Star Trek

Category: Film
Genre: Sci-Fi / Action / Reboot
Directed By: J. J. Abrams
Running Time: 126 min.

Heading into Star Trek there were two apprehensions on my mind.  First the law of evens, which is a tongue in cheek reference to the Odd numbered Star Trek movies being sub-par, and this was number eleven.  Second, it’s a reboot of a classic property with a director from outside the genre’s core.  As it turns out, I really needn’t have worried, Star Trek is a very worthy film, largely living up to the buzz and assuaging most of the doubts I’d had going into it.

Breaking from the expected “how the gang all got together at Starfleet” origin story line, Abrams manages to weave and dodge a bit to keep the audience guessing, even though in the broad strokes we know the final destinations of each of these characters.  The casting for the entire crew was spot on in this film, with the best choices being Karl Urban as Dr. Leonard “Bones” McCoy, and Zachary Quinto as a slightly reinterpreted Spock.  Quinto’s success at this task was even more of a challenge as he acts against Leonard Nimoy himself as an older Spock, and both performances hold up very well.

My main concerns had been with Chris Pine as Kirk, Simon Pegg as Scotty, and Eric Bana as Nero.  Let me start by saying that Chris Pine is not Shatner.  And he shouldn’t be; the new interpretation provided by the new depth of the Kirk character fits nicely with Pine’s performance, especially given the greater level of humor woven into the story.  While given much less screen time than the rest of the cast, Simon Pegg as Scotty simply shines.  A more cheeky performance than James Doohan’s, the new Scotty in instantly likeable and helps draw the story together with his insertion into the main cast in act three.  Eric Bana as the Romulan villain Nero walks a very thin line down a tricky path for an actor.  Romulans have always been over the top or saddled with flat performances in the past (with a few exceptions).  Bana strikes the right balance because the audience understands his motivations, the character is made accessible and therefore believable.

The plot will likely provide a few bones of contention for extreme hardcore fans, but that is to be expected.  In terms of what was considered a reboot, this film does extremely well in terms of continuity, both in literal and emotive terms.  I give Abrams a lot of credit for not shying away from big plot decisions that drive the story forward and provide the impact necessary for the audience to emote with the story.  Less so a reboot, this does well as the eleventh film in the series, and a new, deeper take on the character for a modern audience.

If you watch with a little attention, there are plenty of treats for the fans as well,  each of the main actors gets an iconic line for their character, for example Bones’ “Are you out of your Vulcan mind?” drew a great response from the crowd at the IMAX showing I attended.  The movie is laced with additional nuances and Easter eggs, but I will leave that for the inevitable wiki contributions and cheat sheets that are no doubt already being written by the geek elite.  Suffice to say it’s a Star Trek for both fans and new audiences.

In terms of special effects, one really honestly forgets that there are effects in the film.  The spaceships look like space ships should, and work thanks to intricate CG camera moves. The phasers and transporters all look extremely nifty and are blended seamlessly.  Style wise some scenes were just a tad heavy on lens flares and over lighting, but it can be ignored pretty easily and by no means does it ruin the experience. The new score is excellent and manages to incorporate the original theme, as well as new cues that are beautifully crafted.  Again, the music, outside of the opening and closing titles, is a seamless element; the rest of the movie has far too great of a grip on ones attention to be consciously aware of it unless you make a special effort.

Overall I am exceptionally pleased with the new Star Trek effort, both for its keeping to the spirit of its roots and for making brave choices on new directions, and keeping those two contractions in balance to create an eminently enjoyable film.

Rating: 8.5/10

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

Category: Film
Genre: Action / Comic Adaptation / Sci-Fi
Directed By: gavin Hood
Running Time: 107 min.

X-Men Origins Wolverine is a mixed bag as far as comic adaptations go.  Breaking it down by the three acts, the first was great, the second was adequate and the third act just left me with a disappointed questioning look on my face.

I had hoped that this would be a continuation of the “comic movie renaissance” phenomena of last year that included Iron Man, The Dark Night, and to a lesser extend The Incredible Hulk and The Spirit; by this I refer to comic adaptations being treated with care and respect for the original material, made by fans for fans, within the bounds of adaptability.

Wolverine has a rich history with many elements to draw on.  The adaptation fails to take full advantage of this and treats the characters as expendable checkpoints on the path to concluding the film.  The essential problem here is that this is an origin story, a tale with a steady rise from A to B; now its adaptation into film format requires a story arc with a climax followed by a resolving conclusion that wraps up much of the loose ends.  In order to achieve this the makers of Wolverine reinterpreted the Deadpool character in what I can only describe as a wasteful fashion, robbing themselves of the chance to explore a truly interesting character in exchange for an expendable ultimate villain for the final showdown.

The overall impression this film left was that it wasn’t taken all that seriously in respect to the fanbase, the history, or its own execution.  The effects also looked somewhat phoned in, especially in the final climax battles.  As a simple comic-esque action film, Wolverine is certainly enjoyable, and I generally try to approach these adaptation as exactly that; adaptations of the source material into a new media.  Unfortunately the frankly unnecessary ham handed treatment of some of the plot elements and characters pushes my tolerance on truly enjoying the film in its entirety.  Adaptations necessitate certain levels of change, but this is simply a matter of poor choices.

Rating: 6.5/10

Tropic Thunder

Category: Film
Genre: Comedy / Action / War
Directed By: Ben Stiller
Running Time: 107 min.

Tropic Thunder is one of the surprising comedy successes of recent films. A solid premise, a terrific cast, and a good helping of language give it a punch that I haven’t seen out of a comedy in quite some time.

Past Stiller projects had me wary of getting my hopes up for Tropic Thunder, but as it turns out I was thoroughly pleased with the film. The difference comes from the fact that this film has a good bankable premise, which is something most other modern comedies seem to have trouble with. The layers of actors playing actors no longer acting is rich territory for comedy, and it is well capitalized on.

The cast and their performances are what give the film real traction. Ben Stiller plays much the same as previous roles, but with more depth and less throw-away weirdness, reminding me of his work in “There’s Something About Mary.” Jack Black does a great job of compound comic relief without going too far over the top, much like his performance in “High Fidelity.” Robert Downey Jr. breaks type and plays what is probably his most entertaining role since “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang” as an Ausie method actor playing a Vietnam-era black man getting a bit lost in his method. Supporting performances by Jay Baruchel (of “Knocked Up”), Nick Nolte (channeling a bit of Gary Busey), and Tom Cruise flesh out the film to great effect. Cruise in particular plays his oddest character to date, what I can only describe as a mix between Al Pacino, James Lipton, and Joe Pantoliano, hyped up on some sort of mind altering substance.

By all appearances, the film is a comedy for the adult crowd, which makes it stick out from the landscape of tween comedies. That the creators opted for an unrestrained dialog and chose not to cash in on every gross-out gag available (thought the film has its fair share of over the top moments, they are well played), lets you know what audience the film is aimed at.

All in all Tropic Thunder is a well executed action comedy, that avoids most of the pitfalls that sink other comedies these days, and makes for a satisfying good time.

Rating: 7/10

Hellboy II: The Golden Army

Category: Film
Genre: Action / Sci-fi / Fantasy / Comic Adaptation
Directed By: Guillermo del Toro
Running Time: 120 min.

The second installment in the Hellboy film adaptations takes a different tone than the original. Hellboy II focuses on heart and comedy now that we have a family of characters the viewers have invested in. This makes for a different feel to the film, less hard edge attitude, with the action driven equally by the character development and the MacGuffin elements.

There are some novel solutions to the storytelling, I especially enjoyed the toy army treatment in the opening exposition in lieu of revealing the big visual payoff of the golden army and related characters. While at some points the driving force behind the progression of the film felt sloppy of uneven, the added freedom for comedy and exploring character dynamics yields some real gems. One of these moments in when Abe and HB, after sharing quite a few drinks, burst into song to Barry Manilow’s “Can’t Smile Without You.”

All told this was an entertaining second effort, if a bit weak overall. While it lacked the feeling of great things being afoot of the fist film, the added heart and warmth nearly make up for it.

Rating: 6/10

The Dark Knight

Category: Film
Genre: Action / Superhero / Comic Adaptation
Directed By: Christopher Nolan
Running Time: 152 min.

The Dark Knight has raised the bar on comic inspired films, and films in general for that matter. I came to this film with some rather high expectations on the heels of the successful franchise reboot in Batman Begins. I am pleased to say those expectations were met and exceeded.

The core strength of this film is that all the action and development is character driven; all things come from and speak to the motivations of a wonderfully fleshed out roster of players. The big question mark on everyone’s mind was no doubt the late Heath Ledgers’ portrayal of the Joker, with memories of Jack Nicholson, Mark Hamil (animated) and Caesar Romero defining the character’s screen presence to date. Ledger’s performance is nothing short of masterful, and Nolan’s’ writing and directing breath life into the most organic and complex clown prince thus far. Personally, I forgot there was an actor playing the Joker, for all appearances this creature lived and breathed on the screen. We see a true sociopath, brilliant in his way, asking some disturbingly valid questions, and making astute observations on the nature of his relation to Gotham and the Dark Knight.

The treatment of Batman’s character was novel in it’s own right, exploring his role in the crime equation, delving into scales of perception and persona. Building on Bruce Wayne’s motivations and the limits of the hero persona flesh out both Wayne and Batman in new dimensions. We see him fundamentally torn in what he feels Gotham needs and deserves, an undercurrent of disquiet that reminded me of elements of Bale’s performance in Equilibrium.

Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent/Two Face is believable and exudes a humanizing element that fits well with the overall tone of the film. The motivations and roots of his transformation into Two-Face develop organically, and play a shadowy mirror to the Batman/Wayne development. The supporting cast continue to impress, with Maggie Gyllehall’s replacement of Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes pays dividends. Gyllenhall is far more believable as an adult character, rather than giving the impression of someone playing at working in teh DA’s office. Gary Oldman once again embodies Jim Gordon as if he’d been pulled directly from Frank Miller’s pages; centering the film and playing with a keen awareness to the hero/villain dynamic and the public’s perception thereof. Morgan Freeman reprises his role as Lucious Fox, and lends a feeling of soul and the necessary legitimacy to Wayne Corp, as well as believability to the technology of the film. Michael Caine returns as Alfred Pennyworth, stubbornly keeping the human element in what threatens to become more monster than hero.

As I mentioned, the writing is tremendous, and the pacing is unrelenting; there is no slowdown as the film grows from one facet to another. Visually, the film is spot on, with a heightened realism and gravity that lends credibility and grit to the characters and the action. The feel of Gotham is a you-are-here visceral experience, and the organic feel continues into the look and feel of the characters, making for even greater believability.

All said, The Dark Knight gets it right on all fronts, and shows just want can be done with a graphic property when treated with the proper care and talent.

Rating: 9/10

Hancock

Category: Film
Genre: Action / Superhero / Comedy
Directed By: Peter Berg
Running Time: 92 min.

Hancock looked like an interesting concept, a fully realized anti-hero. As it turns out, Hancock tries to do more than that, and breaks the format in the process. The Hancock character is well put together at the outset, allowing us to sublimate our vicarious desires to have super powers, but not act particularly super. As it progresses, the film manages to work up to a heartful Jerry Macguire feel, and we buy into it.

Its at about this point where it drifts off into unstable territories, heavy handedly dropping in a sizeable plot/origin device with no framework for acceptance. The force driving the action in the film changes gears, and the audience begins to feel like an appendage to the storytelling, which has taken on the flavor of a writer trying to express… something.

All in all Hancock’s Achilles heel comes form trying to do two very different things in the same movie, and this strains one’s investment in suspended disbelief past the breaking point. Putting heart into a film is great, but it has to come organically from the characters, and the back story material for the main cast seems more like nametags than foundational character motivationt.

If Hancock had simply remained a film with the killer app of the anti-superhero, deeper origins not required, it would have been a fun ride. As it stands, the midrange shift in the storytelling feels much like a product of early writing workshops, with a point the writer is desperate to tell, but just can’t seem to stretch the characters around to lend it credibility.

Rating:4/10

Wanted

Category: Film
Genre: Action / Outlaw / Comic Adaptation
Directed By: Timur Bekmambetov
Running Time: 110 min.

From the trailers I’d seen prior to the movie, Wanted appeared to be very much a file for the MySpace generation. As comic adaptations go, Wanted has a pretty loose relationship to the original material, largely by virtue that the tone and content of the original run would be unpalatable to most folks conditioned by the standard storytelling formula.

I went in not really sure what to expect, but as always, with an open mind. I have to say Wanted managed to surprise me on several levels. The main character has a visceral quality that is very hard to balance with his workday, hangdog wage-slave persona, but between the writing and McAvoy’s performance, it works. While still somewhat predictable, the film bends the usual formulas just enough to be interesting, and disbelief remains suspended on most levels. On other fronts there were moment that can only be described as satisfyingly vicious, a s certain quick shock guilty brutality that caught me off guard, though in a positive way (much like Fight Club in it’s day).

I walked away from the film feeling like I was somehow in the slightly wrong viewing demographic, but found it enjoyable nonetheless. Not required theater viewing, but it may loose something on the small screen if you wait to rent it.

Rating:6/10

The Incredible Hulk

Category: Film
Genre: Action / Sci-Fi / Comic Adaptation
Directed By: Louis Leterrier
Running Time: 144 min.

I saw The Incredible Hulk at the Clairemont Town Square 14 on Sunday June 15th. After the problems that beset the first Hulk (2003), and the mass rumor mill circling the new effort, I was curious to see the reboot/sequel. I must say, I was pleased with the results.

I was concerned with the casting of the new film, with reservations as to Norton and Tyler’s appropriateness for the roles (moreso Tyler), especially since I felt that while Jennifer Conelly had been largely wasted on the forst film, she still sets a high bar fopr follow on performance. Luckily I need not have worried, both roles were well cast, with Norton’s ability to inject humor into the Banner character, and Tim Roth as Emil Blonsky/Abomination being unexpected pluses.

The plot and pacing were tru to comic book style. The true success of the movie I think comes from keeping a reasonable scale and scope to the visuals and the range of the story. The South American sequences were a clever way to reintroduce the Banner character and update his situation, before bringing the action home.

I tried to watch with an eye for story more so than technicalities. Looking too closely at special effects in a movie is a bit like picking apart the typography in a novel. That being said, the visual effects in the new Hulk were well done with a few minor odd moment exceptions. One of the hardest hurdles in doing graphic work for the hulk I’ve realized is that none of us has ever seen a nine foot tall grotesquely muscle-bound man creature in real life, so the mind is left reaching for points of comparison for achieving a “realistic” look.

As part of the building Avengers cabal, The Incredible Hulk measures up well.

Rating: 6/10

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Category: Film
Genre: Action / Adventure / Period
Directed By: Steven Spielberg
Running Time: 124 min.

This delayed sequel (quadquel?) left me feeling very conflicted. I dusted off my Indian Jones trilogy box set the weekend prior to seeing the new installment, to make sure I was going into Crystal Skull with more than just old memories and inflated expectations. Walking out of the theater, I was left with the impression that I had seen a good, enjoyable movie, but somehow, it wasn’t Indy.

Much of the altered vibe comes from breaking formula and adopting more modern (but certainly not necessarily better) conventions of cinematic story telling. The new film is set in 1957, and the key plot device involves aliens and their technology. Both of these are a problem. The spirit and vibe of the 1950’s is on the other side of a fundamental shift in the American consciousness: World War II. The world of the 1930’s Indy was largely open for the exploration, wild and surprising, with more than enough room for adventure. The world of the 1950’s has become one in which the lines on the map have been clearly marked, and mankind now has the sobering ability to exterminate himself from that very map. As for the alien elements, this seems simply too fantastic for the scope of the film. The plot devices of the earlier films, while fantastic in nature, were rooted in the human mythology of history, be it biblical or otherwise. Bringing prior alien involvement into a film almost always requires the payoff of their return or resurrection, and this felt too big, it simply overpowered the story.

Secondly, the fine balance of camp vs cheese in the earlier three films (possibly excluding Temple) falls far into the cheese side in Skull. The banter feels grafted over the story, to the point where it interferes with the pacing to an extent. There are several plot decisions that I disagreed with in this treatment, primary Mutt turning out to be Indy’s son by Marian Ravenwood (from Raiders), and second thier eventual marriage at the end of the picture. For a writer I’m sure its satisfying to bring closure and happy ending to characters you’ve created after such a long hiatus (and post trilogy sequels are often a one shot proposition); however, audiences want to see thier heroes back in the thick of things, which often runs counter to efforts towards the Ward and June Cleaver treatment.

Another poison dart in the fedora was adopting the convention of gaining characters throughout the story like luggage. By the beggining of the third act of the film the traveling core of protagonist characters was at least 5 or 6 strong, as opposed to the weaving in and out of characters and plotlines of the previous films prior to the climactic assembly. This lends a Lord of the Rings feel to things, with the mojo spread too thinly amongst the characters, so to speak.

On the technical front, the graphic treatment was simply odd in places, as if there were some intentional play at a certain “look” to the CGI background elements (take a look a the monkey sequence specifically) that simply didn’t work. Instead of looking like, say perhaps an old style matte painting, it looks like bad compositing; and I just simply can’t imagine ILM doing something that blatant by accident.

To his credit Harrison Ford (Indiana Jones) does his best to bring Indy back to us, though some Jack Ryan and Dr. Richard Kimble leak through as well (but it works). Shia LaBeouf (Mutt Williams), who showed us what he could do in Transformers, seems to be restricted by the character of Mutt who doesn’t seem to have been fleshed out quite enough. Cate Blanchett (Irina Spalko) seemed to be phoning in the role, but that may have simple been the Russian accent obliterating any subtle nuances she brought to the role.

Were it not Indiana Jones, and all the history and baggage that brings to the table, this would be a fun romp of a modern movie, something of a low impact cross between The Mummy and National Treasure (two films I very much enjoy by the way). Spielberg has done masterful work in the past and so has Lucas; I think this may be just another movie falling under the fourth film curse (much like odd-numbered Star Treks).

Rating:5/10