Mistake 1: going to see Transformers 2
Mistake 2: going to the the midnight show
Mistake 3: thinking that I have the energy or patience to sit through 2 and half hours of drivel at midnight.
Do you know that old cliche that when it comes to action movies, the sequel just ramps up whatever made the first film successful by 10 and hopes the profits will multiply by 100? Was there a big action sequence in the first film that was really popular? Okay, then let us add 43.2 big action sequences. Was there a mildly humorous (or annoying or both) character, well if people occasionally laughed at the antics of that character, imagine the hilarity that will ensue if we add 5 more such characters. And was their an aesthetically pleasing bombshell damsel? Okay lets add another one.
Michael Bay has pretty much give us every single one of those cliches in the sequel. The man who once almost gave me an aneurysm when he criticized a would be film maker for making a film that felt like retread has provided exactly what you would expect him to provide. There are an uncountable number of over the top action sequences, there are four or five "humorous" characters adding comic relief and a fair amount of backhanded racism. And of course we get more of lithe Megan Fox but also another scantily clad young woman.
The fan boy in me and the one, who grew up playing with plastic transformers and watching the 30 minute commercial that was the cartoon series, admittedly had one moment of pure glee when Optimus Prime took on three Decepticons at once. I couldn't resist smiling. But the rest of the time was painful, long and exhausting. You can be pretty much of two types when it comes to this movie, you want to see it and nothing I say will change your mind or you have no desire to see it and nothing I can say can change your mind.
The plot isn't worth repeating even if I pretended I was paying attention or that I understood it. But what struck me as odd and I don't care whether this was intentional or not, is the blatant conservative rhetoric of the film. Much like 300 was so easy to read as a neo-conservative statement of freedom and democracy, the new Transformers movie smacks you in the face with the Dick Cheney rhetoric that America is less safe thanks to Barack Obama.
Since the first film, the transformers have been allied with humans fighting terrorist acts by the decepticons. Then enter a new president (specifically referenced twice as being Barack Obama). This new president as represented by his sniveling, bureaucratic liaison to the military suggests that it is the tools of fighting the terrorists that may be causing more terrorism. Suggesting that Obama's foreign policy is simply if we stop antagonizing the enemy and get rid of our best way of defending against them then the whole thing will work out peacefully.
It was insulting to say nothing else. And I'm sure more than one person will say I'm reading to much into it but what reason does the film have to make reference to the president as being Barack Obama? Its a fantasy world where giant sentient robots exist, can't it have a fantasy president? The fact that the asshole suit who wants to get rid of the Autobots represents the president seems to me pretty clear. Why does a mindless action film have to not so subtly suggest a real president is ineffectual? I don't care for it.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Goodbye, Solo
Have you ever noticed that although I probably come off as a crabby old man who hates everything he sees, that I actually have more positive reviews than negative ones? Something to think about...or not. Its a bit of a falsified statistic since it includes reviews of movies that I watched at home or own which in general lends towards movies I actually want to see. I can't say for sure why when I go to the cinema I see so many movies I don't want to see. In the end morbid curiosity gets the better of me and I ascribe to a theory that any movie even one that boils my blood in anger is still worth seeing.
But I also suspect that because I endure so many terrible movies that when I hit on one that really makes me smile, I enjoy it that much more because of all the crap that came before it. Ramin Bahrani's film Man Push Cart was more or less an attempt by a modern filmmaker to make a Neo-realist picture. My review was largely positive but I balked at a couple of the contrived subplots.
Bahrani's new film Goodbye, Solo shows me an evolving filmmaker who is cutting out some of his bad habits (some are still there) and yet maintains his deep compassion for characters who are liminal to the larger society. Man Push Cart's Ahmad was a weary, hard working Pakistani, who provided breakfast each day for big movers and shakers of the New York business world trying hard to reach his own American Dream.
Solo(Souleymane Sy Savane), Bahrani's new protagonist is a likable, chatty taxi cab driver originally from Senegal who now resides in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Solo like Ahmad has dreams of a better life this time as a Flight Attendant but it isn't so much the story of greater ambition that moves the story but the simple day to day of a well developed character performing a largely thankless task as so many in the United States today. When an elderly man, William (Red West) makes a request to be driven in several weeks to a semi obscure mountain destination and agrees to pay handsomely for it, Solo is intrigued.
Solo becomes increasingly intrigued by William and befriends him and tries to discover the mystery of the bitter old man. It is in these scenes (the heart and soul of the film) which won me over early on and kept me happy for the entire film. William isn't entirely heartless and opens up partially but nothing turns him from his mysterious goal. West has one of those fantastic faces that reveals and yet conceals a thousand interesting stories. He manages those looks and intonations of certain phrases that suggest a life more profound and sad than you can imagine, much the way Hal Holbrook managed to convey so much in one line of dialogue in Into the Wild.
The story goes along its course and never fully reveals the mysteries of William's life, merely hinting at some of the points and only alluding to why William wants to go to the mountain vista (albeit alludes strongly). And then the film ends. Solo might have a bit of renewed desire to accomplish his dreams but we certainly don't see success and the profound experience of someone who may have changed your life but then disappeared from it its fairly moving. There is a humanity to Solo and a humane treatment of his character by Bahrani that alone makes the film worth watching. Savane pulls off a fully formed likable character whom you believe would befriend a perfect stranger quickly and would genuinely care about what happens to him.
This is the first movie released in 2009 that I truly enjoyed through and through and has me hopeful for the upcoming fall releases and hopes that more gems of this sort are in the wings.
But I also suspect that because I endure so many terrible movies that when I hit on one that really makes me smile, I enjoy it that much more because of all the crap that came before it. Ramin Bahrani's film Man Push Cart was more or less an attempt by a modern filmmaker to make a Neo-realist picture. My review was largely positive but I balked at a couple of the contrived subplots.
Bahrani's new film Goodbye, Solo shows me an evolving filmmaker who is cutting out some of his bad habits (some are still there) and yet maintains his deep compassion for characters who are liminal to the larger society. Man Push Cart's Ahmad was a weary, hard working Pakistani, who provided breakfast each day for big movers and shakers of the New York business world trying hard to reach his own American Dream.
Solo(Souleymane Sy Savane), Bahrani's new protagonist is a likable, chatty taxi cab driver originally from Senegal who now resides in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Solo like Ahmad has dreams of a better life this time as a Flight Attendant but it isn't so much the story of greater ambition that moves the story but the simple day to day of a well developed character performing a largely thankless task as so many in the United States today. When an elderly man, William (Red West) makes a request to be driven in several weeks to a semi obscure mountain destination and agrees to pay handsomely for it, Solo is intrigued.
Solo becomes increasingly intrigued by William and befriends him and tries to discover the mystery of the bitter old man. It is in these scenes (the heart and soul of the film) which won me over early on and kept me happy for the entire film. William isn't entirely heartless and opens up partially but nothing turns him from his mysterious goal. West has one of those fantastic faces that reveals and yet conceals a thousand interesting stories. He manages those looks and intonations of certain phrases that suggest a life more profound and sad than you can imagine, much the way Hal Holbrook managed to convey so much in one line of dialogue in Into the Wild.
The story goes along its course and never fully reveals the mysteries of William's life, merely hinting at some of the points and only alluding to why William wants to go to the mountain vista (albeit alludes strongly). And then the film ends. Solo might have a bit of renewed desire to accomplish his dreams but we certainly don't see success and the profound experience of someone who may have changed your life but then disappeared from it its fairly moving. There is a humanity to Solo and a humane treatment of his character by Bahrani that alone makes the film worth watching. Savane pulls off a fully formed likable character whom you believe would befriend a perfect stranger quickly and would genuinely care about what happens to him.
This is the first movie released in 2009 that I truly enjoyed through and through and has me hopeful for the upcoming fall releases and hopes that more gems of this sort are in the wings.
Year One
Obviously there is something wrong with me. Because the only comedic (and I use the term broadly) actor I hate more than Will Farrell is Jack Black. He's basically anti-comedy most of the time. Basically just loud and offensive. But as foolishly amazed as I was that I went to Land of the Lost I was a bit more perplexed as to why I had gone to see Year One. I'd like to say I was tricked by esteemed critic Manhola Darghis of the New York Times. But that would just be lying to myself. Although she did indeed give the film a critic's pick recommendation, I still knew in my heart that any Jack Black movie was not for me.
The film taking place in a fantasy reality where biblical stories mix with cavemen and Romans is an absurd road trip for the film's leads Jack Black and Michael Cera. Black as his usual load, boisterous, obnoxious self. Cera as his usual quiet, snarky, wimpy self. At times Cera's charm is put to good use and works well but here it is an annoying and ineffectual foil to Black. Cameos by David Cross and Hank Azaria are not nearly as humorous as advertised. Its general theme of poking fun of religious dogma is tame and the topic has been eviscerated by better comedic genius than this group. Notably, Monty Python's Life of Brian, which in retrospect I wish I had just stayed home and watched, is a far better satire of religion and the ancient world.
The film taking place in a fantasy reality where biblical stories mix with cavemen and Romans is an absurd road trip for the film's leads Jack Black and Michael Cera. Black as his usual load, boisterous, obnoxious self. Cera as his usual quiet, snarky, wimpy self. At times Cera's charm is put to good use and works well but here it is an annoying and ineffectual foil to Black. Cameos by David Cross and Hank Azaria are not nearly as humorous as advertised. Its general theme of poking fun of religious dogma is tame and the topic has been eviscerated by better comedic genius than this group. Notably, Monty Python's Life of Brian, which in retrospect I wish I had just stayed home and watched, is a far better satire of religion and the ancient world.
Land of the Lost
Well I really have no one to blame but myself. (Note to Reader: this will pretty much be the theme for several of upcoming reviews) Give a man nothing to do and he is likely to do something really stupid. In my case, ennui made me go see Land of the Lost. I can't really explain why since I find Will Ferrell unfunny and that he has overstayed his welcome as a comedic actor. Perhaps it was the presence of Danny McBride, who stole the show in the recent Pineapple Express. Or perhaps it was memories of his better films such as Anchor Man or Talladega Nights. Whatever the reason, it was a bad decision.
Ferrell plays a discredited scientist who believes that portals to parallel Earths exist. Soon enough a contrived plot allows for our hero, his plucky grad student helper, Anna Friel and the aforementioned Danny McBride as a redneck survival nut are transported to a world of dinosaurs and strange lizard creatures. Friel quickly alters her wardrobe to show off her legs and a series of rather unfunny encounters occur. These include but are not limited to a T-Rex that takes offense to being called stupid and a hallucinatory binge by McBride and Ferrell. When it isn't simply being unfunny, its usually being downright painful.
Ferrell plays a discredited scientist who believes that portals to parallel Earths exist. Soon enough a contrived plot allows for our hero, his plucky grad student helper, Anna Friel and the aforementioned Danny McBride as a redneck survival nut are transported to a world of dinosaurs and strange lizard creatures. Friel quickly alters her wardrobe to show off her legs and a series of rather unfunny encounters occur. These include but are not limited to a T-Rex that takes offense to being called stupid and a hallucinatory binge by McBride and Ferrell. When it isn't simply being unfunny, its usually being downright painful.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Taking of Pelham 123
Dear Mr. Tony Scott,
You are actually a pretty decent film maker. I've pretty much enjoyed every movie you have made in some fashion. Hell I think I like more of your movies than I do of your brother Ridley's but he, sir, made Alien while you made Days of Thunder so unfortunately for you, he's still ahead. But that is neither here nor there. What pray gods, is your obsession with time stamps? Seriously I'm fairly sure this is the third or fourth movie I have seen where you stamp up on the screen some numbers to let us know how much time is left until a specific situation.
Guess what? It is completely unnecessary. Especially when your main villain is so crazy that he frequently SAYS how long the good guys have. We don't need a time stamp just like we don't need an establishing shot of say the Eiffel Tower and a text on screen confirming Paris. You see how the establishing shot already gives us that kind of information? Its superfluous. And it really annoys me personally. Oh, really? There are 42 minutes left before the deadline? Right because John Travolta just said there were 42 minutes left before the deadline. Thanks for confirming what a character already said. Has it gotten to the point that you the film maker think that we are all so ADD that we don't even listen to the characters? And if it has, does flashing the time stamp do anything? We are probably so ADD we aren't reading it.
Point 2 (sorry dear reader, this will only take a moment): Mr. Scott, I'd like to propose a little quiz. Not hard, I assure you. What makes a thriller interesting? a) compelling well developed characters verbally sparring while the secrets of the film are slowly revealed or b) lots of fast moving cars, car crashes and explosions? or c) some strange unfathomable combination of the two? If I had to guess on this film, I'd say you think its c). And when one of your characters acknowledges that the scene in question is silly only makes the scene more absurd, it doesn't justify it.
Sincerely,
Movie Idiot.
Dear Reader,
I apologize for the above, its just I had to get those things off my chest. And at this point you are probably thinking that I hated Taking of Pelham 123 and truthfully, you would be wrong. I actually enjoyed it. Aside from the annoying time stamping and the completely gratuitous action sequence, I actually really enjoyed it. Let me attempt to give a satisfactory explanation as to why.
On an afternoon in New York, a group of men hijack a subway train and get in contact with a central rail control operator. They tell him they want ten million dollars in one hour or they start killing hostages. They gang is led by Ryder (John Travolta). He's tattooed and a little crazy. Its over the top but it works. The rail control operator is Denzel Washington. Preternaturally cool even in a hostage negotiation, I'm thinking if I were a hostage taker I would never want Denzel on the other side of the line. It just wouldn't be fair.
When the film is focused on these two and their conversations, I must say its quite engrossing. And was unfortunately occasionally mucked up by inter-cut unnecessary action sequences involving the money payout and a police escort. Ahhh, sorry, it still bugs me. Both are interestingly developed, Ryder maybe a bit less so but Travolta's unrestrained performance make up for it.
Ancillary characters make for interesting completion of the cast. John Turturro as a police negotiator adds a nice element to the conversations as he tries to aid Denzel on the radio. And James Gandolfini as a Michael Bloomberg-esque mayor of New York is a pleasant part of the mix.
Even the inevitable showdown between Travolta and Washington is for the most part decently done. No silly fight scene or overdrawn chase sequence. Quite a bit of the film plays out exactly as the characters predict and both sides of the affair clearly come off as smart. Not a perfect movie even if you subtracted the irritating things I mentioned above but an enjoyable one through and through thanks to a decent story and well acted interaction between Travolta and Washington.
You are actually a pretty decent film maker. I've pretty much enjoyed every movie you have made in some fashion. Hell I think I like more of your movies than I do of your brother Ridley's but he, sir, made Alien while you made Days of Thunder so unfortunately for you, he's still ahead. But that is neither here nor there. What pray gods, is your obsession with time stamps? Seriously I'm fairly sure this is the third or fourth movie I have seen where you stamp up on the screen some numbers to let us know how much time is left until a specific situation.
Guess what? It is completely unnecessary. Especially when your main villain is so crazy that he frequently SAYS how long the good guys have. We don't need a time stamp just like we don't need an establishing shot of say the Eiffel Tower and a text on screen confirming Paris. You see how the establishing shot already gives us that kind of information? Its superfluous. And it really annoys me personally. Oh, really? There are 42 minutes left before the deadline? Right because John Travolta just said there were 42 minutes left before the deadline. Thanks for confirming what a character already said. Has it gotten to the point that you the film maker think that we are all so ADD that we don't even listen to the characters? And if it has, does flashing the time stamp do anything? We are probably so ADD we aren't reading it.
Point 2 (sorry dear reader, this will only take a moment): Mr. Scott, I'd like to propose a little quiz. Not hard, I assure you. What makes a thriller interesting? a) compelling well developed characters verbally sparring while the secrets of the film are slowly revealed or b) lots of fast moving cars, car crashes and explosions? or c) some strange unfathomable combination of the two? If I had to guess on this film, I'd say you think its c). And when one of your characters acknowledges that the scene in question is silly only makes the scene more absurd, it doesn't justify it.
Sincerely,
Movie Idiot.
Dear Reader,
I apologize for the above, its just I had to get those things off my chest. And at this point you are probably thinking that I hated Taking of Pelham 123 and truthfully, you would be wrong. I actually enjoyed it. Aside from the annoying time stamping and the completely gratuitous action sequence, I actually really enjoyed it. Let me attempt to give a satisfactory explanation as to why.
On an afternoon in New York, a group of men hijack a subway train and get in contact with a central rail control operator. They tell him they want ten million dollars in one hour or they start killing hostages. They gang is led by Ryder (John Travolta). He's tattooed and a little crazy. Its over the top but it works. The rail control operator is Denzel Washington. Preternaturally cool even in a hostage negotiation, I'm thinking if I were a hostage taker I would never want Denzel on the other side of the line. It just wouldn't be fair.
When the film is focused on these two and their conversations, I must say its quite engrossing. And was unfortunately occasionally mucked up by inter-cut unnecessary action sequences involving the money payout and a police escort. Ahhh, sorry, it still bugs me. Both are interestingly developed, Ryder maybe a bit less so but Travolta's unrestrained performance make up for it.
Ancillary characters make for interesting completion of the cast. John Turturro as a police negotiator adds a nice element to the conversations as he tries to aid Denzel on the radio. And James Gandolfini as a Michael Bloomberg-esque mayor of New York is a pleasant part of the mix.
Even the inevitable showdown between Travolta and Washington is for the most part decently done. No silly fight scene or overdrawn chase sequence. Quite a bit of the film plays out exactly as the characters predict and both sides of the affair clearly come off as smart. Not a perfect movie even if you subtracted the irritating things I mentioned above but an enjoyable one through and through thanks to a decent story and well acted interaction between Travolta and Washington.
The Hangover
Four guys go to Las Vegas for a bachelor party, a few days before said Bachelor's wedding. Three guys wake up the next day hungover, clueless as to how the night went and unable to locate their friend. Queue the insane antics as the three strangely different guys trying to discover what happened to their friend and what happened on their night.
I know I laughed several times during the movie. I know as I left the cinema I overheard a guy on his phone tell a friend he had seen the film three times now because it was so damn funny. I know that even though its only been three days, I've forgotten everything but the broad outline of the film. I know that like a hangover in a few more days I won't remember it at all.
I know for some reason I have the song "Tom Sawyer" from Rush stuck in my head and I'm positive it never played in the movie. I don't know what that is about but its probably not a good sign for the movie. I feel confident you could point to any single person on Earth and I could immediately tell you if they would like, love, dislike or hate this movie. If you pointed at me I think I'd say has no opinion one way or the other.
I know I laughed several times during the movie. I know as I left the cinema I overheard a guy on his phone tell a friend he had seen the film three times now because it was so damn funny. I know that even though its only been three days, I've forgotten everything but the broad outline of the film. I know that like a hangover in a few more days I won't remember it at all.
I know for some reason I have the song "Tom Sawyer" from Rush stuck in my head and I'm positive it never played in the movie. I don't know what that is about but its probably not a good sign for the movie. I feel confident you could point to any single person on Earth and I could immediately tell you if they would like, love, dislike or hate this movie. If you pointed at me I think I'd say has no opinion one way or the other.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)