Man of Steel Review

Man of Steel means a lot this summer. It's DC's newest tent-pole film and hopefully their key to unlocking the rest of the DC universe. I've read numerous articles about how the success of this movie will determine what happens with the troubled Justice League.

I have no doubt that financially, this will be a success. The marketing has been great and there is a good amount of buzz around it going into the weekend. As opposed to 2006's Superman Returns, this one has a lead in from Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy. With Nolan on board as producer for Man of Steel, it will carry on the dark, grittier tone of that franchise. While it's still speculative whether or not these characters will be part of a shared DC universe, Man of Steel will owe a great deal to Nolan in it's likely success.

The story is fairly straight forward. It starts by giving us a glimpse of the planet Krypton. Jor-El (Russell Crowe) and Lara Lor-Van (Ayelet Zurer) send their newborn child, Kal-El, to a far away planet to save him from the tragic fate of Krypton. Naturally this new planet happens to be Earth. Here that child is found and raised by the Kents (Kevin Costner and Diane Lane), and spends his teen years trying to live like a normal child while hiding his superhuman abilities.

As an adult he finally discovers his true origins, and after a chance run in with future love interest Lois Lane (Amy Adams), Clarke Kent (Henry Cavill) picks up the cape he was destined for and sets off to defend his family, friends, and earth, from the wrath of fellow Kryptonian, General Zod (Michael Shannon).

I've never been a huge Superman fan. I don't know how well this origin story fits into that of the comics. But through the eyes of someone new to the franchise, it works, and doesn't leave me with too many unanswered questions.

Just because the plot makes sense though, doesn't mean it's executed well. The weakest parts of this movie come in the first 30-60 minutes. The pacing here is pretty bad at times. Clarke Kent's years on earth are thrown at you in a "blink and you'll miss it" fashion. Jumping from his current whereabouts to quick glimpses of his childhood every few moments. The film doesn't stop to breath and let any of these character developments settle in. They are just dished out and stacked in a pile of "defining moments" in Clarke's journey to being Superman, without giving us any sympathy or attachment to his human persona.

Normally this would result in a poorly developed character we would care little about. Thankfully for Man of Steel, Henry Cavill is here. He is perfect in this role. His look and his controlled emotion throughout give us enough to know that he's a lonely, troubled being before, and even after, he finds the cape. He makes you care enough about the character during the poor introduction that it's not a complete loss. If it were a lesser actor I would have checked out of this film mentally very early on.

The rest of the cast were good as well. Amy Adams makes for a much more adventurous Lois Lane than I was expecting. Russell Crowe and Michael Shannon were amazing as you would expect. Diane Lane was a particular standout for me as Clarke Kent's mother Martha, bringing some touching moments in her interactions with Clarke. And props go to Christopher Meloni as Colonel Nathan Hardy. It's not a huge role but I think Meloni is a very underrated actor who needs more screen time. If you don't believe me then watch HBO's OZ and you'll see.

The place where Man of Steel really hits its stride is when the action starts. This is where director Zach Snyder shines. With stylized films such as 300, Watchmen, and Sucker Punch under his belt, he displays an ability here to control his over the top action style more effortlessly than any other director right now. With a carefully guiding hand from Chris Nolan, it gives this film some action scenes that are visually stunning, fast paced, tense, and easy to follow all at the same time.

Watching Superman fly through the air is a special treat for the eyes. Using an over the shoulder look usually reserved for video games, it gave a realism to flying that I never knew I was missing. At no point here will you think you're watching Iron Man zip around. You're right in the midst of the action instead of observing from the distance. It's exhilarating and a definite high point in the movie.

For the slow start this film gets, it more than makes up for it in the second half. Snyder has found his niche and has made a great action film with Man of Steel. His storytelling abilities still leave a bit to be desired though. Thankfully the movie ends off with a nice lead into the future of the character, with a touch of humor thrown in that almost catches you off guard. Hopefully the writers and people in charge take advantage of this in the future and give us a more fleshed out Clarke Kent in future films.

This is no The Dark Knight, don't be fooled. But don't let the weak first half deter you, go see this movie if you like the over the top action style that Snyder is known for. If you don't like his look then you may be better skipping. But for me, it was well worth the $17 IMAX 3D admission fee.

*Man of Steel - 7/10*

Ebert's Legacy and Knowing Limits

I don't know where to start writing about what went wrong with my idea to try to watch a list of the ten best films chosen by one of the most heralded film critics of our time, and then to collect my thoughts and feelings into a blog post. It could have been the length of time it took me to watch them all. It could have been the idea that I could fit my thoughts on these classics into a single blog post. Or it could have been my naivety in thinking that I could thoroughly analyze some of the greatest films ever made on a single viewing with my experience in the history of the medium.

The problem lay somewhere in the mix of the three. It did take way too long for me to watch all ten. I should have written individual blog posts along the way instead of saving for one. But even then I don't believe I could justify analyzing either of these classics on one viewing alone.

In the past few days I've been watching The Story of Film: An Odyssey on Netflix. This is a terrific series with an incredibly eye opening view on the history of cinema. It's also helped make me well aware that I have a long way to go in learning about this business I'm trying to immerse myself in. I know quite a bit more now than I did when I started watching it only a few days ago, but I still have a long way to go in learning about an industry that's been around since the turn of the nineteenth century.

Having said that, with my new found respect for decades of film history, of which I have barely scratched the surface of myself, I won't be giving a full review or in depth analysis of any of the films on my Ebert's Top 10 list.

I do apologize to anyone who has been following this blog and waiting to hear me discuss these but I just don't feel I could do them the service they deserve in one, or even two, blog posts. The enjoyment and meaning of these films comes from watching them, and a couple of paragraphs of my thoughts on each one would hardly suffice given what these films have to offer.

What I can tell you is that they are all worth your time and money if you are a person who enjoys the art of film as more than just mindless entertainment. Regardless of the age, look or language, if you look at films as visual art, masterful storytelling, or metaphors of the world we live in, then look no further for an incredibly rewarding and thought provoking list of films.

I instantly fell in love with each and every one of these. They all display film making and story telling at the top of it's game. There's little wonder why Roger Ebert chose these as his choices for the greatest films ever made. And this is coming from a man who watched more movies than you or I could ever dream of.

The age range here is all encompassing. Ranging from The General, which was made in 1927, all the way up to The Tree of Life which was only released in 2011. A common thread here being the timelessness of the films. The settings may vary throughout the century but the conflicts faced are all universal. Love, greed, jealousy, and the slow descent into madness are all just as much at home in the early 1900's as they are today.

Don't let the age or country of origin deter any of you from watching any of the films on this list. The General surprised me by being one of the funniest movies I've watched recently regardless of being the oldest on the list. And even though Tokyo Story is a black and white Japanese film from the 1950's, it is a perfect example of how to tell a story, and now sits high on my own personal list of favorite movies.

I'll leave my thoughts on the matter at that. What I leave for you guys are direct links to Roger Ebert's reviews of each of the films I watched. I originally started watching these movies as a small tribute to his legacy. Other than to strongly encourage you all to watch these films, I can see no better way for his legacy to be carried on than by reading his words, not mine, on why he believed these were some of the greatest movies ever made.

2001: A Space Odyssey
Aguirre, The Wrath of God

Apocalypse Now

Citizen Kane
The General

La Dolce Vita

Raging Bull

Tokyo Story

The Tree of Life

Vertigo

The Hangover Part III Review

In 2009 we got surprised by one of the best comedies in recent memory.

In 2011 we got treated to a carbon copy of the original that nobody asked for and we all tried to forget.

In 2013 we get the finale of this unplanned trilogy, and believe me when I say I couldn't be any happier.

No, I'm not happy because The Hangover Part III was a hilarious return to the feel of the original. I'm happy because we can finally let this die. Hopefully.

Unlike the second film, this time around they at least went in a new direction. One of the biggest complaints with The Hangover Part II was undoubtedly that it was a copy and paste of the original. They changed the location and the character they are trying to find, but the course of events played out in a very similar manner. You knew what to expect, which immediately took away from the originals blindsided hilarity. And when they tried to top the original, it ended up being cringe worthy and offensive.

With The Hangover Part III they threw out the wedding/bachelor party blackout/find lost buddy format from the first two. That part was a no-brainer though. They got it right the first time and it got panned the second time around. The least I can say is that they learned from their mistakes.

This chapter finds the Wolf Pack spearheading an intervention for Alan (Zach Galifianakis), who has been neglecting his medication for his "mental complications" for a few months now. On route to bringing him to a treatment center they get kidnapped and dragged into a feud between Marshall (John Goodman), and Lesley Chow (Ken Jeong), that spun off from the events of the first two movies. Doug (Justin Bartha) gets taken as collateral and the rest of the pack are sent on their way to find and bring back Chow.

If you have seen the trailers for this movie then you already knew most of that. As is the trend these days, the trailers tell way too much. You see everything you need to know about the plot in less than two and half minutes, along with most of the laughs as well. A better part of the humor here has already been diluted through months of marketing, with the moments around them in the movie lacking any humor whatsoever.

There are a few good laughs hidden throughout, but at no point are you at risk of spilling your drink from laughing hysterically or missing any dialogue because it can't be heard over the collective laughter of the crowd.

Most of the humor that works centers around Alan. While the original was very much an ensemble comedy with Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed Helms) and Alan all playing unique characters with a hilarious rapport with one another. This time around it's very much the Alan show. This isn't a horrible concept as Alan happens to be an incredibly funny character, but Phil and Stu essentially turn into tired versions of their former selves, playing the same tunes they've played before, while Alan seems to have been the only one of the three that has grown over the trilogy. Their only humor comes through their responses to Alan's actions or comments.

Some of the humor seems to be just thrown in for shock value and completely misses the mark. Most notably being the highly marketed Giraffe vs. Bridge sequence. This happens very early during the movie, and acts as a catalyst of sorts to the events that follow, but it's almost cringe worthy how poorly planned out and executed it was. I don't know who thought that decapitating a giraffe would bring any comic value to the movie, and even Alan's response to the event when it unfolds adequately sums up the general feeling towards the whole sequence.

Another big complaint on my part was the heavy inclusion of the Lesley Chow character. He worked so well in the original because he was such an enigma. Very little was known about the man who hopped out of that trunk, flashing his manhood about while swinging a tire iron. And it worked. Ever since the sequel, his screen time has been upgraded and it turns out he's not actually that funny. I assume this was done in some vain attempt to carry over some of what made the original work. Instead he has turned into a pathetic, crude, offensive, scene stealing (and not in a good way) sore on this franchise that is just here to serve as more shock value.

Rounding out the rest of the cast we have John Goodman playing the "villain" Marshall, Heather Graham as Jade the escort from the original, Jeffrey Tambor as Alan's father Sid, and Melissa McCarthy as a pawn store owner named Cassie. All of these characters bring the movie to it's high points. They all fit their roles well and offer a nice breather from the main cast when things start to get a little out of control.

While I don't feel like this was a waste of my money, I'm not going to strongly encourage anyone to run out and see this. If you want a bit of a closer to the Hangover trilogy then you may find some solace here. Though with the story arc of the first two movies being tied up in each one, this one doesn't conclude anything that you wouldn't know you were missing without seeing this movie. But there are a few laughs to be had here, however tainted they may be from over-marketing.

If you're just in the mood for something humorous then I would recommend just waiting until next week when This Is the End hits theaters.

And as for The Hangover saga, I hope they stick to their word that this is the conclusion of the trilogy and let it go before we have to forget there were any other movies after the original.

*I gave The Hangover Part III a 4/10 on IMDB.

Fast & Furious 6 Review

Transformers, G.I. Joe, Resident Evil, and The Expendables. When one mentions pulpy summer blockbusters, these are some of the more commonly thought of names lately. They serve one real purpose: be big, be loud and bring in money (ok that's three but the main one is the money). They can be forgettable. They can be stupid. But as long as they bring in a crowd then who cares.

I'm not trying to fool myself. The Fast & Furious franchise fits into the same category as these other films. However, I believe it has managed to surpass them all in quality and entertainment value, even as it releases its sixth installment in the series.

The first thing that Fast & Furious 6 does right, is that it's completely self aware and it knows who it's audience is. It's trailers are clear examples of this. Showing fast cars, crazy stunts, and over the top action, nobody is going to be tricked into going to see this thinking they're getting an enlightened experience. The film even opens with a great recap of the previous installments in the series during the opening credits. By doing this the film gives anyone new or old to the series the minimal amount of information needed to keep the continuity going. This also shows that story-wise, there hasn't been a lot going on.

This approach works. There isn't much story here and it's the way it should be for this type of film. The plot has a few moments that linger on the relationship of two of the main cast members, and this is one of the only places it stumbles. Other than that it's a simple premise. Bad guys steal things. Former bad guys get coerced into helping law enforcement. Bad guys tackle with former bad guys. Former bad guys win.

That's a pretty poor plot summary, but honestly, that's all you need to know. There's very little story for the action to get snagged on. The fun of this movie comes from everything else that it does fantastically.

While the Fast and Furious franchise has steered clear of the street racing genre it began with, and has become more of a heist/action series, it still hits the mark with fast and sexy cars. The cars here are gorgeous and the chases are some of the best out there. It helps that everything is going too fast to really stop and think about how ridiculous it all is at times. But it's incredibly entertaining nonetheless. I did feel this movie was a little darker than it's predecessor, which took away from some of the chase sequences. Fast cars in dark, tight, European roads don't look as appealing as they do in the well lit streets of Brazil.

One area the series has, and continues to improve, is in the action sequences (vehicular and non-vehicular). I loved the amount of fighting that went on here. With actors such as Dwayne Johnson and Johannes Taslim it would be a shame to let their physical talents go to waste (for those not aware, Johannes Taslim starred in a little movie called The Raid: Redemption last year). Director Justin Lin takes full advantage of Johnson's staggering build and Taslim's martial arts background.

But he also includes everybody else into the mix. The rest of the cast hold their own (sometimes hilariously), even though they don't quite have the same presence on screen as Johnson. But who does really? He makes Vin Deisel look like a chump.

They also don't shy away from large action sequences. Bringing in a tank and a giant cargo jet, it at times feels like they're striving to push the bar too much, but it never does. The ridiculousness of it is filtered by the entertaining characters and their interaction between each other, and Justin Lin adds a sense of tension to these sequences that will have you on the edge of the seat.

Another huge plus for me was the female cast. I don't know if I've ever seen such a strong cast of women in a genre that is typically predominately male cast. The addition of the physical Gina Carano, and the choice to bring Michelle Rodriguez back into the game, set up for a couple rewarding fight sequences. Carano may not be able to act her way out of a paper bag but the girl knows how to fight. And I absolutely love Rodriguez and was thrilled to see her back. But it's not just limited to them. None of the women just sit back and watch the action pass you by. They're in the thick of it with the guys and they more than hold their own in every regard.

I can sit here for hours and talk about all the things I love but I'll stop it now. I feel I'm getting my point across. There's a lot to love here. I strongly urge anybody with a love of good action to go see this. Don't judge it by the past movies or it's ridiculously over-the-top style. This series is one of the rare ones that has fine tuned itself over the years and has evolved with it's audience. You just need to know "how" to watch a movie like this. Leave your skepticism at the door. Don't expect any award winning performances. This is still pulpy fun like the movies I mentioned at the beginning. It just happens to be the best of them.

*I gave Fast & Furious 6 a 7/10 on IMDB.

**Stick around after the credits as well. They do an amazing setup for the next movie.

Breathing Life Into The Dead

Anybody remember last November? A little film came out that marked the end of a franchise that happened to feature some depressing, melodramatic, sparkling vampires. I dare not speak the name of this emotional train wreck for teenage girls, but I only forced myself to suffer through the first two without risking a mental breakdown. That's all I could manage though.

Now that we are past all of that unpleasantness it's time to look to the future for the eternal blood suckers.

I reminisce of a time where slayers kept the fangs at bay. Where vampires were dark, brooding creatures that hid in the daytime and came out to hunt at night. They were loners, lovers, and killers. You feared them. Some of the more socially oppressed wanted to be them. But they were meant to control you with fear and lust. Sexual beings without the gaudy high school drama (save for some of Buffy, but that was all in good fun).

Even True Blood came close to imitating this former glory for vampires. Providing a couple of seasons of rated R vampire fun. But that eventually got a little off topic, introducing more classic, and non-classic, "monsters" than they had the time to successfully develop. I stopped watching after season 4. I could take no more of faeries and were-panthers when all I wanted was some good old fashioned, vampiric, angry-sex-head-twisting fun.

This year we finally have two vampire flicks showing up that I'm genuinely excited about. Byzantium and Only Lovers Left Alive. If you haven't heard of either than here's what you need to know.

Byzantium premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in September and is scheduled to be released worldwide on June 28th. Being directed by Neil Jordan, who's last work in the genre was the fantastic Interview With A Vampire, this is worth the watch from that credit alone.

The plot follows a teenage girl name Eleanor (Saoirse Ronan) and her mother Clare (Gemma Arterton) who have been living off of human blood in secrecy for 200 years. After settling into a abandoned guesthouse which shares the same name as the films title, Eleanor falls for Frank (Caleb Landry Jones) and begins to spill her 200 year old secret. Of course secrets can't stay as such forever and their past begins to catch up with them.

Here's the bloody trailer for your perusal:

I'll admit, there does seem to be a bit of a teen love story riddled in there, but if it is then it looks to be drowned in blood. This is what a vampire movie should look like. Lots of dark and lots of red. It has a great cast and seems appropriately atmospheric for what I expect from a great vampire movie. A few early reviews I've read have had good things to say and I'm incredibly excited for this.

The other film I want to bring to your attention is Only Lovers Left Alive starring Tom Hiddleston and Tilda Swinton. This one was brought to my attention last week while I was desperately trying to keep up with the coverage coming out of the Cannes Film Festival where it premiered.

Only Lovers Left Alive follows the aforementioned actors as two vampires who have been in love for centuries. When their eternal love is tested as her younger sister comes into the picture, they must learn to deal with her and adjust to the new modern world they find themselves in.

Other than a few warm reviews and some brief plot summaries there isn't a lot to judge this by so far. The cast looks great and another reason for my excitement (also featuring Mia Wasikowska, Anton Yelchin and John Hurt). The movie seems to be a bit of a different pace from Byzantium. Less blood, with a hint of dark humor and drama is the vibe I've been getting from what I've read. The director, Jim Jarmusch, seems to have his own distinct sense of style which has caught my interest as well. I haven't seen any of his work yet but a few of his previous films have caught my eye and are on my never ending to-watch list.

While both of these films have me very excited, I don't know how universal the excitement will be? Neither seem to be getting much of a push for coverage. If I wasn't keeping up with news from TIFF and Cannes I would be surprised if I would know about these at all. Unfortunately that seems to be the way it goes with these indie films though. With any luck we may see these guys get a week of showing at the theater here once the summer blockbuster season slows down. Maybe even pick up a showing with the MUN cinema series during the fall. Most likely though, the first chance we'll get to see either of these here in St. John's will be when they are released to home media.

If you do get the chance to watch either, I strongly urge it. Maybe with some successful vampire movies along these lines it will show all the Twihards out there that the best vampires don't sparkle and cry about silly high school romances.

New Direction & Trekking Into Darkness

So that weekly update thing... yeah that's probably not going to work anymore. Not that it was a horribly idea. It's just that I missed two weeks and now I feel a little behind with it all.

The weekly update was providing another problem too. The length of the post. I'm personally not a fan of reading long blog posts or news articles, so trying to keep one weekly update with several different topics into as short a post as possible was posing a challenge. I always felt like I ended up ranting on a little too long about everything.

So with that being said I'm going to no longer commit to one post weekly. Instead I will try to trim it into smaller, more frequent posts regarding a single topic.

This one will still be a little sporadic though.

***************

I've finished watching all of the movies in my Ebert's Top 10 list and I'll have a post up regarding that in the next week or so. I won't bother adding a summary of the last two films, Vertigo and Tree of Life. They were both great, watch them if you can, and I'll have my full thoughts in that coming blog post.

***************

I've only seen a couple movies in the past couple of weeks. Pain and Gain and the new Star Trek. I'm only going to do a review for Star Trek. In a quick rundown, Pain and Gain was a fun movie at times but it was slow to start and bloated with Michael Bay's over stylized camera work and some annoying narration. It picks up about halfway through and turns the remainder into a good bit of ridiculous fun but it's never enough to rise it above being good. Mark Whalberg is great playing an ignorant muscle head oblivious of his own stupidity and was probably one of the best parts for me. I gave it a 5/10 on IMDB.

That's basically all for now. I'll end this off with my thoughts on Star Trek Into Darkness and will be back in the next few days with a review of Fast and Furious 6 (hint: it's awesome) and my thoughts on Ebert's Top 10.

Star Trek Into Darkness 7/10

I'm going to open this review by stating that I've never seen any of the original Star Trek movies or TV shows. I recall passing over them as a kid while flicking through the channels and just thinking they looked silly at the time. With their drab outfits, odd looking characters and cold, dark sets the franchise always seemed a bit of a joke when I was a kid.

I jumped on the Star Trek bandwagon, as many others probably did, with the recent reboot. It brought color and life to characters I shrugged off in my youth. It had a great director at the helm with J.J. Abrams. It was fun and exciting. And most importantly it was smart. It used the gimmick of time travel, which is starting to get overexposed and stale, and simplified it to help open up the franchise to a whole new direction without alienating the fans of the original material. It is, in my opinion, one of the best examples of how to reboot/restart a franchise.

Warp to 4 years in the future and here we are staring the excessively hyped Star Trek Into Darkness in the face. The story this time around follows the crew of the Enterprise as they return to earth from a near fatal mission on a foreign planet. With the consequences of this mission looming over Spock and Kirk, a new threat appears and hits them where they live. Fueled by vengeance, Kirk leads the Enterprise and his crew to the reaches of space to hunt down the man responsible and end up finding more danger than they ever bargained for.

I can't say too much more as far as the plot goes without spoiling anything. One of the things I want to praise about the movie is the clever advertising. Once again, can't say too much, but I've complained a lot recently about the quality of trailers and the amount of information they give regarding plot and spoiling key moments in movies. Well, everyone needs to step back and start taking notes from Mr. Abrams on how to make a trailer because what I thought I was getting, and what I actually got, weren't quite the same. In a good way of course.

With the same cast and crew, the film carries over a lot of the same humor and style as the one before. It does, in typical blockbuster sequel fashion, take on a darker, more serious tone this time around though. This shift works in adding gravity to some elements of the story that would not have worked if it tried to keep with the same upbeat tone and colorful scenery as the first one. They still manage to squeeze in plenty of fancy special effects and explosions to brighten everything up, and the locations they visit at the beginning and end of the film are vivid and colorful to even it all out.

The 3D in this movie was terrific as well. I highly recommend watching this in IMAX 3D if possible. There's a lot of beauty going on here and this is one of the rare movies lately where I actually feel like the 3D added to the experience. I haven't seen it in 2D yet to compare but at no point during the movie did I find it distracting or gimmicky. It helped add depth to the environments and immerse me into the movie as 3D should.

While the cast and acting was good overall, I did feel that it spent too much time around Kirk and Spock. It's not the worst thing because Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto carry their roles well and the chemistry between the two characters is great. Chris Pine is turning into the charismatic action star that Ryan Reynolds wishes he could be. But I would have enjoyed it if more screen time was given to the rest of the crew. The relationship between Uhura and Spock is supposed to be one of the bigger parts of the plot but it never seems to get past childish, teenage bickering between the two. I never really felt their relationship was strained or played a vital part and at no point does the movie make me care enough about it even though it continued to be brought up. The one standout with the rest of the cast, and my favorite part of the movie was Benedict Cumberbatch. That boy can act and he can kick ass with the best of them as well. One particular action scene with him had me grinning from ear to ear and was one of the standout moments of the movie for me.

My biggest problem and fault I found with this movie is in the direction it took as a whole. The whole time I was watching the movie I had the sense that something was missing. It was loud and action packed and it was all done well but it just constantly nagged at me that the movie should have been smarter. It felt like it was slowly fitting into the same mold that so many senseless, generic summer blockbusters fill. Which is disappointing when you think of the potential available here. Space exploration should be groundbreaking. We should be seeing things that we've never seen in a movie before. New planets. New characters. That all seems to be sacrificed here to make room for unnecessary scenes setting up a bromance between Spock and Kirk. I feel this is a hugely missed opportunity and something that could set Star Trek above your typical summer blockbuster fare.

Hopefully in the third installment they expand more into the exploration portion of the series. Less time (if any) spent on earth and on the ship and more time running into danger on undiscovered planets and meeting some new and colorful characters we've never seen before. Why go through the trouble of giving a clean slate to the franchise with the alternate timeline plot point if you don't take advantage of it?

Anyway, until that time, Star Trek Into Darkness will entertain anyone who's a fan of your typical blockbuster eye candy. It's a worthy addition to a series that's at the top of it's game right now. And even if the franchise turns into your standard, run of the mill, summer popcorn flick, then it will still be one of the more entertaining options out there.

Weekly Update 05/15

I don't get Hollywood sometimes. I mentioned a couple weeks ago how Marvel has the potential to have one of the most lucrative franchises right now. With the success of The Avengers and the wave they're going to be riding off of that, they have the opportunity to bring almost any of their comic book characters to new life on the big screen. They have an incredibly good thing going.

So what's the point of having a good thing if you can't fuck it up?

That seems to be what Marvel is aiming to do with their current negotiations. The story I'm referring to is found here. Don't worry if you didn't read the whole thing. The gist of it is that Marvel doesn't give a shit about any of the actors they have playing their super human team that has raked in a few billion dollars for them thus far. All except for Robert Downey Jr. that is. And in his defense, he is the one who got this ball rolling with Iron Man. I highly doubt the movie and character would of had the same success without him in the now iconic role. He's also proven that he can make money on his own terms with the impressive run that Iron Man 3 is currently having. So it's not shocking that he's the only one of the bunch that Marvel seems to have any urgency to get back.

After the success of The Avengers they shouldn't be putting all their money on one person though. If The Avengers has shown us anything, it's that the fans are open to the ensemble cast idea and aren't tied down to one particular character. The only stand outs in The Avengers for myself were the Hulk and Loki. They stole the show on their own, but the rest worked best when they had another Avenger to banter with. It has spread to much more than just Iron Man at this point. If Downey Jr. doesn't show up for a few movies I don't think it's going to be the end of the world at this point.

I also don't get why it seems that the other main actors are falling in line behind Robert and letting him do the talking. I get that he's a bit of a proven box office draw at this point but if he was such a stand up guy then why isn't he willing to take a bit of a pay cut from his alleged $50-80 million he made from The Avengers so that everybody else can get a bit of a bump in pay? Doesn't sound to me like he has any of their interests in mind while negotiating. It's easy for him to say at this point that he won't come back unless the others get a pay increase, when he's made it public knowledge that he doesn't even want to play the Iron Man character much longer. If they don't take him back then he gets to do other things (which is what he seems to want). If they take him back then he's getting a solid payday for another role in a movie that's still two years away and possibly an even bigger payday (for what I assume would be a much smaller role) in a movie that's four-six years away. Assuming they only snag him for the next two Avenger movies and no more Iron Man.

I think Marvel is looking at this all the wrong way and are missing huge story-line opportunities. I don't read comic books but I know enough about them to tell you that a huge part of comic books is life and death. Superheros have been killed off and brought back plenty of times. Either through some fictional form of resurrection or by having new characters step into iconic roles. It all goes with the draw that anybody can be a superhero. So why doesn't Marvel go this route? If Chris Hemsworth doesn't want to come back without a good payday, then suck it up. Give him his payday but write his death into the script of the next Thor movie or the next Avengers movie. Let him die in some epic fashion that will fuel a story arc for another few movies. Give them something to fight for. And then bring him back in some Asgardian fashion in a few years with a new actor in the role. I think this life and death would help move this whole Marvel universe along, keep it fresh and invigorated, and give it a lifespan rivaled only by the Bond franchise.

Obviously not all characters can be written back in with a simple godly resurrection but I would even be ok with just saying goodbye to some characters. It's a very robust comic book universe out there. I think a well done Ant Man could be a worthy replacement for Iron Man.

***************

Thankfully I managed to get caught up with my Eberts Top 10 list this week. It's taking me a very long time to watch 10 movies, I know. But bear with me. Only Vertigo and Tree of Life left for this week. Once again here's a quick summary:

Aguirre, Wrath of God

The hardest on the list to find and understandably so. Odd could be an appropriate word to describe this German film from the 1970's. What starts as an odd journey for riches through Peru, turns into an incredibly captivating descent into madness.

Apocalypse Now

Another of the films I've already seen. This is another look at the slow descent madness and may be one of my favorites. Brando is so amazing in the minimal amount of screen time he has here and Martin Sheen is equally as impressive. A younger version of myself would have probably been bored with this movie. Current me loves it.

Tokyo Story

Let down your guard. Realize that movies are about telling a story. Spectacle and excitement aren't always required. If you can do that then Tokyo Story will be one of the best and truest forms of visual storytelling there is. Not a wasted shot. No filler whatsoever. Never have I seen a movie where the story is so simply laid out in front of me but still had my full attention.

La Dolce Vita

From Italy (not France, my bad) and the first film I've seen from Federico Fellini. Not a movie you want to watch tired. I feel like some of the movie was lost on me with the dialogue, which doesn't always translate well when it's being dished out quickly, and also being a little tired when I watched it. It did leave me wanting to watch it again though and seek out more of Fellini's work.

***************

Once again I only managed to squeeze in one new release this week. Not that I was too busy this week, just that I was still kind of broke from the move. There really hasn't been much to get excited about anyway. Pain and Gain, Olympus Has Fallen and Oblivion were the only ones last week that I was interested in seeing. None of those had me running to spend money on them either. Gatsby came out on Friday so I'll be seeing that sometime this week hopefully. And this coming Friday the new Star Trek is here so the reviews should be picking up a bit. Anyway, on to my thoughts on Oblivion, the only one I saw this week.

Oblivion 6/10

I love sci-fi. It's safe to say at this point it's my favorite genre of movie. I love getting lost in thoughts of what could be. Films are an excellent way to lose yourself. A good film will make you let go of your worries and sink into it. Science fiction movies can pull this off best because they bring you places and show you things that you normally don't see. You can let go of reason. I've never held anything against a sci-fi film for stretching the limits of what's actually possible. I just let it be. If it's good it will own my attention in awe and wonder for the time I'm watching. Even if it's bad it can still present great ideas and gorgeous imagery that you don't see anywhere else.

Oblivion manages to evoke some of that awe but unfortunately the sacrifice of box office success by attaching Tom Cruise to the project dwindles it down into something that's good, but just a hint of what it could have been.

Where it works is in the world and mythology it builds. The post-apocalyptic world that Joseph Kosinksi brings to life (in his graphic novel first and then translated it to the screen himself) is so enthralling, I was amazed by that alone. It's a desolate wasteland, which isn't a completely original idea at this point, that's brought to life beautifully. At one point we follow along as one of the characters zips along on a futuristic motorcycle through the still showing suspension cables of a long buried bridge and it just looks amazing. The whole world is created so elegantly that it makes me happy that CGI has gotten to the point it has.

The technology here is great too. It's futuristic but it's not all shiny with that new car smell still lingering around. It's worn, which is fitting since the movies follows a maintenance crew of sorts, and things break. It adds a level of realism to ideas that aren't quite in the realm of possible right now. It's also nice that they never shove it in your face. There's no elaborate displays of what can be done or no gimmicky ways of introducing them. It's all presented in a very matter-of-fact manner, as if this has been regular life for the characters and we're just stopping by to have a look. It's how science fiction should be handled at all times.

The plot is where the movie starts to hit snags. The idea and reasoning for the post apocalyptic world we're witnessing is pretty standard fare but it does offer an interesting twist on the scenario. I won't go into too many details but it keeps twisting. Sometimes for the better, but mostly for the worst. I can't say I hated the plot but I feel it would have benefited more if it didn't hold it's cards so close to it's chest. The build up is done poorly enough that you can see everything coming before the story thinks it's actually time to let you in. It spends so much time trying to trick you that it forgets to stop and think about where it's going.

The worst part of the movie for me was in the casting. I could forgive the weak plot under the right circumstances and still consider this a great sci-fi film. But someone went and cast Tom Cruise and ruined the chances of that happening. Now I don't hate Tom Cruise, but he really bothers me. Mostly it's his need to own the screen whenever he's in frame (which happens to be a lot). He can't just play subtle or let the story take over. He needs to impose his short stature in wherever he can and make everything he's in his own vessel. I understand the studio wanting a name such as Cruises involved with a project like this to give it some star power and help with box office number. It's hard enough for sci-fi films to be widely accepted when you're title doesn't begin with the word "Star". But I whole heartily think that casting a lesser known actor in the main role, someone who's not going to try to steal every scene, would have worked out much better.

The rest of the cast and crew are okay but nothing amazing. The best would go to Melissa Leo in her small role in the film. Morgan Freeman is great as ever but he actually has very little screen time which bummed me out a little. But with the movie dominated by Tom Cruise's presence nobody really gets any opportunity to stand out here.

In conclusion, I did enjoy the movie but it was mostly a case of me letting my mind wander and imagine what could have been. The world created is amazing and I really was in awe of some of the scenes and imagery present here. The story isn't going to win you over and neither are the characters. Unless you are a Tom Cruise fan of course. But if you are a fan of sci-fi then I would recommend it for the tech and beautiful world created alone. Just don't expect to be blown away by some mind bending plot.

***************

And that's it again for another late blog post. Chances are next weeks won't be on time either as it is the long weekend coming up and I plan on heading out of town for some good ol' fashioned drankin in the woods. But I do plan on having Eberts Top 10 list finished this week and hopefully have reviews for The Great Gatsby and Start Trek up as well.

I'm also looking for feedback on the reviews I have posted thus far. I'll state again that this is all still a learning curve and I'm trying to figure this out as I go along, but I do feel like I start to ramble too much when I start writing a review. What do you think? Am I giving too much information? Too little?

I think I need to come up with a set format to stick to that I can apply to any film I review. Something on the shorter side as well. I recently read an article by Film Crit Hulk over at Badass Digest regarding reviews and it fits nicely into my feelings for movie trailers as well. That article can be found right here. It's had some influence on me as I write these reviews and I'm trying to come up with a style that really gives you nothing in forms of spoiler material as you watch movies. 

And yes that is a writer that goes by the name Film Crit Hulk on a website with Badass in the title. And yes he is awesome. I highly recommend reading some of his stuff.

Thanks again for stopping by folks! Cheers!

My Weekly Update 05/07

Oh. My. God. Game of Thrones. Shit son, that's one good show!

Had to throw that out there. I just watched Sunday nights episode and I'm blown away with the quality of that show so far this season. The past three episodes have been more than I could ever hope for. Also, they are now past the point of what I've read in the books. To any of you who have yet to read them or aren't quite caught up, don't bother. I was on that same train of thought and I completely got off three episodes ago. I found that by reading the books first, a few things happened:

First off, I had to read the damn books. While they are good and well worth the time and effort, it's a lot of time, especially if you only read before bed like I've been inclined to do lately. So trying to read and get caught up before a new season starts isn't my cup of tea, especially when you get to those long ass Sansa chapters.

Second, I spent too much time comparing the two in my head rather than enjoying what a great show it is. Books obviously have much more detail and information. Some of which is good. Some of which isn't. During the first two seasons I spent a lot of time picking at the differences between the two. I feel the greatness of the show was watered down a bit in the process by worrying about a lot of the little things that didn't make the cut or were altered in some form.

And finally, I spoiled a few of the "Holy Shit!!" moments with the book. They were still enjoyable while reading since I could put the pieces together myself and make the perfect image for these scenes in my mind. But this awesomeness is magnified when it's got HBO, a decent budget, and some incredible actors to bring it all to life.

So I strongly urge all of you to do the TV show first. Read the books after if you still want to. I know I will eventually. But I feel the journey is much better going in blind. It's probably one of the best shows on TV lately, and with the way this season has been going I'm soon going to raise this to the same level as Breaking Bad and Sons of Anarchy.

***************

So I moved last week and was fairly busy with that. Spent all of Wednesday moving everything and then the rest of the week was putting this and that away. I did manage to get two of Eberts top ten list out of the way though. I was foolishly hoping to get more done but it will have to wait a little longer. Here again is a brief synopses of the movies I did get to see:

Citizen Kane

One of the more well known movies on the list. Easily recognizable as a classic and widely considered to be one of the greatest films of all time. Some of my fears of watching older movies finally came to surface with this one sadly. While I still thought it was great, it didn't meet all the expectations I had for it.

Raging Bull

This was one of the movies that I hang my head in shame for not watching until now. It's debatable if this is De Niro and Scorseses best movie and I can completely see the reasons behind this argument. I wanted to re-watch it again as soon as the credits rolled.

***************

The only movie I watched in theaters this week was Iron Man 3. I saw this opening night and aside from the lineup to get in, it was nice to see a movie on opening night. I haven't done that in a while and I know it really doesn't change the movie in any way, but some part of me gets a little excited that I get to see the movie before anyone else. Other than the millions of other people around the world who have seen it already of course...... but you know what I mean. 

Iron Man 3 7/10

I won't say too much about Iron Man 3. Most of you have already decided if you're going to see it or not. I've already talked about the Marvel universe they have created in my previous post and if you are buying into that whole thing then this is a worthy installment in that world.

Being the first film after The Avengers is a huge burden to bear, but Iron Man does it in typical Iron Man fashion. All the characters, humor and fancy gadgetry are here that we expect from the series. The trailers give it a more somber tone than you would expect, and the seriousness is there, but it's given in a manner that is consistent with the other two installments. It's marketed to seem more serious for a reason I promise you. You'll see what I mean when and if you watch it.

Iron Man succeeds in picking up where The Avengers leaves off. The references are there but they're not overwhelming. The shadow of the events linger over Tony and they have some effect on him, but it's not where the conflict in this movie comes from. It manages to stay an Iron Man movie in a much bigger universe. He still has his own problems that have nothing to do with that happened in New York and it's done believably. These movies all need to co-exist but they still need to be their own. Iron Man is probably the best example of a character who can stand on his own and this movie solidifies that.

I do wish there could have been more character cameos, or tidbits of info regarding the rest of the Marvel universe hidden in here. But I understand why they didn't. A lot of that before The Avengers was build up. Now that we're past that movie it's going to be a different journey to the next Avengers film. If the quality of the movies to come stay the same as this one, then these missing pieces won't be an issue.

There were a few things about this movie that frustrated me a little though. A few of the characters don't get the amount of screen time I felt they deserved. Either being killed off too quickly or just being oddly absent for extended periods of time.

A few of the plot details are left very vague with little to no explanation. I've thought more about it since I've seen the movie and I've grown a little more accepting of the decisions made. But still, this movie could have (should have) been smarter. A little more exposition could have gone a long way. 

Finally, at one point in the movie Tony Stark mentions being a "hot mess". It's fitting because at times, this movie would fall into the "hot mess" category. I feel like some of the scenes and sequences were a bit much and over the top. It's almost as if it's dialing everything up to pander to the summer movie audience and to try to live on the same plain of spectacle that The Avengers did. Most times it works as the visual eye candy it is. Other times it felt like it was trying way to hard.

I don't think anybody should go into this expecting a sequel to The Avengers. This is an Iron Man movie that lives in a post-Avengers world. It's great if you liked the Iron Man movies and Tony Stark on their own. It might not rub off the same way if you're expecting to see Thor or Nick Fury show up to help out. This is also not the smartest of the three Iron Man films. I feel like this time around they sacrificed some of the intelligence that helped make the first two films some of the better ones in the Marvel universe. In it's place we're getting more grandeur and spectacle, and once you suspend your disbelief in some of the more ridiculous ideas that pop up, you'll get a film that feels much more complete than Iron Man 2, but not quite as smart as the original Iron Man.

***************

That's all I have for this week. Sorry for being a little late with getting this up. Also, don't mind the change in format and spacing compared with the previous weekly updates. I'm trying to find the best flow and this whole blog is still a work in progress of course. As always, comments/suggestions are always welcome.

Thanks again for reading!

The World Is Your Marvel

Last night I went to see the biggest movie so far in 2013. No this is not an Iron Man 3 review. I have to think a little more on that. Decide if Ben Kingsleys performance was brilliant, or whatever you want to determine is the opposite of that.

No no. Before Iron Man 3 started, I stated on twitter that I was about to head into the most important movie in the Marvel universe. Not the biggest. Not the best. At this point those two honors go to The Avengers in my opinion. No, Iron Man 3 is going to be the most important film in this universe because it's going to determine if what Disney and Marvel has on their hands here is a potential Bond-like franchise, or if it's going to sputter into The Avengers 2 on an empty tank of gas.

Since the first Iron Man, Marvel has had a plan. They planted the seed at the end with the introduction of Nick Fury and mentioning the Avengers initiative. This obviously could have turned into nothing more than a fun Easter egg if Iron Man performed poorly. Of course things didn't happen like that. Iron Man became a hit that I don't think anyone could have predicted. Up until that film I had never known a damn thing about the character, but I still loved that movie. I assume that I wasn't alone in that statement.

Now, with the movie a huge critical and financial success, and the mention of the Avenger initiative thrown out into the air and gobbled up by every comic book loving fan-boy (and girl) out there, where next?

Obviously you go up. Build your stepping stones as you climb and hope for the best. Comic book movies had finally found a formula with the success of X-Men, Spider-Man, Batman Begins and Iron Man. People seemed to finally know how to make good, critically acceptable comic book movies, that the people wanted to see. It becomes a bit of a safer bet now to throw a few dollars into Thor and Captain America and see where it goes. It's a well calculated gamble at this point.

After Iron Man, we got bombarded with as much Marvel as the studio could throw at us and it was all good. None of the movies were spectacular but they were all good adaptations of their source material. More importantly though, the pieces were slowly being put into place. Hints in one movie about the next. One characters items showing up in another movie. We all knew what was coming at this point and that was a part of the draw. I know I personally stayed behind with all these movies to catch the short post-credit scene that hinted at things to come. But how would they tie it all together. How do you have all of these larger than life characters share the screen together and not have it turn into a bloated mess of CGI and over the top action?

Joss Whedon is how. He took what could have easily been a glorious mess and turned it into one of the best comic book movies to ever grace the screen. The humor was there. The epic scale was there. All the characters, even those who never had their own films, got their share of screen time and glory. And to all of us who waited so patiently since 2008 when Iron Man came to life, we were rewarded far beyond what we ever thought was possibly in a comic book movie.

This is the gigantic success that is The Avengers. Never has a studio put that much time and effort into developing a cohesive universe where all these characters lived together. The scale of this was huge. Just from the build up alone this movie was going to be a hit. But when the movie ended up being as good as it was and as big as it was, then it became more than a hit. It became a new way to look at how to bring comic book characters to the screen.

Now we live in a post-Avengers world. It's exciting and it's full of great, revolutionary ideas that weren't available to us before. But it's also a dangerous place. With The Avengers we've climbed to the top of a mountain, and as we are about to break the clouds to see what's in front of us, hopefully (I hope, you hope, Marvel hopes) that there will be more mountain to climb above it. Maybe not so steeply, but at least somewhere to go up. Because the other option is that it's a rough ride down.

With Iron Man 3, we're going to see how Marvel and the cast of characters can live in their newly created universe by themselves again. We'll eventually get another Avengers film but between now and then we have Iron Man 3, Thor: The Dark World, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and quite possibly Marvels riskiest endeavor yet to date, Guardians of the Galaxy. How do all of these characters (Guardians aside) go back to the lives they lived before and deal with perils that may pale in comparison to what we saw in The Avengers. How are all of these new adventures going to make sense when we now know that they all know each other exists? What's stopping Iron Man from giving the Hulk a call when shit hits the fan? Why would S.H.I.E.L.D ever risk their own agents in the field when they have Captain America on their side?

These are all questions that Marvel needs to deal with along with adding a slew of other new characters into the mix. Are the original Avengers eventually going to be replaced by them or will they fight side by side? Along with these questions they also have to build up to another planned Avengers sequel and more after that. They've already planned for an Ant Man movie and from what I've read we can expect Dr. Strange and Black Panther movies as well. Not to mention the fact that they have a S.H.I.E.L.D TV series in the work. And who's to say that we'll actually care about any of this in a couple years. We don't have the longest attention spans after all. Our society and culture gets saturated with one thing and then before long, who really cares about it all anymore? Will the Marvel universe have enough to tell us to make us all want to come back and see some more? Will it be able to stay profitable after having one of the highest grossing movies ever?

Obviously only time will tell. I think that it's a safe bet to say that we'll be seeing Marvel movies well past the Avengers next outing. Marvel has the foundation laid for potentially the most successful franchise in the history of cinema. The hard work is done. Now they just need to keep it up. Not reboot a character every five to six years when they can't get an actor back. Not try to get bigger with every instalment. Be smart about the story lines they adapt from the comics. There's a few decades of material for some of these characters so it shouldn't be too hard to avoid the shitty ones. And what I would most like to see, finally start creating some original superheros and villains in the cinematic world.

So with Iron Man 3 now playing we should soon see how life is for everybody after The Avengers. It's already breaking records overseas so it's almost guaranteed that the financial success is going to be there. The reviews seem to be good so far. It all seems to be pointing towards another string of hits for Marvel.



*Obviously I've seen the movie at this point but I wrote this without any of my own personal thoughts on how it turned out. I'll have a review up for that in the next few days.

**HINT: It's better than Iron Man 2!

My Weekly Update 04/21

Here we go. Two weeks in a row and I'm back again. I'll give myself a pat on the back for this. I'm even writing this in a car on the way to Clarenville of all places. I don't really know why I'm going to Clarenville but hey, why not right.

So this week was fairly uneventful. Not a lot going on as far as new movies go. I saw the Jackie Robinson biopic, 42 and that was it for the new things. I've been fairly disappointed by the amount of good movies that Empire Theatres have decided to pass on so far this year. I can count at least 6-7 that I'm genuinely pissed that we haven't gotten here. But enough of my belly-aching. They're making it up to me this week by bringing in The Place Beyond the Pines, which I am incredibly excited about and has the potential to be one of the better movies coming out this year.

A few weeks ago, the greatest film critic(arguably and in my own personal opinion) passed away. Roger Ebert was one of the only critics I trusted as far as their opinions on movies go. I would read reviews on other sites by the random critics they would have working there but I never knew their names. Roger Ebert was the only name that I could refer back to and trust. He was completely unbiased about his view on movies. He looked at every movie with an open mind and took them all for what they were. If he loved a movie, chances are it was truly a great work of art. If he hated it, it probably wasn't worth your time or money to go watch.

His passing, in some small part, spurred me along to get this blog back up and running again. So, in light of this, I've gone and found his most recent top 10 list that he completed for the 2012 Sight and Sound poll. This is a poll that has been completed by the Sight and Sound magazine since 1972 chronicling the best films chosen by the top film professionals. These films represent the best of the best. To be chosen to be in the top 10 films of a critic who has watched and reviewed thousands of films and has gained worldwide acclaim says something quite endearing of the films chosen. The list that Roger Ebert chose in 2012 were:

Aguirre, Wrath of God - Werner Herzog (1972)

Apocalypse Now - Francis Ford Coppola (1979)

Citizen Kane - Orson Welles (1941)

La Dolce Vita - Federico Fellini (1960)

The General - Clyde Bruckman, Buster Keaton (1926)

Raging Bull - Martin Scorsese (1980)

2001: A Space Odyssey - Stanley Kubrick (1968)

Tokyo Story - Yasujiro Ozu (1953)

The Tree of Life - Terrence Malick (2011)

Vertigo - Alfred Hitchcock (1958)

Of this prestigious list I've only seen 3 in their entirety. I dare not say which ones for the inevitable mocking of not having seen some of the most iconic, classic movies there are. My soul hates me a little bit for this as well. Regardless, over the next couple of weeks I'm going to make a point of working my way through this list. Even the ones I've seen already. Finding some of the older ones may be a bit of a challenge but I'm sure I'll be able to locate them without too much trouble.

As I work my way through this list I'm going to keep this blog updated. Not necessarily with reviews of these movies. More so my thoughts, feelings and what I feel may have caused these movies to be adored by one of the greatest fans of the film medium.

So that's what I have planned for my immediate future. Now, as for what I've seen this week:

My Weekly Thoughts

42 7/10

Restraint is a hard thing for Hollywood to swallow these days. Bigger, louder, more offensive, more expensive, more over-the-top, more blood, more violence are all the things most movies strive for. Movies rely on moments that give the audience something they've never seen before. When these work it ends up being what the movie was remembered for. When these moments fail, it ends up being what causes the movie to crash and burn. It’s a very “make or break” world out there.

In the midst of all this, 42 is a great example of restraint at its best.

The movie started a little rough. It felt like it was going to shove its anti-racial ideals into your face in the first few minutes with Bench Rickey(Harrison Ford) gloriously stating his plans to introduce the worlds first black MLB player. And then another heroic show of anti-racism with a washroom incident and Jackie Robinson(Chadwick Boseman). Thankfully it tones everything back just enough shortly after.

The movie never tries to over shadow it’s main character, Jackie Robinson, with any sort of scene stealing display of prejudice. It shows restraint just like Jackie is told to show in the movie.

Movies like this, dealing with racism, have loads of opportunities to paint an extremely ugly face on the matter. To make the audience feel sympathy for the character through disgust from the extreme actions of others. 42 holds back with this, never over-glorifying any act. In fact, other than one poorly thrown baseball, there is no violence in the movie. The worst of the racism shown in the movie is just there to fuel Jackie. To push him to his brink. It’s not there for us for shock value. While this was happening I wasn't hating the person dishing this out. I wasn't a fan of him either, but that wasn't the point of his racist behavior. During this tirade I was focusing on Jackie and his response. It’s there for him and his development and Boseman plays this perfectly.

My only problem with the movie is with the most seasoned actor there, Harrison Ford. While he does have a few good moments, I really felt that he overacted trying to play a gruff old man. He’s old. He’s gruff. I felt like he needed to tone it down a bit and just act a little more naturally. Now I don’t know much about baseball or the character he was playing, so that may have been a great portrayal of that person, but in my opinion his performance was more of a distraction from the beautiful restraint shown in the rest of the film.



So once again, thanks for reading this week. I was going to add another section about some movies news that got me excited this week but I feel I've rambled on long enough. I may do a separate post regarding that stuff later this week. Maybe not. But I will be updating with my thoughts on Roger Eberts top 10 soon.

Until then, cheers!

My Weekly Update 04/28

If I can finish this blog post, edit it and published before I go to bed tonight, it will be a good testament to my commitment to keep this a regular occurring event.

I had to put that statement at the beginning of this post because there is a small part of me that wants to skip this tonight, go lie down, read some of The Hobbit, and meander off into a drool filled sleep. A drive to Clarenville and back (3-4 hours of driving for anyone not versed in Newfoundland geography), and then a hefty turkey dinner at my parents before heading home has made me a sleepy meat-bag. But alas I trudge onward. Even though I'm moving on Wednesday and should be doing something in preparation for that as well.



Last week I listed ten films that Roger Ebert chose as his top ten in 2012 and stated my intentions on working my way through each of these. I won't repeat the list. It's below somewhere if you want to just scroll down. Go on, I wont go anywhere................. Okay. So I have been looking into this and have found all of these films except for one. Aguirre, Wrath of God. This is not on Netflix or iTunes, and I couldn't find it at HMV. I'm sure i'll be able to get it somewhere online but I really don't want to have to resort to torrenting it. I've managed to avoid downloading any movies lately. Just TV shows, which I have no ethical qualms with torrenting anyway. If anybody has a good, legit suggestion on where to find this I would greatly appreciate it. As for the rest of the list, I've only managed to make my way through two so far: The General, and 2001: A Space Odyssey. I hope to pick up the pace with the rest of the ten this week but it will still probably be another couple weeks before I get through them all. When I get through them I plan on doing a full post (maybe two) for that alone, discussing my thoughts on the films and such. But until then I'll just give a quick preview of what I think of the ones I've seen.

First one I decided to watch was fittingly the oldest. The General, made in 1926, is probably the oldest film I've ever watched in full (that I can recall). It's silent, black and white, and clearly looks very dated. That will make it a turn off for many people to watch in these days of CGI and IMAX 3D. But if you can, do yourself a favor and watch this. I was so happy I decided to do this list after watching this movie. I probably never would have seen it otherwise. Of course you need to go into this with an open mind, but if you can do that, you'll be treated to one of the best examples there is of a film, being used to it's full potential as a strictly visual medium.

The second movie I watched was 2001: A Space Odyssey, from one of my favorite directors, Stanley Kubrick. This is one of the movies on this list I have already seen, and was more than happy to watch this again for this blog. I love this movie. This is another example of film-making at it's best as visual art. Stanley Kubricks eye for detail and making every shot perfect was legendary and it's a damn tragedy that he's no longer among us. I'll never have the pleasure of going to the theater to be a part of the experience that was a Kubrick film being seen for the first time. In it's place we have classics like this that can be watched, and should be watched, over and over again.



The rest of this week has been fairly uneventful. I've got my move coming, so practically I've been busy procrastinating doing anything involved with that. I did find the time to watch a couple of new movies though:

My Weekly Thoughts

The Place Beyond The Pines 8/10

I already posted an individual review for this movie that you can find here. That was my first full review of a film and reading it over again now, I'm happy with how it turned out. The only thing I would like to add would be that I've felt a need to go see it again over the past couple of days. It seems that Empire Theatres have decided to keep it around for another week (which is awesome) so I strongly urge people to go see it while it's still here. And if anybody needs someone to go see it with, let me know.


The Disappeared 6/10

I went and saw this movie for two reasons:

1) It is a locally made movie (Nova Scotia actually, but I'll consider anything in Atlantic Canada local) that managed to get some screen time here. Considering the number of these low budget, indie films that Empire Theatres actually brings here to NL, I felt compelled to support it by having a look.

2) I wanted to see what a locally made movie could do on a presumably low budget. Especially considering the entire film takes place, and was filmed, at sea.

If the above two reasons have no place in your stream of thought when deciding what movie you want to see then it's probably not going to be your cup of tea. If they are, then there may be something here worth seeing.

The movie follows a group of six fisherman stuck at sea in two dories after their boat inexplicably sinks. We follow them as they row, battle against the elements, against themselves, and ultimately row some more. And that's all there is. As you can see, plot wise, it runs a bit thin. There's no explanation or hint given as to why the boat sinks or if there were other crew on board. Only one of the crew sustains an injury from the incident and that isn't even explained.

This lack of detail in the film is a little off putting at first. And to some, the simplicity of the plot may ruin the movie all together. As the movie played on though I started to warm up to the whole idea. This lack of back story is what this movie needs. You don't need to be distracted by any logistics of what happened before. The history of the characters isn't important. The director (Shandi Mitchell) puts you, the viewer, in the boat with these six other characters as they do what needs to be done to survive. How they got there is of no concern and their pasts matter not. They're in those two boats, you're there with them, and it's about surviving the moment.

Once this element sinks in, the movie turns into something much greater. The closeness of the camera to the characters puts you in the boat with them. The lack of music (which I originally thought was a greatly missed opportunity for some artistic mood setting) fits the loneliness that one would experience in the middle of nowhere. The lack of special effects and constraints of a small budget make it all feel real. All these factors combine and the dire nature of their situation quickly falls on you. You know their odds are low and it becomes about watching this crew deal with a situation that likely has a grim outcome.

Of course all that is only part of the movie. The rest falls upon the actors. And in the close quarters of the dories and the smallness of the cast, there is very little room for error. There were a few moments where the acting and dialogue did make me cringe a little. In a movie with a little bit more going on these moments may have even slipped by without notice. Unfortunately they end up standing out here. But overall the acting was good. There were a couple of incredibly heart breaking moments in the movie that really stood out and credit goes to the actors involved for making them work.

In the end there's only so much that can be said about this movie without giving anything away. If you enjoy a slow paced movie, especially a bit of a sullen one, then please go see this in the next few days at the theater if you can. This doesn't have a Hollywood production budget and you can tell by looking at it. But it does the job it needs to. Maybe we'll get more indie films like this if it gets support. I can't say that you will love it, but it's definitely one of the best locally made films in recent years.



As per my note at the top, I'm giving myself a good pat on the back and heading to bed. See you all next week!

The Place Beyond The Pines Review

The Place Beyond the Pines is a clever, slow burning film. It’s not for everybody. If you saw and enjoyed Blue Valentine then this will be right up your alley. I actually think it’s a solid improvement over that, even though I did enjoy that movie. 

If you haven’t seen Blue Valentine than you need to know something about director Derek Cianfrance. Happiness isn't his game. Both of his feature films are tragic stories. Blue Valentine shows one of the most futile, realistic relationships that I have seen in film. There are bursts of happiness but they are fighting against the main narrative. They don’t last. They’re swallowed by sadness, anger, regret and resentment. All the things that make a good mind go bad.

The Place Beyond the Pines follows another example of simple lives turned bad. While Blue Valentine deals with a broken relationship and trying to mend it, Pines deals with the legacy we leave for our children through the good, and bad decisions that we make. It may not seem like that from the surface and the trailers, but it’s there.

The film starts by following Luke(Ryan Gosling), a motorcycle stunt driver working in a travelling carnival, as he reunites with Romina(Eva Mendes), a fling from the last time he was in town. As he tries to re-connect with Romina he discovers that she is now caring for his newborn child. A spark ignites and he starts a downward spiral into his attempt at being the father he thinks he should be. Unfortunately a lifetime of riding motorcycles hasn't prepared him for what he needs to do and he eventually runs into Robin(Ben Mendelsohn) while looking for a stable job. This meeting starts him on a tragic course that eventually crosses his path with that of Avery(Bradley Cooper), a rookie cop. Luke and Averys time together on screen ends up being brief, but it sets in motion a series of events that sees Avery become a hero, get involved with some dirty cops, and eventually make a decision that could have life or death implications.

The decisions of both of these characters ultimately shape the lives of their sons. In the third segment of this epic drama we are introduced to AJ(Emory Cohen) and Jason(Dane DeHaan), 15 years later, all grown up and in their teen years as their lives cross fatefully. This is where the consequences of their fathers decisions come head on and change their lives for better, and for worst.

I’ll leave my synopsis at that. Watch the film to figure out the rest.

The first thing I feel I need to say about this film is how amazing Ryan Gosling is. He is by far one of my favorite actors out there right now and it’s clearly shown here why. He looks completely at home playing a deadbeat motorcycle driver dressed in grunge. He plays it perfectly and hits the highs and lows amazingly. He gets to enjoy some genuine happiness, but it’s short lived. I was enthralled with his character and wanted him to succeed. I wanted him to be a great dad. And I was equally as destroyed with the fate he weaves for himself.

Now that’s not to say there was anything wrong with the rest of the cast. I feel the need to point out Goslings performance because I feel there are going to be a LOT of people going to this movie just because he’s in it. He’s front and center in all the posters. They knew how to promote this movie. The problem is, the movie isn't just about him. It’s very much an ensemble cast and be forewarned that Ryan Gosling isn't the heart throb here. He’s a broken man. He hits rock bottom at times. And without giving away his exact fate, he’s only in less than a third of the movie.

Speaking of the ensemble cast, everybody else in this is amazing. Special nods going to Ben Mendelsohn, Eva Mendes and Ray Liotta.

Mendelsohn, if you've never seen him, is an amazingly underrated actor. I first saw him in Animal Kingdom (if you haven’t seen that then you should really seek that out, it’s quite awesome). But since then he’s starred in Killing Them Softly with Brad Pitt and a little movie called Dark Knight Rises. The point is, the man is on the rise, and its evident why in this. He plays the perfect role as the down and out junkie and is effectively good at making your skin crawl. His interactions with Gosling are perfect as he pushes him slowly along his destructive path. And at the end, when he sees what he has done to Luke. What he's turned him into. He has an amazing couple of scenes where he attempts to fix his mistake and Mendelsohn plays it so well. I can't state enough how underrated I feel he is.

Eva Mendes and Ray Liotta both give better than expected performances as well. With the little screen time given to them they make damn good use of it. Ray Liotta is one creepy fucker and he knows damn well how to play that up.

All of the performances under Derek Cianfrances direction are what make this movie what it is. On top of that you have some incredibly beautiful cinematography at work here. Most noticeable during the Ryan Gosling sequence of the movie. When he’s speeding away from the heists on his motorcycle, you get the sense of urgency and it makes you feel like you’re right in the action. The rest of the movie he builds an incredibly dark and almost mysterious atmosphere, fitting for the densely forested area where they filmed the movie. The score of the film backs this up perfectly. He effectively makes a movie about a small group of people feel much more engrossing than most would think it needs to be. And he does this all with a very realistic, down to earth style that only comes from a director with a background in documentaries.

The only area that I felt the film stumbled a bit was in the last third when we get to the lives of the kids in their teen years. The acting was still solid but I felt the pacing was a little all over the place. It felt like it was building to a climax a few times and then would just whimper off, before eventually working back up towards something else. I feel like the effect of the tragic ending was also dulled with this up and down pacing near the end. Up until this section of the movie I was completely glued to the screen, oblivious to the world around me. Once it hit these pacing issues I became a little disconnected from the movie. Finally becoming aware of it’s 2hr 20min running time. I’m sure if they had sliced 10-15 minutes off in that final sequence they could have had a much better build up to the end without it feeling as dragged out as it did.

Without the pacing issues at the end I would have easily said this was going to be one of my favorite movies of this year, hands down. But the end was too much of a distraction from the rest of the movie to be completely ignored. I still loved it. Time will only tell how it ranks with the rest of 2013 to come.

If you don’t mind a bit of a slower paced movie then I strongly recommend this, and to also have a look at Blue Valentine if you can find the time. My strongest advice would be to not watch either in a bad mood in hopes of being cheered up by the “dreamy” Ryan Gosling. You’ll be sadly disappointed.

*I gave The Place Beyond The Pines an 8/10 score on IMDB

My Week In Blog Form

It's experiment time guys. No, not that type of experiment. I mean the type that involves typing and trying something new.

Up until now this blog has been sporadic at best. My last post was my first in quite a while. It was also a movie review of sorts which I never planned on using this blog for when it was in its early stages. Of course things change, and while I do still plan on following a career in some sort of film/media format like I motioned towards in earlier posts, due to a couple binding issues, I'm more or less staying put for the time being and for what looks to be the near future. But that's ok. I'm ok with it. I like where I'm to right now. I'm moving back into my old digs downtown at the end of the month. Nothing against the other people in my current living arrangement, but this area of town(the asshole of it) is shit. Suburbia is not for me quite yet. And after a few weeks of tedious apartment searching I came to realize that everything I was looking for was what I had in my last house before I moved here. So, due to some stroke of good luck(which is nice for a change), that old place of mine has once again become available and I have staked my claim once again.

I've also made a major step in the right direction for myself artistically and have gone and purchased a fandangled new camera. A Canon 60D DSLR to be exact:

I call her Caron. Well... I don't really, but we'll see what happens after this post.

Anyway, this is my new toy and I plan on spending a lot of time with it in the future. I haven't used it too much in the recent couple of months because of Newfoundlands lovely weather, and there's only so many pictures you can take of your dog before she starts to get some sort of complex. But now that the sun is starting to shine and the birds are starting to chirp again, I plan on getting as much use out of this as possible.

Another thing I have done, and plan on continuing to do a whole fucking lot, is watch movies. Like, a lot of them. At the beginning of this year I did up a rough figure for the amount of money I spent at Empire Theatres in the good ol' 2012. I won't get into exact amounts but I feel like I may have paid for a few of those comfy new chairs that everybody is rubbin their arse into. I am totally fine with this though because it was all money well spent. I enjoy going to the theaters quite a bit. But I think it may be time to do something productive with all that spent money as well.

So, like my previous post, I'm going to be sharing my thoughts on here regarding the movies I watch. It won't always be in the form of a full review like my Evil Dead post. Nor will it always warrant its own blog post. There may be some of those for movies I have strong thoughts/opinions on. But for the most part I'm going to make these mini reviews a part of a weekly blog post, commencing tonight. And I plan on taking a couple hours to do this every Sunday night since it's the only night I'm guaranteed to not be busy with work and generally have a few free hours somewhere in the day to do this. I'm thinking I may add some other material into each post as well but for now I'll start with just the movies I've seen. This should at least give anybody who reads this a bit of a more reliable reason to keep checking back here.

Now, without further adieu:

My Weekly Thoughts 

Jurassic Park 3D 10/10

Possibly one of the best sci-fi films of my generation. Steven Spielberg did something amazing back in 1993 by making you believe in dinosaurs with technology that still looks amazing 20 years after, and superb performances by a cast of characters you no longer see in hollywood films. The Ian Malcolms are now replaced by arrogant, save-the-whale, humanitarians that would have died trying to free the dinosaurs from their entrapment's. The John Hammonds are now replaced by power hungry corporate CEO’s who would have become tragic(not so tragic) victims of their own creations. Dr. Ellie Sattler and Dr. Alan Grant would be swapped for much younger, sexier versions of themselves. And Dennis Nedry probably would have been left in the dust all together. The release of the dinosaurs being explained by some non-realistic technological malfunction. We also probably wouldn't have gotten one of the most quotable lines in movie history, “Clever girl”. 

That is how a movie like this would be made today. But back in 1993 it was made differently, it was made almost perfect. Of course there are some flaws, but no other movie in recent memory has struck the same jaw-dropping, awe inspiring chord that this did. 

Adding IMAX and 3D to the package is a respectable mixed bag. 3D only slightly works, being so bad at times it becomes distracting, and not seeming to do anything at all at other points in the film. 

IMAX on the other hand is the format this movie was born to be seen in. Hearing a T-Rex bellow in ear-shattering loud sound quality is the way it’s supposed to be heard. And the added screen size shows the crossbreed of CGI and mechanical dinosaurs on a scale that would only be rivaled by seeing them in the flesh. 

All in all, seeing this timeless classic for the first time in its big screen glory sent me home with a giant smile on my face, even 20 years later, and anybody who’s a fan should see it as well.

Revolution 6/10

While not as good as his first attempt, Sharkwater, Revolution is a visually striking documentary that exceeds its grasp on the subject of saving the world, but still manages to inspire a change. 

It’s nice to see that Rob Stewart has so much passion for what he’s doing, and it really shows. It gave me a sense of entitlement to change some of my ways. But the film seemed to have issues with staying focused, and with the subject matter he’s dealing with it’s a hard task to stay on one individual topic for too long. One of the things that was great about Sharkwater was how specific it was. It covered one topic and it did it well. It gave the sense that the director was trying to step in to make a change. That he was going above and beyond to assist with something he cared passionately about. Even risking prison time at one point. 

Revolution however, doesn't seem quite as personal. You know there’s a good cause here but I never feel like Rob was putting himself in danger to change anything. He’s still trying but this time it’s a different struggle. He’s trying to fit all the worlds problems into a mere 1hr and 25min. He’s trying to show the damage and the solutions at the same time. It’s very admirable but it causes the film to feel a little rushed and almost as if something is missing. 

The purpose of the film isn't lost with this though, it merely feels like a filtered version of what it could have been. It’s still a beautiful film with some great imagery, a great message, and something that anybody who cares about the environment should take the time to watch.

So there you have it. My first in hopefully an ongoing weekly update. I would greatly appreciate any feedback with this as time goes by. Positive and negative. I'm trying to get serious about this and want it to grow into something regular.

I'm also going to be changing around the layout of this site to try to find something I'm a little more comfortable with and appealing to the senses. I've changed it to a pretty safe style right now but I'm going to look for something a little more my own. Any feedback regarding this will be taken to heart as well.

Thanks again to anybody who reads this and hopefully I'll see you back here next week!