Archive for the Adventure Category

Cars 3

Posted in Adventure, Animation, Comedy, Family, Fantasy on June 21, 2017 by Mark Hobin

 photo cars_three_ver3_zpscemphvxy.jpg photo starrating-3stars.jpgCars is officially a trilogy so we must now discuss it as we would the original Star Wars, Godfather and Lord of the Rings sagas.  All joking aside, there’s something almost comforting about the Cars movies.  They sort of offer proof that even the almighty Pixar is imperfect.  None of these films are terrible, mind you.   However, they aren’t particularly meaningful either.  Especially when you compare it to the high standard at which Pixar has always operated.  Given the setting, an automotive analogy is appropriate.  For Pixar, this what shifting into neutral and just coasting looks like.  These pictures are solid entertainment in the moment but don’t expect a timeless classic.

Cars 3 is a return to form, but let me reiterate.  I’m talking about a return to the quality of Cars, not the best Pixar movies. After Cars 2 shook things up by fixating on tow truck Mater over racecar Lightning McQueen, the franchise gets back to the basics of the original.  Here we revisit the focus on the joys of racing and not on an action-packed spy movie.  Cars 3 feels more like a sequel to the first Cars. Even Doc Hudson (Paul Newman, in previously recorded snippets) pops up in flashback offering wisdom from beyond the grave. It’s almost as if Cars 2 never happened.

The drama concerns the current season of racing at the Piston Cup competition. Older racers Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson), Bobby Swift (Angel Oquendo) and Cal Weathers (Kyle Petty) find themselves surpassed by a much more technologically advanced upstart named Jackson Storm (Armie Hammer). It’s clear the senior guys can no longer compete at the same level.  A fresh generation is taking over.  One by one the seasoned racers throw in the towel and retire, but Lightning refuses to quit.  That’s a good thing, right?  Not so fast.  A desperate attempt to push himself to the same speed as Jackson Storm leads to a disastrous accident for Lightning.  He decides to regroup.  Lightning heads off to the Rust-eze Racing Center where he meets the new owner named Sterling (Nathan Fillion).  Sterling is a big fan of Lightning McQueen and wants to see him succeed.  Sterling introduces him to his young trainer, Cruz Ramirez (comedian Cristela Alonzo). As the narrative progresses, Cruz becomes a notable addition to the cast.

Now you might think that this is all leading to a feel-good tale where Lighting learns how to retrain, be the best again and triumph over adversity.  Nope.  Sorry. Not even close.  The events are actually rather subversive and it’s that unpredictability that beckons the viewer to keep following.  There’s a lot of entertainment value in the capricious developments of the story.  It’s never boring.  However every time the drama seems to be pushing toward a particular moral, certain plot contrivances flip the script in a different direction.  We’re misled a few times and the results can be a bit unfulfilling.  It’s like we’re noshing on several appetizers instead of feasting on one entree.  Ultimately the climax can best be described as poignant.  Hint: We do age and there will always be a younger generation to take our place.  That can be seen as both depressing and uplifting.  In the end, Cars 3 is a pleasant diversion. Perhaps more importantly for the studio, it will sell a ton of new toys. Now the real question is, will your kids want to play with Cruz Ramirez or Jackson Storm?

06-15-17

The Mummy

Posted in Action, Adventure, Fantasy on June 10, 2017 by Mark Hobin

 photo mummy_ver3_zpslrfy0i83.jpg photo starrating-2stars.jpgIt must have seemed like a brilliant idea at the time. Disney has their Marvel Cinematic Universe. Warner Bros. has its ever-improving DC Comics world. Universal didn’t want to left behind. Why not reboot their own Mummy franchise as the first installment in a new film series dubbed the “Dark Universe”?  A pompous Russell Crowe even pops up here early on to deliver a lengthy prologue as Dr. Henry Jekyll.  He gives us a little backstory as to how his character will fit into this new world they’re creating.  Other classic Universal Studios monsters are expected to follow: the Bride of Frankenstein, the Creature from the Black Lagoon, and the Invisible Man among others.  Some major stars are being promoted for future installments.  Johnny Depp has signed on to be the Invisible Man and Javier Bardem will be Frankenstein’s monster. The problem is to build a superior anthology of related films, it helps to start off with a bang. Sadly The Mummy is not great. It’s not even good.

Casting Tom Cruise as your lead is a positive way to begin. For the record, I do like Tom Cruise.  Please remember that as I carry on with my review.  As Nick Morton, he’s a former U.S. Military officer who accidentally uncovers the tomb of Princess Ahmanet (Sofia Boutella).  He’s a roguish mercenary type that seeks to profit from the treasure he finds.  He does this with his trusty sidekick Chris (played by New Girl’s Jake Johnson) and aloof archaeologist Jenny Halsey (Annabelle Wallis), a former lover that is young enough to be his daughter. Strangely Cruise has no chemistry with either of his co-stars.  The actor has never been one lacking in charm, until now.  He’s surprisingly stiff if you’ll pardon the pun.  Johnson and Wallis are meant to provide laughs and sexual tension respectively but there’s nary a trace to be extracted from either. Anyway back in ancient times, Princess Ahmanet was really ticked off that she didn’t get to become queen so she’s not a happy camper. Naturally when Nick and his gang disturb her tomb, she uses the opportunity to put a curse on our hapless hero. Yeah, things are looking kind of grim for the poor guy.

The Mummy allows Tom Cruise to do what he does well.  He partakes in some death-defying stunts, looks convincingly exasperated and runs…a lot.  Once again, a Tom Cruise thriller features a setpiece involving a plane.  He is subjected to zero gravity followed by a frightening crash.  He’s still in top physical shape too and he wants you to know it.  The man is in his 50s but he ages like the picture of Dorian Gray. He even manages to show off his naked physique. This logically occurs when he extricates himself from a body bag at the morgue.  They thought he died in a plane crash.  He didn’t.  As to why has to do with developments that are better left unspoiled.  The movie always makes sure to present Tom Cruise in the most flattering way possible.  His co-stars, on the other hand, aren’t quite so lucky. As the Mummy, Sofia Boutella is obscured with skin disfiguring tattoos all over her anatomy and best buddy Chris becomes like the walking dead with eyes to match.

The Mummy could have been silly fun but it gets bogged down in expository explanations of a superfluous narrative.  The ancient history of the female mummy takes up a lot of time.  And what is the plot exactly?  Peel back all the corroborative details and it’s not much of a saga at all.  Just the revenge of an ancient wanna-be Egyptian queen that unites a progression of attacks.  The effects are enjoyable.  I’ll give it that and Tom Cruise tries, really really hard.  I give him an A for effort, but there’s not much here to sink your Friday night popcorn flick teeth into.  It isn’t cheesy enough to be fun and it isn’t refined enough to be thrilling.  Just a sequence of CGI encounters that have been stitched together one after the other for our hexed hero (and us the audience) to experience.  In fact, I’ll save you some money right now. The Mummy is attack of the spiders, beetles, crows, rats, and zombies.  The End.  You’re welcome.

06-08-17

Wonder Woman

Posted in Action, Adventure, Fantasy, Superhero with tags on June 3, 2017 by Mark Hobin

 photo wonder_woman_ver5_zpshsnw2ynx.jpg photo starrating-4stars.jpgThe story of Wonder Woman is less about the dawn of another superhero and more about a sheltered individual living in a bubble who comes to understand what is happening in the outside world around her. Princess Diana (Gal Godot) was a child sculpted from clay by her mother Queen Hippolyta (Connie Nielsen) and given life by Zeus. As such, she does indeed possess special powers, superhuman strength to name but one.  Although her mother forbids it, Diana is trained to be a warrior by her aunt Antiope (Robin Wright).

The production is set during the era of World War I and this conflict forms the basis of the narrative. What really impresses is how much the tale could exist without the value added depiction of an origin story.  It’s telling you’ll never hear the words “Wonder Woman” in the entire movie. The crime fighting uniform she ultimately adopts consists of battle armor and a tiara.  Like other recent DC comic adaptations, they look rather subdued from the traditional red, white and blue tights we’ve seen in previous iterations. Long time fans rest assured, they didn’t try to totally reinvent the character.  This is still the defender you know and love, just recontextualized for a 2017 audience.  She still gets her cuff bracelets and the Lasso of Truth.  Her invisible jet is sadly missing though.

Gal Gadot is such a joy as the titular heroine. She is sexy and beautiful of course, but also wholesome and virtuous as well. She’s a refreshingly stable personality. In that respect, she’s reminiscent of Marvel’s Captain America. That mental stability has been lacking in the DC Extended Universe as of late. It began with Man of Steel in 2013.  DC has completely bungled the new version of Superman. Where is the decent champion of truth we love from the 1978 feature?  This pessimism continued on through Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Suicide Squad, both in 2016.  Most agreed, Gadot’s presence was the best thing about the former film.  Where the characters in those pictures have been conflicted and plagued with self-doubt, Wonder Woman is distinctly well-adjusted.

Events are set in motion when she meets Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), an American spy working for the Allied powers.  He crash lands his plane in the waters off of Themyscira, her island of Amazons. Wonder Woman was taught at a young age that Ares, the God of war corrupted mankind. She’s convinced that he is behind all this. Steve is skeptical of her beliefs but charmed by her presence.  Her adopted persona is Diana Prince when she leaves the island and the excursion becomes a learning experience. He explains what a watch is and she responds with “You let this tiny thing run your life?” Gadot’s chemistry with Chris Pine is so palpable it really enhances the drama. Of course, I expected Gal Gadot to be the major part of the production and she is. What I didn’t expect what how important Chris Pine would be. He really rises to the task. Their charisma together strikes the perfect balance. Their interactions run the gamut from romantic and sensuous to funny and lighthearted. The screenplay is by Allan Heinberg, co-creator of The Young Avengers, a superhero team published by Marvel Comics. Imagine, a comic book movie written by a comic book writer. What a concept!  Heinberg takes the time to develop well-rounded and likable people we truly care about.  It’s one of the most important requirements in an engaging story and Wonder Woman does it well.

The saga incorporates the terror of World War I but it’s still surprisingly upbeat and hopeful. Director Patty Jenkins (Monster) gets so much right. This is a long movie though – 2 hours and 21 minutes to be exact. I think brevity and simplicity are qualities to celebrate in a superhero fable. For the majority of the adventure, the action is well photographed and exciting.  The initial battle, an early skirmish on the beach between the Amazons and German soldiers gets things off a rocking good start. It’s arrows and shields vs. guns and torpedoes. There are more clashes later on and they’re visually well depicted too.  However, the finish is kind of mediocre.  Things deteriorate a bit in the video-game aesthetic of the finale with murky action and CGI.  It’s not enough to sink the whole picture, mind you. The rest of the film is absolutely sensational.  Nevertheless, it is a misstep that’s impossible to ignore in an otherwise spectacular production.

Wonder Woman is smashing success.  Gal Gadot is an absolute delight.  She is an innocent, a babe in the woods.  She enjoys ice cream for the very first time and she tells the vendor, “You should be very proud!” You want to embrace this good-hearted soul. She is someone to cherish. It’s no secret that the comic book business is a male-dominated genre. The pressure to deliver the first female-led superhero box office smash was pretty intense. There are so many instances in which this could have gone wrong, but instead, there are so many ways in which this was done right.  Expectations were so cautious.  The mere fact that the character is such a breath of fresh air makes one give the success perhaps, even more credit than it truly deserves. There has never been a successful female-led superhero blockbuster. That is until now. DC has finally given us something Marvel hasn’t.  I’m ready to see it again.

06-01-17

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2

Posted in Action, Adventure, Science Fiction on May 7, 2017 by Mark Hobin

 photo guardians_of_the_galaxy_vol_two_ver4_zpsd2l8up5k.jpg photo starrating-4stars.jpgWhen the first Guardians of the Galaxy debuted in the summer of ’14, its unqualified success came as a bit of a surprise. It was a superhero team with which most were unfamiliar and so predictions were cautious.  Being the 10th entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), many assumed it would still rank somewhere in the summer’s top 10. However no one thought it would be the biggest hit of the entire season, even besting Transformers: Age of Extinction, the presumed #1.  There was a very good reason.  Guardians was an extraordinary interplanetary space adventure that perfectly blended, action, romance and melodrama – arguably the best MCU entry yet.  Now with Vol. 2, the outlook is better because we know director James Gunn can deliver the goods. However, a great sequel is the general exception, not the norm in my experience. Could Gunn capture lightning in a bottle again? I’m happy to report that Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 rises to the occasion. I had my doubts, but this surpasses expectations.

The original Guardians was a candy-colored, fun-tastic sugar rush of a space dream. Yet the production design of Vol. 2 makes the first film look like a Jim Jarmusch indie. The space opera positively bursts with color, effects, and lively entertainment. Sprinkle in another soundtrack of 70s pop hits.  The formula works again.  Marvel has got another smash hit on its hands. The priority is fun and Vol. 2 is, dare I say it, even funnier than the original.  Not better, mind you.  It would have been impossible to recapture the exhilarating feeling of when we first discovered this rag tag team.  Gunn realizes this and so his focus is mining the comedy from familiar individuals and then deepening our comprehension of what makes these characters tick.

Guardians is all about family.  Director James Gunn’s screenplay manages to weave in a tale about deadbeat dads, sibling rivalry between sisters and infighting amongst the clan. This gives us a fuller grasp of characters we thought we already knew.  The unmistakable chemistry remains with this lovable bunch. There’s Peter “Star-Lord” Quill (Chris Pratt) the smart-alecky leader and tough-talking, unsmiling warrior Gamora (Zoe Saldana). Their relationship, or lack of one, is addressed through the empathic powers of new cast member, Mantis (Pom Klementieff ).   Massive galoot Drax the Destroyer (Dave Bautista) is back.  Despite his literal perception of words, he inexplicably informs the naive alien she’s ugly.  Nevertheless, there seems to be a budding romance between the two.  Also returning are the cranky bounty hunter Rocket, (voiced by Bradley Cooper), that genetically engineered raccoon, and cut from a sapling, Baby Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel).  He’s awfully dim but still cute as can be.  There’s a couple unexpected cameos thrown in and the introduction of an important new villain.  No further explanation is necessary.  I consider those details spoilers.

Guardians Vol. 2 succeeds at being both funny and deep. There’s humor to spare but there’s a poignancy to the proceedings too. We get a more well-rounded understanding of characters we know and love. Guardians gives us the laughs while serving up a lot of heart as well.  Marvel movies have always been amusing.  What sets Guardians apart from others of its ilk is the free associating pop culture aesthetic. No where is that more conspicuous than in the soundtrack.   Peter’s beloved mixtape is the sentimental link to his deceased mother.  Like its predecessor, we get a liberal sampling of 70s hits from the likes of Fleetwood Mac, ELO and Cat Stevens. The film is so loopy there’s even room for a David Hasselhoff tune.  Trust me.  It actually has context in the story.  At times, the More glitz! More dazzle! can seem like too much.  At 2 hours 18 minutes, the extended run time suffers a bit from too much bloat.  But at its best, Guardians is silly and irreverent in the best sense of the word.  This is the giddy spectacle of a summer flick that wants to party down and have fun. The production achieves this in visually spectacular fashion.  It’s an opportunity for any carefree individual to simply enjoy themselves at the cinema.   One need only be open to the invitation.  In a bit of sage advice, Drax tells Peter, “There’s two types of beings in the universe: those who dance, and those who do not.”  This is a film for those who dance.

05-04-17

The Lost City of Z

Posted in Action, Adventure, Biography on April 30, 2017 by Mark Hobin

 photo lost_city_of_z_ver4_zpsftsrwykk.jpg photo starrating-2stars.jpgI wasn’t familiar with British explorer Percy Fawcett before I saw The Lost City of Z. Now that I have, I’m still befuddled as to why he merits consideration.  The movie’s very existence implies that Lieutenant Colonel Percival Harrison Fawcett was a trailblazer.  The account presents a man who made a series of trips searching the uncharted Amazonian forests in search of Z, a lost civilianization. Although he mapped supposedly unexplored Brazilian territory, by white men anyway, he didn’t really accomplish much more than that. Yet the screenplay unconditionally glorifies its central hero. In short, the ambiguous movie doesn’t make it clear why this guy was important.

The Lost City of Z is based on New York journalist David Grann’s 2009 bestselling nonfiction book of the same name. Its subtitle: A Tale of Deadly Obsession in the Amazon, suggests nonstop excitement with charismatic individuals. This saga has neither. Charlie Hunnam looks the part of a dashing hero. He speaks his lines with clear conviction often shouting them to show passion, but he remains a vague personality. He’s joined by various companions on different expeditions. Of note are Henry Costin (Robert Pattinson), Fawcett’s trusted assistant, biologist James Murray (Angus Macfadyen) and Fawcett’s son Jack (Tom Holland), who joins his father on his last trip. I mention them because they are known actors with lines but they don’t elevate this tale. His wife Nina (Sienna Miller) is written as a burgeoning feminist with dialogue seemingly written with a 2017 audience in mind.

There is no cohesive thrust to the narrative. He travels through the rain forest, then comes back home, to the jungle again and back to England he returns. At times, he seems to magically appear in the forest and then back home again so abruptly we lose the appreciation for how difficult the journey to those destinations must have been. This occurs a few times over the course of 2 1/2 hours. In the midst of all this, we get the outbreak of World War I. The film’s taxing length is a killer. The languid middle is only debilitated further by the lack of a satisfying end. What actually transpired in real life doesn’t help, but there are certainly ways to creatively tell a story. The screenplay doesn’t pull that off.

The search for the lost city of Z took up Fawcett’s entire life. The chronicle is ostensibly about obsessive quests. Fawcett kept returning to the jungle in a repetitive fashion. But to what end?  Each meandering journey is marked by a shortage of excitement. We’re looking for inspiration but there’s nothing here to captivate the mind. Instead we get “this happened and then this happened and then this happened.” The drama is recounted with all the joy of a 7th grader reciting a book report. James Gray is a talented director I have long admired. His most seen film was We Own the Night, the 2007 crime drama starring Joaquin Phoenix and Mark Wahlberg. I really enjoyed The Yards (2000) and The Immigrant (2014) too. This is his first piece set outside his native New York. The Lost City of Z represents a departure for the director and judging from this, it was a risk that didn’t pay off.  It looks good. Credit goes to cinematographer Darius Khondji for that. It’s a supreme letdown that the gorgeous facade far exceeds the content within.

04-27-17

The Fate of the Furious

Posted in Action, Adventure, Crime with tags on April 20, 2017 by Mark Hobin

 photo fate_of_the_furious_ver2_zpsldq9ohik.jpg photo starrating-3stars.jpgThe Fate of the Furious begins with a street race in Havana.  It’s a nice traditional nod to the kind of quaintly illegal activities that started this franchise during much simpler times. Of course, the preposterous storylines and feats of skill are the real joy for which this series is known. It’s the bizarre action set pieces that have come to define these pictures. That mentality that has made each entry such a delight for some and something for others to eschew.  The latter of which attest to never having seen any of these films like it’s a badge of honor.  I, conversely, have seen all eight and I freely admit this without shame.

Yet how do you assess a movie where the sillier and more unbelievable the stunts, the better? Let’s start with the cast. The ensemble for each has always been a revolving door. Even characters that you thought had been written out of the series for good without the possibility of a return, have been known to pop back into the continuity. Vin Diesel, Dwayne Johnson, Tyrese Gibson, Chris ‘Ludacris’ Bridges, Michelle Rodriguez, and Kurt Russell are back. Newcomers Scott Eastwood, Helen Mirren, and Charlize Theron are fresh additions. This is the first chapter since Tokyo Drift not to include Paul Walker due to his untimely passing. His presence is missed. Jordana Brewster who played his wife does not return either.

This elite crew operates outside the law for the greater good. These criminals are bound together by a sense of loyalty. This extended clan are more than just friends, they’re family. In particular, Dom, Vin Diesel’s character, reminds us of this over and over again. That camaraderie has held this macho action soap opera together. This screenplay actually plays with that narrative a bit by having one of their own betray the others by working with the baddies. Who and why would be spoilers. That big twist should be revealed by watching this production. I will only offer though that it’s a risky move that isn’t entirely successful. The whole gang united together against the fight of evil has always been a key component of the drama. By tinkering with the formula the story removes a dependable quality that is missing from the story.

F. Gary Gray (Straight Outta Compton) takes over the directing duties from James Wan (The Conjuring). Interesting footnote: The Fate of the Furious reunites Gray with actors Charlize Theron and Jason Statham from The Italian Job, which came out back in 2003. The last movie, Furious 7, was extremely successful. Usually, it’s important to evaluate a film on its own merits without comparing it to other pictures. However, in the case of a franchise, I think it’s more than acceptable, it’s required. We are now eight chapters deep into this chronicle. Fast Five is where everything really came together, serving up a captivating recipe that mixes the genial friendship of a charismatic cast with outlandish stunts that wow audiences. That’s where the franchise really came into its own under Justin Lin (Star Trek Beyond). He is the only filmmaker so far to direct more than one episode (parts 3-6). We should acknowledge how each new adventure measures up with the others. I think The Fate of the Furious transcends parts 2-4 but is less effective than the last 3 (episodes 5-7).

The first low-budget feature about street racing has gradually morphed over time into a big budget action extravaganza where driving cars is more of a detour. I’ve grown to enjoy this series as a whole. Still, I’ll admit that after eight entries, these sagas do start to blend together. It’s the stunts that I remember. This installment throws in a few doozies. Charlize Theron is a surprisingly generic villain, although the mayhem she causes is anything but. As cyberterrorist Cipher, she does a bit of hacking that causes a fleet of cars to high-dive off parking structures and essentially attacks a motorcade driving through the city. This implausible sequence in New York is my favorite moment simply because it’s just so ridiculous. Hobbs & Deckard’s prison break/fight sequence is memorable as well. Ditto the final race across an icy terrain from a nuclear submarine popping out of the frozen waters. Helen Mirren, Jason Statham and especially a baby are the most welcome personalities. Oh and there’s a nice nod to Paul Walker’s character at the end. All in all, it’s a rousing good time.

04-13-17

Kong: Skull Island

Posted in Action, Adventure, Fantasy with tags on March 12, 2017 by Mark Hobin

 photo kong_skull_island_ver2_zpsvvhmmcyl.jpg photo starrating-3andahalfstars.jpgIt’s hard to believe, but there have actually been 7 movies in which King Kong has appeared before Skull Island. The original (and best) is the 1933 classic starring Fay Wray. That masterpiece was famously remade in 1976 introducing Jessica Lange in her debut and then redone again by Peter Jackson in 2005. It’s been only 12 years since that director’s critically acclaimed, box office success, so why exactly is another version necessary?

Kong: Skull Island isn’t technically a remake per se, but rather an “original” story meant to serve as the second entry in a series not unlike Marvel’s cinematic universe. Here in this so-called MonsterVerse, the combatants will feature Godzilla and Kong. Although this new shared universe is a fresh franchise, the idea of pitting Godzilla against King Kong is not unique. It dates back to the 1962 Japanese feature King Kong vs. Godzilla from Tokyo-based distribution company Toho. Provided these contemporary films continue to be successful, Mothra, Rodan and Ghidorah, the three-headed monster, will show up in future pictures as well.  Stay for a post-credits scene, by the way.

Kong: Skull Island flaunts an accomplished cast of actors with at least 10 speaking parts. John Goodman plays a senior official in charge of a group of scientists (Jing Tian, Corey Hawkins) funded by the U.S. Government. They’re escorted by Samuel L. Jackson as a U.S. Colonel and his right-hand man, an Army major portrayed by Toby Kebbell.  Jackson heads up an Army helicopter squadron of soldiers (Jason Mitchell, Shea Whigham, Thomas Mann, Eugene Cordero) from the Vietnam War. There’s also a British hunter-tracker played by a ripped Tom Hiddleston and Brie Larson as a luminous looking photojournalist. I guess you could say the last two actors are the two central human stars but they don’t really register as such.

It’s a sizable cast. While all are adequate, hardly any of these underdeveloped characters have the charisma to enthrall us. Sure we’re given some superficial details about these people that are meant to captivate our interest, but we honestly don’t know them. It’s a shame to see such a notable assemblage of talent so underutilized. It harks back to the days of the casts in those 70s disaster flicks where spectacle was the star, not people. I suppose that’s not surprising given the title of this movie. The CGI creature is the presumed headliner. The fact that John C. Reilly stands out, however, is proof that he can outact almost anyone.

Kong: Skull Island pushes the old adage that bigger is better and this is the biggest Kong yet in terms of size. This upright walking gorilla is a 100-foot tall digital creation by Industrial Light & Magic. His colossal size will make the inevitable showdown with Godzilla more of an even match. Technically speaking, this is the most impressive version of the creature yet. That’s surely saying something too because Peter Jackson’s movie won an Oscar in that category. The special effects are state of the art. Besides Kong, there’s his natural enemies, the Skullcrawlers, which look like massive two-legged lizards. There’s also a giant spider, a colossal red squid, and an enormous water buffalo. Of course, if you’re familiar with this story, we all know who the real monster is, right?

The foundation looks incredible. The island is its own living breathing ecosystem. It’s a spectacular display and the scope of the creatures gives us a sense of awe. Director Jordan Vogt-Roberts certainly delivers the goods. We don’t even have to wait long for the main attraction. Kong appears within the first 30 minutes. Nevertheless, character machinations are ridiculous. The dialogue is silly. This is strictly a B-movie with a much heftier budget. Screenwriters Max Borenstein and John Gatins toy with the events to give us a slightly different take. For one thing, we never leave that darn island. On the one hand, I guess it’s admirable they’re not merely giving us an identical account as previous incarnations of Kong but is what they offer really an improvement? The best part in every iteration of this fable – be it 1933, 1976 or 2005 – has always been the moment where our hairy hero is let loose in the city to contend with a world he doesn’t understand. I miss that part.

Kong: Skull Island is a mindless popcorn flick but it’s still pretty entertaining. This is a lot less ambitious than previous interpretations. Kong’s noble savagery is still apparent, but the main thrust of this action is little more than monsters run amok. The original fantasy had a self-contained plot with a poignant message. This entry exists as an intro to a beast that will go on to star in more installments. That modifies the narrative in a pretty significant way. In more cosmetic changes, the production is envisioned as a period piece as it moves the time frame back to 1973. 70s rock music blares on the soundtrack as helicopters loom in search of a mysterious figure in the jungle. Allusions to a certain Francis Ford Coppola directed war film are deliberate. Yet, I’m still not sure whether it’s intended to be so intellectually shallow. I suppose there’s joy in the simplicity of just the spectacle. Let’s put it this way, the less you think about it, the better it gets.

03-09-17

The Red Turtle

Posted in Adventure, Animation, Family with tags on February 18, 2017 by Mark Hobin

 photo the-red-turtle-2016-01_zpsacawydlr.jpg photo starrating-3andahalfstars.jpgThe story, such as it is, begins when a man adrift in a storm washes ashore on an uninhabited island. At first, he forages for food, but after awhile he endeavors to escape. He builds a raft.  However, at sea, a large red sea turtle swims below and smashes the boat from underneath. The man swims back to the island. He tries, again and again with an increasingly bigger raft and each time the animal foils his attempts. Then one evening, the man spies the creature on the beach attempting to crawl inland. In a fit of rage, he hits the turtle over the head with a bamboo stick and then turns it upside down, setting in motion a fantasy that will blend elements of Hans Christian Andersen with an already Robinson Crusoe influenced tale.

The Red Turtle is a partnership between Japanese Studio Ghibli and French distributor Wild Bunch. Dutch-British animator Michaël Dudok de Wit is doing the artwork. He received international recognition after winning the Oscar for his 2000 short film Father and Daughter. This is his debut feature. His style is reminiscent of Belgian cartoonist Hergé and his comic The Adventures of Tintin. It’s nice to see there’s still a place for the hand-drawn animation that has been widely rejected in recent years by major animation houses like Disney and Pixar. This production is above all an exquisitely animated gem.

The Red Turtle is an artistic work that is virtually wordless. Except for a few shouts of “Hey!” or cries of “Aargh!” there is no dialogue at all. The illustrations draw explicit attention to naturalistic detail. Beauty lies in the meditation on the flora and fauna – the whisper of the wind through the trees, an approaching rain, the buzz of cicadas in the forest, the rhythmic splash of waves against the sand, seeing the stars and moonlight reflected on the water. Whether it be a flock of birds flying overhead or a cast of crabs acting like cartoon sidekicks, this concentrated reflection on nature never ceases to be calm and comforting.

The Red Turtle coasts on ambient noise and wildlife sounds. Assisting the atmosphere is the sumptuous score of composer Laurent Perez Del Mar. By itself, the music is lushly atmospheric, but when paired with the gorgeous spectacle it occasionally veers to excess as it overly emphasizes the emotional cues.  When a tsunami hits, the music swells.  The visual splendor is enough. There’s no need to gild the lily.  Nevertheless, the exhibition is certainly a delight for aesthetes who prefer mood to plot and a languid pace over action.  While The Red Turtle feels like a short expanded to feature length, it’s undeniably pleasant and serene. Its simple joys are pure.

02-16-17

The LEGO Batman Movie

Posted in Action, Adventure, Animation, Comedy, Superhero with tags on February 12, 2017 by Mark Hobin

 photo lego_batman_movie_ver4_zpsc1rro5mm.jpg photo starrating-3andahalfstars.jpgBack in 2014, Batman was introduced as a supporting role in The Lego Movie, an animated tale from Warner Bros. Now the Dark Knight has returned. Both his gravelly voice and out-sized ego are in full force in this humorous take that is his most (deliberately) funny manifestation yet. I still contend Joel Schumacher’s 1997 Batman & Robin is unintentionally funnier.  Director Chris McKay (Cartoon Network’s Robot Chicken), who worked as an editor on The Lego Movie, is making his feature film debut here and he maintains the buoyant quality of the first picture.

The Lego Batman Movie is a rollicking good time. The light and breezy humor pokes fun at its own creation. The pop culture amalgamation is steeped in self-aware satire. It relies heavily on Batman history and every incarnation he’s ever had. Not only sampling from Tim Burton’s and Christopher Nolan’s work but from comic books, the campy 60s TV show, and animated adaptations as well. Unless you’re a superhero savant, it should be impossible to correctly place all the references. I laughed at a part where they recite a ridiculously long list of villains.  The Riddler, Catwoman and the Penguin I knew, but Polka-Dot Man, Crazy Quilt, and the Condiment King? I chuckled at the seemingly made up names. I had no idea that they were all real characters. The joke is amusing either way.

If you thought the triumph of The Lego Movie was a fluke, prepare to be surprised once more. The Lego Batman Movie is another delight. It’s smart and witty in a way that everyone, even this comic book illiterate, can enjoy. Batman fights crime by night but by day he lives an ordinary existence. He retires to his living room to watch a live action projection of Jerry Maguire on a big screen while he eats his microwaved Lobster Thermidor. His computer assistant informs him he has an expired Bed Bath & Beyond coupon, “but I hear some stores will honor them after the expiration date,” she offers. That’s so random it’s genius. Listen closely for a mention of cheesy 80s martial arts flick Gymkata.

But The Lego Batman Movie is first and foremost about the Caped Crusader. He’s once again articulated by Will Arnett. His absurd rendition stands in stark contrast to the dark and brooding iterations of the cinematic adaptations since 1989. Nevertheless, his goofy performance ranks up there with the very best. It’s a clever choice that his Arrested Development co-star Michael Cera voices Robin. The cast is spirited.  Rosario Dawson is the new police commissioner, Barbara Gordon. Ralph Fiennes is Bruce Wayne’s loyal butler. Zach Galifianakis is the Joker. Even Mariah Carey plays a character. The whole production is agreeable fun. If there’s a quibble, it’s that the story is merely a perfunctory excuse to make wisecracks.  Even as the narrative sags in the 2nd half, the action continues to zoom forward in an increasingly eccentric fashion.  It plays for 15 minutes too long. Still, there are enough left-field references and rapid-fire gags to entertain. In fact, it’s tough to catch them all the first time around. I just might be willing to see it a second time.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

Posted in Action, Adventure, Science Fiction on December 19, 2016 by Mark Hobin

 photo rogue_one_a_star_wars_story_ver5_zpsp5ilvmau.jpg photo starrating-2andahalfstars.jpgFilms can make us laugh, cry, tremble and shout. Some of our most intense feelings occur when we’re at the cinema. I can cite reasons as to why I loved a given movie, but ultimately, it comes down to the emotional reaction I had while watching it. That’s why I can assign the same rating to a picture like Vertigo as I would to Team America: World Police. The reasons may be very different, but my enjoyment is the same. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story is the first stand-alone film in the Star Wars anthology series. Chronologically it happens sometime after the events of Revenge of the Sith and immediately before the events of A New Hope (or Star Wars for those born before 1977). It’s a shining example of a production that did not engage my emotions in any way shape or form. I simply didn’t care. It’s not terrible, but it isn’t a satisfying experience either. Now in writing this review I have to assign the reasons why.

1.) The saga is overburdened with minutiae. There’s a lot going on here. We hop around to various locales and characters introducing a lot of people, places, and things but never concentrating on any one thing long enough to make an impression. We even get different time frames – a flashback of when our central hero was a little girl. There’s a lot of names being thrown about too. The messy screenplay by Chris Weitz (About a Boy) and Tony Gilroy (Michael Clayton) is jam-packed with Easter eggs. The script includes so many little in-jokes and winking nods to previous installments, that only the most obsessive Star Wars aesthete will get all of the negligible details. In and of themselves, these inside references aren’t bad. They can be amusing, but too many can take away from the importance of telling a meaningful narrative. There’s an art to telling a simple, good old fashioned story. Oh sure, the screenwriters know their Star Wars history. They’ve done their homework. The adventure has the brains but it lacks heart and a soul.

2.) There’s a ridiculous number of bland characters.  Too many parts mean a lack of focus on a motivating protagonist. Felicity Jones’s warrior, Jyn Erso, teams up with Diego Luna’s rebel spy, Cassian Andor, to steal the plans for the Imperial Death Star. Yet neither Jyn nor Cassian inspires our passion with their lethargic charisma. They just exist to recite their lines so they can advance a dense plot. Without a galvanizing presence to arouse our sympathy, it’s hard to care. Maybe that’s why we also get a veritable backstory of secondary people each one more undefined than the next. Donnie Yen is slightly more invigorating than the rest as a blind monk guided by the Force. However Ben Mendelsohn, Mads Mikkelsen, Riz Ahmed, Jiang Wen and Forest Whitaker all have “key” roles that are so undeveloped that they barely register as personalities. Come see an international cast of great actors portraying insubstantial parts! The screenplay doesn’t have the desire to have them do anything to incite our affection. There’s one exception but it doesn’t even involve someone human. The very best (and he is a delight) is a droid, K-2SO. He’s been programmed to be incredibly honest and speak his mind. He’s like a sassier version of C-3PO portrayed in motion capture and voice by Alan Tudyk. I wish the entire movie had been about him.

3.) Rogue One is a depressing slog. This is a dour affair with surprisingly little humor. It’s telling that even most fans pick K-2SO as their favorite thing about this.  The convoluted tale doesn’t have a narrative to stimulate the emotions. I could go into specifics but that would involve revealing plot details which are apparently verboten when discussing these kinds of pictures. Translation: movies with an overzealous fan base. Words wasted encapsulating what happens are superfluous anyway. That’s why you watch the film. A good review should explain why it succeeds or fails.  Let’s just say the drama is dark and joyless. Not just in spirit but in its presentation. The gritty cinematography has the feel of a documentary about a war-torn country. A dreary blue-gray color palette underscores the gloom.  Cinematographer Greig Fraser (Let Me In, Zero Dark Thirty, and Foxcatcher) has lensed some pretty bleak features. In those, his technique worked because the subject matter demanded it. This is such a grave exercise. I thought Rogue One was part of the Star Wars world,  a thematically hopeful series that’s easy to follow. An adventure of when good triumphs over evil. Granted a little bit of optimism is shoehorned in when a cheesily inserted reference to A New Hope is spoken by a CGI Princess Leia of all people. Last year’s’ referential The Force Awakens may have been Star Wars redux, but at least it was an exciting hybridization. It succeeded because it was unbridled fun. Rogue One is cobbled together from other chapters as well, but it’s so serious it’s didactic. If I wanted to sit through an academic exercise, I’d take a course at the local community college.

Rogue One is well done from a technical standpoint. It has awe-inspiring special effects, meticulous production design, and a rousing score. It draws from a universe of films that I already adore. Well, 4 out of 7 anyway. (Those prequels are pretty weak.) The epic long battle, which comprises the second half, is impressive but it lacks a key component – our emotional attachment. Probably because the script hasn’t engendered our love for these individuals. That’s a key dilemma. The original trilogy embodies three of the most entertaining movies ever made. The grim Rogue One doesn’t even feel like the same universe. Luke, Han, and Leia were captivating, but there’s not one person here to make this story interesting. The chronicle certainly isn’t necessary. It’s merely an assembly line product efficiently produced to make money. You don’t need this other than to answer a lingering question. Why did a design flaw exist enabling the Rebel Alliance to launch torpedoes into a tiny exhaust vent and blow up the Death Star?  Rogue One uses 133 minutes to basically give us an answer. Thanks for the fan fiction, but you could’ve just told me.

12-15-16