Sci-Fi Double Feature Worth Believing

This week I saw both X-Men Origins: Wolverine and Star Trek and I must say, Science Fiction never seemed so appealing… To begin, this installment of the X-Men film-experiments might just redeem the disaster the previous three movies of my favorite childhood cartoon had become. Wolverine is by no means in my top five mutants but I get that he has the biggest appeal as some sort of patriotic rebel, a loner with a cause, steel bones with a soft heart, whatever you want to call it. His past is certainly dynamic, eventful, and dramatic enough to make a prequel too. The story probably surprised me more than anything: After we get past the 10-min, hard-to-believe, intro where we learn that Logan and his brother, Victor Creed (Liev Schreiber) have fought side-by-side, in the Civil War, the World Wars, and Nam (really? I never thought of Wolverine as the devoutly patriotic type and I’m not sure if this was necessary) we proceed to present-day where Wolverine is part of a covert government assassin squad, alongside other morally-corrupt mutants. His conscience gets the better of him and he abandons the evil side for a calm life with his beautiful Canadian fiance. The rest of the film chronicles his search for revenge, redemption, and answers… At times, I thought it moved a little fast. We would see flashes of his journey in an attempt to get us logically to the next spot but I don’t think director Gavin Hood developed those smaller moments enough. I whole heartedly appreciate the inclusion of lesser-known mutants, and their individual personalities are a pleasant departure from the over stereotyped X-Men in the previous films, I only wish they were developed further. For example, we waited three movies to finally see Gambit and he is in the film for 15 min. and only uses his power once or twice… (Cyclops, my favorite character, was blind for most of the movie, but I guess we’ll develop him later.)

Other than that, I thought the story was “believable” and entertaining. Hood incorporated the right balance of special effects and personal character story. Unfortunately, the only unrealistic looking effect was Wolverine’s claws. For some reason the designers chose this to be the thing they spent the least amount of time on. Everything else looked great but those darn claws looked fake… The fight scenes are well worth the price of admission (even if die-hard comic book junkies might find issue with some of the story points). Overall, I found the film was way better than I thought it was going to be, and I’m excited to see the series move away from the cheesiness that it had become.

I watched the first season of Alias and never really got into Lost but I instantly became a fan of JJ Abrams after seeing his first venture into directing film, the latest installment of the classic Sci-Fi story, Star Trek. I should preface my thoughts by saying that I am by no means a Trekky, I’ve never seen a Star Trek movie before, but I did watch Star Trek: The Next Generation every night before bed in middle school. I had enough Trek knowledge to know that this movie looked younger, hipper, and more exciting than clips I had seen from the earlier films.

That being said, I was hooked from the very beginning! Origin stories can be a little heavy handed and either too boring or too quick. This was a great balance of character development and plot advancement. We meet James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) being recruited by Star Fleet and follow his journey across the galaxy fighting aliens, disrespecting authority, establishing those iconic relationships, and trying to save the day. One of the most fascinating features of this film is that I believe it would work for people with many different Trekky backgrounds. You don’t have to know much about the series to follow the plot, but, if you do, the one-liners and allusions are hilarious (and handled seriously, something not to be devalued). I don’t like to use the term “adrenaline thrill ride” too much because I think it’s thrown around a lot (or do we not remember the marketing for Valkyrie?) but I did not once lose interest or become distracted; I was reacting to every emotional up and down, laughed when appropriate, and empathized with the characters (a credit to Abrams’ delicate handling of the very popular subject matter and the possibly complicated plot (time travel is always difficult to follow in films..)).

The relationships created were believable and not a means to an end. I really appreciate the fact that all the characters were not introduced at the same time but we followed Kirk’s journey, and therefore understood how each one of the soon-to-be crew members of the Enterprise relates to him. Of particular interest is Karl Urban’s interpretation of Dr. McCoy: each of the supporting characters certainly did their homework in regards to the old school personas they brought back to life, and they found the essence of the humor, life, and personality of each one. Urban’s use of “Good God” and “I’m a doctor, not a_______ (insert profession)” were spot on and great to see created. John Cho and Simon Pegg also did wonders with Sulu and Scotty respectively. The entire cast was believable and interesting to watch as younger versions of the iconic crew. Eric Bana as the sole bad guy might have been the only blemish: his role (and acting?) seemed a little to big and too much at times and flirted with being over-the-top.

Abrams and his talented cast and crew understand the essence of Star Trek and after having watched this film I now know what they were trying to do with the original TV show. There is the right amount of humor, action, and aliens to please any Sci-Fi nut (and the guy/girl they forced into coming). I may have only seen 2 or 3 movies this year but it is the best one so far…

Valkyrie a Sheep in Wolf’s Clothing. (Spoiler alert, if you can call it that)

Most everyone knows Hitler committed suicide in 1945 while the Allied forces were marching towards Germany. Fewer know of the no less than 15 attempts on Hitler’s life performed by “righteous” members of Germany’s Nazi party. Bryan Singer’s (Usual Suspects, Superman Returns) Valkyrie depicts the rise and fall of one such attempt: from the recruiting of upstanding men, to the formation of the plot, to the eventual quieting of the overthrow…

I somewhat apologize for the spoiler there but now is as good a time as any to discuss my opinion on making a historical suspense movie. Based on true events, this story takes the audience on a suspense ride to assassinate a man who everyone knows dies a year later. This fact is more than common knowledge so I must ask, Do the film makers want us to just put that idea aside for the duration of the film? Or do they actually think we don’t know our WWII history? What is it? I talked to a few people after watching and I told them that I was a little confused about seeing a movie where I know the outcome going in; they all jumped exactly to the movie that first popped in my head as well: Titanic. I think this is different though. That movie used the sinking of the Titanic as the occasion to showcase a tragic love story, the movie wasn’t really about the sinking of the ship. Valkyrie is a suspense thriller about the failed execution of an assassination plot. We know it fails because they chose the most famous man in modern history as the subject of the movie. Fear of unknown events creates suspense. We shriek in horror movies because we are never quite sure when the monster is going to pop out. How much suspense can a film create when the audience knows the protagonists are going to fail before the opening credits ever roll?

So while I was sitting in the theatre I kept asking myself, “Ok, would this be suspensful/thrilling/scary if I didn’t know that it was going to fail?” Maybe, but I doubt that is the question the movie producers want their audience asking so they must just assume we are going to suspend our disbelief right? Harder than it sounds.

Aside from lacking in genuine suspense the movie is just OK. No one uses a common accent. Everyone speaks in English and writes in German. All very distracting. I want to think that it was almost like a really good episode of the Mission: Impossible TV series. They get their mission, conduct it, and wrap it all up in a short period. They never really slowed down enough for character development or took the time to show us around Nazi Germany. I think the actors could have simply changed their costumes and it would have been a different movie. If they were wearing Storm Trooper outfits I probably would have thought they wanted to kill Darth Vador. They never once try and whisper to avoid being overheard discussing “the plan.” I mean, at least lower the Cone of Silence! Their actions are too much like every other suspense movie and not specific or detailed enough to be believable in WWII Berlin.

Most of the supporting cast delivered nice performances but Tom disappointed me. You put lipstick on a big, it’s still a big. I guess if you but an eye patch on Tom Cruise, he’s still Tom Cruise. I usually defend him because I think, at times, he can surprise you with nice character work but here he reverted back to the blockbuster deliveries and movements that have made him a star but held him back from Oscar status. This only adds to my thought that the movie is almost too general. The movie focuses too much on Tom, I’m sorry Cruise’s character, and ignores all the others needed to make this plan succeed.

At times my heart did speed up a little and I was interested in how they were going to make this work (again, after I let myself forget that they are going to fail). It was also fun to see a different side of Nazi Germany; a side where people wanted to stand up to Hitler and fight to change their country for the better. That is why this movie would probably work much better as a History Channel special. If you take away the Hollywood suspense and big name actors to distract you, you actually have a very moving story to tell. Making it something more than it is almost does injustice to the men and women who risked their lives to try remove this dictator.

Valkyrie will thrill you if you let it, but don’t set your expectations too high.

Slumdog Millionaire Your Best Bet This Holiday

Imagine the pressure of playing a game show for a million dollars… Got it? Ok, now add the hopes and dreams of your entire country whose eyes are glued to the nearest TV set watching every move you make; tack on the police who have arrested you under suspicion of cheating; sprinkle on the fact that the woman you have loved since you were 5 has been stolen from you… Oh, did I mention you are 18 and grew up in the Slums of India? How do you think you’d do?

Slumdog Millionarire, Danny Boyle’s latest creation (Sunshine, 28 Days Later, Trainspotting), brings this exact story to the big screen. Jamal Malik (Dev Patel) has one question to go as a contestant on India’s version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire but has been taken into custody to prove he honestly knew the answers. The investigation becomes the frame for detailing Jamal’s brutal, passionate, confusing, and true story growing up as an orphan in India. The police investigator (Irrfan Khan, The Namesake) plays back each trivia question and demands justification for Jamal’s knowledge of each subject. What could have turned into a very boring and predictable story-telling device, Boyle handles very delicately and artistically. Each question’s back story has its own vignette with an individual style, feel, and pace. (Think Paris Je T’aime meets Traffic.) The flashes build to construct a solid history of Jamal’s process from losing his mother at a very young age to possibly becoming one of the wealthiest and most popular men in India. Sounds cheesy, I know, but since Boyle handles each one carefully and with equal attention he never loses the audience. The pace fluctuates, yes, but never stalls.

Slumdog allows the skill of very talented, but lesser-known actors, to do the talking for it (like only a foreign film could; this film could never be made in Hollywood, and is probably better because of it). Children become the stars for the first half of the film and might be the biggest and most pleasant surprise of the piece. Aside from kids looking cute and adorable with everything they do, this film captures an honesty and reality in young characters that we rarely see. Since we believe the characters and their relationships from a young age the transition to their adulthood is a seamless and non distracting one.

The music and soundtrack, edited by Niv Adiri and created by AR Rahman, told its own story, complimented the plot, and masterfully kept the energy alive the entire run (literally and figuratively since much of the first half of the movie involves our young protagonists being chased through the crowded city streets). The energetic and always active shots, as well as Antony Dod Mantle’s dark, rugged, yet honest cinematography (the shot of a man drowning in a bathtub of money comes to mind), make it hard to look away from the sometimes horrific but always beautiful story being told.

Slumdog Millionaire is the story of one man’s literal struggle for survival and quest for love in a cruel world that has given him nothing. The success of this movie comes from the fact that it simply tells the story and tells it well, using all the tools of modern filmmaking. I like to be reminded that good stories and beautiful film work still have a place in our diluted cinema world. And I didn’t even see Regis Philbin once…

Quantum of Solace Falls Back into Genre Film, in a Bad Way

Director Marc Forster’s latest addition to the James Bond legacy, Quantum of Solace, has some nice tricks but never really solidifies itself to keep my interest. When I saw the trailer about a month ago, I knew I was going to love every minute of it. Daniel Craig instantly became my favorite Bond with his debut, Casino Royale. I thought that had the depth and intrigue of a classic Bond film but with the added storyline and contemporary flare needed to compete with today’s tough crowds.

It’s hard to pinpoint exactly what makes QofS weaker than its recent predecessor. Forster (Finding Neverland, Monster’s Ball) takes great liberties with the camera work: his sweeping motion instantly adds energy to the shots and creates a ever-changing landscape for Bond to traverse; the inclusion of clever, super-imposed titles signifying a new location gave the film a edgy style that bordered on distraction but was ultimately just cute; the characters are beautiful and wear amazing clothes and drive amazing cars (a must for a Bond flick).

I hate to say it, but the story finally drug this installment down. Casino Royale is a tough act to follow. That film won back all the average Bond fans that had finally checked out with the last few Brosnan attempts and quieted the die-hard fans that thought Craig was too blond to be Bond. The writers tried to take the easy way out by continuing Casino’s story line and using the same characters (not usually seen with Bond films). Never revisiting that story, they forced us to remember what happened and hoped we would connect everything ourselves. Usually, I hate when they spoon-feed the back story to the audience but give us something to work with! I never really knew what the bad guys wanted, how they were going to get it, or what was stopping them. Most of the time, I didn’t know who was chasing Bond and therefore didn’t care if he got away or not. Because I never fully knew the story I never fully cared about the success or failure of his “mission” (which was never official). The film approached the end and I just thought, “is the world safer now? Did we win?” The writers never fully delivered because I would bet they didn’t think they would have to. James Bond sells itself.

There is no theme or image that makes this film distinct from the rest of the canon. Moonraker is in space! Goldfinger kills a girl by painting her with gold paint (an image revisited with oil in QofS… get some new material…) Absent is the enormous Cuban satellite to slide down, or the invisible/remote controlled car, or the jet pack; anything that the audience could talk about on the way to the parking lot. Which makes this just a collection of themes and stereotypes that have to be checked off the list or something. The recent films have also tried (with varying success) to include powerful women characters but now the sexism is back. The female leads are portrayed as dumb, persuasive, and needy and get in the way at best. A huge step back from where the franchise was headed, in my opinion.

I can’t say I was completely dissapointed, it still has pretty people doing amazing things (some even off-the-wall for a Bond movie though) and that must carry some weight. Maybe my expectations were too high but this never filled the shoes that current action movies are making bigger and bigger every day. Go to see pretty people but don’t expect to have much to talk about on the way home.

Tropic Thunder Before the Tropic Thunder

With tropical storm Fay looming over the southern tip of Florida I decided to enjoy a little comic relief. Tropic Thunder, Ben Stiller’s first attempt at directing since his cult comedy, Zoolander, uses a star-packed cast and enormous budget to entice an ever-evolving audience to laughter. While in the theatre, my opinion of the movie swirled about as much as Fay’s wind direction. I cackled annoyingly, I was bored to tears, I was impressed by the special effects, and I thought the jokes were over-done.

At the same time, I think that is the most interesting aspect of this film: it is a completely new genre. It’s Hot Shots meets Rambo; it’s Scary Movie meets Apocalypse Now. Surprisingly for Hollywood, they notice the complexity of this attempt and attack it seriously. A-list cameos become central character roles; topics and themes that skirt the boundaries of racism are handle with care. They push the limits of our willing suspension of disbelief and expect us, as an intelligent, film-savvy, hard-to-impress audience, to respond in turn.

The movie is funny but could be more so. They parody famous cinematic tropes much like the Scary Movie series and they bend our stereotypes of major actors like Tom Cruise and Matthew Mcconaughey. Both of these techniques seem an effective strategy given an audience inundated by romantic comedies and unintelligent attempts at humor. They take the new adaptation of witty, fast word play perfected by the Seth Rogen comedy team and twist that into a serious action movie. Sometimes too serious. At times, Stiller focuses too much on character depth and plot development and looses his laughter-hungry audience. (It’s hard to fault a movie for too much character but the comedy they create is so intense that I just crave more and more of it and found myself disappointed when they focused on the story.)

It was great to see Black, Stiller, and Downey Jr. do a piece together. I would have liked to have seen more from Jack Black (much like Chevy Chase, it’s hard to take a physical actor and squeeze him into a script.) Stiller basically plays the same character in all his films so what I saw from him was neither a positive or negative surprise and Downey Jr. can add this film to his list on strong comebacks- he earned my focus for most of the movie.

Overall, I enjoyed the film. It was obvious Dreamworks took this film seriously. Tom Cruise’s cameo as the film executive might be worth the price of admission and the more dramatic scenes to not diminish the power of the comedic ones, just delay them. Tropic Thunder might hit land as a category three…

Movie update (To IMAX or not to IMAX)

First let me say that I have updated the “Movie Rankings” page of my site to reflect not only movies released in 2008 but also those that I saw for the first time in 2008, regardless of release year. I was seeing a lot of movies that didn’t fit the only category I had so I thought it was time to add a category.

Secondly, I drove to Louisville today to watch The Dark Knight as an IMAX experience. I was figuratively and literally blown away by the sound quality. I don’t think I have taken much notice to how good sound can get in a theatre and I think my hair was actually moved by the sound waves traveling through the room.

Other than the sound, I can’t really say the IMAX experience was any different than seeing it in a normal venue. My previous encounters with IMAX were in museums where the screen surrounded you and every shot was like you were on a roller coaster. Turns out that is something called an Omnimax, who knew there was a difference?… I didn’t. The picture was a little clearer and, again, the sound effects spectacular, but I don’t think it was worth the $9.75 and hour and a half trip. I actually just left more disappointed at the quality of local movie theaters. If I can see a movie like this and the screen isn’t really that bigger IMPROVE THE SOUND AT ALL THEATERS!

The movie was still wonderful and I think Heath Ledger’s performance actually got better, if that’s possible. See the movie if you haven’t but don’t worry about trying to experience it in IMAX.

Jumper Never Really Gets Off its Feet

The previews for 20th Century Fox’s new film Jumper seemed interesting enough. It conveyed the idea that some kid was capable of teleporting himself and there is some group, headed by Samuel L. Jackson (Get out of my movies!!!), trying to catch or kill the “jumpers.” Yes, that was the preview but that is about as far as the film itself goes as well. I appreciate Doug Liman’s work with the Bourne series and Mr. and Mrs. Smith but he might be reaching too far with this one.

The story goes absolutely no where and most assuredly raises more questions than it solves. We have no idea how David (Hayden Christensen) got his powers, how many people have them, or how they control them. We are not even offered reasons for the Paladins’ (bad guys) disgust with the jumpers or how they are so well funded and have those cool toys other than the fact that Jackson thinks “God should be the only one capable of being in all places at all times.”

Teleportation could be an interesting premise for a movie if handled properly and with the care that a super-human ability needs in order to be understood by us normal people. It is obvious the script was thrown together to showcase the special effects and exotic locals (both of which are pretty cool) but is moronic at best. Christensen still surprises me as an actor that can get work in Hollywood and if Samuel L. Jackson doesn’t stop taking every script thrown his way I am going to lose all respect I had for him from Pulp Fiction and A Time to Kill.

If you simply need to kill some time by all means jump around the world, otherwise don’t bother.

Why So Serious? (Because that is what Batman should be…)

Seriousness is the perfect idea for a comic series shrouded by evil, darkness, and intense personalities. It is no coincidence they chose Batman’s lesser-known moniker as the title for what has become the renaissance of graphic novels and an immigration from kids’ movies based on 90s cartoon series. The Dark Knight amazingly personifies the heart of Batman, a human plagued by the choice between preserving order in chaotic Gotham or living as the rest of us do, as part of a family haunted by goons and thugs. Christopher Nolan’s adaptation of the DC comic reinforces the idea of real people fighting the real battle of good verses evil, even when we don’t know where that line is drawn.

For those fans of the more human Batman seen in Batman Begins, you will enjoy the elaboration of Christian Bale’s character in this installment. No longer do we have the jovial Caped Crusader of George Clooney; Bale shines as a man confronted by the desire for love in a world that needs him as a hero. No better is this dichotomy conveyed than with Wally Pfister’s cinematography. Ironically, the darkest scenes in the first half of the movie show Bruce Wayne gallivanting as Gotham’s playboy (in order to provide alibis for Batman’s actions) while the “Bat cave” is the brightest set in the picture. There is nothing hidden with the real Batman.

One of my favorite themes of this picture is how they explain some of the more improbable events: for example, a great sequence describing how exactly Bruce Wayne/ Batman can travel to Hong Kong and kidnap a CEO while staying within the constraints of the physical world. There are no over-the-top gadgets or superhuman abilities here, which makes it a believable character study, not a Joel Schumacher fantasy. There are bumps and bruises under that cape and a millionaire sacrificing his body to preserve a symbol of hope. Congratulations are in order for the production team deciding not to create a new bat mobile and again creating a believable back-story for the car and his more elastic suit. The motor-cycle-as-ejector-seat is an ingenious addition to Batman’s repertoire as well.

The villains of The Dark Knight are arguably the deepest and most interesting characters in the film. I will admit I was upset to hear they were reviving the Joker for this film. There was no Joker other than Jack Nicholson… until Heath Ledger. From the very first scene we see a mad genius confusing, intimidating, out-smarting, and playing games on his victims. Ledger delivers a brilliant performance, stealing every scene of which he’s a part. Much like Bale’s Batman, Ledger’s Joker leaves the comics and becomes more real, more human. His intelligent dialogue and brilliant body control create a persona who uses our own fears against us. While he admits to never having a plan, we see he is the smartest villain seen on screen in some time. His clever (and completely false) stories of how he got his scars on his face provide a horrific comic relief and insight into the lunacy of Ledger’s character (a character who dresses like a female nurse to talk to Two-Face, holding true to the true DC character). I was hesitant, but this will go down as one of the greatest comic book movie performances of all time.

The story does seem to go on for some time, becoming a five-act epic (which is better than a simple script to showcase special effects.) The pacing is perfect with just the right amount of character development and action sequences, all photographed more artistically than the average action movie. The ending had the opportunity to become heavy handed but Nolan’s sensitivity provides more of a social critique than stereotypical conclusion. The subtlety of all supplemental characters (Freeman, Oldman, Caine, Eckhart, and Gyllenhaal) provide the perfect support and battleground for Bale and Ledger to compete. Traditional Batman worshipers will appreciate the darker interpretation, average fans will enjoy the wonderful performances, and everyone will talking about how The Dark Knight has raised the bar for action movies for years to come.