The original "Clash of the Titans" was one of my favorite films growing up, and remains one of my guilty cult favorites today. Loosely based upon the story of Perseus from Greek mythology, the original Clash featured the very last of the legendary Ray Harryhausen's stop-motion special effects (and the first in which he worked with a team -- up until that point, Harryhausen did all of his special effects by himself), and some over-the-top performances by Oscar-winner Laurence Olivier as Zeus, king of the Olympian gods, Harry Hamlin as the stalwart Perseus, and in particular, the late Neil McCarthy as the made-for-the-movie villain Calibos, the self-styled "Lord of the Marsh." Not a very good movie, but one of my sentimental favorites on par with '85's "Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins," and "1987's "Masters of the Universe."
Flash forward nearly twenty years and we have an all-new "Clash of the Titans" loosely directed by Louis Letterier, who made the only good Hulk movie, '08's "The Incredible Hulk," and starring "Avatar's" Sam Worthington in the role Harry Hamlin, uh, well, I guess, made famous, Perseus. This film is very different from the original "Clash" and strays even further from the Greek myth of Perseus. I didn't have a problem with either. What I did have a problem with was the shoddy editing (brought on by a sloppy two-month 3-D retrofitting before its premiere), weird pacing, and generally how not entertaining the movie was.
This "Clash of the Titans" was a product of studio mismanagement and tampering, and it shows fully on screen. God, why can't Hollywood leave well enough alone the first time?
"Iron Man 2" is the follow up to the smash 2008 hit featuring the Marvel Comics superhero so aptly and ingeniously portrayed by Robert Downey, Jr. Director Jon Favreau returned as well, this time with a dubious screenplay by writer/actor Justin Therioux (the bad guy from "Charles Angels 2" -- yep, that's him!). For all of its hype, budget, and spot-on CGI, "Iron Man 2" is a boring film where really nothing happens at all. In fact, I spent the whole damn movie waiting for something to happen -- kinda like '06's "Superman Returns." And nothing ever does.
Iron Man himself is seen only a few times in the film including a painful, embarassing scene in which a drunk Tony Stark hosts a party at his Pacific Coast mansion. I haven't felt this uncomfortable watching a scene in a comic book-based movie since that stupid auction scene in '97's "Batman & Robin."
There are a few highlights in the movie, however, as Scarlett Johanssen's pretty nice and pretty to look at as Natalie Rushman, AKA Natalia Romanoff, alias the Black Widow -- although I still wonder what ever happened to Ms. Johanssen's impressive bustline; it appears to have almost disappeared altogether. Geek god Samuel L. Jackson returns as S.H.I.E.L.D. public director Nick J. Fury in a larger role that than the Easter egg after-credits scene he had in the first "Iron Man."
Mickey Rourke fails as Ivan Danko, the villain of the piece: Whiplash-cum-Titanium Man, and Sam Rockwell's pretty much wasted as arms dealer Justin Hammer. By the by, the comics' Whiplash is an Italian-American and Hammer's an elderly Englishman...but I'm nit-picking here.
The brightest spot of the movie is not Downey's performance. You can really tell that Favreau and Therioux's script are completely unable to reign him in this time. And it shows and it's not fun at all to watch. The brightest spot of "Iron Man 2" is Gwyneth Paltrow's Virginia "Pepper" Potts. She is drop dead gorgeous, luminescent, and really terrific in a thankless role.
Stay tuned after the credits to see a tiny piece of Marvel Film's next movie, "Thor," which I felt was the only scene of this entire failure of a film that got me excited at all.
"Robin Hood" is to be avoided at all costs, unless you need a surefire cure for insomnia. It's overlong, boring as hell, and generally devoid of any light-heartedness or fun. Say what you will about 1991's "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves," but that movie was entertaining and fun and memorable. This "Robin Hood" simply is not and the fault lies with generally everybody involved, director Ridley Scott and star Russell Crowe, and most of all Universal Studios, who like Warner Bros' epic fail of "Clash of the Titans" should've left well enough alone.
God, I hope this summer gets better...
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
The Human Torch IS Cap...
Well, it looks like Chris Evans will portray the titular character in The First Avenger: Captain America. I'm sure the guy'll do a great job, but can he carry the shield successfully? We'll just wait and see.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Who Should Be Cap?
I began reading Captain America comics sometime during the late eighties, shortly after Steve Rogers returned to the role after being "fired" by the President. I'll never forget that dramatic poster depicting Cap's star-spangled costume folded up and sitting beneath the bold, black print "PRESIDENT FIRES CAP." As a seven year-old boy, I never knew superheroes could be fired! But, I digress...
Marvel Films, soon to be a part of the Walt Disney Company, put forth an ambitious plan for nine films, beginning with 2008's Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk, that would mesh together and culminate in a huge, epic The Avengers film in 2012. This summer's Iron Man 2 is a part of this plan, as is next year's Thor and the weirdly-titled The First Avenger: Captain America. Weird because it's a huge mouthful and weird because Captain America didn't become an Avenger until the title's fourth issue.
A variety of young Hollwood actors are up for the role, with the odd frontrunner being Chris Evans, who portrayed the Human Torch in Fox's okay-but-could've-been-better films. That means if Evans gets the job, he'll have played two iconic Marvel Comics characters in just a few short years. I like Evans as an actor, and I think he'll make a pretty good Captain America. More importantly, he'll be able to stand up to Robert Downey, Jr.'s quick-witted Tony Stark, who'll no doubt make Steve Rogers' life a living hell in The Avengers film.
Personally, I thought Dwayne "The former Rock" Johnson would've been a better choice. Johnson's biracial background might be an issue for some, but his being of half-African-American ancestry would work for a story about the U.S. government of the 1940s experimenting on its own citizens to create a super-soldier. In fact, this topic was explored in the Marvel Comics's mini-series Truth several years back. Johnson's build, looks, and charisma would all work very well for the Star-Spangled Avenger, and not only could he stand up to Downey's Stark, but he could literally look down on him, too!
In the end, however, I'm sure Marvel and Paramount will go with Chris Evans, and I'm fine with that, but I just wish they'd take a little chance here, just like they did with the former tabloid-fodder Downey in Iron Man.
The most important question will be will the movie be any good? God only knows at this point...but here's hoping.
Marvel Films, soon to be a part of the Walt Disney Company, put forth an ambitious plan for nine films, beginning with 2008's Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk, that would mesh together and culminate in a huge, epic The Avengers film in 2012. This summer's Iron Man 2 is a part of this plan, as is next year's Thor and the weirdly-titled The First Avenger: Captain America. Weird because it's a huge mouthful and weird because Captain America didn't become an Avenger until the title's fourth issue.
A variety of young Hollwood actors are up for the role, with the odd frontrunner being Chris Evans, who portrayed the Human Torch in Fox's okay-but-could've-been-better films. That means if Evans gets the job, he'll have played two iconic Marvel Comics characters in just a few short years. I like Evans as an actor, and I think he'll make a pretty good Captain America. More importantly, he'll be able to stand up to Robert Downey, Jr.'s quick-witted Tony Stark, who'll no doubt make Steve Rogers' life a living hell in The Avengers film.
Personally, I thought Dwayne "The former Rock" Johnson would've been a better choice. Johnson's biracial background might be an issue for some, but his being of half-African-American ancestry would work for a story about the U.S. government of the 1940s experimenting on its own citizens to create a super-soldier. In fact, this topic was explored in the Marvel Comics's mini-series Truth several years back. Johnson's build, looks, and charisma would all work very well for the Star-Spangled Avenger, and not only could he stand up to Downey's Stark, but he could literally look down on him, too!
In the end, however, I'm sure Marvel and Paramount will go with Chris Evans, and I'm fine with that, but I just wish they'd take a little chance here, just like they did with the former tabloid-fodder Downey in Iron Man.
The most important question will be will the movie be any good? God only knows at this point...but here's hoping.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Mel's Return, the Wolfmeh, and Faltemeyer's Triumphant Return...
I was glad that Mel Gibson returned to the movies after his DUI arrest and subsequent drunken anti-Semitic tirade (which I still feel began in his The Passion of the Christ but I digress...), but Edge of Darkness was a tired effort that alternated between pretty good and smacking of desperation. Despite Mel's public stumbling, I still root for the guy -- he was Martin Riggs, for Pete's sake -- but there had to have been something better than Edge of Darkness for him to return to the movies for...or maybe there wasn't.
The best werewolf movie has yet to be made, and it totally sucks that Silver Bullet still holds the closest to that title in my heart after all of these years. The Wolfman gave it the old college try, and despite featuring wicked make-up by one of my heroes, Rick Baker, great mostly non-CGI special effects, and the heaving bosom of Emily Blunt, the film is slow and the story is weak. And not even the most bugnuts performance of Anthony Hopkins couldn't save this thing. Here's hoping director (a replacement in the first place for another departed helmer) Joe Johnston's The First Avenger: Captain America (a stupid mouthful like X-Men Origins: Wolverine) will be better and fare better.
The best thing about Cop Out (formerly the much funnier A Couple of Dicks) is composer Harold Faltemeyer's synth-score. I don't believe I've heard Faltemeyer's work in a film since 1989's Fletch Lives. Now having said that, Cop Out is a pretty funny movie and a nice homage to the buddy cops of the Eighties and early Nineties. It's also nice to see Bruce Willis' new teeth and I'm so very glad that they fit better and do not impede his speech and voice like Danny Glover's dentures. Tracy Morgan is pretty hilarious in this one, but he's basically playing himself here, but then again, so is Bruce Willis. The sad thing about Cop Out is that it also describes its director Kevin Smith's career trajectory. The master auteur is now a work-for-hire director. Yet, he has proven that he can direct action sequences. Hey, Kev, how about signing onto Fox's Daredevil reboot?
The best werewolf movie has yet to be made, and it totally sucks that Silver Bullet still holds the closest to that title in my heart after all of these years. The Wolfman gave it the old college try, and despite featuring wicked make-up by one of my heroes, Rick Baker, great mostly non-CGI special effects, and the heaving bosom of Emily Blunt, the film is slow and the story is weak. And not even the most bugnuts performance of Anthony Hopkins couldn't save this thing. Here's hoping director (a replacement in the first place for another departed helmer) Joe Johnston's The First Avenger: Captain America (a stupid mouthful like X-Men Origins: Wolverine) will be better and fare better.
The best thing about Cop Out (formerly the much funnier A Couple of Dicks) is composer Harold Faltemeyer's synth-score. I don't believe I've heard Faltemeyer's work in a film since 1989's Fletch Lives. Now having said that, Cop Out is a pretty funny movie and a nice homage to the buddy cops of the Eighties and early Nineties. It's also nice to see Bruce Willis' new teeth and I'm so very glad that they fit better and do not impede his speech and voice like Danny Glover's dentures. Tracy Morgan is pretty hilarious in this one, but he's basically playing himself here, but then again, so is Bruce Willis. The sad thing about Cop Out is that it also describes its director Kevin Smith's career trajectory. The master auteur is now a work-for-hire director. Yet, he has proven that he can direct action sequences. Hey, Kev, how about signing onto Fox's Daredevil reboot?
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
"Avatar" Wins Again...ugh.
Auteur James Cameron's magnum opus Avatar continues to break records by winning the weekend box office race for the sixth consecutive week. The film, the most expensive movie ever made to date, has grossed well over one billion dollars worldwide, eclipsing the previous top grosser, Cameron's other little movie called Titanic.
The question is, why? I found nothing particularly ground-breaking about the movie, not to mention the fact that it was an hour too long and not all that entertaining or that original. See Dances With Wolves, Last of the Mohicans, and read any of Edgar Rice Burroughs' Barsoom books.
The answer is, that Cameron is able to gauge the audience's likes and dislikes and tap into what exactly they want to see. He accomplished that with Titanic and to a greater degree, Terminator 2: Judgment Day. The Terminator was a good movie in and of itself (and also not that original, see author Harlan Ellison's Outer Limits episodes, "Soldier" and "Demon with a Glass Hand"), but Cameron built upon that idea very skillfully by turning the killing machine that is the Terminator and making him a good guy, thus capitalizing on everybody's favorite action hero Arnold Schwarzenegger. A brilliant move that paid off.
Why did Titanic succeed so greatly? Teenage girls, mostly. They kept going back, week after week, to see Leonardo DiCaprio fall in love and die. It was that simple.
So, why did Avatar top that? Because science fiction is popular again. Because geek culture is in (as evidenced by the resurgence of comic book-based movies). Because much of the movie going public today hasn't seen Dances With Wolves, Last of the Mohicans, or read anything written by Burroughs? God, I hope not, but there's probably a lot of truth in that, too.
Cameron knew he could never make a sequel to Titanic or any sort of follow-up to that film. So, he created his own new world or universe to play in, as unoriginal as it may be, and will reap the benefits pretty much forever. A smart man? Definitely. A good filmmaker? Certainly. An innovator? Perhaps (although Avatar's "groundbreaking" special effects were already achieved in 1999's Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace).
I wish I had a definite answer to why Avatar has become the phenomenon it has become. Unfortunately, I don't. I just wish the movie had been better.
The question is, why? I found nothing particularly ground-breaking about the movie, not to mention the fact that it was an hour too long and not all that entertaining or that original. See Dances With Wolves, Last of the Mohicans, and read any of Edgar Rice Burroughs' Barsoom books.
The answer is, that Cameron is able to gauge the audience's likes and dislikes and tap into what exactly they want to see. He accomplished that with Titanic and to a greater degree, Terminator 2: Judgment Day. The Terminator was a good movie in and of itself (and also not that original, see author Harlan Ellison's Outer Limits episodes, "Soldier" and "Demon with a Glass Hand"), but Cameron built upon that idea very skillfully by turning the killing machine that is the Terminator and making him a good guy, thus capitalizing on everybody's favorite action hero Arnold Schwarzenegger. A brilliant move that paid off.
Why did Titanic succeed so greatly? Teenage girls, mostly. They kept going back, week after week, to see Leonardo DiCaprio fall in love and die. It was that simple.
So, why did Avatar top that? Because science fiction is popular again. Because geek culture is in (as evidenced by the resurgence of comic book-based movies). Because much of the movie going public today hasn't seen Dances With Wolves, Last of the Mohicans, or read anything written by Burroughs? God, I hope not, but there's probably a lot of truth in that, too.
Cameron knew he could never make a sequel to Titanic or any sort of follow-up to that film. So, he created his own new world or universe to play in, as unoriginal as it may be, and will reap the benefits pretty much forever. A smart man? Definitely. A good filmmaker? Certainly. An innovator? Perhaps (although Avatar's "groundbreaking" special effects were already achieved in 1999's Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace).
I wish I had a definite answer to why Avatar has become the phenomenon it has become. Unfortunately, I don't. I just wish the movie had been better.
"The Book of Eli" Review
The Book of Eli is the long-awaited return by filmmaking siblings, the Hughes Brothers, or is it? Albert and Allen Hughes have not directed a movie since 2001's terrible From Hell, another failed attempt at adapting anything Alan Moore (bearded comic book writer and co-author of Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen).
I had totally forgotten about these guys, except when I catch their entertaining documentary American Pimp, and ode to all things "mack" on late-night cable television. The Hughes Brothers are talented, nonetheless, and after seeing the trailers for Book of Eli, I was somewhat excited to watch the movie.
The Book of Eli is the story of Eli, a wandering warrior heading west in what appears to be a post-nuclear war-torn America some three or four decades from now. Eli is carrying the eponymous book, a tome so powerful that it is coveted by the sinister Carnegie, the self-styled and self-appointed leader of one the few civilized towns left in the U.S.
Eli won't give the book up and Carnegie plans to kill him to get it. What ensues is a fairly fast-paced action film with some fine battle sequences and shoot outs and an ending reminiscent of star Denzel Washington's earlier Man of Fire, if you get my meaning.
Speaking of Denzel, he gives another damn fine performance in The Book of Eli, and has finally achieved a level of effortless acting, where we, the audience, completely buy into his ability and the role he's playing. Denzel was also in top form in last year's Taking of Pelham 123, but I felt that The Book of Eli and its title role suited him much better.
Gary Oldman, the definitive James Gordon, was also great as the megalomaniacal Carnegie. Oldman can still play a villain like nobody's business. In fact, I just saw him today in True Romance on Blu Ray, which I highly recommend, as the slimy Afrophiliac pimp Drexl. This guy gives a tour de force job every time he's cast in a movie, and Eli is no different.
Mila Kunis plays Solara, a young woman who allies herself with Eli against Carnegie. Solara is only memorable at the end of the film, but Kunis is not hard to forget. She is incredibly beautiful and gets a little better looking every time I see her on screen. Jennifer Beals is Solara's mother, the blind Claudia and Carnegie's paramour. Beals doesn't look all that different from her heydays of Flashdance, and that's definitely a good thing.
The Book of Eli is a good, solid post-apocalyptic action-thriller in the vein of and The Road Warrior and Escape from New York, but not as good as either of them. As a guilty fan of Waterworld, I wouldn't put it up there either, but it's still a fine addition to the genre, and a nice return of the Hughes Brothers to the world of filmmaking.
Three out of Five Stars
I had totally forgotten about these guys, except when I catch their entertaining documentary American Pimp, and ode to all things "mack" on late-night cable television. The Hughes Brothers are talented, nonetheless, and after seeing the trailers for Book of Eli, I was somewhat excited to watch the movie.
The Book of Eli is the story of Eli, a wandering warrior heading west in what appears to be a post-nuclear war-torn America some three or four decades from now. Eli is carrying the eponymous book, a tome so powerful that it is coveted by the sinister Carnegie, the self-styled and self-appointed leader of one the few civilized towns left in the U.S.
Eli won't give the book up and Carnegie plans to kill him to get it. What ensues is a fairly fast-paced action film with some fine battle sequences and shoot outs and an ending reminiscent of star Denzel Washington's earlier Man of Fire, if you get my meaning.
Speaking of Denzel, he gives another damn fine performance in The Book of Eli, and has finally achieved a level of effortless acting, where we, the audience, completely buy into his ability and the role he's playing. Denzel was also in top form in last year's Taking of Pelham 123, but I felt that The Book of Eli and its title role suited him much better.
Gary Oldman, the definitive James Gordon, was also great as the megalomaniacal Carnegie. Oldman can still play a villain like nobody's business. In fact, I just saw him today in True Romance on Blu Ray, which I highly recommend, as the slimy Afrophiliac pimp Drexl. This guy gives a tour de force job every time he's cast in a movie, and Eli is no different.
Mila Kunis plays Solara, a young woman who allies herself with Eli against Carnegie. Solara is only memorable at the end of the film, but Kunis is not hard to forget. She is incredibly beautiful and gets a little better looking every time I see her on screen. Jennifer Beals is Solara's mother, the blind Claudia and Carnegie's paramour. Beals doesn't look all that different from her heydays of Flashdance, and that's definitely a good thing.
The Book of Eli is a good, solid post-apocalyptic action-thriller in the vein of and The Road Warrior and Escape from New York, but not as good as either of them. As a guilty fan of Waterworld, I wouldn't put it up there either, but it's still a fine addition to the genre, and a nice return of the Hughes Brothers to the world of filmmaking.
Three out of Five Stars
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)