Prometheus

By إبن البيطار (Own work) [GFDL (www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html) or CC-BY-SA-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.0 (www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia CommonsAfter a bit of indecision, we decided to save £25 and skip the IMAX version. Probably for the best – no pointless 3D and more money to spend on the Burger King we wolfed on the way to the cinema to see Ridley Scott‘s latest:

Prometheus

“My God, we were so wrong…”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: In the near future, we discover a message from the stars… and head off to see what lies on LV 426.

See it if you like: the first two Alien films

It’s been a while since the last Alien film. Thankfully, as Resurrection was dreadful. Also, Ridley Scott hasn’t had much to do with them since the original back in 1979. A long time to wait for the creator to revisit his work.

Thing is, was it worth the wait? In my personal opinion, yes. Not because it’s an “Alien film”, but precisely because it really isn’t. It just happens to take place in the same universe and, despite what anyone says, it is a prequel to that 1979 classic. However, it’s not told as an Alien film but more from the point of view of the human race. It sets up the first film wonderfully well (I couldn’t spot any inconsistencies), yet still leaves questions unanswered.

That’s been the beauty of the franchise to date. Alien was a tense horror. Aliens was a balls-out action film. Alien 3 straddled the line and, once the studio got their bloody hands off it and let Fincher re-edit it the way it should have been, ended up being more than watchable. Resurrection, as mentioned, is best left forgotten. Variety has been key in keeping it interesting.

Prometheus continues this trend with a film that probably has more in common with the first instalment, but on a different scale and with quite a lot of expectation sitting on its shoulders. It bears this well.

Kicking off in the not too distant future, a group of archaeologists led by Doctors Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green) discover a series of cave paintings, murals and the like which all contain a similar pattern. After some research, they realise they are effectively a map pointing to a planet that’s reachable using space travel of the day and argue that it’s a chance to meet whoever created the human race.

Peter Weyland (Guy Pearce), or at least his globe-spanning company which plays a fairly major part in the earlier/later films, funds the expedition out there where the group discover… well, I don’t want to give away any more than the trailer.

The film has all the familiar aspects of a member of the franchise: an android (this one called David and played by Michael Fassbender), an untrustworthy “company (wo)man” (Meredith Vickers played by a rather sexy Charlize Theron), huge sets (Scott prefers to build in real life rather than digitally), great Chris Foss-like spacecraft, tension, a strong female lead, and so on.

The story moves quite slowly, in honesty, but when the action kicks in it’s with a shock factor. There’s definitely a horror element, both because of the tension followed by a jump, and in the gore stakes. While not as outright violent as the second movie, and not as edge-of-the-seat scary as the first it manages to have elements of both while focussing on a very good story that tries to give a sound basis for what was to follow.

Performances all round are excellent, though I’d pick out Fassbender in particular as what is effectively the first Weyland android. Quirky, cool and mysterious you wonder if the Alien universe has ever been party to Asimov’s Laws of Robotics.

Visually, it’s a treat from the gorgeous sets to the costumes and creature effects.

It seems to have been getting some mixed reactions which is to be expected. I, personally, think it’s a great slice of classic science fiction. It takes a core question – “where do we come from” – and drops a nice little dollop of “what if” in there. The technology may be a little too advanced for the era during which it’s meant to take place, but that’s the only real slip I could see… and one I’d love to have proven right as it would mean there’s a possibility of me just about seeing the beginnings of it in my lifetime!

I can understand why some people won’t have liked it. On the other hand, I’d recommend it highly because I enjoyed it and Gillian reckoned it was pretty good also.

Enhanced by 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.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]