When watching a Roland Emerich movie, you can pretty much expect massive action sequences mainly constructed of CGI, absurdly reductionist plots focused on a world that has only good and evil and no gray zone and generally a story that is couched in the highly implausible which soon moves into the out right ridiculous. If you don't believe that just think about one of his big hits. Independence Day had a pretty absurd plot, aliens come to Earth seeking to destroy us (update on War of the Worlds, no problem). Plot is entirely geared towards getting all key players to one location for epic cathartic payback (sure fine whatever). Good guys (us) defeat bad guys (aliens) through use of computer virus and Apple computers technology against technologically advanced aliens...wait....what?
Well I assure 10,000 BC is just as absurd. Thousands of years ago among a tribe of hunter/gatherers who rely on the Woolly Mammoth for food, a blue eyed girl comes which forebodes a coming time of crisis for the tribe. Years later a group of marauding raiders come to the tribe and kidnap many of the able bodied men and women (including the blue eyed girl). D'Leh who loves said girl sets out with a handful of warriors to rescue her. Along the way they cross thousands of miles and mountains, jungles and deserts. Along the way an army of wayward warriors join him and see in him a savior who will deliver them from the master of these marauders.
The army eventually arrives at a desert location where massive pyramids are being built for a group who are called gods and are hinted as being either from outer space or Atlantis (or both) (This from the man who gave us Stargate hmmm...). Of course an inevitable confrontation will result in a great final action sequence. So as I said the plot is fairly absurd but whatever that was a given right?
So when does it get down right ridiculous? Well for starters, why given there clearly seems to be an endless supply of available labor near the building of the pyramids, do the marauders go thousands of miles out of their way into the mountains to kidnap the hunter gatherers? And how is it that the bad guys have an astronomical sextant? I guess that is the aliens/Atlantis connection. Throw in the same multi-cultural lets all team up together love fest that was seen in Independence Day and you have the makings of a very boring movie. Independence Day 2 - the Prequel.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Highlander
I can't speak to what Highlander was like to watch when it originally came out in 1986. I can only speak to what it was like watching as a young kid who enjoyed all things sword related. It was awesome. Immortal beings running around having elaborate sword fights. What could be better to a kid raised on fantasy novels and movies? And it is that remembered awesomeness that inspired me to see it on a theater screen at a recent release at my local indie cinema. And so the question would become. Is the movie still awesome? The answer is yes but for different reasons.
Connor MacLeod (Christopher Lambert) is an immortal being, one of many who have lived through time and who participates in a game in which immortals battle each other claiming heads and gaining power. MacLeod has lived for four and a half centuries and now lives in New York. New York has become the location of a final battle between the very last of the immortals. Suspicion arises in the police that MacLeod is a serial killer. MacLeod negotiates dealing with the police, a curious forensics specialist with an expertise in metallurgy and the Kurgan (Clancy Brown) a psychopathic immortal with aims for MacLeod's head.
Sure it sounds a bit odd, perhaps a bit cheesy. And I will not deny that. So what in all the world could make me like this movie? Make me have a desire to sit here and praise it? Sure all the references are dated. The special effects look hokey. Yes the romance is forced and pretty much non existence. There are some questionable motivations for most of the characters and very big plot points seem complete ignored by movie end. Sounds pretty damning, right?
Well let's just see what this movie does have. All Queen Soundtrack. Now that might have some cringing in horror but come on. Once that opening credit sequence starts and Freddie Mercury kicks in with "Princes of the Universe" you pretty much either start nodding your head in approval of the campiness or no there is no or that is all you can do. You just smile and think o man this is going to be fun. Tie that in with the incredibly sappy "Who Wants To Live Forever" (He's immortal! He will live for ever!?) and you really can't go wrong.
What else you ask, unconvinced? Clancy "f*cking" Brown. I added the swear for emphasis because Clancy Brown is bad ass. He was Zim in Starship Troopers and basically played the devil on earth in "Carnivale". And he plays such a crazy over the top villain in this movie that you can't help but smile gleefully when he is on screen. He struts and chews scenery like nobody's business through out the movie. When he plays chicken on the New York streets? priceless. In the church? fantastically absurd.
Sean Connery as an immortal who trains MacLeod. He plays an Egyptian who serves the king of Spain but somehow manages to say everything in a Scottish accent. Go figure. Honestly people what more could you want from a cheesy enjoyable 80s film? It's not Oscar worthy but its definitely worth the viewing.
Connor MacLeod (Christopher Lambert) is an immortal being, one of many who have lived through time and who participates in a game in which immortals battle each other claiming heads and gaining power. MacLeod has lived for four and a half centuries and now lives in New York. New York has become the location of a final battle between the very last of the immortals. Suspicion arises in the police that MacLeod is a serial killer. MacLeod negotiates dealing with the police, a curious forensics specialist with an expertise in metallurgy and the Kurgan (Clancy Brown) a psychopathic immortal with aims for MacLeod's head.
Sure it sounds a bit odd, perhaps a bit cheesy. And I will not deny that. So what in all the world could make me like this movie? Make me have a desire to sit here and praise it? Sure all the references are dated. The special effects look hokey. Yes the romance is forced and pretty much non existence. There are some questionable motivations for most of the characters and very big plot points seem complete ignored by movie end. Sounds pretty damning, right?
Well let's just see what this movie does have. All Queen Soundtrack. Now that might have some cringing in horror but come on. Once that opening credit sequence starts and Freddie Mercury kicks in with "Princes of the Universe" you pretty much either start nodding your head in approval of the campiness or no there is no or that is all you can do. You just smile and think o man this is going to be fun. Tie that in with the incredibly sappy "Who Wants To Live Forever" (He's immortal! He will live for ever!?) and you really can't go wrong.
What else you ask, unconvinced? Clancy "f*cking" Brown. I added the swear for emphasis because Clancy Brown is bad ass. He was Zim in Starship Troopers and basically played the devil on earth in "Carnivale". And he plays such a crazy over the top villain in this movie that you can't help but smile gleefully when he is on screen. He struts and chews scenery like nobody's business through out the movie. When he plays chicken on the New York streets? priceless. In the church? fantastically absurd.
Sean Connery as an immortal who trains MacLeod. He plays an Egyptian who serves the king of Spain but somehow manages to say everything in a Scottish accent. Go figure. Honestly people what more could you want from a cheesy enjoyable 80s film? It's not Oscar worthy but its definitely worth the viewing.
Doomsday
I confess I didn't immediately like Doomsday when I saw it in the theater. But the more I thought about it, the more I discussed it with my friend, the more it grew on me. Perhaps that isn't how one should approach a review of a movie but oh well. Overall with a film like this you expect mindless action fun and sure enough you get mindless action fun. If that is all you need hear then set forth to the theater and gobble up the popcorn like candy. For the sophisticated (read: snob) who can't be satisfied with "its just fun" I'll try to elaborate why it is a worthy ride.
The film has a rousing rave scene in which a group of dystopic attractive juvenile anthropophages roast alive a victim all while listening to the Fine Young Cannibals. Get it? If you don't find that perversely funny then I suppose this movie isn't for you. This film is full of homage and I'm not talking about subtle homage either. There are almost direct intertextuality with Escape From New York (hero Rhona Mitra wears an eyepatch at movie's open), Aliens (as soldiers gear up, a rough and tough commander utters a line with echoes of a line by Apone from Aliens) and Road Warrior (to which the final action sequence owes just about everything).
But the movie actually offers more than these direct parrots. As we see two types of dystopic society. The innevitable and recognizable post-civilization inner city gang which has decked itself out in punk paraphernalia, tatoos and mohawks is of course directly recalling some of the above mentioned films. But we also get a retro Medieval society based in an abandoned castle where the warriors wear suits of armor and make use of maces, spears and swords. And this too has a novelty. A post-apocalyptic society that has not degenerated into Warlord managed anarchy but into primitive old fashioned civilization maintained by noble lies about the outside world.
Tie this in with the malevolent government trying to control the masses and the quickly degenerating notion of keeping things real and one suspects that this is not just an exercise in popcorn fluff but actually a real satire of action films. The fact that it is done with incredible style is all the more to its credit. It plays with the tropes of action movie post-apocalyptic thrillers and never takes itself too seriously. And despite my initial reservations I myself had a certain pleased grin on my face in the final scene of the movie.
The film has a rousing rave scene in which a group of dystopic attractive juvenile anthropophages roast alive a victim all while listening to the Fine Young Cannibals. Get it? If you don't find that perversely funny then I suppose this movie isn't for you. This film is full of homage and I'm not talking about subtle homage either. There are almost direct intertextuality with Escape From New York (hero Rhona Mitra wears an eyepatch at movie's open), Aliens (as soldiers gear up, a rough and tough commander utters a line with echoes of a line by Apone from Aliens) and Road Warrior (to which the final action sequence owes just about everything).
But the movie actually offers more than these direct parrots. As we see two types of dystopic society. The innevitable and recognizable post-civilization inner city gang which has decked itself out in punk paraphernalia, tatoos and mohawks is of course directly recalling some of the above mentioned films. But we also get a retro Medieval society based in an abandoned castle where the warriors wear suits of armor and make use of maces, spears and swords. And this too has a novelty. A post-apocalyptic society that has not degenerated into Warlord managed anarchy but into primitive old fashioned civilization maintained by noble lies about the outside world.
Tie this in with the malevolent government trying to control the masses and the quickly degenerating notion of keeping things real and one suspects that this is not just an exercise in popcorn fluff but actually a real satire of action films. The fact that it is done with incredible style is all the more to its credit. It plays with the tropes of action movie post-apocalyptic thrillers and never takes itself too seriously. And despite my initial reservations I myself had a certain pleased grin on my face in the final scene of the movie.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
The Other Boleyn Girl
I know that when criticizing a movie one is supposed to judge the film on its merits and not complain about what it could of been. But when you make a bad film (and I do believe that most people in Hollywood know when they've made a bad film) you should acknowledge it and do what's right. If its bad, make it over the top bad. That way at least we foolish saps who shell out our $10 will at least have a smile from all the camp we're experiencing. And believe me, I see the potential that The Other Boleyn Girl could have had.
I mean let's pause and just think about the plot for a moment. King Henry (Eric Bana) the 8th's wife has just given birth to a stillborn baby and now Henry is likely to be in the market for a mistress to provide him a male heir. Dastardly wicked uncle to the Boleyn daughters decides that his nieces are prime for such a task. At first offering up single Anne (Natalie Portman) and eventually not so single Mary (Scarlett Johansen). This creates a back and forth and series of seductions other plot twists as the movie plays out. this film failed to deliver.
A movie about a guy prostituting out his own daughters as mistresses to the King of England and all the accompanying melodrama? How could that not be camp brilliance? All they had to do was acknowledge that as their goal and just go big. I mean really big. Have lots of scenes where Bana is just chewing scenery left and right. Have lots of really unambiguous innuendo flying from the seductresses. But do we get any of that? Just the barest of hints of what this film could have been.
Anne at one point utters a line about staying on a horse by using her thighs and other such blatant stuff. Sadly such lines and scenes are few and far between. And the sex (which no offense we should expect in a film about sex) is almost wholly absent save for a few scenes which are ended with the camera rolling up and away like some bad 50s film. This could have been a beautiful unofficial prologue to the Elizabeth movies (especially the most recent one with its over the top messiness).
What could be a better prologue to the story of the "virgin queen" than a campy sexpose on all the shenanigans that produced said queen? Sadly the film is desperately trying to play it safe. And what do we get for our efforts? The beautiful but untalented Johansen; the beautiful and underused Portman and not much else. And the uncle is so unambiguously sinister that I couldn't tell if he was acting that way on purpose or if he too was void of actual talent.
Sometimes campiness is okay, sometimes campiness is necessary. This film failed to deliver.
I mean let's pause and just think about the plot for a moment. King Henry (Eric Bana) the 8th's wife has just given birth to a stillborn baby and now Henry is likely to be in the market for a mistress to provide him a male heir. Dastardly wicked uncle to the Boleyn daughters decides that his nieces are prime for such a task. At first offering up single Anne (Natalie Portman) and eventually not so single Mary (Scarlett Johansen). This creates a back and forth and series of seductions other plot twists as the movie plays out. this film failed to deliver.
A movie about a guy prostituting out his own daughters as mistresses to the King of England and all the accompanying melodrama? How could that not be camp brilliance? All they had to do was acknowledge that as their goal and just go big. I mean really big. Have lots of scenes where Bana is just chewing scenery left and right. Have lots of really unambiguous innuendo flying from the seductresses. But do we get any of that? Just the barest of hints of what this film could have been.
Anne at one point utters a line about staying on a horse by using her thighs and other such blatant stuff. Sadly such lines and scenes are few and far between. And the sex (which no offense we should expect in a film about sex) is almost wholly absent save for a few scenes which are ended with the camera rolling up and away like some bad 50s film. This could have been a beautiful unofficial prologue to the Elizabeth movies (especially the most recent one with its over the top messiness).
What could be a better prologue to the story of the "virgin queen" than a campy sexpose on all the shenanigans that produced said queen? Sadly the film is desperately trying to play it safe. And what do we get for our efforts? The beautiful but untalented Johansen; the beautiful and underused Portman and not much else. And the uncle is so unambiguously sinister that I couldn't tell if he was acting that way on purpose or if he too was void of actual talent.
Sometimes campiness is okay, sometimes campiness is necessary. This film failed to deliver.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Penelope
If I've learned one thing from the new movie Penelope it is that if you have a physical flaw or some other type of flaw do not fret. You see by accepting yourself for who you are, you will magically have that flaw removed and you can then conduct your life as the beautiful person you actually are. If I've learned two things from the new movie, it is that Christina Ricci with a pig nose is still Christina Ricci and therefore still pretty damn cute.
Ricci plays the titular character Penelope. A girl who's family was curse to have a daughter with a pig face. (Why was it only a daughter who was curse?) Penelope is born and her parents decide to fake her death and keep her hidden away from the world. When she is older they concoct a scheme to find a rich blood blood who will marry her and remove the curse. In the course of this she meets Max (James McAvoy) and falls for him but it fails to work out in typical romantic comedy fashion.
At this point the film changes tactics and becomes a story of liberation for Penelope. She runs away from home and experiences the world for herself. she befriends a feisty bike currier (Reese Witherspoon) and reveals her face to the world. The world instead of horrified is infatuated with her. Eventually we will get an acceptance of her self and a magical fairy tale ending. Blah, blah, blah.
This is a fairy tale attempting to stay relevant in the modern world of film. Its been done better (I'll defend Ella Enchanted). Mainly it seems that it doesn't work because what is supposed to be uplifting about the film (personal acceptance) is treated so poorly. Penelope's parents are as bad as the rest of society when it comes to her. And her acceptance of herself is meaningless since it removes the trait she previously found unacceptable.
Plus it isn't entirely clear that there has been any real acceptance in the end. Max isn't asked to do anything really radical now is he? Excuse us, would you be so kind as to fall in love with Christina Ricci sans pig nose? There was some charm between McAvoy and Ricci in some of their early scenes but overall it like the whole movie is disappointing.
Ricci plays the titular character Penelope. A girl who's family was curse to have a daughter with a pig face. (Why was it only a daughter who was curse?) Penelope is born and her parents decide to fake her death and keep her hidden away from the world. When she is older they concoct a scheme to find a rich blood blood who will marry her and remove the curse. In the course of this she meets Max (James McAvoy) and falls for him but it fails to work out in typical romantic comedy fashion.
At this point the film changes tactics and becomes a story of liberation for Penelope. She runs away from home and experiences the world for herself. she befriends a feisty bike currier (Reese Witherspoon) and reveals her face to the world. The world instead of horrified is infatuated with her. Eventually we will get an acceptance of her self and a magical fairy tale ending. Blah, blah, blah.
This is a fairy tale attempting to stay relevant in the modern world of film. Its been done better (I'll defend Ella Enchanted). Mainly it seems that it doesn't work because what is supposed to be uplifting about the film (personal acceptance) is treated so poorly. Penelope's parents are as bad as the rest of society when it comes to her. And her acceptance of herself is meaningless since it removes the trait she previously found unacceptable.
Plus it isn't entirely clear that there has been any real acceptance in the end. Max isn't asked to do anything really radical now is he? Excuse us, would you be so kind as to fall in love with Christina Ricci sans pig nose? There was some charm between McAvoy and Ricci in some of their early scenes but overall it like the whole movie is disappointing.
Be Kind Rewind
The latest film from Michael Gondry Be Kind Rewind is in every way a fantasy film. Mr. Fletcher (Danny Glover) owns an old video rental store in a rundown neighborhood in Passaic, New Jersey. Here he and his adopted(?) son Mike (Mos Def) rent VHS video tapes to a group of local peoples. The city wants to move Fletcher out and build a new development that will help revitalize the town. Adding his own brand to constant irritation is Jerry (Jack Black).
Fletcher goes on a spy mission to find out why his competitors are much better at running their stores than he is and leaves Mike in charge. A attempted sabotage mission leaves Jerry magnetized and he erases all the information on the video tapes. In order to appease regular customer and friend to Mr. Fletcher, Miss Falewicz (Mia Farrow), Jerry and Mike use an old video camera to film a 20 minute version of the original movie in hopes of fooling her.
The comic mismatch of do it yourself film-making makes an impression on a number of the local residents who begin requesting short remakes of classic films. Soon the store starts making a decent amount of money by filming short "sweded" films and renting them to the customers. All this is a hair brained scheme to save the store and building. Of course the remakes bring in a nasty lawyer who raises hell about copyright violation.
I say it is a fantasy because of course it exists in a quasi reality in which we could not only find a store that still rents video tapes but also that it would actually take a spy mission to figure out that other stores are more successful because they moved to DVDs. The film seems to want to appeal to those of the world who are genuine fans of movies and who as kids or adults at times have picked up a camera and "remade" their favorite scenes and movies.
In that regard some of the movie works. Especially when they are showing bits of the recast movies. Their low rent quality and limited use of actors and their recreation of the most memorable scenes of many classic movies creates a decent amount of humorous charm. But ultimately when not focusing on the actual film-making the story is weak and reliant mostly on the wacky antics of Jack Black (who annoys me more than he makes me laugh).
It feels a bit like a better movie about obsession with film is possible and so its attempts at trying are certainly acknowledged. Mos Def is passable as the likable Mike and is actually a decent actor (I remember him fondly from the little scene or appreciated 16 Blocks). Jack Black is as always Jack Black (that is to say a slightly less annoying Robin Williams, but only slightly). In the end the remakes are the real stars and apparently you can see them online without the movie which is probably the better way to go.
Fletcher goes on a spy mission to find out why his competitors are much better at running their stores than he is and leaves Mike in charge. A attempted sabotage mission leaves Jerry magnetized and he erases all the information on the video tapes. In order to appease regular customer and friend to Mr. Fletcher, Miss Falewicz (Mia Farrow), Jerry and Mike use an old video camera to film a 20 minute version of the original movie in hopes of fooling her.
The comic mismatch of do it yourself film-making makes an impression on a number of the local residents who begin requesting short remakes of classic films. Soon the store starts making a decent amount of money by filming short "sweded" films and renting them to the customers. All this is a hair brained scheme to save the store and building. Of course the remakes bring in a nasty lawyer who raises hell about copyright violation.
I say it is a fantasy because of course it exists in a quasi reality in which we could not only find a store that still rents video tapes but also that it would actually take a spy mission to figure out that other stores are more successful because they moved to DVDs. The film seems to want to appeal to those of the world who are genuine fans of movies and who as kids or adults at times have picked up a camera and "remade" their favorite scenes and movies.
In that regard some of the movie works. Especially when they are showing bits of the recast movies. Their low rent quality and limited use of actors and their recreation of the most memorable scenes of many classic movies creates a decent amount of humorous charm. But ultimately when not focusing on the actual film-making the story is weak and reliant mostly on the wacky antics of Jack Black (who annoys me more than he makes me laugh).
It feels a bit like a better movie about obsession with film is possible and so its attempts at trying are certainly acknowledged. Mos Def is passable as the likable Mike and is actually a decent actor (I remember him fondly from the little scene or appreciated 16 Blocks). Jack Black is as always Jack Black (that is to say a slightly less annoying Robin Williams, but only slightly). In the end the remakes are the real stars and apparently you can see them online without the movie which is probably the better way to go.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Definitely, Maybe
The latest from Cinematic Arena is up for your reading leisure. (Definitely, Maybe)
Saturday, March 01, 2008
RunningTally - Part 2
February was not a very good month for movie watching. The quality films I was picking up from last year were dried up and I was mainly left with the dumping ground films of the January and February release season. I did manage to re-watch a couple of gems "Diving Bell" "Control" and "Into the Wild" but overall it was a bit of a let down with an aggregate gain of seven. This was helped by my 6 day end run in which I watched one new movie each night in the last week.
February 16 - Diary of the Dead: Wow Mr. Romero, please just stop.
February 16 - Persepolis: Another quality film from last year and this animated no less. Definitely worth seeing.
February 24 - In Bruges: On Oscar day I saw the interesting but messy film from a new filmmaker that shows some potential but gets bogged down in all the genre shifts.
February 25 - Definitely, Maybe: A fairly nuanced take on the classic Rom Com set up but the little girl and some of the plot still irritated me a bit too much.
February 26 - Vantage Point:This film couldn't even live up to its own gimmick which was the only thing it had going for it.
February 27 - Charlie Bartlett: pretty much dead on arrival teen comedy ala Ferris Bueller.
February 28 - Be Kind Rewind: Not great but it had some charm, not sure how I ultimately feel about it, review forthcoming.
And once again the meaningless statistics!
Films remaining: 81
Days Remaining: 305
Average Number of Films to see per day to achieve goal: 0.27
Average Number of films to see per week to achieve goal: 1.8
February 16 - Diary of the Dead: Wow Mr. Romero, please just stop.
February 16 - Persepolis: Another quality film from last year and this animated no less. Definitely worth seeing.
February 24 - In Bruges: On Oscar day I saw the interesting but messy film from a new filmmaker that shows some potential but gets bogged down in all the genre shifts.
February 25 - Definitely, Maybe: A fairly nuanced take on the classic Rom Com set up but the little girl and some of the plot still irritated me a bit too much.
February 26 - Vantage Point:This film couldn't even live up to its own gimmick which was the only thing it had going for it.
February 27 - Charlie Bartlett: pretty much dead on arrival teen comedy ala Ferris Bueller.
February 28 - Be Kind Rewind: Not great but it had some charm, not sure how I ultimately feel about it, review forthcoming.
And once again the meaningless statistics!
Films remaining: 81
Days Remaining: 305
Average Number of Films to see per day to achieve goal: 0.27
Average Number of films to see per week to achieve goal: 1.8
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)