Movies


I’m in.

I do think the writing needed another editing pass, and the biologist character flaking over the dead corpse was easily the worst “what the…?” moment for me, but over all, I enjoyed the movie.

We got a chance to get away from the kid for a few hours, so the wife and I decided to take in Prometheus, the new science fiction thriller by Ridley Scott. I’ve been looking forward to this since the first trailers hit the internet, so my expectations were way, way up there…

First off, I hate 3D movies. The glasses are a pain in the ass, I don’t like paying extra for the films, and the glasses hurt my eyes after a while. We hit the 2D version, so that’s what I can speak to. Prometheus did not disappoint me. The film is grand in visual and aural scale — starting with sweeping vistas of Iceland and a tremendous score by Marc Streitenfeld, who I had never heard of, but he does sterling work here. (There are some nice callbacks to Jerry Goldsmith’s original Alien soundtrack here and there.) The CGI work is top-notch and is worked into the backdrop of, I’m guessing Spain, for the alien moon LV-223.

The story: this is a not-quite-prequel to Alien, set in the same universe, but with only the most tangential relationship to the first movie. Rather than being about the eponymous Alien, this movie focuses on the Space Jockey (the thing in the chair in the derelict spacecraft from Alien.) You don’t have to have seen any of the other movies to enjoy this one. A few archeologists discover in ancient relics a recurring motif of people worshiping a giant, which is pointing to a cluster of stars. They have figured out the location of the only life-bearing world in the star configuration and a science vessel funded by the Weyland Corporation, Prometheus, is dispatched to investigate. Suffice it to say, things go badly.

There are big questions thrown out here: Where do we come from? Why were we created? Why did the Alien v Predator franchise get made (not to mention Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection.) Very few are adequately answered, something that seems to be the big bugaboo with the critics. Unlike, say, Battlestar Galactica which tried to anser a lot of the big metaphysical questions, and did it a bit clumsily, Prometheus leves us to interpret the clues ourselves. Part of the problem with the story is that it veers from the big questions film that it starts out as into a space-horror movie. We should expect that, but it does draw the grandeur of the movie in for the last half the film.

The picture is, to my mind, stolen by Michael Fastbender as David — the vessel’s android butler. The character is introduced as we see his life, alone, while the others are in cryostasis. He’s learning languages, he’s watching movies, playing basketball on a bicycle, and styling himself after Peter O’Toole in Lawrence of Arabia. He is portrayed as fastidious, smart, and restrained. There is a lack of emotion to the portrayal that conflicts with David’s actions, which suggest much more is going on in his artificial brain. It’s a very nuanced and powerful performance.

The other lead is Noomi Rapace from the Swedish The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo flicks. She plays the lead archeologist, Elizabeth Shaw and a woman of strong faith. She’s looking to find mankind’s maker and will find she doesn’t like what they find. She is less the action heroine that Ripley becomes in the Alien movies, but is a stronger character in many ways. Rapace is good in the role, and she makes the shift from abject terror to fearful but pissed off very well.

The supporting cast are solid, from the icy corporate bitch played by Charlize Theron, to the acerbic but underutilized Idris Elba as the captain of Prometheus, to Shaw’s adventurous, but callous and clueless boyfriend — played capably by Tom Hardy lookalike Logan Marshall-Green.

Overall, I was very pleased with Scott’s return to the genre he redefined. I thought the movie was a masterpiece, visually, although the high def camerawork exposed the biomechanical sets’ plastic quality, making it seem less organic and squicky. A good wetting down of the set would have sorted that, I think. The soundtrack is on my to-buy list. The acting is solid, and there are a few scenes that manage to hit the same level of shock that the chest bursting scene from the original movie did.  It can be taken as a good popcorn flick with some pretensions to being deep, or as a deep sci-fi movie that had to stoop a bit for commercial success.

It was, in my rating style, worth full-price admission. Style 5 out of 5, substance 4 out of 5. Go see it.

I had high hopes for this one, but due to the quality of the latest Marvel Studios product, and the strengths of Joss Whedon (FireflyBuffy the Vampire Slayer, and Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along-Blog) — I was not disappointed. The Avengers is a great popcorn movie and if not the best of the Marvel outings, it places.

The great bits of the movie are no surprise to Whedon fans: the dialogue and character interaction is superb, and occasionally subtle enough to miss. (Tony Stark, while still being snarky, manages to show a deep respect for Bruce Banner throughout the movie; something he doesn’t do with the other characters until the end.) The characters are well-written, from Black Widow’s ability to coax information out of the arrogant Loki, to Captain America’s spot-on “There’s only one God, ma’am, and he doesn’t dress like that…” line, to Tony Stark’s unwillingness to reign himself in to work with the others until the final battle. Of particular note is the SHIELD agent, Phil Coulson, who has a delightful moment where he’s trying to get Captain American to sign his Cap trading cards. (“They’re vintage!”) All the actors turn in solid performances, but Downey and Ruffalo really shine in this picture. Thor should be a bit more central with the villain being Loki, but he’s underutilized (as is Loki, really…) I got the impression that Whedon simply wasn’t interested in the characters that much.

The good: Whedon also managed to couple the story and characters to the CGI effects well: the SHIELD helicarrier is spectacularly rendered. The Hulk looks great and they manage to pull character out of the computer generated monstrosity in a way the other two movies couldn’t touch.

The bad: Well, there is Whedon’s usual killing off of the most likable support character. He does this in everything he’s put out, from Penny in Dr. Horrible, to Wash and Book in Serenity, and on and on in Angel, Dollhouse, and Buffy. You know it’s coming…it’s still annoying precisely because it’s not that much of a surprise, anymore.

But honestly, for me the worst part of The Avengers has got to be Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury. He’s phoning the performance in. When he should be pissed, he comes off as mildly offended or peeved. He does almost nothing in the movie but jerk the heroes around to get them into action. His big moment in the sun is when he shoots down his own pilot from launching a nuke at Manhattan on the orders of the Committee — and still doesn’t stop the launch. His new sidekick (Cobie Smulders) is more interesting — and she even milks a bit of character out of a Hallmark card-flat bit player. (Her facial expressions when dealing with Captain America [sly sexual tension] and Tony Stark [ill-repressed revulsion] make her more than just admittedly-attractive furniture in the helicarrier.)

By the end of the movie, it’s obvious that Fury should be commanding a radar installation in Alaska, and Coulson or Hawkeye should be running SHIELD.

Loki was uninspired as a villain, and his attempt to break the cohesion of the team seemed overly convoluted and designed to pad the almost-too-long run time. The final battle is a bit confused and too long, as well, and we never really get much background on the inter-dimensional bad guys that Loki has teamed up with. (I’m presuming if you’ve read The Avengers comic, you’ll have a better grasp of who and what these guys are.)

Overall, it’s a four of five, for me — solidly good, almost great, but it didn’t quite have that ability to make me feel a sense of delight that Captain America or X-Men: First Class did. A few more minutes trimmed in the editing room and a bit more work on making Thor and Loki more important to the plot, would have made this the best of the Marvel flicks.

On a lark I bought Haywire from iTunes last night. It’s an action movie by Steven Soderberg (usually good stuff) and stars MMA fighter Gina Carano, Ewan McGregor, and Michael Fassbender. To my surprise, I didn’t get the movie I thought I’d get, but an a rather decent espionage/action pic.

The good: the movie isn’t overly convoluted, like a lot of spy pics like to get with triple and quadruple twists; the intelligence field is often stunningly simple — the motivations are money, feeling unappreciated or undervalued, or there’s an ideological component. Know the motivations, anticipate the actions, then take the blame when policymakers screw up the big moves. Haywire keeps is simple. The bad guys are quickly established, their motives are a bit shady, but once understood, the plot is — as in life — a “why didn’t I see that coming?” moment.

The fight sequences, as you would expect, are quite good and very vicious. they have a reality that most fight coordination lacks. Soderberg also understands that it’s better to see what’s happening, rather than obscuring it in fast cuts to make the action faster. You can see what the participants are doing and it looks painful. Easily the most brutal feeling is the first encounter with Channing Tatum, an actor you might not know the name of, but you’ll recognize straight off.

I like that Soderberg kept her character, Mallory Kane, more realistic. She gets knocked around a lot, and while her character keeps fighting, she doesn’t have the superman feel the action pics give to some characters. She gets bruised and cut, and stays that way; she gets hurt and doesn’t shrug it off. It has a similar feel to the fights in Casino Royale.

Soderberg looks to be using natural lighting through the movie, and it gives the film a more realistic feel than the artfully lit action movies. The music is quirky and has an almost 60/early 70s feel to it that lends a big more class to the picture. Top it off with excellent performances from Fassbender (rapidly becoming one of my favorite actors), McGregor (always reliable, even when the movie sucks), and a very understated, classy turn by Antonio Banderas. I’m not overly impressed with Tatum as an actor, but he slams down the action work like a champ. Michael Douglas is a bit player in the movie playing every other Michael Douglas in a suit role.

The bad: the timing of the film and the way the trailers were put together made this feel like it would be a “Bourne with tits” show. It is and it isn’t. You know the heroine got set up (not by the government, but by her company, run by her sleezy spec ops contractor boyfriend [McGregor.]) The film tells the why in flashbacks and I found I wanted a bit more reveal over the course of the movie, rather than the confession/info dump from McGregor at the end. I thought Douglas’ role needed expanded and better integrated into the film; that could have been an editing room issue.

I’m splitting this bit specifically to talk about Gina Carano. She looks like someone that knows how to throw a punch and isn’t glammed up, and she is beautifully physical in the role. She doesn’t get a lot of time for acting — probably a good thing for her first movie — and there’s a lot of glaring and looking superior. I don’t fault her; the director could have worked in a few moments to really humanize her with a few small gestures. I’m not saying she can’t act, but I don’t think she was pushed as hard to do so as she was to show off her remarkable athleticism. I didn’t expect this, as I was supremely unimpressed by the trailers, but I’d like to see her in something again where they give her a bit more than just muy thai to do.

Overall, I’d give this a three and a half to four out of five, depending on your expectations of the movie. If you want kick ass fights and a spare but good story, four; if you wanted a deep spy thriller or a more Bourne-like frenetic ride, 3.5. Or for those that know me: it was a good matinee movie, but not a full pricer. So if you rent, well worth it; if you and a bunch of buddies are going to watch it at least once, it’s a good buy from iTunes or on DVD.

I’ve been tapped to teach a survey class on Western Civilization from the Middle Ages to the French Revolution, and have been putting together my lesson plans. This inspired me to buy a copy of Ingmar Bergman’s superb 1957 The Seventh Seal — a movie about a Crusader returned home after ten years, disillusioned with life and doubting his faith (played by Max von Sydow.) On the beach, he is met by Death, and convinces him to play a game of chess in an attempt to forestall his demise.

The movie deals with the effects of the Black Plague on the people: the belief that they were being punished by God, the collapse of faith, and the fear of everything in the minds of the 14th Century people. It’s a spectacular bit of filmmaking, and an excellent primer for someone running a Middle Ages style campaign.

Okay — I’m of two minds on this one. I love the look of the film straight off. I like the casting I’m seeing, as I like Kate Beckinsale and think Colin Farrell’s usually underrated and underused in the action movies he’s in. Just from the trailer, Farrell comes off much more the everyman who happens to be a super-spy than Arnie. Beckinsale’s hotter than Sharon Stone ever was. I like they lost the Mars and ancient air manufacturing crap in favor of something closer to the political thriller with the usual who the hell am I? stuff Dick wrote. I was less than impressed with the way they shot the reveal that he’s some kind of bad ass…

Don’t believe Farrel can act, and well? Four films: Phone BoothOndineTigerland, and In Bruges. I’d add the Fright Night remake, as well, as an honorable mention.

« Previous PageNext Page »