick Frost as the comic relief and warmth of the piece. Also memorable are spot-performances by Bill Nighy and Martin Freeman.
Just brilliant...enough said!!
****
IN: Martin Freeman
OUT: Jim Broadbent
Coming Soon: Moulin Rouge
Hot Fuzz is an adrenaline rush even in the calming moments. The quick edits and close angles bring the film's pacing into close-quarters, along with well-used jump-cuts and appropriate scoring appropriately cause the adrenaline to flow generously and efficiently. Every action movie convention is used, including the impassioned speech by our hero to the bad guys before the big showdown. It's an excellent combination leading to a well-written and heartfelt film. And I love the British Comedy!!
This is one of my favorite films; I could seriously watch it over and over and over again, and still have room for one more time after that. The construction of action, drama, comedy and thrills builds a brilliant piece of cinema. The casting with Pegg, Frost, Broadbent and Timothy Dalton rounds out a quality performance of all involved. The sets are brilliant, together with beautiful color and great costumes, rounding out a beautiful package.
I particularly enjoy the monologuing, particularly Simon Pegg's Angel's. He is the perfect balance of sensitivity and ice-cold calm with a bit of in-your-face swagger. He's got that stiff, British charm I love so much which is another reason why this is one of my favorites. He's cast perfectly against Broadbent's disturbing geniality and Dalton's wickedly hilarious menace. Also well-done is Nick Frost as the comic relief and warmth of the piece. Also memorable are spot-performances by Bill Nighy and Martin Freeman.
Just brilliant...enough said!!
****
IN: Martin Freeman
OUT: Jim Broadbent
Coming Soon: Moulin Rouge
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
The earth is destroyed in favor of a hyperspace express rout, an intergalactic bypass; but before it is, Arthur Dent (Martin Freeman) is extracted by interplanetary hitch hiker Ford (Mos Def) who's repaying him for saving his life while he was introducing himself to an SUV. They team up with Galactic President Zaphod Beeblebrox (Sam Rockwell) and fellow earth survivor, Tricia McMillan (Zooey Deschenel,) whom Arthur Dent failed to pick-up at a party who left with Zaphod instead. Their many adventures lead them on a quest to discover the ultimate question, of which the answer is 42.
Intelligent and also ludicrous humor is the point of this entire piece. It is completely ridiculous, from the improbability drive to "don't forget your towel" (the reason of which is never explained,) Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy presents an intelligent banter of different explanations for metaphysical inquisitions and contemplations asked by philosophers and scientists for the history of the world. It contemplates everything from the creation of the universe to who we are and the meaning of love and life. And instead of being pompously serious, the tone is playful and snarky keeping all on their toes and paying attention.
I love this film because of all the science fiction conventions it flouts. Instead of a complex scientific explanation for how translations work, Ford pulls out a cartoony looking fish in a jar from his pocket and sticks the fish into Arthur Dent's ear as The Guide, a computer-like book carried always by Ford, explains that the fish is eating the language fed into Arthur's brain and excretes sonic waves that allow him to understand what is being said. Ridiculous, I know, but much more fun!! Because of this, the film's an acquired taste and perhaps not for everyone.
Quality performances by Alan Rickman, Stephen Fry and Helen Mirren, who leant their voices for Marvin the Robot, The Guide and Deep Thought, respectively. I also enjoyed the spot performances by Bill Nighy and John Malkovich, each putting their entire efforts into their short time on screen. The trio of Martin Freeman, Mos Def and Sam Rockwell were a perfect match for each other. A great cast, which is why I chose to see it in the theater in the first place.
Not necessarily a "must-see," but fun nonetheless.
****
IN: John Malkovich
OUT: Martin Freeman
Coming Soon: Hot Fuzz
Intelligent and also ludicrous humor is the point of this entire piece. It is completely ridiculous, from the improbability drive to "don't forget your towel" (the reason of which is never explained,) Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy presents an intelligent banter of different explanations for metaphysical inquisitions and contemplations asked by philosophers and scientists for the history of the world. It contemplates everything from the creation of the universe to who we are and the meaning of love and life. And instead of being pompously serious, the tone is playful and snarky keeping all on their toes and paying attention.
I love this film because of all the science fiction conventions it flouts. Instead of a complex scientific explanation for how translations work, Ford pulls out a cartoony looking fish in a jar from his pocket and sticks the fish into Arthur Dent's ear as The Guide, a computer-like book carried always by Ford, explains that the fish is eating the language fed into Arthur's brain and excretes sonic waves that allow him to understand what is being said. Ridiculous, I know, but much more fun!! Because of this, the film's an acquired taste and perhaps not for everyone.
Quality performances by Alan Rickman, Stephen Fry and Helen Mirren, who leant their voices for Marvin the Robot, The Guide and Deep Thought, respectively. I also enjoyed the spot performances by Bill Nighy and John Malkovich, each putting their entire efforts into their short time on screen. The trio of Martin Freeman, Mos Def and Sam Rockwell were a perfect match for each other. A great cast, which is why I chose to see it in the theater in the first place.
Not necessarily a "must-see," but fun nonetheless.
****
IN: John Malkovich
OUT: Martin Freeman
Coming Soon: Hot Fuzz
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Cruel Intentions/Dangerous Liaisons
Bored blue-ribbon beauties engage in a high-stakes game of seduction. A wager is set upon the seduction of a staunchly chaste wife of an absent lawyer. Consummate cad, Vicomte de Valmont (John Malkovich,) is to seduce Madam de Torvel (Michelle Pfifer) and produce proof in order to secure his long-standing desire: a ravenous night of passion with his friend and former lover, the Marquise de Merteuil (Glen Glose.) His game is soon complicated when he develops feelings for his target, betraying his enduring reputation as a philanderer.
The cadence for Dangerous Liaisons seems completely based on the acting style of its stars, Glen Close and John Malkovich. The mercurial Malkovich bursts out in an explosion of volume and action, while Close remains calm, collected and dignified. The casting harms "the package." The plot, therefore feels clunky and the seduction that is supposed to be taking place, does not for the audience. It's left wondering where the caresses have gone and the gentleness that is supposed to turn our head and weaken our knees. Malkovich is too ballistic to shoulder Valmont because he doesn't have the suave savvy; this role, however, doesn't shy me away from seeing any of his others and he really did work from what he had.
Remakes are the same stories told with a simple shift of genres or settings or both. For example, Romeo and Juliet is a revenge romance set in Medieval Verona. A remake of the tale, set among the greaser gangs of New York, is a little musical called West Side Story. Dangerous Liaisons is set during post-revolutionary France. Whereas Cruel Intentions is set in cosmopolitan New York City.
Cruel Intentions follows the same storyline, except using high school students. In their senior year, step-siblings Seabastian (Ryan Phillippe) and Kathryn (Sarah Michelle Gellar) wager on weather Sebastian can seduce Annette (Reese Witherspoon,) a virgin waiting for true love. In this case, it's not just Sebastian's reputation on the line, but his Classic Roadster, his prized possession.
Gellar and Phillippe are evenly seductive and brutal and twice as lethal. The balance makes the plot more compelling. Witherspoon, as well, gives a warmth to Annette that Pfiffer's Torval lacked. I felt more drawn to these characters than that of Dangerous Liaisons'. The chemistry within the entire cast is fluid, making me emotionally desperate for Sebastian's quest and pulling for him in the love story . As a result, we are devastated when it all comes crashing down. The setup in the denouement is executed with finesse.
Frankly, the remake is better. There's an equal balance of drama and tension. And the payoff rewards the audience for their diligence, offering hope as well as comeuppance. And the cadence is smoother, the chemistry better, resulting in a non-traumatised plot delivery. This package easily sells and I'm buying!!
****
In: Ryan Phillippe
Out: John Malkovich
Coming Soon: Hitchhikkers Guide to the Galaxy
The cadence for Dangerous Liaisons seems completely based on the acting style of its stars, Glen Close and John Malkovich. The mercurial Malkovich bursts out in an explosion of volume and action, while Close remains calm, collected and dignified. The casting harms "the package." The plot, therefore feels clunky and the seduction that is supposed to be taking place, does not for the audience. It's left wondering where the caresses have gone and the gentleness that is supposed to turn our head and weaken our knees. Malkovich is too ballistic to shoulder Valmont because he doesn't have the suave savvy; this role, however, doesn't shy me away from seeing any of his others and he really did work from what he had.
Remakes are the same stories told with a simple shift of genres or settings or both. For example, Romeo and Juliet is a revenge romance set in Medieval Verona. A remake of the tale, set among the greaser gangs of New York, is a little musical called West Side Story. Dangerous Liaisons is set during post-revolutionary France. Whereas Cruel Intentions is set in cosmopolitan New York City.
Cruel Intentions follows the same storyline, except using high school students. In their senior year, step-siblings Seabastian (Ryan Phillippe) and Kathryn (Sarah Michelle Gellar) wager on weather Sebastian can seduce Annette (Reese Witherspoon,) a virgin waiting for true love. In this case, it's not just Sebastian's reputation on the line, but his Classic Roadster, his prized possession.
Gellar and Phillippe are evenly seductive and brutal and twice as lethal. The balance makes the plot more compelling. Witherspoon, as well, gives a warmth to Annette that Pfiffer's Torval lacked. I felt more drawn to these characters than that of Dangerous Liaisons'. The chemistry within the entire cast is fluid, making me emotionally desperate for Sebastian's quest and pulling for him in the love story . As a result, we are devastated when it all comes crashing down. The setup in the denouement is executed with finesse.
Frankly, the remake is better. There's an equal balance of drama and tension. And the payoff rewards the audience for their diligence, offering hope as well as comeuppance. And the cadence is smoother, the chemistry better, resulting in a non-traumatised plot delivery. This package easily sells and I'm buying!!
****
In: Ryan Phillippe
Out: John Malkovich
Coming Soon: Hitchhikkers Guide to the Galaxy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)