Category: Film

Clash of the Titans

Clash of the Titans 1440x900 Wallpaper
Clash of the Titans

“But you are not just a man.”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: Perseus (Sam Worthington) is rescued from the sea as a baby by a fisherman, grows up to find out he’s the son of Zeus and has to save the world.

I settled on the 2D version of Clash of the Titans as the film times suited better. This is a hugely effects-based film, and you can spot the sections where the 3D would “enhance” things. Most of them look rather forced. Actually, most of the film is rather forced.

I’ll be fair – I saw the film at a 7pm showing having had four hours’ sleep, getting to bed at 7am that morning. This may not have helped, but my cine-going companion shared almost all of my views and she’d had a decent night’s kip. Both of us summed it up at the end with “Hmmm” and a shrug. Not what you want from an explosive action epic.

I think we’re hitting an problem with films made up predominantly of special effects. We’ve seen it all before, quite often in the trailers. The one for Clash shows the giant scorpions and the Kraken – the huge beastie from the climax. They’re impressively done… but they just don’t seem “special”. I mean, how many films have you seen over the last year with some huge CGI monster in it? I’ve seen loads.

While the effects are very well done, the overall impression of the film is pretty scrappy. I don’t know whether it’s deliberate but the giant scorpion battle scene is reminiscent of the old Harryhausen epics in more than just idea. While the monsters are somewhat better animated than the old stop-motion ones, they don’t seem to fit on the screen properly, seeming a bit washed out. I seem to remember the old chroma key techniques giving the same unwanted effect.

As has been pointed out in a load of other reviews, this is a film that was crying out for a remake with modern technology. I love the original, but it’s fair to say the animated monsters are a little dated. However, it’s far better scripted and less ostentatious than this modern effort. One bit that really tipped me against the new one was a near-throwaway moment. Perseus picks up a mechanical owl from a box and asks what it is. He’s told to just leave it. To me, that seemed more of a slap in the face to Harryhausen’s original than a homage.

Much as you can say it looks better than the 1981 film, it simply isn’t a better piece of entertainment. I think a lot of it boils down to it being far too simple. They’ve taken a masterpiece of theatre – such that the original was – and turned it into a low-brow, effect-heavy show reel.

The gods look incredibly gay (PC police – sod off) with their over-shiny armour. Except Hades who, in fairness, has some awesome effects related to his appearance – much as the same character did in the recent Percy Jackson film. Liam Neeson manages to utter a wonderfully commanding “Release the Kraken!” but otherwise, the dialogue just isn’t up to much.

I’ll finish with some dialogue from the end of the original. Theatrical? Perhaps. But isn’t that how gods should be? There is simply nothing in this updated version to compare. For more, check out the IMDB quotes page for the 1981 film. Gorgeous prose.

Zeus: Perseus has won. My son has triumphed.

Hera: A fortunate young man.

Zeus: Fortune is ally to the brave.

Thetis: What a dangerous precedent. What if there more heroes like him? What if courage and imagination became everyday mortal qualities? What will become of us?

Zeus: We would no longer be needed. But, for the moment, there is sufficient cowardice, sloth and mendacity down there on Earth to last forever.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Bounties, Dragons and Shanks

Maintaining my mayorhood of the local CineWorld (courtesy of FourSquare), I squeezed in three films before rush hour yesterday: Perrier’s Bounty, How To Train Your Dragon and Shank.

Perrier’s Bounty

“Dorty. Like a bag of carrots”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: Young man owes money to dangerous Irish gangland boss. Of course things go from bad to worse…

This film is a prime example of why low-budget, independent cinema should be supported and celebrated.

Michael McCrea (Cillian Murphy) is a young gambler who owes Perrier (Brendan Gleeson) a grand. He has till 10pm to pay up otherwise he’ll have two bones broken. His choice. And digits don’t count. A pair of rather scary gangland types are out to make sure he doesn’t have other ideas.

Of course, this being a mild Lock, Stock… clone things don’t go quite as planned. Violence definitely ensues, paths cross, a dying father (Jim Broadbent) makes an appearance and a woman gets involved (a rather hot one in the guise of Natalie Britton). And it’s funny.

There’s a mild bit of narration which is definitely worth paying attention to. It plays a part in a twist which takes place with the very last line of dialogue. This tiny attention to detail sums up the movie. It’s careful, well-paced, funny, clever and hugely entertaining.

It isn’t the best film ever, but it’s definitely a “must see”.

How To Train Your Dragon (3D)

“Trolls exist. They steal your socks. But only the left ones. What’s with that?”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: A young Viking discovers there there are things about the dragons his village has been fighting that nobody else knows…

Straight to the point with this one before I go any further: DO NOT MISS THIS FILM. It is simply superb. Clever, funny, well-animated, beautifully-presented and with very good use of 3D. Yes, it’s actually worth spending the extra to see the film with daft glasses on.

The opening sequence is a great introduction to the scenario and the characters – and the delightfully stupid-looking sheep. If I have one quibble it’s that I didn’t realise Vikings had faux-Scottish accent, but I’ll forgive the film-makers on the basis that otherwise this is one of the best films I’ve seen in a long time.

This quality beginning is maintained for the entire running length of the film. There isn’t a low point in the entire movie. It’s perfect scene after perfect scene. The pacing is spot on, the heart-warning parts aren’t mawkish and the action is fast-paced and exciting.

I could throw hyperbole at you for another four paragraphs or just make it easy – GO SEE IT.

Yeah. That was better.

Shank

Plot-in-a-nutshell: Street urchin’s brother is killed so he goes out to get revenge on the lad who did it.

Starting off well, Shank goes into a quick decline with indecipherable dialogue, a linear script and annoying cut-scenes. Set in London (2015), where the economy has collapsed, crime run rife and gangs rule the streets we’re introduced to Junior (Kedar Williams-Stirling) and his band of homies who earn a crust by stealing “munchies” (food) and sell it on to a dealer.

It took me a good 10-15 minutes to get my head around the verbals, with the “yo, me homies, blud” dialogue being rather hard to decipher. Oh, except for Craze (Michael Socha) who’s from the north so just spends his time asking people to fight him. Of course.

The plot, what there is, is incredibly linear. More so than some of the RPGs I’ve played on handhelds. Meet one person, do something, get info, go see next person, do something, get info… Aptly, a few of the cut scenes are done in the form of computer games – some better than others.

Shank tries, but really not hard enough. It gets significantly worse when the gang of girls join in towards the end, sounding like a coked-up bunch of Grange Hill rejects, screaming at each other and ending every sentence with “yeah”. It’s like watching a bunch of chavs fighting only without the entertainment value of some of them hopefully being killed.

After the previous two films I saw today, this was a hell of a let-down. While Perrier’s Bounty is a prime reason to support independent films, Shank undermines this. A valiant attempt, I suppose, but it falls very far short of quality.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Shutter Island

Shutter Island (film)
Shutter Island

I wasn’t planning on seeing Shutter Island as the handful of people I know who did catch it had complained it was too long. But my dad liked it, so I gave it a shot on Sunday afternoon.

Shutter Island

“You’ll never leave this island.”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: Two federal marshals investigate an escaped patient on a secure island facility… or do they?

I’ll try to keep spoiler-related commentary till the end, as there is a twist in this tale. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Teddy Daniels, a Fed with a rather stressed-out past. He and his partner are sent to Shutter Island, a secure facility for the criminally insane set on a rock in the middle of the ocean.

The facility is run by the slightly scary Dr. Cawley (Ben Kingsley) who can’t explain how one of their inmates escaped from a locked cell. Very mysterious.

As the story progresses, the film gets more jumpy. Not as in “scary” – it skips about from topic to topic. Flashbacks start to appear in dream-like sequences as Daniels starts to dream and become ever more paranoid about the actions of the Doctor, the other island staff and the patients. Questions are unanswered or avoided, the patients seem to be acting in collusion with the staff - or scared of them.

There are some lovely sequences, in particular the dream where Daniels holds his dying wife as she turns to ash and blows away. Very well done and the special effects lend it a wonderful dream-like quality.

The acting performances are superb across the board. Being a Martin Scorsese film it’s not surprising that it’s beautifully presented as well. However, I do have some issues that I’ll go over at the end as they could relate to spoilers. I did find that it ran on too long, though. I guessed the “twist” very early on – about 10-15 minutes in, which is a shame. However, at the point where the pieces really do start to drop, the film should be on it’s final run-in. And it’s not. From this point, there’s maybe 45 minutes to an hour to go which is too long.

I’d be interested in reading the source novel to see how it’s paced, but the film is just a little too slow. A shorter running length would have had more impact, I feel. Still, a very good story and a superb cast.

HERE BE SPOILERS!!!!!!

You have been warned.

Alright. At the end of the film you find out that Daniel is actually mad. However, I guessed this very early on. How? Well, I’m not sure if this was deliberate on Scorsese’s part or not, but the editing throughout the film is very disjointed. Someone holds a cup, the view changes and they’ve already put it down. Someone lights a cigarette with one hand, the camera changes angle and they’ve moved it from their face to their side.

Now, this happens in films. Usually you spot this once every few minutes. But in Shutter Island, especially near the beginning, I was finding discrepancies almost every time the camera view changed in a scene. As I said, this could be poor editing. Or it could be the director hinting that things aren’t as they seem. Deliberately disjointed if you like. Which does make a lot of sense later on when we realise that what’s “happening” is predominantly in the mind of the main character.

What does anyone else think? Am I being overly analytical? Was the editor just smoking crack the week he did the work on this film? Or was Scorsese being really clever?

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Kick-Ass

Kick-Ass Poster
Kick-Ass

I managed to catch one of the “preview” screenings of Kick-Ass this evening. Surprisingly, the cinema wasn’t packed despite the huge hype and positive reviews. After watching, I think it got the audience it deserved…

Kick-Ass

“Okay you c**ts… lets see what you can do now!”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: geeky teenager becomes non-super-powered superhero Kick-Ass… and lands himself in a world of trouble as a result.

Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson) is a nerd. A geek. A comic book dweeb. Who one day wonders why nobody has ever tried to be a super hero. Not that they should, just with all the source material out there why hasn’t someone actually patched together some lycra and gone out crime-fighting?

So he does.

And he’s monumentally crap at it. Which, in honesty, is far more entertaining than someone actually being good at kicking criminal backside. It certainly leads to some very brutal slapstick.

On the other side of the coin are Big Daddy (Nicolas Cage) and his daughter Hit Girl (Chloe Moretz). Both highly skilled and dripping in cash, they’re more Batman and Robin-esque. Only somewhat happier to eviscerate the opposition than Bruce Wayne ever was. Or crush them. Or blow them up.

Kick-Ass has its moments, and a ton of references (some subtle, some not so) to past films, TV series and comics. The action sequences are frenetic and bloody, the jokes sometimes humorous but a lot of it is down to shock value (like a small child using the “C” word). So if you’ve seen the trailer, you’ll not laugh as hard. Nor will it really stand up to repeat viewing.

It’s fun. It’s just not as fun as I was expecting or hoping for. Still, it’s a good adaptation of the original comics, even though it’s slightly less violent (seriously). Don’t expect a masterpiece and you won’t be disappointed. And it’s good to see Cage in a superhero film that’s not crap. Not to name any Ghost Riders or anything.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Dragon tattoos, Phillip Morris and bounty hunters

I Love You Phillip Morris
Jim Carry does not have a dragon tattoo

Due to a timetabling cockup I ended up going into town earlier than anticipated. And then due to a very fortunate piece of scheduling I managed to cram in three films rather than just the one I’d intended. Thus Män som hatar kvinnor (The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo), I Love You Phillip Morris and The Bounty Hunter all in one afternoon/evening.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

Plot-in-a-nutshell: A journalist is tasked with finding a girl, missing for fifty years and on the way discovers a far murkier history to the story

I had absolutely no idea what to expect from this film. At all. I’d not seen a trailer and the only review I’d heard was part of one on Radio 5 a week or so ago where I was warned about the violent nature of the sex scenes. All I knew was that it was based on a novel and it was in Swedish. Thankfully with subtitles.

The lack of forewarning is always good when seeing a film based on a novel, Swedish or not. Mainly as it’s very rare for those who’re read the book to enjoy the film. I’ve still yet to meet anyone who’d read The Lovely Bones or The Time Traveller’s Wife also recommend the film afterwards. Such is, I gather, the case with TGWTDT.

This is a shame as it’s not bad. It’s long – almost 2 1/2 hours – but it rarely seems to drag. The pace is a little slow to start, but once the additional depth is added and the characters are explored it all moves along nicely.

Michael Nyqvist plays the journalist, Michael Blomkvist, and Noomi Rapace takes on the role of Lisbeth Salander, the titular Girl. The one thing that surprised me was that very little was made of the tattoo itself. She does have one. You see it. That’s it.

It’s her character that’s the most intriguing, though, even more-so than that of the missing girl. She’s damaged, under guardianship… but we don’t know how or why. This thread runs from almost the beginning of the film until almost the end.

Some of the sex scenes are indeed brutal. There are only two to really watch out for and they’re not hugely graphic, just unpleasant. A few people did leave the cinema but not during or immediately after either of these, which seemed strange.

It is a long film, and it’s not exciting as most Hollywood-made thrillers and mysteries have to be. There are maybe a couple of adrenaline-pumping moments in it. The rest is slow, methodical, thoughtful and captivating.

If you like a film that makes you think and don’t mind sitting around for long then this is worth the effort. On the other hand, if you need a shooting or a car chase every thirty minutes then definitely look elsewhere.

I Love You, Phillip Morris

“It’s really expensive being gay”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: Great husband Steven Russell (Jim Carrey) decides to stop living a lie and come out of the closet… and jumps into debt, resorts to fraud and lands in jail where he meets the real love of his life – Phillip Morris (Ewan McGregor)

Amazingly based on a true story (how closely based, I’m happy not knowing), this is a great story with some equally impressive performances from all those involved. Narrated by Russell, we hear about his beginnings as a wonderful family man before a car accident makes him realise that life’s too short to live a lie.

You do need to be pretty open-minded to watch this film. There are some overtly (homo)sexual sequences that some may be uncomfortable watching and there’s a fair bit of strong language. However, this is all balanced with some genuinely funny moments and great dialogue.

Russell simply lets his life run away with him and doesn’t realise what he’s doing half the time. He just happens to be good at it so he runs with it. McGregor is excellent as Morris and the pairing of the two just works.

There is a near-twist at the end that works up well and I confess I wasn’t expecting it – though I’m sure half of the cinema was. I shall say no more in case I spoil it!

Not the best film ever, and there are more insightful commentaries on the issue of gays in society (Philadelphia still has to hold the award for that) but it’s simply enjoyable as it doesn’t pull any punches about its subject matter.

The Bounty Hunter

Plot-in-a-nutshell: Milo (Gerard Butler) is a bounty hunter who has to bring his ex-wife Nicole (Jennifer Aniston) in for skipping bail – hilarity is supposed to ensue.

Seen the trailer for this film? Then you’ve seen all the good bits. Like Ms Anniston, it’s got a couple of good parts but the rest is all filler.

The funny parts are genuinely funny, but they’re few and far between. The central section where the couple start to get all mushy over each other again is just slow and painful. The ending, though, isn’t bad.

Basically, it’s a bit of a mess. I’d happily recommend maybe half of it. Unfortunately, without providing you with a timetable of when you can walk out of the cinema and come back in it would be hard to miss the dross.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]