Super 8

J. J. Abrams and Steven Spielberg team up as director and producer, and create a very traditional Spielberg-like movie that also has an unmistakable Abrams-like modern feel, and is set in the seventies. How does this mash-up work? Let's just say that quality filmmaking which comes from a love of the craft is something that will always be in style.

It’s 1979; Joe Lamb is a thirteen year-old, pretty average sort of kid. But his mom recently died in a work accident, and things between him and his dad are strained and distant as they try to muddle through on their own. Time continues almost lifelessly. He hangs out with his buddies, riding bikes, joking around and making super 8 zombie movies. Things slowly settle into a normal. One midnight, filming secretly at a train station, the group of friends witness a mysterious train crash, and are caught in the middle of a dangerous event that none of them will ever forget – it’s like something straight out of a movie!

The plot is pretty straight-forward with no big twists, but through a unique attention to the deep characters and relationships, it’s compelling and entertaining, even without the sci-fi element. And I love that the monster, though fully created and fully capable of dominating the screen was hidden from us as long as it was hidden from our heroes. It’s a classic trick learned accidentally by Spielberg, and used here brilliantly by Abrams. In fact if I had to describe Super 8 in one word it would be classic. Not saying it’s “a classic” but that it is classic; totally, unabashedly classic. And sometimes that’s exactly what we need; a popcorn flick that can be called neither a mind-bender or mindless, but just a happy medium, well made, and ready for you to lose yourself in it.

Typically, film heroes are slightly older than the target audience, but even though this movie is about a bunch of kids, it’s not really a kid’s movie. It’s a nostalgic movie, and relating to younger characters helps that effect pleasantly. The kids really do make this movie. Reminiscent of The Goonies, they goof off, tease each other, and freak out with hilarious realism. And the actors playing them were equally amazing. Outstanding are Joel Courtney, playing the lead in his very first movie, but you would never know it by watching his superb performance, and Elle Fanning, playing Alice, the newcomer to the group of boys, is the most talented young actress I’ve seen. The other boys are more supporting cast, and their performances are lesser, but mostly only in terms of screen time. Obviously a lot of attention went to casting the kids, and the result was rewarding. Kyle Chandler as Joe’s dad and deputy of the town is also worth mentioning, but this movie really belongs to the kids.

It seems like it’s too easy to make a “successful” movie these days. Just throw together a script that involves saving the world, cast a bunch of pretty actors, and then drown everything in special effects. And people will throw down money watch it. No doubt a few movies fitting that description just popped into your head… like Transformers, perhaps? But not everyone goes that lazy way, some people thankfully still give their films all the attention they need, and are rewarded with something you could actually call art; a real, good movie. Abrams is one of those people, and with this movie, he creates a lovely homage to classic filmmaking, then goes a step further, adding in elements that make modern movies great as well. 

Sure, it has its share of flaws, but they’re easily ignorable in favor of the involving story and characters. Super 8 encourages us to be nostalgic, get lost, and feel at home in its brilliant, modern blast from the past, even if we never happened to have lived there. A sweet, thrilling and compelling ride, it reminds us yet again that well-made, thoughtful movies with heart can also be visually exciting, and full of fun, and laugh-out-loud moments. It’s the sort of movie that threatens to extinguish those half-hearted, factory line films, and though I doubt they will go extinct anytime soon, I will always look forward to when – every once in a while – a remarkable movie like this one jumps out and surprises us, then entertains and involves us through a contagious love for the cinema.

- 4.5/5 stars

The Hunger Games

When I consider how I should review The Hunger Games my first instinct is to compare every individual scene side by side, the book via my imagination vs. the movie. Then any excluded parts of the book would be thoroughly analyzed as I’d determine whether in my opinion, the scene really was expendable, or heaven forbid, necessary.

Obviously that is a very, very bad idea, so I will try my best to ignore my instincts.

Our hero(ine) Katniss is a straightforward absolute arrow-slinging cynic – a person we wouldn’t really want to be friends with if she were real, but she still makes a great hero for us. She volunteers to take her younger sister’s place in a TV game show, where losing literally means death, and we’re swept away on an epic, thought-provoking ride. Through her eyes, we see the similarities between our culture’s entertainment, and the horrible “entertainment” of her world, and other serious and dark views and ideas. This is the franchise, complete with a dramatic love-triangle, that the target audience, young teen girls are putting aside Twilight to obsess over. There is a hilarious paradox somewhere in that…

Don’t get me wrong, I like this franchise… really, I do. I mean, who would’ve thought we could watch a movie about kids killing other kids for entertainment and be simultaneously appalled and entertained? But we are, and it even works. It’s a good, original story that is well acted, very compelling, and presented in the right way to not glorify the content as mindless entertainment, and I will continue to elaborate on these more simple reasons why I enjoy it… if I can manage not to get distracted again. Bear with me if you will.

So, twenty-four teenaged contestants and only one will win— and survive. And the movie convinces us that it’s true. Half the movie is spent building up to the arena, and none of it is wasted. This is where all the good stuff happens. The tension is incredible in these parts, building up to the initial bloodbath in the arena, which was bitingly real; an impression that the dreaded shaky-cam actually helped with in this case. Imagine that. But still, in less intense moments, I would really like to be able to see, and not get dizzy. I think that directors should be tested and approved in order to use the shaky-cam effect in their films. J. J. Abrams can be the judge.

Moving on to the cast… it was inspired. Jennifer Lawrence is probably the only person who could've pulled off such a potentially dislikeable character with actual likability. She made this movie. But rest of the cast more than fulfilled their parts as well. Josh Hutcherson as Peeta appears to have leapt straight out of the book. Elizabeth Banks as Effie was duly hilarious, as was Woody Harrelson playing Haymich. Wes Bentley as Seneca Crane surprised me, together with his beard and his… end, he quickly became a character worth remembering. And then there’s Stanley Tucci. Seriously, who else could play Caesar Flickerman? He owns his few scenes, and they’re my favorite bits of the movie. I won’t mention everyone, but this was a well cast movie all around, especially in the young, fresh actors. They did an outstanding job.

My favorite part of the book was left out. Not shocking since the book is full of great intricate details. But most of them were cut out to allow focus on the actually important things, like the plot, the theme and the spirit of the book, so it's okay. The only thing I feel is missing is in the characters. I know, that sounds contradictory to what I just said about the cast, but as good as they are, they’re still lacking in depth compared to their book counterparts. It is a small complaint though, and with three more films coming, I trust the characters can and will be more developed.

But I’m falling back on my instincts, and bringing the book in too much. This movie, just as a movie, is a good, well made, and well acted movie. It’s convincingly real. It’s powerful and thought-provoking. It’s visually beautiful, and the futuristic world very creative. It showcases Lawrence’s performance of this one-of-a-kind character, and a talented supporting cast. Blunt, deep, astounding… and memorable – hey, it’s just like Katniss. Oh, yeah, and it’s even entertaining.

- 4/5 stars

Premium Rush

The always sensational Joseph Gordon-Levitt is Wilee, a smart and nimble bike messenger in New York City. His bike has one gear and no brakes, but he apparently doesn’t actually have a death-wish, he just loves the rush of speeding though traffic and using his lightning-quick reflexes to not get killed. Of course, not getting killed is a lot easier when no is actually trying to kill you. Not that Michael Shannon as crooked cop Detective Monday is really trying to kill Wilee, he just wants the package he’s carrying. But Wilee is a stickler for the rules and loyal to his friend who gave him the package, and refuses to let Monday have it. The package must be either at its destination or in the hands of Monday at seven o’clock, and the time is now five-thirty. Let the hour-and-a-half chase through the streets of New York commence.

Yes, this movie is just an hour and a half, unusually short for an action flick these days, but in the end it didn't matter, because the story was put together right, and filled up the exact amount of time it needed. Perfect in length, with remarkable balance, it flies by with zero slow spots, but never rushes over anything too quickly. Every once in a while, a well-timed flash-back will fill you in a little bit more on the plot, which is by no means complicated, but I for one never took notice. I was way too busy watching Gordon-Levitt kicking butt at a break-neck pace, and enjoying every minute of it.

Gordon-Levitt was, of course, the reason I wanted to see this film, and it was a good reason; he always performs so well and this was no exception. But there is more worth watching to this film besides a good and compelling hero. For example, there are three more good-guy characters that get a chunk of screen time. Wilee’s girl, Vanessa, (Dania Ramirez) her roommate, and sender of the mysterious package Nima, (Jamie Chung) and Wilee and Vanessa’s co-worker Manny (Wole Parks) who barely makes the title “good guy” as he’s annoying and amazingly self-absorbed. They were good, without adding to, or detracting from the movie very much at all. Then there’s Michael Shannon, the bad guy, and he was a very good and creepy bad guy. A love-to-hate-him sort of fellow, and kept the tension up throughout the movie.

 

Action films are a dime a dozen, with their overly stylish, mostly unbelievable action sequences and stunts, and fiery explosions. They go way over the top, and yet we still sometimes manage to get bored watching them. I’m not going to say the action here is anything really new, lots of movies do have quality action after all, but I sure did enjoy it like it was new. Mostly, I think, because it was real, with no green screen and little special effects. It felt real, and it was refreshing, and exciting. And by "real" I don't mean "shaky and quick-cut." The director David Koepp kept the camera smooth, so every stunt is clear and enjoyable. Definitely action worth seeing, and good thing too, because the action never stops, so if it was lousy, the movie would be practically nonredeemable.

None of the elements in Premium Rush are very original. The most original being that our hero is a bike messenger, which probably hasn’t been used much because it just doesn’t seem like a great idea. But take the basic plot, all the usual action flick formula, and the one original element, and – this is the key – make it well, and you will end up with a good movie that is at its very least worth watching. A movie that doesn’t feel like it came out of a factory. Joseph Gordon-Levitt automatically raises the quality of any movie he’s in by at least 75%, but really he’s just icing on the cake; something that will tempt someone like me to see this non-factory-made movie. Still, Gordon-Levitt is my favorite part of the movie, but thanks to every other part being quality as well, I was satisfied that his abilities weren’t wasted on trash. Not without its flaws, but this film is what it claims to be; a non-stop from beginning to end, rip-roaring good time at the movies. Grab your helmet, and hold on tight.

- 3.8/5 stars

The Dark Knight Trilogy

(Spoiler warning: they may pop up anywhere… especially at the end!)

Batman Begins--

The trilogy begins with a ground-breaking idea that superheroes can be taken seriously, and gives us a totally believable origin story for one of the world’s most believable superheroes. There are three points to cover (in my opinion) in order to make a good, complete story, and the first is covered exactly right in this movie; the hero.

Young Bruce Wayne sees his parents murdered in front of him and grows into a hate-filled man with his eyes on revenge, whatever the cost. Life-changing words from the girl he loves and a crime boss change his mind and send Bruce around the world in an attempt to understand criminals, and what it’s like to have nothing. A mysterious man finds him and offers him a chance to change and make a change with just a little ninja training and spiritual guidance. The latter doesn’t exactly stick for Bruce, as he decides he will never needlessly kill anyone, when it’s required of him to finish his training. He becomes a League of Shadows drop-out, and returns to Gotham determined to honor his father, and serve the city, mostly by locking up every criminal he can find. Using a piece of advice from his mentor - and to protect his loved ones - a costume is in order, and before you can start to sing “na na na na na…” the Batman is born.

The majority of Bruce Wayne/Batman’s character development happens in this movie; at the end he’s a hero, and this movie is about his journey, from beginning to heroism. And finally it's done right - finally we get to understand Bruce. He’s no longer stylized, campy, melodramatic, or plain silly; he’s real, and his superhero status is believable.

The amazing, and visionary director, Christopher Nolan, is of course the person to thank for this. He knows how to make a movie true to life without tossing out the pleasure of watching a movie for entertainment. The key appears to be to make it dark; the real world is a dark place after all. But there is more to it that just that, and what really impressed me were all the details. Why bats, for an example? “Bats frighten me,” says Bruce, “it’s time my enemies shared my dread.”

Christian Bale is Batman. He wonderfully embodies the complex character with powerful subtlety. Previous renditions of the character practically crumble into nothing, and anyone who may try to take on the role anytime in the near future would probably be crazy, and therefore would do a bad job of it. And who else could ever play Alfred but Michael Caine? I mean, come on. Gary Oldman is perfect as Gordon, a more traditional brand of hero everyone loves to cheer for. Don’t forget Morgan Freeman as Mr. Fox, and Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes is lovely, but unfortunately doesn’t last. And the antagonists, Cillian Murphy, and Liam Neeson, put out their due amount of evil and creepiness according to their character to satisfaction.

Batman Begins is a classic movie really, starting with a flawed character in need of change, and ending with that character saving the day and becoming a new person; a hero. This is done to perfection, but “ending” is the key word here… there is a good and satisfying end. Batman’s identity as a hero is established, and the character’s arc is complete, but this is only the first movie, and we want more, so, what now?

The Dark Knight--

Well, there's two of my three points left to cover, and the second one is a test. We have to know that the Batman can hold to his morals, and will never give up on his city no matter how bleak things get. Usually, this is where a sequel comes out, trying to re-sell the same format of the first film by putting a different plot on it, and that’s why sequels don’t work… usually. There’s no worries when Nolan is at the helm. He knows how to make a sequel that doesn’t feel like a re-hash. The key now is to go even darker, and more intimate, and bring on a storm of trials to push our hero to his limits. Enter the Joker.

Heath Ledger’s turn as the Joker is very good… very, very good. Perhaps too good... in a word, convincing… in the highest sense of the word. We’re not supposed to understand him, and honesty, I don’t want to. And with his great performance, it’s easy to forget everyone else in the movie, but Bale continues to be good, despite this movie not being quite as much about his characters development as the previous one. Maggie Gyllenhaal does a fine job replacing Holmes, and adds spunk to Rachel. But Aaron Eckhart as Two-Face Harvey Dent is my personal favorite. He holds up very well against the Ledger's overpowering Joker and leaves a heavy impression with a sad and thought-provoking role.

The movie as a whole, in fact, is very thought-provoking, but also very entertaining, with great action, and real drama; it’s a truly well-done movie that succeeds on every level it goes to. If you can survive the darkness, the contrasting light is well worth it. Or just sit back and enjoy the artistic beauty, or the smart involving script, and stylish action. I always consider the middle movie of a trilogy to typically be the worst, due to the difficulty of providing a satisfying beginning and end to the story, but I don’t have any evidence at all to prove that here. This is the most well-done film in the franchise, and in my opinion, also has the best ending of the three movies.

I won’t go over plot details here, mostly because I can’t exactly remember them straight, but basically, the Joker raises @#!*% , and destroys lives, and then we watch the aftermath, and how characters deal with their crumbled worlds. Harvey Dent begins a good man, but he breaks under pressure and becomes the very thing that destroyed him. Bruce gets the same treatment, but he somehow hangs on. Broken, but not defeated Batman maintains his heroism, (to the audience at least) and holds to his morals. He is committed to doing whatever it takes to save the world. Now we know that for sure. There’s only one thing left now. We saw the journey to his being a hero, and he scraped through the test at great personal cost, now all we need is an end.

The Dark Knight Rises--

But we don’t know that. I think I’d be happy to see more movies about Bruce Wayne beating the odds and defeating evil for as long as they continue to be good and entertaining, but Nolan knows… yes, he knows a lot of things… and he knows we need an end. The third point; every story needs an end, and Nolan has it covered in Rises. It’s got to be hard to end a franchise, but if you don’t, it will eventually fizzle out anyway, so it’s best to end it sooner, and end it well. Though, “well” is a rather dull way to describe the way this movie wrapped up the franchise. “Satisfying,” “amazing” and “epic” are better words for the job.

Of course, there can’t be just an ending, so this movie provides a new test for the Dark Knight as well. Eight years later, the Batman is in hiding, and Bruce turned to a recluse is never seen either, but the fix he offered up in the last movie stuck, and the city has been a better and cleaner place. Until Bane shows up, terrorizing the city as he puts his devastating plan in motion. Bruce is eager become Batman just one more time, and thinks he’s ready to give his life to save the city, but this time he’s not the only one willing to give everything to stand against evil.

Commissioner Gordon has always been helpful, but in the Batman’s absence he steps up, and does all he can to keep the evil at bay, along with newcomer Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who jumps right in as John Blake, a young, idealistic cop with spirit, who is this movie's most straight-forward and honest hero. Then there’s Anne Hathaway, also new, playing Selina Kyle, who has her share of problems, but does the right and selfless thing when it really counts. I like that these characters are really focused on and fleshed out as leads along with Bale, and the ensemble feel they bring to the movie is great.

Played very well by Tom Hardy, Bane is sufficiently evil, and his composed, boiling rage disturbing. He’s powerful in every way, but thankfully doesn’t overpower any other characters. Marion Cotillard as Miranda Tate is disappointing in the best way possible, with both the good and bad side played convincingly. Maybe it’s only because I tried to stay spoiler-free going into this movie, but I thought the plot twists were handled very well, and weren't too confusing, or unbelievable.

How could anyone doubt that Christopher Nolan knows what he’s doing? He very successfully wraps up the trilogy with this film, not getting lazy in any aspect, giving us smart and unique plotting, involving acting from an all-around stellar cast, and powerful tone. Probably the hardest of the three movies to do right, but right it definitely is. My only complaint is very small; that it gets a little slow in the middle, but hey, at two hours and forty-five minutes, “a little slow” for a few minutes is pretty impressive, especially when you're not making a Lord of the Rings movie.

These three movies are built very differently, yet they fit together like it had been planned the whole time, and each brings something unique to the table. This dark, thrilling and powerful trilogy has really set a high standard for movie heroes of a super persuasion, by succeeding as more than just a superhero movie. It ponders the meaning of heroism, the effects of evil on society and the individual character, and delves in deep. It gives us an awesome, breath-taking visual experience, and a dark, chilling, but ultimately rewarding story, just brimming with thoughtful details. And finally, it gives us the right conclusion, where good prevails against the dark and the hero is rewarded for his sacrifice. A hero, a test, and an end… our Dark Knight delivered and gave us a solid, satisfying conclusion that resonates. My appreciative thanks go to Nolan, for a deep, exciting, and unique franchise.

- 4&1/2 of 5 stars, for each movie.

Hello, John Blake franchise?

The Bourne Legacy

The time has come for Jeremy Renner to establish his identity, and his supremacy, and, well, you know. Before, he would usually play second fiddle to the likes of Tom Cruise or Ben Affleck, but could this be the film that proclaims him a full-fledged Hollywood action hero with acting chops? Can he fill Matt Damon’s shoes? Is that a ridiculous question considering he doesn’t play Bourne in this Bourne film? (Yes.) Here’s a better question: can the filmmakers respect this franchise with all its newcomers and changes, and let them live up to their potential, or will they just suck money and heart out of it until it dies? If they were to go the respect way, they would have made the right choice, and unless Damon comes back for a Bourne/Cross team-up, they should do some serious title re-thinking.

So, the trailer is pretty cool, but it is also misleading in some mildly annoying ways, and shows off most of the best bits of the movie, and I found something better for you to watch instead; the Bourne theme song! I know, I know... enjoy.

Jason Bourne is wreaking havoc, doing his “Ultimatum” thing, and causing lots of trouble. More trouble than he even realizes. More secret programs are in danger than just Treadstone, and everyone is scrambling to try and minimize the damage. New to the films, but apparently not to the programs, Eric Byer (Edward Norton) takes charge, and decides that a program called Outcome needs to disappear. Meanwhile, Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner) is performing an extreme looking training exercise in Alaska. He finishes in record time, then has a friendly chat with a much less talkative fellow agent. Then he almost gets blown up. He escapes though, and even tricks Byer and co. into believing he’s dead. But he’s got a problem; Outcome agents are experiments for physical and mental enhancement, and in order to keep their skills they need to regularly take medication. Aaron only has two doses left, and getting more is understandably difficult with the program being terminated and all. Luckily, there’s another survivor. Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz) runs tests and experiments on the agents but is left mostly in the dark about the program. Still, she survives the termination/cover-up via massacre only barely. More assassins show up at her house later, but lucky for her that’s also where Aaron shows up on his quest for meds, and helps out in his traditional style. She needs him in order to live through another day, and he needs her in order to stay who he is, so they stick together.

Edward Norton playing the bad guy was just fine and dandy as he usually is, but didn’t do very much besides talk, and Renner and Weisz worked well together. I’m looking forward to hopefully seeing more of them in a sequel. Renner, of course, can raise the quality of a movie just by being in it, but I never really thought of Weisz as a good actor before either so she rather impressed me. The normal-nice-guy-turned-super-assassin and ultra-smart and pretty scientist are original, cheer-able characters. And, as a plus, I found it very refreshing that by the end of the movie the characters already had a good relationship that was rooted in something more solid than romance.

So, I liked this movie, I really did, but a few little problems and missed opportunities irked me. Like the cinematography. And I know the previous Bourne movies had shaky and sometimes blurry quick-cut shots, but there's a fine line between that realistic shaky-cam edge, and not being able to tell what's going on. And by "fine line" I mean “incredibly obvious line”. I know it can add to the tension, and I suppose some people do like it, but I prefer to, you know, see. Fortunately it was ignorable most of the time. And missed opportunities left me wishing for deeper character development for Cross. Deep characters are pretty much Renner’s specialty after all, and he just felt underused… though underused for him is perfectly normal for anyone else. They apparently just tried to make another Bourne movie minus Bourne, and that's exactly what they did - way better than they had a right to, by the way - but the result wasn’t as great as it should've been, and had the potential to be, if they'd invested more in their new star.

Yep, if it hadn't been for the name of Jason Bourne being mentioned in nearly every other scene I probably would've totally forgotten him, because Renner does his part as an awesome action hero extremely well; kicking butt, and saving the girl with style and likability. He excels at the action. Aaron runs, climbs, jumps, fights, and outsmarts the bad guys with epic ease. There are some jaw-dropping stunts that Renner performed himself, (he’s a one man army, taking Hollywood by storm) and the action sequences are original and exciting, well choreographed and – mostly – well filmed. I especially liked the tense sequence in Marta's house.

Quite enjoyable overall, exceptionally good at some points, yet crumbly in others, this movie is nothing if not inconsistent. Like a two hour long trailer, or a bridge, without a solid beginning or end, Legacy feels like it’s a well-done setup for what’s to come. So, should we be excited for the next installment? Well, while this film certainly could’ve been better, it also could've been way worse, and the potential for improvement is there, so I’m cautiously optimistic, and, may I say, excited for the next go around with our new “Bourne” hero. Fix a few problems, and put in a little more effort and care, and Aaron Cross can bring this franchise to fresh new heights… he doesn’t even need Bourne, or his legacy.

- 4/5 stars

And ok, here's the trailer, in case you feel you must watch it.