Change Your Image
north-julie
Reviews
Spider-Man (2002)
perfect origin story
When young social outcast peter parker is bitten by a genetically modified spider he gains incredible powers that allow him to climb walls, shoot web from his wrist and jump huge distances. At the same time, noted scientist Norman Osborn uses a human genome system modifier on himself and ends up with incredible strength and a very large dose of insanity. The way that these two men use their powers is the crux of the story as parker becomes crime fighter Spiderman and Osborn steals a secret military designed suit of armour and advanced glider and begins a trail of destruction throughout New York as villain the Green Goblin.
Spiderman is probably the most lightweight of the comic book films we have seen so far, in that it is not dark and has an abundance of primary colours. It is firmly marketable as a touching and character building film, and has little sense of danger for any of its protagonists. Director Sam Raimi, best known for directing episodes of cult hit Xena: warrior princess has delivered a standard formula superhero flick in the vein of Superman. He has made the film as accessible to a mainstream audience as possible, with no blood or gore, flashy violence and only two deaths (one off screen). As such, for those wanting to see Spiderman in pain or distraught, they will have to watch Spiderman 2.
At school, parker is an outcast with only one real friend (Harry Osborn, son of the Green Goblin) and has a long time secret love for fellow student Mary Jane Watson (played easily by the beautiful and talented Kirsten Dunst). Parker has never told anyone about his love for Watson, but it is painfully clear to Harry and his aunt and uncle. His Aunt is Aunt May, played gently and softly by Rosemary Harris who is easily able to show Mays courage and strength when peters uncle is killed. His uncle, Uncle Ben, is portrayed equally well by Cliff Robertson who shines in the few scenes that he has.
Meanwhile, the main four characters are all good in their own specific ways. Tobey Maguire, who looks very boyish despite being around 26 years old, is perfect as your local nerd with the heart of gold. He is quiet and insecure until the powers he inherits give him much more confidence. Dunst is able to play a teenage girl any day of the week, and she expertly shows Watsons growing affection to parker. James Franco, at first naive, grows as the film progresses and when his father dies at the hands of Spiderman he swears vengeance.
That of course brings us to Norman Osborn/the green goblin. Willem Dafoe is charged with bringing the goblin to life, and without doubt provides a weak link. Talented as he is when simply playing Osborn, he slips into panto villain mode when he becomes the goblin. He isn't helped by the mask he is forced to wear, which looks like a reject from an episode of the power rangers.
On the supporting cast is JK Simmons as J Jonah Jameson, head of the daily bugle (where peter gains a job as a photographer after taking pictures of himself as Spiderman and giving them to Jameson, who puts them in his paper). Jameson is exactly the same as he is in the comics, hating Spiderman to such an extent that he uses the Bugle to turn the city against Spiderman.
Effects wise, we have some great scenes of Spidey swinging through the big apple (with the best saved till last) but we have the occasional dodgy shot (Spiderman using giant inflatable balloons as trampolines in one of the action scenes) but the effects are adequate enough. Danny Elfmans score is great (with the opening signature tune stunning) and the sound effects such as the sound of the web coming out of peters wrist are done well.
On the whole, everything is done with great care, but no real verve. Its a suitable film for all and has great performances from ninety nine percent of its cast. It doesn't push any boundaries or try to delve too much into the darker aspects of superhero life, but as family entertainment and a great story it succeeds admirably.
A good film but beaten by its superior sequel which builds on everything here and makes it better.
AVP: Alien vs. Predator (2004)
its bad but its not THAT bad
Okay. When you see the words 'directed by Paul WS Anderson' attached to the credits of a film you automatically think 'oh sh*t'. However look at his track record more closely and you'll see his films are generally poor but not in a 'worst film ever!' kind of way. Event Horizon was a nifty little sci-fi film with great effects and a great cast while for all its faults Reisdent Evil was fairly entertaining but hampered by dodgy fx. The same kind of thing can be said for AvP.
When a satellite picks up a heat swell on a deserted Antarctic island, company executive Mr Weyland organises a trek to the location to discover whats hidden two thousand feet under the ice. They find an abandoned temple with hints of Egyptian, Aztec and Coambodian (i think) design to it. Inside they discover a breeding ground for Alien parasites that are the meat for a race of extra terrestrials called Predators who turn up every one-hundred years to hunt these vicious black monsters. Needless to say the Predators turn up just as the human team enters the temple and fighting ensues between all three races.
For a film called Alien vs Predator, you'd expect there to be plenty of conflicts between the aforementioned species. Unfortunately we are limited to one basic fight and a couple of ten second long scraps. This is a flaw, and if your feeling annoyed you can have a go at the film for this outrageous dose of false advertising.
Most people know that the Alien series of films began in 1979 with classic Alien, was followed by even bigger classic Aliens, dodgy threequel Alien3 and even dodgier follow up Alien Resurrection. On a whole its one of the greatest film series of all time, a favourite of sci-fi fans and many others. At its heart was Ellen Ripley (absent from this film because her films were set in the future while this is set at present day) a woman who had extraordinary survival skills and eventually managed to wipe out the entire alien species at the cost of her own life.
There are just two Predator films meanwhile. The first starred Austrian Oak Arnold Schwarzennegger and was a superior slice of jungle based combat. The hunter killed Arnies crack commando unit one by one until only Arnie was left and a stunning battle between the two ended the contest. Its follow up Predator 2 was a giant pile of steaming rubbish with Danny Glover being stalked by a Predator on the streets of LA.
As you can there is a lot of history for this film to live up to. Sadly, it only ends up being half decent in attempting to merge the two film series, and the idea of the Predators using the aliens to train themselves is a clever one. The setting of the temple is a poor choice though as its too dark and claustrophobic for any decent confrontations, and strangely Anderson manages to eject any tension from the scenes because it is abundantly clear when the Aliens or Predators are about to attack.
On the acting front everyone is one dimensional, with a handful of forgettable characters pushed to the forefront. Sanaa Lathan (Blades mother in Blade) is pretty enough to lead the cast, displaying a decent amount of ballsy courage and vulnerability but shes no Sigourney Weaver (who played Ellen Ripley). Raoul Bova is the 'seond longest survivor' of the human cast, and thats not me trying to be funny, thats just how he seems to be used in the film. He is an Italian scientist who manages to read an Aztec wall inscription faster than he can probably read Italian to basically explain the plot of the film in a one minute segment. He eventually dies (as does everyone except Lathan) and we promptly forget about him because, well, all we know about him is that he is Italian.
Lance henriksen pops up for a continuity bashing cameo as Weyland. Henriksen played android Bishop in Aliens and Alien3, and also Bishops human creator at the climax to Alien3. How hes here in present day as well as the future is baffling, but what the hell. The fact he dies seems to be ignored as well (if he dies, hows he in Alien3?) Effects wise the film is top notch. The cg aliens are much better than those seen in the last Alien film Alien Resurrection, and the expertly realised Alien Queen (shes runs! and jumps!) adds a good element of something never seen before because the Alien Queen of Aliens simply stood and swung its tail around. Now shes mobile! Music wise the films scores again. It has a brilliant musical score (check out the piece accompanying the alien and predator coming face to face for the first time or when the Predator ship leaves Earth at the end). The sound effects are brilliant as well, so backstage the job has been done.
Its just a shame Anderson messes up the action (the alien/predator opening fight is quite clearly two men in suits bashing each other) and that the characters are forgettable pieces of fluff. He also messes with Alien mythology. The Alien Queen lays eggs that sprout 'facehuggers' that grab onto your face and put an alien embryo inside you. Up to a day later the alien pops out your chest. In AvP the alien pops out of a woman's chest two minutes after its been laid. An annoying error that could have been avoided if the makers had really thought about it.
There are some nice touches (the logo from the Alien 3 poster can be seen on the floor of one of the rooms in the temple) but ultimately there is nothing to get excited about with this film. It doesn't bore you but it doesn't hit you with anything spectacular.
Rent before you buy.
X-Men (2000)
its dated now but its still a brilliant introduction for the series
When x men came out in 2000 it was the first of the new batch of marvel comic book movies. The x men series of comic books is apparently the highest selling series in the world (according to creator Stan Lee) and as such a movie was inevitable. Director Bryan Singer (The Usual Suspects) has delivered a movie that pleases the fans while bringing newcomers a lot of joy.
When a US senator decides that all mutants in the USA should come forward and be registered Magneto (playesd impressively by Ian Mckellen) realises that it would spell doom for mutants everywhere and so he decides that now is the time to fight back. Kidnapping the Senator, he builds a machine that can give any human mutant powers. His plan is to use the machine on the upcoming world summit meeting and inflict mutancy on every world leader so that they can no longer distance themselves from the mutant population. Meanwhile Magneto's old friend Charles Xaviar (played wonderfully by Patrick Stewart) and his loyal band of mutants the X-men learn of the plan and set out to stop him. Joining them are young girl Rogue who can kill anyone she touches and angry Wolverine who has incredible regenerative powers and sharp claws that shoot out from his knuckles.
What is a mutant? Well, every few thousand years evolution comes on leaps and bounds and a select group of humans experience changes around puberty. Some of the afflictions seen in this movie are the ability to control the weather, laser beams emanating from a mans eyes and telepathy.
As an introduction to what would eventually become a trilogy, this is a perfect film. It has a lot of exposition because the makers obviously realised that it would be followed by more films in the series, and as such it lacks any grandstanding action scenes. The effects are top notch, and the acting by the impressive cast (Halle Berry, Hugh Jackman, Famke Janssen) is as it should be. Indeed, Hugh Jackman takes centre stage as the sceptical Wolverine and his brand of hard edged charisma is pivotal to the films success.
The action (a train station bust up, a fight on top of the Statue of Liberty) is entertaining and at the time was amazing eye candy, but since then the amazing action scenes of the last few years (city wide destruction in War of the Worlds, huge battles in the LOTR trilogy) have pushed these rather meagre conflicts back a bit. In essence, X men seems simply like a teaser for its sequel and the upcoming X men 3.
In short, this is a great film that has brilliant characters and a good dose of controlled humour (Wolverine tells Cyclops to 'keep his eye open') as well as solid foundations laid out by ever reliable pairing Patrick Stewart and Ian Mckellen. Bryan Singer delivered a film that entertained and amused us all, but looking back its clear that this was merely a film where Marvel tested their products and waited to see if their comic book characters could work on celluloid.
A great origin movie, and remember that if this film hadn't been a success we'd never have had Spiderman or any of the other Marvel films that have been produced.
7/10
Predator (1987)
muscular action with a testosterone overload
When Arnold Schwarzengger and his rescue team are coerced into rescuing a cabinet minister from the Cuban jungle, they find mutilated corpses and are eventually hunted down one by one by a vicious alien who's only pleasure in life is that of hunting and killing for sport. Schwarzenegger decides that running is not an option anymore and wills his men to fight back against the creature. When his entire team is killed in ever more gruesome circumstances by the unstoppable extra terrestrial he decides to take the fight back to the alien and a muscular bout of action ensues.
Director John Mctiernan has crafted a very streamlined and muscular action film here, and as such the film moves at a breakneck speed without pausing to ponder some of the implausibilities on show. The action is frenetic and nicely edited, and as the film progresses the tension begins to become unbearable. Here is one of the best action movies of the eighties, with some of the best effects from the pre-cgi era.
Shcwarzenegger proves one of his best performances here as the leader of the aforementioned rescue squad, and as well as obviously being very physically able he presents just the right mix of hard edged authority and wide eyed vulnerability when he realises that for once he is fighting against something that could best him in unarmed combat. The rest of his squad is split into the usual mix of stereotypes. There's the Indian chappie with the big knife who naively believes he can take on the predator and succeed, there's the cowboy who refers to himself as a 'sexual tyrannosaurus' and carries an extremely large mini-gun. And then there's Carl Weathers, who despite seeming to be an established military soldier manages to mess everything up on a constant basis, and willingly accepts a berating from one of Arnies men despite being ranked higher than him.
Plot wise, we don't gain much information on the Predator. Seen arriving in a spaceship at the beginning we know its an alien and we gather from the way it stalks the team and kills them one by one that it is a hunter. We see it rip the spine out of one of its victims and attach the skull to a belt around its waste, which again signifies a hunter celebrating a kill. When it is revealed that it only kills those who are armed we know it is killing for sport and in a fair kind of way. This is a link to a possible 'honour system' for the predator, although this is of course just as guess. We don't need to worry about specifics because when the team starts being killed one by one all we worry about is how the predator is going to perform a kill next.
The setting is probably the strongest part of the film. The huge and expansive jungle is suitably foreboding and provides a stunning atmosphere of dread to the film. Forget the romanticised jungle that is present in the hit TV show 'Lost' because after the soldiers spend five minutes in this jungle you already know that you wouldn't want to do the same. The enormous trees, bizarre sounds and threat of death by a giant alien is enough to put anyone off jungles for life.
The effects are top notch, with the Predators invisibility defence mechanism providing some impressive shimmering effects. The laser gun it has mounted to its shoulder might look puny in appearance but when it punches a huge hole in one of the marines' chests you'll treat it with more respect. On this note, it is fair to say that the combat in the film is some of the best around. The feeling of power is incredible, and it comes early on as the team single handedly destroys a base that seems to contain the entire Cuban army. The huge explosions aren't just superfluous as they seem to hit the audience with ferocious energy, and when the rescue team spots the Predator and opens fire you'll have to resist the urge to duck. All seven men open fire on the jungle in an awesome display of firepower that not only destroys a large portion of the jungle but in reality should really alert the entire country to the teams' presence considering how much noise is being made.
On a final note, the mano-a-mano conflict at the end between Arnie and the Predator is superb. Although people might be tempted to laugh at Arnie when he makes his impressively primal scream into the night, but considering his team is all dead and he's about to fight a heavily armed alien with nothing more than a bow and arrow and some mud for protection you realise hes got nothing to lose.
Overall this is one of the best action movies ever made, and the presence of only one female means that the masculine feel to the film isn't tainted and the action doesn't have to be softened or dumbed down (indeed, some of the gore is disturbing.) Forget the sequel and its poor quality because this is a superb film!!!
Slither (2006)
gory and hilarious in equal measure- a cult classic
When a slimy alien substance arrives-on Earth inside a medium sized asteroid, a small town in America is instantly overrun by mutant alien worms that jump into their victims mouths and turn them into mindless zombies. A local police chief and the female teacher he secretly loves fight back. They plan to take down the leader of the aliens, the husband of the teacher. He has switched from a normal middle aged man into some kind of giant squid.....
If this isn't a classic example of a B-Movie plot then i don't know what is? Slither is a homage to those crappy and cheap seventies movies where giant over-sized bugs invade small towns. It has decent effects for such a small movie, and a hilarious script that provides its characters with some spectacularly fun one liners ("thats some f****d up sh*t") Director James Gunn has not even attempted to make a serious movie here, instead filling the screen with winks at the audience (one of the shops in the town is called R J Macready after Kurt Russels character in The Thing) and gory over the top effects. Slither is a rip off of such low grade classics as Invasion of the Bodysnatchers and The Puppet Masters but it has a sense of delightful playfullness that sets it apart. It also has a lot of gore. A LOT.
Nathan Fillion (Malcom Reynolds in Serenity)is Bill Pardy, the police chief dealing with the crisis affecting his hometown. He secretly has a crush on schoolteacher Starla, but she is married to Grant Grant (thats not a typo, he really does have the same first and second names) although she has feelings for him that extend beyond friendship. It just so happens that it is Grant who is the first to be affected by the bugs, and after eating most of the neighbourhoods dogs and cats he then proceeds to turn into a giant squid. Yes thats right- a giant squid.
And so begins a battle between Fillion and Starla against the marauding zombies, which leads me to a clear definition of Slither- its the American version of our Shaun of the Dead. It is blessed with better effects albeit but its basically the same film.
Nathan Fillion is a comedy god and he delivers his lines so well that the audience cheered whenever he was on screen. He is blessed with a great dose of comic timing, and is brilliant in a heroic role like this. Michael Rooker as the leader of the aliens is suitably menacing and his wife (Elizabeth Banks) is beautiful and vulnerable (although when she stabs one of the zombies in the neck with a giant pole she is anything but vulnerable).
Slither is a brilliant B-Movie style film that contains brilliant comedy and great effects. James Gunn has produced a superb movie that really should have been a great hit at the cinema.
Nathan Fillion deserves to have a hit movie!!!!
King Kong (2005)
What an atrocious mess
When Peter Jackson finally finished the LOTR trilogy, he openly stated that he would be very much inclined to direct an updated version of 1933 classic King Kong. After stating repeatedly that it was that film that made him want to be a director, he confessed his love for all things Kong and was asked by New Line Cinema to make the movie of his dreams.
And this is what he created!
Armed with a supposed $207 million budget Jackson set about creating a monster epic to beat them all. What he has made is a lifeless, dull and poorly directed mess of a movie. And weighing in at over three hours long, viewers are going to have to sit through a lot of sh*t when they watch this movie.
Starting off with Jack Black playing an ambitious movie director, the film just never recovers. He has conveniently found a map for the legendary 'skull island' and bizarrely decides that travelling there would be a good idea because its scenery would be the perfect location for his new movie. He finds a new leading lady (Naomi Watts) and manages to con Adrein Brody's bored writer into coming with them. They travel by boat to skull island, Watts gets kidnapped by the natives, Kong takes her, dinosaurs (!) attack Kong, Kong gets captured, taken to New York..... For such a big film, the plot just seems laboured and people like Adrien Brody just don't seem to be interested. He isn't my idea of an action hero, and he does honestly seem bored with his role and the movie in general. The guys an Oscar winner- whats he doing in this tosh???
I have no particular love for Jack Black. He is fairly funny in films like High Fidelity, but here he is the worst of a poor bunch. He is annoying (which may be the point of course) but seriously unlikeable for the lead in a movie of this magnitude. Naomi Watts, stunningly beautiful, is decent enough as the woman who falls in love with a giant ape (!) but nothing special. Critics have raved about the scene where she dances with Kong but i find it highly embarrassing as she juggles and cartwheels to poor comedic effect. Playing a woman emotionally attached to a giant monkey is going to be hard for any woman, and she doesn't quite manage to make it stick.
Kong is brought to life by Andy Serkis, and for what its worth does behave like a real gorilla. The Kong effects are admittedly very good, but with him boasting a very dark brown coat of fur he is merely hiding the poor effects present elsewhere.
In 1993 Jurassic Park stunned us with its huge dinosaurs. The cgi effects were top notch all round. Here, twelve years later when cgi is used all the time, the effects have come down in class. The three T-Rexs that battle Kong in an endless and boring battle are poorly designed. The cgi effects are too computer animated to look anything other than computer animated, and from there the whole film suffers. New York is presented nicely, although this past New York is no match visually for The Fifth Elements future New York. Once again older effects better those seen here. Maybe New Zealand special effects houses really are poor and the LOTR trilogy was a fluke....
There is one gobsmackingly awful sequence when our heroes are chased down a canyon by a herd of giant Brontosaurs. The background is so obviously green screen they may as well put a poster on it saying 'FAKE'. This sets an appropriately low tone for the film in terms of effects.
Overall, the gaping plot holes contribute to the poorness of the film. Why would Jack Black want to take Kong back to New York when there is an island full of dinosaurs, supposedly extinct for 65 million years? An extinct animal would surely be better to sell to the public than a giant over-sized monkey? And how did the inches thick vines in the canyon hold the weight of a forty foot gorilla and three T-Rexs????? Why would a woman fall in love with a gorilla? How did they get Kong onto the boat? Three quarters of the crew have died, and there is no viable entrance for a 2000lb gorilla. Well Peter Jackson???
How did Naomi Watts' character manage to stand on top of the Empire State Building in a skimpy dress and- (a) not get blown off? or (b) not freeze to death???
The battle between Kong and the bi-planes is decent enough with Kong smashing the endless supply of planes that continually fly past him shooting, but with that kind of budget and that director i expected a lot more than this poor excuse for a film.
Avoid unless you have a great love for poorly realised cgi dinosaurs.
Blade (1998)
Stunning effects and action. Blade is perfect popcorn pleasure
When a young man is taken by his mysterious girlfriend to an underground rave, little does he know that she is secretly a vampire and that all of the other 'ravers' are blood sucking beasts. But don't worry- there's Blade to save the day.
And spectacularly so.
Blade. armed with a sword, shotgun, handgun and shuriken type weapon, rips through half of the occupants, taking them out in a flash of brilliant effects and expertly staged hand to hand combat. The vampires disintegrate into dust and Blade moves on.
This opening action scene is one of the best ever, and sets a dark but constantly entertaining tone for the rest of the movie. Directed by Stepthen Norrington, who went onto make Sean Connery flop LXG, Blade came out before The Matrix and in terms of coolness, beats Keanu's film hands down.
When vampire Deacon Frost (Stepthen Dorff) plans to resurrect a long dead vampire god, Blade and his mentor/sidekick Whistler (Kris Kristofferson) use their heavy arsenal to stop him. With doctor Karen Jenson onboard (N Bushe Wright) Blade also searches a cure for his thirst. No, not that kind of thirst...
Blade, played to understated perfection by Wesley Snipes, is a half blood, or 'daywalker'. His pregnant mother was bitten before giving birth to him (it turns out later it was Frost who bit her) and he has been given all of the strength of a vampire, and none of their weaknesses (daylight, garlic, silver). Unfortunately he also has their thirst, and he uses a garlic compound to quell his thirst. Snipes is physically able to perform in the film, and with Blade a man of few words he has no problem conveying the human emotions.
Kristofferson is effective as Whistler, and his death scene late in the movie is accompanied by superb melancholic music. Dorff, while not the beefiest of bad guys, is able to give Frost a youthful exuberance and cocky persona that sits as a perfect opposite to Snipes and his brooding.
Wright is decent support as the token female, working away on a cure while also letting Blade bite her when he can't find any serum. Donal Logue is annoying as Frosts sidekick, but thats the point. However, when he finally gets his comeuppance its a great comedic moment as he charges at Blade and gets decapitated by an acid edged piece of rope.
The fights and effects are superbly staged, with the nightclub massacre one of the highlights of action film history. The gleaming white tiles end up blood splattered as Blade takes no prisoners. Later Blade jumps off as building, grabs onto a speeding train and gets put in some kind of ancient tomb style device. The action never lets up, and Norrington delivers well with his limited budget.
Blade, unlike some other action heroes, decides to take a life when he could easily spare it. When launching his one man assault on Frosts headquarters, he annihilates the human bodyguards of Frost and discovers one on the floor lying injured. Blade points his shotgun in the guards face, and the guard shouts 'no! i just work for them!' before Blade blasts his head off. Its an incredibly powerful moment, coming after Whistlers death and filling Blade with anger and a lust for revenge. He is a great hero, but not infallible.
This is a great action movie, and there is no chance of someone watching it and being left bored. Its perfect Friday night entertainment, and deserves to be loved.
A splendid action epic.
Batman Begins (2005)
A return to form for the Batman series- couldn't have come at a better time
When Batman and robin was released in 1997, it looked like being the end of the Batman series. Incredibly camp and over the top, and featuring the worst of the three Batman's who had played the role, it was a dire film that looked like ending what had been a great franchise.
Now, with a smart and talented director shooting the action (no offence to Joel Schumacher intended) and a cast made mostly of Brits, batman Begins has resurrected what was once considered a dead franchise and given it a new lease of life.
Starting off with a look at Bruce Waynes early life, we discover why Bruce Wayne has a fear of bats and we watch as his mother and father are killed right in front of his eyes. One major change to Batman mythology is the fact that unlike in 1989s Batman, it isn't the soon to be joker that kills Bruce's parents, but a small time criminal who is later killed off.
Bruce goes to a middle eastern country to learn how to fight and regularly gets himself arrested and thrown into prison just so that he can fight against the low life criminals that he is incarcerated with. The pre-batman Bruce Wayne shows some exemplary fighting skills despite never having any kind of training, and is picked out by Liam Neeson to be a new breed of warrior. Bruce returns to Gotham to discover that Rutger Hauer's slimy businessman has taken over his parents company, and that the city is under the control of Tom Wlikinsons crime lord, who is being assisted by psychotic Cillian Murphy (the scarecrow, complete with scary mask and gas firing weapon)Bruce decides that he is the one who should fight against the Scarecrow and gears himself up.
Bruce trains as Batman, assisted ably by Morgan Freeman's weapons creator Lucius Fox, who presents Wayne with a new bulky batmobile. Freeman exudes a calm influence in his scenes, and he is very likable in his role.
The film belongs to Christian Bale, brilliant as the tortured Bruce Wayne. He is vulnerable in his early days as Batman, and he presents the human side of Bruce Wayne admirably well, something that Michael Keaton had failed to do in his two batman movies.
As the scarecrow, cillian murphy is suitably menacing and his disguise, a distorted mask, is very well created. Liam Neeson, as Waynes mentor in the early part of the film, is good value. But an unsung hero of the film is Michael Caine, playing Alfred the butler with all of the charm and elegance that he usually brings to his roles.
The effects, especially in the climatic train battle, are expertly done, and the fight scenes are very effective. Bale is able to sustain a good presence in the fights, and his human side is displayed with a lot of promise over how he might perform in future roles.
Overall, this is a superb entry in the series, and it should continue with a clue at the end that sets up a possible sequel featuring the joker. If they can get Sean Penn to play him, they might just have another classic on their hands.
Batman Begins is the best of the four batman movies, and one for casual moviegoers as well as fans of the Dark Knight.
Amazing!
Tremors (1990)
hilarious
When giant burrowing mutant worms attack a small town, its up to Kevin Bacon and Fred Ward to save the day. Now, with the plot out of the way, we can move on....
Yes thats right. This is a classic example of a B-Movie, with a limited use of plot and a good old fashioned use of great characters and humour used to fill in the blanks.
As Val, Kevin Bacon displays his leading man credentials in a role that is born for him. He will never be an action man in the mould of Bruce Willis, running down a street in a vest waving guns around. Here he has a role perfectly drawn out for him, as a small town hero who has limited common sense and intelligence, but a heart of gold. Fred Ward, brilliant as an unhinged soldier in southern Comfort, is great as Bacon's slightly older (well, a lot older actually) best friend who has a calmer more restrained view of life than his usually overexcited friend. Finn Carter provides a pretty face as an improbably pretty meteorologist, and grabs some of the best lines of the movie (while also stripping down to her undies) Michael Gross, with his personalised numberplate that reads UZI 4 U is a hoot, with his giant arsenal of weapons in his underground bunker. The fact that it can supposedly survive a nuclear blast but not a burrowing worm is overlooked because he is great support along with his slightly unhinged wife. They shoot one of the 'mother humpers' to death when it dares to break into their bunker, with Gross having to resort to his hilariously over-sized elephant gun to get the job done.
These larger than life characters are what gives Tremors its charm. The film never takes itself too seriously, and is a lot better than many serious creature features (for instance Godzilla). It has great comedy (the group pole vaulting away from the worms) and great liners such as the following
Kevin Bacon (talking about the worms)- What do you think they are doing?
Finn Carter (looking exasperated as she keeps being asked questions about the worms)- Why do you keep asking me?
The great script, imaginative effects (the worms are blind, so they hunt by listening to vibrations from above and then sending out little tentacles affectionately known as 'graboids') and good performances from the central cast give this loving B-Movie a great shine.
If you like cheesy slightly cheap comedy horror movies than this is for you!
The Faculty (1998)
decent but not that great
When a group of high school students discover that their school in being overrun by nasty little parasitic aliens, they unite and attempt to stop the spread of these aliens by finding the 'queen.' Thats the basic plot of The Faculty, a more mainstream film than what director Robert Rodriguez has usually made (Desperado, El Mariachi). Unfortunately, while The Faculty is very entertaining it is woefully short of any original ideas that really set it apart.
With a good group of promising young stars (Elijah Wood, Johs Hartnett, Jordanna Brewster) and a good group of older stars playing the teachers (Robert Patrick, Selma Hayek) the film has a good base for its story to sit on. However, that story has been lifted from a film that is regularly mentioned by the characters in this film, Invasion Of The Bodysnatchers. You can also draw comparisons with The Thing and The Puppet Masters, which is a problem for this film. It has a very recycled feel to it, although Rodriguez does get a lot of wattage out of his younger stars. Josh Hartnett displays promise as outsider Zeke, and he is ably supported by Wood's lovable loser nerd. Jordanna Brewster is suitably bitchy as the cheerleader who hates everyone that isn't thin and attractive, although her role has been better countless times before. Robert Patrick, playing the first teacher to become inhabited by the aliens, seems to be sleepwalking through his role. Otherwise, Clea Duvall adds nothing as the supposed 'butch lesbian', although her romance with Shawn Hatosy's jock seems very contrived.
Effects wise, there is nothing to write home about. The aliens themselves are too small to really be considered, although the alien queen that appears at the end is as cheesy and poorly realised as any B-Movie effect you've ever seen. This particular plot device is needlessly added on, as Elijah Wood battles the Queen by running away and hiding, and then squashing it in the stand inside the school sports hall.
One major point that needs raising is the continued use of Zeke's mind altering drug. It seems that this is the only weapon that will work against the aliens, and we regularly see it used to defeat those people who have been 'taken over'. However, the constant use of the drug by the students is continually overdone, and in todays society we don't really need to see a bunch of teens using a mind altering drug on such a regular basis.
There are of course plot holes. if new girl Marybeth is the queen, why does shy happily kill the school head-teacher, a woman who is already possessed by one of the aliens? Why doesn't she just turn into the giant monster thing when Zeke takes her and the others to his house. She could have simply 'turned' them all there and then. If Jordanna Brewster is an alien, why doesn't she just turn Elijah Wood when they are alone in the toilets together? How do the students even know that there is a queen anyway? There is a strong need for people to watch this movie and leave their minds in neutral. Viewed as cheesy Friday evening cinema this hits all of the right notes. if you're looking for grown up and intelligent sci-fi then you've come to the wrong place.
Rent, but don't buy if you have any serious love for your film collection.
Pitch Black (2000)
great little horror movie
Pitch Black opens with the basic shot of a transport vessel moving lazily through space. Almost obscured is a huge comet blazing a trail right in front of the ship. Three minutes later the comet has ripped through the ship, killed the Captain and set the ship on a direct course towards the surface of a handily placed planet.
Pilot Fry is thrown into the fray, and she has a choice between jettisoning the half of the ship containing the passengers to save her skin or trying to get the whole ship down in one piece which is impossible. She ignores the safety of the crew and trys to jettison the crew quarters, only to find that there is a malfunction and she is unable to do so. She manages to crash the ship, yet around fifteen of the passengers survive. One of those passengers is bounty hunter Johns. Another is his captured prey, Riddick.....
Riddick escapes, and Johns is forced to search the surface of the planet looking for him. It turns out that there are three suns for this particular planet, which isn't the most helpful thing for Riddick because while in prison he had his eyes 'tinted' to allow him to see in the dark. This is why he wears a pair of designer goggles that keep him safe from the sunlight. Johns captures Riddick and ties him up with some metal cables, taking his goggles away to keep him subdued.
With the ship damaged, the crew, led by Fry, finds an outpost with a small shuttle type ship. They need to transfer the fuel cells from their transport ship to this little shuttle in order to escape. However, while searching the outpost they discover that they are not the only living creatures on this planet and that there are some winged bat things that only come out at night. With three suns you'd be thinking that night would be impossible on this planet right? Wrong.
Unluckily for the survivors there is an eclipse of one of the suns. Its unclear why the other two suns suddenly disappear but hey, this is Hollywood. Anything can happen.
So the crew enlist riddick to help them survive the ensuing darkness. He helps them take the fuel cells and fights off the marauding bat things while sparring with Johns at the same time.
Pitch Black is a low budget movie that looks far more expensive than it really is. The effects for the crash are superb, and the bat things are brilliantly realised. As fry, radha Mitchell exudes just enough power and vulnerability to show that she is in charge of the situation yet aggrieved about what she tried to do during the crash. As Johns, B-movie regular Cole Hauser is eerie enough and strong enough to play the role easily enough, although his trusty shotgun looks a tad on the flimsy side.
The movie though really belongs to Vin Diesel. His riddick is a brilliant creation, all muscular front and steely insides. He doesn't care about anyone or anything, although he does seem to develop a lust for Fry that grows throughout the film until she is literally taken from his arms at the end of the film. He is easily able to carry the fight scenes and while not a talented thespian he does give his few lines (he doesn't speak at all in the first twenty minutes) with enough zest to carry him through.
David Twohy injects the limited scope of the film with skill and grandeur, and the action has a pumped up and superior feel to it. Short and snappy action scenes fill the latter half of the movie, and the lack of really choppy editing keeps things moving at just the right pace. The performances are adequate, and while the film is never really scary or chilling, it is definitely entertaining enough to fill an evenings worth of viewing.
This is proof that sometimes a low budget can really aid a film, as Twohy doesn't just throw a huge explosion or gun fight into the mix just for the sake of having one. He keeps things tight and focused, and the film is all the better for it.
A brilliant little movie.
Serenity (2005)
A very good film, but constraints leave it just short of greatness
After a brilliantly paced opening sequence that lasts around ten minutes, the screen fades to complete blackness and the word SERENITY comes into focus. The outline of a ship appears around behind the word, and the camera pulls back to reveal a rugged looking spaceship gliding through the atmosphere of a planet. Accompanied by a superb musical score, this fifty second scene is one of the most magical introductions i have ever seen. effortlessly combing state of the art cgi with a soft slice of music, this is a beautiful sight. After this we are introduced to the crew of serenity via another (unbroken) sequence that gives newcomers just enough information to go on concerning personalities/roles on the ship/relationships.
I say newcomers because serenity is not an introduction to this universe. the short lived firefly series that was cancelled by fox in 2002 was the introduction. i had never heard of it before watching serenity, and only knew about the film after spotting a TV advert for it. in that thirty seconds i was hooked onto the effects and humour. Joss whedon, the brains behind Buffy and Angel is the man responsible for firefly and serenity, and even though the show was cancelled and the film a flop, he has done a great job in creating a world and set of characters that we can love and relate to. And to be fair, with fox cancelling everything they don't understand and universal not bothering to give serenity any kind of strong marketing campaign, joss is not at fault for the way the series and film have performed.
I have now seen the entire fourteen episode run of firefly, and it has to be said that the series is better than the film. the characters were given more room to develop, and in a film with only two hours to fill, some characters (Wash, Kaylee) are pushed to the fringe as they look for a reason to be in the film. Indeed, apart from Wash's death, he only has a few comedic lines that make him stand out (and even then only as the comedy relief). It is river tam and Mal Reynolds who are the focus of this film, and it suffers slightly because of that.
In the series it is touched on briefly about the fact that river is a psychic and possibly a human super-weapon, but here in serenity she is able to break free and show who she really is. Mal is the captain of serenity and is presented as a hero, but not an ordinary hero. over the course of the film Mal shoots three unarmed men, which sets him apart from other heroes. the great thing about this character is that hes not a stereotypical action hero. yes he is tall and good looking and makes jokes, but he also has a dark side, brought about by the defeat of his army in a past war with the planet-ruling alliance.
The alliance are serenity's version of the Empire, and while their fleet of star-ships is not regularly seen, it does feature in the films most outstanding action sequence when serenity attempts to force its way down to the surface of a planet.
The plot concerns river being rescued from an alliance military school masquerading as a school 'for the gifted' by her brother Simon. He brings her on board serenity to protect her from the alliance (although an unarmed transport vessel that is always in the news for pulling illegal jobs is probably not many peoples first choice of a safe hiding place). The alliance send emotionless 'operative' chiwetel ejiofor after her, and he tracks serenity until the inevitable final battle. in an earlier battle between Mal and the operative, Mal is roundly beaten but saved by a perfectly timed exploding pile of incense set up by Mal's on and off lover inara. Later the operative attempts to disable Mal by severing the nerves that control his lower body. However, Mal doesn't have those nerves anymore, as they were hit by debris while he was in battle many years ago. The operative is able to track serenity yet he cant finish the job. Such dispension of disbelief at the continuing failure of the operative is necessary to enjoy the film, as one minute hes impossible to beat and the next he has a golden chance to kill the crew but orders his men to 'stand down.' but this is a minor gripe in such a great movie. it has great effects and humour ('were gonna explode? i don't wanna explode!) and great characters. Mal is the hero bordering on anti hero, Jayne is the girlie named muscular man, Zoe is the warrior woman, Kaylee is the cute and innocent sex obsesses engineer, inara is the 'whore' as Mal politely puts it, wash is the wisecracking pilot, Sheppard Book is the bible quoting human opposite of Mal, Simon the weaselly doctor and river the small but powerful teenager who at one point manages to beat up a bar full of over-sized men. Apart from those nine and the operative the film lacks any consistent character (Mr universe is a tech-no nerd who may as well be called Mr exposition) so its imperative that we like the crew of serenity. and we do, because nobody writes entertaining characters like Joss whedon does.
enjoy the stunts and humour and pay attention to the twist halfway through the movie (concerning firefly regulars the 'reavers' and you will certainly enjoy serenity a lot more than sci fi warhorse star wars (at least the prequels anyway).
Mal says late on 'could be bumpy'. that sums up this film. bumpy in places (a couple of dodgy effects spring to mind) but serenity is a smooth ride overall.
Starship Troopers (1997)
highly entertaining
The book of Starship Troopers was written a long time ago by Robert A Heinlein. Its a great tale of epic battles and one young mans crusade through the military ranks. The film shares many similarities, but has jettisoned the 'skinnies', a race of subhumans who are also at war with humanity. The film focuses on the war between humanity and the bugs, a race of spider like creatures living many miles away. Because of this streamlining, the film is a modern classic. Cut into two parts (training and fighting) Starship Troopers deserved much more than the feeble US gross it achieved.
Starring a bunch of relative unknowns, this is a bombastic action epic that batters the senses with fantastic images of war torn landscapes and huge warships. Casper Van Dien is Johnnie Rico, the square jawed hero, Denise Richards his beautiful girlfriend Carmen who wants to be a pilot, Dina Meyer the girl with the huge crush on Johnnie and Doggie Howser the hilarious scientist with the even more hilarious quavering eyebrows. Michael Ironside is the metallic armed teacher cum warrior who watches over Rico at the beginning and then end of the movie. And there is also a dashing young pilot who wants to steal Carmens heart.....
Yes thats right, Starship Troopers copies the Titanic method of plonking a love story onto the back of the epic storyline. However, Rico and Carmens romance is short lived as they part ways, so it doesn't put a dampener on the film.
Rico and his buddies are put through a rigorous training regime by the improbably named Clancy Brown. Training involves showering in a giant unisex shower, having your hand stapled to a wall by a knife and being shot by cardboard laser firing soldiers. Rico causes the death of a fellow pupil, threatens to walk out, yadda yadda yadda. Carmen is off learning how to fly her giant spaceship while Doggie Howser feeds a cow to one of the bugs. This first half of the film is great fun as it builds up the characters. None of them are especially great at acting, and Casper Van Diens jaw does seem to do most of the acting in his scenes. However, its when the evil bugs destroy Buenos Airies that things get nasty.
Yes thats right- Buenos Airies. One element from the book that didn't need to be kept. None of the people in the film speak Argentinian yet when that city is destroyed everybody gets angry and goes off to war.
The first battle scene is spectacular. The giant spaceships hover in space being pummelled by giant bursts of sticky blue emissions that appear to be coming out of some giant bugs bum-holes. Dropships take the troops down to the planet, and then the troops meet the bugs (but not until they have fired miniature nuclear weapons at targets no less than a hundred meters away). The humans get slaughtered by 'superior tactics' which translates as the bugs simply having more legs than us humans. The humans reply by invading the exterior planets of the bugs solar system, and an incredible last stand style battle in an abandoned fortress is the highlight of the film. Giant tank bugs fire well, fire at the fortress while millions of bugs charge towards the fortress and then STAND STILL. Up above flying green bugs manage to decapitate half of the infantry while Johnnie Rico single handedly kills the bugs, fixes the radio system, pulls half of his commanding officer out of the mouth of a tank bug, causes the death of Dina Meyers character and shoots one of the flying bugs in such a way that it crashes into the admiral of the fortress.....
yes this is a film that doesn't take itself too seriously, and its all the better for it. Other noteworthy things to mention follow- Jake Busey plays Ace, a character who seems to always have his eyes shut to a squint. Rico jumps on the back of a tank bug and defies gravity by being able to stand on it without support, fire into the bugs back, drop a grenade into the bug, jump off and survive without barely a scratch. All of this takes place while the bug is moving at around fifty miles an hour. Doggie Howser catches a gigantic brain bug, the captain of Carmens ship is cut in half BY A DOOR, a man has his brain sucked out of his head by a bug with a straw.....
Starship Troopers contains some of the best special effects ever devised. The spaceships are perfectly realised and the bugs are lifelike. The shot of hundreds of bugs converging on the abandoned fortress is mesmerising, as is Casper Van Diens jaw. There is humour, with a cameraman taping one of the battles and then being ripped apart. An Asian officer attempts to beat the entire bug army on his own, Michael Ironside loses his legs. Its all fun, as is the movie.
One thing is never really explained. WHY are we fighting the bugs? The bugs planet is able to shoot giant asteroids towards Earth because of its 'gravity well.' What does this have to do with the bugs? When the humans invade the infamous Planet P, they capture a brain bug to find out why the bugs fight. They fight because we have declared war on them! A minor gripe yes, but surely something could have been done about our motives for this war.
A great film with fantastic effects. its just a shame that it wasn't a bigger hit, and that it inspired the mediocre sequel.
Lost in Space (1998)
a big dumb movie with great effects
There are some striking special effects scenes that we have witnessed over the years. From asteroids hitting the earth to dinosaurs roaming, we have seen some pretty spectacular scenes. However, a film full of great effects is not a great film. Lost In Space is a prime example of this.
When the Earth is dying in the future, it is predicted that we will search for a new home. This is the crux of Lost In Space, as the (swiss family) Robinson attempt to fly their pretty boring looking spaceship to the other end of the galaxy to colonise a planet called alpha prime. Onboard is the usual group of family members- self obsessed dad, intelligent but ignored son, angry wife and bickering daughters. Also onboard is Matt Le Blanc, star of friends.
There is a couple of problem within the casting of the crew. Heather Graham (playing the eldest child) is improbably beautiful for a scientist. She also comes out with one of the worst quotes in history ('i don't like the sound of that sound').
Unsurprisingly, there are those who oppose the idea of an alternative planet being found for the human race. One such man is Gary Oldmans character Smith. He spouts bizarre monologues that sound like the bits that Shakespeare chopped from his plays. He tries to kill the Robinson family and hotwires the unnecessary robot so that it goes crazy and damages the ship. From here, the crew is lost.
There are many problems with this film. Gary Oldman, a great actor in the fifth element and leon, is not exactly the most threatening of bad guys in this movie. he snivels and weasels his way through the film, finding himself endlessly punched by Le Blanc. The random space monkey that the crew encounter is poorly recognised by cheap effects, and is a pointless addition. Heather graham is not a scientist. The ship is boring to look at. and on, and on....
The film also has silly leaps of logic. The spiders that the crew come up against onboard the floating spaceship are clearly robotic, yet have a predators teeth. They are able to bite their way through the hull of the ship, and yet ten minutes later the ship flies through the atmosphere of a planet without even suffering a scratch. I'm no scientist but surely an incredibly hot atmosphere is stronger than a spiders teeth??? The ship manages to fly THROUGH THE SUN! i don't care how fast they are going, thats surely impossible! However, a movie like this is bound to be full of effects, and Lost In Space doesn't disappoint. The destruction of the Proteus spaceship is spectacular as the Robinsons ship wheels away from the expanding fireball. And the final flight through the planet is great fun to. Matt Le Blanc plays his role well, looking heroic and not taking himself too seriously. He is unintentionally hilarious when the robot is malfunctioning and he flies through the air to land on its back. And his pathetic attempts to flirt with Heather Grahams depressed looking scientist add welcome heart to the film.
If it wasn't for the budget, this film would definitely receive a lower grade. The story may be dull and the acting fairly mediocre, but Lost In Space isn't trying to be Solaris. It just wants to entertain, and no matter how much you try, you cannot truly say that this film bores you.
War of the Worlds (2005)
flawed but spectacular
Inside the first fifteen minutes of this film we learn that there is something about to happen to the Earth. Newsreaders describe stories of freak electrical storms and a giant black cloud appears in the sky. Its very windy and all of a sudden bursts of lightning start to smack the ground. Five minutes later Tom Cruise watches as a giant mechanical tripod appears from under the ground and proceeds to blast everything with its giant laser cannons.
It can be said that similarly themed movie Independence Day is one of the best examples of a summer blockbuster movie that is great to look at but poor to think about. What that film did have was a tense and tension filled opening forty minutes. The giant space-ships moved above the major cities and then.....waited. They stopped and waited for the right time to attack. In war of the worlds the opening attack is done and dusted inside of twenty minutes. This is a mistake.
Steven Spielberg has of course made some of the greatest movies of all time. he has always been a very good visionary director, putting images on the screen that no one can match (from rampaging T-Rex's to hundreds of men being massacred on a beach). The opening attack by the tripod in war of the worlds is one of the most terrifying and brilliant scenes of the last decade. the tripod itself (kept under wraps until the films release) is brilliantly realised through great effects. however, we have only just met Tom Cruise's character, and at this time he is presented as anything but a nice guy. so we watch this scene not bothered about whether he dies or not. and the fact that we are so early into the film means that there hasn't been any time to build up tension. as a standalone scene this would be regarded as classic, but as the opening to a film its somewhat misplaced.
To Cruise is the irresponsible dad who has to take care of endlessly screaming daughter Rachel and endlessly moaning son Robbie. Dakota Fanning (playing Rachel) screams and cries her way through the film, and while this might be what a ten year old kid would do in real life, this isn't what we go to the cinema for. One particular scene, when the tripod is being destroyed in the films climax, we keep cutting to Tom and Dakota sat inside a random giant pipe. Dakota is sat screaming her head off for no apparent reason. if it wasn't illegal and morally wrong, I'm sure tom would have just put her in the path of the tripod and said 'come and get her boys!' Placing this film in the eyes of one family instead of the whole film is a good idea on paper, but not in a movie. To keep the movie going and to keep the audience informed, Cruise keeps meeting characters who spill exposition like nobody's business. Tom- 'hey soldier whats happening?' soldier- 'well we saw the tripod earlier and it fell over. its being erratic' and so on. the family also meets crazy Tim Robbins, who thinks that he can take down one of the tripods with his trusty shotgun. in one dramatic scene some of the alien invaders enter Tim Robbins basement and him and cruises family have to keep moving around to dodge the curious fellows. while good to watch, its hard to ignore the fact that this is just a copy of the raptor-in-kitchen scene from Jurassic park.
Tim Robbins plays his small part well, but cruise eventually has to kill him when Robbins decides to start shouting crazily just meters away from the tripods. This scene isn't powerful at all because the killing takes place off-screen. A powerful scene to admire is the scene before the tripods attack the boat. Cruise and his family are in the only working car in what seems like the whole of America, and they try to navigate their way through a large crowd. things turn ugly and men start to pile into the car. Cruise and his son attempt to beat up the hundreds of irate men but fail, and cruise is held at gunpoint by a guy who wants the car. fanning is still in the car and cruise keeps telling the guy 'i just want me daughter back' this is a great and emotional scene which is a dramatic highpoint.
Otherwise the effects are great (although its hard not to have great effects with a high budget) and the performance from cruise as the embattled father is good enough for this movie. The action scenes are good, with the opening assault and the helicopters/tanks/soldiers/planes versus tripods battle spectacular. the speeding flaming train is also a great visual sight, and the noise that the tripods make before attacking is eerie and effective.
Two gripes- cruises son disappears into a flaming ball of fire and reappears slightly dirty at the end. memo to scriptwriters- have the guts to follow through with your 'death' scenes. and the ending? the tripods get ill? what??? we could have at least had more scenes of humans beating the tripods to give us our victory lift. Oh well great to look at but lacking real heart, this is a finely crafted b-movie at the end of the day, but with better effects.
Alexander (2004)
a good addition to the growing list of historical epics
I followed the story of Alexander from production to completion. During filming, the general feeling was that it was going to be average at best. Despite the legendary director, strong cast and huge budget, cynics claimed Aleaxander would flop
Alexander flopped in America, and Britain. It did however make a slight profit on its 150million dollar budget worldwide, so it can be said that all was not lost. Except some of the respect people had for Oliver Stone.
I recently bought the Directors Cut of Alexander. I'd read the scathing reviews, and seen its disappointing grosses. I have to admit I've never seen any other Oliver Stone movie, so my judgement of this film might be at pains to other people who've seen his past films. I have to say i enjoyed this movie, despite the big flaws.
I'm a fan of Farrell, Jolie and Kilmer. Any criticisms of their performances is unfair. Farrell, playing the King who conquered the planet, does what he can with the material available. Remember Alexander lived years ago, so it can never be completely defined what made him charge across the globe. Farrell displays all of the necessary emotions and character nuances to help us decide why Alexander did what he did. Alexander is presented as a king who sometimes begged his troops in desperation to fight for him, as a strong willed leader who took an army of 40,000 to victory against an army of 250,000, and as a cultured man who tried and failed to unite different nationalities and cultures together. Remember that this film covers his ENTIRE LIFE, so his reasons and beliefs might have changed as the years passed.
Questions were asked as to why Alexander begged his troops to fight in India. Well, would you want to fight another battle after doing so for eight years? Alexander knew his men were tired and scared so he begged. His willingness to lower himself from King to the equal of these men took a lot of courage. People ask armies fought and died for a man who weeped and begged them to. The answer is so blindingly obvious its surprising nobody has brought it up before. HE WAS KING! He was their ruler, so they had to fight for him regardless of whether he inspired them. If they didn't fight, they were executed (like the doctor at the end of the film).
Jolie is bizarre draped in snakes and speaking in a weird accent. Why? Remember, they were nuts in those days, so a woman like her was nothing new. What's clear from history and legends is that the ancient times were FULL of strange characters like Olympius. What about Hercules, the man who could pick up a house? Achilles, the man who killed hundreds whilst never getting injured (at least according to Troy). Why couldn't a woman be covered in snakes? As Olympius, Jolie has fun being as weird and wonderful as like in real life.
Val Kilmer is great as the drunken lout of a King who was(or wasn't in Olympius's eyes) the father of Alexander. People criticise him saying he was one dimensional. Well, how many dimensions does an alcoholic have? He was fine as Phillip, playing him well. The scene in which he banishes Alexander from his court is extremely well played by Kilmer (and Farrell).
The battle scenes are the most visceral and astounding ever put to film. The first, at guagmela, is the best I've ever seen beating anything in Troy because it just seems more real. Whereas the two armies stood battering each other without any skill or tactics in Troy, the essence of Guagmela is the skill of Alexander while leading his incredibly outnumbered army to victory. The blood flows, unlike in Troy and the abysmal KIng Arthur, and the furious devastating blows exchanged give this battle something that these other epics lacked. Guagmela is hard to follow at first, but when watched again, it's clear how the battle unfolds. Alexander charges his cavalry down the right flank, waiting for King Darius to advance the front of his army towards the Macedonion phalanxes. Alexander, with the order "LEFT TURN!" charges into the 'bridge' (gap between the Persian front and back lines) assaulting the troops directly in front of Darius himself. A spectacular engagement just like the battle in India which features stampeding elephants and even more carnage. It also features the glorious sequence in which the injured Alexander is carried away from his final victory, with Vangelis magnificent score playing in the background.
Flaws- the battles can be confusing. Anthony Hopkins is annoying as Ptolmey. Jared Leto is wasted as Hepthastion. His homosexual scenes with Alexander are underplayed. Leto wears eyeliner. Rosario Dawson is wasted, although her sex scene with Alexander is surprisingly graphic. And yes, some of the dialogue is literally written monologue. It needed another battle in the middle of the film, instead of one at the beginning and end.
But the score from Vangelis, astounding battle scenes, superb individual sequences such as Alexander taming his horse, being carried off the battlefield in India, and superb end credits mean that this is a missed opportunity yes, but not the complete failure it has been called.
One more thing. The bisexuality of Alexander is dealt with maturely, but repeatedly. Why the problem with this? Homosexuality isn't outlawed. Its not like Farrell has sex with Leto. If you're going to make a film based on someones life, make sure you don't lose too many details. Alexander and Hepthiastion are soulmates and in the directors cut at least, this is shown. Nothing graphic, just love they could never reveal to the world.
There is more to say about Alexander but I've said enough. The directors cut is enjoyable, don't be put off by bad reviews and negative press. this is a good film!
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
time for a fresh look at this one
No matter what anybody says, Phantom isn't actually that bad a film. Yes its slow in places, has a questionable script and some poor acting (Natalie Portman stand up), but in the end were we really expecting a film that would stand up to the test of time like the originals has?
Think about it for a moment. Think about what Phantom has been mainly criticised for, and then look at my reasoning below.
In 1977 Lucas made star wars as a labour of love. Only star wars. Empire and Jedi were made to cash in on that films success, so when people say that he has only made phantom for the money, so what if he has? He's only human after all, and if its money he wants then he did well didn't he? Film-making is a money making business, and only a handful of directors are really in it for the artistic effect it has on the world. If Lucas made these new films halfheartedly, then so what?
What you have to remember firstly is that when star wars was made, the effects were top quality and state of the art. Nothing like them had been seen before, so of course they were going to get praise. These days, instead of cardboard spaceships and wires, we have CGI. Yes its weightless and unreal, with too many smooth edges and not enough variation in the different shades of colour. But was Lucas really expected to go back to technology he had used twenty years ago?
The fact that many people accused Phantom as just being a tool Lucas used to sell merchandise is a moot point. Star wars was made for a generation of children (and of course adults) who were brought up imagining what they were playing with. Toys and action figures weren't as advanced, but now they are, and mainly because of star wars we have a lot of merchandising. Lucas, clearly with one eye on that market has produced a movie thats not only a movie, but a cash cow he can make even more money off. So what if star wars toys were overflowing in stores around at Christmas? Lucas knows where the money is at, and he went straight for the sweet spot. If the film you make has the power to earn you x amount of dollars another way, then why not exploit that road?
The above are just superficial points. Now we have the meat of my argument.
Star wars comes out. Empire comes out. Jedi comes out. All three are lauded as magnificent films upon release, and twenty five years later they still are. When you think of star wars today, you usually think of great effects, great characters, and a great easy to follow storyline. Nobody thinks about the faults.
Lets look at some possible areas for discussion relating to the always loved original star wars trilogy, and the mostly disliked Phantom.
Jake Lloyd/Hayden Christensen vs Mark Hamill
yes I know Christensen isn't in Phantom, but you can see where I'm coming from. Yes, Lloyd is irritating as Anakin, and most people just wanted to punch his stupid whiny voice. But then, isn't that the same way most people felt about Hamill after star wars? Who can honestly say that Hamill is anything but a weener as Skywalker? Who would you rather be; Luke or Han solo? Nuff said. And Christensen is repeatedly attacked for his less than impressive acting skills. Did Hamill win an Oscar for best actor? Did Harrison Ford or Carrie Fisher? No they didn't. When the anakin actors are criticised, shouldn't we be remembering that hamill and co weren't exactly amazing back in the original trilogy?
Old scripts vs new script
Poor dialogue? Meaningless expressions and sentences? Words that nobody in the audience understand? Which am i talking about, phantom or star wars a new hope? Yes Lucas can't write a script to save his life, but as Harrison Ford so eloquently put 'you can type this s***, but you sure as hell can't say it.' the dialogue in the originals was shoddy, as it is today. Remember that when you say that Phantom has a poor script.
Jar Jar Binks vs c-3po
Yes binks needs shooting. He very nearly ruined the movie. But in every nostalgia programme i watch people always refer to c-3po as being the most annoying character in the series. In fact, after empire came out there were calls for his head, and yes he is slightly annoying in that film, as binks is in Phantom. If we're going to attack Binks, we damn well have to attack c-3po.
Overall what I'm trying to say is that while phantom has its much criticised faults, so did the originals. If we're going to have a go at Phantom, i think its fair that we do the same for the originals. After all, its slightly unfair to pick out various problems with one film, but then ignore them completely for another film thats identical.
Don't let nostalgia blind you to the truth. Phantom is flawed, but so were the others!
Armageddon (1998)
my favourite film of all time- enjoyable from start to finish
I was twelve when this appeared in cinemas. Me and my cousin had the choice of seeing this, Lost in Space or Godzilla. I wanted to see Lost in Space, and my cousin wanted to see Godzilla. In the end we came to a compromise; we'll see Armageddon. It looked decent enough, and its advert was on the t.v in every ad break so we though Why Not? Suffice to say, I'm glad we went to see this.
Starting with a spectacular scene of destruction involving a space shuttle, moving onto a spectacular scene of destruction in New York, and then bringing us into touch with the plot, this film never once lets up with its pace. Its so fast and energetic, and you never have time to ponder any inaccuracies or errors. If we want to be highly entertained, this will suit you to a tee.
Performance wise, this film hits every note on the head. Bruce Willis has always been a great actor to me, and in Armageddon he excels as cynical, hard edged and deeply patriotic father Harry Stamper. His daughter Grace is played by Liv Tyler, a beautiful girl who has been very understated in her role. Credit where credits due, she carries the slower more thoughtful earthside scenes well, linking to great effect with the impressive Bill Bob Thornton. Some people have said that Armageddon didn't give enough focus to what was happening on Earth while the asteroid was being dealt with, but Tyler and Thornton cover their end well.
Ben Affleck. He's always had that slightly annoying presence, and recent flops haven't helped him either. But here, back in 1998 when he was given fourth billing in a Michael Bay movie, as opposed to when he was first billed in Michael Bays Pearl Harbour, he is actually quite likable. Not having to carry a movie is better for him, as lets face it he won't ever win a best actor Oscar. Here though, he is quite endearing as AJ, the young oil driller who is led by his feelings, and not his brain. Indeed, it is hilarious when Willis says 'you all right kid?', and Affleck answers with 'yeah of course, considering I've never been this scared before in my life, ever.' he has that boyish appeal, and here is when he really did look like he had a good career ahead of him. Nowadays of course, its different.
The supporting cast are great as well. Steve Buscemi is gifted as a comedian, albeit a slightly weird one, and he has a lot of fun in his role. Although admittedly you do want to slap him when he starts going crazy and firing the machine gun (which after repeated viewings of the film i still haven't worked out where it came from).Keith David is always good value, and he gets the biggest laugh in the film when the astronauts start singing, and he turns to Thornton and says 'so trueman, this is who you found to save the planet.' the subplot involving him and the 'secondary protocol' is unnecessary, but it does have a certain 'this could happen' feel to it. Its easy to see President Bush making the mistake the President in Armageddon made, and trusting his advisor's over NASA, causing the death of the planet. Will Patton is good as Willis' best mate, and Michael Clarke Duncan, Peter Stormare, and William Fichtner are all humorous and lovable characters. The acting by some is slightly weaker than you'd expect, but this is a big dumb summer blockbuster and Oscar winning acting is never going to be likely.
The effects, backed up by the huge budget, are astounding, and standout sequences are the opening destruction raining down on New York and the shuttles take off. The meteors are well realised, and the asteroid looks incredibly menacing in evil, surrounded by green/blue gases and chunks of wicked looking rock.
A brilliant soundtrack, coupled to Trevor Rabins haunting and melancholic score gives the movie energy and emotion when required. Indeed, in the beautifully written sequence where Willis says goodbye to daughter grace is superbly done, with the great acting coupled with Trevor Rabin working his magic to draw every extra ounce of love and sadness from the scene.
You can easily say the film has problems, not least in Michael Bays inability to keep his camera from moving in six directions at once, and the need to keep every shot down to less than a second in length. But this is a summer film, so sharp editing is required to keep the action sequences going at a lightning fast pace.
Overall, this is great film. And if you don't shed a tear when Willis blows himself up with the asteroid, or when Patton is reunited with his son, you aren't alive.
Essential viewing!
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
a stunning musical worthy of remembrance!
what can I say? I had avoided Moulin Rouge at the cinema like the plague, turned off by musicals full stop. Then when it appeared on video I avoided it again. It was last year when it was shown on television and I was absolutely blown away by it. A stunning movie full of heart felt emotion and beautifully adapted songs, it was such a brilliant experience watching it for the first time. From the moment Ewan Mcgregor started his rendition of YOUR SONG I knew I loved this film.
Performance wise this film hits the mark. Being a musical, the actors don't take their roles too seriously, an example the cast of Phantom of the Opera 2004 could have learned from. Mcgregor is superb as the penniless writer who falls for the girl he can't have. When he sings YOUR SONG and his face lights up who admits that they weren't moved? His voice never falters, and he has such a magnetic screen presence coupled with an easy going personality that it is a small wonder that h ended up being cast in a role few people would have fought for him to play in the beginning. Kidman is good as well, playing her tragic role easily and making sure her voice doesn't let her down either. The Duke is superbly played by Roxbrough, and he does enough to make you genuinely hate this sorry little man with a weasly voice and quite ridiculous moustache. Leguizamo, who I have never seen in another role is fine as Toulouse, and Broadbent is good value as zidler, with his hilarious rendition of LIKE A VIRGIN raising quite a few laughs. His serious face as he recites the words to the song is amusing, ad he has enough dramatic thrust to make the audience believe that while he has a theatre to care for, he is still concerned about his stars.
The songs meanwhile are brilliantly realised. YOUR SONG is performed superbly by Mcgregor, and COME WHAT MAY is suitably uplifting when first done, and then again at the end. The other songs are done well as well, mixing old style music with recent hits to forge well thought out partnerships. But the best song is WE CAN BE LOVERS, mixing some of the best love songs ever written into one, starting with ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE and finishing with I WILL ALWAYS LOVE YOU. It also features the finest moment of the entire movie, as Mcgregor leaps to the top of the elephants head (Satines house) and sings out the famous song from the end of An Officer and a Gentleman WHERE EAGLES FLY. It is amazingly done, with the camera swooping past his delighted face as he belts out the words.
Overall this is a magnificent achievement, and any faults such as choppy editing and the occasional camera wobble can be discarded.
As they say, the show must go on!
The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)
Underrated and entertaining action fest
The Chronicles of Riddick is an example of a film that people have heavily criticised before even seeing the film. People went to see it expecting a Pitch Black sequel, but what they got was an action film that they didn't understand.
Riddick himself is a very intriguing character. Vin Diesel will never win an Oscar portraying a serious character in a period film, so letting him portray a f**ked up convict capable of killing a hundred men without pausing for thought was an ideal piece of casting. He plays Riddick well, looking menacing in every scene, and easily spitting out his one liners. He has a strong physical presence as well of course, and looks comfortable in every fight scene. One minor gripe is that when with Alexa Dyvalos (Kyra) he looks slightly uncomfortable.
On the plot front, the 'all conquering army marching across the galaxy destroying everything in its way' is a tried and trusted formula, working as well as it can here. The next target for this army, Helion, is presented as a religion fuelled world, and contains one of the only links to Pitch Black. Keith David returns as the Muslim preacher Imam, and is promptly killed off. Riddick avenges his death, but is captured by the Necromongers (crap name) and taken to become part of this army. When it is found out that he is a Furion (another crap name) the order is given to kill him.
The problem with all of this is that the makers of this film have tried to hard to come up with snappy clever titles to represent key parts of the film. Firey planet Crematoria obviously represents crematorium. Furion is a link to Riddicks anger (fury) and necromonger is a link to- well its just a crap name really. And therein lies another problem- overproduction. The effects are stunning, particularly during the Necros assault on Helion at the beginning, but sometimes you feel that the 100 million dollar budget has been spent on the effects, and that they picked someone up off the street and let him write the script. This has an effect on the performances as well.
Judi Dench is wasted as the chief elemental, saddled with so much scene setting dialogue that she might as well have been called Mrs exposition. Colm Feore tries hard to be menacing, but he comes across as a bit of a weasel. He overacts as well, making the Lord Marshall as camp as a power rangers baddie. Physically he fits the role, which is shown in his duel with Riddick at the end. Alexa Dyvalos is average, trying hard to be as fucked up as Riddick but falling short. The romance between her and Riddick is wisely blunted and shown only through glimpses, as it would be look odd with those two together. Keith David brings some much needed weight to the film, and his death is a sad moment. Even though he is here for only twenty minutes, he lasted the duration of Pitch Black and was a very fleshed out character.
The action is in places excellent, and places poor. The assault on Helion is awesome, and the sprint over crematoria dramatic and reaches a well staged finale. The end fight between Riddick and the Lord Marshall is fun, but in places choppy editing ruins any cohesion and excitement. The fight against the necros on Crematoria before the sun hits the ship hanger is a victim of this, and turns into a boring game on counting how many different camera shots are used.
Flaws in the film include the overproduction, poor in places in script and some less than impressive performances. Otherwise this film is underrated and enjoyable.
Before I wrap this up, there are some questions raised by the film. Why do most of the characters have ridiculous names like Irgun, vaako and Kyra, while Vin Diesel plays someone called Richard? Can a bottle of water really beat the effects of the sun and stop someone from being melted? And what exactly is the point of those tiger/lion things in the crematoria sequin's?
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Lucas was so close!
After going to see Star Wars Episode 3, I have to admit that I have never breathed a sigh of relief so loud! Finally raising the bar to a high level, George Lucas has managed to make a movie that doesn't suffer from a slow pace like Episode 1, or an atrocious script like episode 2.
The film is enjoyable to watch, and is certainly an improvement yes, but it can't escape the minor problems seen in 1 and 2.
Starting off with a stunning shot of Anakin and Obi Wans star-fighters sweeping low over the bow of a republic cruiser, we are then treated to a massive space battle over Coruscant. The effects are great, the banter between Obi Wan and Anakin is humorous, but the battle itself lacks any kind of dramatic punch. There's no thrust, no real energy to the battle. Explosions and cgi spaceships can only entertain us so much, but when Lucas employed the same technique at the end of ep 2 this battle just seems very flat. Where is the high octane thrills of the asteroid chase in ep 5? or the thrills of the trench run in ep 4? Count Dooku is promptly dealt with, raising the question of why did Christopher Lee bother to be in the movie? Caertainly Anakin decapitating him is a very dark and revealing moment, but surely a lesser important character could have been the one to get killed? We needed to see more of the Jedi being killed, as this is one of the most important parts of the saga. The actual deaths are bemusing as well, with the once untouchable and undefeatable Jedi knights being killed without any resistance. And the much hyped up battle on Kashyyk lasts two minutes, never really getting off the ground in terms of thrills.
the lightsaber duel at the end drags, but is certainly entertaining enough, and the first time we hear Vader breath is a very well done moment. Even though you are expecting it, it is superbly played out. However, when Vader speaks, and then shouts 'noooo!' I cringed in disbelief. Surely one of the most embarrassing moments in film history? Performance wise, Natalie Portman is atrocious, reeling off her lines without ever really meaning them. Mcgregor can't be faulted, although he seems to be going through the motions. Hayden is better than in ep 2, but thats like saying being stabbed is better than being shot. Mcdairmid is hammy and good value, and Samuel L JAckson is always brilliant (although his death is poorly done) C-3po is hardly seen, and while some might say that this is good,he was always a good tonic of laughter for breaking up the serious bits. Although well done to Lucas for resisting the urge to just throw him into a scene, as he has been guilty of doing before.
the dark tone, impressive effects and general excellence of the sets makes this a great film, but the flaws are always plain to see. It just doesn't feel as natural as the original trilogy, but we wanted to see the birth of Vader, and here it is!