When word came out that a fourth installment of Indiana Jones was on its’ way, people were understandably skeptical. After all, the last trilogy George Lucas updated didn’t turn out so well.
The fact that Steven Spielberg is at the helm of this picture offers some reassurance.
Harrison Ford, 65, reprises one of his iconic roles as Indiana Jones, professor of Archaeology by day, international adventurer by night. Ford trades in his watch and pension for his trademark fedora and bullwhip.
In “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull,” nineteen years have passed since the last movie. The film immediately thrusts the viewer into the world of the 1950’s, courtesy of Elvis Aaron Presley’s “Hound Dog,” which was at the top of the charts around the time of the movie.
Gone are the Nazi scientists searching for the power to conquer the world. Replacing them are the Cold War-era Russians searching for the power to conquer the world.
Cate Blanchett (“The Aviator”) plays a Russian colonel who is obsessed with the possibilities offered by psychic warfare. While her accent falters at times, she does very well playing the evil-yet-seductive women that Indy seems to always come in contact with.
Shia LeBeouf (“Transformers,” “Disturbia”) plays a James Dean-style greaser, complete with leather jacket and motorcycle. He nervously combs his hair, doesn’t back down from anything, and does all the other things that round out the characters from “Grease” and “West Side Story” among others.
The character of George “Mac” McHale, played by Ray Winstone (“The Departed,” “Beowulf”) seems to be a last minute addition, a double-, triple- and quadruple- agent who is a shadow, passing in and out of the narrative without leaving any sort of lasting impression. Winstone plays his part well, but the writing for his character just isn’t up to snuff.
The movie continuously beats you over the head with the fact that it takes place in the fifties. The presence of Nazis in the previous films made it clear when the previous films were taking place, they didn’t go out of their way to reinforce the fact that it takes place in the forties.
All the varsity jackets, pleated skirts, Everly Brothers’ tunes and milkshakes with multiple straws in them serve to make this film a nostalgia piece, which doesn’t jive with the spirit of the original movies.
Indiana Jones was based on the adventurers from the early part of the 20th century who existed in pulp magazines with serialized stories that played out from week to week.
The movie’s main weakness is that the film seems content in simply bringing back the nostalgia of the previous films, without adding anything new.
Ford looks very fit for his age, and the script doesn’t take it easy on him in terms of stunts. If it weren’t for LeBeouf calling him ‘gramps’ constantly, his age wouldn’t even be relevant.
The movie wants to emphasize the obvious age distance between LeBeouf and Ford, even to its’ own detriment. While the serial adventurers that Indy is based on were always timeless, this film seems determined to make him a dinosaur.
While it might save us another two movies, making a second trilogy (like Star Wars), this ageism really takes away from what could have been just another classic Indiana Jones adventure. Lucas and Co. seems resigned to the fact that Indy is past his prime and the movie is going to appeal to fans of the franchise.
Maybe it was the universal panning of his new Star Wars trilogy that made Lucas and his team so gun-shy, or maybe he just doesn’t have the energy to throw himself into a new epic.
Either way, the film is entertaining. It’s too bad the producers didn’t go for a home run, they seemed content with hitting a single, albeit a single that will net hundreds of millions of dollars.
The vibe is there, but the insistence on reminding the viewer that Dr. Jones is the old man and LeBoeuf is the young turk just gets old, pardon the pun.
Anyone who liked any of the previous films will undoubtedly want to see it, and maybe will even enjoy the film. It’s just a little sad to see the bar set so low.
Rating - $7.00
Friday, May 23, 2008
Friday, May 16, 2008
Narnia: Prince Caspian
“Prince Caspian” begins with Peter, Edmund, Susan and Lucy (Pevensie is their surname, by the way) struggling with the real world after having been kings and queens of Narnia.
It has been a year since they came back through the wardrobe to the real world. As suddenly as they left Narnia, they are returned, as an Underground station quickly turns into a beach on the shores of Narnia.
While a year has passed for the Pevensie siblings, 1300 years have passed in Narnia. Imagine the changes that our world has undergone in 1300 years, and you can imagine the unfamiliar territory Narnia has become.
Gone is the Golden Age of Narnia that followed the demise of the White Witch in “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.” A race called the Telmarines has destroyed almost all of what made Narnia a magical place.
The Telmarines are based on the Spanish Conquistadors that imposed their will over much of North America. Like their Earth counterparts, the Telmarines have killed off most Narnians, relegating the survivors to an underground existence in the forest.
The title character finds himself in a Hamlet-like predicament, his father is recently deceased, and his uncle Miraz now sits on the throne. When Miraz’s wife gives birth to a son, Caspian suddenly becomes expendable.
Only the sudden intervention of Caspian’s tutor Cornelius allows him to escape into the woods, where he encounters the banished Narnians.
Miraz is played with a certain swarthy charm by Italian actor Sergio Castellitto. Castellitto does a fantastic job of playing a Cortez-style conquistador who is willing to do anything to keep the crown. He is a fearsome villain that brings all the savagery of “300’s” King Leonidas to the film.
The Pevensie children are played by the same actors and actresses from the previous film. As Edmund, Skandar Keynes pushes his character to the front of almost every scene. While Edmund was a major character in the first film, he takes a back seat to the other siblings for this one.
It is a credit to Keynes’ screen presence that he is able to draw attention even in a reduced role. His dry British wit steals every scene it’s in, and his mix of courage and dourness make Edmund a character worth observing.
Harry Gregson-Williams (“Team America,” Kingdom of Heaven”) composed a transcendent score for the movie. He is able to provide accompaniment to a chase through the woods or a sneak attack on a castle that conveys the tension of the moments in many different ways.
The score is so effective that the few moments of silence seem to be the loudest, most intense of the film.
Due to the epic nature of the C.S. Lewis book on which the movie is based, there is no shortage of battles and confrontations. The Christian theology that is so omnipresent in the novels is very much a part of this film.
The struggle between differing ideologies, whether it be between Caspian and Peter or the Narnians and Telmarines, is shown in a way that the audience is clear on who is right and who is wrong.
The movie’s gravity and epic feel is slowly undone by its reliance on slapstick humor. With so many talking animals populating Narnia, the filmmakers cannot resist the “Alvin and the
Chipmunks” humor that seems to fill most family films.
While this can be excused at the beginning, when things remain light, the shtick laid in ever thicker as the movie progresses. Almost every significant moment towards the end is tainted by a cheap throwaway attempt at a laugh.
In addition to robbing the film of its epic nature, the jokes slowly eat away at some great acting performances. The hour and a half spent making Miraz a dangerous character is nullified by five minutes of lame jokes right before what should be an epic battle between him and Peter.
Lewis’ saga is supposed to be one of the great mythologies of Western literature. The books succeeded in putting Christian themes in an epic fantasy narrative that stands up with or without the religious context.
If the movies continue to make talking animals make cheap jokes, not only does this take away from Narnia’s legacy, it does a disservice to all fans of the novels who want to see Lewis’ vision brought to the silver screen.
Rating - $5.50
It has been a year since they came back through the wardrobe to the real world. As suddenly as they left Narnia, they are returned, as an Underground station quickly turns into a beach on the shores of Narnia.
While a year has passed for the Pevensie siblings, 1300 years have passed in Narnia. Imagine the changes that our world has undergone in 1300 years, and you can imagine the unfamiliar territory Narnia has become.
Gone is the Golden Age of Narnia that followed the demise of the White Witch in “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.” A race called the Telmarines has destroyed almost all of what made Narnia a magical place.
The Telmarines are based on the Spanish Conquistadors that imposed their will over much of North America. Like their Earth counterparts, the Telmarines have killed off most Narnians, relegating the survivors to an underground existence in the forest.
The title character finds himself in a Hamlet-like predicament, his father is recently deceased, and his uncle Miraz now sits on the throne. When Miraz’s wife gives birth to a son, Caspian suddenly becomes expendable.
Only the sudden intervention of Caspian’s tutor Cornelius allows him to escape into the woods, where he encounters the banished Narnians.
Miraz is played with a certain swarthy charm by Italian actor Sergio Castellitto. Castellitto does a fantastic job of playing a Cortez-style conquistador who is willing to do anything to keep the crown. He is a fearsome villain that brings all the savagery of “300’s” King Leonidas to the film.
The Pevensie children are played by the same actors and actresses from the previous film. As Edmund, Skandar Keynes pushes his character to the front of almost every scene. While Edmund was a major character in the first film, he takes a back seat to the other siblings for this one.
It is a credit to Keynes’ screen presence that he is able to draw attention even in a reduced role. His dry British wit steals every scene it’s in, and his mix of courage and dourness make Edmund a character worth observing.
Harry Gregson-Williams (“Team America,” Kingdom of Heaven”) composed a transcendent score for the movie. He is able to provide accompaniment to a chase through the woods or a sneak attack on a castle that conveys the tension of the moments in many different ways.
The score is so effective that the few moments of silence seem to be the loudest, most intense of the film.
Due to the epic nature of the C.S. Lewis book on which the movie is based, there is no shortage of battles and confrontations. The Christian theology that is so omnipresent in the novels is very much a part of this film.
The struggle between differing ideologies, whether it be between Caspian and Peter or the Narnians and Telmarines, is shown in a way that the audience is clear on who is right and who is wrong.
The movie’s gravity and epic feel is slowly undone by its reliance on slapstick humor. With so many talking animals populating Narnia, the filmmakers cannot resist the “Alvin and the
Chipmunks” humor that seems to fill most family films.
While this can be excused at the beginning, when things remain light, the shtick laid in ever thicker as the movie progresses. Almost every significant moment towards the end is tainted by a cheap throwaway attempt at a laugh.
In addition to robbing the film of its epic nature, the jokes slowly eat away at some great acting performances. The hour and a half spent making Miraz a dangerous character is nullified by five minutes of lame jokes right before what should be an epic battle between him and Peter.
Lewis’ saga is supposed to be one of the great mythologies of Western literature. The books succeeded in putting Christian themes in an epic fantasy narrative that stands up with or without the religious context.
If the movies continue to make talking animals make cheap jokes, not only does this take away from Narnia’s legacy, it does a disservice to all fans of the novels who want to see Lewis’ vision brought to the silver screen.
Rating - $5.50
Friday, May 9, 2008
Iron Man
It has become just another Hollywood contrivance. Make a superhero movie and spend money on special effects, not the script. The movie then pulls in $100 million based on the built in fans of the comic.
Everything the “Spider-Man” and “X-Men” movies accomplished for the superhero genre were soon undone by the “Fantastic Four,” “Hulk,” “Daredevil,” “Ghost Rider” and “Elektra” movies that tried to CGI their way past their narrative shortcomings. If you’re wondering when the term CGI became a verb, it was
“Iron Man” is a return to glory for the superhero franchise. While not as much as a household name as Spiderman, Iron Man is still one of the marquee characters in the Marvel universe. He has also never been represented on film, save for a straight-to-DVD cartoon adventure.
The film is the first of Marvel’s movies to be financed by Marvel Studios, and it gives hope that they are paying closer attention to the product that carries their name.
One of Iron Man’s fundamental appeals is the fact that he has no “super powers.” There was no exposure to radiation, nor was he born with any special abilities. All of his powers come from his own mind, from the suit of armor that he has designed for himself.
Most superhero movies cast actors on their way up. Tobey Maguire, Eric Bana and most of the ‘X-Men’ cast used their roles to transition from working actor to superstar. This is what makes Robert Downey Jr. an interesting choice for Iron Man and his alter ego, Tony Stark.
Stark is a work-hard, play-hard weapons contractor who has no sleepless nights due to the nature of his business. It helps that he is often accompanied to bed by a beautiful woman and expensive whiskey.
Sooner or later we all have to pay the piper, and Tony Stark is no exception. His convoy is attacked in the Middle East and he is captured by terrorists intent on having him design their next superweapon. Instead of a missile, Stark develops a prototype of his iron suit.
Stark’s captivity teaches him a lesson about what exactly his weapons do, and he vows to change the effect he has on the world.
It is a testament to Downey’s acting chops that he is able to pull off the transition from a witty yet unlikable weapons contractor to a genuine superhero. Unlike many superhero movies, the story actually shows the changes in Stark, rather than just tells you that he has changed.
Gwyneth Paltrow plays his secretary Pepper Potts. She plays the part well, she is attractive but not gorgeous, and she has just a hint of the neurotic, insecure woman character that she is so well known for.
A bald Jeff Bridges plays the film’s villain, Obadiah Stane. Besides having a great name, Stane is a good villain, ruthless in the boardroom and on the battlefield. One of the things that kept Iron Man from seeping into the general comic book landscape was the lack of notable villains. Bridges does a good job of bringing a credible threat to Iron Man.
The Fantastic Four had Dr. Doom, the X-Men had Magneto, Superman had Lex Luthor. It could be argued that the most famous superheroes (Spider-Man, Batman, Superman, X-Men) were so successful because of the myriad of memorable villains they had to face.
Second-tier superheroes like Iron Man, Captain America and Daredevil do not face quite the same caliber of villains. Since there are already two more “Iron Man” sequels in the works, the producers would do well to put time and effort into creating notable villains.
A major strength of this film is it leaves the viewer wanting more. There is not much CGI, which allows the film to rely on the narrative and the dialogue. There are only a few scenes with Iron Man in his armor, which whets the audience’s appetite for possible sequels.
The major weakness of the film is that almost half of its 126 minutes is taken up with Iron Man’s origin. While this makes a strong foundation for future movies, it doesn’t help when “Iron Man 2” is still at least two years away.
If you do see this movie in the theatre, make sure you stay until the credits run out. There is a short teaser that features an expected but welcome cameo.
The movie is well worth seeing, and there are enough subtle nuances to invite repeated viewings. Stan Lee makes his best cameo in a Marvel film yet. Hopefully this is a sign that studios will no longer be content with churning out mindless superhero movies, but rather will take the time and effort required to bring these print heroes to life.
Rating - $10.00
Everything the “Spider-Man” and “X-Men” movies accomplished for the superhero genre were soon undone by the “Fantastic Four,” “Hulk,” “Daredevil,” “Ghost Rider” and “Elektra” movies that tried to CGI their way past their narrative shortcomings. If you’re wondering when the term CGI became a verb, it was
“Iron Man” is a return to glory for the superhero franchise. While not as much as a household name as Spiderman, Iron Man is still one of the marquee characters in the Marvel universe. He has also never been represented on film, save for a straight-to-DVD cartoon adventure.
The film is the first of Marvel’s movies to be financed by Marvel Studios, and it gives hope that they are paying closer attention to the product that carries their name.
One of Iron Man’s fundamental appeals is the fact that he has no “super powers.” There was no exposure to radiation, nor was he born with any special abilities. All of his powers come from his own mind, from the suit of armor that he has designed for himself.
Most superhero movies cast actors on their way up. Tobey Maguire, Eric Bana and most of the ‘X-Men’ cast used their roles to transition from working actor to superstar. This is what makes Robert Downey Jr. an interesting choice for Iron Man and his alter ego, Tony Stark.
Stark is a work-hard, play-hard weapons contractor who has no sleepless nights due to the nature of his business. It helps that he is often accompanied to bed by a beautiful woman and expensive whiskey.
Sooner or later we all have to pay the piper, and Tony Stark is no exception. His convoy is attacked in the Middle East and he is captured by terrorists intent on having him design their next superweapon. Instead of a missile, Stark develops a prototype of his iron suit.
Stark’s captivity teaches him a lesson about what exactly his weapons do, and he vows to change the effect he has on the world.
It is a testament to Downey’s acting chops that he is able to pull off the transition from a witty yet unlikable weapons contractor to a genuine superhero. Unlike many superhero movies, the story actually shows the changes in Stark, rather than just tells you that he has changed.
Gwyneth Paltrow plays his secretary Pepper Potts. She plays the part well, she is attractive but not gorgeous, and she has just a hint of the neurotic, insecure woman character that she is so well known for.
A bald Jeff Bridges plays the film’s villain, Obadiah Stane. Besides having a great name, Stane is a good villain, ruthless in the boardroom and on the battlefield. One of the things that kept Iron Man from seeping into the general comic book landscape was the lack of notable villains. Bridges does a good job of bringing a credible threat to Iron Man.
The Fantastic Four had Dr. Doom, the X-Men had Magneto, Superman had Lex Luthor. It could be argued that the most famous superheroes (Spider-Man, Batman, Superman, X-Men) were so successful because of the myriad of memorable villains they had to face.
Second-tier superheroes like Iron Man, Captain America and Daredevil do not face quite the same caliber of villains. Since there are already two more “Iron Man” sequels in the works, the producers would do well to put time and effort into creating notable villains.
A major strength of this film is it leaves the viewer wanting more. There is not much CGI, which allows the film to rely on the narrative and the dialogue. There are only a few scenes with Iron Man in his armor, which whets the audience’s appetite for possible sequels.
The major weakness of the film is that almost half of its 126 minutes is taken up with Iron Man’s origin. While this makes a strong foundation for future movies, it doesn’t help when “Iron Man 2” is still at least two years away.
If you do see this movie in the theatre, make sure you stay until the credits run out. There is a short teaser that features an expected but welcome cameo.
The movie is well worth seeing, and there are enough subtle nuances to invite repeated viewings. Stan Lee makes his best cameo in a Marvel film yet. Hopefully this is a sign that studios will no longer be content with churning out mindless superhero movies, but rather will take the time and effort required to bring these print heroes to life.
Rating - $10.00
Friday, May 2, 2008
Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay
The movie "Harold and Kumar go to White Castle" promised in its final moments a sequel in which the pair head to their nirvana, Amsterdam. Since this movie is called “Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay,” we are left to wonder what went wrong.
The film opens to find the drug-addled duo, hunger satisfied, planning their next move. After a quick shower from Harold and a trip to the bathroom from Kumar (at the same time in the same bathroom, they are nothing if not efficient), they are ready to board an international flight.
Amsterdam is the destination, besides the legal drugs, there is a hot neighbor for Harold to track down. Even the best laid plans can run afoul, as a battery powered piece of drug paraphernalia leads to the two being arrested as terrorists.
It becomes apparent in the first few minutes that the film is raising the bar on the crude humor its predecessor was based on. Human and animal defecation provides the punch line to several early jokes.
Enter Daily Show alumnus Rob Corddry as a bigoted government bureaucrat with questionable personal hygiene. While he is a caricature of any sort of real person, in the farcical world of Harold and Kumar he is a funny and formidable foe.
Alliteration (and assonance) aside, the movie provides a deeper look into Harold and Kumar. The first film showed Harold’s insecurities while painting Kumar as an underachiever concerned only with his next bong hit.
This film delves a little deeper into who both characters are, including a scene of what the dyad were like pre-cannabis. A love interest for Kumar is also introduced, making him a slightly more dynamic character.
While the movie isn't in any danger of being an Oscar sleeper, it does have a coherent plot structure. Besides the conflict between the twosome and Corddry, tension build throughout the film between the two
A believable conflict between Harold and Kumar, as well as between them and the government guides the movie through its various funny scenes.
Of course, no Harold and Kumar movie would be complete without the obligatory Neil Patrick Harris appearance. Harris’ scene in the first film has shaped his legacy to anyone born after “Doogie Howser, M.D.” NPH's perversions in this film manage to climb to another level, including a memorable farewell.
Between drug humor and full frontal nudity the movie does have a message about the inaccuracy of stereotypes and the dangers of racism. The pair encounters a tobacco-chewin’ redneck who happens to live in a modern ranch house with a beautiful wife. Of course, for comedic purposes all isn’t as it seems, but the point gets across.
Anyone looking for a poetic and epic story of man’s redemption over circumstances that threaten to destroy him should probably search elsewhere. Anyone looking for 102 minutes of a crude buddy comedy that isn’t too taxing on the noggin, will find this movie very enjoyable.
Rating - $10.00
The film opens to find the drug-addled duo, hunger satisfied, planning their next move. After a quick shower from Harold and a trip to the bathroom from Kumar (at the same time in the same bathroom, they are nothing if not efficient), they are ready to board an international flight.
Amsterdam is the destination, besides the legal drugs, there is a hot neighbor for Harold to track down. Even the best laid plans can run afoul, as a battery powered piece of drug paraphernalia leads to the two being arrested as terrorists.
It becomes apparent in the first few minutes that the film is raising the bar on the crude humor its predecessor was based on. Human and animal defecation provides the punch line to several early jokes.
Enter Daily Show alumnus Rob Corddry as a bigoted government bureaucrat with questionable personal hygiene. While he is a caricature of any sort of real person, in the farcical world of Harold and Kumar he is a funny and formidable foe.
Alliteration (and assonance) aside, the movie provides a deeper look into Harold and Kumar. The first film showed Harold’s insecurities while painting Kumar as an underachiever concerned only with his next bong hit.
This film delves a little deeper into who both characters are, including a scene of what the dyad were like pre-cannabis. A love interest for Kumar is also introduced, making him a slightly more dynamic character.
While the movie isn't in any danger of being an Oscar sleeper, it does have a coherent plot structure. Besides the conflict between the twosome and Corddry, tension build throughout the film between the two
A believable conflict between Harold and Kumar, as well as between them and the government guides the movie through its various funny scenes.
Of course, no Harold and Kumar movie would be complete without the obligatory Neil Patrick Harris appearance. Harris’ scene in the first film has shaped his legacy to anyone born after “Doogie Howser, M.D.” NPH's perversions in this film manage to climb to another level, including a memorable farewell.
Between drug humor and full frontal nudity the movie does have a message about the inaccuracy of stereotypes and the dangers of racism. The pair encounters a tobacco-chewin’ redneck who happens to live in a modern ranch house with a beautiful wife. Of course, for comedic purposes all isn’t as it seems, but the point gets across.
Anyone looking for a poetic and epic story of man’s redemption over circumstances that threaten to destroy him should probably search elsewhere. Anyone looking for 102 minutes of a crude buddy comedy that isn’t too taxing on the noggin, will find this movie very enjoyable.
Rating - $10.00
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)