Thor: The Dark World review
2 ½ (out of 4)
Marvel Studios continues their unmatched streak of dependably enjoyable comic-book-themed films with Thor: The Dark World.
As Phase One, which included all of its studio films from 2008 to 2012, of Marvel’s unprecedented superhero universe culminated with the impressively cohesive spectacle that was The Avengers, the direction and quality of Phase Two — all studio films from 2013 to Avengers: Age of Ultron in 2015 — was uncertain. However, this summer’s Iron Man 3 was a noteworthy accomplishment and, thankfully, the delightfully energetic sequel to the God of Thunder’s 2011 debut is respectable enough to keep this powerful franchise surging forward.
Following the events of The Avengers, Thor (an enduringly convincing Chris Hemsworth) has been fighting battles to keep peace between the nine realms of the universe. However, when his sweetheart and earthly astrophysicist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) accidentally discovers the Aether, an ancient weapon with the power to destroy all existence, the newly reawakened dark elves led by their formidable leader Malekith (Christopher Eccleston) are keen to exploit its infinite power. As the Convergence — a time when all nine worlds align — approaches, Thor, reluctantly requiring the assistance of his treacherous brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston, continuing to be one of cinema’s most lovable villains), must prevent interspace catastrophe.
The first act of The Dark World is worryingly uneven. The film struggles to distance itself properly from The Avengers, the humor is hokey, the editing is awkward and there is an overreliance on visual effects. The always unnecessary “darker” tone — a common trope of 21st century superhero sequels — diminishes the joyful buoyancy and humanity that made the Kenneth Branagh-directed predecessor so fun, such as the effective fish-out-of-water gags whenever Thor has to adjust to common earthbound situations.
However at the turn of the second act, the film finds it footing. Thor: The Dark World is satisfied enough in outdoing — or at the very least out-hammer-throwing — the original instead of desperately straining to meet the grandeur of The Avengers. The film manages to carve out its own identity and that’s what makes this another Marvel success.
All outside references and fan-teasing cameos aside, The Dark World (mostly in the latter half of the film) utilizes the subtle humor, superb visuals and rollicking sense of amusement that worked so well 2 1/2 years ago, only this time weaving on a grander scale with more interesting villains and a dizzyingly intricate climax.
At the very least, Marvel has proven that despite the soaring standards of The Avengers, reverting back to creating solitary superhero films is not a disappointing comedown. Rather, with features as crisp and exciting as Thor: The Dark World, Marvel proceeds to retain its remarkable reputation.
*Published in The Pitt News / November 7th, 2013
Marvel Studios continues their unmatched streak of dependably enjoyable comic-book-themed films with Thor: The Dark World.
As Phase One, which included all of its studio films from 2008 to 2012, of Marvel’s unprecedented superhero universe culminated with the impressively cohesive spectacle that was The Avengers, the direction and quality of Phase Two — all studio films from 2013 to Avengers: Age of Ultron in 2015 — was uncertain. However, this summer’s Iron Man 3 was a noteworthy accomplishment and, thankfully, the delightfully energetic sequel to the God of Thunder’s 2011 debut is respectable enough to keep this powerful franchise surging forward.
Following the events of The Avengers, Thor (an enduringly convincing Chris Hemsworth) has been fighting battles to keep peace between the nine realms of the universe. However, when his sweetheart and earthly astrophysicist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) accidentally discovers the Aether, an ancient weapon with the power to destroy all existence, the newly reawakened dark elves led by their formidable leader Malekith (Christopher Eccleston) are keen to exploit its infinite power. As the Convergence — a time when all nine worlds align — approaches, Thor, reluctantly requiring the assistance of his treacherous brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston, continuing to be one of cinema’s most lovable villains), must prevent interspace catastrophe.
The first act of The Dark World is worryingly uneven. The film struggles to distance itself properly from The Avengers, the humor is hokey, the editing is awkward and there is an overreliance on visual effects. The always unnecessary “darker” tone — a common trope of 21st century superhero sequels — diminishes the joyful buoyancy and humanity that made the Kenneth Branagh-directed predecessor so fun, such as the effective fish-out-of-water gags whenever Thor has to adjust to common earthbound situations.
However at the turn of the second act, the film finds it footing. Thor: The Dark World is satisfied enough in outdoing — or at the very least out-hammer-throwing — the original instead of desperately straining to meet the grandeur of The Avengers. The film manages to carve out its own identity and that’s what makes this another Marvel success.
All outside references and fan-teasing cameos aside, The Dark World (mostly in the latter half of the film) utilizes the subtle humor, superb visuals and rollicking sense of amusement that worked so well 2 1/2 years ago, only this time weaving on a grander scale with more interesting villains and a dizzyingly intricate climax.
At the very least, Marvel has proven that despite the soaring standards of The Avengers, reverting back to creating solitary superhero films is not a disappointing comedown. Rather, with features as crisp and exciting as Thor: The Dark World, Marvel proceeds to retain its remarkable reputation.
*Published in The Pitt News / November 7th, 2013
The Counselor review
2 (out of 4)
Armed with an excellent cast, an experienced director and a celebrated writer, The Counselor appeared to have enough resources to be a compelling adult drama but the underused and misdirected talent led to a disappointing and baffling clutter of colorful confusion.
The visual panache and impressive collection of actors are about all that The Counselor has in its favor. The film is slowly undone by an inconsistent quality of dialogue, a dangerous lack of exposition and a largely unsatisfying conclusion.
Michael Fassbender once again offers an extraordinary performance as a man simply referred to as “Counselor.” Caught up in drug smuggling and ill-prepared to face the repercussions of unfortunate circumstances, Counselor struggles to keep himself and his fiancée Laura (a sorely underused Penelope Cruz) alive. Although Fassbender can sell the desperation of his situation, the absence of a courageous and daring protagonist feels misplaced in a film so unfazed by its own ridiculousness.
Counselor has a few acquaintances in his illegal activities. Westray (Brad Pitt, in another decent turn) is a confident middleman and Reiner (Javier Bardem sporting another disgracefully bad haircut) is an eccentric friend deeply involved with drug trafficking, along with his ravenous and wicked girlfriend Malkina (Cameron Diaz).
It would likely be a challenge for anyone to explain the film’s plot given how little the film explains itself. While ideally it is refreshing that a film resists force-feeding plot details to the audience, The Counselor is far too befuddling for its own good — the story, particularly the conclusion, is not fascinating nor satisfying enough to compensate for the enormous lack of clarity. The Counselor is nonetheless absorbing solely due to the expectation that the film will eventually reveal itself to be compelling underneath the pulpy style, mostly uncomfortable sexual material and startling moments of violence — although, regrettably, it isn’t.
Scott, despite decades of reasonably great filmmaking, hardly seems confident in this film’s direction. The film stumbles from drama to action to unnecessary sexual scenes in an aimless stupor. McCarthy’s frustratingly uneven dialogue hardly helps the problem. The film in its entirety seems so concerned with being edgy and sensationalist that any enjoyment soon evaporates in the haze of the manufactured sleaziness. Whether the messiness is intentional or not, The Counselor is unforgivably sloppy.
It’s easy to be seduced by the quality of the actors, writer and director involved with the film. However, upon the slightest reflection the film’s lazily constructed ideas crumble into a heap.
Though saved in some respects by good performances and an assertive visual style, The Counselor remains a trashy, confounding, unsettling and narratively unfulfilled mess.
*Edited version published in The Pitt News / November 4th, 2013
Armed with an excellent cast, an experienced director and a celebrated writer, The Counselor appeared to have enough resources to be a compelling adult drama but the underused and misdirected talent led to a disappointing and baffling clutter of colorful confusion.
The visual panache and impressive collection of actors are about all that The Counselor has in its favor. The film is slowly undone by an inconsistent quality of dialogue, a dangerous lack of exposition and a largely unsatisfying conclusion.
Michael Fassbender once again offers an extraordinary performance as a man simply referred to as “Counselor.” Caught up in drug smuggling and ill-prepared to face the repercussions of unfortunate circumstances, Counselor struggles to keep himself and his fiancée Laura (a sorely underused Penelope Cruz) alive. Although Fassbender can sell the desperation of his situation, the absence of a courageous and daring protagonist feels misplaced in a film so unfazed by its own ridiculousness.
Counselor has a few acquaintances in his illegal activities. Westray (Brad Pitt, in another decent turn) is a confident middleman and Reiner (Javier Bardem sporting another disgracefully bad haircut) is an eccentric friend deeply involved with drug trafficking, along with his ravenous and wicked girlfriend Malkina (Cameron Diaz).
It would likely be a challenge for anyone to explain the film’s plot given how little the film explains itself. While ideally it is refreshing that a film resists force-feeding plot details to the audience, The Counselor is far too befuddling for its own good — the story, particularly the conclusion, is not fascinating nor satisfying enough to compensate for the enormous lack of clarity. The Counselor is nonetheless absorbing solely due to the expectation that the film will eventually reveal itself to be compelling underneath the pulpy style, mostly uncomfortable sexual material and startling moments of violence — although, regrettably, it isn’t.
Scott, despite decades of reasonably great filmmaking, hardly seems confident in this film’s direction. The film stumbles from drama to action to unnecessary sexual scenes in an aimless stupor. McCarthy’s frustratingly uneven dialogue hardly helps the problem. The film in its entirety seems so concerned with being edgy and sensationalist that any enjoyment soon evaporates in the haze of the manufactured sleaziness. Whether the messiness is intentional or not, The Counselor is unforgivably sloppy.
It’s easy to be seduced by the quality of the actors, writer and director involved with the film. However, upon the slightest reflection the film’s lazily constructed ideas crumble into a heap.
Though saved in some respects by good performances and an assertive visual style, The Counselor remains a trashy, confounding, unsettling and narratively unfulfilled mess.
*Edited version published in The Pitt News / November 4th, 2013
The World's End review
3 (out of 4)
The end is nigh and I am sad to see it pass.
Director Edgar Wright, accompanied by the devilish comic due of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, completes his "Cornetto" trilogy with The World's End, an entry that does not disrespect the standards of its ingenious predecessors.
Although it may be the weakest of the three – the other two installments including recent cult classics Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz – I cannot complain. It would be the equivalent to whining over the dustiest of several gems.
Unable to withhold his teenage persona, Gary King (Pegg) attempts to rally his high school buddies Peter (Eddie Marsan), Steven (Paddy Considine), Oliver (Martin Freeman) and Andy (Frost) – all of whom are gainfully employed and well-adjusted to adult life – to complete a task. Many years earlier in their hometown of Newton Haven they tried to complete the golden mile, a pub crawl spanning a dozen establishments. However, like the rest of the trilogy, something bizarre and sinister lurks behind the eeriness of the town's inhabitants, turning a night of nostalgia into ridiculous mayhem.
I am impressed with Pegg and Frost as actors because, despite how iconic and funny their characters from Shaun of the Dead have become, the two never repeat themselves. Here both are playing against type. Pegg portrays a brash, mischievous has-been and Frost is a 15-years-sober corporate suit. As writers they can also spin completely new thread, entwining effective slapstick and gags, brilliant, quotable dialogue and strange yet completely involving premises.
It is even more pleasant to see such imaginative writing manage to include all the beloved tropes from the first two installments to please fans without even one too many winks or nudges. The plot compress all the drinking, splattering violence, rapid editing and consistent laughs that have earned Wright his fans in the first place, all devoid of derivation. Needless to say, The World's End is easily the sharpest and most caringly crafted comedy of this year, edging out the very funny and similarly themed This is the End.
Although the film does lose steam in the wild catastrophe of its third act, it compensates with quite a payoff, equivalent to the spectacular shootout in Hot Fuzz. In an appropriately conclusive manner, the movie discusses the role and the worth of humanity on a galactic scale, ending the trilogy with weight and importance along with the giddy laughs.
The final compliment I can give is that, akin to Shaun and Fuzz, there are too many jokes moving at too swift a pace to keep up with in one viewing. I would hardly be surprised if The World's End earns its reputation as another modern comedy masterpiece after everyone has eventually caught up.
*Published in Voices / September 2013
The end is nigh and I am sad to see it pass.
Director Edgar Wright, accompanied by the devilish comic due of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, completes his "Cornetto" trilogy with The World's End, an entry that does not disrespect the standards of its ingenious predecessors.
Although it may be the weakest of the three – the other two installments including recent cult classics Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz – I cannot complain. It would be the equivalent to whining over the dustiest of several gems.
Unable to withhold his teenage persona, Gary King (Pegg) attempts to rally his high school buddies Peter (Eddie Marsan), Steven (Paddy Considine), Oliver (Martin Freeman) and Andy (Frost) – all of whom are gainfully employed and well-adjusted to adult life – to complete a task. Many years earlier in their hometown of Newton Haven they tried to complete the golden mile, a pub crawl spanning a dozen establishments. However, like the rest of the trilogy, something bizarre and sinister lurks behind the eeriness of the town's inhabitants, turning a night of nostalgia into ridiculous mayhem.
I am impressed with Pegg and Frost as actors because, despite how iconic and funny their characters from Shaun of the Dead have become, the two never repeat themselves. Here both are playing against type. Pegg portrays a brash, mischievous has-been and Frost is a 15-years-sober corporate suit. As writers they can also spin completely new thread, entwining effective slapstick and gags, brilliant, quotable dialogue and strange yet completely involving premises.
It is even more pleasant to see such imaginative writing manage to include all the beloved tropes from the first two installments to please fans without even one too many winks or nudges. The plot compress all the drinking, splattering violence, rapid editing and consistent laughs that have earned Wright his fans in the first place, all devoid of derivation. Needless to say, The World's End is easily the sharpest and most caringly crafted comedy of this year, edging out the very funny and similarly themed This is the End.
Although the film does lose steam in the wild catastrophe of its third act, it compensates with quite a payoff, equivalent to the spectacular shootout in Hot Fuzz. In an appropriately conclusive manner, the movie discusses the role and the worth of humanity on a galactic scale, ending the trilogy with weight and importance along with the giddy laughs.
The final compliment I can give is that, akin to Shaun and Fuzz, there are too many jokes moving at too swift a pace to keep up with in one viewing. I would hardly be surprised if The World's End earns its reputation as another modern comedy masterpiece after everyone has eventually caught up.
*Published in Voices / September 2013
Side Effects review
3 ½ (out of 4)
After his more lighthearted features like the Ocean’s Trilogy and The Informant!, director Steven Soderbergh has lately been taking a stab at more dramatic material. Films like Haywire and more notably Contagion have been successful attempts, but Side Effects may be the best of his latest efforts.
Like 2011’s Contagion, this film is an illness-related drama, both shot with Soderbergh’s distinctively soft-focused and color-rich cinematography, and both were penned by a frequent collaborator of Soderbergh’s Scott Z. Burns. While this film lacks the grander scale and larger ensemble of Contagion, Side Effects has an equally clever script and strong performances.
Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara) has suffered from depression since her husband Martin (Channing Tatum) has been in prison for insider trading. Even when he is finally released her problems seem to worsen so she seeks the help of Jonathan Banks (Jude Law) who is involved in the medical, psychiatric, and pharmaceutical world. Banks tries to assist her in her struggles by prescribing her many anti-depressants until finally a brand new treatment seems to be working. However, after a devastating accident, Banks and Taylor find themselves in a particularly difficult legal position and soon Banks must solve the mystery of the drug and it’s effect on Emily, and receives some help from Taylor’s former therapist (Catherine Zeta-Jones).
My description of the plot may sound a bit ambiguous, but that’s only because most of the film’s major events are too important to spoil. While Side Effects is of the drama-thriller variety, it is most definitely a mystery and a superb one at that.
Burns’ uncommonly brainy script is something special. The film’s first half hour or so may seem a bit dry and uneventful but stick with it and it will deliver. The remainder of the film is an engaging mystery story that twists and turns just enough to compel but not confound.
In addition the film has a fine cast, in particular the leads Jude Law and Rooney Mara who give truly outstanding performances. Jude Law is easily likable as the film’s truth-seeking lead and delivers some of the best work of his career. Rooney Mara, on the other hand, continues to prove herself as one of her generation’s most daring young actors, and while this role isn’t quite as bold or demanding as her Oscar-nominated performance in Fincher’s version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, it is still mesmerizing how she evokes sympathy in a viewer as easily as fear.
Finally, this film deserves credit simply for its time of release. The early months of any year are usually used as a cinematic landfill for a studio’s poorer films. I can only hope that audiences skip the garbage and discover this shrewd, entertaining gem.
Soderbergh has said that Side Effects may be his last feature film. I can only hope that a director of such talent reconsiders continuing to make films but if he’s committed to retirement, I’m glad that he went out on a high note.
*Published in Voices / February 2013
After his more lighthearted features like the Ocean’s Trilogy and The Informant!, director Steven Soderbergh has lately been taking a stab at more dramatic material. Films like Haywire and more notably Contagion have been successful attempts, but Side Effects may be the best of his latest efforts.
Like 2011’s Contagion, this film is an illness-related drama, both shot with Soderbergh’s distinctively soft-focused and color-rich cinematography, and both were penned by a frequent collaborator of Soderbergh’s Scott Z. Burns. While this film lacks the grander scale and larger ensemble of Contagion, Side Effects has an equally clever script and strong performances.
Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara) has suffered from depression since her husband Martin (Channing Tatum) has been in prison for insider trading. Even when he is finally released her problems seem to worsen so she seeks the help of Jonathan Banks (Jude Law) who is involved in the medical, psychiatric, and pharmaceutical world. Banks tries to assist her in her struggles by prescribing her many anti-depressants until finally a brand new treatment seems to be working. However, after a devastating accident, Banks and Taylor find themselves in a particularly difficult legal position and soon Banks must solve the mystery of the drug and it’s effect on Emily, and receives some help from Taylor’s former therapist (Catherine Zeta-Jones).
My description of the plot may sound a bit ambiguous, but that’s only because most of the film’s major events are too important to spoil. While Side Effects is of the drama-thriller variety, it is most definitely a mystery and a superb one at that.
Burns’ uncommonly brainy script is something special. The film’s first half hour or so may seem a bit dry and uneventful but stick with it and it will deliver. The remainder of the film is an engaging mystery story that twists and turns just enough to compel but not confound.
In addition the film has a fine cast, in particular the leads Jude Law and Rooney Mara who give truly outstanding performances. Jude Law is easily likable as the film’s truth-seeking lead and delivers some of the best work of his career. Rooney Mara, on the other hand, continues to prove herself as one of her generation’s most daring young actors, and while this role isn’t quite as bold or demanding as her Oscar-nominated performance in Fincher’s version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, it is still mesmerizing how she evokes sympathy in a viewer as easily as fear.
Finally, this film deserves credit simply for its time of release. The early months of any year are usually used as a cinematic landfill for a studio’s poorer films. I can only hope that audiences skip the garbage and discover this shrewd, entertaining gem.
Soderbergh has said that Side Effects may be his last feature film. I can only hope that a director of such talent reconsiders continuing to make films but if he’s committed to retirement, I’m glad that he went out on a high note.
*Published in Voices / February 2013
Skyfall review
3 ½ (out of 4)
Daniel Craig’s third Bond entry, Skyfall, so smoothly merges classic Bond to the modern era that there is reasonable indication that 007’s best may still be ahead of him, even 50 years in.
From its spectacular opening chase to its gripping shootout leading up to the film’s chill-inducing final minutes, Bond’s 23rd film excursion is so effective that its powerful performances, excellent dialogue and sumptuous cinematography are as thrilling as its creative action sequences.
After being shot during a mission in which a file containing the identities of MI6 agents is stolen, James Bond is consequently presumed dead. He enjoys his time off the grid but after it seems that a cyber-ambush on MI6 has directly targeted at M (Judi Dench), Bond must return to the agency. His injuries hinder him as he struggles to become the agent he once was while also tackling the particularly vindictive and brilliant foe behind the attacks, Silva (Javier Bardem). Through Silva’s complex plan for revenge, both the pasts of M and Bond resurface.
The film’s only blemish is with its villain. Don’t get me wrong, Javier Bardem is an exceptionally resourceful actor. He has proven his ability to manifest evil characters to great effect and while he's an entertaining and bizarre Bond bad guy, his character’s motivations are questionable. He sells the revenge tale, but the lengths to which he goes to fulfill his diabolical scheme border on the absurd. Nevertheless, Bardem is an undeniable scene-stealer even though the whole show belongs to Craig.
After viewing this film I am now convinced that Daniel Craig is the best James Bond in the franchise’s history. Connery is everyone’s favorite, but Craig is undoubtedly the most versatile actor to play the role. He can handle humor, emotion and physical performance remarkably well, and this is certainly his best of his realistic performances thus far as Bond’s emotional development comes full circle.
Let’s go down the rest of the Bond film trademark checklist. "Skyfall," Adele’s soulful power-ballad is a beautifully bluesy opening credits piece, though Jack White’s tune from the franchises previous installment is my personal favorite. Naomie Harris and Bérénice Marlohe are both strong Bond girls, their solid acting chops managing to outweigh their stereotypical roles as simple eye-candy; still, Eva Green’s Vesper from Casino Royale is easily is the best leading lady of the Craig films. However, of these trivial traits of the series, Skyfall is tops in terms of the opening action sequence – this elaborate, exhilarating chase in Turkey hustles through rooftops and trains in extravagant fashion, and it’s arguably the best of not only Craig’s films, but the entire series.
For Academy-Award-winning director Sam Mendes (American Beauty), this is fairly new territory. However, regardless of the unfamiliarity, he has crafted a truly effective and relatively flawless Bond film. His crisp, articulate but never flashy approach, combined with the gorgeous cinematography of veteran Roger Deakins (nine-time Oscar nominee) makes Skyfall an artfully vibrant visual triumph unlike any other Bond film; and a surprisingly competent script, despite MGM’s financial troubles that affected the screenwriting, give the film the absorbing story it needs to be memorable.
With this third film, Craig’s Bond films have formed something of a reboot trifecta. This film so perfectly adjusts itself as a modern film into the roots of the classics – plenty of homage is paid to the Connery era that peaks with one of the most ingenious endings I have seen in a while. True Bond fans are in for a treat.
But due to the stylish mastery of this film and superb reimagining that is Casino Royale, I’m left feeling greatly disappointed that Quantum of Solace is so miscalculated and forgettable. If that second chapter had fallen into more skillful hands, then we would have ourselves an unparalleled Bond threesome.
But our sadly imperfect Craig trilogy is irrelevant. Skyfall is a refined, dazzling and potent film that transcends both the standards of Bond films and action films alike. The electrifying final moments mark the end of the beginning for the Daniel Craig era of James Bond – I can only hope there is much more to come.
*Published in Voices / November 2012
Daniel Craig’s third Bond entry, Skyfall, so smoothly merges classic Bond to the modern era that there is reasonable indication that 007’s best may still be ahead of him, even 50 years in.
From its spectacular opening chase to its gripping shootout leading up to the film’s chill-inducing final minutes, Bond’s 23rd film excursion is so effective that its powerful performances, excellent dialogue and sumptuous cinematography are as thrilling as its creative action sequences.
After being shot during a mission in which a file containing the identities of MI6 agents is stolen, James Bond is consequently presumed dead. He enjoys his time off the grid but after it seems that a cyber-ambush on MI6 has directly targeted at M (Judi Dench), Bond must return to the agency. His injuries hinder him as he struggles to become the agent he once was while also tackling the particularly vindictive and brilliant foe behind the attacks, Silva (Javier Bardem). Through Silva’s complex plan for revenge, both the pasts of M and Bond resurface.
The film’s only blemish is with its villain. Don’t get me wrong, Javier Bardem is an exceptionally resourceful actor. He has proven his ability to manifest evil characters to great effect and while he's an entertaining and bizarre Bond bad guy, his character’s motivations are questionable. He sells the revenge tale, but the lengths to which he goes to fulfill his diabolical scheme border on the absurd. Nevertheless, Bardem is an undeniable scene-stealer even though the whole show belongs to Craig.
After viewing this film I am now convinced that Daniel Craig is the best James Bond in the franchise’s history. Connery is everyone’s favorite, but Craig is undoubtedly the most versatile actor to play the role. He can handle humor, emotion and physical performance remarkably well, and this is certainly his best of his realistic performances thus far as Bond’s emotional development comes full circle.
Let’s go down the rest of the Bond film trademark checklist. "Skyfall," Adele’s soulful power-ballad is a beautifully bluesy opening credits piece, though Jack White’s tune from the franchises previous installment is my personal favorite. Naomie Harris and Bérénice Marlohe are both strong Bond girls, their solid acting chops managing to outweigh their stereotypical roles as simple eye-candy; still, Eva Green’s Vesper from Casino Royale is easily is the best leading lady of the Craig films. However, of these trivial traits of the series, Skyfall is tops in terms of the opening action sequence – this elaborate, exhilarating chase in Turkey hustles through rooftops and trains in extravagant fashion, and it’s arguably the best of not only Craig’s films, but the entire series.
For Academy-Award-winning director Sam Mendes (American Beauty), this is fairly new territory. However, regardless of the unfamiliarity, he has crafted a truly effective and relatively flawless Bond film. His crisp, articulate but never flashy approach, combined with the gorgeous cinematography of veteran Roger Deakins (nine-time Oscar nominee) makes Skyfall an artfully vibrant visual triumph unlike any other Bond film; and a surprisingly competent script, despite MGM’s financial troubles that affected the screenwriting, give the film the absorbing story it needs to be memorable.
With this third film, Craig’s Bond films have formed something of a reboot trifecta. This film so perfectly adjusts itself as a modern film into the roots of the classics – plenty of homage is paid to the Connery era that peaks with one of the most ingenious endings I have seen in a while. True Bond fans are in for a treat.
But due to the stylish mastery of this film and superb reimagining that is Casino Royale, I’m left feeling greatly disappointed that Quantum of Solace is so miscalculated and forgettable. If that second chapter had fallen into more skillful hands, then we would have ourselves an unparalleled Bond threesome.
But our sadly imperfect Craig trilogy is irrelevant. Skyfall is a refined, dazzling and potent film that transcends both the standards of Bond films and action films alike. The electrifying final moments mark the end of the beginning for the Daniel Craig era of James Bond – I can only hope there is much more to come.
*Published in Voices / November 2012
Battleship review
1 ½ (out of 4)
Two word review: Aquatic Transformers. It’s really as simple as that; any sort of intellectual complexity is never acquainted with these sorts of overblown, explosion-filled, Michael Bay-esque extravaganzas. Probably the most surprising thing about this film is that the man behind every bad summer movie I’ve ever seen is not responsible for this one as well. Battleship has the right formula: indecipherable action, flat characters and pathetic dialogue all within a painfully overlong running time. Only this time it’s even more so.
With no characters, mythology or even a story behind its property, how did they manage to make a film out of a simple board game? As predicted by many cynics, this was accomplished through a barrage of poor performances, a paper thin plot and an onslaught of generic visual effects.
What little story there is involves a navy seaman Alex Hopper (Taylor Kitsch) who has plenty of talent but little discipline. He is part of a crew participating in naval exercises when alien forces rain down from the sky. Trapped by their force fields, Hopper and his crew have no choice but to survive the invasion or die trying.
Kitsch may just be the blandest and most unexciting movie lead in film history – his acting chops and presence are equivalent to that of a film extra and his supporting cast, with the exception of a cumulative eight refreshing minutes of Liam Neeson, is of little to no help. It may be unbelievable but Rihanna may just have the least disgraceful performance of the entire main cast.
The first hour of Battleship is near-unbearable. The first act serves no purpose other than to introduce characters that will never be developed, and to offer completely unoriginal disaster sequences that get old very fast, just like the annoying musical cues of AC/DC songs that are used to string every badly conceived scene together.
But there comes a point halfway through where the story finally incorporates the basics of the actual board game into the film. In addition, some cool alien weapons are introduced, my favorite of which being huge rotating metal spheres with minds of their own, designed to destroy anything in their path, which are used in probably the most well-staged action sequence in the film. The latter half is where the movie becomes just stupid enough to enjoy and surprisingly watchable from there on out. Although the pure triteness of the film and the incredibly uninteresting characters are a constant, these nice touches save Battleship from being totally worthless.
However, even though a break from the pointless seriousness is much appreciated, there’s still nothing in Battleship I hadn’t seen before. For the spectacle-seeking summer moviegoer, I suggest watching the splendor of The Avengers for the second or third time.
*Published in Voices / May 2012
Two word review: Aquatic Transformers. It’s really as simple as that; any sort of intellectual complexity is never acquainted with these sorts of overblown, explosion-filled, Michael Bay-esque extravaganzas. Probably the most surprising thing about this film is that the man behind every bad summer movie I’ve ever seen is not responsible for this one as well. Battleship has the right formula: indecipherable action, flat characters and pathetic dialogue all within a painfully overlong running time. Only this time it’s even more so.
With no characters, mythology or even a story behind its property, how did they manage to make a film out of a simple board game? As predicted by many cynics, this was accomplished through a barrage of poor performances, a paper thin plot and an onslaught of generic visual effects.
What little story there is involves a navy seaman Alex Hopper (Taylor Kitsch) who has plenty of talent but little discipline. He is part of a crew participating in naval exercises when alien forces rain down from the sky. Trapped by their force fields, Hopper and his crew have no choice but to survive the invasion or die trying.
Kitsch may just be the blandest and most unexciting movie lead in film history – his acting chops and presence are equivalent to that of a film extra and his supporting cast, with the exception of a cumulative eight refreshing minutes of Liam Neeson, is of little to no help. It may be unbelievable but Rihanna may just have the least disgraceful performance of the entire main cast.
The first hour of Battleship is near-unbearable. The first act serves no purpose other than to introduce characters that will never be developed, and to offer completely unoriginal disaster sequences that get old very fast, just like the annoying musical cues of AC/DC songs that are used to string every badly conceived scene together.
But there comes a point halfway through where the story finally incorporates the basics of the actual board game into the film. In addition, some cool alien weapons are introduced, my favorite of which being huge rotating metal spheres with minds of their own, designed to destroy anything in their path, which are used in probably the most well-staged action sequence in the film. The latter half is where the movie becomes just stupid enough to enjoy and surprisingly watchable from there on out. Although the pure triteness of the film and the incredibly uninteresting characters are a constant, these nice touches save Battleship from being totally worthless.
However, even though a break from the pointless seriousness is much appreciated, there’s still nothing in Battleship I hadn’t seen before. For the spectacle-seeking summer moviegoer, I suggest watching the splendor of The Avengers for the second or third time.
*Published in Voices / May 2012
The Adventures of Tintin
short review
3 (out of 4)
Spielberg finally gives 3-D animation a go with an adaptation of the incredibly popular European comic book series.
Despite some less impressive endeavors into motion capture animation in the past decade (The Polar Express, Beowulf), Spielberg shows full understanding and mastery of the technology with flawless animation that at times looks identical to live action. In addition, all of Spielberg’s skillful direction and more whimsical touches, as well as some fine voice work by Jaime Bell, Andy Serkis and Daniel Craig, shine through when the thin story threatens the film’s enjoyment.
The plot essentially combines the brisk adventurousness of Indiana Jones with the cheeky light-heartedness of Spielberg’s Catch Me If You Can. And best of all the film is just plain fun, thanks to swift pacing and some dazzlingly complex action sequences.
*Published in The Blazer / January 2012
Spielberg finally gives 3-D animation a go with an adaptation of the incredibly popular European comic book series.
Despite some less impressive endeavors into motion capture animation in the past decade (The Polar Express, Beowulf), Spielberg shows full understanding and mastery of the technology with flawless animation that at times looks identical to live action. In addition, all of Spielberg’s skillful direction and more whimsical touches, as well as some fine voice work by Jaime Bell, Andy Serkis and Daniel Craig, shine through when the thin story threatens the film’s enjoyment.
The plot essentially combines the brisk adventurousness of Indiana Jones with the cheeky light-heartedness of Spielberg’s Catch Me If You Can. And best of all the film is just plain fun, thanks to swift pacing and some dazzlingly complex action sequences.
*Published in The Blazer / January 2012
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows
short review
2 (out of 4)
After Robert Downey Jr. reinvented the character of Sherlock Holmes by making him a scruffy, narcissistic, infinitely cunning badass, the continuation of that intellectual action hero’s franchise was perfectly welcome. But despite improvements in both the film’s villain, James Moriarty (Jared Harris, who is far more threatening than the original’s Mark Strong), and the strong female character (Noomi Rapace who easily has more presence than Rachel McAdams, but is sorely underused), A Game of Shadows suffers from the faults of most big-budget sequels: a collage of excessiveness.
This Sherlock is overlong, noisy, far too convoluted and, worst of all, unabashedly self-satisfied. The plot, which seems almost undecipherable, is beyond explanation. But who cares? Audiences adored the first one for its witty British humor, creatively thrilling action and, of course, Downey Jr.’s impressive performance. Sadly, none of these factors are up to par.
Downey, while amusing, borders on the point of annoying several times making the comedy, particularly his fun banter with Watson (Jude Law), unsatisfying. And the action almost always feels like a louder, staler rehash of the first film, save for an eye-catching forest chase and an entertaining interlude on a train.
*Published in The Blazer / January 2012
After Robert Downey Jr. reinvented the character of Sherlock Holmes by making him a scruffy, narcissistic, infinitely cunning badass, the continuation of that intellectual action hero’s franchise was perfectly welcome. But despite improvements in both the film’s villain, James Moriarty (Jared Harris, who is far more threatening than the original’s Mark Strong), and the strong female character (Noomi Rapace who easily has more presence than Rachel McAdams, but is sorely underused), A Game of Shadows suffers from the faults of most big-budget sequels: a collage of excessiveness.
This Sherlock is overlong, noisy, far too convoluted and, worst of all, unabashedly self-satisfied. The plot, which seems almost undecipherable, is beyond explanation. But who cares? Audiences adored the first one for its witty British humor, creatively thrilling action and, of course, Downey Jr.’s impressive performance. Sadly, none of these factors are up to par.
Downey, while amusing, borders on the point of annoying several times making the comedy, particularly his fun banter with Watson (Jude Law), unsatisfying. And the action almost always feels like a louder, staler rehash of the first film, save for an eye-catching forest chase and an entertaining interlude on a train.
*Published in The Blazer / January 2012
Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol
short review
3 ½ (out of 4)
Director Brad Bird (The Incredibles, Ratatouille) makes his live action debut with a fourth entry in the previously underwhelming action franchise.
Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol is one of the most memorable and thrilling action movies in years and one that made me disregard the uneven continuity of the rest of the series. Tom Cruise, who is pushing 50, shows no signs of tiredness or disinterest in playing the IMF agent Ethan Hunt. And unlike every other Mission: Impossible film, this one isn’t all about Cruise.
The teamwork is what makes Ghost Protocol such great fun, all because of such a likable cast including newcomers to the series Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker), Paula Patton and the returning comic relief of Simon Pegg (Shaun of the Dead). Their wonderful collaboration, matched with Bird’s confident direction through what could have been a mediocre script, is the formula that makes this so exceptionally entertaining.
And the grandiose, elongated action set-pieces are remarkable and exhaustively spectacular, from the suitably silly gadgets in the mission at the Kremlin to Cruise’s exhilarating scaling of the Burj Khalifa, the tallest building in the world. This Mission is an outstanding film that gives the straight-forward action movie a good name again. IMAX viewing is essential.
*Published in The Blazer / January 2012
Director Brad Bird (The Incredibles, Ratatouille) makes his live action debut with a fourth entry in the previously underwhelming action franchise.
Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol is one of the most memorable and thrilling action movies in years and one that made me disregard the uneven continuity of the rest of the series. Tom Cruise, who is pushing 50, shows no signs of tiredness or disinterest in playing the IMF agent Ethan Hunt. And unlike every other Mission: Impossible film, this one isn’t all about Cruise.
The teamwork is what makes Ghost Protocol such great fun, all because of such a likable cast including newcomers to the series Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker), Paula Patton and the returning comic relief of Simon Pegg (Shaun of the Dead). Their wonderful collaboration, matched with Bird’s confident direction through what could have been a mediocre script, is the formula that makes this so exceptionally entertaining.
And the grandiose, elongated action set-pieces are remarkable and exhaustively spectacular, from the suitably silly gadgets in the mission at the Kremlin to Cruise’s exhilarating scaling of the Burj Khalifa, the tallest building in the world. This Mission is an outstanding film that gives the straight-forward action movie a good name again. IMAX viewing is essential.
*Published in The Blazer / January 2012