The Best Films I Have Never Seen Before: Bullet in the Head (1990)

Friday, October 11, 2013

The Best Films I Have Never Seen Before: Bullet in the Head (1990)

Bullet in the Head (1990)
Directed by: John Woo.
Written by: Janet Chun & Patrick Leung & John Woo.
Starring: Tony Leung Chiu Wai (Ah Bee), Jacky Cheung (Fai), Waise Lee (Little Wing), Simon Yam (Luke), Fennie Yuen (Jane), Yolinda Yam (Sally Yen).

Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, there was no better action filmmaker in the world than John Woo. In films like A Better Tomorrow (1986), and it’s even better sequel A Better Tomorrow II (1987), and his two masterpieces The Killer (1989) and Hard Boiled (1992), Woo elevated gunfight choreography to its very highest level. I suppose it was inevitable that Hollywood would come calling, and after a few disappointing efforts – Hard Target (1993) and Broken Arrow (1995) – Woo made his American masterwork Face/Off (1997), arguably the most entertaining pure action movie made in America in the 1990s. Since then, his career has most been disappointing – Mission Impossible II (2000) was entertaining sure, but it doesn’t come close to Woo’s best work. The less said about Windtalkers (2002) and Paycheck (2003), the better. I did quite like his last film – Red Cliff (2008), although I’ve only ever seen the truncated American release – which cut out roughly half of Woo’s epic return to his homeland.

All of this is a fancy way of saying that I am a John Woo fan, although not as big of one as I once was. I have always meant to check out his 1990 film Bullet in the Head. I remember trying desperately to track this film down back when I was high school and not being able to, so when I came across a copy recently, I couldn’t help myself. I just had to check out what some had referred to as Woo’s best film, and Woo himself had referred to as his “Apocalypse Now” – because he drove himself as crazy as Coppola did making the film.

 

But it wasn’t Apocalypse Now I thought of when watching Bullet in the Head, but another Vietnam film – Michael Cimino’s The Deer Hunter (1978). Like that film, Bullet in the Head is about three friends who go off to Vietnam during the American war there. Of course, these characters are not American, but from Hong Kong, and are not going to fight a war, but to make money. A friend of theirs tells them that wherever there is war, there is money to be made – and these three guys, who fancy themselves criminals - think they can be the ones to make it. But of course, everything gets shot to shit pretty damn quickly.

Woo is a genius at action sequences, and they are the highlight of Bullet in the Head as well. There are multiple chase sequences, and gun battles, and while nothing may quite reach the heights of the opening of Hard Boiled, there is a long sequence in a nightclub when things go bad that comes pretty damn close. And unlike the other Woo movies of the period, this is also a war movie – the three “friends”, who quickly fall apart, eventually find themselves captives of the Vietcong, and like the men in The Deer Hunter, are tormented for their captor’s amusement. In The Deer Hunter, they were forced to play Russian roulette. In Bullet in the Head, they are forced to execute American soldiers, as their captors look on and laugh. But, again like in The Deer Hunter, when you give your prisoners a gun, you give them a weapon they can use against you – and this sets up another epic gun fight.

With all due respect to those who think Bullet in the Head is Woo’s masterpiece, I don’t quite get it. The opening scenes of the film – in Hong Kong (and like The Deer Hunter include a wedding) aren’t very good at all, and in fact are almost embarrassingly simplistic – especially in terms of the dialogue. When the action starts up in the second and third acts, the movie certainly gets far more entertaining – the action sequences are the reason to see the movie, and they are brilliantly staged as we have come to expect from Woo.

But the story of the movie is just far too derivative. I think I’ve mentioned The Deer Hunter about six times now, and that’s because this movie really does seem to go past the point of mere homage, and gets almost into plagiarism territory. Worse, the film makes all the characters more simple and one note than they were in Cimino’s films. Tony Leung is very good as Ah Bee (the Robert DeNiro equivalent), as he maintains his moral compass, and tries desperately to keep the group together. But Waise Lee as Little Wing (the Christopher Walken equivalent) isn’t given all that much to do – and they make him too simple minded – really bordering on mildly retarded. This, I suppose, makes Jacky Cheung’s Fai into the John Savage character, although that really isn’t fair to Savage, who doesn’t become a villain as Fai does here, just a bitter, angry cripple. Fai’s continued attempts to keep the gold he stole become increasingly ridiculous as the narrative goes along. And his final scene with Leung, back in Hong Kong, is gruesome in a way that simply feels exploitive.

I understand the urge that must have went into making Bullet in the Head for Woo. He had just had a falling out with his producing partner, Tsui Hark, who apparently was more powerful than Woo in Hong Kong cinema at the time, and this led to Woo pretty much being blacklisted – he financed much of the movie himself. And Woo wanted to make something more “serious” than the simple gangster-action movie he had been doing. Not only is he addressing the Vietnam war, but he very explicitly references the then recent Tiananmen Square incident (even all these years later, it’s impossible not to think of what happened there when watching Woo pretty much recreate the famous incident, under the guise of something else).

The problem seems to be that Woo doesn’t really have anything to say about the issues he raises – either the Vietnam War or Tiananmen Square. At least nothing anything beyond the most basic. And he lifts so much directly from The Deer Hunter that it detracts from what is great about the film. John Woo is better than most at action movies – and A Bullet in the Head proves that in the action sequences. It also proves why he has so rarely decided to tackle serious subject matter. He’s just not very good at that.

Movie Review: The Grandmaster

Monday, August 26, 2013

Movie Review: The Grandmaster

The Grandmaster
Directed by: Wong Kar Wai.
Written by: Wong Kar Wai & Haofeng Xu & Jingzhi Zou.
Starring: Tony Leung (Yip Man), Zhang Ziyi (Gong Er), Song Hye-kyo (Cheung Wing-sing), Chang Chen ("The Razor" Yixiantian), Zhao Benshan (Ding Lianshan), Wang Qingxiang (Gong Yutian), Zhang Jin (Ma San), Yuen Woo-ping (Chan Wah-shun), Xiaoshenyang (Sanjiangshui), Cung Le (Tiexieqi), Shang Tielong (Jiang), Lo Hoi-pang (Uncle Deng).

There is no director working today who makes more visually stunning films than Wong Kar Wai. This was even true, although to a lesser extent, of his ill-advised English language debut – My Blueberry Nights (2008). That film was dramatically hollow, and rather slow, but damn, did it look good. Wong has spent the last few years making his epic kung fu film, The Grandmaster, and once again, it is one of the most visually stunning films you will see this year. If the film isn’t up to the level of Wong’s best films, that’s because the narrative is a little scattershot – it takes multiple detours during it’s running time. In lesser hands, this would be a bigger flaw – but Wong’s detours are as entertaining and the main thrust of the story.

The movie is a biopic of legendary martial arts master Yip Man – who has already been the subject of two apparently more traditional biopics Ip Man and Ip Man 2 by Donnie Yen (that have remain unseen by me). Wong isn’t so much interested in a traditional rise and fall and rise narrative that many biopics take – tracing the man who became famous back to his roots. Instead, The Grandmaster is really an all-encompassing epic film about Chinese history from the 1930s through the 1950s, as seen through the eyes of several martial arts masters.

The Grandmaster isn’t really a kung fu film directed by Wong Kar Wai, as it is a Wong Kar Wai Kung fu film – if that makes any sense, and to me it does. Although the film is visually stunning, and contains some of the best kung fu sequences you will ever see, this film is every inch a Wong Kar Wai original – he is more interested in the philosophy and politics behind kung fu than in the kung fu itself – and of course, there is a decades long attraction between two characters who are essentially kept apart by their own sense of honor. It’s not exactly In the Mood for Love with kung fu, but that’s probably a better description than anything else I can come up with.

When we first meet Yip Man (Tony Leung), he is happy – married with kids, living off his family’s money, and a master in the Southern wing chun style of kung fu. All the kung fu masters gather at a famous brothel – although if anyone actually has sex with prostitutes its remains unseen, this is more of a social club. The old grandmaster Gong Yutian (Wang Qingxiang) is retiring, and as is traditional, must have one final duel before he can do so. Since his protégé Ma San (Zhang Jin) has already humiliated most of the southern masters, they choose Yip Man to represent them. The two duel, and Gong declares Yip the winner. His daughter however, Gong Er (Zhang Ziyi) doesn’t like the outcome and challenges Yip Man herself – and wins. But more important than the duel itself, this sets up a decades long attraction between these two characters – one in which they never truly act on, although they are perfect for each other. The betrayal of the Gong legacy by Ma Sun, and the Japanese occupation of China, become two of the most important storylines for much of the movie – because Gong Er wants vengeance on Ma Sun, and the occupation costs Yip Man more than most – or as he says it “We went straight from the spring of my life, to the winter”. In the North American released, another subplot involving another master, known as The Razor (Chang Chen) – has been all but excised from the movie – which is a shame, because I wanted to see more of him.

The duels in the film are among the best I have ever seen in a film. Wong doesn’t go quite as far over the top with wire work than say Ang Lee in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon or Zhang Yimou in Hero, but the effects are certainly exaggerated. There are too many duels to highlight each one – but far and the best one takes place at a train station, as snow falls down around the gorgeous Zhang Ziyi, who proves herself to be the most gifted martial artist in the film. Tony Leung, a huge star and a constant Wong collaborator, isn’t a kung fu specialist, and his scenes are not quite as good as a result. Still, his years of training for the role pay off – besides, as I mentioned earlier, Wong is more concerned with the philosophy behind kung fu than its practice – and for that, Tony Leung is perfect. He may not be able to hold a candle to say Jet Li in kung fu, but his acting ability more than makes up for it.

I feel I need to see The Grandmaster a second time. This is an utterly beautiful film, and the first time I watched it, I was simply swept up in the beauty of the images. Wong films have a way of doing that to you. The storyline, especially to somewhat like myself who is not exactly an expert on Chinese history, was slightly confusing at times, and I have to admit that I don’t really feel that I got “know” Yip Man during the course of this movie. Perhaps, however, the film would have been better had it told a simpler story – especially since Wong has never been a director whose films focus too much on the narrative anyway – he much more concerned with mood, tone and emotions than a standard plot.

As the movie flashes from moment scene to the next, it does begin to feel like he’s trying to pack too much into one movie. Wong has often been accused of being a “style over substance” director – a complaint that I sometimes agree with in films such as Happy Together. When the style and substance meet perfectly – as they do in films like Chungking Express, In the Mood for Love or 2046 – there are few directors better in the world than Wong. The Grandmaster is not on their level – Wong does seem a little more concerned with how everything looks here, than with the story or the characters. However, The Grandmaster still deserves to be seen – and on the big screen if possible. It is visually stunning from start to finish, contains some excellent kung fu scenes, and another great performance by Zhang Ziyi. The Grandmaster is not up to the level of most Wong Kar Wai films – but considering how great they are, it’s perhaps unfair to expect him to be at that level each time. The Grandmaster may not be the Wong Kar Wai masterpiece I wanted it to be – but it’s a fine film just the same.

Movie Review: Elysium

Friday, August 16, 2013

Movie Review: Elysium

Elysium
Directed by: Neill Blomkamp.
Written by: Neill Blomkamp.
Starring: Matt Damon (Max), Jodie Foster (Delacourt), Sharlto Copley (Kruger), Alice Braga (Frey), Diego Luna (Julio), Wagner Moura (Spider), William Fichtner (John Carlyle), Brandon Auret (Drake), Josh Blacker (Crowe), Emma Tremblay (Matilda), Jose Pablo Cantillo (Sandro).

Unlike particularly every other big blockbuster of this summer, Neil Blomkamp’s Elysium left me wanting more, not less. This is a more ambitious film than Blomkamp’s debut – District 9 – but doesn’t have the same overall impact of the previous film. The biggest reason for that is because Blomkamp has so many ideas that he wanted to get onscreen, and the run time of 109 minutes just isn’t quite enough to fit them all in. I wanted to spend more time in the dystopia of Los Angeles in 2154, more time in the utopia of the Elysium itself – the orbiting space station populated by the rich – and I wanted all of the characters to be a little more fleshed out. One of the things District 9 did so well is that it never let either its political allegory or the special effects get in the way of the very human story of its protagonist – something Elysium doesn’t quite manage. Still, in a summer that has had mostly disappointing or uninspired or simplistic blockbusters, Elysium joins Guillermo Del Toro’s Pacific Rim as my favorites of the season. And if I was left wanting a little more, it’s because Blomkamp’s film is that rare blockbuster that I feel could have sustained a more substantial running time.

The year is 2154. We are told that the world essentially collapsed late in the 21^st Century (why, the movie doesn’t say – which will bug some, but didn’t really bug me – could the movie have given a really satisfactory answer anyway? And why would the characters spend their time talking about something that happened decades ago anyway?). The rich (or 1% if you will) built a giant space station known as Elysium, where they continue their lives just as before. In what we see of Elysium, everything if golf course green and perfect. The rest of humanity is stuck on Earth – which, if what we see of L.A. in this movie is representative of the planet as whole, is about one step away of what Wall-E had to deal with. They work menial jobs to support the lifestyle of the Elysium residents, and are policed by robots. On Elysium, everyone has machines that will cure virtually every disease known to mankind – so they have become pretty more immortal. On Earth, healthcare is an even more hellish nightmare than it is now. And just to add another level of allegory to the movie, almost everyone in L.A. is Hispanic – and speak Spanish as much as English – whereas almost everyone on Elysium is white, and if they speak something other than English, it’s French.

The protagonist of the movie is Max – and the performance by Matt Damon is one of the film’s chief strengths. Because Blomkamp spends so much time on the plot mechanics, character development isn’t something he has much time for. Casting Damon is a stroke of genius, because he’s one of those actors audiences instantly identify with – you don’t have to spend time setting Matt Damon up as a good guy – we already known he is (Hitchcock often did the same thing with actors like Jimmy Stewart or Cary Grant). He’s an orphan, who has spent time in jail for car theft – but is trying to turn his life around. He has a job in a factory building the very robots who abuse him – and its here where he has an accident that exposes him to radiation that will kill him in 5 days. Not wanting to die, he’s determined to get to Elysium to be cured. First though, he has the steal secrets directly from the head of his old boss (a slimily perfect William Fichtner) for a cyber punk coyote (Wagner Moura – delivering the movie’s best supporting performance) to pay for his passage. Oh – and he also runs into his childhood flame Frey (Alice Braga) who has a daughter with leukemia.

The movie will be written off by some as a liberal fantasy – and it’s easy to see why. The folks on Elysium are clearly the 1%, exploiting the earth bound 99% to make as much money as possible. When you add in the advanced healthcare they get, while the people below have next to nothing, and the implicit commentary about U.S. and Mexico, you do in fact have liberal’s nightmare – a worst case scenario of where everything is going if the conservatives get their way. The villains of the movie are represented by Jodie Foster’s Delacourt, Elysium’s defense minister, who would rather shoot down and kill Earth refugees trying to get to Elysium than capture and deport them – and justifies everything by talking about the “children”. Foster makes a strange vocal choice for Delacourt, which I would be annoyed with, except I often like it when actors make strange vocal choices with their characters for no other reason than to amuse themselves – and to help disguise an underwritten role, which Foster’s certainly is. The other bad guy is Kruger (District 9‘s Sharlto Copley), a “sleeper” agent on Earth, who is essentially an insane Minuteman, patrolling the border, and exterminating everything with extreme prejudice – but of course thinks that if everyone would just listen to him, things would be much, much better.

Looking back over what I’ve written so far, I seem to be harder on Elysium than my true feelings on the movie itself. There is no doubt that Elysium would have benefitted from either trimming down some of its political overtones to focus more on the details of the characters and the plot, or from a more expansive running time that would have allowed Blomkamp to more fully explore everything. Perhaps there is a longer cut of the film that we will get to see one day (I hope so). So while Elysium is far from a perfect film, there is also so much in the film to admire. Blomkamp once again proves himself to be a great visual director – the slums of Los Angeles is one of the most distinctive physical environments in any movie this year, and they are contrasted nicely with what we see of Elysium (even though I wanted to see more). There are a lot of nice touches – like the parole officer – that makes the world feel lived in. The special effects in the movie are excellent – and you never get the sense that Blomkamp is using them in place of his story, but to add to it. Blomkamp doesn’t feel the need to pump up the action – and at times, even takes a long view of the action (as in the shooting down of the ships trying to get to Elysium). While the movie does devolve into a typical action movie climax – it’s handled much better than most action movies, without an over reliance on rapid fire editing or shaky camera work to artificially goose the action. And while I may have wanted a little more character development in pretty much every character in the movie, I cannot find much fault in any of the performances – all the actors are quite good.

I mentioned Pacific Rim off the top of this review, and said that Del Toro’s film from July and Elysium are my two favorites in terms of the big budget blockbusters this summer. That’s true. Pacific Rim may destroy as much, or more, of the world as the rest of the blockbusters this summer, but also didn’t forget about the characters, and had visual flourishes worthy of Spielberg in top blockbuster mode (the little girl in particular is haunting). Elysium on the other hand is the one blockbuster this season that seems to have something more on its mind rather than just mindless destruction and special effects. Those can be entertaining – and often were in the big movies this summer – but it also gets tiring. Elysium at least attempts to do something more in the blockbuster format, and I admire the film for doing so. If I'm still a little disappointed in the film, it’s because District 9 proved how great Blomkamp can be – and Elysium is no District 9.

Movie Review: Drug War

Thursday, August 15, 2013

Movie Review: Drug War

Drug War
Directed by: Johnnie To.
Written by: Wai Ka-Fai & Yau Nai-hoi & Ryker Chan & Yu Xi.
Starring: Louis Koo (Timmy Choi), Sun Honglei (Captain Zhang Lei), Crystal Huang (Yang Xiaobei), Wallace Chung (Guo Weijun), Gao Yunxiang (Xu Guoxiang), Li Guangjie (Chen Shixiong), Guo Tao (Senior Dumb), Li Jing (Junior Dumb), Lo Hoi-pang (Birdie), Eddie Cheung (Su), Gordon Lam (East Lee), Michelle Ye (Sal), Lam Suet (Fatso).

If Hong Kong action master Johnnie To was going to have a breakout hit in North America, it probably would have happened by now. He has been working steadily since 1980 – so he was making films when the likes of John Woo, Tsui Hark and Ringo Lam were all the rage among North American film geeks in the late 1980s and early 1990s. But To never quite had their success. By the time he came to the attention of international critics – after several film festivals (including Cannes and Toronto) starting programming his films in the early 2000s, film geeks had movie on to other Asian film hotspots – namely the extreme horror coming out of Japan and Korea. And that’s a shame, because To is one of the best action filmmakers in the world right now – and one of the most prolific. He has 55 directing credits according to IMDB – 23 of them since the first of his films that I saw – Fulltime Killer back in 2001. I’ve still only seen a select few of his films – and while not all of them are great – they are all usually better than the average American action film. His latest, Drug War, is no different.

Drug War is not an overly original movie. It’s plot – about a Hong Kong drug dealer arrested by police in Mainland China and forced to become an informant – has been told before. The scenes in which the main cop – Captain Zhang (Sun Honglei) has to go undercover, and the drug dealer Timmy Choi (Louis Koo) has to pretend to me something he’s not will likely remind viewers of Infernal Affairs – or it’s American remake, The Departed. It is also not really a thorough examination of drug policy – in China, being a drug dealer will get you a death sentence. The movie doesn’t question such a policy, and really stops just short of actively endorsing it. Given that this is the first time To has ventured to mainland China for financing – normally he stays in Hong Kong – and the government oversight that comes along with that, it’s probably not overly surprising. But the film still does observe the thin line between cop and criminal – and while that’s not quite as original as what To did in last year’s Life Without Principle – essentially saying bankers and gangsters are the same – it’s still an effective theme to build a good action movie around.

So in the movie, Choi gets caught after a meth lab explosion that he escapes – but he ends up driving erratically and crashing into a restaurant. Knowing he faces a death sentence, he quickly agrees to Zhang’s offer to become an informant. Choi has a contact with one drug dealer, who he is arranging a meeting with China’s premiere Drug kingpin – and can get Zhang all the details. And since these drug dealers have never met each other – Zhang ends up playing too completely opposite dealers in the span of a few minutes to set both of them up to take the fall. The film also involves some deaf brothers who cook meth – and a group of Hong Kong gangsters pulling the strings. And of course, there will be lots of shootouts to climax the movie.

The material in Drug War is fairly standard – but To wraps it up in an entertaining package. It’s amusing to see the stoic Zhang at first take on the even more stoic persona of one drug dealer, than go gleefully over the top in the next scene, taking on the persona of a drug dealer known as Haha – because he laughs at just about everything. These scenes are also tense, since we are never quite sure when violence is about to erupt.

The shootout that ends Drug War – as all Hong Kong action movies have to end in a shootout – is the best of its kind I’ve seen in a movie so far this year. While To may be from Hong Kong, his action stylistics are quite different from the “bullet ballets” preferred by a director like John Woo. To’s action sequences are cleaner and simpler than Woo’s – but much more coherent than the typical action sequence in an American movie, which deploy shaky cameras and rapid fire editing to the point of incoherence at times. With To, you always know what is going on, and he expertly stages these scenes with ease.

Drug War is not as ambitious as To’s best films – Election, Election 2 or the aforementioned Life Without Principle for example. But it is brutally effective – and contains one of the best performances in any Too film from Louis Koo as Choi – a man who will do anything to survive, so of course, we know he’s doomed.

Movie Review: 2 Guns

Thursday, August 8, 2013

Movie Review: 2 Guns

2 Guns
Directed by: Baltasar Kormákur.
Written by: Blake Masters based on the graphic novels by Steven Grant.
Starring: Denzel Washington (Robert 'Bobby' Trench), Mark Wahlberg (Michael 'Stig' Stigman), Paula Patton (Deb), Bill Paxton (Earl), Fred Ward (Admiral Tuwey), James Marsden (Quince), Edward James Olmos (Papi Greco), Robert John Burke (Jessup), Greg Sproles (Chief Lucas), Patrick Fischler (Dr. Ken).

Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg are two very talented actors, who spend most of their time coasting on their considerable charm. Before last year’s Flight, Washington had spent basically a decade doing this – and Wahlberg, while occasionally throwing in a film like The Lovely Bones and The Fighter – basically does the same thing. You know what you’re getting when you walk into an action movie starring one of these two guys. And to both of their credit, they don’t simply phone in their performances – they perform them to the hilt, even if they aren’t really challenged by them. That can be said about their first onscreen team-up – 2 Guns. This is a likable, late summer action comedy with double and triple crosses, an ever twisting plot, and multiple trips across the border into Mexico.

When the film opens, we meet Bobby (Washington) and Stug (Wahlberg) as they walk into a dinner across the street from a bank. They want to rob the bank, and are there for two reasons – one, to scope out their target, and two, to make sure that this dinner “with the best donuts in three counties” won’t mess up their job. Needless to say, not everything is what appears to be. They pull off the robbery – only to discover they have both been lying to each other, and whoever gave them the information in the first place has also been lying. What follows is an over complicated plot featuring a Mexican drug dealer (Edward James Olmos), a crazed CIA agent (Bill Paxton), the DEA (represented by Paula Patton), and the army (James Marsden). The plot is busy, but never confusing, and the movie breezes by easily – coasting on the considerable charm of Washington and Wahlberg.

The film was directed by Baltasar Kormakur, who had made some pretty acclaimed films in his native Iceland, before coming to Hollywood. His North American “debut” was last year’s Contraband – also starring Wahlberg – and also having one of those plots where nothing is as it seems. Personally, I thought Contraband overstayed it’s welcome – tried too hard to pull the wool over the audiences eyes a few too many times. 2 Guns seems to be constantly threatening to do the same – but never quite does. The film is short, violent, funny, briskly paced and ends just as I was starting to get tired of all the plot twists. In short, it’s an effective genre piece – not much more – but a fun way to spend a couple of hours.

Washington and Wahlberg are surprisingly good together. It didn’t surprise me to find out after the movie was over that it was initially meant to be a vehicle for Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson (perhaps they backed out when Google came calling) . The film was most likely re-written to better suit its current stars – but this is still an buddy-comedy/action movie – and Washington and Wahlberg play well off each other. It also helps that the rest of the cast is game as well. Olmos is having fun playing the stereotypical Mexican drug kingpin – and I’m not sure what movie I’ve seen him in the last decade or so where he’s been better. James Marsden once again proves why he’s better suited for these type of odd, quirky supporting roles than as the leading man. Paula Patton is a standard issue “love interest”, but she does the job well. Best of all is Bill Paxton, who just may be insane.

Overall, 2 Guns doesn’t attempt to do anything too new. There’s nothing wrong with making a solid, fun, genre movie – and that’s precisely what the filmmakers have done here. I do hope that it isn’t too long before Washington and Wahlberg stretch their acting muscles again, but for now, it’s good enough to see them at their charming, movie star best.

Movie Review: The Wolverine

Monday, July 29, 2013

Movie Review: The Wolverine

The Wolverine
Directed by: James Mangold.
Written by: Mark Bomback and Scott Frank.
Starring: Hugh Jackman (Logan), Tao Okamoto (Mariko), Rila Fukushima (Yukio), Hiroyuki Sanada (Shingen), Svetlana Khodchenkova (Viper), Brian Tee (Noburo), Haruhiko Yamanouchi (Yashida), Will Yun Lee (Harada), Ken Yamamura (Young Yashida), Famke Janssen (Jean Grey).

One time I’ve wondered about superhero movies is why the all seem to follow the same three movie arc, before petering out and/or rebooting themselves. In the first movie, the hero discovers their powers, learns how to use them and then has to confront a villain at the end. The second movie, they have to face an even bigger enemy – one that makes them question their own abilities – but eventually they overcome them, but not without some sort of cost. The third movie, the hero doesn’t really want to be a hero anymore – but has to, one last time – before they give it up. Most of these heroes literally have decades of stories to draw from in the comics – so why do they always follow the same pattern. This is what makes James Mangold’s The Wolverine somewhat refreshing. While it is still a part of the overall X-Men saga – specifically referencing events in X-Men: The Last Stand (and in a post credits sequence setting up next year’s Days of Future Past), for the most part this is a standalone entity that has a self-contained story. There are bad guys, of course, but the fate of free world doesn’t hang in the balance – entire cities are not destroyed, and thousands of people are not killed, and billions of dollars in damage do not occur. By superhero movie standards, The Wolverine is almost small scale. The story itself is not exactly earth-shatteringly original – if you don’t see the plot twists of the third act coming, you probably haven’t seen a movie before – but in the superhero genre, this is about as close as we’re probably going to get to originality.

The movie opens in Nagasaki on the day the bomb is dropped. Logan (Hugh Jackman) is a POW, and he protects a kindly Japanese soldier from the blast (no, I don’t really believe what he does is possible – but at least he’s not in a refrigerator, right Indiana Jones?). The movie than picks up decades later – with Logan wandering around somewhat in Northern Canada, haunted my his past – in particular visions of the now dead Jean Grey (Famke Janssen). This is when he is approached by Yukio (Rila Fukushima). She says the Japanese soldier he saved all those years ago is now a rich and powerful man – and is dying. He wants to meet Logan to say goodbye. It takes some convincing, but Logan heads off to Japan. Of course, the situation is not quite as simple as he thought it would be – Yashida (Haruhiko Yamanouchi) doesn’t want to say goodbye – he wants Logan’s powers, and thinks he has a way to get them. Logan ends up embroiled in the affairs of a major Japanese corporation – and protecting the innocent Mariko (Tao Okamoto), who everyone seems to want dead.

This is the sixth time (if you include his one scene cameo in First Class) that Jackman has played Logan/Wolverine, and he can do the role in his sleep. This is one of the reasons why in the past I have suggested that perhaps it’s time to cast someone new in the role – and try to make the movies a little darker, since Wolverine is such a dark character to begin with. But in this movie, Jackman proves me wrong – the role is still suited to him, and he’s not sleepwalking through it. The film is a little darker than previous installments of the series – in particular the last stand alone Wolverine movie – and Jackman is up to the challenge. The movie is almost all Jackman – although he is ably supported by an almost entirely Japanese cast – and the movie at times is more of a character study than an action movie. While this is not the best X-Men movie (that’s still a battle between X2 and First Class), this is probably Jackman’s best performance to date as Wolverine – and considering just how long he’s been playing the character, that’s saying something.

The action sequences in the movie are also handled well – for the most part. The most exciting one without doubt in a fight sequence on top of a bullet train, which is exciting and entertaining. There are other good ones – a chase sequence that starts at a funeral for example – that are also handled well – none of that lame rapid-fire editing we normally get. Mangold is more a traditionalist, and he keeps the action on a smaller scale. This works better for me – and makes it more exciting – than say Superman and General Zod destroying whole cities at a time. The movie does go over the top in the climatic fight sequence though – and drags it on too long – but that’s to be expected in these movies. They all do that.

The movie was shot in 3-D, and I have to say, I didn’t see much of a point in it. It doesn’t ruin the movie like bad 3-D can do, but considering the movie is on a smaller scale, I didn’t really see why it needed to be in 3-D, and cannot think of a single sequence that was enhanced by it. The special effects are fine – in keeping with the rest of the movie, they are on a smaller scale than most superhero movies in recent memory, but they are effective.

The Wolverine is not a great movie – and yet, I do think it’s a good one, and rather refreshing. If studios are going to insist on making lots and lots of superhero movies every year (and they seem to) and audiences are going to keep flocking to them (which they seem to be doing), it makes sense to try and do something different – at least every once in a while. And while The Wolverine doesn’t reinvent the wheel when it comes to the genre, it is different than most recent superhero movies. Those ones have started to blend together and be inter-changeable. The Wolverine is not a great superhero movie – but at the very least it’s a different superhero movie – and that’s perhaps even rarer.

Movie Review: Bullet to the Head

Thursday, July 18, 2013

Movie Review: Bullet to the Head

Bullet to the Head
Directed by: Walter Hill.
Written by: Alessandro Camon based on the graphic novel by Alexis Nolent and Colin Wilson.
Starring: Sylvester Stallone (James Bonomo), Sung Kang (Taylor Kwon), Sarah Shahi (Lisa), Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje (Robert Nkomo Morel), Jason Momoa (Keegan), Christian Slater (Marcus Baptiste), Jon Seda (Louis Blanchard), Holt McCallany (Hank Greely), Brian Van Holt (Ronnie Earl), Weronika Rosati (Lola), Dane Rhodes (LT. Lebreton), Marcus Lyle Brown (Detective Towne).

It’s easy to see what drew director Walter Hill and star Sylvester Stallone together. Both are icons of the action genre, whose best days are decades in the past. With Bullet to the Head, the duo seems content to pretend it’s still the 1980s when this kind of muscle-bound, lunk headed action movie was popular – and according to Spike TV still is. As a throwback to the 1980s, Bullet to the Head is actually pretty good – there is a reason why Hill is widely regarded as master of the genre, and there is a reason why Stallone was once one of the biggest stars on the planet. But that’s all Bullet to the Head is – a throwback to an earlier era of action filmmaking that some of us have already had our fill of.

The movie stars Stallone as James Bonomo, an aging hitman, who along with his partner, is given the contract on ex-cop Hank Greely. They pull the job off like pros – except they don’t kill the prostitute he’s with – but when they go to meet their contact to collect the rest of their money, Bonomo’s partner is killed, and he is attacked by Keegan (Jason Momoa). Greely’s old partner from DC (Sung Kang) arrives to look into his murder (why? I have no idea, since he appears to not really have liked the guy), and quickly figures everything out, and also figures out the local cops aren’t overly interested in figuring things out. So he contacts Bonomo and offers to team up with him – that why, they can find out who set up their old partners together. Of course, it involves police corruption, a slimy lawyer (Christian Slater) and a crime kingpin (Adewale Akinnouye-Agbaje) – and of course, Stallone’s hot daughter (Sarah Shahi) will get herself in trouble.

Had Bullet to the Head been a great throwback to the 1980s, it would have been a fun time at the movies. After all, some of those 1980s action movies are pretty great – at least as guilty pleasures. But Bullet to the Head isn’t really a great throwback – it plays more like one of those 1980s action movies that have long since been forgotten, that you come across at 2 o’clock in the morning on cable when you are battling insomnia. The film is largely forgettable and completely illogical – really can anyone explain anything that Sung Kang’s character does in the entirety of the movie.

The film is diverting. I was never really bored by it – Hill can still direct an action sequence, even if at one point he seems to be cribbing from David Cronenberg’s Eastern Promises (with fewer penis’). You can almost see Hill smiling during the final showdown between Stallone and Momoa, which goes beyond ridiculous – and has fun doing it.

But ultimately, what Bullet to the Head shows is why these movies stopped being made in the first place. They just stopped being all that much fun.

Movie Review: Pacific Rim

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Movie Review: Pacific Rim

Pacific Rim
Directed by: Guillermo del Toro.
Written by: Travis Beacham & Guillermo del Toro.
Starring: Charlie Hunnam (Raleigh Becket), Idris Elba (Stacker Pentecost), Rinko Kikuchi (Mako Mori), Charlie Day (Dr. Newton Geiszler), Burn Gorman (Gottlieb), Max Martini (Herc Hansen), Robert Kazinsky (Chuck Hansen), Clifton Collins Jr. (Ops Tendo Choi), Ron Perlman (Hannibal Chau), Diego Klattenhoff (Yancy Becket).

On the surface, Guillermo del Toro’s Pacific Rim seems like any other summer blockbuster – full of explosions, special effects and pointless 3-D. And if that’s all you want from Pacific Rim it delivers the goods. The film was marketed almost as Transformers vs. Godzilla – and no one who walks into the theater expecting that will go away disappointed. The fight sequences between the giant robots – known as Jaegers and the reptilian or fish like monsters – known as Kaijis – are great. Unlike Michael Bay, del Toro doesn’t get lost in rapid fire editing, and movement for movement sake – you can always tell where everything is in relation to each other, as del Toro is a master of special relations in this film – something that seemingly few directors today are. But del Toro’s film is a little bit more than a typical blockbuster – at least this summer’s blockbusters. There is a human story that he never loses site of. And there are moments that truly tap into the audiences fear. While the film is effective at being a big, dumb action movie, it’s a little deeper than it first appears. It’s still not a great film – but in a summer that has largely left me wanting more from the blockbusters, it’s as good as we’re likely to get.

The plot is really quite simple. It’s 2020 and 7 years ago (or in 2013 – watch out!) a transport between dimensions was discovered deep in the Pacific ocean. Nothing humans have can enter this “rip”, and they cannot destroy it. But the Kaiji can get through – and they do, laying waste to coastal cities along the Pacific ocean. With humanity on the brink of collapse, countries put aside their differences and started the Jaeger program – essentially huge robots, that are piloted by two men, who are mentally connected with each other – and the robot. This was successful for years – but the Kaiji keep getting bigger, and the Jaeger’s are no longer enough to stop them. So politicians, as they always do, decide to abandon the Jaeger program and instead build huge walls (not coincidentally, del Toro is originally from Mexico – although surprisingly, he doesn’t really use these huge walls as a political point). The head of the Jaeger program, Stacker Pentecost (Idris Elba) doesn’t like being shut down – and he has a plan to once and for all end the war. But most of the Jaeger pilots have been killed, and he only has a few robots left. So he calls on Raleigh Becket (Charlie Hunnam), who was once a Jaeger pilot, but was connected to his brother as he was killed by a Kaiji, and left the program, for one last go. He needs a new co-pilot however – and wouldn’t the adorable and brilliant Mako Mori (Rinko Kikuchi), haunted by her own traumatic memories, be perfect. There are only three other teams left – one from China, one from Russia, and one from Australia, and together, they are going to shut down the portal. How? Two bickering geniuses Geiszler (Charlie Day) and Gottlieb (Burn Gorman) seem to have the answer.

I’m not going to try and argue that the movie is at all original – my anime obsessed wife was so incensed by the preview she texted me that they were just ripping off the old series Evangelion (she has a point), and of course del Toro borrows liberally from old monster movies – mainly out of Japan like Godzilla and his ilk. Giant monsters have been a staple of science fiction movies for decades now – although you don’t see them much anymore. But del Toro, a movie geek at heart, wanted to bring them back – bigger and better than ever before. And he does that.

Pacific Rim is large scale Hollywood filmmaking at its finest. The movie has all the action anyone could ever want – and it’s handled with skill – and the special effects are probably the best I have seen in a movie so far this year. I’m on record as not being a fan of 3-D (I avoid it when I can, which I couldn’t this time) – but I will say that while I didn’t see much of a point to the 3-D here – it didn’t really enhance anything, except in a few, quiet moments – it doesn’t really detract from the movie either. And with 3-D, that’s pretty much the best we can expect.

The movie snuck up on me though, to the point where I didn’t really realized how involved I was – how much I cared about the characters – until fairly late in the movie. True, Hunnam’s Becket is a kind of one-dimensional hero with a tortured past – but he plays it well. Day provides quite a bit of comic relief in his role – especially when paired with Ron Perelman who has a great moment that will remind some of Deep Blue Sea. Most of the rest of the cast does what is required of them, and little more. The two standouts however and Kikuchi and Elba. Kikuchi, who was marvelous in her Oscar nominated performance in Babel, and the best thing about The Brothers Bloom, creates a real character out of Mako – who could have easily just been the token cute girl they throw into the movie. Here backstory – told in the film’s best sequence, which is probably the best sequence in any blockbuster this year – truly is terrifying, even if you can see it coming before it gets there. More surprising however is Elba – who for much of the movie seems like a square jawed, one dimensional military man who screams a lot. But there is a real person underneath that, which Elba nails.

I’m not going to try and say that Pacific Rim is some sort of masterpiece – it isn’t. Like many blockbusters, it is hampered by studio demands, who get a large say in what goes into the movie they are spending a few hundred million making. But del Toro plays the game better than most – delivering a movie that the studio wants, while also making something that fits into his filmography. Del Toro is at his best in smaller scale movies – like The Devil’s Backbone or Pan’s Labyrinth – but when he steps in and makes a big budget, Hollywood film – like Blade II or the original Hellboy – he makes something wholly his own. Pacific Rim comes close to that as well. The film is fun and entertaining – big budget filmmaking on a grand scale – both in terms of its action and special effects, and the emotions of the movie. Out of all the big blockbusters so far this year, Pacific Rim may just be the best.

Movie Review: White House Down

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

Movie Review: White House Down

White House Down
Directed by: Roland Emmerich.
Written by: James Vanderbilt.
Starring: Channing Tatum (Cale), Jamie Foxx (President Sawyer), Maggie Gyllenhaal (Finnerty), Jason Clarke (Stenz), Richard Jenkins (Raphelson), Joey King (Emily), James Woods (Walker), Nicolas Wright (Donnie the Guide), Jimmi Simpson (Tyler), Michael Murphy (Vice President Hammond), Rachelle Lefevre (Melanie), Lance Reddick (General Caulfield), Matt Craven (Agent Kellerman), Jake Weber (Agent Hope), Peter Jacobson (Wallace), Barbara Williams (Muriel Walker), Kevin Rankin (Killick), Garcelle Beauvais (Alison Sawyer), Falk Hentschel (Motts), Romano Orzari (Mulcahy), Jackie Geary (Jenna), Andrew Simms (Roger Skinner).

There is a difference between an ordinary stupid movie and a gloriously stupid movie, and I cannot think of a better example to highlight the difference than comparing two 2013 films – Olympus Has Fallen and White House Down. Olympus Has Fallen is an ordinary stupid movie – a group of terrorist take over the White House for their own nefarious purposes, and a lone Secret Service agent takes them out one at a time on route to rescuing the President. White House Down is a gloriously stupid movie with the same basic premise – the only difference being that the lone man is not a Secret Service agent yet, and he actually teams up with the President to take down the terrorists. Both movies essentially want to be Die Hard in the White House. But Olympus Has Fallen is just a regular stupid movie – a mildly diverting action movie that is okay while you’re watching it, and then completely forgotten. White House Down on the other hand is a gloriously stupid one. Director Roland Emmerich throws everything imaginable at the audience through the over two hours the movie runs, and while it’s impossible to take a moment of the movie seriously, I also found it impossible to resist. If you want to call White House Down a stupid movie, I won’t argue with you. But it’s gloriously stupid because it goes for broke at every moment. I left the theater grinning from ear to ear.

The basic setup is simple. John Cale (Channing Tatum) works on the security detail for the Speaker of the House (Richard Jenkins) – but his dream job is to be a Secret Service agent on the President’s protection detail. He is divorced, and has an 11 year old daughter Emily (Joey King), who is obsessed with politics, and idolizes President Sawyer (Jamie Foxx). So Cale pulls some string, gets an interview with the head of the President’s details – Finnerty (Maggie Gyllenhaal), and brings Emily along so she can see the White House. The interview doesn’t go well, but the two of them join a tour, and things seems to be going well – that is until a group of terrorists coolly, calmly and efficiently take over the White House. They need the President – what for, you’ll have to wait to find out – and somehow Cale ends up saving the President, and the two of them hide in the White House while trying to find a way out – and taking out the terrorist’s one at a time. Oh, and Emily – who was separated from Cale, of course – gets herself into a lot of trouble with the terrorists, by not being the dumb kid they think she is.

As a director, Emmerich has no subtlety in him – he deals strictly in this type of huge, bombastic action movie. Even when he tried a more serious movie – with the Shakespeare was a fraud drama Anonymous – the result was a bloated mess of a movie. He has his share of those on his resume – Stargate, Godzilla and 10,000 BC chief among them. But when he hits it just right – like Independence Day and parts of The Day After Tomorrow and 2012 – the result can be a ridiculously good time at the movies. White House Down certainly fits the bill on that level.

The movie works so well for a few reasons. The first being Emmerich can direct action, and thankfully, he has not gone with the trendy hand held camera and rapid fire editing approach to the action sequences. The action sequences are clear and well shot – you’re never confused about what’s going on, unlike so many other action movies.

Perhaps the bigger reason why the film works though is the performances. Tatum and Foxx have a nice chemistry together – they are essentially doing buddy action movie shtick, but it works well. Both have effortless charm and humor, and that keeps the movie afloat no matter how ridiculous things get. I also appreciated that they didn’t make Foxx some anonymous, no politics President like they did with Aaron Eckhart in Olympus Has Fallen – he’s clearly modeled after Barack Obama, and he’s clearly a Democrat (even if the word is never uttered). It may have been even more interesting to make him a Republican, but I’m not going to nitpick too much. The supporting cast – from Gyllenhaal to King to Jenkins to  James Woods and Jason Clarke as two of the bad guys to Michael Murphy as the Vice President to Nicolas Wright, as a tour guide, all have nice moments as well.

I’m not trying to argue that White House Down is a great movie – it isn’t. But it is a great guilty pleasure experience. So many of the blockbusters this summer – both good and bad – have taken themselves very seriously. It’s somewhat refreshing to see such glorious, ridiculous stupidity on full display in White House Down.

Movie Review: World War Z

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

Movie Review: World War Z

World War Z
Directed by: Marc Forster.
Written by: Matthew Michael Carnahan and Drew Goddard & Damon Lindelof  and J. Michael Straczynski based on the novel by Max Brooks.
Starring: Brad Pitt (Gerry Lane), Mireille Enos (Karin Lane), Daniella Kertesz (Segen), James Badge Dale (Captain Speke), Ludi Boeken (Jurgen Warmbrunn), Matthew Fox (Parajumper), Fana Mokoena (Thierry Umutoni), David Morse (Ex-CIA Agent), Elyes Gabel (Andrew Fassbach), Peter Capaldi (W.H.O. Doctor), Pierfrancesco Favino (W.H.O. Doctor), Ruth Negga (W.H.O. Doctor), Moritz Bleibtreu (W.H.O. Doctor), Sterling Jerins (Constance Lane), Abigail Hargrove (Rachel Lane), Fabrizio Zacharee Guido (Tomas), David Andrews (Naval Commander).

The zombie genre hasn’t really changed much since George A. Romero pretty much invented it with 1968’s Night of the Living Dead. Romero is still the undisputed master – making 6 films in his “dead” series in the 45 years since the first (he always said he wanted to make 10 – I doubt he’ll make it). The one thing almost every zombie movie – whether it shows the outbreak or is about the aftermath – is that it is about a confined group of people, in one location. The outside world may or may not be falling down like they are – they just don’t know (I supposed 28 Weeks Later is an exception). The biggest debate in zombie movie circles ever happened with the release of 28 Days Later and the remake of Dawn of the Dead – should zombies run?

On that level, you can at least say World War Z offers something slightly new to the zombie genre. Although, unlike the book the film is based on, the movie concentrates on one person, it does offer a global perspective on a zombie outbreak. Max Brooks book had more on its mind than zombies – and was really about politics, and how countries around the world would react to an outbreak of this kind. As far as zombie fiction goes, it actually took the questions relatively seriously.

The movie doesn’t follow the book exactly – that would have made it episodic, and since Brad Pitt was on board, he needs to be at the center of it. So instead of showing us the outbreak piece by piece, country by country with a revolving door of characters, the film concentrates on Pitt’s Gerry Lane – a former UN Investigator called back into service to hope around the globe and try and find where the zombie outbreak started. If they knew where it started, they may know how to stop it. He doesn’t want to do this, but if he doesn’t he and his family – wife Karin (Mireille Enos) and two daughters will be thrown off the relative safety of the Navy ship they’ve be taken in on. He doesn’t really have a choice.

I said earlier that this kind of globetrotting action epic is new to the zombie genre – and I really do believe that – that doesn’t mean that World War Z is exactly original. To be, this almost felt like the type of disaster movie that Roland Emmerich usually makes – although one that is done much better than most of his films. The film is more of a thriller and action movie than a horror film – I wasn’t really scared at any point during the film (although my wife was, but she’s scared of everything in movies). That doesn’t mean the movie isn’t intense – because there are great moments of tension – or exciting – as the film has a couple of great action sequences (the one in Israel is particularly well handled).

And I did like the zombies in this film. I have always been more of a “slow zombie” guy than one of the new breed of running zombies. The zombies win not because of their speed or strength or smarts, but simply because there are too many of them, and they overwhelm you. In World War Z, the zombies are running – and it works really well. Director Marc Forster has said he was inspired by insects with these zombies, and you can easily see that when the zombies swarm their prey, or even when they’re by themselves – trapped in a corner like a fly trying to get out a closed window.

Pitt anchors the movie with his good guy routine – which he does well. While I always like Pitt more when he takes chances – and few movie stars of his caliber have taken as many over the last decade – it’s easy to forget just how good he can be when he’s in full movie star mode as he is here. It’s not going to get him an Oscar or anything, but a movie like this needs a good guy at it’s core – someone for the audience to root for – and Pitt more than fits the bill.

World War Z is well made, mainstream entertainment. I had fun watching the film for two hours, and if the hinted at sequel materializes I see it. The film took some chances and mixed genres effectively. And while the movie doesn’t skimp on action, it also doesn’t beat you into submission with it like many of the action movies so far this summer. It may not be a great film, but it’s an effective one.

Movie Review: Man of Steel

Monday, June 17, 2013

Movie Review: Man of Steel

Man of Steel
Directed by: Zack Snyder.
Written by: David S. Goyer & Christopher Nolan based on characters created by Jerry Siegel   & Joe Shuster.
Starring: Henry Cavill (Clark Kent / Kal-El), Amy Adams (Lois Lane), Michael Shannon (General Zod), Diane Lane (Martha Kent), Russell Crowe (Jor-El), Antje Traue (Faora-Ul), Harry Lennix (General Swanwick), Richard Schiff (Dr. Emil Hamilton), Christopher Meloni (Colonel Nathan Hardy), Kevin Costner (Jonathan Kent), Ayelet Zurer (Lara Lor-Van), Laurence Fishburne (Perry White).

One of the complaints I often have about remakes and reboots is that the filmmakers behind them are content with simply doing the exact same thing that previous filmmakers have done with the franchise. This was the case with last year’s The Amazing Spider-Man – a fine film in its own right, and probably better than Sam Raimi’s original Spider-Man from a decade ago, but a film that doesn’t really try to do anything different with Spider-Man (no, giving him a different girlfriend and a different bad guy doesn’t count). If nothing else, you cannot make the same complaint about Man of Steel. Directed by Zack Snyder, from a screenplay by David S. Goyer (with the help of Christopher Nolan, who also produced), it’s clear that all involved wanted to make a different Superman movie this time out. It is a retelling of the origin story of Superman – but it is vastly different from Richard Donner’s 1978 Superman – and the sequels (including the overly reverent Superman Returns). I appreciated the effort behind the film and its ambitions however more than the final result. I’m not going to say Man of Steel is a bad movie – because it isn’t – the first half is actually very good, but the film has some flaws that hold it back from being a great film.

The movie opens on Krypton, as the planet is on the brink of collapse. These scenes are fairly well handled – with Russell Crowe as Jor-El, the planet’s top scientist, giving an intelligent, sensitive performance, knowing that his planet his doomed and placing the hopes of all of Krypton with his newborn son Kal – the first “naturally born Son of Krypton is hundreds of years” as he sends him to earth, before being killed by General Zod (Michael Shannon), who along with his cohorts will be captured and banished to the Phantom Zone – but not before he vows to find Kal.

We then meet Kal – now Clark Kent (Henry Cavill) – decades later, as he is essentially a drifter, going from one place to another on a quest to find out who he really is. The first hour is packed with flashbacks to his youth – where he realizes he is different and doesn’t want to me. It’s in these scenes that we get the film’s best performance – by Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent, the humble Kansas farmer who adopted Clark as his own son, and warns him repeatedly that he has to keep his abilities a secret, because humans will not be able to handle the truth about him. Costner, who is much better now that he is a character actor, and not a leading man, gives these scenes real emotional weight – even if you do have to question his advice, and in a key scene his decision, which really doesn’t make much sense, no matter how emotional the scene itself is, or how great he is in it.

Eventually, of course, Clark will discover the truth about himself – buried under the ice in Northern Canada, where they find an alien spaceship. This is also when he meets Lois Lane (Amy Adams) – intrepid reporter for the Daily Planet. And, eventually, what will lead General Zod to Earth – and force Kal-El/Clark Kent to make a decision that will out him to the entire planet – something he has not wanted to do.

In general, I liked much of the first half of Man of Steel. The scenes on Krypton bordered on overkill at times, without ever quite tipping over. And the performances were generally spot on – Cavill doing more dramatic heavy lifting than Supermans of the past, as the movie strives to make him a little more brooding and complex than prior versions of the character. I’ve already talked about how great Costner is in the movie – the most realistic character by a mile. Michael Shannon makes a wonderful snarling villain as Zod – devoid of the camp that Terrence Stamp brought to the role (and that’s both a good and bad thing). Amy Adams is wonderful as Lois Lane. Or perhaps it’s more accurate to say that based on what we see in the film, Adams COULD be wonderful as Lane. She is the perfect blend of perky and tough – cute, but overly cutesy, and a wonderful love interest for Cavill. But because the movie’s second half devolves into one loud fight sequence after another, and because the movie seems to be saving all the Daily Planet banter for the second movie, Adams doesn’t quite get the opportunity to be a great Lois Lane. If the filmmakers are smart, they’ll give her much more to do next time out. You may say the same thing about Diane Lane as Ma Kent – you can sense that she is capable of more, but because the flashbacks put such a heavy emphasis of Costner, she’s kind of lost in those scenes.

I hinted at my major problems with Man of Steel in the last paragraph – but let me spell them out a little more. It’s clear that Christopher Nolan had a large influence on the film. Like his Batman films, Man of Steel wants to be a more realistic superhero movie – it takes the question of what someone like Clark Kent would actually be like as a child – the struggles, the questions, the desire to be normal, having the weight of the world on your shoulders. In general, I appreciate that, but it doesn’t work quite as well in Man of Steel as it did in Nolan’s Batman movies. For one thing, Batman (unless he’s being played by Adam West) always was kind of a brooding asshole – so Nolan’s take on the character made more sense. But the same idea doesn’t quite work as well for Superman – because his story is, of course, much more far-fetched than being a pissed off billionaire who likes to beat people up. It still works up to a point – and I appreciated the effort – but after spending half the movie seemingly obsessed with the question of how humanity would react when they find out about Clark Kent’s powers, the movie pretty much ignores the question in the second half – you know, when they actually find out – so they can get one big loud fight scene after another.

And that’s my bigger problem with Man of Steel. The first half of the movie seemed to be striving for something, that the second half ignores. The action sequences in the second half of the film are well done – and thankfully not as overindulgent as they have been in Snyder’s previous films 300, Watchmen or Sucker Punch (not nearly as much slow motion). In fact, they rank with the best work of any action sequences this year. But they drag on and on, and are piled one after one for pretty much the last half of the movie – or about 75-80 minutes. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing – and Man of Steel hits that point, and then goes well beyond it. I won’t complain about yet another movie that destroys skyscrapers and multiple blocks of a major city, and then never dealing with the aftermath (really, how many THOUSANDS of people must have been killed in these final scenes). The film uses imagery undeniable similar to that of a real life event like 9/11, and then never does anything with it. Okay, so maybe I will complain a little about it.

This probably sounds like I didn’t much care for Man of Steel – and that’s not really accurate. I really did like the first half of the movie. And while I grew tired of one fight scene after another in the second half, I have to admit they are well done – this is some of the best special effects and sound work you will see this year. But I also couldn’t help but be somewhat disappointed in Man of Steel. There is so much here to love that the fact that the movie ends up being just okay is a little disappointing. I’m looking forward to the sequel though – I just hope they realize what they did well this time out, and not screw it up next time.

Movie Review: After Earth

Monday, June 3, 2013

Movie Review: After Earth

After Earth
Directed by: M. Night Shyamalan.
Written by: Gary Whitta and M. Night Shyamalan, story by Will Smith.
Starring: Jaden Smith (Kitai Raige), Will Smith (Cypher Raige), Sophie Okonedo (Faia Raige), Zoë Kravitz (Senshi Raige).

After Year is the first big movie of blockbuster season that is downright awful. I may have been mildly disappointed in Iron Man 3 and a little more than mildly disappointed in The Great Gatsby, but both films were at least entertaining to a certain degree. Although After Earth is significantly shorter than any of the other big movies of the last month, it feels a lot longer. The movie is deadly slow, ponderous, boring and at times downright goofy. It is a failure for all involved.

The movie stars Will Smith and his son Jaden as father and son (naturally). It is set 1,000 years after humanity had to evacuate Earth because their actions made it in uninhabitable for humans. Since then, they have found a new home, but apparently have been engaged in the longest war ever against the Ursa’s – an alien creature, that is pretty much another clone from the Alien franchise. These aliens are different however – they cannot see or hear – and track down humans by smelling their fear. That’s right – their fear.

Smith is Cypher Raige – a decorated General of the Rangers – the human Army who is tasked with protecting the rest of us and killing the Ursa’s. Jaden is Kitai Raige, his teenage son, still reeling from his failure as a child as he hid from the Ursa’s and watched one of them kill his big sister, Senshi. Cypher has never forgiven him for that (although, he was a child, and did what his sister told him to, and what the hell was he going to do?). Cypher, of course, is about to retire. He has one last training mission to go to – and decides to take Kitai along with him. Kitai has just failed to be promoted to Ranger, but his mother Faia (Sophie Okonedo) convinces Cypher the trip will be a chance to get to know his son.

If you’ve seen the previews – then you’ve seen the rest. A rocket crash kills everyone but Kitai and Cypher – although it leaves Cypher with two broken legs – unable to move from the downed ship. It has also destroyed their homing beacon, so no one will be able to find them. But there is another one – in the tail of the ship that crashed 100 KM away. Kitai needs to go and retrieve it or they’re both dead. Oh, and they crashed on earth, where now every animal can kill you and whose temperature fluctuates wildly (you would think that would kill the animals – but I guess not – perhaps Darwin could explain why if he was around).

The film has been directed by M. Night Shyamalan, once one of the most promising directors working, and now looking at his third horrible movie in a row (the other two being The Happening and The Last Airbender – others would say fifth in a row, but while I hated The Village, I did not hate Lady in the Water as many did). Here, although he co-wrote the screenplay, it is based on a story by Will Smith himself – who obviously hoped this would be a star making vehicle for his son Jaden. Jaden has shown he can be a pretty good young actor in films like The Pursuit of Happyness and The Karate Kid, but here he is thrown into the deep end, and simply does not have the charisma or acting chops to carry this film. I’m not going to be too hard on him though, since most child actors couldn’t do what is expected of Jaden Smith here. For much of the movie, he is by himself, in the middle of an extremely fake CGI world, dodging killer monkeys and a giant bird, and has no one to play off of. Carrying a movie without a screen partner is an incredibly difficult thing to do – most actors cannot do it, and we cannot really expect Smith to do it here. True, for most of the movie, he has his father in his ear telling him what to do – but it’s not the same thing as having a true scene partner. For his part, Smith Sr. gives his dullest performance I can imagine. I’ve never thought Smith was a terrific actor, but he’s always been a terrific movie star – using his undeniable charm and likability to full advantage (and it should be said, he did pretty much carry a movie by himself – I Am Legend. Here, he plays his character like it was written – an almost emotionless character, who doesn’t know, or even seem to want to know, his son. His is emotionless is many ways – making his name Cypher a far too on the nose description of his character – the same could be said for Smith Jr.’s name Kitai which is Japanese for Faith.

There are a few moments in After Earth where I sensed the talented Shyamalan behind the camera – a few subtle moments and camera moves that brought to mind his best work. But for the most part, this is another deadly dull movie for him. He is clearly a “director for hire” here, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that, but he seems to have lost most of his eye behind the camera. He seems disinterested. His screenplay is still full of the forced sentimentality and “profound” moments that are in reality quite shallow which has marred much of his work.

I could forgive After Earth many of its flaws if it weren’t for the biggest one – the film is deadly dull. It drags on from one scene to the next, and even in the action moments, fails to get the pulse of the audience racing. The movie just sits there on the screen. And I just sat there in the audience waiting for it to be over.