Perhaps more admirable and commendable than moving or masterful, the large scale frontier adventure tale visualized with eye-popping wide angle realism doesn't quite to add up to something greater than the sum of its parts. This is the power of that indescribable piece of storytelling/cinematic magic which when missing can make even the boldest, visionary works of art feel strangely inert.
Showing posts with label Adventure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Adventure. Show all posts
Wednesday, 13 January 2016
Thursday, 6 February 2014
Raise the Titanic
Thursday, 27 December 2012
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
The critical tepidness to this picture is astounding to me, the newest Hobbit film a natural extension to The Lord of the Rings trilogy is in fact a better film than any of the three original, critically acclaimed, and Oscar winning films. Peter Jackson miraculously manages to find the same pulse of the original series but hangs his startling visuals and impeccable fantasy action filmmaking skills onto a stronger and more accessible story as well as casting his characters with stronger actors./
Friday, 28 September 2012
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) dir. Steven Spielberg
Starring: Harrison Ford, Kate Capshaw, Ke Huy Quan, Amrish Puri, Philip Stone
By Alan Bacchus
As we all know, the story begins before Raiders of the Lost Ark in Shanghai in 1935. The Paramount logo fades into a giant metal gong, which sounds the beginning of an elaborate Busby Berkeley style musical number featuring American singer Willie Scott (Kate Capshaw) singing “Anything Goes”. Our hero, Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford), is also in the bar making a deal for the lost remains of Nurhaci – last emperor of the Ming Dynasty. Fighting and action ensues, which finds Indy fleeing the scene with Willie Scott and Indy’s young protégé, Short Round (Ke Huy Quan). Next thing you know, they’re on a flight across the Himalayas before they’re forced to abandon the plane using only a yellow dingy for a parachute. After a rollercoaster ride down the mountain, off a cliff and through treacherous rapids they settle down and are found by a kindly old Indian man.
At the man’s village, Indy is tasked with finding a lost Sankara stone, a rock with magical powers, which Indy thinks can bring him 'fortune and glory'. The trio travel to Pankot Palace where they soon find themselves battling sword-wielding warriors, a shaman with the power to rip a man’s beating heart from his body and a young Maharaja who uses voodoo dolls to subdue his enemies. In addition to rescuing the magic stone, Indy frees the children from the village and wins the heart of the nation. Breathe.
If it’s even possible, this second entry of the series moves at a pace more blistering than Raiders. In fact, the film is one long journey from one place and event to another with no time for thought or decision making. It’s as if a supernatural force of nature is blowing Indy and his troops to the Indian village and compelling them into their mission.
Again, as with Raiders, Indy goes through a series of trials and unbelievable obstacles. There’s a greater undercurrent of evil through this journey. In Raiders it’s the physical and transparent threat of the Nazis, but in Doom the enemy isn't revealed until the middle of the film, when Mola Rum (Amrish Puri) rips the heart from the shell-shocked slave. Throw in brainwashing elixirs and enslaved children and you have a really dark and violent film.
Among the great set pieces is the fantastic opening musical number, which teased us at the thought of Spielberg revitalizing the classic Hollywood musical (it hasn't happened yet). In fact, the next scene showing the exchange of the Emperor’s remains is a wonderful sequence cleverly using the table’s ‘Lazy Susan’ for suspense (Hitchcock would have been proud). There’s a rollercoaster/theme park action scene which feels like just that – a theme park ride, and the glorious finale – the rope bridge confrontation - is shot with David Lean-like perfection.
Spielberg, Lucas and the boys certainly didn't set out to make a culturally responsible film. In fact, it's a series of egregious racial and cultural clichés and stereotypes. Is there anything vaguely close to “Chilled Monkey Brains” or “Snake Surprise” in the Indian cuisine? Has the Indian culture ever had a history of ritualistic human sacrifices? And voodoo dolls are not even in the right hemisphere. But really, who cares? The dinner scene is now a classic from the series – completely ridiculous and hilarious in its excess.
How could Temple of Doom match Raiders? It couldn't. Watch this film as pure fantasy - even more over-the-top and self-reverential than the first film - and rediscover a great adventure. Enjoy.
***½
Thursday, 27 September 2012
The Grey
While the terrifying depiction of the wolves in 'The Grey' has been the centre of the praise directed toward this film, for me it’s Carnahan’s ability to capture the harshness of the north with a kind of intensity rarely equalled. It’s certainly not the best Arctic survivalist film. I might give the trophy to Mikael Kalatozov’s 'Letter Never Sent', but Carnahan manages to play into the expectations of this sub-genre and deliver a powerful and reflective adventure film with balls and pathos.
The Grey (2012) dir., Joe Carnahan
Starring: Liam Neeson, Dermot Mulroney, Frank Grillo
By Alan Bacchus
This is one of the benchmark stops along the way for Liam Neeson’s monumentally unlikely career turn as a legitimate action hero. Obviously, it was Taken that turned him into an ass-kicking leading man, and here he’s much the same but with a tortured soul. He’s John Ottoway, an outdoorsman contracted by an Alaskan oil company as security of sorts against the dangerous wolves which prowl the landscape. Ottoway’s a man of few words, a man of action but with sad eyes which hide a painful past. Dreamy flashbacks to encounters with his wife suggest she’s dead, or she’s left him, which is perhaps why he’s now off the grid hunting wolves.
His next assignment goes awry when he and his convoy of drillers become stranded after a plane crash in the far north. With civilization far, far away, it’s that familiar set up, a group of men against the wild, conflicts oscillating between man and nature, as well as amongst themselves. While Ottoway’s experiences in the outdoors makes him the natural leader, it's inevitable that there’s some conflict, specifically with the pessimistic Diaz, played by Frank Grillo.
Carnahan, who has over-stylized most of his films in his filmography, indeed applies a strong visual look, including grainy faces combined with over-exposed white skies that enhance the harshness of the environment. Here it all works. Carnahan’s camera work is precise, handheld some of the time, but never shaky. And his near invisible use of CG effects (snow and background matting) effectively put us in one of the most violent environments on Earth.
Evocative music and artful detours to flashback sequences take us out of the harsh world creating a sad feeling of inevitability for these characters. Never do we feel a happy ending is coming, nor do we want it. For Ottoway it’s about coming to grips with the trauma in his life and challenging his angst and rage into a final battle with the relentless wolves.
Carnahan relaxes his inspired realism on a few occasions when a character or a set piece or two lapses into stock conventionality, but not enough to tarnish the experiential nature of this film, thrilling and moving, and not easily forgotten.
***½
Tuesday, 17 July 2012
The Amazing Spider-Man
The general grumpiness of people’s attitudes toward this film is palpable. So I’m happy to champion the new take on Spider-Man as a sharply executed shift in tone from the Sam Raimi version. Director Marc Webb finds a happy medium between the brooding, deadly serious tone of Christopher Nolan’s Batman and the colourful cartoony campness of Raimi’s Spider-Man, an admirable modus operandi of comic realism, both in emotion and visual design. I eagerly anticipated future entries in this new series.
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) dir. Marc Webb
Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Martin Sheen, Sally Field
By Alan Bacchus
It was an almost unprecented task to reboot such a successful series, which is less than 10 years old. After all, the last Spider-Man(#3) was in made in 2007, just five years ago. The Marc Webb version apparently comes from the ‘Ultimate Universe’ series (I’m not a reader), wherein the brass at Marvel Comics rebooted a bunch of their old franchises (The Avengers included). Here we get to see the familiar story of Peter Parker but with fresh new layers, including his estrangement from his father, his tempestuous relationship with his Uncle Ben, his interest and involvement with the bio-genetical industry, which, through a spider bite, transformed him into a ‘spider-man’, a more elaborate learning curve of his powers and added spidey senses, as well as a new romantic relationship. In this case, it’s not Mary Jane (whom I suspect might come into play in a sequel) but Gwen Stacy, another bio-genetic geek who teams up with Parker to fight the irresponsible and deranged Curt Connors.
The broad strokes of the story, including Parker’s bullying and his arrogance arising from his powers to the world domination-plotting of the bioscientists, are all standard fare comic book material, but it’s Webb’s tonal adjustments that admirably allow this picture to sit proudly beside Sam Raimi's without ursurping it.
Aiding Webb greatly is Andrew Garfield, a ‘marvel‘ as Peter Parker. From The Social Network to his fine work in his British films, we all knew he could act. But Garfield arguably trumps Tobey Maguire’s dough-eyed Parker, as he feels like a relatable teenager, complex and emotional, without resorting to caricature.
Webb and his writers tease us with a new backstory involving Parker’s father and his innovations with the Oscorp bioscientists. We don’t even get to see Norman Osborn, though his presence is always there – in this case a shadowed figure pulling the strings off camera. But Webb still manages to craft an equally complex villain in Connors, an amputee who wants as much as anyone to find the missing scientific link that would enable him to regenerate his cells and grow back his arm. He’s a reluctant villain, who, through the pressures of the unseen Norman Osborn, takes a risk and tests his formula on himself. Of course, it doesn’t work and he’s transformed into a beast - a green lizard.
Webb’s action sequences are directed with the same realism and integrity he’s given to his characters. With many computer tools at his disposal Webb has exercised admirable restraint using as many organic and practical effects as possible. His spiderwebs looks like a real gooey substance, and much of his web-swinging could have been performed in real time as traditional stunts, as opposed to the overused CGI Spiderman in Raimi’s version.
At 136 minutes, the film threatens to be overlong, yet I can only admire the patience and attention Webb gives to the origin story before launching into the main action. The toughest parts of comic book storytelling are those moments when we have to be convinced that putting on a mask and a costume and fighting crime on one’s own is the right thing to do. This takes time and care.
Webb is in no hurry, and neither was I. The Amazing Spider-Man is one of those rare cases when expectations and execution match up perfectly, which, for this type of popcorn movie, makes for a thoroughly satisfying experience.
***½
Sunday, 25 March 2012
The Hunger Games
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Lenny Kravitz
**
By Alan Bacchus
I knew two things about this film before going in: One, that it's the story of a group of teenagers thrown together in a forest-arena of sorts to fight out some kind of battle to the death; and two, that it originated from a series of books aimed at young adults. And assuming the target audience for the film would be those same young people, something just didn't add up. How do you tell a story about such a sick and twisted blood sport which inexorably leads to everyone dying and not have it violent, grisly bloody and thus rated R?
Simple, you cheat the audience, and deliver a syropy and soft ultra light version of Battle Royale, the monumentally superior version of this story made in Japan in 2001.
The opening is especially clunky, establishing the near future and dystopian world where a 'Pan American' state, post WWIII, is divided into 12 districts policed in part by the aforementioned annual spectacle of death called The Hunger Games. The visual design of this world is dull and unimpressive, combining the rural future landscape of say, The Postman, where technology is only in the hands of the elite, and the garish pop art world of Speed Racer, wherein the Games organizers strut around in renaissance style coloured wigs and caked on makeup.
The set up involves showing how a boy and girl are chosen from each state to compete in the games to the death. Naturally, there's immense fear and trepidation from all those who qualify. We know Jennifer Lawrence's character Katniss Everdeen will get chosen (well, kind of), but it's the male choice, Peeta Mellark (Hutcherson) a character we don't know that allows the gravitas of the situation to set in. Unfortunately this fear is gradually wittled away as the film moves along.
A high concept like this requires bullet proof plotting and character motivations in order suspend our disbelief. If this can't be achieved filmmakers have a couple other options at their disposal. Tone, specifically humour, allows us to glance passed illogical plotholes. Most of the comparable films made in this genre are satircal. Battle Royale, for sure, had a sharp acerbic wit, Death Race 2000 had similar political overtones but under the guise of a shameless b-movie. The Truman Show figures prominently in the mix as well, but which had a very direct and effective statement on reality television and voyeurism. The Hunger Games does not appear to allude to anything, or have any kind of message. We're simply asked to accept this world as reality without question. A world where civilization has devolved to such a bloodthirsty state that the population at large would not only allow this to happen but cheer it on. I didn't buy it for a second.
That said, I don't disapprove of spilling the blood of minors for the sake of entertainment. Indeed this is what I wanted to see, but was willing to accept an alternative if there was some kind of intellectually superior substitute. Nope, it turns out to be a love story, setting up a Twilight-like love triangle in the ensuring films.
Blood or not, we don't even get to see some cool action. Gary Ross's abysmally directed action scenes are shot with that generic 'television-style' shaky camera where you don't really see anything. Thus, no panache, no flair, no excitement, avoiding bloodshed at costs which is most likely the reason for the annoying camerawork. Of course, this goes back to the audience, young adults, the Twilight audience who can't pay to see R-rated movies. There's nothing wrong with that, but it just makes Ross' job more challenging - something he sadly fails at.
Another shameful creative decision was to portray the other kids in the Games as 'evil', violent baddies who revel in the sport, as opposed to the innocent youth, simply chosen at random by the state. We don't get to know any of the other contestants, other than their black and white characterizations.
The only thing to praise in this film is the section after the participants are chosen and before they are put into the arena. It's this 'training period' where we meet Katniss and Peeta's mentor, played by Lenny Kravitz and Woody Harrelson who engage the pair with genuine affection, forming the strongest relationships in the film. Unfortunately, I think we have to wait until parts 2 and 3 before we see how these relationships play out.
Friday, 23 March 2012
Letter Never Sent
Starring: Tatyana Samojlova, Yevgeni Urbansky, Innokenti Smoktunovsky, Vasili Livanov
****
By Alan Bacchus
Part of my own personal cinematic bucket list has been achieved with the release and viewing of this film. It comes from Mikhail Kalatozov, a master director virtually unknown by most of the cinematic world. It’s the second film in a remarkable trio of films, sandwiched between The Cranes Are Flying (1957) and I Am Cuba (1964), three pictures marked by a impassioned patriotic zeal, romanticized melodrama in the grandest form and virtostic camerawork unrivalled by few if anyone in cinema.
For decades, even being a Palme D’Or winner for The Cranes Are Flying, Kalatozov was off the cinematic radar, that is, until the rediscover of I Am Cuba by Martin Scorsese and Francis Coppola and its restoration by Milestone Films in the 90’s. The discovery of that film was akin to finding a Federico Fellini, or Stanley Kubrick toiling away behind the iron curtain unknown to the West. Years later the Criterion Collection restored and released The Cranes Are Flying in 2001. Looking on Kalatozov’s filmography I knew of the Letter Never Sent, released in between these two pictures, which made its unavailability immensely frustrating. A few years ago a print of Letter played at the Tribeca Film Festival, but it still remained unavailable to the public at large - until now.
The film gloriously lives up to my own personal hype, resulting in an awesome cinematic experience as moving and astounding as say, Lawrence of Arabia. It’s a simple story of survival, four Russian geologists dropped off in remote Siberia digging for diamonds in hopes of discovering a repository of new wealth for the State at large. Kalatozov’s wideangled and mobile camera captures first the joys of discovery of the propective diamond mine and the horrors of nature's cruelty when the group gets lost in a rampaging forest fire.
All the while a love triangle brews within the group between Tanya (Samojlova) and her lover Andrei and the forlorn attraction of poor Sergei who desperately pines after Tanya. The juxtaposition of this interpersonal conflict against the background of the most harrowing of climates on earth is staggering. But at all times Kalatozov’s weighs the scales evenly between the human experience and the spectacle of the adventure.
The key set piece in the film is the awesome forest fire sequence. For about 20mins the foursome is forced to escape the KMs-long rampage of flames, a sequence marked by impossibly realistic set design and intense visual compositions and mise-en-scene.
Gradually the environment wittles the crew down to three, then two and then one. The final act is unbelievably harrowing and dramatic. The final two crew members huddling together to survive, with no food, no water, and blistering cold winds. There’s a death scene shot in this sequence that is so utterly emotional and sad. At this moment, it becomes just one person against nature in a sequence which has the remaining survivor drifting down a river on a log, virtually frozen, waiting for a miracle. The miracle that does arrive which pushes the film into the stratosphere.
Fans of Cranes and Cuba will find Letter Kalatozov’s least stylish in terms of camerawork. Some of the flashier moves, such as the spiral staircase shot in Cranes or the astonishing long takes in Cuba are mostly absent, but replaced by equally startling compositions against the stark Siberian backgrounds and elaborate choreography of his characters through the thick forest wilderness.
Part of Kalatozov’s modus operandi, which is perhaps why he was persona non grata for so many years, is the strong feelings of patriotism and support of the Soviet socialist agenda. There’s no doubt I Am Cuba is was made under strict propaganda rules. In the Letter Never Sent, the motivation of the four characters to succeed is firmly established for the good of the Soviet people as opposed to personal wealth. And never is there any conflict amongst the group for this. Regardless of one’s politics, their selfless devotion to their cause is so passionate we desperately want our heroes to live and survive.
A shame it took this long for most of the world to find the Letter Never Sent. There’s no doubt in my mind it should be considered one of the greatest adventure films ever made, and despite it’s mere 96min running time, an epic as grand conceptually and thematically as there’s ever been in cinema.
Letter Never Sent is available on Blu-Ray from the Criterion Collection
Friday, 9 December 2011
The Four Feathers (1939)
The Four Feathers (1939) dir. Zoltan Korda
Starring: John Clements, Ralph Richardson, June Duprez, C. Aubrey Smith
***
By Greg Klymkiw
I wonder if it's better, at least with some movies, to hold childhood memories dear and assume those same feelings of joy will NEVER be rekindled in adulthood. Zoltan Korda's celebrated 1939 film adaptation of A.E.W. Mason's turn-of-the-century Boys Own-styled novel of war and redemption during Britain's colonial struggles during the late 19th century in Egypt and Sudan, was a movie near and dear to my heart. Seeing it now, I can SEE why I loved it. I just don't FEEL it anymore.
Mason's book spawned numerous adaptations for the silver screen, and of those I've seen, I still believe it's the best. Don Sharp directed a low-budget version in the 70s with a great cast, but sub-par production value and Shekhar (Bandit Queen, Elizabeth) Kapur generated a dull, annoyingly revisionist version with the late Heath Ledger in 2002. What these subsequent versions lack, frankly, are the stunningly directed battle scenes of Korda's film (Sharp's were proficient, Kapur's a mess) and, surprisingly, the Kapur offers less food for thought in terms of the notions of imperialism and war.
It's a simple tale. Harry Faversham (John Clements) is descended from an upper-crust British family of war-mongers and against his better judgement, he follows in their footsteps. On the eve of Britain going to war with the Dervishes in Egypt and Sudan, he resigns his post. His three best friends, military men all, send him three feathers - signifying that they believe him to be a coward. His fiance, Ethne (June Duprez) and her father General Burroughs (C. Aubrey Smith) are disgusted with his decision. Ethne always loved Harry's best friend, Captain John Durrance (Ralph Richardson) anyway, so she also bestows Harry with a feather symbolizing his cowardice and breaks off her betrothal (a marriage of convenience to please her father who now has nothing but contempt for his son-in-law-to-be). Harry, is not a coward, however. Once the war begins in earnest, he secretly journeys to the middle east in disguise and sacrifices everything to rescue his three friends from the hands of the Dervishes.
This is, purely and simply, a great story! Great! As a movie, it would take a total bonehead to mess it up and Zoltan Korda (along with legendary producer Alexander Korda) render it with skill, production value and impeccable taste. So why, you might ask, does the movie not send me soaring to the same heights I ascended as a young boy? It's a reasonable question and one I find difficult to answer. Allow me to try.
The movie opens with an astounding battle montage that lays the historical groundwork for what follows. So far, so good. We're then introduced to Harry as a young man and get a sense of of his intelligent, sensitive, introspective nature - at odds with his family and those around him. Leaping ten years later, we find him on the cusp of marriage and war. When he resigns his commission, he makes it clear to both his superiors and fiance that his dream is to use his wealth to HELP people, not to engage in senseless war (especially this one which, is rooted in both vengeance and the maintenance of colonial exploitation). When the movie settles into Harry coming to the decision to assist his comrades and begin the long, dangerous journey into the Middle East, the movie begins to slow down - not so much due to pace, but because a number of interesting elements that have been introduced take a back seat to the proceedings.
Korda seems to settle into a weird auto-pilot here. We get all the basic plot details by rote, but with little passion. Oh, there's plenty of spirit infused in the surface action, but by abandoning the very interesting thematic and character-rooted ideas of a man struggling with the "values" of colonialism is precisely what drags the movie down. This theme is not one rooted in the same kind of revisionism applied to contemporary adaptations of period work, but is, in fact, anchored in both the source material and the first third of the screenplay. Even more odd, is that we don't adequately get a sense of how Harry's friendship with the three men is what pushes him forward. He pushes forward because the plot would have it so.
As a kid, this WAS good enough. Alas, as an adult, it's not - especially since the groundwork of some very interesting and ahead of its time notions of anti-colonialism are introduced, but dropped and/or just glanced upon. Plot takes over, but there are layers - already and consciously set-up - that are begging to be plumbed.
When the film shifts its focus to his old pal John and we're treated to an astounding night attack sequence upon the British by the Dervishes, the movie springs miraculously back to life. When Harry catches up to John and the arduous rescue sequence across the desert begins, the movie slows down again. This time, it's a similar problem. Korda hits all the plot points, but seldom rests long enough to explore the true resonance of the tale.
There are several more rescue and action scenes - including a battle sequence that is clearly one of the best ever committed to film, so this is not to say I was disappointed in seeing the movie again. On the contrary, it's still a fine story and there's enough by way of spectacular derring-do with a huge cast, great costumes and stunning technicolor photography. The problem, perhaps, is all mine - assuming it's possible to recreate childhood wonder with EVERY movie I loved as a kid.
It's not the movie's fault. Korda ultimately delivered what audiences at the time wanted. After all, the world was on the cusp of war with Hitler. Propaganda in all things war-related was starting to heat up.
Historically, in terms of the British film industry, this movie and subsequent British films thrived because of the Act of Parliament passed in 1927 which instituted a stringent exhibition quota that lasted for ten years and was responsible for developing a vibrant indigenous film industry in Britain. Sure, there were bombs and it also gave way to what was referred to as the "quota quickie" (low budget B-movies), but it helped the Korda family establish a great British studio and generate product that, while expensive and unable to recoup costs entirely in Britain, did so spectacularly in the international marketplace. It also gave rise to consistent output from the likes of Alfred Hitchcock and The Powell-Pressburger Archers' team.
The Four Feathers was beloved the world over - for decades. Certainly, as a child, it did what it was supposed to do and as an adult, it has plenty of great things going for it. It's a good movie. Don't mind me.
"The Four Feathers" is now available on a Criterion Blu-ray version. The source material seems to have needed quite a brush-up and, at the very least, the colour is spectacular. The uncompressed mono sound is a joy - proving once again that a great mono mix is as spectacular as anything. There's a bevy of decent extras in this package including an audio commentary by film historian Charles Drazin, a new video interview with David Korda, son of director Zoltán Korda, "A Day at Denham", a short film from 1939 featuring footage of Zoltán Korda on the set of "The Four Feathers", a trailer and an essay by Michael Sragow.
Wednesday, 16 November 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Ralph Fiennes, Alan Rickman
***½
By Alan Bacchus
I was a naysayer of this series in several of my Potter reviews citing the dullness of the three leads and their lack of character development. The plotting seemed to ramp up in the last four movies, which created confusion for those who didn’t care to keep up. This, of course, is my fault. But this time I watched all the previous films over the course of a couple of weeks before completing the franchise. Miraculously, in the final episode, Potter pulls out its best film by connecting the dots from the course of the series resulting in a truly satisfying and emotional conclusion.
When we last left Potter and his pals they were looking for the ‘horcruxes’, trinkets through which Voldemort had transformed his soul during that historic battle with Harry’s mother and father and left Potter with the lightning bolt scar. These horcruxes become the mission du jour, the destruction of which will eventually defeat the dark lord.
Meanwhile, Voldemort has found the 'elder wand', which is all-powerful and certainly no match for Potter. As Voldemort assembles his army, the wizards at Hogwarts are fortifying the castle with a force field of sorts, ready for the eventual siege.
The siege on Hogwarts is exciting, rendered with creative and well designed special effects. And while the action is fast and furious, Harry’s search for the final horcrux located in Hogwarts forces him to finally come face to face with his destiny.
The dramatic guts of the entire series lay in a remarkable and revelatory sequence, which traces the connection of Severus Snape, Dumbledore and Potter himself. It’s a 20-year journey that affects the decisions of Potter in the present. This is the stuff of great epic storytelling and David Yates and company execute these key reveals with maximum dramatic impact.
A secret is revealed, which admittedly I guessed in the last film. However, the best twists are not the sudden or arbitrary reversals of fortune but rather the reactions of the characters to these twists of fate.
With that said, the filmmakers also commit a diabolical CHEAT.
SPOILER ALERT…As implied above, we come to learn that Harry himself is a horcrux. In the back of our minds (and Harry’s) we expected this. And when this information is revealed it is still a shocker, as Harry must die to save the world. What a dramatic decision to make. And indeed Harry makes that decision and sacrifices his life.
Yet when Harry’s death is revealed to Hermione and the other Hogwarts wizards, he comes back to life. WHAT? I’m sure there was a magical explanation for this somewhere, but it’s a cheap bait-and-switch tactic that betrays the build-up before it.
It’s a blip that prevents this film from becoming great and marking itself with cinematic perfection. Oh, how close the filmmakers came to that. Nonetheless, it’s still the most successful franchise in the history of cinema, so no one other than me seems to care.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 is available on Blu-ray from Warner Home Entertainment.
Sunday, 25 September 2011
Hero's Island
Hero's Island (1962) dir. Leslie Stevens
Starring: James Mason, Kate Manx, Warren Oates, Rip Torn, Harry Dean Stanton, Neville Brand, Robert Sampson and Brendan Dillon
**1/2
By Greg Klymkiw
"Revenge. Revenge. REVENGE!!! I am the devil! Oh yes I am. I have lived in Hell. I've wrecked and burned a hundred ships. I don't pull a plough!" - James Mason as Blackbeard the Pirate in Hero's IslandWhat's not to love about James Mason?
He was, without question, one of the most versatile screen actors of all time. It's impossible to take one's eyes off the guy and that distinctive mellifluous voice worked perfectly whether he played a hero, villain or everything in between. Who will ever forget him in any number of roles that he might as well have patented: Johnny McQueen in Odd Man Out, Carol Reed's classic crime thriller about "the troubles"; the ill-fated Hendrik van der Zee in Albert Lewin's Pandora and the Flying Dutchman; the two-faced Roman turn-coat Brutus in Julius Caesar, the doomed boozer Mr. Norman Maine in A Star is Born; the suave villain VanDamm in Hitchcock's North By Northwest; the lecherous pedophile Humber Humbert in Kubrick's Lolita; the heavenly bureaucrat Mr. Jordan in Warren Beatty's Heaven Can Wait; his stunning supporting turn as Paul Newman's nemesis, the sleazy, slimy powerful lawyer Concannon in Sidney Lumet's The Verdict.
Of course, my favourite Mason performance is that of the breeding plantation owner Warren Maxwell in the best movie of all time, Richard Fleischer's Mandingo where, sporting a first-rate accent of the Deep South, Mason reeled off one great line after another - the best being advice he imparts to his son: "Your wife craves you has wenches. She wants for you to have wenches. Keeps her from havin' to submit."
Oh, and have I mentioned yet that he played Captain Nemo in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea? Captain FUCKING Nemo!!!
The above are some of his quintessential roles, but as a producer, he also generated a handful of extremely interesting films - Michael Powell's deleriously sexy Age of Consent where he played the middle aged artist who falls in love with a mostly nude 22-year-old Helen Mirren and most notably as the prescription-drug-addicted Ed Avery in Nicholas Ray's astonishing Bigger Than Life.
One of the pictures Mason produced was, however, completely unknown to me until recently. It's a corker of an 18th century boys' adventure story called Hero's Island.
Written and directed by Leslie Stevens (who would go on to direct William Shatner in Incubus, the only feature film made entirely in Esperanto), we follow the adventures of Devon and Thomas Mainwaring (Kate Manx and Brendan Dillon respectively), their two children and their loyal friend Wayte (Warren Oates) - indentured servants who have recently been given their freedom and bequeathed an entire island in the Carolinas. Here they look forward to a new life of freedom and as landowners no less. Alas, the Gates family - inbred fishermen led by Enoch (Robert Sampson) and his knotheaded brothers Nicky (Rip Torn) and Dixie (Harry Dean Stanton) are laying claim to the island and order the settlers out. In an altercation, they murder Devon's husband. She's devastated, to be sure, but she orders Wayte not to seek vengeance through violence. As an indentured servant, she was raised in the (I kid you not!!!) Quaker Christian tradition.
Things change when a bearded sailor who goes by the name of Jacob (James Mason) is washed ashore, tied to a plank and bearing a sign that reads: "Dead Man". Clearly there is more to him than meets the eye. He's cultured, well-versed in the seafaring tradition and still has his fancy sabre strapped to him. Wayte immediately suspects Jacob is someone rather notorious who has been the victim of a mutiny. This would be true. He is Blackbeard the Pirate.
Well, this is a pretty good deal for all concerned. Blackbeard can handle these yahoos no problem.
When the Gates brothers bribe the evil governor, Kingstree (Neville Brand) and his henchmen on a neighbouring island to take back the land by force, Blackbeard decides he's not about to risk his freedom (being a wanted man and all) for the sake of a piece of rock in the open water.
This, is clearly NOT a good deal for all concerned. How is a Quaker woman and her children going to handle this one?
Well, she IS a gorgeous Quaker woman, her kids are blonde cherubim and when Blackbeard witnesses Kingstree committing a horrific, merciless act of murder (no, I won't spoil it and tell you who it is), he clearly must leap into action.
Carnage ensues and, happily, the Quaker woman discovers the value of firearms. This IS America after all.
Okay, I'll be honest here and say that Hero's Island is clearly no undiscovered cinematic diamond mine, but as far as swashbuckling adventures go, it's a solid vein of Amethyst. First off, we've got James Mason. 'Nuff said. Secondly, take a look at that supporting cast - Warren Oates, Harry Dead Stanton, Rip Torn and Neville Brand! 'Nuff said. Thirdly, Kate Manx (the director's real-life wifey) is mighty babe-o-licious!
From a directorial standpoint, Stevens handles the proceedings with solid craft and even attempts a few daring approaches to the material - one of which is a terrific, long single take where Manx and Mason each reveal their innermost turmoil to each other. There are also a couple of tremendous POV shots from behind Neville Brand (a really great villainous turn, by the way), one of which has his tall black hat in the foreground and James Mason walking towards him - arms outstretched like Christ. Finally, there's a really well-choregraphed sabre duel between Mason and Brand that puts many contemporary herky-jerky action scenes to shame.
Stevens eventually made his mark in American television as the creator, writer, producer and occasionally director of such excellent series as the original The Outer Limits, McCloud, The Virginian and the original Battlestar Galactica.
And, of course, lest we forget Stevens's most notorious achievement - the only feature shot completely in Esperanto - with Bill Shatner, no less.
Hero's Island is a recent release from the MGM Archives. Like many studios we'll be seeing more and more of these on-demand DVDs. The problem is that it delivers movie fans a whole mess of films for premium prices and straight-up transfers to DVD-R. The widescreen transfer for Hero's Island looks just fine on a laptop, but leaves a bit to be desired on a bigger monitor. It's also hard to get them. Only a few retailers stock any titles at all (in Toronto, Canada the Yonge-Dundas Sunrise Records carries a huge number of them as does the old Starstruck Video located at Dundas and Tomken) and the only other option is online ordering which not only costs the premium price but shipping and handling. This is well and good for titles people are willing to buy at any cost, but given that something like Hero's Island was unknown even to me (someone who has psychotically seen over 30,000 movies), it seems a shame that a decent James Mason swashbuckler isn't available at a more reasonable price point.
Tuesday, 12 July 2011
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Starring: Shia Leboeuf, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Josh Duhamel, Tyrese Gibson, John Turturro, Frances McDormand, John Malkovich
***
By Alan Bacchus
Here we go again – another round of Bay-bashing. And really, it’s so easy to hate this stuff. Certainly in this latest chapter of the Transformers ‘saga’, as before, it's more mind-numbing beat downs of sight and sound. Metal machines pounding each other endlessly, hyper-active human characters talking a mile a minute, American patriotism gone wild.
I had fun with the first film, if anything simply to watch what I had once thought was an unfilmable franchise turned into an impressive array of top notch special effects and eye-popping real world explosions, stunts and action. There were even some genuinely likeable and fun characters to enjoy, namely Sam Witwicky’s affable mom and dad.
By the second film, the repetition wore out its welcome very quickly – like after the first five minutes – thus rendering the theatrical experience assaulting. Even Sam's parents were annoying.
And so, with little expectations other than the smattering of lenient critics calling it the ‘best of the series’, Transformers: Dark of the Moon is a pleasant surprise. Sure, it clocks in at two-and-a-half hours, but it moves quickly.
Writer Ehren Kruger’s chief improvement is a simplification in character and plot. The opening establishes the reason for the title, Dark of the Moon – a fun riff on history, wherein Kruger postulates that the reason for the Apollo mission was to investigate and recover a downed alien spacecraft from the early ‘60s. Bay and company have fun with these conspiracy theories, including a jaunt to Chernobyl, and they plot out a fun backstory, which seems to erase what was established in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. So, objection here.
In the present, our hero Sam Witwicky is out of school looking for a job but frustrated that his hero status has been shoved under the rug by the government to cover up the presence of the Transformers robots. The Decepticons still exist in hiding and are plotting a scheme by which they can recover an important artifact from the Moon to revive the body of a long lost Autobot leader. This old robot does come to life in the form of ‘Sentinel Prime’ (voiced well by Leonard Nimoy), who may or may not be working for the Decepticons. Ultimately, the evil robots aim to construct a giant portal that would bring the entire planet of Cybertron to Earth for the purposes of intergalactic colonization.
Surprisingly, Transformers works well in 3-D. Most of the problems with this new medium have been corrected by Mr. Bay – there’s little, if any, ‘double imaging’, the brightness level was normal, the 3-D process accepted Bay’s kinetic action scenes well and I got no headaches! What an improvement from Avatar.
Because of the 3-D process, Bay’s shooting style was significantly toned down, for the better. Longer, wider shots tend to improve the scope of the spectacle aids. In full action, the robots were actually discernible, and for the first time in the series it wasn’t just a swash of colour and light blurred across the screen. In fact, this film might just have the least amount of action with much of it back-ended during the Chicago siege sequence. Bay takes his time and lets humour push the film into the third act when it gets wild and crazy. Arguably the best sequence involves very little robot action. It’s a fun adventure for Sam and his military team sliding across a Chicago building toppling over on its side.
Strong new characters add some freshness where the old ones had become stale. Frances McDormand’s tight-ass Chief of Staff character is fun, and she’s one of three Coen Bros. alum (including mainstay John Turturro) going along with the fun. Burn After Reading’s John Malkovich goes over-the-top in a role as Sam Witwicky’s looney boss. The ubiquitous Ken Jeong does what he does best as an equally looney conspiracy nut. And Alan Tudyk is just plain batshit crazy as a German assistant to John Turturro.
The new Megan Fox, Victoria’s Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, is a marked improvement. She actually might have some acting chops, and she certainly has a better funny bone than Ms. Fox had in the series.
Considering the license to print money this series has become, like the Pirates series, I don't doubt we will see more Transformers movies in the future. But thankfully, I doubt we’ll see Michael Bay back at the helm. Instead, he’ll likely be moving on to more creatively inspiring directorial ventures. We’ll see.
Tuesday, 1 February 2011
SUNDANCE 2011 - The Troll Hunter
Starring: Otto Jespersen, Glenn Erland Tosterud, Johanna Morck, Tomas Alf Larsen, Urmila Berg-Domaas
***
By Alan Bacchus
After a festival of heavy brooding dramas The Troll Hunter was a breath of fresh air, a lively adventure film using the now-entrenched found footage technique mixed with a fun b-movie creature-feature genre.
Playing in the Midnight Section, it wasn’t a premiere for The Troll Hunter as it played to excited audiences at Fantastic Fest, but with the elevated playing field of Park City which meant more traditional journalists and international buyers watching the film, it was a signficant inclusion in the Festival.
We catch up with the story following two film students on the tail of a alleged bear poacher who may or may not be hunting bears illegally around the rural Norwegian hinterland. The kids are both adventurous and naïve in their attempts to interview the mysterious hunter. Sensing the kids’ enthusiasm and the fact they have a camcorder available to document the trip, the Hunter brings them along. After the first encounter they’re soon to learn the Hunter is not hunting bears but trolls, giant trolls.
We learn that trolls are not uncommon, in fact, they’ve been rounded up and placed in special quarantined forests for years by the Norwegian government, but with four trolls on the loose outside their designated area the Troll Hunter has been sent to capture or kill them.
With the delicious governmental conspiracy in place Øvredal executes a fun filled monster-movie highlighted by some fantastic old school special effects. Although Ray Harryhausen is the inspiration the effects are invisible and seamlessly incorporated into the verite found footage imagery. And Øvredal admirably learns from the mistakes some of these other found footage films by keeping the camera level and steady for most of the time, thus losing the ugly nauseating shakiness. That said, there are subtitles to read as well so I highly recommend sitting way in the back.
Written as a classic b-movie anti-hero, the Hunter is placed in the Snake Plisskin/Indiana Jones mold, a soft spoken, big stick carrying fighter who does his tasks with workmanlike efficiency. The seriousness of his demeanour, and ho-um attitude to the fact that he’s fighting living breathing trolls. contributes greatly to deadpan ironic humour.
This peculiar Scandinavian sense of humour, the incorporation of Norwegian mythology, and even a little bit of black metal heard in the end credits make this a uniquely Norwegian action/horror film.
Monday, 6 December 2010
Mutiny on the Bounty
Starring: Clark Gable, Charles Laughton, Franchot Tone, Eddie Quillan, Dudley Digges
****
By Alan Bacchus
High seas adventure cinema par excellence. Three big screen versions of this story have been made and there’s no doubt this version is the best. Five Academy Awards nominations including a winner for best picture doesn't lie, but watching Clark Gable in his prime squaring off against Charles Laughton is undeniably powerful and exciting cinema.
It's 1789, the Fletcher Christian (Gable), is scouring the port for sailors and midshipmen to pilot the HMS Bounty, a King's ship assigned to a mission to Tahiti. It's two year expedition, a lengthy journey which frightens some, but it's the Captain, William Bligh (Laughton) who strikes the fear of God in the men.
Bligh lives by the code of leadership by fear. Fear of the brutal punishment which Bligh continually inflicts on his men. Whether it's whipping with a cat 'o' nine tails or keel hauling, the crew take beating after beating. Christian watches in horror but knows Bligh's orders are condoned by the laws of the King. After arriving at Tahiti and enjoying three months of tropical bliss, once back on the ship Christian just can't take it anymore and fights back against Bligh, engineering the most famous mutiny in sailing history.
Charles Laughton and Clark Gable are a terrific match. Two of the great adversaries ever on film. One American, arguably the biggest star in the world, and the other one of Britain's best actors. Though Laughton is shorter and considerably less handsome, he is an imposing presence on screen. It’s interesting to note Clark Gable using his usual American accent to play a Briton. Strangely it doesn’t matter. All it takes is Gable’s personification of honour and poise which makes him believable as an upper classman of Britain.
It was a big production then and even 80+ years later the production value is still stunning and realistic. The castoff scene for instance which launches the Bounty is staged magnificently by director Lloyd, full of epic grandeur. If anything many of the Tahiti scenes, shot on a sound stage with rear projected palm trees, look fake and betrays the realism of the sailing sequences.
But in all versions of the story, and this one included, the weakest moments all seem to be the Tahiti sequences wherein the crew of the Bounty make stay on the island for 3 months collecting fruit, sunbathing in skimpy bathing suits, bedding the native women and in general living high on the hog. While this sequence in this picture is unabashedly sentimental and conflict free the period of rest is necessary for the audience. For when the crew eventually gets back on the ship and into the cauldron of punishment from the Captain it seems even more intense and cruel. And thus, the eventual Mutiny in the second half becomes even more cathartic.
The fact is when Bligh and Christian are on board together at sea, it’s a cinematic dynamo of tension and conflict. The actual mutiny scene seems to come as an afterthought, and based on the intense build up, the scene is, if anything, under whelming. Despite the faults of the 1962 version, the calmer more reluctant muniteer as portrayed by Brando and under the direction of Lewis Milestone executes his mutiny with more panache , but at nearly 3 hours, it's simply too long to hold our attention before this scene. At 130 mins, the 1935 seems just right.
'The Mutiny on the Bounty" is available on Blu-Ray from Warner Home Video
Thursday, 2 December 2010
The Sorceror’s Apprentice
Starring: Jay Baruchel, Nicolas Cage, Alfred Molina, Theresa Palmer, Alice Krige
**1/2
By Alan Bacchus
The celebrated Mickey Mouse segment from Disney’s Fantasia serves as the jumping off point for this latest Bruckheimer/Disney production. It’s the same team that made the National Treasure series (Turtletaub/Bruckheimer/Cage), and so it’s commercial critical, and creative failure is one of the surprises of the summer.
The Fantasia segment serves only as an inspiration for a story as opposed to modelling a feature out of the story or tone of the original. In fact when the Fantasia scene does come in the narrative of this new version, it feels unnecessary and takes us out of the film.
About 4 or 5 writers construct a brand new mythology, not established in any previous story, or video game. Nicholas Cage plays Balthazar Blake a sorceror who apprentices under Merlin in the Middle Ages, when the evil Lady Morgana (from the same Arthurian story) Merlin, Blake fights her off and imprisons her and her fellow evil sorcerors in a nesting doll, each layer representing a trapped villain. Before death Merlin transfers his power to a ring which can only be unlocked by the one Prime 'Merlinian'.
It takes Blake thousands of years before finding the Prime Merlinian in modern day Manhattan, a pathetical physics geek Dave Stutler (Jay Baruchel). After overcoming his reluctance Dave becomes Blake’s protege, learning the skills of a sorceror like a student learns kung fu from mentor. On the loose is Maxim Horvath (Alfred Molina) who desires to unlock Morgana from the nesting doll and spread evil around the world, etc etc.
Half of this synopsis is told to us in a shamelessly expository flashback sequence along with a very simple recitation of the backstory in voiceover. Most movies try to hide this type of dry description of information, and so the laziness by the screenwriters in this film is oft-putting at the start.
It’s the same kind of action-comedy formula as most of these Disney action adventure movies. The battling-buddy dynamic of Cage and Baruchel never finds it’s groove. Baruchel’s affable geek schtick is less annoying than other roles, but his heart just doesn’t seem to be in this one. The romance between he and his gal-pal is perfuctory, and there’s never any real urgency to fight evil or save the girl.
Cage doesn’t have much to work with either. He’s only given a couple of good lines – a crack about pointy shoes is funny, and is smartly reused throughout the film. But he just doesn’t seem to have been able to let loose and chew it up like he’s done so well recently in Bad Lieutenant or Kick Ass.
At least a star and a half in this review is due solely to the production design and special effects work – a perfect blending of good old fashioned practical in camera effects, magnificent real world production design, and sparing use of CG and blue screen. The real Manhattan locations helps give credibility and believeabilty to this world as well. The special powers and weaponry used by the heroes and baddies seems kinda plausible and admirably never go over the top. A decent featurette on the Blu-Ray shows off everyone’s enthusiasm for this old-style brand of filmmaking.
Unfortunately, someone forgot about the story and character, both of which are underwhelming and sadly muted, thus wasting one of better looking films we’ve seen this year.
The Sorceror’s Apprentice is available on Blu-Ray and DVD from Walt Disney Home Entertainment
Thursday, 18 November 2010
The Bridge on the River Kwai
Starring: Alec Guinness, Sessue Hayakawa, William Holden, James Donald, Jack Hawkins
****
By Alan Bacchus
I once met a WWII veteran who was imprisoned in a Japanese POW camp not unlike the one depicted in this film. Not surprisingly, his opinion of the realism of this film was bunkum. In Kwai, David Lean and producer Sam Spiegel romanticize prison camp life, dulling down the shear brutality and torture that occurred, but as someone once said, "the truth should never get in the way of a good story" and The Bridge on the River Kwai is one of the greats.
Lean was a master of framing great characters against huge canvasses of war. Such is the case with Kwai and his duelling rivals: Col Saito and Col Nicholson. Saito is the hard-line commandant of a POW camp in Western Thailand charged with building a bridge to complete the Burmese Railway, while Nicholson is the British career officer determined to maintain his dignity and pride, even if it means collaborating with the enemy and thus building a bridge better than the Japanese could to prove his superiority as a soldier and man of honour.
Character depth is heavily weighted towards Nicholson, unfortunately, as, after the first act, Saito gets the short shrift. But it's a magnificent character arc for Nicholson, culminating in blowing up his own bridge, a great cinematic representation of the contradictions of war, not unlike the absurdities in Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket or Renoir's The Grand Illusion.
Lean contrasts Nicholson's British snobbiness with the pragmatism of the American Shears, played by William Holden, who provides the parallel story to the action in the camp. His un-heroic escape from prison and eventual return to regain his pride and dignity links up memorably with the grand finale.
The standard plastic jewel box just wouldn't cut it for a film of this grandeur and prestige. As such, though it's not bursting at the seams with extras, the new Blu-Ray comes in a large, beautifully designed, sturdy box worthy of the greatness of the film inside. Along with the pristine looking high-def image, this "collector's edition" comes with a glossy hardcover book with photos and liner notes to go along with some of the requisite, but unnecessary, "lobby cards."Seriously, does anyone really care about lobby cards?
Though British soldiers in Japanese war camps weren't whistling military marches during their incarceration, in terms of cinematic storytelling, The Bridge on the River Kwai is still a jolly good show.
Wednesday, 20 October 2010
The Mission
Starring: Robert De Niro, Jeremy Irons, Liam Neeson, Ray McAnally, Aidan Quinn, Cherie Lunghi
**1/2
By Alan Bacchus
The Mission won the Palme D’Or in 1986, was nominated for a bunch of Oscars, but 25 years later the film’s lasting reputation seems to more about its score than the movie. Ask most people what they first think of when asked about The Mission and they’ll likely say that film with the great score.
Indeed Ennio Morricone’s music is beautiful, a grand orchestral epic feeling full for hypnotizing indigenous choral chanting. Unfortunately it sets a pace that the film itself just can’t keep up with.
The story finds a Jesuit priest Gabriel (Jeremy Irons) scaling up the impressively beautiful Iguazu Falls to meet up with the very remote and ‘uncivilized’ Guaraní peoples. After ingratiating Christianity to them they are rudely interupted by a hired mercenary/slave trader Rodrigo. Curiously the film cuts away from a violent attack back to Rodrigo in more civilized city setting wherein we learn of strife with his brother who has gone on and married his girlfriend. After a nasty duel Rodrigo kills his brother sending him into severe depression.
Enter Gabriel again who recruits him for a mission back to the Guarini to redeem himself and repent his sins. They journey up the falls and back into the welcoming arms of the peaceful peoples serves as a kind of rite of passage transforming Rodrigo into a man of peace. But with the aggressive Portuguese slavers encroaching on the land, Rodrigo rallies his new people in defence of land and God.
Another interesting note is that the screenwriter Robert Bolt, who penned the David Lean classic Lawrence of Arabia. Joffe has nothing on Lean though, but there’s similarities in the introduction of Western values and cultures on old world populations. Visually the location work in the jungles and rivers and the placement of the New World white men in with the Old World indigenous population of South America look echo John Toll/Terrence Malick’s work in The Thin Red Line and Werner Herzog’s Aguirre Wrath of God.
The film works best as a series of set pieces, which on their own are as powerful and epic as Morricone’s great score. The opening is stunning. Joffe and Bolt creates a powerful visual metaphors by placing their hero Gabriel next to the awesome power of nature. Sound and music and visuals combine to create one of the most beautiful opening scenes of any film.
Robert De Niro gives a typically intense performance as the hardened and doomed Rodrigo. It’s De Niro in his prime using his supreme skills in the Method, producing an inside-out physical performance, and with little words.
Despite De Niro, Joffe’s visuals and Morricone’s score Joffe never finds the heart of film. It all seems an admirable technical exercise without providing a moving transcendental experience we desperately need. By the end of the nearly three hours of The Thin Red Line, we know the narrative is scattershot but Malick enlightens us spiritually the final moments provide a pleasing wave of satisfaction. Although Joffe’s chosen subject is that of Christianity and religion, there’s no spiritual depth to the material.
Other than Rodrigo, the film is bereft of any other characters with adequate weight. Jeremy Irons doesn’t do much and the relationship of Gabriel and Rodrigo is sorely underdeveloped. Irons, for most of the picture, observes and we certainly do not see any inner journey across the arc of the story.
And so, recently rewatching the film on Blu-Ray confirms why, Palme D'Or notwithstanding, the film’s soundtrack rose above the rest of the film in prestige and admiration.
'The Mission' is available on Blu-Ray from Warner Home Video
Wednesday, 13 October 2010
King Kong
Starring: Faye Wray, Robert Armstrong, Bruce Cabot, Frank Reicher, Sam Hardy
****
By Alan Bacchus
Arguably the spectacle of all spectacle films, an enormous achievement of special effects, drama and romance. It was an enormously ambitious production, the story of an ambitious filmmaker looking to capture on location cinema reality in a remote lost world-type island whose crew encounters a giant vicious ape who has a soft spot for young blondes. The film not only showed us a huge monster battling dinosaurs and climbing the skyscrapers of New York City, but an undeniably sincere romance of beast to woman, and the heartbreaking tragedy of human folly.
It's a great opening, a lengthy build up to reveal the big monster. We meet the wily film director Carl Wenham on a ship docked in a foggy New York harbour, figuring out what to do about finding a leading lady for his latest production. He has enough confidence and guile to think he can find a desperate woman on the street in the middle of the night, someone willing to travel across the world for a chance at adventure and fame. Well he find it, in the person of the innocent and determined young actress Ann Darrow. After a quiet cup of coffee, the pitch worked and soon they're sailing toward their mysterious destination.
Once there they find the deliciously-named Skull Island inhabited by surley natives who seem to worship some kind of large creature housed by giant wooden doors. When the natives kidnap poor Ann and tie her up to rock in a sacrificial ceremony we finally get to see the monstrous beast which plies the land – a giant ape named Kong. Kong takes Ann into the jungle, an even more dangerous environment with old world dinosaurs and other strange creatures. Carl, his crew and Ann’s new beau Jack Driscoll go into the jungle to save Ann, eventually stunning Kong. When they bring Kong back home he’s turned into a circus performer, as the Eighth Wonder of the World. As we all know, the chains refuse to hold Kong, and he escapes into the city to find his one true love, the luscious Ann Driscoll, while destroying much of art deco Manhattan.
One of the miracles of this picture is the life which renowned animator Willis O’Brien creates out of his clay Kong figurine. It seems like rudimentary stop motion with today’s eyes, Kong’s fur constantly shifting around his body even when nothing in happening, for instance, and even the rough transitions between the 22 inch clay Kong and the large scale model of his head for close-ups, but there’s a character there, real emotions, rendered better than any actor in the film.
This leads to the heartbreaking finale. As King Kong battles the biplanes from the tippy top of the world’s tallest building, his feet barely hanging on, on the brink of falling off, a sitting duck target for the machine gun fire of the brutal military instruments of man, not a soul in the world doesn’t feel saddened by Kong’s fate.
The fact is, King Kong is the tear jerking for guys. Some may say it’s Braveheart or Gladiator. If you don’t get that lump in your throat, or a tear in your eye from watching Kong fall off the building, you’re not a man.
And for fans of this picture, please check out the pedigree of these filmmakers. There's a bit of King Kong in the other Cooper/Schoedsack pictures, Four Feathers, The Most Dangerous Game, Last Days of Pompeii, and Rango and the Merian C Cooper/Irving Pichel production of She.
King Kong is available on Blu-Ray from Warner Home Video
Wednesday, 29 September 2010
Robin Hood
Starring: Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchett, Mark Strong, William Hurt, Max Von Sydow
**1/2
By Alan Bacchus
A long time ago I ceased to expect anything on the level of Alien or Blade Runner from Mr. Scott. While his filmography is peppered with legitimately fine films such as Thelma and Louise, Black Hawk Down, Hannibal even Matchstick Men (!), his late career output seems to be more disappointments. So I refuse to be 'disappointed' by a Ridley Scott film anymore, only surprised. And so without any pressure Robin Hood isn’t half bad – but not exactly a ringing endorsement either.
If I put to paper all the criticisms I have of this film compared to what I liked about it, i would be inclined to assign a 2 star rating or even less. But there’s an infectious energy to the picture and a couple of decent action sequences for it to satisfy. Sure it has a bloated running time way past the 120min mark. And sure, it still feels like there are large chunks of plotting and character development missing. And sure it’s another typical brooding dour and humourless performance from Russell Crowe. And sure Crowe and Blanchett are just way too old to play these characters, but let’s not dwell on what the film should have been and focus on the positives.
Sir Ridley and his scribe Brian Helgeland make a clear point to replace the traditional frolicking and swashbuckling adventure story of Curtiz/Flynn variety for a more complex-plotting multi-character narrative weaving in the actual history of the time, that is, the war between England and France, the end of the Crusade and the signing of the Magna Carta.
The action starts out with Robin Longstride, as RH was then known, as an archer in King Richard the Lionsheart’s army, on their way home from their 10 year Crusade – an endeavour which has financially crippled the land. Not understanding economics very well King John feels pressure to tax the people more to bring money in to fight off the surging French.
Sick of fighting for Richard’s ignoble ideals Robin escapes to Nottingham where Robin finds himself assuming the identity of his fallen commander Robert Loxsley, late husband to none other than Maid Marian. And so a reluctant courtship ensues, during which time he witnesses first hand the troubles the King's policies are causing, eventually leading to Robin joining forces with John to fight off the invading French.
This is the just tip of the iceberg. There’s a hell of a lot of plot going on, and though Helgeland’s writing makes everything clear there’s just not enough time to give adequate attention to everything and everyone. What’s lost are the fundamental elements of the Robin Hood story we know and love. There’s little if any robbing from the rich to giving to the poor, the traditional characters are there, including Marian, King John but also Little John, Will Scarlett, Alan O’Dale, Friar Tuck. But unfortunately these compatriots have little character or personality other than the fact that Little John is huge, Scarlett has red hair, O’Dale is a musician and Friar Tuck is fat.
But here I am laying out the criticisms again.... The best performance in the film is actually Max Von Sydow, as the blind Walter Loxley. Von Sydow had the misfortunate lately of being wasted on underwhelming roles in Shutter Island and Minority Report. But as a blind father figure to Robin he becomes the heart and soul of the film.
But what really matters is that Ridley's action scenes have flare and spectacle. Especially the final beach battle between Robin, the English army and the nasty Frenchmen which reminds us of the great finale to El Cid. Every time Russell launches his arrow at someone, or rides his horse with speed through the forest it’s fun, as such I'm OK with this film.
Robin Hood is available on Blu-Ray from Universal Studios Home Entertainment
Monday, 20 September 2010
Prince of Persia
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Gemme Arteton, Ben Kingsley, Alfred Molina,
**
By Alan Bacchus
This latest Jerry Bruckheimer/Disney production seems to be another attempt to create a new franchise in the vain of Pirates of the Caribbean. The title even suggests a chapter format or some sort, as if there’s a library of stories waiting to be told. Apparently there's a number of video games instalments of the story which serves as the source material. The full title of this one is called Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. While there’s plenty of swashbuckling action, there’s little creativity or panache in Mike Newell’s direction, none of the gleefulness of Gore Verbinski’s work in the Pirates pictures, or Louis Leterrier's scope in Clash of the Titans and most importantly there’s no Johnny Depp-worthy character icon to give cause for further instalments in this series.
Set in Persia (aka Iran) Jake Gyllenhaal plays Dastan a former street kid adopted into a royal family who is now one of the King’s trusted warriors. Rumours of illegal weapons being built in a neighbouring city prompts the King to invade and takeover the city. Dastan is the hero of the battle, and along the way comes into possession of a mysterious mystical dagger. Just like George W. Bush’s false pretences of the current Iraq war, the weapons of mass destruction in the film turn out to be a rouse to extract the ‘Sands of Time’ hidden underneath the city which fuels the dagger‘s power to travel back in time.
Soon after the king is murdered Dastan is blamed and forced to flee with the comely princess of the city, Tamina (Gemma Arteton). As fugitives, Dastan and Tamina have to fight to clear their names of the King’s murder and protect the dagger from the evildoers hot on their path.
Gemma Arteton who is in every film now is unrecognizable as the Princess. Her dark face makeup covers up her lilly-white skin complexion, and her black hair and short bangs give her an exotic look. She’s turns out to have the soul of the film. Ben Kingsley is the baddie, which isn’t revealed until the second act, but it’s not spoiling much. Though he’s completely bald he might as well be twirling a greesy moustache in the opening scenes. He’s fooling nobody. Alfred Molina is the best of everyone, but underutilized, if he was 25 years younger, he could have been the Johnny Depp character this film needs.
If anything, the Prince of Persia film would seem to be an excuse to update the old Arabian Nights tales. The middle eastern lands hasn’t been exploited for this type of Hollywood entertainment in years. Jake Gyllenhaal sports a British accent even though he’s playing a Persian. It would be a head scratching decision but it’s been the Hollywood convention to use the British accent to be the non-American catch-all manner of speech. Most importantly Jake lacks the required charisma of an Errol Flynn, Harrison Ford or Burt Lancaster (three of the great swashbuckling heroes) to make this series succeed. His parkour skills are impressive, especially when highlighted by Newell’s super slo-mo camera work, but his sleepy eyes and mostly dour expression is too downbeat to make this film a winner. Put a fork in this franchise, it was worth a shot.
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time is available on DVD and Blu-Ray from Disney Studios Home Entertainment
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)