I recently got some feedback! A friend recommended the site to an acquaintance of his, who had this to say of me after reading my review of Butterfly effect:
"He may know a lot about movies, but he doesn't know anything about life"
Brilliant. OK, its a lot funnier in spanish, but I still want that engraved in my tombstone. Dude, even if your taste in movies is shit, you got me in a nutshell. Except for my knowing a lot about movies, you're thinking of the guys below.
And I found this site: www.ruthlessreviews.com
I actually knew of them a while back (their hilarious top ten death metal picture list found their way to my mailbox somehow), but another friend recently recommended their movie reviews section after reading my School of Rock review. It's the only negative review of that piece of crap I've seen online (besides mine, but that's more of a rant than a review), and it kicks ass. The rest of their site kicks ass. Be sure to check out their guide to '80s action... Priceless.
Friday, May 20, 2005
Star Wars Episode 3 Revenge of the Sith
Episode I was an irredeemable disaster. Episode II was rarely above mediocre, a mess of a movie only memorable for the first scene, the final battle sequence, and some of the worst acting since The Blair Witch Project 2.
So, what to make of Revenge of the Sith? It's far better than the other two installments, but that's not high praise- it barely qualifies as praise at all.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. The movie mostly follows the adventures of the Jedi Anakin Skywalker and Obi Wan Kenobi as they work against the enemies of the republic, and chronicles Anakin's (pitifully short) fall into the Dark side and transformation into Darth Vader. The whole action-adventure side of things is handled rather well, all things considered: clumsy at times, and show-offy, but fun nonetheless. As for the rest...
The acting. Oh my god, the acting!. You know how some directors elicit better performances out of their actors? Well, Lucas is just the opposite*. I assume he's so pissed off he can't replace them with CGI, that he's settled for burning down their careers- there is no other way to excuse some of the shitty dialog he wrote for them.
Plot has never been a strong point in the prequels. This time it fares slightly better, but still falls apart at the slightest examination. I've already mentioned the dialogue, but the characters themselves are underwritten and poorly developed, making it all but impossible to care for them. The comic relief is hardly comic, and ill-conceived oddball touches abound (check out Obi Wan's lizard ride, or the ridiculous wheezing bio-droid) That said, there are some good bits, which I'll get to later.
The special effects are where the movie really shines. Although I still think many of the scenes lack solidity, they are all pretty impressive. Some nerd toiled for weeks on end for that bit of debris to fly out of that explosion and smack that other ship; never mind that a better director would have left it on the background- Lucas focuses on and follows it to show you just how much attention he pays to detail! Plus, it looks pretty damn good.
OK. So, given everything I've mentioned, it'd be a pretty safe bet to say I didn't like it, right? Well, not really. I did enjoy it even if I think it's not particularly good. There are two main things that elevate this above its own mediocrity: a social conscience and, more importantly, violence.
Now, far be it from me to say that this movie is in the same league as Fahrenheit 9/11 or Citizen Bob Roberts. But coming from a man that has his head so far up his own ass that he can bite his uvula, the parallels he draws in his movie to the current political situation are pretty momentous. And I can't believe that the same man who wrote love scenes that would get laughed off a cheap soap opera set wrote the line (and I'm paraphrasing here, my memory sucks): "so this is how democracy ends- with applause"
In another big departure from the other, kiddy-friendlier prequels, this movie is violent. Very much so. While not a drop of blood is spilled, we get hacked limbs, summary executions, a children massacre (!!!), and it is clearly conveyed that all of this violence not only looks cool, but it *hurts*. It made me feel warm and fuzzy all over. Parents all over the world will be psychically scarred, and their children will love it; Hallelujah! Too bad they didn't show the kids, sorry, younglings (...) getting slaughtered.
The last big fight also merits mention. In it Obi Wan exhibits real pathos (in perhaps the only honest-looking emotional display in the whole prequel trilogy), and Anakin... well, I enjoyed that last bits of that scene thoroughly, you'll understand why when you see it. A great detail- their almost identical fighting styles (master and apprentice, after all). Great stuff.
So in the end, I'd say this movie ranks somewhere between OK and good. It entertains, and it might even give someone food for thought. But most importantly, and I thought I'd never say this, is that it qualifies as art- as in the difference between something made to please or meet expectations, and something made because you feel you have something to say. It's not good art, but it takes risks, and that's something I respect.
*: consider Lucas as the Anti-Herzog, and Christensen the anti-kinski: a hack director and a bad actor that constantly elicit new lows from each other...
So, what to make of Revenge of the Sith? It's far better than the other two installments, but that's not high praise- it barely qualifies as praise at all.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. The movie mostly follows the adventures of the Jedi Anakin Skywalker and Obi Wan Kenobi as they work against the enemies of the republic, and chronicles Anakin's (pitifully short) fall into the Dark side and transformation into Darth Vader. The whole action-adventure side of things is handled rather well, all things considered: clumsy at times, and show-offy, but fun nonetheless. As for the rest...
The acting. Oh my god, the acting!. You know how some directors elicit better performances out of their actors? Well, Lucas is just the opposite*. I assume he's so pissed off he can't replace them with CGI, that he's settled for burning down their careers- there is no other way to excuse some of the shitty dialog he wrote for them.
Plot has never been a strong point in the prequels. This time it fares slightly better, but still falls apart at the slightest examination. I've already mentioned the dialogue, but the characters themselves are underwritten and poorly developed, making it all but impossible to care for them. The comic relief is hardly comic, and ill-conceived oddball touches abound (check out Obi Wan's lizard ride, or the ridiculous wheezing bio-droid) That said, there are some good bits, which I'll get to later.
The special effects are where the movie really shines. Although I still think many of the scenes lack solidity, they are all pretty impressive. Some nerd toiled for weeks on end for that bit of debris to fly out of that explosion and smack that other ship; never mind that a better director would have left it on the background- Lucas focuses on and follows it to show you just how much attention he pays to detail! Plus, it looks pretty damn good.
OK. So, given everything I've mentioned, it'd be a pretty safe bet to say I didn't like it, right? Well, not really. I did enjoy it even if I think it's not particularly good. There are two main things that elevate this above its own mediocrity: a social conscience and, more importantly, violence.
Now, far be it from me to say that this movie is in the same league as Fahrenheit 9/11 or Citizen Bob Roberts. But coming from a man that has his head so far up his own ass that he can bite his uvula, the parallels he draws in his movie to the current political situation are pretty momentous. And I can't believe that the same man who wrote love scenes that would get laughed off a cheap soap opera set wrote the line (and I'm paraphrasing here, my memory sucks): "so this is how democracy ends- with applause"
In another big departure from the other, kiddy-friendlier prequels, this movie is violent. Very much so. While not a drop of blood is spilled, we get hacked limbs, summary executions, a children massacre (!!!), and it is clearly conveyed that all of this violence not only looks cool, but it *hurts*. It made me feel warm and fuzzy all over. Parents all over the world will be psychically scarred, and their children will love it; Hallelujah! Too bad they didn't show the kids, sorry, younglings (...) getting slaughtered.
The last big fight also merits mention. In it Obi Wan exhibits real pathos (in perhaps the only honest-looking emotional display in the whole prequel trilogy), and Anakin... well, I enjoyed that last bits of that scene thoroughly, you'll understand why when you see it. A great detail- their almost identical fighting styles (master and apprentice, after all). Great stuff.
So in the end, I'd say this movie ranks somewhere between OK and good. It entertains, and it might even give someone food for thought. But most importantly, and I thought I'd never say this, is that it qualifies as art- as in the difference between something made to please or meet expectations, and something made because you feel you have something to say. It's not good art, but it takes risks, and that's something I respect.
*: consider Lucas as the Anti-Herzog, and Christensen the anti-kinski: a hack director and a bad actor that constantly elicit new lows from each other...
Thursday, May 05, 2005
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
A friend let me know, just before I went into the theater, that this was a tough movie to enjoy. Man, do I agree with him.
Now, don't take that the wrong way. The movie is good - far better than I had any right to expect. Funny, intelligent, well acted and weird as hell. So, how can it be hard to enjoy?
Well... simply put, familiarity with the source material. Douglas Adams is all about setting up extended jokes where all the fun is in the punchline. If you know all the punchlines, you're left with the extended set-up. It does spoil things quite a bit.
There are also some adaptation problems to be found. Artifacts from the movie's accidented journey from the page to the screen are everywhere; from a particularly glaring (but necessary) exposition scene on one of the major characters early in the movie, to plot holes and story threads that are lost in the shuffle (a conspiracy is never resolved, or even gone into... and the main story never quite makes sense). Strangely enough, these are really minor points. In a movie that features a infinite improbability drive which converts the characters into talking sofas or animated knitwork dolls, a cohesive story is not a priority.
And a great adaptation it is. It captures perfectly the haphazard structure of the books, complete with asides and digressions. The Guide entries bear a disturbing similarity to corporate infomercials, complete with hilarious flash-like animations (the babel fish entry is sublime) The actors are uniformly excellent; a bit jarring at first, but they quickly grow on you (a statement which describes the movie quite well, in fact). My main fears after learning that Buena Vista was behind the movie were fortunately unfounded. While kid-friendly, it's definitely not a kiddie flick; the action was not transposed to the US, nor did they hire only photogenic actors. And the movie sports a distinct personality: unlike the first two Harry Potter movies, where you could actually feel a faceless committee erasing any trace of personality the filmmaker might have tried to leave in his work (nevermind that the filmmaker in question, Chris Columbus, is a talentless hack), you can actually tell that someone put a lot of himself into the movie. That these things count as major triumphs speaks volumes of the sad state of Hollywood fare.
Anyhow, I was thoroughly impressed, even if I did not laugh as much as I would have had I not read the books, watched the miniseries, and played the text adventures... I think Douglas Adams would be proud.
Now, don't take that the wrong way. The movie is good - far better than I had any right to expect. Funny, intelligent, well acted and weird as hell. So, how can it be hard to enjoy?
Well... simply put, familiarity with the source material. Douglas Adams is all about setting up extended jokes where all the fun is in the punchline. If you know all the punchlines, you're left with the extended set-up. It does spoil things quite a bit.
There are also some adaptation problems to be found. Artifacts from the movie's accidented journey from the page to the screen are everywhere; from a particularly glaring (but necessary) exposition scene on one of the major characters early in the movie, to plot holes and story threads that are lost in the shuffle (a conspiracy is never resolved, or even gone into... and the main story never quite makes sense). Strangely enough, these are really minor points. In a movie that features a infinite improbability drive which converts the characters into talking sofas or animated knitwork dolls, a cohesive story is not a priority.
And a great adaptation it is. It captures perfectly the haphazard structure of the books, complete with asides and digressions. The Guide entries bear a disturbing similarity to corporate infomercials, complete with hilarious flash-like animations (the babel fish entry is sublime) The actors are uniformly excellent; a bit jarring at first, but they quickly grow on you (a statement which describes the movie quite well, in fact). My main fears after learning that Buena Vista was behind the movie were fortunately unfounded. While kid-friendly, it's definitely not a kiddie flick; the action was not transposed to the US, nor did they hire only photogenic actors. And the movie sports a distinct personality: unlike the first two Harry Potter movies, where you could actually feel a faceless committee erasing any trace of personality the filmmaker might have tried to leave in his work (nevermind that the filmmaker in question, Chris Columbus, is a talentless hack), you can actually tell that someone put a lot of himself into the movie. That these things count as major triumphs speaks volumes of the sad state of Hollywood fare.
Anyhow, I was thoroughly impressed, even if I did not laugh as much as I would have had I not read the books, watched the miniseries, and played the text adventures... I think Douglas Adams would be proud.
Tuesday, May 03, 2005
Dog Soldiers
A group of soldiers doing some wargame practices in the scottish wilderness run into honest-to-god-fucking werewolves. Wacky hijinks ensue, much blood is splattered, and few, if any, survive. Huzzah!
Oh, and it's fucking grand.
The british prove once again that they excel at scaring your pants off while making you piss them laughing. Well, maybe not scaring, I can't really comment on that end (the only movie that really scared me was The Changeling), but it is suitably gruesome and wrings maximum menace from its extremely tight budget...
Yes, this is a B-movie. But until the rubber suits come out, it's hard to tell. The actors don't stand out, but do a nice job overall, the script is quite good, and the action is convincing. Even the werewolves are good, once you get past how obviously fake they are; the movie wisely uses them sparingly untill the last half hour or so, when the action ratches up enough that you just don't care.
And while this movie is not quite as funny as Shawn of the Dead (which Dog Soldiers predates), it's damn funny. A particular sequence with a dog, some misplaced intestines, and a shower of vomit had me almost crying with laughter. Such laugh-out-loud moments are far between, but they're much more frequent than in straight-genre comedies these days (check my review of School of Rock, for example).
So what what the hell are you waiting for? it's bloody, it's funny, it's got freaking werewolves in it. The action's great and the characters are well rounded and likeable enough. Just watch it, ok? and then watch Shawn of the Dead.
Scary Movie my fookin arse. This movie may have the only funny matrix reference ever.
Oh, and it's fucking grand.
The british prove once again that they excel at scaring your pants off while making you piss them laughing. Well, maybe not scaring, I can't really comment on that end (the only movie that really scared me was The Changeling), but it is suitably gruesome and wrings maximum menace from its extremely tight budget...
Yes, this is a B-movie. But until the rubber suits come out, it's hard to tell. The actors don't stand out, but do a nice job overall, the script is quite good, and the action is convincing. Even the werewolves are good, once you get past how obviously fake they are; the movie wisely uses them sparingly untill the last half hour or so, when the action ratches up enough that you just don't care.
And while this movie is not quite as funny as Shawn of the Dead (which Dog Soldiers predates), it's damn funny. A particular sequence with a dog, some misplaced intestines, and a shower of vomit had me almost crying with laughter. Such laugh-out-loud moments are far between, but they're much more frequent than in straight-genre comedies these days (check my review of School of Rock, for example).
So what what the hell are you waiting for? it's bloody, it's funny, it's got freaking werewolves in it. The action's great and the characters are well rounded and likeable enough. Just watch it, ok? and then watch Shawn of the Dead.
Scary Movie my fookin arse. This movie may have the only funny matrix reference ever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)