More movies I've seen in the past few weeks:
Captain America: The First Avenger
Step # 5 toward 2012's Joss Whedon superhero-fest "The Avengers" (after "Iron Man" 1 & 2, "The Incredible Hulk", and "Thor"), this adaptation of Marvel Comic's very first comics character is quite a good movie. "Thor" is still my favorite film in the superhero summer of 2011, but Cap runs a close second. Set (mostly) during World War II and featuring a well-cast Chris Evans (minus his usual overbearing cockiness) as a 98-pound weakling trapped in the body of a buff American icon, this movie feels fresh due to the near complete lack of modern day cynicism and grittiness. Don't get me wrong, it's still a tough-as-nails movie at times, but it captures that rip-roaring feel of classic golden age comic books, which is hard to do. I have a couple of issues with the movie. Sometimes it feels a bit rushed. The timeline of the movie spans most of the years of the war rather than just a few weeks or months, which is different, but it glosses over plot points and action sequences now and again. And because this movie is part of a larger beast, it sometimes feels overstuffed and cluttered with references and tie-ins to the storylines of the other Marvel movies. Nevertheless, it's a great movie and a great introduction to a great character, greatly directed by a great director, Joe Johnston ("The Rocketeer", "October Sky"). It's grrrrreat!
Be sure to stay until after the end credits for a sneak peek at "The Avengers"! It's short but sweet.
Horrible Bosses
Have I mentioned what an awesome year for comedies 2011 has been? Now comes "Horrible Bosses", the funniest movie of the bunch, as far as I'm concerned. Directed by Seth Gordon (he made the excellent video game player documentary "The King of Kong"), the movie starts off quite low-key and mildly funny, but as the movie goes on it ramps up - and ramps up - and continues to ramp up, eventually reaching a point of critical mass, causing your brain to explode in a fountain of belly laughs and maniacal giggles. I may exaggerating just a bit, but it is really funny. Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day are three put-upon average joes who conspire to have their three A-hole bosses killed (Jennifer Aniston, Colin Farrell, Kevin Spacey). It's madcap comedy at it's best, the most successful of it's kind since "The Hangover". Bateman is good, as usual, but it's the other two guys who are the breakout stars (especially Day's whiny-voiced married man/shmoe). I wasn't too familiar with their past work, but I sure as hell know their names now. Aniston's sexy/raunchy portrayal has gotten the most media buzz (rightly so - yowza), but she actually has the least screen time of the three bosses. Farrell (an underrated actor, if you ask me) plays a great spoiled prick, but it's Spacey's super boss from hell who takes the spotlight. What a creep. And I'd be remiss to forget Jamie Foxx, who plays a character named "Motherfucker Jones". How he got that name, well, I'd better let him explain. . .
Cowboys and Aliens
It's the late nineteenth century. A man wakes up in the desert with no memory of his past. He has an alien weapon attached to his wrist. He arrives at the local settlement and pisses off the resident bigwig by humilating his son. Then aliens invade the town and take many of its residents. The man and the bigwig must band together and lead a posse into the desert to rescue the kidnapped townsfolk. There you have it. This mashup of the classic western and sci-fi genres had oodles of promise, but doesn't quite live up to it. It also could have been much, much worse ("Wild, Wild West", anyone?). In the end, it's mediocre. Good for a viewing, if you've got nothing better to do. So what went wrong? Hard to say. The movie just doesn't pay off when it should. Just when it seems about to reach that next plateau of coolness, it withdraws and loses its will. The Good - Bond actor Daniel Craig, as the man with no memory, is perfect. No other actor in the business can play characters so unflinchingly badass and yet also have the acting chops to make those characters three-dimensional and imperfectly human. It's a tough balancing act. Clancy Brown and Sam Rockwell, in supporting roles, are also excellent. And the ultimate reasons for the aliens' presence on Earth is original and kind of cool. The Mediocre - Harrison Ford as the bigwig. He's okay. Olivia Wilde does well with what she's given. I think her character needs more development. And if she seems far too beautiful to be living out in the hard-bitten West, well, there's a good explanation for that which I won't spoil. Director Jon Favreau ("Iron Man") has gotten better with directing action scenes, but he's still not quite there. Maybe he should stick with smaller character-driven flicks. And the design of the aliens is alright, but average. The Bad - Well, there's nothing really bad here. Like I said, mediocre. Okay. Ho-hum.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2
For the record, I have not read any of the "Harry Potter" novels. I've purposefully kept myself away from reading them so that I can view the movies as movies and not take any preconceived notions or foreknowledge into the viewings. Besides, comparing the movie versions to the novels, while it can be interesting and fun, is ultimately futile. It's like two almost entirely different languages. So I have a somewhat different viewpoint from the average audience for these movies, a.k.a. the "Potter-Heads". And I have a couple of gripes about the movies that I'd like to get off my chest. Keep in mind that I think the movies, overall, are pretty good. Don't kill me with your magic wands.
1) Chris Columbus, director of the first two movies in the series. He sucks. He's made some of the most vile, painful movies I've ever had the displeasure of sitting through (I can only blame myself for that, really). Awful stuff like "Stepmom", "Rent", "Bicentennial Man", "French Kiss", "Home Alone 2", "Mrs, Doubtfire", "Percy Jackson and the Olympians". Empty, soulless movies and characters. Terrible grasp of special effects and storytelling basics and a penchant for indulging actors and kids who "mug" annoyingly for the camera. And he really loves hackneyed, maudlin storytelling devices. Oh, God, does he love them. Thankfully, the strength and character of J.K. Rowling's original story balanced out his crappy direction, making his first two "Potters" fine to sit through (mostly). And I do have to give Mr. Columbus credit for casting the actors that he did. Good job, now go away. He was replaced by better filmmakers for the following installments.
2) The movies stay too faithful to the books. To the point of distraction. If you have to turn to the nearest person who's read the books and ask them what just happened in the movies, that is not good. For example - when Sirius Black is killed in "Order of the Phoenix", he falls backward into a strange, unexplained magical portal and fades away. Huh. On first seeing this in theaters, I figured that this would pay off and he would be back somehow, possibly returning in some form to aid Harry. Why else would the filmmakers go through the effort to have that mysterious portal there in the first place, let alone have Sirius fall into it in such a pointed manner? But, no. Sirius doesn't return from the grave. It was an ultimately pointless and distracting detail. Correction: It was in the book, and the filmmakers were just being slavish to the source material. But for me it just created false expectations and unnecessary clutter. It didn't further the story and should have been left out. Just have him die "normally". There are more examples like this in the series, all of them annoying. But they aren't so bad that they kill the story, just annoy.
3) The "Scooby-Doo" endings. I'm not insulting "Scooby-Doo", mind you, but I'm referring to the big "mystery reveal" endings which the first five "Potter" movies all share. And the real culprit is - (gasp!). "It was so-and-so all along!" "And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it wasn't for you darned wizard kids!" "You see, Harry. . ." And then Dumbledore explains what you've just been watching for the past 2-3 hours. Let me tell you, when I saw "Half-Blood Prince" I was totally blown away - not only was the story starting to move forward in leaps and bounds, but there was no "Scooby-Doo" ending! Joy! Plus, in a world permeated by such a nebulous force as "magic", where anything goes, mystery becomes a hard thing to pull off. In a good mystery tale, you should be able to piece together the solution from the clues introduced during the course of the story - but hopefully not outguess the author and figure it out before the end. It's a mean tightrope. In the "Potter" movies, there aren't enough clues laid out to be able to put it all together before the end, even if you watch them multiple times. You need to have read the books first. See complaint #2.
Okay, so how about the damn movie? It's really good, a well-done ending for a well-done series (despite my above nitpicks). There are plenty of epic battle/action sequences (director David Yates has a nice grasp of visuals and special effects), but this movie's strongest scenes are the more intimate, character-driven ones. The whole sequence revealing Professor Snape's motivations was one of my favorites, a nice moment for Alan Rickman to shine. The last act of the movie feels a little bit rushed, and there are a couple of undeveloped plot threads (what happens to Draco Malfoy I kind of like, but it's very, very anticlimactic, and Wormtail disappears completely and gets no comeuppance whatsoever - disappointing), but overall it's worth it for those who've stuck with the series this far. The 3-D was okay in a couple of sequences, but when your movie is 75% dark or dimly lit, it kind of becomes pointless. All-in-all a good ending, although I thought they should have called it "Neville Longbottom Strikes Back". He totally steals the show from Harry.
Hobo With a Shotgun
Rude, crude and unapologetic, "Hobo With a Shotgun" is a total blast (ha, ha). Directed by Canadian newcomer Jason Eisener, Rutger Hauer stars as a hobo with no name who drifts into a town run by a ruthless crime lord, gets mistreated by scumbags, snaps and goes on a vengeance filled rampage with a double-barreled shotgun. Combining motifs from Troma movies, John Carpenter action flicks, and grindhouse gore and revenge thrillers from the 70s and 80s, this movie fits alongside such recent retro-homage efforts as Quentin Tarantino's "Death Proof", and Robert Rodriguez's "Planet Terror" and "Machete". The style of the movie is way over the top, as is the acting by most of the characters (intentionally). Rutger Hauer is totally on his game and it's great to see this legendary character actor sink his over-the-top teeth into something this juicy. I have to give credit to newcomer Molly Dunsworth as Abby, a hooker with a heart of gold who aids the hobo in his endeavors. She has to put up with a lot of shit but, in the end, gets the most character evolution out of all the cast. There's nothing particularly clever, or subtle, about "Hobo With a Shotgun", but there's so much behind-the-scenes moxie and scummy charm that you can't help but enjoy the ride. And it's one of the most blisteringly colorful-looking movies of the year. Grab some beers and a couple of pizzas, and enjoy the ride.
Well, that's it for now. Before I go, I have to plug "Rise of the Planet of the Apes". It's truly and excellent film, fully character-based, expertly acted with a solidly-told story. I will be doing a more detailed review later, but I just wanted to help get the word out for now. A total joy. It will definitely be on my list of best movies of 2011. Damn dirty apes. . .
No comments:
Post a Comment