Well, I didn't get out to see any of my August picks. I thought I might not, but I'm still looking forward to most of them, so I'll just have to catch them later. I mostly stayed home and played catch-up on some earlier 2018 releases: The Endless, The Hurricane Heist, Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, and Rampage.
I did go to the theater though -- Dad and I went to see 2001: A Space Odyssey for it's 50th anniversary. It was a cool experience, definitely more powerful and effective on a big screen with cranked up sound! It's a fascinating film, and I seem to enjoy it more with each rewatch.
Hopefully I'll get to the theater this month -- there's at least one that I'm hoping to get out for! Not a huge spread this month, as summer wraps up, but definitely still some interesting ones! What looks good to you?
Cold Skin
Sept 7th; NR
I know, I know. I know what this looks like, and I know there's no way it's a really good movie -- but I want to see it anyway. It's the kind of lower-rate fantasy action horror that I enjoy. At the very least it has a memorable premise and setting. Ray Stevenson in in it, and the main actor, David Oakes I've seen around the block on Masterpiece productions.
The Predator
Sept 14th; R
My boy Boyd Holbrook leading a Predator movie? After Logan I'd watch him in anything, but with how much I enjoyed Adrien Brody's take on a Predator hero, I get the impression that this is going to be a real treat. Maybe I should try and watch the original first though. I never got around to that one. Also I'm not sure this one looks as good as Predators, but even if it isn't, it would take a lot to keep me from enjoying it! Jacob Tremblay, Tom Jane, and apparently Yvonne Strahovski are also in it. So, that's extra cool. If I had to pick only one movie to see this month, at the moment this would be it! (Red band trailer.)
Patient Zero
Sept 14th; R
Alright, now that's what I'm talking about! This is what I was hoping for whenever Matt Smith left Doctor Who -- that he'd get to star in original movies that were fun but expanded from Who. (I was super disappointed at his role in Terminator Genysis, and then he was still underused in P&P&Z) But this looks neat. Zombies, but a new and imaginative take on them. And he's the lead. At this point I don't even care if it's bad. I mean, I'd watch it anyway because I like zombie flicks. Also, there's Natalie Dormer and Stanley Tucci, and Stanley Tucci is always a good idea.
A Simple Favor
Sept 14th; R
I don't want to watch this so much as I just want to know then result of the mystery. The style is appealing. It claims noir, and the plot has a noir tone, and it reminds me a bit of Thoroughbreds, but then I found that it's directed by Paul Feig and I'm wondering if it'll really have that style or if it's just an effective trailer and good marketing.
I Think We're Alone Now
Sept 14th; R
One of THOSE scifi movies. I'm a fan. Well, I mean, I like slow and cerebral scifi, anyway. This trailer really wants you to know how art-house-y it is, and otherwise reveals so little -- besides that it's got Peter Dinklage and Elle Fanning, everyone else is dead, there's some white X's on the ground, and it's all super dramatic -- that I don't have anything to say except I'll probably watch it just because I like scifi.
The House with a Clock in it's Walls
Sept 21st; PG
After the unusually enjoyable Goosebumps movie, kid's fantasy movies with Jack Black have an extra appeal for me. Ooh, and Steven Spielberg produced. And Cate Blanchett. She's golden. The kid looks like Jacob Tremblay, but it's not him. Based on a book and you should know what I think about that by now! (It's generally a good sign.) It's like Harry Potter lite, with more little-kid fantasy. Yep, I want to see this.
Life Itself
Sept 21st; R
Okay, but do all the story lines connect? It looks like it's gonna be one of those Love Actually things where there's only a loose connection and so many stories because one wasn't meaty enough to make a whole movie. That the impression I just got, anyway, but hey, I'll watch it. I'll watch it for Oscar Isaac and Olivia Cooke, and also for Olivia Wilde and Mandy Patinkin.
The Old Man & the Gun
Sept 28th; PG-13
Robert Redford's last movie before he retires from acting, apparently where he plays a gentleman bank-robber, and Sissy Spacek becomes his Bonnie. It looks like a very nice and well made film, though not exactly the sort I'd watch out of interest for the plot. Still I'll keep my eye on it and the reviews and maybe something about it will catch my fancy. At this point in my life, Redford's older movies are higher on my priority list.
Black 47
Sept 28th; R
Nice. Hardcore Irish revenge drama in 1847, during the famine. Hugo Weaving, Jim Broadbent, Freddy Fox, and Barry Keoghan. The lead I've not seen before -- no wait, I have, in Animal Kingdom. Anyway, I like the idea of violent period dramas, most of the one's I ever watch are more on the romance side, and Dickens is the darkest it gets. On the downside of that though, more tragic and meaningless character deaths (I can only assume) because of the famine, a real-life thing, which is sad. Still it looks like it's worth a watch.
Summer 03
Sept 28th; NR
Haha, so this is for kids who wanted to like Lady Bird but it turned out to be too meaningful and not romantically cliched enough, right? Kids that probably don't even remember the early 2000's. I do, and being catholic wasn't unusually popular. So the fact that this movie has it as well as Lady Bird which was set only a year later, seems like a rather big coincidence. That's all I have to say. I don't want to watch this movie. (And I don't really care if it's Lady Bird lite either.) (On another note it feels super weird to me that so many movies are being set "back" in the 2000's. Like, it feels like it just happened yesterday. Is it really vintage already??) (ALSO I generally love coming of age movies, but the sexual ones are literally the worst???) Okay I'm really done now. Have a nice day!
Showing posts with label Stanley Tucci. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stanley Tucci. Show all posts
Saturday, September 1, 2018
Saturday, March 18, 2017
Beauty and the Beast
Everyone's here, everything's the same, and the nostalgia is strong. There's Belle with her simple blue dress and her swishy yellow one, Gaston with his poof-in-the-front hair, the Beast's unnaturally blue eyes, Lumiere and Cogsworth and their constant bantering. All the songs are sung, all the magic displayed, and that same happy ending is more life-like than it has ever been. But is this remake truly worthy?
With the original being only 25 years old, it's already a relatively up-to-date kind of fairytale. Are the advancements in GCI technology since 1991 enough to refresh the story? Does making it live-action and filling the beloved roles with appealing actors create new worth? Perhaps not -- but that didn't stop the production, so I figured it wouldn't have to stop our enjoyment either. I plunged in opening night with no inhibitions, but also not much confidence in the quality.
The worst thing was the visual effects. The idea was that today we are perfectly capable of making humanoid beasts and talking inanimate objects seem real so they can play believably next to live actors. Now, I have seen Guardians of the Galaxy, and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, so I know this to be true; the technology has advanced to the point where its use is practical and able to hold up over time. So, why does the animation of the Beast look so bad? They used mo-cap technology, it's Disney so they should have plenty of money -- yet looking at his face, my mind could never accept it as real.
It's a mystery because I know the capabilities are there, but besides speculating about laziness, the only thing I can point out is that the facial design was poorly done. Perhaps in an effort to keep the movie PG but seriously the Beast's face was too human and too... pretty. Pointy nose, flat face, and his tiny protruding fangs got in the way and disappeared from scene to scene. So much else was adapted to look exactly the same, and I wish he had been too. At least his face should have had more structure. The one thing the Beast had going for him was Dan Stevens and the moments when you could tell he was somewhere behind all that badly designed CGI, actually giving a performance.
The animate inanimate objects were more successful in that they were not distracting or completely unbelievable, but they still were less expressive than they have been, either as cartoon characters or as portrayed by dramatic stage performers in funny costumes. Overall the special effects wound up giving off a distinct odor of careless minimal effort. Practical effects, sets, props, and costumes were happily not subject to that, and in their splendor, the spectacle thrives.
So I've hit on the worst the movie gives us -- now the best. That, of course is Luke Evans as Gaston. Full disclosure, I may have swooned when he first started singing. He has a fantastic voice with a clear, loud Broadway sound that is perfect for Gaston, and he matched it in his over-the-top, scenery-chewing performance. He was obviously having a blast in the role, and wound up making Gaston as great and as interesting as he's ever been. The downside of this was that he made everyone else look bad. Not his fault of course, and some people managed to look bad without his comparison.
Emma Watson for instance. And I want to be clear that going in I had some hopes for her Belle. I thought she looked the part, and could easily imagine her doing the role justice. However, her characterization of Belle was given very little energy -- Belle's friendly optimism turned to prim politeness and her determined passion to bouts of anger and irritated sarcasm. Her singing was also problematic, requiring auto-tuning, and simply not being as strong as a character like Belle requires. I can only suppose she was cast for her star power and pretty face.
New songs were added (similar to those exclusive to Broadway) and one was a ballad for the Beast. I did not expect that from Dan Stevens and was impressed. His speaking voice was digitally altered to be low and gravelly, but I couldn't tell if the same effect was applied to his singing. Either way, since I couldn't tell, it was well done. As a human he was much more easily enjoyed. He gets a cool opening scene (the movie's most creative expansion) which I was immensely glad to see, but his live-action screen time was still much too short for my preference. His eyes probably won him the role, but hopefully a more widespread appreciation of his talent will be the end result.
Ewan McGregor I had not heard sing before, but he delivered with expected aplomb in "Be Our Guest" and everywhere else. Emma Thompson was also excellently solid as Mrs. Potts, lovely and reliable to the very end. Kevin Kline's Maurice got to sing a little too which was nice. Josh Gad's LeFou was amusing in spite of sharing scenes with the distractingly good Gaston. Hattie Morahan surprised me with her presence. (Period drama fans will recognize her from the 2008 Sense & Sensibility where she played opposite Dan Stevens!) Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Plumette, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Stanley Tucci, Audra McDonald; the cast overall was a plethora of talent, though some were underused.
Whether or not this remake is worthy must depend on the individual. For some it may be, and for some it may not. I thought it was worth the ticket for Luke Evans alone, but I can't help but notice that practically everything that was good about this movie came directly from the original. It borrowed everything, slapped on CGI paint and considered it enough of a re-brand. When new things were added, they didn't make sense, like the book that can transport you anywhere -- what was that? Expanding with backstory and side plots isn't a bad idea in principle, but it was done only to stretch out the run time, and none of the additions mattered to the plot in the end.
It has its magical moments of singing, dancing, visual splendor, and of course romance, but don't suppose that credit belongs solely to this film; where this new Beauty and the Beast succeeds it succeeds because it tells a good story, not because it tells a good story well.
 |
| Because, as with all great tales that are old as time, it should be. |
With the original being only 25 years old, it's already a relatively up-to-date kind of fairytale. Are the advancements in GCI technology since 1991 enough to refresh the story? Does making it live-action and filling the beloved roles with appealing actors create new worth? Perhaps not -- but that didn't stop the production, so I figured it wouldn't have to stop our enjoyment either. I plunged in opening night with no inhibitions, but also not much confidence in the quality.
The worst thing was the visual effects. The idea was that today we are perfectly capable of making humanoid beasts and talking inanimate objects seem real so they can play believably next to live actors. Now, I have seen Guardians of the Galaxy, and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, so I know this to be true; the technology has advanced to the point where its use is practical and able to hold up over time. So, why does the animation of the Beast look so bad? They used mo-cap technology, it's Disney so they should have plenty of money -- yet looking at his face, my mind could never accept it as real.
 |
| Sorry dude but you're just too human. |
It's a mystery because I know the capabilities are there, but besides speculating about laziness, the only thing I can point out is that the facial design was poorly done. Perhaps in an effort to keep the movie PG but seriously the Beast's face was too human and too... pretty. Pointy nose, flat face, and his tiny protruding fangs got in the way and disappeared from scene to scene. So much else was adapted to look exactly the same, and I wish he had been too. At least his face should have had more structure. The one thing the Beast had going for him was Dan Stevens and the moments when you could tell he was somewhere behind all that badly designed CGI, actually giving a performance.
The animate inanimate objects were more successful in that they were not distracting or completely unbelievable, but they still were less expressive than they have been, either as cartoon characters or as portrayed by dramatic stage performers in funny costumes. Overall the special effects wound up giving off a distinct odor of careless minimal effort. Practical effects, sets, props, and costumes were happily not subject to that, and in their splendor, the spectacle thrives.
 |
| And guess who brings the spectacle? |
So I've hit on the worst the movie gives us -- now the best. That, of course is Luke Evans as Gaston. Full disclosure, I may have swooned when he first started singing. He has a fantastic voice with a clear, loud Broadway sound that is perfect for Gaston, and he matched it in his over-the-top, scenery-chewing performance. He was obviously having a blast in the role, and wound up making Gaston as great and as interesting as he's ever been. The downside of this was that he made everyone else look bad. Not his fault of course, and some people managed to look bad without his comparison.
Emma Watson for instance. And I want to be clear that going in I had some hopes for her Belle. I thought she looked the part, and could easily imagine her doing the role justice. However, her characterization of Belle was given very little energy -- Belle's friendly optimism turned to prim politeness and her determined passion to bouts of anger and irritated sarcasm. Her singing was also problematic, requiring auto-tuning, and simply not being as strong as a character like Belle requires. I can only suppose she was cast for her star power and pretty face.
 |
| Poor girl. But my, what a guy that Luke Evans! |
New songs were added (similar to those exclusive to Broadway) and one was a ballad for the Beast. I did not expect that from Dan Stevens and was impressed. His speaking voice was digitally altered to be low and gravelly, but I couldn't tell if the same effect was applied to his singing. Either way, since I couldn't tell, it was well done. As a human he was much more easily enjoyed. He gets a cool opening scene (the movie's most creative expansion) which I was immensely glad to see, but his live-action screen time was still much too short for my preference. His eyes probably won him the role, but hopefully a more widespread appreciation of his talent will be the end result.
Ewan McGregor I had not heard sing before, but he delivered with expected aplomb in "Be Our Guest" and everywhere else. Emma Thompson was also excellently solid as Mrs. Potts, lovely and reliable to the very end. Kevin Kline's Maurice got to sing a little too which was nice. Josh Gad's LeFou was amusing in spite of sharing scenes with the distractingly good Gaston. Hattie Morahan surprised me with her presence. (Period drama fans will recognize her from the 2008 Sense & Sensibility where she played opposite Dan Stevens!) Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Plumette, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Stanley Tucci, Audra McDonald; the cast overall was a plethora of talent, though some were underused.
 |
| Still they had a LOT to do with the movie being as enjoyable as it was. |
Whether or not this remake is worthy must depend on the individual. For some it may be, and for some it may not. I thought it was worth the ticket for Luke Evans alone, but I can't help but notice that practically everything that was good about this movie came directly from the original. It borrowed everything, slapped on CGI paint and considered it enough of a re-brand. When new things were added, they didn't make sense, like the book that can transport you anywhere -- what was that? Expanding with backstory and side plots isn't a bad idea in principle, but it was done only to stretch out the run time, and none of the additions mattered to the plot in the end.
It has its magical moments of singing, dancing, visual splendor, and of course romance, but don't suppose that credit belongs solely to this film; where this new Beauty and the Beast succeeds it succeeds because it tells a good story, not because it tells a good story well.
Thursday, May 12, 2016
Captain America: The First Avenger
Seeing Civil War in the theater sparked another re-watch of Steve's first adventure The First Avenger, and I figured it was about time I gave it a review. My opinion of it has shifted slowly over the past 5 years, as with each viewing my perspective was slightly different because of the films that came after it, but it has always been essentially the same -- a really quite good movie.
Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is the biggest Boy Scout character maybe ever -- certainly in the MCU -- and as such it's difficult to give his character conflict. Because he knows what's right and does it, it's hard to find a tight spot to put him in that would create a compelling story. His origin story deals with that problem in a way no later movie could. Instead of it being about how he fights for truth and liberty and how he helps people, this movie focuses on his struggle to get to a place where he is actually capable of doing those "Captain America" things.
We know that his heart always is and always will be in the right place, and The First Avenger proves that. As a skinny sickly kid he determinedly stands up to bullies to the point where he seems almost insane to do it, and relentlessly tries to make it into the army. I guess he knows what his heart is capable of. And fortunately so does Dr. Erskine (Stanley Tucci) who sees his spirit and his goodness and gives him a chance. To the raised eyebrows of Colonel Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) and Agent Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell) he is chosen to be the first test subject for a serum that turns people into super-soldiers.
Stanley Tucci is always a lightening aspect in any movie, and here he's delightful. As soon as Steve gets a body with strength to match his heart and soul though, Erskine is killed and the serum stolen by Richard Armitage! (This movie has so many great "hey, it's that person!" bit-parts. It's fantastic.) I love the proceeding chase scene. Suddenly Steve is who he was always supposed to be, and he immediately uses his new-found physical strength to do good. The scene action-wise is sometimes quite silly and no one had figured out Cap's fighting style yet, so it's missing the visual "oomph" it could have had, but I still love it.
The whole movie's production is often distractingly cheap in fact. Obviously there wasn't enough confidence in it to warrant the kind of budget a Marvel movie gets today. Green screens are obvious, fighting and stunts are cheesy and fake, and I remember the 3D as the worst I've seen. But, like Cap, this movie has its heart in the right place. It dwindles on the action and visuals side, but focuses admirably on character.
I didn't fall in love with Chris Evans' Cap until The Winter Soldier, but he's always done the part nearly flawlessly, and he hit on it so well with this first try. He's so convincingly kind and endearing and you can't help but feel so sad for him at times (when he's stuck selling bonds and drawing himself as a dancing monkey springs to mind) but he still exudes strength and bravery and is the kind of person you'd be afraid of if you were a bad guy. Hugo Weaving as the bad guy hams it up more than he should have, by the way. The movie has a strong comic book tone to it, but it's halfway in a way that fits with the later films, and halfway not.
Bucky, (Sebastian Stan) I didn't fall in love with until Civil War. When I first saw this movie I barely noticed him. He was a sounding board for Steve's early conflict, then he blended into the Howling Commandos, and his "death" completely convinced me. How things have changed. Now, the sounding board is the beginning of a very complex character. The two have a great friendship, and it's interesting to watch how it changes from Bucky trying to protect Steve from himself and from war, to becoming the one who needs to be protected, yet he doesn't hesitate to follow Steve, and never resents him. Stan has the "strong silent type" down pat but is also light and charming at the proper times. The bit where he tries to hit on Peggy and she doesn't even look at him is hilarious.
And even after Peggy got her own TV show, her character doesn't get any better than it is here. Strong and confident, and warm and lovely this Peggy knows her worth and doesn't care one bit if no one else does. I always liked Dominic Cooper's Howard Stark too -- one hundred percent rogue swagger and charm. Tommy Lee Jones is often the funniest bits of the movie while he helps the plot move along. And even though they're small parts, all the Howling Commandos are good, and I especially like that Neal McDonough and JJ Feild are a part of the group.
The one thing that has always bothered me the most about his film is how contrived and ambiguous the plane crash at the end was. I've tried to figure it out, but it seems like they just couldn't think of a hole-proof way of forcing Cap to make that choice and crash the plane, so they tried to cover it up by not explaining exactly why it was necessary to crash. It had to happen so it had to happen, but that always dampened the impact of that emotional moment for me.
The First Avenger is far from being a flawless movie, and most of its flaws are right on the surface for all to see, but with each viewing the characters become more and more endearing and deep, and show no sign of becoming obsolete as Marvel films continue to grow on the solid foundation they helped set. This early, light-and-breezy Marvel flick is a sincere and fitting origin for the most noble and patriotic of superheroes.
 |
| The Star-Spangled Man with a Plan! |
Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is the biggest Boy Scout character maybe ever -- certainly in the MCU -- and as such it's difficult to give his character conflict. Because he knows what's right and does it, it's hard to find a tight spot to put him in that would create a compelling story. His origin story deals with that problem in a way no later movie could. Instead of it being about how he fights for truth and liberty and how he helps people, this movie focuses on his struggle to get to a place where he is actually capable of doing those "Captain America" things.
We know that his heart always is and always will be in the right place, and The First Avenger proves that. As a skinny sickly kid he determinedly stands up to bullies to the point where he seems almost insane to do it, and relentlessly tries to make it into the army. I guess he knows what his heart is capable of. And fortunately so does Dr. Erskine (Stanley Tucci) who sees his spirit and his goodness and gives him a chance. To the raised eyebrows of Colonel Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) and Agent Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell) he is chosen to be the first test subject for a serum that turns people into super-soldiers.
 |
| "There are men laying down their lives. I got no right to do any less than them." |
Stanley Tucci is always a lightening aspect in any movie, and here he's delightful. As soon as Steve gets a body with strength to match his heart and soul though, Erskine is killed and the serum stolen by Richard Armitage! (This movie has so many great "hey, it's that person!" bit-parts. It's fantastic.) I love the proceeding chase scene. Suddenly Steve is who he was always supposed to be, and he immediately uses his new-found physical strength to do good. The scene action-wise is sometimes quite silly and no one had figured out Cap's fighting style yet, so it's missing the visual "oomph" it could have had, but I still love it.
The whole movie's production is often distractingly cheap in fact. Obviously there wasn't enough confidence in it to warrant the kind of budget a Marvel movie gets today. Green screens are obvious, fighting and stunts are cheesy and fake, and I remember the 3D as the worst I've seen. But, like Cap, this movie has its heart in the right place. It dwindles on the action and visuals side, but focuses admirably on character.
 |
| Not a perfect soldier, but a good man. |
I didn't fall in love with Chris Evans' Cap until The Winter Soldier, but he's always done the part nearly flawlessly, and he hit on it so well with this first try. He's so convincingly kind and endearing and you can't help but feel so sad for him at times (when he's stuck selling bonds and drawing himself as a dancing monkey springs to mind) but he still exudes strength and bravery and is the kind of person you'd be afraid of if you were a bad guy. Hugo Weaving as the bad guy hams it up more than he should have, by the way. The movie has a strong comic book tone to it, but it's halfway in a way that fits with the later films, and halfway not.
Bucky, (Sebastian Stan) I didn't fall in love with until Civil War. When I first saw this movie I barely noticed him. He was a sounding board for Steve's early conflict, then he blended into the Howling Commandos, and his "death" completely convinced me. How things have changed. Now, the sounding board is the beginning of a very complex character. The two have a great friendship, and it's interesting to watch how it changes from Bucky trying to protect Steve from himself and from war, to becoming the one who needs to be protected, yet he doesn't hesitate to follow Steve, and never resents him. Stan has the "strong silent type" down pat but is also light and charming at the proper times. The bit where he tries to hit on Peggy and she doesn't even look at him is hilarious.
 |
| "I thought you were dead." "I thought you were smaller." |
And even after Peggy got her own TV show, her character doesn't get any better than it is here. Strong and confident, and warm and lovely this Peggy knows her worth and doesn't care one bit if no one else does. I always liked Dominic Cooper's Howard Stark too -- one hundred percent rogue swagger and charm. Tommy Lee Jones is often the funniest bits of the movie while he helps the plot move along. And even though they're small parts, all the Howling Commandos are good, and I especially like that Neal McDonough and JJ Feild are a part of the group.
The one thing that has always bothered me the most about his film is how contrived and ambiguous the plane crash at the end was. I've tried to figure it out, but it seems like they just couldn't think of a hole-proof way of forcing Cap to make that choice and crash the plane, so they tried to cover it up by not explaining exactly why it was necessary to crash. It had to happen so it had to happen, but that always dampened the impact of that emotional moment for me.
 |
| Interestingly, the sweeter part of their romance is when they are apart. |
The First Avenger is far from being a flawless movie, and most of its flaws are right on the surface for all to see, but with each viewing the characters become more and more endearing and deep, and show no sign of becoming obsolete as Marvel films continue to grow on the solid foundation they helped set. This early, light-and-breezy Marvel flick is a sincere and fitting origin for the most noble and patriotic of superheroes.
Friday, November 20, 2015
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2
Spoilers throughout.
The mammoth phenomenon that, three and a half years ago, kick-started the trend of teen dystopia movie adaptations has finally reached its conclusion. The dystopia trend is still raging strong today, and shows almost no sign of relenting, yet, this final part of the final chapter of the girl who began it all feels past its prime -- and about a year overdue. The beginning of the end (in more ways than one) was the first Mockingjay movie and the decision to split the story into two movies. Did that decision help the movie-makers adapt the slightly bloated and chaotic last book more accurately? Absolutely. Was it worth it? Well...
This film centers on Katniss and co. as they give their all to one final push in the war against President Snow. It starts out with the exact same dull, droning tone that Mockingjay Part 1 gave us. I was surprised at this for about two seconds before I realized that expecting this film to be more exciting when it was filmed at the same time as the last one was totally unrealistic. I kept having this conversation in my head: Me: "This is boring and I don't care about it anymore." Me: "Okay, but at least try and view it from an unbiased perspective so you can review it." Me: "Fine." Five minutes later, Me: "This is boring!" Eventually I realized that my unbiased opinion is just that -- this movie was sluggish and dull and lifeless for more than half of the run time.
The cause of this probably came a lot from the two-part-stretch, but I also noticed that it had a lot to do with characters. The interesting, lively characters were sidelined in favor of the characters that were neck-deep in dark, heavy drama. Katniss is capable of, and has been a lively character is the past, but the movie inexplicably toned down that side of her here. For the most part she looks like she's sleepwalking through the plot. It can't be Jennifer Lawrence's fault though -- she's just too good at being depressed and despondent. When she breaks out of that rut and absolutely kills a scene at the end, I wished that Katniss had been present for more of the movie.
Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) and Gale (Liam Hemsworth) are also pretty despondent too, as they spend the movie moping -- Gale, because he knows he's losing the love-triangle battle, and Peeta, because he randomly and unwillingly flip-flops between being a good guy and a bad guy. The book's quick dismissal of Gale always bothered me, and the film does nothing to combat that. After Katniss doesn't kill him when he asks her to, and after he (possibly) inadvertently causes Prim's death, their last conversation only touches on his side of the guilt. Though I did love the delivery of Katniss' line that dismisses him forever. On Peeta's side, things often get too mushy and verge uncomfortably on cheesy as they set up for Katniss to finally choose him, but still they don't properly cover the best of their drama. At the climax when he prevents her from killing herself, the potentially powerful moment was sadly rushed and glossed over.
Relatively new characters get first priority for screen time and development, and Natalie Dormer, Elden Henson, and Mahershala Ali stand out. Old favorites only really make appearances. Haymitch (Woody Harrelson) lights up the screen when he's there. Johanna (Jena Malone) is just begging for more screen time. Effie (Elizabeth Banks) gets to show up, but doesn't get to be her usual amusing self. Caesar Flickerman (Stanley Tucci) goes full villain in his cameo-length part. Donald Sutherland and Julianne Moore keep things professional as their respective Presidents. Finnick (Sam Claflin) tries to make the most of it, but is mostly ignored before being given the same disappointing throwaway death he got in the novel. Beetee (Jeffrey Wright) practically doesn't even exist. Even Prim (Willow Shields) -- the one sure-fire sucker-punch -- isn't developed enough to get the best reaction. As the characters serve their purpose as the novel dictated, they fade away, unimportant. One novel was made into 4 hour, 20 minute film, and yet there were no character expansions.
The only thing that was deemed worth expanding, it seems, was the action sequences -- though still minimally. The action in general though is really what makes this film worth watching over reading the book. They are visually cleaner than the book's hectic descriptions, and are a welcome break from lingering shots of deadpan faces. Ideally, this and the last film combined could be at least a half-hour shorter, and that extra time was picked up mostly by making each event -- each shot -- last just a little longer. It did nothing to add to the content of course -- a ten-second shot of Katniss' face is just as descriptive as a two-second one. It's like they were too lazy to add any new content, but also knew that a movie must be over 2 hours in order to be an "epic," and these movie have to be epics.
So after an hour and a half or so off all that, we finally get to the tide-turning final battle, and the climactic aftermath, and finally, the film gets good. This is what we were waiting for, and it didn't disappoint. Because it was the best parts of the book, it was the best parts of the film. They showed it all like the book demanded, and everything fell naturally into place. I finally fully understood the scene where Katniss votes in favor of the symbolic Hunger Games. Then Plutarch's letter, read out by good ol' Haymitch, and the fan-pleasing moment between Haymitch and Effie. The way they showed the slow progression of time as life starts to find a place again with our heroine and her fellow District 12 victors was simple, and genuinely great. And then that final scene, that gives us full circle feel for the final resolution, as Jennifer Lawrence delivers one last monologue, as the woman who used to be Girl on Fire.
It is important to note, that though I give this film and Mockingjay Part 1 the same star score, and though my review of Part 1 may sound more positive, I definitely consider Part 2 to be the better of the two films.
It got really messy there for a while, but managed to wrap it all up in a satisfying way -- the exact same satisfying way the book did of course, but redundancy is underrated. Actually, it's not, but it is forgivable. Especially in this case when the franchise was so tired for so long I actually thought it would sleepwalk right though the end, but, thankfully, it wound up waking up just in time to conclude with a bang almost loud enough to cover up the previous sounds of snoring. So, no, I don't think the two-part split was worth it, but all things considered... there are worse games to play.
The mammoth phenomenon that, three and a half years ago, kick-started the trend of teen dystopia movie adaptations has finally reached its conclusion. The dystopia trend is still raging strong today, and shows almost no sign of relenting, yet, this final part of the final chapter of the girl who began it all feels past its prime -- and about a year overdue. The beginning of the end (in more ways than one) was the first Mockingjay movie and the decision to split the story into two movies. Did that decision help the movie-makers adapt the slightly bloated and chaotic last book more accurately? Absolutely. Was it worth it? Well...
 |
| Stick with me and we'll find out! Or die trying! |
This film centers on Katniss and co. as they give their all to one final push in the war against President Snow. It starts out with the exact same dull, droning tone that Mockingjay Part 1 gave us. I was surprised at this for about two seconds before I realized that expecting this film to be more exciting when it was filmed at the same time as the last one was totally unrealistic. I kept having this conversation in my head: Me: "This is boring and I don't care about it anymore." Me: "Okay, but at least try and view it from an unbiased perspective so you can review it." Me: "Fine." Five minutes later, Me: "This is boring!" Eventually I realized that my unbiased opinion is just that -- this movie was sluggish and dull and lifeless for more than half of the run time.
The cause of this probably came a lot from the two-part-stretch, but I also noticed that it had a lot to do with characters. The interesting, lively characters were sidelined in favor of the characters that were neck-deep in dark, heavy drama. Katniss is capable of, and has been a lively character is the past, but the movie inexplicably toned down that side of her here. For the most part she looks like she's sleepwalking through the plot. It can't be Jennifer Lawrence's fault though -- she's just too good at being depressed and despondent. When she breaks out of that rut and absolutely kills a scene at the end, I wished that Katniss had been present for more of the movie.
 |
| Unfortunately even Jennifer Lawrence can't carry a movie all by herself. |
Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) and Gale (Liam Hemsworth) are also pretty despondent too, as they spend the movie moping -- Gale, because he knows he's losing the love-triangle battle, and Peeta, because he randomly and unwillingly flip-flops between being a good guy and a bad guy. The book's quick dismissal of Gale always bothered me, and the film does nothing to combat that. After Katniss doesn't kill him when he asks her to, and after he (possibly) inadvertently causes Prim's death, their last conversation only touches on his side of the guilt. Though I did love the delivery of Katniss' line that dismisses him forever. On Peeta's side, things often get too mushy and verge uncomfortably on cheesy as they set up for Katniss to finally choose him, but still they don't properly cover the best of their drama. At the climax when he prevents her from killing herself, the potentially powerful moment was sadly rushed and glossed over.
 |
| I guess the film lost sight of its best features: it's powerful moments, and it's fun, memorable characters. |
Relatively new characters get first priority for screen time and development, and Natalie Dormer, Elden Henson, and Mahershala Ali stand out. Old favorites only really make appearances. Haymitch (Woody Harrelson) lights up the screen when he's there. Johanna (Jena Malone) is just begging for more screen time. Effie (Elizabeth Banks) gets to show up, but doesn't get to be her usual amusing self. Caesar Flickerman (Stanley Tucci) goes full villain in his cameo-length part. Donald Sutherland and Julianne Moore keep things professional as their respective Presidents. Finnick (Sam Claflin) tries to make the most of it, but is mostly ignored before being given the same disappointing throwaway death he got in the novel. Beetee (Jeffrey Wright) practically doesn't even exist. Even Prim (Willow Shields) -- the one sure-fire sucker-punch -- isn't developed enough to get the best reaction. As the characters serve their purpose as the novel dictated, they fade away, unimportant. One novel was made into 4 hour, 20 minute film, and yet there were no character expansions.
 |
| I can only guess that the film makers were literally too scared of the fans to make any changes at all. |
The only thing that was deemed worth expanding, it seems, was the action sequences -- though still minimally. The action in general though is really what makes this film worth watching over reading the book. They are visually cleaner than the book's hectic descriptions, and are a welcome break from lingering shots of deadpan faces. Ideally, this and the last film combined could be at least a half-hour shorter, and that extra time was picked up mostly by making each event -- each shot -- last just a little longer. It did nothing to add to the content of course -- a ten-second shot of Katniss' face is just as descriptive as a two-second one. It's like they were too lazy to add any new content, but also knew that a movie must be over 2 hours in order to be an "epic," and these movie have to be epics.
So after an hour and a half or so off all that, we finally get to the tide-turning final battle, and the climactic aftermath, and finally, the film gets good. This is what we were waiting for, and it didn't disappoint. Because it was the best parts of the book, it was the best parts of the film. They showed it all like the book demanded, and everything fell naturally into place. I finally fully understood the scene where Katniss votes in favor of the symbolic Hunger Games. Then Plutarch's letter, read out by good ol' Haymitch, and the fan-pleasing moment between Haymitch and Effie. The way they showed the slow progression of time as life starts to find a place again with our heroine and her fellow District 12 victors was simple, and genuinely great. And then that final scene, that gives us full circle feel for the final resolution, as Jennifer Lawrence delivers one last monologue, as the woman who used to be Girl on Fire.
 |
| Girl -- fire. Fire -- girl. For the last time. |
It is important to note, that though I give this film and Mockingjay Part 1 the same star score, and though my review of Part 1 may sound more positive, I definitely consider Part 2 to be the better of the two films.
It got really messy there for a while, but managed to wrap it all up in a satisfying way -- the exact same satisfying way the book did of course, but redundancy is underrated. Actually, it's not, but it is forgivable. Especially in this case when the franchise was so tired for so long I actually thought it would sleepwalk right though the end, but, thankfully, it wound up waking up just in time to conclude with a bang almost loud enough to cover up the previous sounds of snoring. So, no, I don't think the two-part split was worth it, but all things considered... there are worse games to play.
Friday, November 21, 2014
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1
Spoilers are marked.
The Games are over; the fire has caught; now it's war.
And everyone's on board with it, except the most important one -- Katniss. Still traumatized from the Quarter Quell, the news that District 12 was completely obliterated (and that 13 wasn't), and the fact that Peeta was left behind when she was rescued, the last thing she wants to do is be the Mockingjay, the face of the rebellion, standing in front of more cameras, pretending again.
Further than that, it's hard to tell what of the plot counts as setup, and what is actual plot development. But it's not like you really need an introduction anyway -- it's the Hunger Games! So I'll just leave it there, and jump right in.
Jennifer Lawrence. Jennifer is the lead, and she leads. We don't have to even think about it anymore; we know Katniss like we know ourselves. Even when she does stupid things that would make us dislike any other character, with her we understand. We know she's not prefect -- but she is perfect. When the film slows down and borders on boring, Jennifer's face, perfectly encapsulating the character, no tiniest movement out of character, even the blankest of expressions speaking volumes, keeps us from growing bored. It's been nearly three years since Katniss fully came to life, and we've still yet to cease being fascinated with her.
Who next? Katniss is so prominently the main character that everyone else is equally and significantly below her. Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) would be, but his role is dramatically diminished for this installment, so, Gale. Liam Hemsworth's Gale finally gets some time unshared with Peeta here, but not as much as I expected. I always refer to him as "the lesser Hemsworth" but Liam shows no signs of being any less talented than his older brother, and has completely melded with Gale in my mind, just as most the other actors and their characters have. So I was surprised when his role didn't seem any expanded from the last two movies. Thinking about it, it was bigger; it had to be, but it didn't feel it. He had two or three scenes to show his acting abilities and develop character, but otherwise he was just there; being Gale of course, but in a stagnate way instead of growing.
Actually, I could say the same about almost every returning character here; they're all stagnate. And I guess we all know why. (More on that later.) Woody Harrelson as Haymitch continues to be sarcastic and sharp; Elizabeth Banks as Effie continues to be oblivious and stuck-up; the two share a funny "what in the world" moment. Phillip Seymour Hoffman's Plutarch Havensbee amusingly appears to be slightly claustrophobic. Beetee (Jeffery Wright) is there, doing computer stuff and inventing things. Prim (Willow Shields) is still smarter than Katniss, and their mother quietly worries. Buttercup is happily present, and orange and grumpy. President Snow (Donald Sutherland) is evil, cold, and creepy. New characters are topped by Julianne Moore as President Coin, perfectly cast, perfectly no-nonsense and authoritative. Also Mahershala Ali as Boggs, and the lovely Natalie Dormer as Cressida, my favorite addition. I love her hairstyle. And Pollux (Elden Henson) and Castor (Wes Chatham), off to a good start.
Sam Claflin as Finnick manages some significant motion in character development, but it is easier for him since he was only introduced in the last movie -- where he kept a put-on persona. Here, Finnick's true self comes out in patches, as his newly-unnecessary cocky and suave self begins to melt away. And of course it only makes him all the more endearing. I'm sure I'm not alone in wishing more screen time for this guy, though all the characters were overlooked by my standards.
Like its predecessor, Mockingjay is magnificent to look at. Set mostly underground, the view isn't quite so magnificent, but it is filmed with authority and strong style to great effect. There also isn't much action, but the little there is is done expertly. There was one moment when the word "shaky-cam" came to mind, but it wasn't out of place and didn't last. And the suspense of the climax was so effective and brilliantly edited, that I felt it, and had to remind myself that I knew what happens.
I almost don't even need to mention adaptation because there's nothing more to say after I say that Francis Lawrence is very good at adapting accurately, and that is exactly what he did here. It's extremely rare for me to have no complaints when comparing a movie to a book when I read before watching, so mark this -- I have no complaints. Wait, I do -- why did they give Gale a crossbow? He can use a real bow you know! So change the above to "no significant complaints" and we're good.
Honestly, I would have been okay with some changes. Mockingjay was my least favorite of the books, and I thought it was possible for the film to improve upon it. And with the two parts, I thought it likely to succeed -- more time equals more time to expand the parts left wanting in the novel. Like character development; you can never have too much of that, and these characters are worth it. Or action. They did add two scenes of action, but they wound up as meaningless unexciting filler with no familiar characters being involved. This was this film's one falter -- compared to the other two, it was downright boring, and nothing happened. Sadly, nothing exciting could have possibly happened, unless they blatantly deviated from the novel to spice things up. Because it was only the first half of the novel, and remember the first two; the first halves were nothing but setup.
So should they have made it only one movie? It's a conundrum; to separate them was to destroy the structure (if you looks at the films individually, which for now, we must) but to put them together would have been to force the final battle into the small proportions of the Games, and that would have likely resulted in everything being rushed and squeezed in confusingly -- much like the book was, or even more. Personally, I would have gone with the three-hour Peter Jackson style movie, but since that wasn't an option, this is the next best thing: waiting a year to finish the movie I started last night.
As a stand-alone movie, it doesn't; it can't. But as the first half of the last of a trilogy, which is how I am judging it, it was exactly what I was hoping for.
MAJOR SPOILERS here to the end!
Here be all my thoughts on anything spoilery. Beginning with Peeta, who didn't get a paragraph above because everything to be said about him is a spoiler. Josh Hutcherson may not have had a lot of time on screen, but he had a ton to chew on with Peeta's complete and terrifying character change, which was handled like a pro -- perhaps because he is one. He makes us confused and worried and then creeped out, and by the end... total shock. I'm not exactly sure what to think of their digitally making him so thin, but I guess it would have been too much to do it the hard way, and unconvincing to let him look normal.
I also didn't mention Jena Malone's Johanna, partially for the same reason, but mostly because she gets all of about 4 seconds of screen time. Still, she's bald and crazy-looking and smiles perfectly and leaves an impression.
The part in the climax that I mentioned was brilliant was the immaculate way the raid to rescue the victors from the Capitol was cut in with Finnick telling his story in front of the camera, and Katniss looking on -- with a similar expression to ours as we feel the suspense. It was spellbinding for a while but it went on too long that way, and the spell broke before it was supposed to; but until then it was my favorite part of the movie.
Really, MAJOR end-of-the-movie SPOILERS now. Final warning.
I made two predictions concerning this film. First was that it would be better than the book, and for that we'll have to wait for full completion to see. The second was where Part 1 would leave off. I picked the right general time, but missed hitting it exactly by about 3 minutes. I guessed it would end right after Peeta tries to kill Katniss, and for a terrifying moment of blackened screen I panicked that I might be right. The last three-ish minutes were very nice of them to include, but the overall effect is the same; this film was stopped short smack in the middle; "cliffhanger" doesn't even describe it. The one in Catching Fire was where it was supposed to be -- this one... this was no place to end a movie. And a year from now we'll know whether it was worth it.
All I know now is that this is definitely the place to end this review.
Or maybe I should have made it into two parts.
The Games are over; the fire has caught; now it's war.
And everyone's on board with it, except the most important one -- Katniss. Still traumatized from the Quarter Quell, the news that District 12 was completely obliterated (and that 13 wasn't), and the fact that Peeta was left behind when she was rescued, the last thing she wants to do is be the Mockingjay, the face of the rebellion, standing in front of more cameras, pretending again.
Further than that, it's hard to tell what of the plot counts as setup, and what is actual plot development. But it's not like you really need an introduction anyway -- it's the Hunger Games! So I'll just leave it there, and jump right in.
Jennifer Lawrence. Jennifer is the lead, and she leads. We don't have to even think about it anymore; we know Katniss like we know ourselves. Even when she does stupid things that would make us dislike any other character, with her we understand. We know she's not prefect -- but she is perfect. When the film slows down and borders on boring, Jennifer's face, perfectly encapsulating the character, no tiniest movement out of character, even the blankest of expressions speaking volumes, keeps us from growing bored. It's been nearly three years since Katniss fully came to life, and we've still yet to cease being fascinated with her.
 |
| The Girl on Fire; The Mockingjay. |
Who next? Katniss is so prominently the main character that everyone else is equally and significantly below her. Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) would be, but his role is dramatically diminished for this installment, so, Gale. Liam Hemsworth's Gale finally gets some time unshared with Peeta here, but not as much as I expected. I always refer to him as "the lesser Hemsworth" but Liam shows no signs of being any less talented than his older brother, and has completely melded with Gale in my mind, just as most the other actors and their characters have. So I was surprised when his role didn't seem any expanded from the last two movies. Thinking about it, it was bigger; it had to be, but it didn't feel it. He had two or three scenes to show his acting abilities and develop character, but otherwise he was just there; being Gale of course, but in a stagnate way instead of growing.
 |
| Still, he's at his most likable in this movie. |
Actually, I could say the same about almost every returning character here; they're all stagnate. And I guess we all know why. (More on that later.) Woody Harrelson as Haymitch continues to be sarcastic and sharp; Elizabeth Banks as Effie continues to be oblivious and stuck-up; the two share a funny "what in the world" moment. Phillip Seymour Hoffman's Plutarch Havensbee amusingly appears to be slightly claustrophobic. Beetee (Jeffery Wright) is there, doing computer stuff and inventing things. Prim (Willow Shields) is still smarter than Katniss, and their mother quietly worries. Buttercup is happily present, and orange and grumpy. President Snow (Donald Sutherland) is evil, cold, and creepy. New characters are topped by Julianne Moore as President Coin, perfectly cast, perfectly no-nonsense and authoritative. Also Mahershala Ali as Boggs, and the lovely Natalie Dormer as Cressida, my favorite addition. I love her hairstyle. And Pollux (Elden Henson) and Castor (Wes Chatham), off to a good start.
 |
| Yeah. She's cool. |
Sam Claflin as Finnick manages some significant motion in character development, but it is easier for him since he was only introduced in the last movie -- where he kept a put-on persona. Here, Finnick's true self comes out in patches, as his newly-unnecessary cocky and suave self begins to melt away. And of course it only makes him all the more endearing. I'm sure I'm not alone in wishing more screen time for this guy, though all the characters were overlooked by my standards.
 |
| I'm so glad my original doubts about Claflin's abilities to play the part went unfounded. |
Like its predecessor, Mockingjay is magnificent to look at. Set mostly underground, the view isn't quite so magnificent, but it is filmed with authority and strong style to great effect. There also isn't much action, but the little there is is done expertly. There was one moment when the word "shaky-cam" came to mind, but it wasn't out of place and didn't last. And the suspense of the climax was so effective and brilliantly edited, that I felt it, and had to remind myself that I knew what happens.
I almost don't even need to mention adaptation because there's nothing more to say after I say that Francis Lawrence is very good at adapting accurately, and that is exactly what he did here. It's extremely rare for me to have no complaints when comparing a movie to a book when I read before watching, so mark this -- I have no complaints. Wait, I do -- why did they give Gale a crossbow? He can use a real bow you know! So change the above to "no significant complaints" and we're good.
 |
| Yep. We're all good. |
Honestly, I would have been okay with some changes. Mockingjay was my least favorite of the books, and I thought it was possible for the film to improve upon it. And with the two parts, I thought it likely to succeed -- more time equals more time to expand the parts left wanting in the novel. Like character development; you can never have too much of that, and these characters are worth it. Or action. They did add two scenes of action, but they wound up as meaningless unexciting filler with no familiar characters being involved. This was this film's one falter -- compared to the other two, it was downright boring, and nothing happened. Sadly, nothing exciting could have possibly happened, unless they blatantly deviated from the novel to spice things up. Because it was only the first half of the novel, and remember the first two; the first halves were nothing but setup.
So should they have made it only one movie? It's a conundrum; to separate them was to destroy the structure (if you looks at the films individually, which for now, we must) but to put them together would have been to force the final battle into the small proportions of the Games, and that would have likely resulted in everything being rushed and squeezed in confusingly -- much like the book was, or even more. Personally, I would have gone with the three-hour Peter Jackson style movie, but since that wasn't an option, this is the next best thing: waiting a year to finish the movie I started last night.
As a stand-alone movie, it doesn't; it can't. But as the first half of the last of a trilogy, which is how I am judging it, it was exactly what I was hoping for.
 |
| So, it was half of exactly what I was hoping for. |
MAJOR SPOILERS here to the end!
Here be all my thoughts on anything spoilery. Beginning with Peeta, who didn't get a paragraph above because everything to be said about him is a spoiler. Josh Hutcherson may not have had a lot of time on screen, but he had a ton to chew on with Peeta's complete and terrifying character change, which was handled like a pro -- perhaps because he is one. He makes us confused and worried and then creeped out, and by the end... total shock. I'm not exactly sure what to think of their digitally making him so thin, but I guess it would have been too much to do it the hard way, and unconvincing to let him look normal.
 |
| And the character only gets more interesting and complicated from here! |
I also didn't mention Jena Malone's Johanna, partially for the same reason, but mostly because she gets all of about 4 seconds of screen time. Still, she's bald and crazy-looking and smiles perfectly and leaves an impression.
The part in the climax that I mentioned was brilliant was the immaculate way the raid to rescue the victors from the Capitol was cut in with Finnick telling his story in front of the camera, and Katniss looking on -- with a similar expression to ours as we feel the suspense. It was spellbinding for a while but it went on too long that way, and the spell broke before it was supposed to; but until then it was my favorite part of the movie.
Really, MAJOR end-of-the-movie SPOILERS now. Final warning.
I made two predictions concerning this film. First was that it would be better than the book, and for that we'll have to wait for full completion to see. The second was where Part 1 would leave off. I picked the right general time, but missed hitting it exactly by about 3 minutes. I guessed it would end right after Peeta tries to kill Katniss, and for a terrifying moment of blackened screen I panicked that I might be right. The last three-ish minutes were very nice of them to include, but the overall effect is the same; this film was stopped short smack in the middle; "cliffhanger" doesn't even describe it. The one in Catching Fire was where it was supposed to be -- this one... this was no place to end a movie. And a year from now we'll know whether it was worth it.
All I know now is that this is definitely the place to end this review.
Or maybe I should have made it into two parts.
 |
| Next movie -- last movie. Let's do this. We can. We can wait a year. A whole year... |
Saturday, November 8, 2014
Mr. Peabody & Sherman
Spoilers are labeled, and confined to the end of the post.
Mr. Peabody and Sherman. They were a semi-classic duo who had a spot on the Rocky and Bulwinkle Show. A dog and his adopted son who go time-traveling to the past where they learn about history, usually get involved in it somehow, come back home, and wrap everything up with a nice pun.
Now, the basics are the same, but they've been modernized and updated to be relevant in today's times. But no matter how hard you try, there's no way to squeeze depth out of a premise so one-dimensional. Maybe if they had just concentrated on fun, history and punning, it wouldn't have fallen so flat, and maybe if they'd winked back to the good ol' days, it wouldn't have felt so terribly, modernly empty. Or, maybe, bringing back this odd duo was just a bad idea, and they did the best they could with them.
So my opinion is that this little animation's existence is pretty much unnecessary, but I also probably made it sound worse than it really was in the preceding paragraph. When the plot was concentrating on what it should have been (you know, time-traveling, general adventuring, etc.) it was amusing and on the border of smart.
The cast of voices was flawless without being at all outstanding either. Still, with an eleven-year-old kid (Max Charles, aka little Peter Parker) playing Sherman that's not bad. Ty Burrell as Peabody sounds very like the original too. And then there's cameo performances, including Allison Janney, Stanley Tucci, Stephen Colbert, and, Patrick Warburton, whose name you may not recognize, but whose voice you almost certainly would -- Kronk! Puddy! Hymie! The Tick! Buzz Lightyear of Star Command! You know -- the guy who can make anything sound funny.
Okay, let's see, what else... oh, the animation. The animation was... mediocre -- nothing special, nothing terrible. Really, the only outstanding thing about this movie was the jokes. That is, of course, after you filter out the potty humor. And then half of the remaining were used in the trailer, but you know what? When they hit the mark, they REALLY hit the mark -- therefore, the rest of this post will be dedicated to my favorite punchlines and puns; The Best Jokes of Mr. Peabody and Sherman!
Warning: Spoiled jokes from here on out!
Mr. Peabody and Sherman. They were a semi-classic duo who had a spot on the Rocky and Bulwinkle Show. A dog and his adopted son who go time-traveling to the past where they learn about history, usually get involved in it somehow, come back home, and wrap everything up with a nice pun.
 |
| "Can I push the pun button now, Mr Peabody?" "No, Sherman, we save the puns until the end of the trip." |
Now, the basics are the same, but they've been modernized and updated to be relevant in today's times. But no matter how hard you try, there's no way to squeeze depth out of a premise so one-dimensional. Maybe if they had just concentrated on fun, history and punning, it wouldn't have fallen so flat, and maybe if they'd winked back to the good ol' days, it wouldn't have felt so terribly, modernly empty. Or, maybe, bringing back this odd duo was just a bad idea, and they did the best they could with them.
 |
| "On the border," mind. |
The cast of voices was flawless without being at all outstanding either. Still, with an eleven-year-old kid (Max Charles, aka little Peter Parker) playing Sherman that's not bad. Ty Burrell as Peabody sounds very like the original too. And then there's cameo performances, including Allison Janney, Stanley Tucci, Stephen Colbert, and, Patrick Warburton, whose name you may not recognize, but whose voice you almost certainly would -- Kronk! Puddy! Hymie! The Tick! Buzz Lightyear of Star Command! You know -- the guy who can make anything sound funny.
Okay, let's see, what else... oh, the animation. The animation was... mediocre -- nothing special, nothing terrible. Really, the only outstanding thing about this movie was the jokes. That is, of course, after you filter out the potty humor. And then half of the remaining were used in the trailer, but you know what? When they hit the mark, they REALLY hit the mark -- therefore, the rest of this post will be dedicated to my favorite punchlines and puns; The Best Jokes of Mr. Peabody and Sherman!
Warning: Spoiled jokes from here on out!
Mr. Peabody: Sherman, don't you remember why I told you to stay close to me during the French Revolution?
Sherman: Because after the French Revolution, it was gonna rain?
Mr. Peabody: Close, I said after the French Revolution comes the Reign of Terror!
Paul Peterson (Stephen Colbert): When it comes to the safety of my daughter, nothing is more important than-- [cell rings] Sh-ello? Sure, I'll take a survey.
[inside the Trojan Horse]
Odysseus: [Holds a mini figure of the Trojan Horse] Someone left this for us!
Agamemnon (Patrick Warburton): A present? Nice! It looks just like our horse.
Odysseus: Should I bring it inside?
Agamemnon: It'd be rude not to.
Mr. Peabody: Thank you for taking care of my son, Agamemnon, but it is time for him to come home.
Sherman: Sorry, Mr. Peabody. I've joined the Greek Army.
Agamemnon: Shermanus is one of us, now. He's a brother.
Sherman: I'm his brother.
Mr. Peabody: He is my son.
Agamemnon: He took an oath!
Sherman: I took an oath.
Mr. Peabody: He's SEVEN!
Agamemnon: [Sherman whispers into his ear] AND A HALF!
Mr. Peabody: Sherman, I absolutely forbid you to fight in the Trojan war!
Sherman: That's not fair! All of my friends are fighting in the Trojan war!
Mr. Peabody: Sherman, it's dangerous.
Sherman: I'm wearing a helmet!
We are now at the end, so, PUNS!!
Mr. Peabody: [When a mummy arm falls to the floor] That's disarming.
Penny Peterson: I'm not Penny, anymore. Now, I'm Princess Hatshepsut, precious flower of the Nile.
Mr. Peabody: Precious, perhaps, but if you think we're going to leave you here, you are most definitely in de-Nile!
Mr. Peabody: And to think, Marie Antoinette could have avoided the whole revolution if she had just issued an edict to distribute bread among the poor. But then she couldn't have finished her desert. After all, you can't have your cake and edict too.
Mr. Peabody: You know what they say: If at first you don't succeed, Troy Troy again...
But, for the record, please don't Troy Troy again and make a sequel to this movie! -- Me
Sherman: Because after the French Revolution, it was gonna rain?
Mr. Peabody: Close, I said after the French Revolution comes the Reign of Terror!
Paul Peterson (Stephen Colbert): When it comes to the safety of my daughter, nothing is more important than-- [cell rings] Sh-ello? Sure, I'll take a survey.
[inside the Trojan Horse]
Odysseus: [Holds a mini figure of the Trojan Horse] Someone left this for us!
Agamemnon (Patrick Warburton): A present? Nice! It looks just like our horse.
Odysseus: Should I bring it inside?
Agamemnon: It'd be rude not to.
Mr. Peabody: Thank you for taking care of my son, Agamemnon, but it is time for him to come home.
Sherman: Sorry, Mr. Peabody. I've joined the Greek Army.
Agamemnon: Shermanus is one of us, now. He's a brother.
Sherman: I'm his brother.
Mr. Peabody: He is my son.
Agamemnon: He took an oath!
Sherman: I took an oath.
Mr. Peabody: He's SEVEN!
Agamemnon: [Sherman whispers into his ear] AND A HALF!
Mr. Peabody: Sherman, I absolutely forbid you to fight in the Trojan war!
Sherman: That's not fair! All of my friends are fighting in the Trojan war!
Mr. Peabody: Sherman, it's dangerous.
Sherman: I'm wearing a helmet!
We are now at the end, so, PUNS!!
Mr. Peabody: [When a mummy arm falls to the floor] That's disarming.
Penny Peterson: I'm not Penny, anymore. Now, I'm Princess Hatshepsut, precious flower of the Nile.
Mr. Peabody: Precious, perhaps, but if you think we're going to leave you here, you are most definitely in de-Nile!
Mr. Peabody: And to think, Marie Antoinette could have avoided the whole revolution if she had just issued an edict to distribute bread among the poor. But then she couldn't have finished her desert. After all, you can't have your cake and edict too.
Mr. Peabody: You know what they say: If at first you don't succeed, Troy Troy again...
But, for the record, please don't Troy Troy again and make a sequel to this movie! -- Me
Saturday, November 1, 2014
Upcoming Movie Roundup - November
This month we trade quantity for quality. October saw lots and lots of movies release, but none turned out interesting enough to be worthy of a ticket price. November, however, has one movie I've been planning on seeing since March of 2012, and another I only recently heard of that has captured my attention and excitement so well that I'll probably have to see it in theaters too. Then there's even a third, that teeters on the fence, and I'll start with that one.
Interstellar
Nov. 7th; PG-13
Christopher Nolan is being very secretive about his new movie, and it's having the opposite effect intended on me. All I know about it is that it stars Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway, and the earth is dying and these people plus some go on a beautiful and epic interstellar space trip to try to save the human race. The cast is comprised of a lot of people who I think are talented, but never seek out their movies. And the plot probably will have more to it, but I don't know, because it's all a secret! Reviews currently skew positively, but not as dramatically as necessary to distract my interest from two other movies coming soon. I don't doubt I'll see Interstellar someday, but I'm not dying to right now.
Big Hero 6
Nov. 7th: PG
This is the movie I'm dying to see. Really, I know next to nothing about this one as well, but everything I don't know is something I want to see this film to find out. What's the deal with Balloon-Man? What's the deal with the ESP-using Kabuki mask guy? What's the deal with the kid? What's the plot for this movie? And why do they jump out a window??? I do not know, but here's what I do know: The trailer is awesome -- second best only to Guardians of the Galaxy this year (IMHO). It says that this movie is gonna be fun and fresh and funny -- and it just so happens that that's what the critics are saying as well. The next Disney animation is a Marvel animation. I'm ready.
Here's the awesome trailer:
And an almost-as-awesome-and-more-informative second trailer:
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1
Nov. 21st; PG-13
And this is the movie I've been anticipating so much and for so long that it hardly seems real that it's actually going to be here soon. There's only one dampener, but it's a big one; this is only the first half of the end. When this film cuts in that perfect cliffhanger moment (as it's bound to do) I'm not entirely sure I'll be able to handle it. However, I do think it was a wise choice to split the movie -- the book was too much of a long jumbled mess to fit properly into one film. I also won't mind at all if they make some alterations and additions. (Additions would be best.) If they do it right this should keep up with the pattern -- with The Hunger Games the book was better, and with Catching Fire book and film were equal -- and be Part 1 of a film that is actually better than it's book!
What are your thoughts on this month's epic menu? Or is your menu different from mine? Leave your thoughts below!
Interstellar
Nov. 7th; PG-13
Christopher Nolan is being very secretive about his new movie, and it's having the opposite effect intended on me. All I know about it is that it stars Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway, and the earth is dying and these people plus some go on a beautiful and epic interstellar space trip to try to save the human race. The cast is comprised of a lot of people who I think are talented, but never seek out their movies. And the plot probably will have more to it, but I don't know, because it's all a secret! Reviews currently skew positively, but not as dramatically as necessary to distract my interest from two other movies coming soon. I don't doubt I'll see Interstellar someday, but I'm not dying to right now.
Big Hero 6
Nov. 7th: PG
This is the movie I'm dying to see. Really, I know next to nothing about this one as well, but everything I don't know is something I want to see this film to find out. What's the deal with Balloon-Man? What's the deal with the ESP-using Kabuki mask guy? What's the deal with the kid? What's the plot for this movie? And why do they jump out a window??? I do not know, but here's what I do know: The trailer is awesome -- second best only to Guardians of the Galaxy this year (IMHO). It says that this movie is gonna be fun and fresh and funny -- and it just so happens that that's what the critics are saying as well. The next Disney animation is a Marvel animation. I'm ready.
Here's the awesome trailer:
And an almost-as-awesome-and-more-informative second trailer:
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1
Nov. 21st; PG-13
And this is the movie I've been anticipating so much and for so long that it hardly seems real that it's actually going to be here soon. There's only one dampener, but it's a big one; this is only the first half of the end. When this film cuts in that perfect cliffhanger moment (as it's bound to do) I'm not entirely sure I'll be able to handle it. However, I do think it was a wise choice to split the movie -- the book was too much of a long jumbled mess to fit properly into one film. I also won't mind at all if they make some alterations and additions. (Additions would be best.) If they do it right this should keep up with the pattern -- with The Hunger Games the book was better, and with Catching Fire book and film were equal -- and be Part 1 of a film that is actually better than it's book!
What are your thoughts on this month's epic menu? Or is your menu different from mine? Leave your thoughts below!
Sunday, June 1, 2014
Upcoming Movie Roundup - June
Edge of Tomorrow
Jun 6th; PG-13
If science fiction is the peanut butter of movie genres, then Tom Cruise is the jelly. And this movie is looking delicious. The trailer is fantastically intriguing, and practically perfect; giving away just enough to create interest, while keeping the element of mystery. And besides the mysteriousness of it all it also looks packed with epic sci-fi action, the right amount of humor, and drama and fun. And don't forget about Emily Blunt who is brilliant, and and totally should have been in a movie with Cruise by now. I was won over already, so the current 95% rating on Rotten Tomatoes is just the sweet, sweet icing on my anticipation cake. (On a side note, I think I might be hungry.)
The Fault In Our Stars
Jun 6th; PG-13
Okay. Let's just say this: I'm currently in the middle of reading the novel, and, if this movie version has half the quality the book, it'll be a pretty great film, no matter how teenage-romance-y it is. However, with the cast including the great Shailene Woodley and her Divergent co-star Ansel Elgort, and with how the trailer seems like it could be a trailer for the book it follows it so closely... I dunno, I'm having a hard time believing it could go so far down as to be half as good. There's probably no chance of it turning out better than the book though. Still, who knows; I could hate the ending of the book, and take this all back. You never know. Except for sometimes when you pretty much do.
Trust Me
Jun 6th; R
Clark Gregg writes, directs, and stars. I repeat: CLARK GREGG writes, directs, and stars. Oh, and the supporting cast? Just a few people like Sam Rockwell, Allison Janney, and Amanda Peet. Who all together remind me of The Way Way Back, and you all know how I felt about that movie. The plot is completely different of course, but very original, revolving around an agent for child actors. I won't get my hopes up since early review are split, plus there's the R-for-language rating to get around, but... oh, who am I kidding, my hopes are definitely up.
How to Train Your Dragon 2
Jun 13th: PG
Sometimes sequels are terrible ideas and ruin the original movie (if the original movie was good in the first place.) I was wary of How to Train Your Dragon originally because of the silly trailer, but of course I was proved wrong when I finally did see it. And then comes along the sequel to be suspicious of. Except I'm not. I was a little, up until the teaser trailer came out, and after the silliness they won me over by proving they were making an original movie instead of just capitalizing on the first's success. They proved it by making Hiccup age significantly. It's a small thing, but a very encouraging one. It means things will be different. And now of course it's getting lots of praise in early reviews, so I guess I'll be happy to see this one eventually.
The Signal
Jun 13th (limited); PG-13
I'm not exactly sure why this one is interesting -- it has a little to do with Laurence Fishburne, and Brenton Thwaits (who is apparently in the middle of a breakout year, what with being Prince Phillip in Maleficent, and the lead in The Giver, which I'll certainly be mentioning come August) but mostly it's just the trailer which is "weird" and "wow" and "huh?" all at the same time.
Transformers: Age of Extinction
Jun 27th; NR (yet)
Oh help me. Am I actually including a Transformers movie in this list? I guess so... Technically it's not a reboot, but the cast of characters has been completely redone, so there seems to be a chance of a hope of a possibility of it coming off feeling maybe a little fresher than it would otherwise. Mark Wahlburg for Shia LaBeouf is a fine trade in my book. Plus the dinosaurs, er, dinobots... is it possible that mean that they've gone so far down the path of ridiculousness that this movie might actually be so bad it's good? I'll be observing from the sidelines to see.
Snowpiercer
Jun 27th (limited); R
I'll keep this one short and simple: Chris Evans. Jamie Bell. John Hurt. Tilda Swinton. And most importantly. Watch. This. Trailer.
Jun 6th; PG-13
If science fiction is the peanut butter of movie genres, then Tom Cruise is the jelly. And this movie is looking delicious. The trailer is fantastically intriguing, and practically perfect; giving away just enough to create interest, while keeping the element of mystery. And besides the mysteriousness of it all it also looks packed with epic sci-fi action, the right amount of humor, and drama and fun. And don't forget about Emily Blunt who is brilliant, and and totally should have been in a movie with Cruise by now. I was won over already, so the current 95% rating on Rotten Tomatoes is just the sweet, sweet icing on my anticipation cake. (On a side note, I think I might be hungry.)
The Fault In Our Stars
Jun 6th; PG-13
Okay. Let's just say this: I'm currently in the middle of reading the novel, and, if this movie version has half the quality the book, it'll be a pretty great film, no matter how teenage-romance-y it is. However, with the cast including the great Shailene Woodley and her Divergent co-star Ansel Elgort, and with how the trailer seems like it could be a trailer for the book it follows it so closely... I dunno, I'm having a hard time believing it could go so far down as to be half as good. There's probably no chance of it turning out better than the book though. Still, who knows; I could hate the ending of the book, and take this all back. You never know. Except for sometimes when you pretty much do.
Trust Me
Jun 6th; R
Clark Gregg writes, directs, and stars. I repeat: CLARK GREGG writes, directs, and stars. Oh, and the supporting cast? Just a few people like Sam Rockwell, Allison Janney, and Amanda Peet. Who all together remind me of The Way Way Back, and you all know how I felt about that movie. The plot is completely different of course, but very original, revolving around an agent for child actors. I won't get my hopes up since early review are split, plus there's the R-for-language rating to get around, but... oh, who am I kidding, my hopes are definitely up.
How to Train Your Dragon 2
Jun 13th: PG
Sometimes sequels are terrible ideas and ruin the original movie (if the original movie was good in the first place.) I was wary of How to Train Your Dragon originally because of the silly trailer, but of course I was proved wrong when I finally did see it. And then comes along the sequel to be suspicious of. Except I'm not. I was a little, up until the teaser trailer came out, and after the silliness they won me over by proving they were making an original movie instead of just capitalizing on the first's success. They proved it by making Hiccup age significantly. It's a small thing, but a very encouraging one. It means things will be different. And now of course it's getting lots of praise in early reviews, so I guess I'll be happy to see this one eventually.
The Signal
Jun 13th (limited); PG-13
I'm not exactly sure why this one is interesting -- it has a little to do with Laurence Fishburne, and Brenton Thwaits (who is apparently in the middle of a breakout year, what with being Prince Phillip in Maleficent, and the lead in The Giver, which I'll certainly be mentioning come August) but mostly it's just the trailer which is "weird" and "wow" and "huh?" all at the same time.
Transformers: Age of Extinction
Jun 27th; NR (yet)
Oh help me. Am I actually including a Transformers movie in this list? I guess so... Technically it's not a reboot, but the cast of characters has been completely redone, so there seems to be a chance of a hope of a possibility of it coming off feeling maybe a little fresher than it would otherwise. Mark Wahlburg for Shia LaBeouf is a fine trade in my book. Plus the dinosaurs, er, dinobots... is it possible that mean that they've gone so far down the path of ridiculousness that this movie might actually be so bad it's good? I'll be observing from the sidelines to see.
Snowpiercer
Jun 27th (limited); R
I'll keep this one short and simple: Chris Evans. Jamie Bell. John Hurt. Tilda Swinton. And most importantly. Watch. This. Trailer.
Monday, December 2, 2013
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
Round two of one girl on fire vs. the world.
After surviving the Hunger Games with not only her own life, but against all unfavorable odds with that of her district partner's as well, Katniss Everdeen figures she's won, but the best anyone can do in the Games is only survive them -- and what she did to save their lives she saw as simply survival, but the people of the Capitol saw it as love, and, even worse, people of the Districts saw it as rebellion. To appease the President and calm the people, Katniss continues her charade with Peeta on their Victory Tour, but too little too late; the fire of rebellion has been lit, with Katniss unwillingly at the front. The 75th Hunger Games arrives, and this time they are going to be very different.
With the new leader -- aka director Francis Lawrence -- and an obvious budget upgrade, the world of Panem was upgraded as well, and the franchise soars to new and extraordinary heights. The style of the Capitol and its people are the same, but much, much more richly done, and in the Districts there's more to be seen, plus we see more of the other Districts than is absolutely necessary, which was nice.
The special and digital effects have all jumped up to the highest quality, and fight scenes are cleanly choreographed and still very realistic feeling. The filming style was unobtrusive -- no more dizzying shaky-cam -- but not so much to be called generic. There were some very bold and memorable, and even beautiful shots, all adding a considerable amount to, but never overshadowing the dramatic impact of the story.
And that story is adapted flawlessly from its book source. Not word-for-word-precisely, but so impressively close to it that I could count on one hand the deviations from the book I noticed immediately, and all were only details. Few things were left out and even fewer were changed, and all, I believe, with the commendable reasons of creating a more concise storyline, a tolerable length for the movie, and a natural feel and flow -- as if it wasn't adapted from a book at all.
On the acting side, Jennifer Lawrence continues to blow me away. I have never before seen any actor leave so many consistently poignant performances in their wake, but for her there is no end in sight. As Katniss she is immaculate -- we see how Katniss' being tirelessly rash and cynical gets on other character's nerves, but she effortlessly wins our affection, and leads the movie with power and a huge, albeit masked heart.
But this time, and to their credit, the supporting cast is able to step out of Lawrence's talented shadow, and hold their own next to her.
Josh Hutcherson's Peeta gets more real attention a few minute tweaks and is a stronger and more compelling character this time around. Even though he's not a survivor-at-all-cost like Katniss, he has a strength (to quote Pippin) of a different kind, and here we begin to see his merits that make him the moral center of the franchise. And he is actually helpful in fights now as well. Hutcherson takes all the character improvement and deepening in stride and ups his game to match.
Liam Hemsworth does the same for Gale; even though Gale still isn't as much of a main character as characters that are included throughout the plot, he still shows improvement from the first, feels more comfortable in the part, and is primed and ready for his giant role increase in Mockingjay.
As for the new characters, the only casting I was wary of was Sam Claflin as Finnick (which I'm sure you understand if you've seen Pirates 4 or Snow White and the Huntsman) but as soon as he spoke, all my worries flew away. He adopts a natural sounding American accent and displays the cool, sultry charm and hidden pain of Finnick perfectly. Turns out he's a fine actor, and completely deserves this beloved role that will likely help him land more parts that require slightly more than a pretty face.
Jena Malone as Johanna, though, I knew would be great from the beginning, based on her being one of very few impressive things in the '05 Pride and Prejudice (as Lydia). She did not disappoint, and completely embodied the snide, rude, and angry character so well that I've already completely forgotten how I'd originally imagined her. Not that she was much removed from my imagination anyway.
All other new editions also hit their mark exceptionally -- Havensbee, Beetee, Wiress, Mags, etc. right down to the new head Peacekeeper were adapted, cast, and characterized with care and attention, and it shows. As for the returning supporting cast, still great, and still getting their share of development. I was especially impressed with Donald Sutherland's President Snow, who could not have been creepier.
With the plot splitting so dramatically into two distinct sections, there was dangerous potential for uneven pacing, but even at two hours and twenty minutes, the pace never faltered, and the amount of details from the book that were packed in is amazing. Some of my favorites: firstly, Buttercup is actually orange. Cheers! The way they introduced Snow's... breath problem, was pretty genius too -- perfectly subtle. They also stepped up Prim's development, simply and effectively. Finnick and Mags' relationship was very, very sweet to see too. Katniss' speech at Eleven about Thresh and Rue was straight from the book (as were many lines) and doubly moving coming from Jennifer.
But even with all the little details and fine performances, this movie could've still disappointed, if it hadn't kept the deep themes of the book. In a time where violence is more often than not played either for laughs, the "cool" factor, or tossed aside carelessly, it is wonderfully refreshing when death in entertainment is treated with weight. And I find it disturbing yet amazing seeing the similarities between the Capitol and our modern world and government. How this franchise is so equally good at being a sci-fi thriller, a "teen romance" and a thoughtful commentary on society is simply incredible. Catching Fire isn't as dramatically controversial as The Hunger Games, but it's still extremely thought-provoking, and a very far cry from anything that could possibly be considered mindless. It's so entertaining, but not hypocritical with its cautionary message. The deeper side is why I adore it, but as even as pure entertainment this movie is just about as thrilling as it can be, and astonishingly well-made.
For the entire two-and-a-half hours, I was completely immersed in the unique world, characters, and themes that make up this brilliant adaptation, and I didn't want it to end. The Hunger Games was a great movie, but its book was better; with Catching Fire, the film and book are equally great, and probably the best of the series. However, if the pattern and the movie's quality continues as it is, the Mockingjay movies will be even better than their book counterpart, and the idea of that is making me very, very excited. This franchise... is on fire.
After surviving the Hunger Games with not only her own life, but against all unfavorable odds with that of her district partner's as well, Katniss Everdeen figures she's won, but the best anyone can do in the Games is only survive them -- and what she did to save their lives she saw as simply survival, but the people of the Capitol saw it as love, and, even worse, people of the Districts saw it as rebellion. To appease the President and calm the people, Katniss continues her charade with Peeta on their Victory Tour, but too little too late; the fire of rebellion has been lit, with Katniss unwillingly at the front. The 75th Hunger Games arrives, and this time they are going to be very different.
 |
| Ladies and gentlemen... the victors of the 74th Hunger Games! |
With the new leader -- aka director Francis Lawrence -- and an obvious budget upgrade, the world of Panem was upgraded as well, and the franchise soars to new and extraordinary heights. The style of the Capitol and its people are the same, but much, much more richly done, and in the Districts there's more to be seen, plus we see more of the other Districts than is absolutely necessary, which was nice.
The special and digital effects have all jumped up to the highest quality, and fight scenes are cleanly choreographed and still very realistic feeling. The filming style was unobtrusive -- no more dizzying shaky-cam -- but not so much to be called generic. There were some very bold and memorable, and even beautiful shots, all adding a considerable amount to, but never overshadowing the dramatic impact of the story.
 |
| Here's an example for the effects and the filming artistry. |
And that story is adapted flawlessly from its book source. Not word-for-word-precisely, but so impressively close to it that I could count on one hand the deviations from the book I noticed immediately, and all were only details. Few things were left out and even fewer were changed, and all, I believe, with the commendable reasons of creating a more concise storyline, a tolerable length for the movie, and a natural feel and flow -- as if it wasn't adapted from a book at all.
On the acting side, Jennifer Lawrence continues to blow me away. I have never before seen any actor leave so many consistently poignant performances in their wake, but for her there is no end in sight. As Katniss she is immaculate -- we see how Katniss' being tirelessly rash and cynical gets on other character's nerves, but she effortlessly wins our affection, and leads the movie with power and a huge, albeit masked heart.
 |
| She's Jennifer Lawrence -- of course she's going to blow us away. |
But this time, and to their credit, the supporting cast is able to step out of Lawrence's talented shadow, and hold their own next to her.
Josh Hutcherson's Peeta gets more real attention a few minute tweaks and is a stronger and more compelling character this time around. Even though he's not a survivor-at-all-cost like Katniss, he has a strength (to quote Pippin) of a different kind, and here we begin to see his merits that make him the moral center of the franchise. And he is actually helpful in fights now as well. Hutcherson takes all the character improvement and deepening in stride and ups his game to match.
 |
| And Peeta is a pretty impressive actor himself. Also, Stanley Tucci returns as Caesar, complete with his over-the-top hair, teeth and personality. |
Liam Hemsworth does the same for Gale; even though Gale still isn't as much of a main character as characters that are included throughout the plot, he still shows improvement from the first, feels more comfortable in the part, and is primed and ready for his giant role increase in Mockingjay.
 |
| He may be the lesser Hemsworth, but he's still pretty great. Katniss agrees. |
As for the new characters, the only casting I was wary of was Sam Claflin as Finnick (which I'm sure you understand if you've seen Pirates 4 or Snow White and the Huntsman) but as soon as he spoke, all my worries flew away. He adopts a natural sounding American accent and displays the cool, sultry charm and hidden pain of Finnick perfectly. Turns out he's a fine actor, and completely deserves this beloved role that will likely help him land more parts that require slightly more than a pretty face.
 |
| Mags and Finnick. Does anything get more adorable than this? No, no it does not. |
Jena Malone as Johanna, though, I knew would be great from the beginning, based on her being one of very few impressive things in the '05 Pride and Prejudice (as Lydia). She did not disappoint, and completely embodied the snide, rude, and angry character so well that I've already completely forgotten how I'd originally imagined her. Not that she was much removed from my imagination anyway.
 |
| Oh the intensity. Yikes. |
All other new editions also hit their mark exceptionally -- Havensbee, Beetee, Wiress, Mags, etc. right down to the new head Peacekeeper were adapted, cast, and characterized with care and attention, and it shows. As for the returning supporting cast, still great, and still getting their share of development. I was especially impressed with Donald Sutherland's President Snow, who could not have been creepier.
 |
| Newbie, Plutarch Havensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and returning old (but awesome) grump, Haymitch (Woody Harrelson). |
With the plot splitting so dramatically into two distinct sections, there was dangerous potential for uneven pacing, but even at two hours and twenty minutes, the pace never faltered, and the amount of details from the book that were packed in is amazing. Some of my favorites: firstly, Buttercup is actually orange. Cheers! The way they introduced Snow's... breath problem, was pretty genius too -- perfectly subtle. They also stepped up Prim's development, simply and effectively. Finnick and Mags' relationship was very, very sweet to see too. Katniss' speech at Eleven about Thresh and Rue was straight from the book (as were many lines) and doubly moving coming from Jennifer.
 |
| They even kept the drinks that make you sick in this scene. Also, as you can see, Effie's (Elizabeth Banks) style has been taken to the next level of flamboyancy. |
But even with all the little details and fine performances, this movie could've still disappointed, if it hadn't kept the deep themes of the book. In a time where violence is more often than not played either for laughs, the "cool" factor, or tossed aside carelessly, it is wonderfully refreshing when death in entertainment is treated with weight. And I find it disturbing yet amazing seeing the similarities between the Capitol and our modern world and government. How this franchise is so equally good at being a sci-fi thriller, a "teen romance" and a thoughtful commentary on society is simply incredible. Catching Fire isn't as dramatically controversial as The Hunger Games, but it's still extremely thought-provoking, and a very far cry from anything that could possibly be considered mindless. It's so entertaining, but not hypocritical with its cautionary message. The deeper side is why I adore it, but as even as pure entertainment this movie is just about as thrilling as it can be, and astonishingly well-made.
 |
| In short, another victory for Katniss Everdeen. |
For the entire two-and-a-half hours, I was completely immersed in the unique world, characters, and themes that make up this brilliant adaptation, and I didn't want it to end. The Hunger Games was a great movie, but its book was better; with Catching Fire, the film and book are equally great, and probably the best of the series. However, if the pattern and the movie's quality continues as it is, the Mockingjay movies will be even better than their book counterpart, and the idea of that is making me very, very excited. This franchise... is on fire.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)