4 posts tagged “film review”

"Hayao Miyazaki is known for some of the best anime ever made. From his humble beginnings working on animated adaptations of traditional English fictions such as Treasure Island and Puss ‘n Boots to modern genre classics including Howl’s Moving Castle, Princess Mononoke and Spirited Away, Miyazaki has achieved an almost unparalleled mastery of animation and storytelling."

Read the full review at Fantasy Magazine.

Being 36 as of 45 minutes ago, the Terminator property is one dear to my heart. The original Terminator (1984) was a tremendous influence on my then-blossoming idea of manhood.  In a general way, action movies of that era and their descendants are the only action movies I care for.  Naturally, the Terminator series is heavily sci-fi oriented, but that has historically been a thin veneer, which peels off in minutes, like the T-800's organic sheath. 

One is a fool to expect anything less than phenomenal effects from a Terminator movie, and Salvation fulfills that hope and then some.  Sure, giant human-shaped robots make no sense, really, but we love them anyway.  What I really want to know is why any post-apocalyptic setting seems to require random fires all over the place.  Wreckage and rubble, sure, but constant gas leaks lasting for decades are a bit much.  The machines, in spite of their inherent and requisite design flaws are marvelously rendered.  Their audible representation was also excellent, fitting in nicely with Danny Elfman's excellent if predictable score.

The acting is also predictable.  Largely lackluster, the dialogue is delivered in that typical action movie style; reminiscent of a can of Coke left open overnight.  The numerous hands that touched the script are also fairly obvious.  Only J. D. Brancato and Michael Ferris are credited, but word on the web is that at least four other scriptwriters worked this project, further proof that Hollywood is a lopsided beast that despises the very foundation upon which it is built. 

Those lines most vital to an action script (i.e. one liners) received some attention by director McG (Joseph McGinty Nichol), but like the rest of his name, the vital relationships and supporting characters were ignored if not forgotten entirely.  The end result is merely typical action movie fare. 

A major complaint is the ending, of which I will say only this: If it annoyed you, you must not have seen it coming.  I am therefore led to believe you have utterly ignored everything every English teacher you ever had tried to teach you.  Read a book

Overall, I enjoyed the movie a lot, but must still consider its flaws in rating.  I give T4: Salvation 6 of 10 points.

WARNING: SPOILER AHEAD

You'd think I'd learn.  Seriously.  I have been watching adaptations of beloved comics for years, but I still haven't gotten a simple fact locked into my head.  See, there are two formulae for comic flicks:

A.  Take established characters, tweak settings and back-story, create film based on original script, written with existing materials in mind.
B.  Recreate a specific story arc.

Type A has great potential.  Reference Spiderman 1 & 2, X-Men 1 & 2, The Incredible Hulk, both FF movies, etc.  Type B is guaranteed to piss me off (the simple fact that escapes me).  See V for Vendetta and now, Watchmen.

They really had me going, too.  I mean sure, there were some omissions here and there.  After all, how are you possibly going to include all that greatness in a movie?  But they kept almost all of the really vital bits.  I had a pretty good idea that something was wrong when we never met the artist, but I let it slide.  Right up to the end.

The characters were treated fairly.  Zack did a good job of that.  Sure, Malin Akerman can't act her way into a wet paper bag, but she certainly looked like Silk Spectre II.  Sure, Patrick Wilson was a little light, but he did a helluva job with NiteOwl II.  Likewise, Rorshach (Jackie Earle Haley) was terrific!  I can't really argue with the rest of the cast' everyone looked and played their parts well.

The visuals, soundtrack, special effects were all stunning.   Dr. Manhattan was incredible, except for one interaction with a pillow and a handful of mistimed phonemes.  His aura was perfectly executed, as were his creations.  The fact that a viewer can follow the story panel for frame is pretty likable too.  I mean, generally, everything lined up perfectly.  Great care was taken to recreate this history-making graphic novel faithfully.  Except for the end.

If you haven't read the comics, but have seen the movie, don't. Seriously. Pointless.  If you've read the comics, but haven't seen the movie, go ahead and go.  It's terrible exciting to see the pages come to life like nothing before.  The soundtrack is awesome; fits right in.  The book was their storyboard, shot for shot, and that's impressive, frankly.

But dammit, Zack Snyder, what's the point of recreating everything so carefully just to change the ending?  Do you not "get it"?  Did you try to carry the iconic book that revolutionized the way comics are perceived to the masses without actually understanding it?

See, my gripe is this: with everything else so well done, from Archimedes to Rorshach's face, why the hell would you replace the alien attack with Dr. Manhattan going, apparently, insane?  Is this your pathetic attempt at a twist-ending?  It's like making Princess Leia the emperor.  It's like chocolate cake with mustard icing.  It's crap.

That's right, folks.  They kept the magical mystery in this movie frame for frame, pathos for pathos, right up to the big revelation.  Then they proved that Ozymandias, king of kings, was not the world's smartest man, but instead a drooling moron.

See, any sci-fi geek can tell you that one of the great themes of the genre is that of human unity through alien threat.  Note I didn't say "atomic scientist threat".  Atomic science is what brought on the problem in the first place!  I want my Cthulian horror, you bastards!  I want my unknowable alien menace, capable of pushing the human race to realize there are greater threats than any man could ever conceive, lurking silently overhead.

You broke the story, Zack, because your peace is so fragile that Rorshach's journal is no longer required to break it.  All it takes now is one Russian asking, "Well, couldn't the American pig-dogs just make another Dr. Manhattan?"  Where does that leave our alienated, pathos-ridden men-become-gods? 

Obviously, our world doesn't need one more real person struggling against all odds to be heroic.  It needs one less Zack Snyder.

I give Watchmen 2 of 10 points.  (The comics? A solid, undoubted 10.)

Twenty-nine years and eleven sequels later, we again pick up a trail of blood that leads the audience on a blood-spattered thrill ride.  Jason Vorhees lives, Camp Crystal Lake lies in ruins, and the gore strikes the big screen like a machete in the face.

 If one were to slice and dice the original movie, the first three sequels and the awesome might of a modern big budget special effects team, then blend the lot on pulse for 97 minutes, one would get this remake.  One should not be displeased with said result.

 Of course it’s a slasher movie.  Of course the acting is sporadic at best.  Of course there’s next to no plot, but hey, what can the audience expect?

 They can expect brutal slayings, an innovative and mysterious masked machete artist, lots of breasts, and a solid back-to-basics attitude.  And how can you possibly argue with a decapitation during the credits?  How, I ask?  By not being a slasher fan, but otherwise you’ve got to love it! 

 The efforts of writers Damian Shannon, Mark Swift, Mark Wheaton and Victor Miller combine to produce natural and often witty dialogue, a solid pace and plenty of gore.  They also gave us a comparatively more intricate Jason, blessed with a malicious forethought that has never been so well portrayed.  Camp Crystal Lake, from the dock to the cabins to the overturned school bus, is Jason’s personal playground, with every feature used to full effect.

 The acting is generally decent, with special acclaim afforded to Jared Padelecki (Clay Miller) and Amanda Righetti (Whitney Miller).  Less successful was Danielle Panabaker’s Jenna, who has some moments, but is mainly awkward and inexact.  Travis Van Winkle (Trent) is lovingly despicable, and his death thoroughly gratifying.  The action is, naturally, commendable throughout.

 Speaking of gratuitous, that may be the word that most succinctly describes this movie.  There’s gratuitous humor, gratuitous violence, gratuitous nudity, gratuitously violent nudity and gratuitously nude violence.  Everything the slasher fan needs. 

 In closing, I am obliged to mention that this movie actually made me jump in my seat.  This feat has gone entirely unaccomplished since C.H.U.D. (1984). 

 I give Friday The 13^th (Again) 7 of 10 points.