Thursday, April 29, 2010
Review: The Infernal Departed Affairs
Two messengers deliver identical messages. One messenger is from Hong Kong and delivers the message in 2003. The other messenger is from Boston (or Bahhston for you in the Northeast) and delivers the same message three years later presumably because he got distracted by the Red Sox/Bruins/Celtics for three years. Is one messenger favored over the other just because they delivered the message in different styles?
The Departed hit theaters in October of 2006 boasting an impressive man's man cast headed by Jack Nicholson, Leonardo DiCaprio and Matt Damon. It just got really hot in here so take a moment to swoon if needed. And I don't just mean the female readers. Martin Scorcese directed this crime drama of deception, suspense and enough Boston accents to choke a Catholic guilt filled Irishman. I won't waste anyone's time reviewing The Departed. If you haven't watched it, rectify that situation. It's easily in my personal top 10. It's well acted by a perfectly selected cast of characters with a story that's suspenseful, exciting and at times hysterically funny. It's a testament to how Scorcese's talent as a director isn't slowing down with his age (unlike my ever expanding tummy).
Leaving the movie theater after my first viewing of The Departed in the fall of 2006 I was informed by fellow writer Nick Connors 1) to get my feet off the dashboard of his Jeep 2) that The Departed was actually based on a movie out of Hong Kong from 2003. I wasn't necessarily surprised given that most scripts floating around Hollywood are based on a book, video game, short story, TV show, childhood toy, household appliance or are just a remake of another movie. Now, five years and one Netflix subscription later I finally watched the original film Infernal Affairs.
Considering it was the source work for a Martin Scorcese film, it's not surprising that I found the movie excellent. Normally I don't like reading subtitles unless it's to tell me that Godzilla's coming or VH1's Pop-up Video (yeah, you remember that show) but I didn't mind following the dialogue in subtitle format here. It also didn't impede my comprehension of the story. While I thought the movie was well done I didn't necessarily enjoy watching it. I already knew the story and as the movie progressed, I began to realize that The Departed is (quite literally in some cases) a shot for shot remake of Infernal Affairs. Granted the dialogue has been changed in a few places to accommodate the Boston vibe and some of the scenes are out of order but for the most part it's a direct remake right down to the locations of most of the scenes.
Infernal Affairs was also the first of a trilogy. The second film, which delves into the origins of the characters prior to the first movie, is great while the third movie is only so-so. The third film was too confusing to me with the storyline constantly switching between 6 months before the first movie and 6 months after the first movie. As a stand-alone trilogy, they make a solid three films and are definitely worth watching especially if you enjoyed The Departed.
What I have a hard time accepting is that the Hollywood Academy chose to (finally) bestow an Oscar to Mr. Scorcese for this film. Don't get misinterpret that I didn't think The Departed was deserving. I was happy that it won. It's just a little confusing that after the legendary films Scorcese has helmed which the Academy snubbed, they would finally reward him with the coveted Oscar for directing a remake. Most directors would kill to make just one of the many, many quality movies Scorcese has made: Mean Streets, Raging Bull, The Last Temptation of Christ, Taxi Driver , Goodfellas and even slightly lesser fare like Gangs of New York, Casino or The Aviator. All of these films the Academy never acknowledged for Best Picture or Best Director. Some of these snubs were understandable such as losing Best Director in 1989 to Barry Levinson for Rain Man Some snubs were questionable like Dances With Wolves/Costner winning in 1990 over Goodfellas. And some are anger inducing even today like Redford beating out Raging Bull with the suckfest that is and was Ordinary People. Giving Scorcese the Oscar for The Departed felt like a charity gift in an effort to begin to apologize for the all the times they screwed him over.
I give The Departed five Guiness car bombs (the highest honor I can give a Boston film aside from three helpings of shepherds pie). Infernal Affairs can have 5sake bombs and then try to explain to me one more time how Hong Kong is different from China. And that's about as political as this site will get.
Sorry for the long layoff. I can't even keep up commitments on things I enjoy.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Review: Fast and Furious
I like Paul Walker.
There. Now it's out there.
I don't need to elaborate on why I like him. I probably couldn't even if I wanted to try. He's the Carlos Zambrano of acting. I know he's going to perform horribly but I get my hopes up before every performance thinking this time could be different. I'm aware that he's not the most gifted actor and every character he plays is pretty much exactly the same. Whether it's a quarterback, soldier, government agent, conflicted undercover government agent or some combination of those choices he always plays the stereotypical "cool, tough guy with a slightly sensitive side". Actually, some psychiatrist would probably say that the reason I like him despite his poor acting is because I want to be like the characters he plays. Ouch. Self-revelation stings.
Brief side note tangent: I don't know what clause Paul Walker has in his acting contract that he be allowed to have sex with the female lead on a washing machine but it's happened twice now in Varsity Blues (before Billy Bob gave his dinosaurs a holler) and again in Running Scared.
The Fast and the Furious came out in 2001 to the delight of 16-18 year old boys who wanted to drag race each other out of the parking lot of the movie theater. For me, it meant pushing my 1994 Ford Taurus all the way up to 82 mph on I-65 before the car and my hands started to shake. The movie was a success and naturally the sequels followed. There was 2 Fast 2 Furious which I thought was way too fast yet inadequate on the furious side. The third installment was called Tokyo Drift which I'm pretty sure is the term for a Japanese guy farting on you as he walks by. I could be wrong though since I didn't see the movie. By the time the third movie came out not one of the original actors was left.
Apparently all the acting roles dried up for Michelle Rodriguez, Paul Walker, Vin Diesel, and Jordana Brewster although in fairness I don't think Brewster had any roles since the first movie. They're all back for a fourth round though as you can tell from the poster.
When I first saw the title for Fast and Furious I thought they had made a mini-documentary describing Kingsley's demeanor as he chased me down an alley after Nick lied that I was going to Julie's. Unfortunately, Fast and Furious is just the fourth movie in the car racing franchise. Not much has changed since the last time we saw all of these characters together. Paul Walker is somehow still a government agent. I would love to say this is the movie where he proves me wrong and gives a great performance without woodenly reading his lines but I would be lying.
Michelle Rodriguez is still the extreme, always yelling girlfriend of Vin Diesel. It's sad to see that Vin's character Dom is still suffering from the condition of arm overheating thus preventing him from wearing sleeves....ever. Oh and Brewster is back as Dom's sister to provide emotional support. And by that I mean she's there for Paul Walker to hook up with again. Only this time it's on a kitchen counter. Nice move up from the washing machine Paul. It's quicker access for her to make you a sandwich from there when you're done. I'm kidding, I'm kidding. Calm down feminists.
There's not really much to review here in terms of a plot. After splitting from his girlfriend for her own safety, Dom goes off on his own only to discover that his girlfriend has been murdered anyway. This is where Diesel really excels as he spends the remainder of the movie in deep discussions with the other characters regarding the true nature of good and evil along with the futility of a human life. Nah, I'm kidding. He drives cars into people, buildings and other cars while blowing sh*t up. While working as a driver for the drug dealer responsible for Rodriguez's death, he encounters Paul Walker who is also working undercover to bring down the same man. Since both know the other's ulterior motive they're forced to work together and rest assured there will be a bro hug at the end of this.
This is pure summer entertainment and the filmmakers know it. There's never more than 10 minutes of dialogue before another action/chase scene. I've always thought these movies must be easy for the actors to make since all the chase scenes require is to make worried faces, act like they're shifting gears and occasionally look in the rear view mirror. The rest they leave to the stunt drivers. It's nice to see Walker and Diesel accepting their place in the movie food chain making the kind of movie they're good at making and the public wants to see. I could be trite and arrogant in pointing out the weak dialogue and the impossibility of some of the chase scenes (100 mph in an underground labyrinth in the dark?) but who really goes to the summer movies expecting believability?
While I don't live my life a quarter mile at a time (it's actually 32 miles at a time which is the distance of my commute), I can enjoy a good summer popcorn movie. Plus it's Paul Walker so I can't hate it too much. That doesn't save it from an average rating though. I would buy this movie 3 beers. Perhaps 3 Bud Heavys otherwise known as Bud Diesels. Get it? Diesel? Like Vin Diesel? Yeah, yeah I know. Ten minutes on the timeout stool.
Review: The Slammin' Salmon
The plot is (as you can probably tell) fairly simplistic, but it actually works well here. Rather than allowing themselves to get bogged down in a plot that reaches too far or becomes overcomplicated, setting the entire film in a single location allows you to spend the 90 minutes focused solely on character development. Now, this isn't character development in the traditional sense, but you do get a a sense for who all these characters are, and they establish nice little quirks or personality traits for each of the characters that helps to draw the humor out during the rest of the film.
All of the Lizards do a fine job at playing their particular roles. If you liked their style or sense of humor in their previous films, you will feel right at home in this one. They each ended up with a few scenes/lines that made me laugh, and there weren't any weak links. No one member particularly outshines all the others, but Jay Chandrasekhar is particularly hilarious as"Nuts", even if his character doesn't seem to get as much screen time as some of the other leads. Among the non-Broken Lizards stepping into lead roles is Michael Clark Duncan as the owner of the restaurant. Ducan isn't typically known as a comedic actor, though he has dipped his toe in the waters from time to time. In this film though, he steals nearly every scene he's in. He perfectly nails the character as both equal parts dim-witten and intimidating, and he has a number of fantastic one-liners that I have found myself referencing numerous times since I saw the film. The rest of the roles are filled out by a string of cameos from individuals playing patrons at the restaurant. The performances here vary, but it will keep you entertained to see what actor/actress is going to pop up next, and they run a nice mix between new talent and a number of folks you'll recognize from previous Broken Lizard movies.
The first question people will ask when they found you saw this movie will inevitably by "Was this as good as Beerfest or Super Troopers?" Unfortunately, my answer to that would be "no." That's not to say that it was a bad movie, but at this point I just don't think people will be talking about this one with the same fondness so many hold for the Lizard's previous work. That said, I certainly wasn't disappointed with the film, and yes Spud, it is definitely better than Club Dread. It provided more than enough laughs, the characters again found that perfect mix of unique and relateable, and I can easily see myself quoting lines to this movie with friends months and years down the road. This solid outing keeps me firmly entrenched in the "fan" camp for Broken Lizard, and while I wouldn't rate this as their best work, I'm certainly on board for whatever they cook up next. (PUN!)
After its shift is over, I'd take this movie out for three rounds on me. Duncan gets to pick what we drink.
After its shift is over, I'd take this movie out for three rounds on me. Duncan gets to pick what we drink.
Review: Boxboarders!
I discovered Boxboarders! (yes, the exclamation point is part of the official title) when I was scrolling though a list of films that were recently added to Netflix's online streaming service. The film tells the stories of two "surfers" (who will not once be seen surfing during the entirety of the film) Ty Neptune and James James (not a typo). During a moment of boredom/genius, James decides (for reasons left unexplained) to take a refrigerator box and strap it to the top of a skateboard. He then sits inside the box and rides it down a hill. He crashes. This is essentially the point of the whole film. The rest of the 90 minutes are filled with your typical archetypes of the rich boy who wants to steal the idea, the stuck up girl who taunts our heroes, the down-to-earth girl that we should have been with all along, a tormented younger brother, and two other guys who says "gnarly" a lot. The entire movie is pretty standard fare for the early 1990s, or at least it would be if it wasn't made in 2007. You owe it to yourself to check out the trailer on IMDB.
Based on that description, you would probably assume that I didn't like Boxboarders!, but that was actually not the case. Don't get me wrong, this movie definitely has its flaws. A number of the moments are so cliche that I was quoting the dialog along with the characters (even though I've never seen the movie), the plot takes certain turns that seem to have no basis, entire subplots are created and then forgotten in a single scene, and the shakey-cam could rival Michael Mann's best (and I don't think that's done intentionally).
All of that being said, this feels like exactly the kind of movie that I would make if someone gave me a few thousand bucks and a video camera. Maybe that's why I found it so endearing. You can't help but feel like these people enjoyed the hell out of themselves as they made the movie. You won't recognize any of the main characters in this one (although the "villain" looks exactly like Mitchell Goosen from the 1993 film Airborne) but a few of their parents are played by actors you might recognize. The two most recognizable are The Office's Melora Hardin, and the always unbelievable Stephen Tobolowski. Not sure how Tobolowski found his way into this movie, but his role as the quirky, therapist Dad was pretty funny. He once again proves that he can be entertaining and likable in absolutely anything and everything he's in. If this guy isn't your favorite character actor in Hollywood, then you just clearly haven't seen the fantastic documentary Stephen Tobolowski's Birthday Party (and shame on you for that).
Boxboarders! is not a great movie, but in the right frame of mind, it can be really enjoyable. I watched the movie with a few beers and a few friends and found that I rarely stopped laughing. The laughter was a mix of intentional and unintentional on the part of the film, but I can't say that I wasn't entertained. If you and a friend are ever sitting around one night, bored and looking for something to do, keep Boxboarders! in mind. Might I suggest the drinking game we tried:
Take one drink every time:
1) Someone says "dude"
2) A challenge is thrown down
3) Someone crashes in their boxboard (take a shot if that crash takes place in water)
4) A main character fantasizes about the popular girl
5) A pun is made using the word "box"
6) "The Lizardman" appears on screen
7) The little brother screams
In short, Boxboarders! perfectly walks that line of "so bad it's good" and "entertaining enough to be watchable while I laugh." This is the exact quality that used to make films perfect fodder for the guys at MST3K, and I think you will find yourself doing the exact same thing as you watch this movie yourself. I would have hated this movie if it tried to take itself too seriously, but instead it seemed like it was just a small group of people trying to have a good time, and you can't knock that. I wont cheapen our rating system by inflating this movie's score, so I think I can only offer to buy it two drinks were we to cross paths at a bar. If you watch this movie with friends and make a night of it, you can easily add another drink onto that total.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Review: Extract
Judge’s latest foray onto the silver screen is Extract, another comedy set around the inter-workings of an office, only this time we’ve swapped out the cubicle farm for a factory that makes flavor extracts. The plot is comparable to most of Judge’s other movies. There is one particular element that drives the main plot, but most of the movie is comprised of the smaller things that happen to the characters along the way. It’s the perfect setup for this type of movie, as the plot remains coherent, but it leaves you much more leeway to keep the focus where it belongs, on the characters.
And the characters in this movie are fantastic. I think this comes from a combination of Judge’s comedic writing, and the pitch-perfect cast he has gathered for this film. This is far and away the movie’s biggest strength. Jason Bateman makes a solid anchor for a cast that largely tips toward the eccentric. He plays a quality foil for the other actors, and remains relate-able as the everyman we are supposed to connect with. His three years of training on Arrested Development serve him well here.
The supporting cast is all pretty well developed for a 90-minute comedy. They each have a particular character quirk that they rely on, but it’s done in a way where they don’t just come off as one-note characters. Ben Affleck makes a nice return to work his comedic chops as Bateman’s best friend, JK Simmons continues his bid to become the most underrated comedic actor of the last five years, and Beth Grant cracked me up almost the entire time she was on screen. Also, if you don’t get at least a chuckle out of Grant’s outfits in this movie, you are dead inside. One final supporting player worth mentioning is David Koechner, who plays Bateman’s neighbor. This is the only character that does just sort of repeat the same joke over and over, but for me, it worked. Koechner was really funny in those scenes, was great at drawing out the awkward humor in the moment, and played a fantastic dorky neighbor, which was a nice change of pace from the overly confident characters he typically portrays.
The only fault I found with this movie is that it was a bit uneven. There are moments in here that are classic Judge, but the humor wasn’t as consistent as with some of his other movies. I’m afraid that people are going to write this movie off because it’s not Office Space, and I don’t really think that that’s a fair comparison. Honestly, those people didn’t give Office Space a chance either, and that movie floundered on the shelf at Blockbuster for like 2 years after it had been released. I have a feeling that time will be kind to Extract, and it will be one of those movies that people do start to pick up on a few years down the road once they stop watching it through the goggles of “From the guy who brought you Office Space.”
I would buy Extract four beers and plan for a quality night out with the boys. I'm looking forward to re-watching this movie in the future, and I might even add an extra drink onto the total, but I’m drawing the line if it asks me to start doing hits of Special K.
Review: Year One
I bring this up because the copy of Year One that Netflix sent my way was the unrated version. This was my first red flag, as the movie itself went to theaters as a PG-13. Am I really supposed to believe that a movie with the potential to be so hardcore that it would be left unrated, ended up tame enough for 8th graders? After having watched the unrated version of this film, I cannot for the life of me determine what was so “unrated” about the movie. I am disappointed in myself for having bought into the marketing machine, but I also feel a bit let down that the movie itself felt so tame and so……………..rated.
Speaking of feeling let down, let’s actually get this review rolling shall we? Year One is the tale of two cavemen (Michael Cera and Jack Black) on what essentially boils down to a road trip. It’s territory that has been trodden many times before, but it was probably the best way to handle a movie like this. I say that because the movie was largely lacking in plot. The whole thing almost felt like I was watching something more in the vein of Monty Python’s Flying Circus. Not so much with the quality of the humor, but in the sense that there were a number of scenes that boiled down to little more than comedy skits, and the thread that held the skits together was thin at best. For proof of this, look no further than the scene where Michael Cera finds himself in danger with a large snake. He gets himself into this situation, and then..............the camera fades to black. The next shot is the two lead characters walking through the woods as if nothing happened and talking about something entirely different. Are you serious? That just screams of lazy writing to me. They worked the character into a situation, had no good ideas to get him out of it, and so they just ended that skit and started the next one? Sadly, this is not the only time this happens in the movie.
That’s not to say that this model is all bad. In fact, it does service what I think is the best part of this movie: the cast. Cera and Black do a pretty good job, but they really don’t do much more than play their typical Cera and Black characters. However, the supporting cast is fantastic, with cameos from David Cross, Paul Rudd, Paul Sheer, and a number of others that I don’t want to spoil. It’s these cameos that keep you going in the movie. Bill Hader is hilarious in the movie, and you probably won’t even realize that he was in it. I was willing to overlook the fact that two cavemen went up a mountain and came down the other side in the middle of the Roman Empire, because it meant that we got to meet new characters. If you’re anything like me, you’ll basically spend the entire movie wondering what historical character is going to pop out next, and what awesome comedic actor will they have playing them.
Year One has its funny moments, but the humor is definitely lowest common denominator. Don’t get me wrong, I was laughing, but I expected a lot more from this cast and crew. I’d still buy the movie two beers, but those are both earmarked for the actors that dropped in for cameos.
Review: Surrogates
This was a movie that I was really looking forward to because I’m a fan of the source material. Surrogates came to life as a five-issue comic book miniseries that I think was pretty entertaining. My biggest fear from the start is that the movie would need to be padded like crazy, as the original comic was not a long story. In order to avoid the crutch of having to pad out the movie, the movie does divert from the source material. The general concept and characters are largely the same, but most of the smaller plot points are original. The overall story isn’t mindblowing, but it moves along at a fast enough clip and should keep you entertained. There are more than a few flaws in the plot’s logic, but a few handfuls of popcorn should help you look past them. Similar to my earlier comparison with Wall-E, the movie is a bit heavy-handed in its social commentary. I don’t particularly like having a message beaten over my head, but as a movie, I was able to enjoy it. Like my fellow reviewer Curt said in his District 9 review, movies with an allegory still need to be entertaining enough to stand on their own.
While the movie had flaws, there were two things about it that I really liked. First of all, the effect that they used for the titular surrogates was really cool. I don’t know if it was makeup, CGI, or a combination of the two, but I love the look they achieved. All of the surrogates looked like humans (as they were all played by the actors themselves), but there was also something about them that was “off,” especially with their skin. The skin just looked wrong, and it was perfect because it constantly reminded you that you weren’t looking at humans. It was done so in a way as to not be distracting, but as you watched the scene, you definitely knew it was there. On the other side of the coin, they also did a great job of making all of the humans in the movie look sufficiently more “worn” than their surrogate counterparts. It was a nice dynamic that helped sell the message the movie continued to push. The who concept of the surrogates added helped to add a cool sci-fi element to the movie. It presents you with a future that’s a bit more realistic than something as clean and technology driven than we see in most sci-fi fare.
The other thing I really liked about the movie was Bruce Willis’ performance, particularly as the human character. He did a great job of conveying the emotions of someone who was seeing the world for the first time in a long while. He gave you an idea for how alone the character felt, as although he was surrounded by people, they weren’t really people. It’s my opinion that Willis is the best thing about this movie by far. You could make an argument that his acting as the surrogate was pretty stiff, but I’m going to assume that was done on purpose.
Out of a total of five, I would buy Surrogates 3 beers. That’s only if we were humans though. If we went out as our surrogate robots, I guess I would have to buy us glasses of……oil! Holy shit. Do you see what I did there? Did you picture it in your head? Robots drinking oil at a bar. They’d be just like people. Oh man. Ha ha ha……ha…………………….ha……………………………………….wheeeeeew.
Review: X-Men Origins: Wolverine
My knowledge of the X-Men comes almost exclusively from the early 90s Fox animated series. I don’t really know anything about the comics, and as such, I can neither confirm nor deny how accurate this origin story is. If I had to guess based on my gut reaction (and my history with origin stories) it probably hits on two or three main elements, and then makes up the rest. That being said, any major fans of Wolverine may find themselves upset at changes made by the film, but since I was oblivious, I was able to keep my panties out of the proverbial twist.
From a plot perspective, I found the movie pretty lacking. There wasn’t really much of a thread connecting the film, there were just scenes that took place in between action set pieces. The only two characters that are consistent are Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) and Sabretooth (Liev Schreiber). The rest of the movie is filled with other characters that make five-minute cameos and then fight each other for a variety of reasons (both clear and confusing). It honestly reminded me of playing a video game. When I pick a character in Street Fighter, the game isn’t over until I’ve fought every other character. I beat one, and the next fight starts. That’s what this movie felt like. Characters were introduced, then there was a big fight, and then they were gone, never to be heard from again.
This method of plotting the film is probably due to their strategy for this franchise in the future. Although the movie is called “Wolverine,” it really felt more like a showcase to set up other Marvel characters. They introduce familiar names like Deadpool and Gambit, and you can almost feel the studio going “How do you feel about this character? Would you watch a movie that was just them?” Regardless of the fact that, yes, I would probably go see Ryan Reynolds in a Deadpool movie, I felt a little cheated. I wanted to see a fully fleshed out movie about Wolverine, and instead I felt like they used Wolverine to lure me in, and then just showed me previews of coming attractions to gauge my interest level (and no doubt sign actors into binding contracts requiring them to play the characters in any sequels/spin-offs).
Ignoring the plot, there were some enjoyable things about this movie. The big fight scenes were typically fun, and there is something that is endlessly entertaining about watching a guy cause havoc with sweet metal claws. This movie also sports some of the coolest facial hair in movies to date. Jackman and Schreiber both really let their facial follicles fly, and it helps to remind you that you are watching a comic book. It’s not a terrible way to kill 90 minutes, but your seatback needs to be in the upright and locked position, and your brain and any other electronic devices need to be switched into the off position. And you better get used to it too. As anyone who reads the internet can tell you, the X-Men franchise’s life on the silver screen is far from over.
Once we finished our classes at Professor Xavier’s School for Gifted Youngsters, I’d buy this movie two beers.
Review: State of Play
State of Play is the story of a reporter (Russell Crowe) trying to investigate the murder of a young girl who was working for an up-and-coming congressman (Ben Affleck). The story is interesting enough, and the plot twists and turns just the right amount to keep you interested, even if you see the twists coming. One word of caution though, the ending isn’t spelled out as clearly as most, and if you don’t pay attention during the movie, you may walk away at the end not sure what happened to who, and who got their comeuppance.
Performances in this one are pretty good all around. The highlight for me was the always fantastic Helen Mirren as Crowe’s boss. She plays a character that is much more in-your-face and hardnosed than she normally does, and it works really well. I’m all for seeing Helen Mirren play a hard ass. I also really liked Ben Affleck’s performance in this one. He went through a rough patch, but it looks like he’s come out alright on the other side with quality performances in this movie, Hollywoodland, and a fantastic turn behind the camera in Gone Baby Gone. I hope he can keep this up, because I like seeing him do well.
Although the acting is great, the biggest issue that I had with this movie was that it wasn’t the original miniseries. I hate typing those words. I know that it makes me sound like an elitist asshole. I don’t mean for it to. I hate the people who are always like “The book was better” or “I prefer to watch Bad News Bears in French, as it was originally intended”. The reason I say that I prefer the miniseries is that it is six hours long. For most people that may turn them off, but I loved that it gave the writers more time to develop the subplots and flesh out relationships between the characters. In the miniseries you felt like you were taking a step by step journey along with an investigative journalist, whereas in this movie I felt like they made a lot of plot jumps without having time to fully justify them. If I didn’t know the story, I feel like I would have constantly been saying “Now, why are we going to this building? How did they know to meet them there?” In order to trim the movie by two-thirds, this version had to eliminate entire characters and plot points. One of the more interesting characters from the original (portrayed by James McAvoy early in his career) is completely missing. I realize that this is necessary to get the movie down to 2 hours, and he was probably the only main character you could cut, but it still was sad to see that character eliminated. At times it felt like you were missing out on some of the key parts of what made the original so good. If you’ve never seen the miniseries, you won't be pining for what you don't know you're missing, but for those fans of the original, you will likely be disappointed at the loss of some of the more subtle character interactions and back story.
Overall, the movie is solid. It has a few strong performances, some nice showings by supporting actors (Jeff Daniels and Jason Bateman in particular), and has a plot that is interesting enough to keep you watching. I think the writers did as good a job as they could to cut a miniseries down to a movie, but the entire affair still seems truncated. I’d buy the movie three drinks at its favorite bar on Capitol Hill, but to anyone who saw this and felt it to be incoherent or lacking, give the miniseries a try. Ugh, I hate myself.
Review: Star Trek
Let’s get this out of the way up front: I’m not a Trekkie. I say this not to try and make myself sound cool, or distance myself from this subset of geek culture, but I say this so that you’ll go easy on me. I’ve never watched the shows, I’ve only see a few of the movies, and my knowledge of Star Trek does not extend beyond Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Picard, and the guy from Reading Rainbow. I likely missed half of the fan-service in this movie, and will probably embarrass myself with at least one or two of the comments I make during this review. Consider this the review for those that are uninitiated to the cult of Star Trek, comments below are not necessarily applicable to those who worship at the altar of the Enterprise.
From a plot perspective, this movie starts out at the beginning of it all, with the birth of Kirk. Things are a bit slow to get going, but the movie does hit its pace mid-way through. I think part of the reason the opening felt slow is that it kept dancing around things. We already know that Kirk is going to join Starfleet, we can skip the back-and-forth will he/won’t he. I’m going to sound like a broken record here, but again, this suffers from what I will call “prequel-itis.” Kirk is not going to die, you know this. At the end of the movie, we’ll end up with the crew as we know it, and things can move forward. I know that practically zero summer action movies actually kill off the main characters, but it does still take away part of the tension. Knowing the fates of these characters, and knowing the locations they will find themselves at the end of the film does rob the ending of some of its punch. This is less a gripe about the movie itself, and more my own personal stance towards the recent influx of prequels, reboots, etc. I’ve said it before, but when you already know the ending of the movie, it becomes much more about the journey than the ending itself. The good news for Star Trek, is that the journey was actually good.
The casting in this movie was extremely well done. I loved Chris Pine as Kirk. He perfectly pulled off that sort of rogue, confident, upstart who walks the tightrope between being awesome and being an overly cocky douchebag. He also avoids the pitfall of trying to do a Shatner impression. Wouldn’t have worked, smartly avoided. The other cast members, in particular Simon Pegg as Scotty, John Cho as Sulu, and Karl Urban as Bones, all do a great job with what they’re given. Sadly the each end up with fairly little screen time. This movie is clearly about Kirk and Spock. Speaking of, I wasn’t particularly crazy about Quinto’s Spock, but the more I think about it and talk to others about the movie, I think it’s just that I find the character of Spock as pretty lame. When you have a character that can’t display emotion, it makes it difficult for me to appreciate that character, as I typically lean towards “this guy can’t act for shit.” I’m willing to give Quinto the benefit of the doubt here though, as everyone else is so well-done that I can’t imagine that this is anything less than exactly what Abrams was shooting for.
Speaking of Abrams, he does a great job here. This movie really feels unique, but at the same time, faithful. It’s very much a Star Trek movie, but it also loudly echos Abrams and his frequent collaborators (writers Kurtzman and Orci, and producer Lindelhof). This is almost exactly what you’d expect to get when you cross the Abrams-verse with Star Trek. There’s that element of off-kilter science fiction that tries its best to be based in fact, and he even throws in a pretty obvious Alias reference for those who can spot it (Rambaldi device anyone?). As a big fan of his, this sat with me quite nicely, and I’m more than comfortable with him at the helm for the sequel(s). That being said, I know the joke has been made, but seriously, cool it with the lens flares. I get it, it’s the future, it’s bright, it’s shiny. Message received.
Overall, I found the movie enjoyable, if a little slow. Unfortunately, the movie seems to end exactly where you’d expect the plot to really get started. I suppose that’s kind of the point of a prequel though. I will say that watching the ending of this movie got me really excited for what’s to come in the sequel, and I suppose that’s the perfect praise for a movie like this: I’m excited to see what they come up with next. It still leaves me slightly unsatisfied with the plot as a whole though. Maybe I’m just not the prequel type, or maybe I’m not enough of a Trek fan to care, but I really didn’t need to see how each of these characters met or how they didn’t get along at first, but now they do. I would have been content starting the movie right from that point. Yes, you lose a bit of character development, but that’s easy enough to wrangle in once we’re moving. I guess this isn’t particularly Star Trek’s fault. I think I’m just personally fed up with the prequel/reboot genre. We didn’t used to need entire movies for this. What has caused this culture shift? Why can’t we accept that these four people are a crime fighting team? Why do we always need to show you how they met, why they became a team, how their first mission didn’t go so well until they learned to get along, etc. I don’t know what to blame. Was it the success of Batman Begins? Before that? I loved Batman Begins, I don’t mean to take anything away from it, but if that movie is the reason why we have to reboot every single franchise on Earth and give it a grittier, darker origin story, I’m afraid I’m not going to look back on that movie’s cultural impact fondly. Don’t blame Trek for these transgressions, it’s merely a product of the environment movies find themselves in. But suffice to say that where Dark Knight exceed upon Batman Begins, I look for Trek 2 to exceed upon this one.
Even though I’ve clearly got some sand in my underpants surrounding reboots, I’d still buy this movie 4 beers out of any six-pack. I’d probably even pony up for a two extra shots. One shot for the potential of our next drinking excursion, and another for the pitch-perfect joke about “red shirts” - a comedy goldmine even for those with the barest of Trek knowledge.
Review: Transformers - Revenge of the Fallen
Did you see the first Transformers? Congratulations, because you just saw the second Transformers. There isn’t a hell of a lot of difference between the two, and all of the faults I had in the first one remained basically unchanged in the second one. Still, that does mean that if you liked the first one, you’ll probably like this movie for all the same reasons.
I don’t mean to come off like some sort of jerk or elitist, but there are a few things I have to get off my chest about this movie, and most of them aren’t good. I always feel bad trashing a movie, because I’m sure that there were hundreds of people that worked really hard in making it, and I don’t like coming in and trying to trash that. So, instead of saying that this is a “bad” movie, I’ll just say that I didn’t like it. Now we’re just talking about a matter of opinion, rather than of fact.
To begin with, my biggest grievance with this movie is that there are no characters. Rather than develop the characters we met in the first movie, the real “stars” of this movie are the Transformers. I suppose that makes sense, as that’s the title of the movie (and they were the stars of the cartoon), but I still find it difficult to watch a movie that is largely comprised of CGI characters. Technology has continued to advance and make these digital effects look more lifelike, but as humans I think we have difficulty relating to non-human characters appearing in life-like settings. The rule doesn’t apply to animated films where everything is animated, but grafting these things into real life is still jarring. It didn’t work with Jar-Jar (see the pun I just set up there?), and it still doesn’t work here. The rule is not exclusive, and there are exceptions. Gollum from Lord of the Rings is a great example of a CGI character that actually worked, but those are definitely the exception rather than the rule. Even then, I’m of the opinion that Gollum only worked because it was a digital interpretation of Andy Serkis. Through Serkis, we were able to see Gollum interact with the other actors on the screen. In Transformers however, they’re all robots. We’re simply stuck watching one CGI character interact with other CGI characters. This left me feeling a little flat, as I didn’t feel connected to any of them. Additionally, as all these characters are undeveloped and built almost exclusively in the gray color palette, you will never have any idea what is going on in fight scenes. You never know if the good guy is winning or not, because you just keep seeing a gray robot getting punched by another gray robot and you have no idea who that is. Also, I realize they were trying to give the robots a sense of larger-than-life scale, but pull the freaking camera back. Please. These things aren’t real and you can frame the shot however you want, so give them a bit more room to work in the frame. That would have gone a long way to helping me at least try and keep track of who’s winning and who’s losing. When I give up even trying to follow the fights in a movie that is basically nothing but one large fight, you really limit my ability to enjoy the movie.
The few humans that do populate the film do a mixed job. I personally like Shia LaBeouf quite a bit, and he was in typical Shia-form here. Megan Fox is no Meryl Streep, but she isn’t as bad an actress as everyone makes her out to be (also, she’s easy on the eyes). She definitely gets the short end of the stick here, as her character didn’t really feel integral to the plot. They clearly kept her character in the movie solely because Megan Fox is hot, and they know that will sell tickets. My least favorite character in the flick was the “roommate” character that was supposed to live with LaBeouf’s character. While the actor playing the roommate didn’t do a bad job, this character was pretty distracting because he keeps dropping in and out of the movie with no rhyme or reason, whenever they need a third person in the scene. It happens so often that I guarantee you that at least twice in this movie you will forget the character exists and then exclaim “He’s still here?” when he pops up mid-battle to find himself in need of saving.
From a plot perspective, some of the things that take place are downright ridiculous. First of all, the Transformers are supposed to be “secret” and the people of Earth don’t know about them, yet they enter the movie by skydiving from a plane into downtown Shanghai? Yeah, pretty sure someone is going to see that. The movie also suffers from allowing the locations to drive the plot. These cool locales never feel like we arrived there organically. Instead it felt written backwards like “What has to happen to get the Transformers to the Pyramids?” On top of this we had some comedic moments that left me feeling so awkward that I almost had to turn away from the screen. These moments were so awkward, that I checked the writing credits to see if Ricky Gervais was involved in the project. The problem here is that when Gervias creates these awkward moments, he is legitimately trying to create something that is funny. Unfortunately, it seems like this movie was legitimately trying to elicit laughs. These moments stood out in stark contrast to how seriously the movie wants itself to be taken, and largely fell flat. Very flat. Case in point: The ridiculous “ghetto” robots that talked in ethnic slang. I realize they were meant to be the comic relief. However they were such a ridiculous stereotype, and so stunningly racist, that I could not believe these characters were written seriously.
I think my biggest problem with this movie is that it screamed laziness. They didn’t even bother to try and make this movie seem coherent. The plot just jumped from point to point with very little explanation, and I constantly kept forgetting where we were and how we got there. My favorite example comes about half-way through when the main characters head to Washington DC to visit the Air and Space Museum. Without giving anything away, let’s just suffice it to say that at some point, they demolish a wall of this building, and walk outside. By itself, that’s not too terrible, however my problem with the scene is that when they walk outside, they are suddenly in New Mexico! The film makes absolutely no mention of this. Perhaps I am hyper-sensitive to this scene as a DC resident, but I don’t think it takes a degree in geography to realize that walking out the back door of a building in the DC suburbs does not put you smack dab in the middle of a mountainous desert. To add insult to injury, once they are in New Mexico, the camera does one of those “spin around the main character” moves and you can see that there is not a single building in sight. Not only did they try and play off a cross-country filming location swap, but they then have the audacity to clearly show you that there are no buildings anywhere near where the characters are now standing. In a movie that is 90% CGI, couldn’t we have thrown a building in there somewhere? It’s just that kind of half-assed attitude towards trying to make this movie flow that drove me nuts as I watched it. I wasn’t stupid enough to try and dig for plot holes and continuity errors in a Transformers movie, but when they are so blatant and ridiculous that you can’t help but trip over them, it seems unfair to pretend like I didn’t notice.
Wow. That probably came out a little hate-filled. I don’t mean to be so hard on a mindless action flick, but you could almost feel parts of this movie going “Oh, who cares. Just do whatever and these idiots will pay to see it anyway.” You want to know the sad part? They’re right. No matter how bad Transformers 2 was, when Transformers 3 finally does come out (as we all know it will) people are still going to see it, and it’s still going to make money hand-over-fist. That noise you hear is the sound of a million different independent actors and directors re-evaluating their life goals.
I’d probably only buy this movie one drink, and even then it’s just going to be an excuse to hang out with Shia LaBeouf. If he wanted to bring the robots along, I’d definitely be ordering drinks on their tab.
Reivew: G.I. Joe Rise of the Cobra
I decided to go into this movie with my expectations near rock bottom. I expected a mindless, big budget, over the top summer movie. We had an agreement. As long as the thing kept moving, entertained me, and didn’t try and take itself too seriously, I would overlook gaping plot holes and a litany of other ridiculous goings on.
G.I. Joe: Rise of the Cobra serves as an origin story. Not for the Joes, which has already been created by the start of the movie, but for (as the titled suggests) the Cobra. This prequel-type plot line does, as I’ve mentioned in other reviews, take away much of tension in the film’s plot. Cobra Commander probably isn’t going to die in this one, as the film is called “Rise of the Cobra”. I also just spoiled the movie’s ending for you, at the end of this movie, Cobra will have risen (but you probably guessed that already). I say this because it puts you in the right frame of mind for this movie; it is clearly more about the journey than the destination.
The plot itself is decent enough to keep you entertained, but if you’ve ever watched an action movie like this before, you’re going to see all the twists coming from a mile away. My initial reaction was “Well, a kid would probably enjoy this,” but then I got to thinking about the value of nostalgia. I’m not sure if this movie was directed a kids. Kids today aren’t really familiar with the G.I. Joe series, and so probably weren’t draw to this movie at the outset. This puts us in a weird middle ground, because the movie playing largely upon your nostalgia, but they make a few major changes to series’ (for lack of a better word) “cannon” to make the flick a bit more palatable to the general population. These changes probably won’t sit well with any Joe die-hards, so we’ve eliminated the nostalgia factor. Personally, I loved the cartoon, but I wasn’t ever really obsessed. I never read any of the G.I. Joe comics either, so none of the changes really got me too up in arms. Other than the uber-nerd Joe devotee, most of you will probably be willing to roll with the punches.
In a previous review, I complained that Terminator Salvation suffered from too many in-jokes and series references. However, here I found that that was one of the movie’s biggest strengths. Whereas T4 wanted to be taken seriously, GI Joe knows how ridiculous it is. Director Stephen Sommers (The Mummy) has a lot of fun with the fan-service and references to the series, and it all fits in rather nicely. It gives the movie such a light-hearted vibe, that you become much more willing to overlook its flaws and just come along for the ride. That being said, I was extremely disappointed that there wasn’t a single reference to either “pork chop sandwiches” or “Mr. Body Massage Machine”. That was prime territory for a shout-out. Then again, bringing internet humor into franchises like this typically falls flat (See: X-3’s Juggernaut jokes), so I can forgive them passing on the reference.
From a character perspective, most of the roles were cast relatively well. Marlon Wayans hits the right notes as the obligatory comic relief, and Channing Tatum seems to be having fun with the release of this role (a welcome change from staring in moving about street fighting or Nicholas Sparks). This movie also features two redheaded chicks. Bonus points for that. From a character development standpoint, some of the characters are given much more backstory than others, all told in “Lost”-style flashbacks as the story progresses. A number of the characters get no story at all though, so I’m going to assume that they are saving something for the inevitable sequel. Still, it felt odd to focus so heavily on some characters while leaving other major characters entirely untouched.
As I said, this movie was definitely intended as prep for potential sequels. However, assuming the rest of the series maintains the easy-going popcorn-movie nature of the first one, I’d probably be down for the ride. I won’t shell out the $10 to see it in theaters, but it makes for some quality lazy Sunday morning fare.
After a hard day of fighting Cobra, I’d buy this movie 3 drinks as a way of saying thank you for taking something fun and enjoyable and not trying to reboot it into a dark, serious, war film. I might even throw in an extra beer if they promised to re-design the Cobra Commander’s outfit before the sequel, it’s just not cool.
Review: Terminator Salvation
It is with that in mind that I sit down to write my review of Terminator Salvation. Our fourth time back to the well for the Terminator franchise, and the second outing sans original creative force James Cameron. This time, we ended up with internet whipping-boy McG behind the camera, but that is counter-balanced with the surprising choice of Christian Bale stepping into the role of series hero John Conner. These two creative forces are at odds in my brain, and I was entirely unsure what to expect on this ride.
I won’t bore you with details of the plot, as they are practically irrelevant. As with any series that dips it’s toe into the murky waters of time travel, the plot is filled with contradictions to the previous films and also has to walk the line of “well, I know nothing bad can happen to this character since he hasn’t yet done the one thing we all know that he is going to do in the future” which zaps of the film of much of its dramatic tension. Most scenes typically feel like little more than directional material to get you to the next action set piece. Then again, if you’re watching Terminator 4 for the script, perhaps you had best take an Advil and go lie down.
From an acting perspective, Bale does a serviceable job as Connor, but it certainly isn’t his best role. That being said, the character goes through almost zero development. Whether this created a scenario where Bale didn’t have enough to sink his teeth into, or whether he just gave up and is going through the motions, I don’t know (we all know there was some tension on the set and Bale was frustrated with parts of this film’s production). To be honest, I have no idea why he took this movie. Bale is an actor I greatly admire, I think he makes fantastic choices as to what roles he takes, and I feel like I’ve liked him in every role he’s inhabited. I figured that having the Batman role sewn up gave him the box office cred and studio clout to do whatever the hell he wanted to. I’m not sure why he’d try and take on a role in a 3rd sequel with a character this tame. I had him pegged as more of an Ed Norton type actor, where he would pop up to do a big studio picture every once and a while in order to get the pull to make whatever he wanted. Perhaps there was some sort of studio politics at play here we are unaware of.
Whatever disappointment I felt with the character of John Connor, was redeemed in Sam Worthington’s portrayal of Marcus. This was my first experience with Worthington, as I hadn’t seen Avatar at the time I checked this movie out. Needless to say, I was impressed. I thought Worthington did a great job of giving the character a little bit of depth in the face of some of the stupid situations the plot found him in. In fact, I would name Marcus as the main character of the film, as I felt he was the driver of much of the plot, and he went through the stages of character development that I kept expecting from John Connor, but never got. I realize that Worthington is about to be the guy who is in every single action movie coming out in the next two years, but so far, I like him. I’ll be interested to see what he does next and what roles he takes to flesh out his ability as an actor.
From a direction standpoint, I’m torn. I thought McG did a decent enough job with the action elements of the film, but the film really lacked the intelligence of the Cameron films. I realize that the word “intelligence” may be a bit strong, but Cameron definitely had a message with his films. There was also a subtlety to the elements of humor and characterization that have been missing in these last two films. I realize that to compare this movie to T1 and T2 (movies that considered by many to be groundbreaking sci-fi films) is a bit unfair, but the film invites that comparison on multiple occasions. I want to tell you that “this film would have been viewed in a more positive light if it wasn’t trying to be a sequel to Terminator” but I don’t think that’s possible. This film constantly beats you over the head with references to the previous films and little winks to camera. For me this did nothing more than put cracks in the fourth-wall with all these little in-jokes. While I appreciate these references and fan-service in most settings, it also sets up a scenario where you are constantly reminded that these movies are not as good as the original movies. It almost felt like a YouTube parody in that this movie was made by people who were fans of the original, not the creators of the original. Having characters in your Terminator movie run around and say things like “Come mit me if you want to lib” is only going to make me wish it was Arnie that was saying it. Sadly, I doubt this is the end for the Terminator franchise, I just hope they end up doing something new and exciting with it, as opposed to just beating it into the ground and tarnishing the value of this once-great franchise.
If I were to bump into this movie at a bar, I’d buy it two drinks. One for Worthington, and one for Bale (if only so that I could ask him “Why?”)
Review: Funny People
Funny People was a movie that I think benefited immensely from the fact that I caught it on DVD. I had previously been warned (if you want to call it that) not to expect a movie in the same vein as the last two Apatow-helmed flicks. In this case, I’m glad I had my expectations re-aligned, as I think it helped me approach the film from the right mindset.
As I’ve mentioned, Funny People is a very different film from the last two movies Apatow has turned out. This film felt much more personal, and to me that personality seems injected in equal parts by Apatow and star Adam Sandler. Sandler, in tone with the film, plays a much darker, more serious, character than people are used to seeing him portray. He’s done this well in the past in films like Punch-Drunk Love, but here he finds a solid middle-ground that adds weight to his character without making him seem too much of a departure from the Sandler you know.
The plot of the film essentially centers around Sandler playing a semi-caricature of himself. As a former stand-up who has “sold out” to take on brainless family comedies. He begins to re-assess his life and stumbles upon a young upstart comic (Apatow regular Seth Rogen) who he uses to get back in touch with what he wanted to be.
The film gets things moving relatively quickly, and one of my favorite scenes in the entire movie happens early on. Sandler, having just received some awful news has to walk through the lobby of an office building. In the lobby he is recognized, asked to pose for photos, asked about his movies, etc. It’s an interesting perspective, and it shows you how difficult it must be for comedians like Sandler to be expected to be “on” all the time, no matter what is happening in their personal lives. I’m not much of a sympathizer with whiny celebrities, but situations like that really make you think about how you would react in a similar situation, and take steps towards explaining some of the erratic behavior we see from so many celebrities.
That’s a bit outside the scope of a traditional review, but I bring it up because I think it hits at the films strongest quality. This movie really feels like an insider’s view in the world of a stand-up comedian. You see what happens backstage, numerous comics play themselves (or versions thereof), and you see how real-life interactions end up as fodder for the stage. It gives the movie a really cool vibe, and almost comes off like a less douchey episode of Entourage. Regardless of these characters flaws, you find yourself thinking that they’d probably be cool to hang out with, making you invest in what happens to them as the story progresses.
My biggest complaint with the film is that it ran a bit long. At around two and half hours, this movie runs well beyond the length of your average comedy. Part of the reason for this longer running time is twist the movie takes about two-thirds of the way in. I won’t spoil anything here, but one of the sub-plots of the movie really becomes the driving force of the final act. I wasn’t particularly a fan of the shift, as I was enjoying the movie as is, but I understand that that decision had to be made for the sake of driving some sort of character arc and leaving us with a fully seasoned story (as opposed to 90 minutes of spending time with these characters). However, it felt like the movie took a “Wedding Crashers” turn where they realized they had to craft a plot, threw the entire thing into the last 30 minutes, and forgot to keep telling jokes. I didn’t like it in Wedding Crashers, and I don’t like it now.
Speaking of characters, there are a number of minor players that were fantastic in their particular roles. Jason Schwartzman’s role as Rogen’s roommate, and Wu-Tang’s RZA as Rogen’s co-worker, were two of the highlights in my opinion.
One final item that I thought deserved special mention was the production design of the film. This movie was PACKED with “easter eggs” littered in the background. Whether they interwove actual footage of a young Sandler, or whether it was the fictional movie posters, memorabilia, etc. from his character, this movie would really impress you if you picked up your remote and took the time to pause each scene to check out the backgrounds and foregrounds. The fact that they had the option to use legitimate footage of Sandler really helps keep you in the moment. I’ve always found it particularly distracting when movies use the traditional method of hastily photo-shopping two actors’ heads onto a picture to try and make me think they’ve been married for twenty years or whatever. I didn’t have a chance to check out the DVD’s special features, but if they included even a small portion of some of the cool things they produced for this movie (fictional trailers, fictional TV shows, etc.) then it would probably all add to the authentic feel of the movie.
In short, I enjoyed this movie. I think I enjoyed it more than most, because my expectations were a bit closer to the film’s actual goal, as opposed to being driven by some of the film’s promotional material. I wish the film had been able to spread the character arc and development over more of the film so that the last act didn’t seem so serious and out-of-sync with the rest of the film, but I really did enjoy seeing these characters interact and the frighteningly real-world way they reacted to the situations presented to them.
Were we to meet in a bar, I’d buy this movie three beers, and just sit there and listen while it told me jokes and stories from back in the day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)