Archive for the ‘Movies’ Category

It’s like, that movie…

Monday, January 4th, 2010

Avatar movie logo

I won’t write a whole lot about James Cameron’s latest, Avatar, because the following diagram sums up almost exactly how I feel about the movie (courtesy of Aurich Lawson, from Ars Technica):

A Venn diagram of Dances With Wolves, Fern Gully, Dune with Avatar in the middle

Avatar: the Venn diagram

It just seems as if storywriters cobbled together elements from many popular movies (look in the comments, especially) and added a huge dose of incredible 3D imagery – akin to hanging Monica Bellucci’s beautifully voluptuous body on Kate Moss’s scrawny skeleton. The movie is still entertaining – as the huge box office opening numbers attest – and the world of Pandora is certainly compelling, but time will tell whether this particular chapter of its history will have the same legs as Cameron’s previous work in the genre such as Terminator and Alien.

Watch it and make up your own mind, but if you do, definitely go for a 3D session otherwise you’d be missing out on one of the most compelling things about this movie.

Bookmark and Share

Holmes, Holmes on the range

Wednesday, December 30th, 2009

Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson

Sherlock Holmes movie poster

Sherlock Holmes, starring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law, is one of the recent crop of sexed up literary classics such as The Picture of Dorian Gray, and Tim Burton’s upcoming Alice in Wonderland. This movie is surely conceived for the current generation, with its slow-motion flashbacks accompanied by a narration of how-it-works; you could be forgiven for thinking that this is a new CSI: Ye Olde England.

Director Guy Ritchie has delivered us a quick-thinking, fast-talking, and hard-hitting Holmes. Without having actually read the books, I’d hazard a guess that they’ve made a valiant effort to retain the spirit of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s work, but have sadly taken the liberty of emphasising the characters’ physical prowess as much as their intellectual capabilities. Regardless, Holmes solves mysteries by being a superlative detective, with or without biffo, and I found the movie to be agreeable, with Downey Jr. an inoffensive Holmes, and Jude Law playing the affable but beleaguered Watson perfectly.

However, there were two things that really, truly irked me in Sherlock Holmes, although they weren’t problems with the movie, per se:

1. The blatant declaration of franchise
It seems that a Hollywood movie wont’ be bankrolled these days unless it’s a sequel, or could potentially spawn sequels. When was the last time you saw a movie whose title doesn’t contain a numeral (deliberate attempts to avoid this, such as The Dark Knight notwithstanding)? Sherlock Holmes brings this to a new low, by incorporating Holmes’ arch-nemesis Professor Moriarty into the plot right from the get-go, but not resolving that particular part of the storyline.

2. It’s all about America
In the middle of the movie, the film’s antagonist Lord Blackwood delivers his monologue about the fruits of his nefarious plan, about how the “new colonies” are weak from civil war, how their government is just as crappy as the British one, and how by taking over both he will rule the world. It’s as if everything that happens up until then doesn’t matter, but once their precious country is threatened, that’s the moment when the penny drops and the duh-merican thinks to themselves “hoo boy, that’s why his ass needs a-whuppin’!”

Why is it that America is always depicted as “the world”? It’s as if the average citizen can’t fathom how a foreign person could conceivably do significant evil to the world if it’s not a threat to the U.S. of A. Take Quentin Taratino’s Inglourious Basterds – they even had to insinuate themselves into history of Nazi Germany. Sadly, I’m sure that if pressed, they would just retort that America makes movies for America, and if you don’t like it go and make your own… except that they ripped off Sherlock Holmes from the British. Oh well, I’m sure the irony is lost on Hollywood. At least they have the decency to make their movies entertaining, unlike Australian ones.

Bookmark and Share

Imagine if…

Sunday, November 29th, 2009
The otherworldly-looking Lily Cole

The otherworldly Lily Cole

You will quite likely have heard of The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, probably because Heath Ledger died of an accidental drug overdose during its filming. Ledger’s death also occurred at around the same time that he was being lauded for his superb performance as The JokerĀ  in The Dark Knight, further increasing the anticipation for this movie.

Without wanting to make it a recurring theme here at GeekReads, I tell you: don’t let yourself get affected by the hype. Parnassus is a clever and entertaining movie and Ledger is good in the lead role of Tony, a disgraced charity mogul being used as a pawn in a bet between Mr. Nick (the devil) and the doctor, but it’s not a performance that will win him the same accolades that he received for playing the deranged nemesis of Batman (inevitable awards given as a posthumous “tribute” notwithstanding). Nevertheless, I still much prefer Heath Ledger to Eric Bana, who can’t seem to shake off his “Australian-ess”.

The rest of the cast – including the very exotic looking and doll-like Lily Cole (Valentina), and Verne Troyer (Percy), who must be the only short-statured actor who can act if his ubiquity is anything to go by – play their roles well, and provide plenty of circus freak-show moments to keep the movie interesting. Unfortunately, the characters never quite fit together, and lack the chemistry necessary to hook you into the story emotionally. Completing the triangle with Tony and Valentina is Anton (Andrew Garfield), an orphan adopted by Dr. Parnassus, who is more annoying buffoon than viable love interest.

The look and feel is hard to describe, but the feel of the movie is dirty, gritty and gypsy-ish – the seedy bits somewhere in between past and present London, although it is set in modern times. In contrast, the bright and surreal scenes inside the Imaginarium take some getting used to, and like the characters (or maybe because of the characters) vary greatly in consistency. The movie certainly lives up to its name though, with lots of very imaginative sets, costumes and visuals.

The four Tonys: Heath, Johnny, Colin and Jude

The four Tonys: Heath, Johnny, Colin and Jude

Mention must be made of the stand-in actors – Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell and who donated their time and effort to help complete the movie (their fees are being donated to a trust fund for Ledger’s daughter, Matilda). Each of them does a marvellous job of channelling Ledger. Personally, I thought Johnny Depp did the best job.

I really do wonder how the movie would have turned out had Heath Ledger lived. The ending did feel somewhat tacked on, and I never did quite figure out whether I was supposed to like or hate Tony. Surprisingly, Parnassus is an original idea from (director) Terry Gilliam and Charles McKeown, so maybe a few years down the track they’ll do a remake using the original concept.

If you do go see this, try not to think of it as “Heath’s last movie”. You’ll enjoy it more.

Bookmark and Share

Movie round-up

Monday, November 16th, 2009

International flights might be long and arduous, but if you’re travelling with a decent airline, at least you’ll always get to see the latest movies. We had a fantastic experience with Singapore Airlines on our trip to Hong Kong – everything was great, including the surprisingly decent food (ice-creams!), the attentive service (more drinks!), and how we both managed to sleep during the flight (unusual!) – but it was like a dream-come-true for Jenny, the movie buff.

I don’t think it was by design, but the people that did the in-flight entertainment magazine must have seen that a lot of the recent releases seemed to involve time in some manner, so they made it into their theme for the month hence the several flicks featuring either a temporally-inspired name or plot device.

Here’s a bunch of brief reviews for the ones that I watched – counting in both directions. Jenny watched a few different movies and even managed to squeeze in one more than me (she watched Terminator Salvation, Julie & Julia, and My Sister’s Keeper instead of Museum and Pelham). Yeah, we watched a lot of movies :-)

The Time Traveler's Wife movie posterThe Time Traveler’s Wife
It was always going to be difficult to film this one. Not only because of the huge number of fans created by the success of the novel, large portions of which you’re likely to piss off not matter what direction you take, but also because of the cerebral nature of the time-travel plot device, which requires more than a visual cue here and there to pull off. When the main character age is denoted by his haircut, you know that the screenplay writers have given up trying.

Still, they managed to hit most of the major marks of the novel. Claire and Henry are capably played, although it won’t likely win any awards for Rachel McAdams or Eric Bana. The writers understandably omitted the sub-plot with Henry’s suicidal ex-girlfriend, and also, thankfully, the wacky rebound relationship between Claire and Gomez at the end. I’m also somewhat surprised at Hollywood’s restraint, since there is nary a naughty bit to be seen, despite the frequent erotic sections in Niffenegger’s text.

I still have no idea what all the hoo-ha was about with the movie’s release being delayed by almost a year, but now that it’s out, go see it. It’s not all that bad.

The Girl Who Leapt Through TimeThe Girl Who Leapt Through Time
I missed this one at some kind of anime film festival last year, and have been looking for it on DVD since, so I was delighted to see this on the playlist on the flight. The story, albeit with a typically wacky Japanese twist at the end, tells of Makoto, a girl who inadvertently gains the ability to travel backwards through time. She uses this ability to avoid or undo all the bad things that happen to her, only to learn a hard lesson about consequences.

It’s very warmly drawn and animated, with realistic characters and emotions taking centre stage ahead of the plot device. I feel that this is kinda the movie that Time Traveler’s Wife should have been, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. This was easily my favourite movie of the lot.

Night at the Museum 2: Battle for the Smithsonian movie posterNight at the Museum 2: Battle for the Smithsonian
This one didn’t have much to do with time, unless by a stretch of the imagination you count how the exhibits only come alive at night. It’s a sequel in the pure Hollywood sense of the word: bigger cast, bigger budget, bigger um… y’know, just bigger. It has exactly the same plot as the first one – set things straight with the rogue exhibits before the night is out and the game is up – but contrived so that it could be set in the Smithsonian.

They didn’t just up the ante on the architecture though, it also calls upon a greater number of cameos from famous people both in the sense of actors as well as historical characters. It gets very silly as it goes along, but is otherwise an enjoyable mindless flick. It probably helped that I was watching it during the equivalent of a very late night by Australian time.

The Taking of Pelham 123 movie posterThe Taking of Pelham 123
What is it about John Travolta? I’m not a seasoned movie reviewer or anything, so take this with a pinch of salt, but it’s like he overacts in every role that he’s been in recently: look at me! I’m John Travolta! Check out my range of emotions! I’m a great actor!

I didn’t get this movie. The plot didn’t make sense, and at the end when Travolta gets his comeuppance I have no idea why he bothered with the whole thing in the first place, and left me wondering why I’d wasted the previous 90 minutes or so hoping to find out.

500 Days of Summer movie poster500 Days of Summer
Summer is the name of the girl. Ha ha. The rest of the movie is just about as awful as that joke, plucking randomly from the timeline of the relationship between the hapless main character, Tom, and the bizarre eponymous love interest played by Zooey Deschanel.

I get the feeling that I’m missing out on some kind of overarching philosophy about love (having read somewhere about how love usually runs through its full range within the first 500 days or something), but I’m not sure I would agree with it even if I did. It’s jaded in the same way as a lot of “modern” love stories – I’m an old codger at heart and like my love stories to be coherent and have happy endings.

The philosophy wouldn’t be the only thing I missed, having no clue why Summer suddenly shows up married halfway through the movie, although it was probably shown in one of the montages that went far too quickly for my sleep deprived brain to process. Or, it could just be that I forced myself to watch a chick flick and my brain refused to parse it.

—-

Phew. There you go. I’ll be back with more book reviews pretty soon too. The keen beans among you may have noticed that I’ve updated my “currently reading” headline twice recently, meaning two more book reviews are in the pipeline. Ah, if it isn’t work, it’s holidays. Where does one get time to blog? :-)

Bookmark and Share

Up

Saturday, September 19th, 2009
Disney Pixar's Up movie wallpaper

Disney Pixar's Up movie wallpaper

I was very sceptical about Up when I first read the premise for it a few years ago: a movie about an old man who decides to flee his life by floating away in a house attached to thousands of balloons? Bleh. I remained unconvinced throughout the trailers, although by then a number of reviews had started trickling out, all glowing. Then I watched it, and the opening sequence punched me so hard the guts that I spent the rest of the movie recovering.

Carl and Russell, house in tow

Carl and Russell, house in tow

Pixar makes creating brilliant, heartfelt movies seem so effortless. Think about it: they’ve made people around the world sympathise with rats, have feelings for a garbage collecting robot, laugh at the monsters hiding in kids’ closests, and now they’re asking us to fall in love with Carl Fedriksen, a grumpy 78-year old man. Pixar’s secret, as Director Peter Docter reveals in an interview, comes from the advice that the late Disney veteran Joe Grant gave to him, which is that every story must be set on top of an “emotional bedrock”. That echoes the sentiments of Walt Disney, who once said “for every laugh, there should be a tear”. Considering the number of tears that Jenny shed, this is one heck of a funny movie. Me? I er, had a cold, which is why I was sniffling throughout the movie – yeah, that was it…

We saw it in 3D, paid the 3D movie tax, and received yet another pair of glasses that I’m loathe to throw away because of the wastefulness of it – there are no recycling bins for them at the Macquarie cinemas. The effect was well used, not to show things coming in and out of the screen as a lot of 3D features tend to do, but to provide depth or closeness as the emotional tone of the scene required*. Pixar doesn’t rely on gimmicks, smarts or cynicism to build a bridge with the audience, instead creating real and honest characters that you can’t help but empathise with. Like Miyazaki, they’re masters of observation as much as anything else, and you can really see parallels with reality in every animation sequence, from facial expressions to the way fog moves across the landscape. The dogs are especially hilarious, and there are a lot of little dog-jokes dotted throughout. (A little joke tip for you just in case: dogs are colour-blind.)

Russell

Russell

One thing that annoyed me though, was the voice of Russell, performed by Jordan Nagai. It can’t have been easy working with a 7-year old kid, as he was at the time (described in this interview – warning: contains spoilers) but Pixar were trying to go for youthful innocence, and I guess this is just another example of how far they’re willing to go for authenticity. Most of the time it sounded like he was reading the script, which is fair enough considering that this is his first movie voice-acting role: the story goes that he tagged along to his brother’s audition for the role of Russell, and the casting crew asked him to audition. Even though he’s never acted before he managed to endear himself enough to score the part. How jealous would the brother be!

That aside, I found the storyline to be just plausible enough, and definitely more than entertaining enough, to allow suspension of disbelief. It’s easy to criticise the physics of it if you could be bothered, but it really is incidental to the evolution of the characters. Unlike Ponyo, where the setting was just another character to be observed, the relationship between Carl and Russell takes the spotlight here, and the background remains exactly that (albeit a very beautiful one).

Pixar went to great lengths to make Up kid-friendly such as making sure that nobody dies when falling from great heights (rot13: rira gur ivyynva’f qrngu vf nzovthbhf, nf ur’f ynfg frra ubyqvat n srj onyybbaf nf ur cyhatrf qbja gb rnegu, qvfnccrnevat oruvaq gur pybhqf), but things do get quite stressful at times, if not especially scary, with one child asking to leave.

But yay! we finally got to see Pixar’s latest. It’s been out in America since May, and while there’s often a delay, we had to wait a whole 4 extra months!? The rumour going around is that the distributor wanted the run to co-incide with a school holiday, but that still doesn’t explain the staggered release dates: it was released on the 3rd in Queensland and Victoria, the 10th in South and Western Australia, and New South Wales last of all on the 17th (not sure about the rest).

Go and see it before the school holiday rush. Bring tissues.

—-

* There’s a great little featurette about this on the official site.

Bookmark and Share