Alien: Resurrection (1997)
Grade: C+
Starring: Sigourney Weaver, Wynona Ryder, Dominique Pinon, Ron Perlman, Gary Dourdan, Michael Wincott, Dan Hedaya, J.E. Freeman, Brad Dourif and Leland Orser
PREMISE: Two-hundred years after her death, infamous space explorer Ellen Ripley is reborn via DNA cloning so that the queen alien embryo within her can likewise be recreated--and weaponized.
RATED R for graphic gory content and disturbing images, blood and violence, language, scary moments, and brief nudity
Okay, so, first things first: everyone knows Ridley Scott's Alien (1979) and James Cameron's follow-up, Aliens (1986), are genuine masterpieces, two of the greatest science fiction movies ever made (Scott's original also belongs on the list of greatest horror movies ever made), and in the ballpark of best movies ever made. Both register today as uncommonly smart and sophisticated boo pictures, creature features that live and die by the less-is-more mentality concerning how often the antagonistic Creatures are shown onscreen, and both are near-perfect models of how to create, and sustain, gripping, white-knuckle suspense over long periods of time without ever dropping the ball. Alien: Resurrection is not in the same league as those films. Not in the same league, not in the same ballpark; it's connected to those films only by featuring the same malicious creature (the fanged, slime-secreting, acid-bleeding xenomorph) and the same protagonist (Sigourney Weaver's gritty, foul-mouthed Ellen Ripley). Whereas those earlier films thrilled audiences mostly with human drama and prolonged intensity (something practically unheard-of in the horror/thriller genre today), Resurrection piles on the blood and guts (literally) and slimy aliens with gusto.
And yet...it's not a bad movie. Nowhere close to those other two, of course, but not bad. It's a bit of a shame that, because it's part of the same franchise, you can't help but watch it and think of those other more quality pictures, but, if you leave your mind open, and set hopes for a third masterpiece aside, Resurrection is a surprisingly-entertaining, super campy action-packed romp. The script is weaker, the aliens look faker, and there are enormous gaps in logic and storyline, but it's essentially a sublime chase-and-kill action flick, about on par with the popular vampire/werewolf Underworld saga that's been popping in and out of theaters since 2003. Weaver still proves capable of carrying a movie, and a few new, energetic faces help keep the interest up and the excitement going through another showdown with some of the movie world's deadliest-ever monsters.
Plot: More than 200 years after she died just as an alien was bursting from her rib cage (in Alien 3), Ellen Ripley (Weaver) has been successfully recreated through cloning by scientists of the United Systems. Recreated with her was the alien embryo, which the scientists (led by J.E. Freeman and Brad Dourif) remove in order to create more aliens--creatures that, long ago, Ian Holm's science officer, Ash, once called "the perfect organism", circa the original Alien. However, the recreated Ripley's brains have been addled and she's showing some unusual tendencies and abilities, possibly due to the recreation of the alien within her at the same time her personal DNA was being remade. Enter the crew of The Betty, a smuggler spacecraft manned by gun-totaing mercenaries (Ron Perlman, Michael Wincott, and Gary Dourdan), which hooks up with the floating laboratory Ripley's aboard, bringing in captured human hosts for the new aliens the scientists are looking to breed (if you remember, the xenomorph needs a separate host in order to grow, from "facehugger" to "chestburster"). Also aboard The Betty is young Call (Winona Ryder), a smart, fresh-faced young woman who has the look of someone who knows more than she's letting on.
Just after Call sneaks into Ripley's cell and nearly kills her (Ripley talks her out of it), the aliens, taking advantage of the fact that their acid blood corrodes and melts metal, break out of their cages and storm the space lab. Scientists and security guards are killed by the dozen, including a general (Dan Hedaya) who was on hand to oversee the development of his new choice weapons. The giant spacecraft, now no longer being actively-manned, is also hurtling toward Earth. The crew of The Betty have no choice but the trust the peculiar, twitchy Ripley in their fight against, and flight from, the aliens, as they try to reach their ship again and take off before dying in the crash, which is sure to be devastating.
What Works?
Of course, the creature action works. Why wouldn't it? Who doesn't love seeing a giant fanged monster that bleeds steel-melting acid and is, at times, surprisingly-smart run around causing mayhem, swimming, climbing, biting, and tending to off any minor characters who are particular douche bags. Even an alien who comes on the scene late, and looks almost completely different from the others, while obviously a little silly-looking, is believable as a real, living being. The suspense is, of course, nothing on the suspense of the earlier movies, but it nonetheless keeps you involved despite some of the very bizarre happenings (the first half hour, and last twenty minutes, of Resurrection seem like they were written and conceived by someone on an acid trip, pun intended). Another thing, obviously, that keeps you engaged are the high-energy performances of the cast (Ryder, Perlman, Pinon, Wincott, and Orser are all effective), a plus in a special-effects laden action/horror flick.
What Doesn't Work?
Okay, so, that acid trip-esque set-up is freakin' bizarre (if you ask yourself "what am I watching" at any point during Resurrection, you won't be the first), and, especially as acted out by Brad Dourif and Dan Hedaya, painfully hammy at points. Those two give cringe-inducting performances, and Weaver, well, the first lady of the Alien universe gives the kind of performance that's hard to review-it seems contrived and cheesy, yet a lot of that is because she's asked to do some incredibly weird (read: dumb) things. Also, like many movies that end with disaster narrowly-avoided-and nowhere else in the plot to go-Resurrection ends with a coda that tries to be poetic and profound but mostly just ends up being lame.
Content:
Gore, gore, gore! This is a blood and guts (and brains) type of movie, so keep the little kids (and some of the easily-squeamish adults) away. People and aliens are blown apart left and right, and many of the details (like organs dnd body parts) are shown. F-words are also dropped like hot potatoes, used as nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, etc... There are a few brief nude images (like a quick shot of a woman in a thong), and some unsightly-bordering-on-hideous shots of half-Ripley/half-alien prototypes the scientists were working on. In short: Resurrection, like most horror movies, doesn't exactly back into its R rating; it wears it proudly on its sleeve.
Bottom Line (I promise):
At twenty minutes, I was thinking what the hell? At one hour, I was thinking: hey, this is all right. And at an hour-and-a-half, I was thinking: You know, this is actually kinda cool. Resurrection isn't a masterpiece of plotting and suspense like the first two pictures in the saga, but it's a campy and intriguing action flick that, if you're into sci-fi, should float your boat.
Alien: Resurrection (1997)
Directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet
Written by Joss Whedon; based on characters created by Dan O'Bannon and Ronald Shusett
Length: 109 minutes
Rated R
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Saturday, April 14, 2012
LOCKOUT
Lockout (2012)
Grade: C
Starring: Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Joseph Gilgun, Vincent Regan, Lennie James, Peter Stormare, Peter Hudson, and Tim Plester
PREMISE: When the inmates of a maximum-security prison riot and take over while the President’s daughter is aboard on a peacekeeping mission, the U.S. Government dispatches a rogue agent to bring her back and, if possible, wrest the station from control of the prisoners.
RATED PG-13 for language, violence, some bloody material and scary images
Lockout is unquestionably one of those movies that makes a great trailer. High-security prison in space + pretty, good-hearted president’s daughter (Maggie Grace of Taken fame) + prisoner takeover + (most importantly) quippy, muscle-bound rebel-without-a-cause (Guy Pearce) = cool premise and action galore. Sounds like a can’t-miss idea, right? Surprisingly for such an intriguing idea, Lockout barely succeeds. Mostly, its 95-minute running time plays like a trailer for a longer, more developed movie. The action scenes are quick and barely get the pulse racing, the dialogue is short, cute, and over with quickly, the emotion is half-baked and the romantic sparks are ambiguous, at best. Throw in a decidedly murky and unnecessary subplot, and Lockout sputters.
Plot: Snow (Pearce) has just been arrested for murder, espionage and scheming to bring down the U.S. Government. When he refuses to admit guilt-claiming someone else set him up and actually committed the key murder-plus showering his captors with cheap insults, Agent Langral (Peter Stormare) decides he’s earned himself a visit to the Big House. In this case, the Big House is MS-1, a space station/prison that orbits the earth. It’s still in its test phase, but, what with its ability to keep prisoners in cryo-sleep (and, therefore, under complete control at all times) it seems bound to be a big hit, and it has the capacity to hold over 500,000. However, Snow can’t even be transported there before the inmates take over. It happens when President Warnock’s daughter Emilie (Grace) is on board, trying to get an idea of the psychological state of people kept in cryo-sleep for years at a time—one of her aides sneaks in an extra gun, and, when he gets up close and personal with a prisoner (Joseph Gilgun) who’s being mouthy with the First Daughter, the gun is snatched. You can pretty much guess what happens from there. The prisoners are freed from cryo-sleep, swamp the prison guards, blast the warden out into space, injure the First Daughter and take her and her surviving aides hostage, and there seems to be nothing for the Government to do but blow it out of the sky. Of course, the president (Peter Hudson) isn’t about to let that happen while his daughter is on board. They send in Snow, hoping he can locate the First Daughter and get her to the hidden escape pod—once she’s freed, the decision to blow the station will be easy. But Snow is outnumbered, outgunned, and time is running out.
What Works?
Both leads deserve a better movie. Pearce (who should look familiar after appearing some of the past few decades’ most popular films: 1997’s L.A. Confidential, 2002’s The Count of Monte Cristo, 2009’s The King’s Speech) is smarter than the average muscle-head movie star, and this is an interesting change of pace for him. He has a lot of fun with his character’s rebellious, smart-mouth tendencies, and you can’t always tell exactly what he’s about to do. And, for a guy with a track record as a character actor, he’s surprisingly-convincing as a buff secret agent. Grace is solid, too, showing more brains than the average damsel-in-distress while navigating the emotional waters of chirpy smart girl, terrified hostage and mourner even before she gets to fit neatly into the opposites-attract dynamic with Pearce. They have surprisingly decent chemistry, and their snappy interplay is often quite funny.
What Doesn’t Work?
While you could argue that, even for an action flick like this, the two main characters making a solid impression counts as success, the movie itself isn’t all that good. It feels sorta empty, and it flies by. And that’s not to mention so much is left out—the movie jumps periods of time (including hours) in the blink of an eye, and fails to explain a lot of small but important details as it hustles. All this brought on-for me-an air of disbelief, as I couldn’t believe this was the real movie and not a simply a trailer or a sneak peek. And the subplot, involving Snow’s effort to prove his innocence by trying to find a fellow conspirator among the ship’s inmates, is distracting and rather phoned-in. It’s as if the filmmakers suddenly realized their movie was about 45 minutes long and needed more details. Newsflash: if your action film just has some more action-and maybe some more down time with your two talented leads-you don’t need to add extra plot lines.
Most of the other characters given significant screen time are just distracting. Lennie James and Peter Stormare are the requisite informed Government heavies, Peter Hudson is the deer-in-the-headlights president, and Joseph Gilgun and Vincent Regan are the two “leaders” of the inmates, a pair of Scottish brothers, the former of whom is completely insane and the latter is principled but merciless. Both actors are memorable but under developed.
And, in another big strike against an action movie like this, a key early chase scene is so frantically filmed that it’s almost unintelligible, and the special effects aren’t always convincing.
Content:
There’s a fair amount of language (including PG-13’s one allotted F-word), and, while most of the violence is kept at a distance, there are some unnerving details like the crazy Gilgun character offing a bunch of innocent hostages right after he said he wouldn’t. Then again, Lockout is so brisk and quick that most details won’t stay with you very long.
Bottom Line (I promise):
A cool premise + two engaging main actors seems a recipe for success, but Lockout seems so intent on being over with quickly that it undermines its better qualities. It’s a mildly-entertaining rental at best.
Lockout (2012)
Directed by James Mather and Stephen St. Leger
Written by James Mather, Stephen St. Leger, and Luc Besson
Length: 95 minutes
Rated PG-13
Grade: C
Starring: Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Joseph Gilgun, Vincent Regan, Lennie James, Peter Stormare, Peter Hudson, and Tim Plester
PREMISE: When the inmates of a maximum-security prison riot and take over while the President’s daughter is aboard on a peacekeeping mission, the U.S. Government dispatches a rogue agent to bring her back and, if possible, wrest the station from control of the prisoners.
RATED PG-13 for language, violence, some bloody material and scary images
Lockout is unquestionably one of those movies that makes a great trailer. High-security prison in space + pretty, good-hearted president’s daughter (Maggie Grace of Taken fame) + prisoner takeover + (most importantly) quippy, muscle-bound rebel-without-a-cause (Guy Pearce) = cool premise and action galore. Sounds like a can’t-miss idea, right? Surprisingly for such an intriguing idea, Lockout barely succeeds. Mostly, its 95-minute running time plays like a trailer for a longer, more developed movie. The action scenes are quick and barely get the pulse racing, the dialogue is short, cute, and over with quickly, the emotion is half-baked and the romantic sparks are ambiguous, at best. Throw in a decidedly murky and unnecessary subplot, and Lockout sputters.
Plot: Snow (Pearce) has just been arrested for murder, espionage and scheming to bring down the U.S. Government. When he refuses to admit guilt-claiming someone else set him up and actually committed the key murder-plus showering his captors with cheap insults, Agent Langral (Peter Stormare) decides he’s earned himself a visit to the Big House. In this case, the Big House is MS-1, a space station/prison that orbits the earth. It’s still in its test phase, but, what with its ability to keep prisoners in cryo-sleep (and, therefore, under complete control at all times) it seems bound to be a big hit, and it has the capacity to hold over 500,000. However, Snow can’t even be transported there before the inmates take over. It happens when President Warnock’s daughter Emilie (Grace) is on board, trying to get an idea of the psychological state of people kept in cryo-sleep for years at a time—one of her aides sneaks in an extra gun, and, when he gets up close and personal with a prisoner (Joseph Gilgun) who’s being mouthy with the First Daughter, the gun is snatched. You can pretty much guess what happens from there. The prisoners are freed from cryo-sleep, swamp the prison guards, blast the warden out into space, injure the First Daughter and take her and her surviving aides hostage, and there seems to be nothing for the Government to do but blow it out of the sky. Of course, the president (Peter Hudson) isn’t about to let that happen while his daughter is on board. They send in Snow, hoping he can locate the First Daughter and get her to the hidden escape pod—once she’s freed, the decision to blow the station will be easy. But Snow is outnumbered, outgunned, and time is running out.
What Works?
Both leads deserve a better movie. Pearce (who should look familiar after appearing some of the past few decades’ most popular films: 1997’s L.A. Confidential, 2002’s The Count of Monte Cristo, 2009’s The King’s Speech) is smarter than the average muscle-head movie star, and this is an interesting change of pace for him. He has a lot of fun with his character’s rebellious, smart-mouth tendencies, and you can’t always tell exactly what he’s about to do. And, for a guy with a track record as a character actor, he’s surprisingly-convincing as a buff secret agent. Grace is solid, too, showing more brains than the average damsel-in-distress while navigating the emotional waters of chirpy smart girl, terrified hostage and mourner even before she gets to fit neatly into the opposites-attract dynamic with Pearce. They have surprisingly decent chemistry, and their snappy interplay is often quite funny.
What Doesn’t Work?
While you could argue that, even for an action flick like this, the two main characters making a solid impression counts as success, the movie itself isn’t all that good. It feels sorta empty, and it flies by. And that’s not to mention so much is left out—the movie jumps periods of time (including hours) in the blink of an eye, and fails to explain a lot of small but important details as it hustles. All this brought on-for me-an air of disbelief, as I couldn’t believe this was the real movie and not a simply a trailer or a sneak peek. And the subplot, involving Snow’s effort to prove his innocence by trying to find a fellow conspirator among the ship’s inmates, is distracting and rather phoned-in. It’s as if the filmmakers suddenly realized their movie was about 45 minutes long and needed more details. Newsflash: if your action film just has some more action-and maybe some more down time with your two talented leads-you don’t need to add extra plot lines.
Most of the other characters given significant screen time are just distracting. Lennie James and Peter Stormare are the requisite informed Government heavies, Peter Hudson is the deer-in-the-headlights president, and Joseph Gilgun and Vincent Regan are the two “leaders” of the inmates, a pair of Scottish brothers, the former of whom is completely insane and the latter is principled but merciless. Both actors are memorable but under developed.
And, in another big strike against an action movie like this, a key early chase scene is so frantically filmed that it’s almost unintelligible, and the special effects aren’t always convincing.
Content:
There’s a fair amount of language (including PG-13’s one allotted F-word), and, while most of the violence is kept at a distance, there are some unnerving details like the crazy Gilgun character offing a bunch of innocent hostages right after he said he wouldn’t. Then again, Lockout is so brisk and quick that most details won’t stay with you very long.
Bottom Line (I promise):
A cool premise + two engaging main actors seems a recipe for success, but Lockout seems so intent on being over with quickly that it undermines its better qualities. It’s a mildly-entertaining rental at best.
Lockout (2012)
Directed by James Mather and Stephen St. Leger
Written by James Mather, Stephen St. Leger, and Luc Besson
Length: 95 minutes
Rated PG-13
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
WAR HORSE
War Horse (2011)
Grade: B+
DIRECTED BY STEVEN SPIELBERG
Starring: Jeremy Irvine, Peter Mullan, David Thewlis, Emily Watson, Matt Milne, Robert Emms, Tom Hiddleston, Benedict Cumberbatch, David Kross, Leonard Carow, Celine Buckens, Niels Arestrup, Toby Kebbell, Hinnerk Schonemann, and Eddie Marsan
PREMISE: A horse born and raised on an English farm in the early 1900s is whisked away for use in the army during World War I. During the war, the horse goes from owner to owner, from English to Germans, and, like the people around it, struggles to survive.
RATED PG-13 for intense war violence and scenes of peril, and dramatic emotional content
Saving Private Ryan and Schindler’s List will always be Steven Spielberg’s masterpieces, but War Horse is one heck of an invigorating epic. Beautifully-filmed, powerfully-moving, funny, terrifying and both gut and heart-wrenching, Horse is a powerful picture that, in the hands of a masterful director, shows both the agony and the ecstasy human beings can experience, and the best and worst they’re capable of. Though it’s nearly two-and-a-half hours long, it’s an adventure that keeps you spellbound, and only during the last thirty minutes (when the movie threatens to overdose on sentimentality) does it stumble.
Plot: By all accounts, Joey (the titular horse, which is chestnut brown with a few identifying white spots) should never have passed into Albert Narracott’s hands (Albert is played by the earnest, expressive actor Jeremy Irvine). But his drunken father (Peter Mullan) saw something in its fight and spirit at an auction, enough to quite literally bet the family’s farm on it. When the financial burden of the farm becomes too great, however, the father is forced to sell Joey, sending him into the hands of an idealistic army officer (Tom Hiddleston) just as the Great War appears on the horizon. After one early, frightful battle, Joey passes into the hands of the Germans, where he’s soon used to aid a pair of brothers (David Kross and Leonard Carow) as they dessert the Kaiser’s ranks. Shortly thereafter abandoned at a farm owned by a hard-working old man (Niels Arestrup) and his sweet-natured granddaughter (Celine Buckens), he becomes a family fixture just before the Germans show up again, taking him immediately back into the fold to help pull artillery. He’s soon caught up in another battle, one in which both the Germans and English suffer staggering casualties, and one in which Albert is present, fighting for his country just as he vowed to do once his horse was taken away to do the very same thing.
What Works?An awful lot. In the tradition of great epics, War Horse features stunning cinematography, heart-stopping action, moments of intimate character development, and across-the-board strong performances from a sprawling cast.
Janusz Kaminski’s camera works wonders, capturing glimpses of gorgeous countryside and terrifying battles, building suspense as characters hurry to find one another, following both people and animals as they try to hide from foes, and watching as desperate men both German and English struggle to accept the inevitability of their mortality. The violence in War Horse doesn’t come close to matching Spielberg’s iconic Private Ryan carnage, but what it lacks in bloody details it makes up for in shock, awe, and the grim reality of destructive war. The film’s great epic moment comes from a British officer (Benedict Cumberbatch) shouting “BE BRAVE” to his men before a head-on charge into enemy territory; another similar, but rather less-inspiring, moment comes when an officer in a trench cries “May God and the King watch over you” just before his men run out into No-Man’s Land. The pointlessness of that ‘encouragement’ is revealed a moment later, when the soldiers are blown to bits almost as soon as they step onto the battlefield. And one of the film’s most unforgettably shaking moments comes when Hiddleston’s officer realizes he and his men have hurried head-on into a fatal ambush—the actor’s expression, shocked and scared, will stay with you.
Basically, War Horse does about as well as Private Ryan at depicting the hopelessness and-dare I say it-pointlessness of war, in which many faceless men (and women) die, many of them without knowing why they’re even fighting. But this pointlessness is set aside in one critical late scene when a Brit (Toby Kebbell) and a German (Hinnerk Schonemann) work together to try and free Joey from tangles of barbed wire. Set aside whether or not such a spectacle is truly believable, and listen to the dialogue—“How are things over in your trench?” “Delightful.” And, when they part ways, the German says “just remember Peter, your friend from Dusseldorf!” It’s one of the most unique, beautiful movie moments I can think of, and one that gives you hope for the human race in a movie that points to some of our worst tendencies.
The battle scenes are what will probably stay with you, but there’s plenty of sublime material off the battlefield: scenes of Albert training Joey have a familiar but inspiring lift, Celine Buckens shines with youthful enthusiasm as a girl who unexpectedly finds Joey in her barn, feeds him, and tries to teach him to leap hurdles, and Emily Watson, as Albert’s mother, is perfect in a moment when she tries to explain to her son why his father drinks so much—and exactly what it is he’s trying to escape by drinking.
What Doesn’t Work?I’ve waxed poetic about War Horse’s ability to show war at its grittiest. It’s not quite as good at navigating more familiar waters about a family in dire straits, with nothing but a horse to hope in, and a textbook happy ending. As I mentioned, the last thirty minutes are a little too nice, a little overly-sentimental, so, despite the obvious emotional satisfaction (and our instinctive pleasure, as moviegoers, at seeing everything work out), it’s hard to not to question the legitimacy of what’s occurring onscreen. One of the only criticisms anyone’s ever had of Spielberg’s classic, Schindler’s List, was a late moment when Oskar Schindler broke down with regret and remorse at not saving more Jews—many thought it was a little too treacly, too much of an attempt to wring tears from the audience. Most of the last thirty minutes here have that feel. It doesn’t ruin War Horse, but it pushes the boundaries of believability a bit too far, and feels a bit too manufactured.
Content:I’m sure you can figure this out for yourself if you’ve read this far: War Horse features several full-scale battle scenes that aren’t particularly bloody but are frighteningly-intense. Throw in the animals-in-peril angle, and you’ve got a movie that is definitely not childproof. Beyond battles, however, the film is clean: there’s nary a swear word or sexual reference.
Bottom Line (I Promise):So very close to being flat-out amazing, War Horse is powerful, moving, and unforgettable, but an undercurrent of undeniable schmaltz rises up to take some of the air out of the third act. However, it’s still a very solid movie, made with love and care by the great director, Spielberg.
War Horse (2011)
Directed by Steven Spielberg
Written by Lee Hall and Richard Curtis; Based on the book by Michael Morpurgo
Rated PG-13
Length: 146 minutes
Grade: B+
DIRECTED BY STEVEN SPIELBERG
Starring: Jeremy Irvine, Peter Mullan, David Thewlis, Emily Watson, Matt Milne, Robert Emms, Tom Hiddleston, Benedict Cumberbatch, David Kross, Leonard Carow, Celine Buckens, Niels Arestrup, Toby Kebbell, Hinnerk Schonemann, and Eddie Marsan
PREMISE: A horse born and raised on an English farm in the early 1900s is whisked away for use in the army during World War I. During the war, the horse goes from owner to owner, from English to Germans, and, like the people around it, struggles to survive.
RATED PG-13 for intense war violence and scenes of peril, and dramatic emotional content
Saving Private Ryan and Schindler’s List will always be Steven Spielberg’s masterpieces, but War Horse is one heck of an invigorating epic. Beautifully-filmed, powerfully-moving, funny, terrifying and both gut and heart-wrenching, Horse is a powerful picture that, in the hands of a masterful director, shows both the agony and the ecstasy human beings can experience, and the best and worst they’re capable of. Though it’s nearly two-and-a-half hours long, it’s an adventure that keeps you spellbound, and only during the last thirty minutes (when the movie threatens to overdose on sentimentality) does it stumble.
Plot: By all accounts, Joey (the titular horse, which is chestnut brown with a few identifying white spots) should never have passed into Albert Narracott’s hands (Albert is played by the earnest, expressive actor Jeremy Irvine). But his drunken father (Peter Mullan) saw something in its fight and spirit at an auction, enough to quite literally bet the family’s farm on it. When the financial burden of the farm becomes too great, however, the father is forced to sell Joey, sending him into the hands of an idealistic army officer (Tom Hiddleston) just as the Great War appears on the horizon. After one early, frightful battle, Joey passes into the hands of the Germans, where he’s soon used to aid a pair of brothers (David Kross and Leonard Carow) as they dessert the Kaiser’s ranks. Shortly thereafter abandoned at a farm owned by a hard-working old man (Niels Arestrup) and his sweet-natured granddaughter (Celine Buckens), he becomes a family fixture just before the Germans show up again, taking him immediately back into the fold to help pull artillery. He’s soon caught up in another battle, one in which both the Germans and English suffer staggering casualties, and one in which Albert is present, fighting for his country just as he vowed to do once his horse was taken away to do the very same thing.
What Works?An awful lot. In the tradition of great epics, War Horse features stunning cinematography, heart-stopping action, moments of intimate character development, and across-the-board strong performances from a sprawling cast.
Janusz Kaminski’s camera works wonders, capturing glimpses of gorgeous countryside and terrifying battles, building suspense as characters hurry to find one another, following both people and animals as they try to hide from foes, and watching as desperate men both German and English struggle to accept the inevitability of their mortality. The violence in War Horse doesn’t come close to matching Spielberg’s iconic Private Ryan carnage, but what it lacks in bloody details it makes up for in shock, awe, and the grim reality of destructive war. The film’s great epic moment comes from a British officer (Benedict Cumberbatch) shouting “BE BRAVE” to his men before a head-on charge into enemy territory; another similar, but rather less-inspiring, moment comes when an officer in a trench cries “May God and the King watch over you” just before his men run out into No-Man’s Land. The pointlessness of that ‘encouragement’ is revealed a moment later, when the soldiers are blown to bits almost as soon as they step onto the battlefield. And one of the film’s most unforgettably shaking moments comes when Hiddleston’s officer realizes he and his men have hurried head-on into a fatal ambush—the actor’s expression, shocked and scared, will stay with you.
Basically, War Horse does about as well as Private Ryan at depicting the hopelessness and-dare I say it-pointlessness of war, in which many faceless men (and women) die, many of them without knowing why they’re even fighting. But this pointlessness is set aside in one critical late scene when a Brit (Toby Kebbell) and a German (Hinnerk Schonemann) work together to try and free Joey from tangles of barbed wire. Set aside whether or not such a spectacle is truly believable, and listen to the dialogue—“How are things over in your trench?” “Delightful.” And, when they part ways, the German says “just remember Peter, your friend from Dusseldorf!” It’s one of the most unique, beautiful movie moments I can think of, and one that gives you hope for the human race in a movie that points to some of our worst tendencies.
The battle scenes are what will probably stay with you, but there’s plenty of sublime material off the battlefield: scenes of Albert training Joey have a familiar but inspiring lift, Celine Buckens shines with youthful enthusiasm as a girl who unexpectedly finds Joey in her barn, feeds him, and tries to teach him to leap hurdles, and Emily Watson, as Albert’s mother, is perfect in a moment when she tries to explain to her son why his father drinks so much—and exactly what it is he’s trying to escape by drinking.
What Doesn’t Work?I’ve waxed poetic about War Horse’s ability to show war at its grittiest. It’s not quite as good at navigating more familiar waters about a family in dire straits, with nothing but a horse to hope in, and a textbook happy ending. As I mentioned, the last thirty minutes are a little too nice, a little overly-sentimental, so, despite the obvious emotional satisfaction (and our instinctive pleasure, as moviegoers, at seeing everything work out), it’s hard to not to question the legitimacy of what’s occurring onscreen. One of the only criticisms anyone’s ever had of Spielberg’s classic, Schindler’s List, was a late moment when Oskar Schindler broke down with regret and remorse at not saving more Jews—many thought it was a little too treacly, too much of an attempt to wring tears from the audience. Most of the last thirty minutes here have that feel. It doesn’t ruin War Horse, but it pushes the boundaries of believability a bit too far, and feels a bit too manufactured.
Content:I’m sure you can figure this out for yourself if you’ve read this far: War Horse features several full-scale battle scenes that aren’t particularly bloody but are frighteningly-intense. Throw in the animals-in-peril angle, and you’ve got a movie that is definitely not childproof. Beyond battles, however, the film is clean: there’s nary a swear word or sexual reference.
Bottom Line (I Promise):So very close to being flat-out amazing, War Horse is powerful, moving, and unforgettable, but an undercurrent of undeniable schmaltz rises up to take some of the air out of the third act. However, it’s still a very solid movie, made with love and care by the great director, Spielberg.
War Horse (2011)
Directed by Steven Spielberg
Written by Lee Hall and Richard Curtis; Based on the book by Michael Morpurgo
Rated PG-13
Length: 146 minutes
Sunday, April 1, 2012
WRATH OF THE TITANS
Wrath of the Titans (2012)
Grade: C-
Starring: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Edgar Ramirez, Toby Kebbell, Rosamund Pike, John Bell and Bill Nighy
PREMISE: God/man Perseus must battle powerful otherworldly creatures, retrieve a supernatural weapon, and navigate an impossible labyrinth in order to save his father, the god Zeus, and stop a monster unlike any other from being unleashed on Ancient Greece.
RATED PG-13 for violence and scary images
I’m one of the only people I know who actually embraced 2010’s Clash of the Titans, a quick little effects-driven odyssey about a demigod (half human/half god), Perseus (Sam Worthington), who was looking to save Ancient Greece from dark supernatural powers. Most of the naysayers I know were displeased with the film’s lack of heart and character development; conversely, I think I liked it because I didn’t expect it to be The Lord of the Rings or Braveheart or something (we’ve been spoiled with several actual really good, deep battle movies in recent years). To me, Clash of the Titans was what it was supposed to be, a fast-paced swords-and-sandals flick with plenty of action, some cool effects, some mythological mumbo-jumbo, a hot babe (Gemma Arterton) and a super-masculine dude looking to win that babe by being heroic (Worthington).
However, its sequel, Wrath of the Titans, which came out this past Friday, can’t even manage that. The hot babe (Rosamund Pike) could barely have been used less, the primary villain (Edgar Ramirez’s Ares) is a mopey man-child, the special effects are pretty crappy (fake-looking Cyclops, Pegasus, Minotaur, etc…) and the dialogue is so bad its only memorable line is the previous film’s best line (“Release the Kraken”) mentioned in passing. To me, Wrath was flat-out boring--something no hour-and-a-half action flick is supposed to be--and I couldn’t wait for it to be over so I could go do something productive.
Plot: About ten years after his legendary defeat of the Kraken, Perseus has just buried his wife (sadly, the adorable Arterton does not appear in this film), and, with his sword and armor hidden away, spends his time trying to raise his young son Helius (John Bell) as an ordinary, boring human fisherman. But, soon enough, the land is again being menaced by creatures from the Underworld, and other worlds, and Perseus has to let his savior/warrior flag fly. Turns out Ares (another half-human son of Zeus) has joined up with Hades (Ralph Fiennes) and decided to win immortality by freeing his and Zeus's (Liam Neeson) father, Kronos, who can only be awoken from imprisonment/hibernation by being fed someone’s power, and Ares and Hades have decided it should be Zeus’s. Outmatched and in desperate need of help, Zeus pleas with Perseus, his son, to save him, even if it means a trip to Tartarus, the Underworld prison that is both impossible to find and, if found, impossible to navigate. And the only thing that can possibly defeat Kronos, if he is revived, is the Spear of Triam, a kind of super-weapon made up of Zeus’ Thunderbolt, Hades’ Pitchfork, and Poseidon’s Trident. So Perseus sets off at once, aided by a fugitive (Toby Kebbell) known as “The Navigator”, the warrior queen Andromeda (Pike) and the half-crazy old blacksmith (Bill Nighy) who designed the Spear of Triam, to reclaim the weapon and navigate the prison. Dogging their steps is Ares, who has long despised Perseus for being Zeus' favorite son.
What Works?
Not a lot. Nighy is a bit of fun, but his character is disposed of way too quickly. The only actor who truly seems to have a sense of conviction is Fiennes, who’s probably glad to have his nose back (he was denied it in his popular gig as Harry Potter super villain Voldemort over the last half-decade). Hades is the only character who’s really interesting or menacing at all, even if he gets some annoyingly-whiny dialogue (apparently, Bro issues can be as bad as Daddy issues, as evidenced by Hades’ pining for acceptance from Zeus). Neeson is about 50/50—he could do this in his sleep, but he, too, has some conviction. And the only time Wrath approaches the level of campy fun it’s clearly shooting for is when Hades and Zeus put aside their differences and take on some nasty baddies by blasting them out of the way just by thrusting their palms in the monsters’ general directions.
What Doesn’t Work?
Just about everything else. Worthington, whenever he’s stationary enough to actually try and act, does his usual ruggedly-masculine-yet-sensitive routine; it’s just a shame that he doesn’t do anything he hasn’t already done in Avatar, Terminator: Salvation, or Clash. Pike has a gorgeous face (as evidenced by some breathtaking close-ups) but is saddled with what has to be one of the most thankless roles in recent movie history—for a Warrior Queen, she's almost never shown fighting anyone and she’s never shown acting with any queenly authority. And, considering she’s the only female around, you figure she and Worthington are supposed to develop something, but there’s not a whiff of chemistry between them (and the movie doesn’t try at all--their one kiss, which was shown in the trailers, was probably only filmed to try and lure date-going couples into the theater). Elsewhere, Ares, as mentioned, is just a whiny beefcake, and Kebbell is slightly engaging but his character has nowhere to go--a fact that becomes obvious pretty fast.
Of course, Wrath isn’t supposed to be about the acting, but there are lots of other problems besides a lack of any discernible character development (in anyone but Fiennes and Neeson, that is): the action is mostly incomprehensible, there are gaps in logic everywhere, the storyline stinks and it's hard to follow, most attempts at humor are borderline pathetic, and the entire plot hinges on the ridiculous notion that the flesh-and-blood Zeus, Hades, and Poseidon (Danny Huston, in a tiny part) are offspring of a giant lava monster. Speaking of Kronos, I can’t have been the only person scratching my head over Perseus’ figuring that the best way to combat the monster was to fly his Pegasus straight through the clouds of molten lava being chucked at him. If I were that Pegasus (which only ever appears in the film exactly when, and where, Perseus needs it), I’d sue, or at least find an owner with more concern for my well-being.
There’s also a serious breach of logic when the primary trio (Worthington, Pike, Kebbell) gets lost in the ever-shifting labyrinth of Tartarus’ many massive passageways, yet still end up exactly where they need to get to save Zeus (presumably, somewhere in the middle or at the far end) in about five minutes.
Content:
Some of the monsters are flaming demons that look moderately scary and stab and slash the hell out of some unimportant faceless CGI people, but the real problem for parents with little kids is likely going to be the kids’ frequently asking what’s going on, and parents’ being unable to tell them. The action is furious but pretty bloodless, and even bloodied or bruised people tend to noticeably improve from scene to scene, even if only minutes or even seconds passed. Wrath is intense but inordinately silly.
Bottom Line:
If you really want action, go see John Carter, Act of Valor, or 21 Jump Street. If you want more human touches, watch The Hunger Games or Mirror Mirror. If you want to see something that’s only occasionally so bad it’s funny, and almost never so bad it’s good (mostly just so bad that it’s, well, bad), well...I still can’t really recommend this. Inoffensive but instantly forgettable, Wrath of the Titans is miles from being a must-see.
Wrath of the Titans (2012)
Directed by Jonathan Liebesman
Written by Dan Mazeau, Greg Berlanti and David Leslie Johnson; from a story by Beverley Cross
Length: 99 minutes
Rated PG-13
Grade: C-
Starring: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Edgar Ramirez, Toby Kebbell, Rosamund Pike, John Bell and Bill Nighy
PREMISE: God/man Perseus must battle powerful otherworldly creatures, retrieve a supernatural weapon, and navigate an impossible labyrinth in order to save his father, the god Zeus, and stop a monster unlike any other from being unleashed on Ancient Greece.
RATED PG-13 for violence and scary images
I’m one of the only people I know who actually embraced 2010’s Clash of the Titans, a quick little effects-driven odyssey about a demigod (half human/half god), Perseus (Sam Worthington), who was looking to save Ancient Greece from dark supernatural powers. Most of the naysayers I know were displeased with the film’s lack of heart and character development; conversely, I think I liked it because I didn’t expect it to be The Lord of the Rings or Braveheart or something (we’ve been spoiled with several actual really good, deep battle movies in recent years). To me, Clash of the Titans was what it was supposed to be, a fast-paced swords-and-sandals flick with plenty of action, some cool effects, some mythological mumbo-jumbo, a hot babe (Gemma Arterton) and a super-masculine dude looking to win that babe by being heroic (Worthington).
However, its sequel, Wrath of the Titans, which came out this past Friday, can’t even manage that. The hot babe (Rosamund Pike) could barely have been used less, the primary villain (Edgar Ramirez’s Ares) is a mopey man-child, the special effects are pretty crappy (fake-looking Cyclops, Pegasus, Minotaur, etc…) and the dialogue is so bad its only memorable line is the previous film’s best line (“Release the Kraken”) mentioned in passing. To me, Wrath was flat-out boring--something no hour-and-a-half action flick is supposed to be--and I couldn’t wait for it to be over so I could go do something productive.
Plot: About ten years after his legendary defeat of the Kraken, Perseus has just buried his wife (sadly, the adorable Arterton does not appear in this film), and, with his sword and armor hidden away, spends his time trying to raise his young son Helius (John Bell) as an ordinary, boring human fisherman. But, soon enough, the land is again being menaced by creatures from the Underworld, and other worlds, and Perseus has to let his savior/warrior flag fly. Turns out Ares (another half-human son of Zeus) has joined up with Hades (Ralph Fiennes) and decided to win immortality by freeing his and Zeus's (Liam Neeson) father, Kronos, who can only be awoken from imprisonment/hibernation by being fed someone’s power, and Ares and Hades have decided it should be Zeus’s. Outmatched and in desperate need of help, Zeus pleas with Perseus, his son, to save him, even if it means a trip to Tartarus, the Underworld prison that is both impossible to find and, if found, impossible to navigate. And the only thing that can possibly defeat Kronos, if he is revived, is the Spear of Triam, a kind of super-weapon made up of Zeus’ Thunderbolt, Hades’ Pitchfork, and Poseidon’s Trident. So Perseus sets off at once, aided by a fugitive (Toby Kebbell) known as “The Navigator”, the warrior queen Andromeda (Pike) and the half-crazy old blacksmith (Bill Nighy) who designed the Spear of Triam, to reclaim the weapon and navigate the prison. Dogging their steps is Ares, who has long despised Perseus for being Zeus' favorite son.
What Works?
Not a lot. Nighy is a bit of fun, but his character is disposed of way too quickly. The only actor who truly seems to have a sense of conviction is Fiennes, who’s probably glad to have his nose back (he was denied it in his popular gig as Harry Potter super villain Voldemort over the last half-decade). Hades is the only character who’s really interesting or menacing at all, even if he gets some annoyingly-whiny dialogue (apparently, Bro issues can be as bad as Daddy issues, as evidenced by Hades’ pining for acceptance from Zeus). Neeson is about 50/50—he could do this in his sleep, but he, too, has some conviction. And the only time Wrath approaches the level of campy fun it’s clearly shooting for is when Hades and Zeus put aside their differences and take on some nasty baddies by blasting them out of the way just by thrusting their palms in the monsters’ general directions.
What Doesn’t Work?
Just about everything else. Worthington, whenever he’s stationary enough to actually try and act, does his usual ruggedly-masculine-yet-sensitive routine; it’s just a shame that he doesn’t do anything he hasn’t already done in Avatar, Terminator: Salvation, or Clash. Pike has a gorgeous face (as evidenced by some breathtaking close-ups) but is saddled with what has to be one of the most thankless roles in recent movie history—for a Warrior Queen, she's almost never shown fighting anyone and she’s never shown acting with any queenly authority. And, considering she’s the only female around, you figure she and Worthington are supposed to develop something, but there’s not a whiff of chemistry between them (and the movie doesn’t try at all--their one kiss, which was shown in the trailers, was probably only filmed to try and lure date-going couples into the theater). Elsewhere, Ares, as mentioned, is just a whiny beefcake, and Kebbell is slightly engaging but his character has nowhere to go--a fact that becomes obvious pretty fast.
Of course, Wrath isn’t supposed to be about the acting, but there are lots of other problems besides a lack of any discernible character development (in anyone but Fiennes and Neeson, that is): the action is mostly incomprehensible, there are gaps in logic everywhere, the storyline stinks and it's hard to follow, most attempts at humor are borderline pathetic, and the entire plot hinges on the ridiculous notion that the flesh-and-blood Zeus, Hades, and Poseidon (Danny Huston, in a tiny part) are offspring of a giant lava monster. Speaking of Kronos, I can’t have been the only person scratching my head over Perseus’ figuring that the best way to combat the monster was to fly his Pegasus straight through the clouds of molten lava being chucked at him. If I were that Pegasus (which only ever appears in the film exactly when, and where, Perseus needs it), I’d sue, or at least find an owner with more concern for my well-being.
There’s also a serious breach of logic when the primary trio (Worthington, Pike, Kebbell) gets lost in the ever-shifting labyrinth of Tartarus’ many massive passageways, yet still end up exactly where they need to get to save Zeus (presumably, somewhere in the middle or at the far end) in about five minutes.
Content:
Some of the monsters are flaming demons that look moderately scary and stab and slash the hell out of some unimportant faceless CGI people, but the real problem for parents with little kids is likely going to be the kids’ frequently asking what’s going on, and parents’ being unable to tell them. The action is furious but pretty bloodless, and even bloodied or bruised people tend to noticeably improve from scene to scene, even if only minutes or even seconds passed. Wrath is intense but inordinately silly.
Bottom Line:
If you really want action, go see John Carter, Act of Valor, or 21 Jump Street. If you want more human touches, watch The Hunger Games or Mirror Mirror. If you want to see something that’s only occasionally so bad it’s funny, and almost never so bad it’s good (mostly just so bad that it’s, well, bad), well...I still can’t really recommend this. Inoffensive but instantly forgettable, Wrath of the Titans is miles from being a must-see.
Wrath of the Titans (2012)
Directed by Jonathan Liebesman
Written by Dan Mazeau, Greg Berlanti and David Leslie Johnson; from a story by Beverley Cross
Length: 99 minutes
Rated PG-13
Friday, March 30, 2012
MIRROR MIRROR
Mirror Mirror (2012)
Grade: B
Starring: Julia Roberts, Lily Collins, Armie Hammer, Nathan Lane, Robert Emms, and Mare Winningham, with Jordan Prentice, Mark Povinelli, Joe Gnoffo, Danny Woodburn, Sebastian Saraceno, Martin Klebba and Ronald Lee Clark as the Dwarves
PREMISE: When she finds out her stepmother, the queen, has been letting her once-joyous kingdom suffer and starve while tending exclusively to her own "needs", sheltered princess Snow White breaks out of the castle and seeks allies for a rebellion.
RATED PG (contains action, some scary moments/images, and some rude humor)
Not gonna lie: I felt really dumb buying a ticket to see Mirror, Mirror.
After all, I’m a twenty-four year old guy, going alone--in the middle of the day--to see a new adaptation of the classic Snow White fairy tale the day it came out. And it isn’t even the gothic horror action spectacle (Snow White and the Huntsman) expected to thrill mature audiences this summer; it’s the PG-rated one that’s supposed to be a lot more family friendly and reminiscent of the classic Disney cartoon. Nonetheless, to be an effective movie critic, I need to see the big-name movies that are making a splash-at or before the time they’re making that splash-so, for this weekend, it came down to two new-release titles: Mirror Mirror and Wrath of the Titans. Yes, the man in me really wanted to make it Wrath, to see Sam Worthington do the Sam Worthington thing—hack up computerized baddies in front of a green screen while shouting and squinting into the distance—so, I thought “I might as well get the unpleasant business out of the way”, thinking I’d save the real treat for tomorrow, after work.
Surprise! Wrath has big shoes to fill, as Mirror Mirror proved to be a great time at the movies, its nearly-perfect combination of action, romance and humor effectively surpassing the realm of standard kiddie fair, and landing in the all-ages-welcome entertainment section.
Plot: Unfortunately for Snow White, her queen mother died giving birth to her, and her beloved father later rode off into the woods and was never seen or heard from again. As a young woman (Lily Collins), she’s all but locked in a secluded tower in the castle of her stepmother (Julia Roberts), a beautiful queen and a powerful enchantress. It is by sheer chance that Snow-on a forbidden excursion outside the castle to see for herself the impoverished condition of the commoners-meets Prince Alcott (Armie Hammer) heir to the throne of a wealthy neighboring kingdom. At the time she meets him, however, he’s only in his underwear, himself and his squire (Robert Emms) having been robbed and entrapped by seven peculiar men who live in a secret lair nearby. Learning that Snow snuck out-and of her and the handsome Alcott’s immediate mutual attraction-the queen tells her right hand (Nathan Lane) to either execute her or leave her in the woods to be devoured by the fabled Beast that lives there. He leaves her, and she is saved by those seven men who attacked the prince—dwarves who frequently masquerade as bandits that rob the queen's caravans. While the queen schemes to win over the prince (including trying to slip him a love potion that will make him want to marry her) Snow moves in with the dwarves, learns stealth and swordfighting, convinces the dwarves to give their spoils to the poor, and and enlists their help in an attempt to take back her throne, and, if she can manage it, the prince.
What Works?The key performances are all first rate, with the actors fearlessly embracing their classic-type roles. Roberts is wicked fun (pun intended) as the evil queen, Collins (daughter of singer Phil Collins) is truly winning as the sweetheart-turned-adventurer Snow White, and Lane and Hammer compete furiously for the honor of best comedic performance—Lane’s a wry cut-up and Hammer is a fearless hoot, making the most of a subplot where a wrongly-concocted love potion addles his brains. Hammer and Collins also have a prolonged half-serious/half-flirtatious swordfight that harkens back to a similar scene in The Mask of Zorro, what with romantic sparks flying even as metal clashes and punches are thrown. And the dwarves (who, thankfully, are given names and types that are at least more interesting than Grumpy, Dopey, Sleepy, etc…) bring an irreverence to their group bickering that recalls Shrek at its wittiest—they have actual discernible personalities, too. And there's a late celebrity cameo that almost had me cheering.
I already referenced one of the films this movie brought to mind (Shrek); others that come to mind include Tangled and Enchanted. Realizing (rightly) that today’s audiences are going to be easily bored by something that’s either too-low-I.Q.-kiddie in its content and humor, or overly-treacly in its romantic material (a la Twilight), it opts for a mix of endearing earnestness and adventurous razzle-dazzle, and it works perfectly. The banter is amusing, the feelings are believable, the adventure is exciting, and more than one late curveball is thrown just to throw off people like me, who “know exactly where this is going”. The more serious subjects (the townspeople’s desperate living conditions, the queen’s evil schemes) hit home, but, of course, in a good old-fashioned Disney adventure like this, good will prevail (sorry if you expected otherwise and I just spoiled the movie for you).
Ultimately, the pace is quick, the laughs are plentiful, and the performances colorful.
What Doesn’t Work?A few of the sillier touches, such as the queen’s turning Lane into a cockroach and some pre-Final Credits titles that tell how each of the dwarves went on to fare (in very wink-wink fashion), are a little unnecessary and pointless, but most of Mirror Mirror is surprisingly first-rate entertainment. Not one scene really drags.
Content:It’s a PG-rated Disney film. As with Shrek, and some other recent animated films that strive to be Whole Family-Friendly in order to make a louder bang at the box office, some of the humor is a little naughty, but most of it won’t register with kids younger than 13 anyway (and one of the running gags is actually pretty hysterical). There are a few scary moments in the woods (as in the classic cartoon Snow White), and some scary effects, but this is ultimately an inoffensive, family-friendly picture.
Bottom Line (I Promise):Funny, feisty, and full of life, Mirror Mirror is an entertainment that will delight the kid in all of us, and sets the bar high for best Snow White adaptation of the year (bring it on, Snow White and the Huntsman).
Mirror Mirror. Directed by Tarsem Singh. Based on a Story by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm; Written for the Screen by Melissa Wallack and Jason Keller. Length: 106 minutes. Rated PG
Grade: B
Starring: Julia Roberts, Lily Collins, Armie Hammer, Nathan Lane, Robert Emms, and Mare Winningham, with Jordan Prentice, Mark Povinelli, Joe Gnoffo, Danny Woodburn, Sebastian Saraceno, Martin Klebba and Ronald Lee Clark as the Dwarves
PREMISE: When she finds out her stepmother, the queen, has been letting her once-joyous kingdom suffer and starve while tending exclusively to her own "needs", sheltered princess Snow White breaks out of the castle and seeks allies for a rebellion.
RATED PG (contains action, some scary moments/images, and some rude humor)
Not gonna lie: I felt really dumb buying a ticket to see Mirror, Mirror.
After all, I’m a twenty-four year old guy, going alone--in the middle of the day--to see a new adaptation of the classic Snow White fairy tale the day it came out. And it isn’t even the gothic horror action spectacle (Snow White and the Huntsman) expected to thrill mature audiences this summer; it’s the PG-rated one that’s supposed to be a lot more family friendly and reminiscent of the classic Disney cartoon. Nonetheless, to be an effective movie critic, I need to see the big-name movies that are making a splash-at or before the time they’re making that splash-so, for this weekend, it came down to two new-release titles: Mirror Mirror and Wrath of the Titans. Yes, the man in me really wanted to make it Wrath, to see Sam Worthington do the Sam Worthington thing—hack up computerized baddies in front of a green screen while shouting and squinting into the distance—so, I thought “I might as well get the unpleasant business out of the way”, thinking I’d save the real treat for tomorrow, after work.
Surprise! Wrath has big shoes to fill, as Mirror Mirror proved to be a great time at the movies, its nearly-perfect combination of action, romance and humor effectively surpassing the realm of standard kiddie fair, and landing in the all-ages-welcome entertainment section.
Plot: Unfortunately for Snow White, her queen mother died giving birth to her, and her beloved father later rode off into the woods and was never seen or heard from again. As a young woman (Lily Collins), she’s all but locked in a secluded tower in the castle of her stepmother (Julia Roberts), a beautiful queen and a powerful enchantress. It is by sheer chance that Snow-on a forbidden excursion outside the castle to see for herself the impoverished condition of the commoners-meets Prince Alcott (Armie Hammer) heir to the throne of a wealthy neighboring kingdom. At the time she meets him, however, he’s only in his underwear, himself and his squire (Robert Emms) having been robbed and entrapped by seven peculiar men who live in a secret lair nearby. Learning that Snow snuck out-and of her and the handsome Alcott’s immediate mutual attraction-the queen tells her right hand (Nathan Lane) to either execute her or leave her in the woods to be devoured by the fabled Beast that lives there. He leaves her, and she is saved by those seven men who attacked the prince—dwarves who frequently masquerade as bandits that rob the queen's caravans. While the queen schemes to win over the prince (including trying to slip him a love potion that will make him want to marry her) Snow moves in with the dwarves, learns stealth and swordfighting, convinces the dwarves to give their spoils to the poor, and and enlists their help in an attempt to take back her throne, and, if she can manage it, the prince.
What Works?The key performances are all first rate, with the actors fearlessly embracing their classic-type roles. Roberts is wicked fun (pun intended) as the evil queen, Collins (daughter of singer Phil Collins) is truly winning as the sweetheart-turned-adventurer Snow White, and Lane and Hammer compete furiously for the honor of best comedic performance—Lane’s a wry cut-up and Hammer is a fearless hoot, making the most of a subplot where a wrongly-concocted love potion addles his brains. Hammer and Collins also have a prolonged half-serious/half-flirtatious swordfight that harkens back to a similar scene in The Mask of Zorro, what with romantic sparks flying even as metal clashes and punches are thrown. And the dwarves (who, thankfully, are given names and types that are at least more interesting than Grumpy, Dopey, Sleepy, etc…) bring an irreverence to their group bickering that recalls Shrek at its wittiest—they have actual discernible personalities, too. And there's a late celebrity cameo that almost had me cheering.
I already referenced one of the films this movie brought to mind (Shrek); others that come to mind include Tangled and Enchanted. Realizing (rightly) that today’s audiences are going to be easily bored by something that’s either too-low-I.Q.-kiddie in its content and humor, or overly-treacly in its romantic material (a la Twilight), it opts for a mix of endearing earnestness and adventurous razzle-dazzle, and it works perfectly. The banter is amusing, the feelings are believable, the adventure is exciting, and more than one late curveball is thrown just to throw off people like me, who “know exactly where this is going”. The more serious subjects (the townspeople’s desperate living conditions, the queen’s evil schemes) hit home, but, of course, in a good old-fashioned Disney adventure like this, good will prevail (sorry if you expected otherwise and I just spoiled the movie for you).
Ultimately, the pace is quick, the laughs are plentiful, and the performances colorful.
What Doesn’t Work?A few of the sillier touches, such as the queen’s turning Lane into a cockroach and some pre-Final Credits titles that tell how each of the dwarves went on to fare (in very wink-wink fashion), are a little unnecessary and pointless, but most of Mirror Mirror is surprisingly first-rate entertainment. Not one scene really drags.
Content:It’s a PG-rated Disney film. As with Shrek, and some other recent animated films that strive to be Whole Family-Friendly in order to make a louder bang at the box office, some of the humor is a little naughty, but most of it won’t register with kids younger than 13 anyway (and one of the running gags is actually pretty hysterical). There are a few scary moments in the woods (as in the classic cartoon Snow White), and some scary effects, but this is ultimately an inoffensive, family-friendly picture.
Bottom Line (I Promise):Funny, feisty, and full of life, Mirror Mirror is an entertainment that will delight the kid in all of us, and sets the bar high for best Snow White adaptation of the year (bring it on, Snow White and the Huntsman).
Mirror Mirror. Directed by Tarsem Singh. Based on a Story by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm; Written for the Screen by Melissa Wallack and Jason Keller. Length: 106 minutes. Rated PG
Saturday, March 24, 2012
THE HUNGER GAMES
The Hunger Games (2012)
Grade: B+
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Stanley Tucci, Lenny Kravitz, Wes Bentley, Donald Sutherland, Alexander Ludwig, Amandla Stenberg, Willow Shields, Isabelle Fuhrman, and Toby Jones
PREMISE: A girl in a futuristic society takes her sister's place in The Hunger Games, thus landing herself in a nationally-televised twenty-four-person fight to the death in which the winner earns a lifetime of wealth and fame.
RATED PG-13 for blood and violence, intense emotional content, and some disturbing images
First there was Harry Potter.
Then there was Twilight.
Now comes The Hunger Games.
Just as one teen SUPERfad (Twilight) appears to be stumbling its way out of the public consciousness (only one lousy movie left!), here comes another to take its place. This effective adaptation of the fast, furious novel about a dystopian society, by author Suzanne Collins, rolls into theaters with a huge amount of anticipation, and plenty to draw in even those who haven't read the book. There's a central love triangle that will both divide and capture audiences, tons of action, plus humor, heroism, sacrifice and political intrigue; this story has already won the hearts and minds of millions, including me. I read the first book back in May, read the two sequels within a few months, and then waited eagerly for the film's release. Of course, I did so with some trepidation: my devotion to the Harry Potter saga (and its very lengthy, very detailed books) led me to be extremely harsh and critical of each of the eight movies, and, having read Hunger Games three times, I had a feeling I'd approach Gary Ross' film the same way. Thankfully, my delight at seeing these familiar characters, places, and events depicted onscreen-plus a generally-quick pace-swept me away, just as the best of the Potter films did, so I quickly found myself able to sit back and enjoy the ride.
Plot: Being selected to participate in the Hunger Games is pretty much a guaranteed death sentence, but gutsy teenager Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) doesn't hesitate to volunteer to take her sister's place when the 12-year-old (Willow Shields) is initially chosen instead of her. The Games--a cruel, utilitarian futuristic government's way of essentially Giving the Finger to the twelve districts that once tried to rebel and overthrow it--features one boy and one girl from each district, between the ages of 12 and 18, tosses them into a random arena, and lets them have at it. Twenty-three will die. One will win: a life of fame, fortune, and relative ease being the reward. After volunteering, Katniss is whisked off to the Capitol-the country's central, governing city-where she sees the best (incredible food, plush hotel suites, easy-to-use futuristic technology) and the worst (Games contestants are gussied up for nationally-televised interviews, a la American Idol, and the audience votes on their likelihood of survival) it has to offer. But then the Games start, and Katniss is up against 23 others, with limited supplies, limited food, a blood-thirsty audience, and no potential allies, except, possibly, for the brave, kindhearted boy from her own District (Josh Hutcherson). Katniss was known for her hunting prowess back home, but even if she doubts herself against tough competition, she must stick to her guns, because she promised her sister she'd really try to win and make it back.
What Works?
There's so much plot-and so many characters-that I barely touched on half of it in my plot synopsis, but, as I mentioned, the movie is well-paced; it moves quickly from the start. But even non-readers will have enough time to understand who's who. There's Katniss' chirpy, highly-made-up escort (Elizabeth Banks); the drunken, surly mentor (Woody Harrelson) who once won a Hunger Games; her creative, mellow stylist (Lenny Kravitz), and, most importantly, Gale (Liam Hemsworth), Katniss' hunting partner and best friend back home, who could very likely be her boyfriend if she survives the Games. And all the most important fellow tributes get at least mildly-lengthy interludes--Cato (Alexander Ludwig), the hulking, sadistic boy who has trained his entire life for the Games; Clove (Isabelle Fuhrman), his slinky and barely-less-bloodthirsty pal; Rue (Amandla Stenberg), the sweet-natured cutie-pie with whom Katniss forms a temporary alliance, and, of course, Peeta, who Katniss doesn't technically know, but who once gave her help in a time of need.
The performances aren't supposed to be flashy, so they aren't, but the bookaholics in the audience like me are going to be in spasms of delight whether the acting bites (which it doesn't) or not. Lawrence is pitch-perfect as Katniss--she's likeable, withdrawn but expressive, convincingly nimble in the action sequences, and a powerful emoter. Hutcherson was born to play Peeta--he fits the part like a glove. Hemsworth is good, but we're only getting a taste of him here; he'll be much more important in future installments. Ludwig is a nasty meathead who gets a surprisingly-poignant monologue late in the running, Fuhrman gets to chew on some of the script's most deliciously-nasty lines (plus getting to whale on Lawrence during a bravura mano-a-mano showdown), Stenberg and Shields are both adorable and emotionally-affecting, and all the adults (Harrelson, Banks, Kravitz) fill their already-iconic parts well. Other standouts include a cheeky Stanley Tucci as the winking, blue-haired, Seacrest-esque Games' host, Wes Bentley as the program director, and an eerily-sinister Donald Sutherland as Panem's dark-hearted president.
What romance there needs to be registers convincingly enough, there are a few light moments to break up the tension, the action is engaging, and Ross shows that he's really done his homework as a director: not only does he lend a kind of visual poetry to scenes of characters dreaming, daydreaming, or even dying, but he also gives us a number of behind-the-scenes sequences of the program's directors and producers that flesh out some of the supporting characters and will come as a great surprise even to those who read the book repeatedly--they weren't possible in the text due to the book's first-person viewpoint.
What Doesn't Work?
Despite being nearly two-and-a-quarter hours long, Games has to hit the ground running, and does; so, while a great deal is included, nearly all of it could have used a little more time (same problem Harry Potter always had). The romance that develops between Katniss and Peeta isn't given nearly enough time to really make an impact (taking some of the lingering emotional punch out of the ending); ditto for Katniss/Rue's alliance, and it's a little funny to see Hemsworth get so little screen time after the marketing campaign boasted of his prominence as one of the "Big Three". And the action--well, a lot of people were surprised that the bloody, straightforward content that fills Games was being made into a movie with a PG-13 rating. Having seen the movie, I think it was the right call, even if the action is a little disorienting as presented. The fast-cut editing and shaky-cam filming recall the Bourne series in that it's both effective in portraying how it would probably really appear--especially when a regular girl is thrust into a whirlwind of such relentless carnage--and frustrating (I wish the camera were a bit more relaxed).
Content:
I actually just hit on it: the violence is bloody but rarely directly-shown. However, you do see a young girl get hit with a spear and then die, all in intimate close-up, as was the case in the book. You also get a lot of looks at the bodies, and faces, of people who are unmistakably dead, even if they're not particularly bloody. This is not a movie for younger kids. Also similar to the book, most of the movie's frames are suffused with barely-restrained emotion that boils over at points--many audience members will cry. There's no unnecessary sexual content and no cursing, but the majority of this movie is very intense.
Bottom Line (I Promise):
A very solid adaptation of a spectacular book, Gary Ross's The Hunger Games is no silly entertainment--it's on the level of the best of the Harry Potters. In fact, it'll be way too short for many people, especially lovers of the book like me. Consider this one recommended: just bring tissues.
The Hunger Games (2012)
Based on the novel by Suzanne Collins
Directed by Gary Ross
Written by Gary Ross, Suzanne Collins, and Billy Ray
Rated PG-13
Length: 142 minutes
Grade: B+
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Stanley Tucci, Lenny Kravitz, Wes Bentley, Donald Sutherland, Alexander Ludwig, Amandla Stenberg, Willow Shields, Isabelle Fuhrman, and Toby Jones
PREMISE: A girl in a futuristic society takes her sister's place in The Hunger Games, thus landing herself in a nationally-televised twenty-four-person fight to the death in which the winner earns a lifetime of wealth and fame.
RATED PG-13 for blood and violence, intense emotional content, and some disturbing images
First there was Harry Potter.
Then there was Twilight.
Now comes The Hunger Games.
Just as one teen SUPERfad (Twilight) appears to be stumbling its way out of the public consciousness (only one lousy movie left!), here comes another to take its place. This effective adaptation of the fast, furious novel about a dystopian society, by author Suzanne Collins, rolls into theaters with a huge amount of anticipation, and plenty to draw in even those who haven't read the book. There's a central love triangle that will both divide and capture audiences, tons of action, plus humor, heroism, sacrifice and political intrigue; this story has already won the hearts and minds of millions, including me. I read the first book back in May, read the two sequels within a few months, and then waited eagerly for the film's release. Of course, I did so with some trepidation: my devotion to the Harry Potter saga (and its very lengthy, very detailed books) led me to be extremely harsh and critical of each of the eight movies, and, having read Hunger Games three times, I had a feeling I'd approach Gary Ross' film the same way. Thankfully, my delight at seeing these familiar characters, places, and events depicted onscreen-plus a generally-quick pace-swept me away, just as the best of the Potter films did, so I quickly found myself able to sit back and enjoy the ride.
Plot: Being selected to participate in the Hunger Games is pretty much a guaranteed death sentence, but gutsy teenager Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) doesn't hesitate to volunteer to take her sister's place when the 12-year-old (Willow Shields) is initially chosen instead of her. The Games--a cruel, utilitarian futuristic government's way of essentially Giving the Finger to the twelve districts that once tried to rebel and overthrow it--features one boy and one girl from each district, between the ages of 12 and 18, tosses them into a random arena, and lets them have at it. Twenty-three will die. One will win: a life of fame, fortune, and relative ease being the reward. After volunteering, Katniss is whisked off to the Capitol-the country's central, governing city-where she sees the best (incredible food, plush hotel suites, easy-to-use futuristic technology) and the worst (Games contestants are gussied up for nationally-televised interviews, a la American Idol, and the audience votes on their likelihood of survival) it has to offer. But then the Games start, and Katniss is up against 23 others, with limited supplies, limited food, a blood-thirsty audience, and no potential allies, except, possibly, for the brave, kindhearted boy from her own District (Josh Hutcherson). Katniss was known for her hunting prowess back home, but even if she doubts herself against tough competition, she must stick to her guns, because she promised her sister she'd really try to win and make it back.
What Works?
There's so much plot-and so many characters-that I barely touched on half of it in my plot synopsis, but, as I mentioned, the movie is well-paced; it moves quickly from the start. But even non-readers will have enough time to understand who's who. There's Katniss' chirpy, highly-made-up escort (Elizabeth Banks); the drunken, surly mentor (Woody Harrelson) who once won a Hunger Games; her creative, mellow stylist (Lenny Kravitz), and, most importantly, Gale (Liam Hemsworth), Katniss' hunting partner and best friend back home, who could very likely be her boyfriend if she survives the Games. And all the most important fellow tributes get at least mildly-lengthy interludes--Cato (Alexander Ludwig), the hulking, sadistic boy who has trained his entire life for the Games; Clove (Isabelle Fuhrman), his slinky and barely-less-bloodthirsty pal; Rue (Amandla Stenberg), the sweet-natured cutie-pie with whom Katniss forms a temporary alliance, and, of course, Peeta, who Katniss doesn't technically know, but who once gave her help in a time of need.
The performances aren't supposed to be flashy, so they aren't, but the bookaholics in the audience like me are going to be in spasms of delight whether the acting bites (which it doesn't) or not. Lawrence is pitch-perfect as Katniss--she's likeable, withdrawn but expressive, convincingly nimble in the action sequences, and a powerful emoter. Hutcherson was born to play Peeta--he fits the part like a glove. Hemsworth is good, but we're only getting a taste of him here; he'll be much more important in future installments. Ludwig is a nasty meathead who gets a surprisingly-poignant monologue late in the running, Fuhrman gets to chew on some of the script's most deliciously-nasty lines (plus getting to whale on Lawrence during a bravura mano-a-mano showdown), Stenberg and Shields are both adorable and emotionally-affecting, and all the adults (Harrelson, Banks, Kravitz) fill their already-iconic parts well. Other standouts include a cheeky Stanley Tucci as the winking, blue-haired, Seacrest-esque Games' host, Wes Bentley as the program director, and an eerily-sinister Donald Sutherland as Panem's dark-hearted president.
What romance there needs to be registers convincingly enough, there are a few light moments to break up the tension, the action is engaging, and Ross shows that he's really done his homework as a director: not only does he lend a kind of visual poetry to scenes of characters dreaming, daydreaming, or even dying, but he also gives us a number of behind-the-scenes sequences of the program's directors and producers that flesh out some of the supporting characters and will come as a great surprise even to those who read the book repeatedly--they weren't possible in the text due to the book's first-person viewpoint.
What Doesn't Work?
Despite being nearly two-and-a-quarter hours long, Games has to hit the ground running, and does; so, while a great deal is included, nearly all of it could have used a little more time (same problem Harry Potter always had). The romance that develops between Katniss and Peeta isn't given nearly enough time to really make an impact (taking some of the lingering emotional punch out of the ending); ditto for Katniss/Rue's alliance, and it's a little funny to see Hemsworth get so little screen time after the marketing campaign boasted of his prominence as one of the "Big Three". And the action--well, a lot of people were surprised that the bloody, straightforward content that fills Games was being made into a movie with a PG-13 rating. Having seen the movie, I think it was the right call, even if the action is a little disorienting as presented. The fast-cut editing and shaky-cam filming recall the Bourne series in that it's both effective in portraying how it would probably really appear--especially when a regular girl is thrust into a whirlwind of such relentless carnage--and frustrating (I wish the camera were a bit more relaxed).
Content:
I actually just hit on it: the violence is bloody but rarely directly-shown. However, you do see a young girl get hit with a spear and then die, all in intimate close-up, as was the case in the book. You also get a lot of looks at the bodies, and faces, of people who are unmistakably dead, even if they're not particularly bloody. This is not a movie for younger kids. Also similar to the book, most of the movie's frames are suffused with barely-restrained emotion that boils over at points--many audience members will cry. There's no unnecessary sexual content and no cursing, but the majority of this movie is very intense.
Bottom Line (I Promise):
A very solid adaptation of a spectacular book, Gary Ross's The Hunger Games is no silly entertainment--it's on the level of the best of the Harry Potters. In fact, it'll be way too short for many people, especially lovers of the book like me. Consider this one recommended: just bring tissues.
The Hunger Games (2012)
Based on the novel by Suzanne Collins
Directed by Gary Ross
Written by Gary Ross, Suzanne Collins, and Billy Ray
Rated PG-13
Length: 142 minutes
Thursday, March 22, 2012
PRINCE OF PERSIA: THE SANDS OF TIME
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010)
Grade: B
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Gemma Arterton, Ben Kingsley, Alfred Molina, Richard Coyle, Toby Kebbell, and Ronald Pickup
PREMISE: When the youngest son of the Persian Emperor is framed for the king's sudden murder, he goes on the run hoping to find a way to prove his innocence, all the while in possession of an ancient artifact with the power to destroy the world.
Rated PG-13 for action violence and some disturbing images
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, is quite the spectacle. Swords clash, arrows fly, horses gallop, fires blaze, men of royalty strut, ostraches race, women's eyes gleam, and the fate of all mankind hangs in the balance. Based on a popular video game series that originated in 2003, Prince delivers all the goods of a video-game-turned-movie in an engaging manner, charging through murders, mythology, and surprise twists while maintaining its sense of fun. While it delivers all those things we expect from our action adventure films-swashbuckling heroes, dastardly villains, romantic intrigue, and action upon action upon action-it does it with a greater sense of purpose, more conviction that something like the recent, phoned-in Three Musketeers.
Plot: Dastan (Jake Gyllenhaal) isn't a prince by birth, so he will never get a real share of the throne of his adopted father, the Persian Emperor (Ronald Pickup). An orphan who impressed the old man with his guile and street smarts one day in the market, Dastan is on a longer leash than his actual prince brothers, Tus (Richard Coyle) and Garsiv (Toby Kebbell), and wins the family's approval by leading a successful campaign to conquer the sacred city of Alamut. When Dastan presents his father with a pair of decorative robes found during the siege-given to him by the heir apparent, Tus-and the robes spontaneously burn and kill the king, he's forced to run for his life. He's aided in his escape by Princess Tamina (Gemma Arterton) of Alamut, who knows a little something about a bejeweled knife Dastan recoverd during the siege. The hilt of the knife is a curious glass case containing swirling sand, and, when the ruby on the end of the hilt is pressed, the holder can turn back time--even able to return a dead person to life. Dastan wants to use it to revive the king, but the princess would rather return it to its rightful place in a temple, not only because Dastan's uncle Nizam (Ben Kingsley) seems to have his eye on it, but because the dagger is the key to an ancient power, given by the gods, that, when unlocked, can destroy the world.
What Works?
As is often the case with this sort of movie, the plot is complex, and sometimes difficult to understand, but Prince of Persia wastes little time with boring exposition. The action comes fast and frequent, with clever tactics and even cleverer stunts, and the humor-particularly in cocky banter between Dastan and Tamina-aids the film enormously in its non-violent stretches. The actors are all solid, with the engaging Gyllenhaal embracing the liveliness of the daredevil Dastan, Arterton nailing the banter but taking seriously the deep faith of the princess, Kingsley blustering as old baddies do, and Alfred Molina stealing a number of scenes as a peppy ostrich-racing merchant Dastan encounters on his travels. The special effects are suitable, and, while many of the film's final plot twists are predictable, you actually care enough about the characters to take them seriously. Compared to an empty-headed by-the-numbers project like The Three Musketeers, this movie is a gem of pacing and intrigue.
What Doesn't Work?
Okay, so, like I said, the plot can be confusing. Basically, there's a dagger, there are the gods, something about the dagger and the sand that can destroy the world--sometimes you just sort of revert to sitting and smiling and not asking questions, waiting for it to all unfold. Also, in a movie like this, the names are nigh impossible to pick up, and the will-they-or-won't-they romantic subplot sputters when overused. The key, as ever, with something like Prince of Persia is to not take it too seriously, and, when you don't, you're engaged by the spectacle onscreen.
Content:
Like Musketeers, Prince of Persia, being a Disney adventure film, is pretty clean. There's nary a cuss word, and, despite some revealing outfits (worn by women AND men), no real nudity or edgy sensual content. There are large-scale action sequences, sometimes containing sinister baddies with nasty weapons, and sometimes good guys bite the dust, but very little blood is spilt. But there are some creepy crawly snakes, and a few effects that could frighten younger viewers.
Bottom Line (I Promise):
Led by a likeable star trying something new, and moving along quickly with a high entertainment value, Prince of Persia has exactly the impact it was trying to, and that's a flat-out reward for a summer action flick like this.
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010)
Based on the Video Game Series created by Jordan Mechner
Directed by Mike Newell
Written for the screen by Boaz Yakin, Doug Miro, and Carlo Bernard
Rated PG-13
Length: 116 minutes
Grade: B
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Gemma Arterton, Ben Kingsley, Alfred Molina, Richard Coyle, Toby Kebbell, and Ronald Pickup
PREMISE: When the youngest son of the Persian Emperor is framed for the king's sudden murder, he goes on the run hoping to find a way to prove his innocence, all the while in possession of an ancient artifact with the power to destroy the world.
Rated PG-13 for action violence and some disturbing images
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, is quite the spectacle. Swords clash, arrows fly, horses gallop, fires blaze, men of royalty strut, ostraches race, women's eyes gleam, and the fate of all mankind hangs in the balance. Based on a popular video game series that originated in 2003, Prince delivers all the goods of a video-game-turned-movie in an engaging manner, charging through murders, mythology, and surprise twists while maintaining its sense of fun. While it delivers all those things we expect from our action adventure films-swashbuckling heroes, dastardly villains, romantic intrigue, and action upon action upon action-it does it with a greater sense of purpose, more conviction that something like the recent, phoned-in Three Musketeers.
Plot: Dastan (Jake Gyllenhaal) isn't a prince by birth, so he will never get a real share of the throne of his adopted father, the Persian Emperor (Ronald Pickup). An orphan who impressed the old man with his guile and street smarts one day in the market, Dastan is on a longer leash than his actual prince brothers, Tus (Richard Coyle) and Garsiv (Toby Kebbell), and wins the family's approval by leading a successful campaign to conquer the sacred city of Alamut. When Dastan presents his father with a pair of decorative robes found during the siege-given to him by the heir apparent, Tus-and the robes spontaneously burn and kill the king, he's forced to run for his life. He's aided in his escape by Princess Tamina (Gemma Arterton) of Alamut, who knows a little something about a bejeweled knife Dastan recoverd during the siege. The hilt of the knife is a curious glass case containing swirling sand, and, when the ruby on the end of the hilt is pressed, the holder can turn back time--even able to return a dead person to life. Dastan wants to use it to revive the king, but the princess would rather return it to its rightful place in a temple, not only because Dastan's uncle Nizam (Ben Kingsley) seems to have his eye on it, but because the dagger is the key to an ancient power, given by the gods, that, when unlocked, can destroy the world.
What Works?
As is often the case with this sort of movie, the plot is complex, and sometimes difficult to understand, but Prince of Persia wastes little time with boring exposition. The action comes fast and frequent, with clever tactics and even cleverer stunts, and the humor-particularly in cocky banter between Dastan and Tamina-aids the film enormously in its non-violent stretches. The actors are all solid, with the engaging Gyllenhaal embracing the liveliness of the daredevil Dastan, Arterton nailing the banter but taking seriously the deep faith of the princess, Kingsley blustering as old baddies do, and Alfred Molina stealing a number of scenes as a peppy ostrich-racing merchant Dastan encounters on his travels. The special effects are suitable, and, while many of the film's final plot twists are predictable, you actually care enough about the characters to take them seriously. Compared to an empty-headed by-the-numbers project like The Three Musketeers, this movie is a gem of pacing and intrigue.
What Doesn't Work?
Okay, so, like I said, the plot can be confusing. Basically, there's a dagger, there are the gods, something about the dagger and the sand that can destroy the world--sometimes you just sort of revert to sitting and smiling and not asking questions, waiting for it to all unfold. Also, in a movie like this, the names are nigh impossible to pick up, and the will-they-or-won't-they romantic subplot sputters when overused. The key, as ever, with something like Prince of Persia is to not take it too seriously, and, when you don't, you're engaged by the spectacle onscreen.
Content:
Like Musketeers, Prince of Persia, being a Disney adventure film, is pretty clean. There's nary a cuss word, and, despite some revealing outfits (worn by women AND men), no real nudity or edgy sensual content. There are large-scale action sequences, sometimes containing sinister baddies with nasty weapons, and sometimes good guys bite the dust, but very little blood is spilt. But there are some creepy crawly snakes, and a few effects that could frighten younger viewers.
Bottom Line (I Promise):
Led by a likeable star trying something new, and moving along quickly with a high entertainment value, Prince of Persia has exactly the impact it was trying to, and that's a flat-out reward for a summer action flick like this.
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010)
Based on the Video Game Series created by Jordan Mechner
Directed by Mike Newell
Written for the screen by Boaz Yakin, Doug Miro, and Carlo Bernard
Rated PG-13
Length: 116 minutes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)