Aug 16
JeremyMovies Batman, Heath Ledger, Joker, The Dark Knight
WARNING: Spoilers ahead (if there is anyone not me who hasn’t seen the movie)
I bet you’re thinking that this topic is so over and why would I even write about it weeks after its release, when its relevance has completely dried up. Well, I just finally got around to seeing The Dark Knight and I thought it frankly sucked sweaty donkey balls. It was so bad that I felt I need to come back home and react to everyone else’s raves with a rant of my own. I should have had a premonition of the disappointment I was in for when the lights went down and the trailers came on; sadly, I didn’t. I saw through an interminable set of images that did not capture my attention or make me want to keep my eyes or ears on the screen. Little did I know that this was just a teaser of my feelings for the rest of the afternoon!
First off, let’s deal with Heath Ledger, since that’s the biggest talk surround the movie. Ledger certainly pulled off this final role much better than I ever would have given him credit for prior to seeing the film. I will say that he was a brighter spot in a dull, dreary afternoon for me. His Joker stands out as excellent, with a level of panache and eerie madness rarely seen in a screen actor; frankly had I not known it was Heath Ledger, the credits would have surprised me. His performance, however, did not reach the brilliance one associates with Oscar-worthy roles, despite all the buzz. The Joker’s failing to me was an inability to really engage with the other characters.
Many of the other actors in the film are among my favorites, including Ledger himself. I love watching Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, and even Christian Bale (though I can only really see him singing and dancing to “Santa Fe” the whole time). I usually even don’t mind watching them in bad roles. They did not, however, excite me here, as none of them were able to show off the range of what they can do on the screen. All characters were one dimensional sketches rather than the complex constructions that make us care about them. Maggie Gyllenhaal was just as big a waste of screen time as Katie Holmes was in Batman Begins, supporting the contention I had back then that it was the role and writing rather than the actress that made Rachel Dawes wooden and zero dimensional.
The story itself was completely uninspiring and much more slow-moving than a comic book action movie should ever be. (Though that kind of worked for Superman Returns.) For two and a half hours, I was bludgeoned with the idea that Batman is an anti-hero, dammit, he is, he is! However, the juxtaposition of the Joker’s delightlfully psychotic anarchy next to Batman’s careful disregard of the law was so poorly drawn as to be nearly lost entirely. The set ups in the plot were entirely transparent (puh-lease, I knew there was a bomb in his stomach the second he said he was nauseous! not to mention the criminal on the boat with the detonator…OBVIOUS! Gordon’s “death?” if you could only see my eyes rolling…) and added no sense of inventiveness to the story. The density of the Harvey Dent plot line only served to distract from the Joker’s story, even though it was supposed to have been engineered by him.
Not even the cool shit — the explosions, the gizmos — could save this film for me. In the end, it had nothing I enjoyed. About 20 minutes into the movie, I started to think “It’s a shame I don’t have to pee. Then I could at least get up for a few minutes.” I don’t know what others saw in The Dark Knight; whatever it was, I’m in the dark about it.
Aug 15
AndrewMovies Harry Potter, Movies, Warner Bros Studios
Script problems on the last two installments of Harry Potter (both from the same book Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows) has forced the studio to move back the release date of the next installment, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. A strange move, chalked up officially to a desire to release the flick during the summer rush.
Clearly, that explanation is just fluff. Usually when studios move movie releases, it is because they either don’t want to compete with a movie opening at the same time, or they do want to compete with another movie opening at the new release time. But any Harry Potter flick would blow any movie out of the water regardless of the time of year, even if the film sucks.
The script problems were attributed to the writer’s strike that last 3 months (and didn’t affect the Half-Blood Prince), but maybe the real story is that Warner Bros. is having a harder time than expected of dividing Deathly Hallows into two fully-formed movies. It’s been done (Kill Bill comes to mind) and done well, but there was already a lot of consternation about splitting Deathly Hallows in two. Even more interesting, the release date for the first movie installment of Deathly Hallows is unchanged. It’s still November 2010 (though that date is officially “tentative”).
Another plausible reason for the delay: Half-Blood Prince the film isn’t as strong as they would have liked (the book is a bit of a throw-away) and they need another 8 months to shore up some of the editing.
Jul 14
AndrewMovies Movies, Sequel
Every summer brings a crop of popular movie franchises back to the big screen, and this summer is particular ripe with sequels. Though summer is still sizzling, the sequels themselves are winding with only a few more to go, and it seemed a perfect time to grade the sequels starting with
Spider-Man 3 full review
What’s Good?
Sam Raimi continues to treat Peter Parker, and the Spider-Man franchise, as if these are real people. His endeavor to make the super hero genre about the people and not the action hero made the original film revolutionary.
What’s Bad?
The third installment has way too many characters who get substantial screen time, detracting from the story we wanted to see: Mary Jane and Peter Parker.
Grade? 6 (out of 10) It was easy to see what Raimi was going for, but 3 lacked the finesse of either of the two previous films. And how many times will Mary Jane be a damsel in distress for Spider-Man to rescue before she ditches New York for somewhere more anonymous like Smallville, Kansas. Oh wait…
Shrek the Third
What’s Good?
Donkey and Puss put on a show, stealing Shrek’s thunder from start to finish in this one. Another sequel without Shrek? I’d see it.
I thought Artie was a good foil for Shrek, and the middle third of the movie is vintage Shrek.
What’s Bad?
Shrek’s reaction to being father is totally believable, but the fact that Fiona is pregnant seems irrelevant to the what’s going on.
Merlin’s appearance, though brief, was excruciating to sit through. Prince Charming is so annoying in this one, I was hoping he was heading for a beheading. No suck luck…
Grade? 5 (out of 10) The film had its wickedly funny moments (particularly rescuing Artie from prep school) but the energy and humor that made the first installment a joy loses its flavor towards the end of the third.
Ocean’s Thirteen
What’s Good?
Every scene inside the casino was thrilling. That’s where the heart of the franchise resides (and has a lot to do with why Ocean’s Twelve was such a disaster) and it’s good to see Ocean’s Thirteen return to its roots.
What’s Bad?
The set-up is both convoluted and rushed, not a good combination. We get that it’s largely irrelevant why Ocean’s band of brothers is robbing casino baron Bank but rarely it is ever this obvious that the director cares as little as we do about the whys. The design of The Bank (the casino) was so distracting that it made me squirm.
The real criminal of this film is its lack of a sense of humor. The first film was tongue-in-cheek, the third takes itself and its premise way too seriously for its, or our, own good.
Grade? 7 (out of 10) What’s a little contrivance among friends? Ocean’s Thirteen is vastly more entertaining than Twelve , the casino scenes are delightful and George Clooney and Brad Pitt have a chemistry that is fun to watch.
Live Free or Die Hard
What’s Good?
Everything. From start of finish, this movie is worthy of being in the Die Hard franchise. The plot takes all of three minutes of the film, and the rest of the 130 minute flick is spent watching John McClane kick ass and take names. Die Hard has always taken the most over-the-top approach to action sequences and even in this modern age of digitally created action, managed to be thrilling and stay true to the franchise. The fight scene at the power plant is brilliantly choreographed. The action is relentless, and the interplay between Justin Long and Bruce Willis keeps the humor quotient cranked throughout. Even Kevin Smith’s cameo appearance worked.
What’s Bad?
This movie is so improbable on every level, be prepared to leave your disbelief at home. It’s not the black hat stuff -- it’s all in the details. Like why is a power plant that controls the eastern seaboard grid only guarded by three armed security and one useless technician. Don’t ask, like I said, it doesn’t matter.
Grade? 8 (out of 10) Look, I’m not going to say it’s better than the original, but Live Free or Die Hard gets major props nonetheless.
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer full review
What’s Good?
The visual effects. The relationships between the members of the FF are more believable, and far more enjoyable to watch, in this installment.
What’s Bad?
It’s just not a very good movie.
Grade? 3 (out of 10) Rise of the Silver Surfer is at least as good as the original.
Harry Potter
As a movie franchise, Harry Potter has only improved on the original. But as we go deeper into the series, the comparisons to the books (particularly because each book is longer than one movie can contain) inevitably turn the books’ fans into the movies’ harshest critics.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
What’s Good?
Harry Potter films are consistently visually compelling, and Order of the Phoenix convincingly offers us the magical world within our own.
What’s Bad?
This movie is going to leave a lot of casual fans behind. There is virtually no exposition, and the screen is crowded with a lot of characters. The longest book is condensed to the shortest film, creating a movie that never stops to take a breath. The story assumes we know a lot about what has happened off screen, and if you haven’t read the books, it’s entirely possible that you don’t.
Grade? 6 (out of 10) For the first time in the franchise, the film feels too short.
Coming Soon
The Bourne Ultimatum
More of the Same? Previews seem to indicate that the third installment is a carbon copy of the first two. That’s a good thing.
Rush Hour 3
More of the Same? The preview emphasized the humor of the films and downplayed the action. Which is fine, as long as Rush Hour 3 doesn’t turn into one of those films where all of the good jokes are in the preview.
Jul 05
AndrewMovies Movies, Transformer
G.I. Joe the movie? Another He-Man and the Masters of the Universe remake? Because once those are reality all of my favorite childhood toys will have be re-envisioned for the 21st century. Transformers was just a harbinger of the destruction to come.
Along with comic book adaptations, cartoons to live-action films have always been the desiccation of some of my most intimate youthful imaginings. I lived in those worlds for chunks of time, and when I watch the films, I am rarely able to watch them without some serious, butt-kicking nostalgia. That said, I think it was inevitable that I left the theater after Transformers with mixed feelings.
The best part of Transformers is Sam Witwicky, played by Shia LaBeouf. LaBeouf is extraordinary in this role. He perfectly captures this quirky, obsessed kid and convinces us that he would react just the way he did when he discovers that his car can transform into a robot and that it has a personality. For the first half of the movie, he takes us along for the ride and it’s a good one. We meet his crazy-ass parents, get two car chases -- one where he’s chasing his Camaro, and the other where the Camaro is chasing him -- and we get some wonderful, bumbling scenes with Megan Fox, who plays the hot chick Mikaela Banes.
But the movie quickly disintegrates by trying to pass off an improbable and inexplicable plot. I’m embarrassed to try and repeat it. The film is overloaded with unnecessary exposition and inane backstory, details that don’t make sense of the past and don’t help us make sense of the story in the present. Michael Bay holds our hands through every step, as if he’s afraid we won’t be able to accept the Transformers for what they are. We get it; they are alien and they can adapt into our vehicles in order to disguise themselves. It’s cool. It’s almost besides the point that they are chasing the Allspark (believe me, you won’t care and it doesn’t seem to matter by the end anyway.) The whole Sector 7 thread could easily have been missing from the story and it would have been at least as good a movie. Bay would have been better served to stick to what he does best: blow things up.
Bay damages his reputation as an action heavy in the first hour by spending most of the time on Sam and giving us a very richly developed hero to cheer for. Then the second hour plus is about the robots. My friend summed it up best after the film when he said, “It could have been about any robots. They just happened to be called Transformers.” And that is the fatal flaw in Michael Bay’s adaptation. This was an okay robot story, but it was a seriously bad Transformers movie. There was only scant introductions to the Autobots, none at all for the Decepticons. They had zero personality beyond good vs. bad, and Sam’s fealty for Bumblebee aside, the scripts presumes that humans would embrace the Autobots like buddies.
I think this plays off of the fact that we are supposed to embrace the Autobots like buddies. That’s why a prolonged scene at Sam’s house involving the Autobots in a game of hide and seek runs over 10 minutes. It’s the only time in the film that we get to know the Autobots as autonomous personalities. The rest is just Decepticon butt-kicking. And even there, the action happens so fast across the screen, you never get a very good sense of what’s going on. Optimus Prime is absent for most of the final battle until he zooms into the final scene for the sole purpose of taking on Megatron, a battle that is short-lived and anti-climatic. Maybe while the Transformers were surfing the internet to learn about Earth-culture, they could take in a little Matrix-style fighting. Now wouldn’t that have been something.
I have to brace myself for every cartoon to live action movie because inevitably it ends up flat. But it’s impossible to separate the ingrained knowledge of my youth when I watch the film. I want it to be exactly like I used to imagine it. At the same time, it’s always a little awe-inspiring to see those things on the big screen. Transformers doesn’t quite pull it off at either end.
Jun 16
AndrewMovies Fantastic Four, FF, Marvel, Silver Surfer
So going into a movie that was resoundingly panned by every major media outlet, amateur reviewer, and comic book pundit doesn’t really put in you a mind that’s it is going to be any good. And let’s face it, history was not on the side of Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer. Comic book adaptations to film are notoriously bad (Punisher, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Elektra to name three.) And even the ones that were successful, I hated (Batman Returns, Superman Returns, Spider-Man 3 to name three more.) Whatever your measure of quality, it’s just damn hard to make a good superhero flick that pleases everyone (X-Men, Spider-Man, 300 are probably the best of the breed.) And then there is the first Fantastic Four installment, which was good, but not stellar. So with all this evidence, I was wholly surprised to enjoy Rise of the Silver Surfer from start to finish.
Let me say this right away: if you are a hardcore fan of the Fantastic Four comic book, the movie resembles it not at all. The movie is wildly inaccurate to the FF comic book lore, takes great liberties with the characters, the first appearance of the Silver Surfer, even the Devourer of Worlds, Galactus himself who is only seen in silhouette. But if you haven’t learned anything from Hellboy, The Hulk, and X-III The Last Stand, it’s that comparing what you see on the big screen to the decades of continuity of comic book history is futile and painful. Just don’t do it.
That leaves you to judge the merits of the film on its ability to tell whatever story it deems to tell, the special effects, and the overall effect of convincing you that the superhero world could be the real world.
The story in Rise of the Silver Surfer is the story of a Fantastic Four team that hasn’t quite gelled and embraced its destiny. The Human Torch is more of a hothead than ever, Mr. Fantastic can’t seem to give up his research even to save his relationship. Invisible Woman wants her life to return to normal, pre-cosmic storm. And strangely, the Thing no longer seems concerned that he’s composed of orange rock. Then there’s the mysterious energy signature that, we already know, is the Silver Surfer coming to scope out the Earth to find it a nice snack for his master, Galactus. So his presence heralds the end of the world. If none that makes any sense to you, I wouldn’t worry about it. Oh, and Victor Von Doom is back as well.
The plot is virtually incomprehensible, and full of gaping, illogical holes. In order to make the science make sense, most of it is glossed over. In order to make the fantasy elements make sense, most of those are glossed over too. And yet, it’s helpful to recognize that this strategy seems to work for virtually every single comic book film adaptation. When the movie sucks, it’s really annoying. But what I liked about this film is that there is no pretense of even trying to explain the nuance of the how’s and why’s. It simply asks us to accept that Mr. Fantastic’s scientific deductions are sound, and that the super powers of the Fantastic Four work the way they do in the film.
This film kept the pace manageable (it barely clocks in at 90 minutes) and injected a healthy dose of humor evenly throughout the film. The Fantastic Four are sexy, there are gratuitous flashes of partial nudity, and the four have a great chemistry on screen. They make a convincing family, even if the sibling relationship between Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) and Sue Storm (Jessica Alba) was a little too sexed up for my comfort. I even found Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd) and Ben Grimm (Michael Chiklis) likable in this film in a way they very much were not in the first FF. So what that Von Doom (Julian McMahon) and the army captain were completely extraneous to the plot, or that the Silver Surfer (voiced by Laurence Fishburne) pulled a Professor Xavier, spending large chunks of the film incapacitated and largely useless.
Digital effects in action and fantasy films are at unparalleled quality these. Frankly, I thought this movie looked hot. The Silver Surfer was stunning in every scene, as was the finale when Galactus has arrived on Earth, tendrils of his energy machine reaching out to consume the earth. And seeing the Human Torch stretch his range in a take down with Von Doom was brief, but satisfying.
That only leaves whether or not this was a convincing glimpse into a superhero world. I think so. It kept me engaged in a superhero fantasy from beginning to end. So I will say this definitely wasn’t the greatest movie, nor the finest comic book adaptation. But as an entry into the compendium of comic books turned movie franchises, it was a heck of a lot better than I was led to believe.
May 04
AndrewMovies Ivan Raimi, Movie, Peter Parker, Spider-Man, Superhero
I left the theater on opening night of Spider-Man 3 thinking to myself, “Man, I hate that Peter Parker.” It is rare for a hero movie to create such a despicable, unfathomably shallow and irresponsible hero, but to director Sam Raimi’s credit, he has done just that.
I say credit because Raimi, and fellow screenplay writers Ivan Raimi and Alvin Sargent, fully realize a flawed and imperfect hero. Maybe I should tip my hat to Tobey Maguire for convincing me that if I had just met Peter Parker, I would line up behind Venom and Sandman to take a swing at him.
Spider-Man 3 isn’t a great movie, but it is a pretty good one. The action hits all the right notes of spectacle that modern audiences expect. Cars get overturned and crushed, buildings get demolished with abandon, and police officers and bystanders alike get pelted with the residual byproduct, more often then not cement bricks, of super-powered heroes and villains going at it.
Also quite like movies of this generation, there is a lot going on packed into almost two and half hours. So much, that some scenes jump quickly to another, giving the whole flick a disjointed feel. You almost wish that Raimi had been more selective in the editing room, but some scenes are gone so fast there is no time to process what happened, leaving little impression.
At its heart, Spider-Man 3 is really about Peter Parker’s relationship with his girlfriend Mary Jane Watson. All of the action resolves around this dynamic to some degree and their love is the driving force behind my extraordinary disdain for Peter Parker. The guy acts like a self-involved egghead who got into Kappa Sigma and now he’s popular with the girls. It goes to his head. Raimi deftly shows us how Peter’s egomania destroys his relationship with Mary Jane, and he is completely and utterly shocked when Mary Jane breaks up with him. It’s a painful scene because we want to see them together and happy, and because Peter Parker never saw it coming.
Then, of course, there is Spider-Man’s relationship with an alien symbiote that wants to take over his body and use it as an energy source. If that sounded like a load of crap, just go with it.
Spider-Man 3 tackles the subplot of Peter Parker’s relationship with his high school best friend (arguably his only friend that we know of) Harry Osborn. Osborn, played by James Franco, is the most fun we are going to have in the film. He loses his memory and in the absence of the anxiety over his father’s recent death (well, two movies ago,) he becomes fun-loving, forgiving and downright flirty. Franco is hot in this film because, at least in the first half, he doesn’t have to look stern and anguished and keep his lines to rote villain cliches. Oh yeah, Harry eventually gets his memory back, but you’re gonna have to see the movie yourself to see how that turns out.
And finally, Raimi gives us two very human, very realistic Spidey villains, Venom and the Sandman. Venom is Eddie Brock (played by Topher Grace) on steroids. Though the set-up for why Brock hates Parker is glossed over pretty quickly, let’s just say, he’s got a legitimate beef with Parker. And with the help of a certain symbiote (that damn symbiote again!) figures out he can get to Parker through his girlfriend. I won’t ruin it anymore, but let’s just say that for a third movie in a row, Mary Jane ends up trussed up waiting for Spider-Man to come rescue her.
Sandman (Thomas Haden Church) also has his reasons, and he gets a full three minutes to explain them at the end of the movie. His backstory is not as fully developed as the others, but all the same, there is just something about this guy that he could be someone you know. You know, if that guy can turn into a giant human sandbox and blow away like a dust cloud, though I guess it saves on taxi fare.
My only other complaint is how Aunt May (Rosemary Harris) is used solely as Peter’s conscience. That, at least, smacks more of contrivance than anything else.
The Spider-Man films are always at best about the relationships between the main characters, and Raimi has done something magical in the keeping to that game plan. But in delivering such authentic characters, I came to realize that while I might love the movie, I absolutely, unequivocally hate Peter Parker. I guess there’s always Clark Kent. I hear he’s looking for a boyfriend…
Older Entries Newer Entries
RSS
