Thursday, August 4, 2011

Crop O' Movies: "Super 8," The Way Back," "The Roommate," "Rango," "Hanna," "The Adjustment Bureau," "Rio," "Sucker Punch" & "Battle: Los Angeles"

Hell, I should just stop trying to be a writer and continue not doing other things...
Anyway. More new movies. Hope you haven't heard enough about them to read on...


Super 8 ☆☆☆

"Super 8" is consistently entertaining, and doesn't lack filmmaking zing, excitement or pathos, but director/writer J.J. Abrams' Spielberg-ode and childhood nostalgia-trip is more weak in areas than expected and rarely surprised. But I'm in the minority here, because critics really responded to it, most being youngsters themselves when Spielberg classics like "E.T" and "Close Encounter Of The Third Kind" came out. And the majority of older auds too, giving it a good number (the BO has slowed at about 125mil, not bad at all). Hence that reception, I guess "Super 8" is another sci-fi insta-classic, right after the big response (auds gave it the shoulder) of this spring's "Source Code," a movie I didn't like as much as most did, and the same goes for "Super 8." I felt, though so easy to love, the movie isn't very smart or in any of it's science fiction levels that make Steven's masterworks "E.T," "Close Encounters," or "A.I.," or darker genre pieces like "2001" or "Blade Runner." For most of "Super 8," the movie felt rather dopey and gave the impression Abrams was trying too hard, even as it hits just the right amount of Speilbergian sentimentality and thrills at maximum level, a strong suit for Abrams. 

The Spielbergian set-up: 14-yr-old Joe Lamb is your average kid, modest and nice and growing up in 1979, in made-up Ohio mini-burg Lillian (after Abrams grandmother), which I think is an oil ring town. From the effective opening shot of factory safety days being fixed down to zero, then on to the effective opening scene, the winter funeral of Joe's mother, the victim of a terrible floor accident. Joe's father, Jack Lamp and deputy policeman, is horribly grieving and Joe is left to go on with life and grief all on his own, by which he carries around mom's necklace she wore. But that doesn't detour his friend Charlies, a pudgy mini-Carl Denham, who is determined to shoot a zombie 8mil short to submit into a festival. Knowing Joe by now, he won't have a problem with it, if only to get him away from thoughts of the tragedy and neglecting dad...

The kids - including un-impressionable Preston, anxious Martin, pseudo-pyromaniac Cary, and everyone's crush, cute, woman-like Alice Dainard (played by one of hugely talented young actresses working right now, Elle Fanning) - take their filming exploits to a railway station, just as a train screeches and whistles by. "Production Value!," Charles excitedly shouts. As they scramble to set the shot and then roll camera, Joe is the only one who sees - a truck is aimed for a head-on collision! What results is the most spectacular and thrilling (though dragged) train crash sequence in movie history, only topped by the one movie that inspired it, DeMille's "The Greatest Show On Earth."

In the post war zone-like train carnage, it couldn't be worse, but something smashes out of a displaced car. We, nor the kids, see what it is, and can't make a guess enough before Air Force guys swarm in on cue, lead by one-sided military villain Col. Nelec (Noah Emmerich). The kids escape in Alice's vintage car that I've already forgotten the name of, left only to ponder...

Soon after, mystery events happen in the preceding mayhem: Lillian's denizens are disappearing, with the sheriff also vanished leaving Jack to investigate what could be a nasty new killer on the loose. All the while, Nelec and his boys hem in, and Charles, Alice, Joe and gang still shoot Charles' horror epic, now with the mile-long expanse of the train wreck with copters flying by, the military trucks ominously processing through the squares, and bodies of soldiers standing/patrolling all over as backdrops. 

Can you guess: As people vanish and Joe learns weird things, he savvy's onto the mystery, having the clues (the super 8 footage being what only saw the monster full-on) and he, Charlie, Alice, Preston, Martin and Cary race to find a misunderstood creature as Nelec has the town evacuated looking for the thing. It all leads to one rousing last act, and emotional climax I'd expect you'd all see coming, Eh, it's satisfying enough.

Okay. First, before I get into the bad stuff, let's start with the good stuff...

The best of all of "Super 8" is non-arguably with the kids. They are top-notch, had chemistry and great play-off banter. And did you know, most had little to no experience, minus Fanning. Riley Griffiths as Charles is the best. Ryan Lee as Cary has got this kid's obsession down, Gabriel Basso is good as frightened Martin, and Zach Mills as Preston had little to do or say but was still funny anyway. But the two to watch, of course, are Joe and Alice. Joel Courtney as Joe has the right amount of modesty, and looks to have infinite innocence etched into his face for life. He is a good lead. Elle Fanning can do any character that comes her way. Here it's playing matured Alice, who may know more about life already than these boys do, and, like a good Spielberg kid heroine, can show fear and tears when scary sci-fi shit goes down, Heck, Alice herself is a good actor. Remember that scene just before the crash? I would have thought maybe she was upset about what she had just told Joe (about her dad and his mom's accident linking), but really, she can sniffle on cue, just as Elle can. Joe and Alice's scenes together were some of the best moments in the film. Some too with Joe and Charles, and one in particular with having them argue over Alice. Only one problem with all of the kids, each is stereotypical, but so well done by the actors (and they are!) that you didn't care...

J.J. Abrams (or Jeffrey Abrams). He has fantastic directing skill. His button on the action, and even on the emotional stuff, is like watching a pro at the top of his form. And he's only directed features three times now, with a handful of pilots. And his work with these actors...Really, is that all you need to make a good movie. Well, yes. That's all...

Um, okay, that's about it. Now, the bad stuff. SPOILER ALERT!...

Let's start with what I think is the weak foundation here. The script. But what? How? How can that be? Abrams started out as a writer, having written treatments and co-written screenplays since he was in college, how is the writing to "Super 8" any less? Well, it is. And it happens. And it could be a lot of reasons. His approach. His timing (Our current climate. Even where he is in his own life). Stress. Not enough time. Spielberg or someone over his shoulder too much. Most of these are unlikely. I just think Abrams had so much heart for this, and little conflict from outside, that rewriting probably what he had already in his mind was hard to do. I imagine it that way. Or he simply had the skill to write this, and we all know the feedback from lots of guys (including Steven) was all supportive and positive, but instead - well, missed. I think he did. Or I don't know. All I know is I didn't like the script, in the "It's a good draft now go do another one" way. Eh, you know what, most scripts are thin, or just bad,  anyway. That's half the problem with some of the movies I talk about below, and some the strongest point. It's something that Steven Spielberg himself said, in a talk with Abrams and James Cameron about his work, to some effect, "Great writing makes us look good..." 

Still, isn't it funny lot of what was written by Abrams in "Super 8" was just weak, loose, formulaic, and predictable. And most of it I found I just didn't get...

1. First scene. Joe's horribly grieving dad arrests Louis, supposedly the man responsible for Joe's mom's death, at his own wife's funeral. Why? Because he's angry? It makes little sense to me...

2. And as characters, Jack and Louis were weak, with not enough scenes with them. And why did the two race off during the climax only to show up right at the end and not get involved? They resolve their differences during the drive (it felt slapped on), but even as Jack is suffering, blames Louis, and Louis blames himself and wants to stay as far away from the Lambs as possible, I felt neither of their character convictions passed off. They were placeholders for emotional grounding. To add to that...

3. So was Joe's mom dying. He cradles her locket for strength, but it's not used or exploited enough. Anyway, having your protagonist keep-safe a family trinket of a dead relative - esp. a locket with a picture in it - is a cliche. It could have worked better, though did for the most part, with the ending when the alien needs that one last bit of metal to make his ship take off was the metal of the locket, and Joe realizing he has to "let go." It worked, but...Come On! It was cheesy! We get it. He's letting his mom go, even as their relationship, and his father's, was never really explored in the fist place...

4. You know, the whole climax was cheesy and predicable, even as it worked.  Did anyone see the alien was building a ship with the stolen goods? I did, before I sat down. And that the "thing" was indeed an alien? Yep, more points for me. And if you didn't what did you think it was? The smoke monster? And the chase through town as missiles and explosions go off was a bit silly, even as it was superbly thrilling. And that obligatory emotional climax. Again, I liked it, but it just barely worked for me. What almost did it in was Michael Giacchino's music. It was nostalgic, exactly what we want in a movie like this, even during that climax, but it was too much in there. But you know it was intentional. Those now classic John Williams/Steven Spielberg scores were kind of awe-inspiring and in your face, too. Though Williams can really make it work, and his music is that good. Giacchino's is too, but I felt it was just too conscious of being a Williams impression. Than again, so was the movie with being a big Spielberg impression. Not a big problem, it just needed to be written better...

5. The story, the plot, needed more involvement, and character involvement. Loved the 1970's small town setting. Loved the idea of kids making horror/8mil movie getting caught up in actual supernatural stuff, even as these kids shoot with all this in the background! But most of it was wasted. The kids' adventure in making that movie wasn't satisfying enough, wasn't even challenging. Come on, the military is everywhere, and it's easy to film your little movie? And you military cuts didn't seem to care? You guys are doing snooping that is top secret and yet you let Joe and his friends shoot in front of your operations? And why wasn't there more conflict with the kids, and Charles, in getting their movie done? For Charles, I liked that's what he might have cared about (he says it's just Alice, but that I didn't buy), but he could have been a pint-sized obsessed auteur, really like Carl Denham, still trying to shoot, to exploit, right up until the end...

6. The Alien. He (I think it was he) had a number of problems with me. Okay, he's enraged at humans for mistreating him, but why does he kidnap/kill the ones who are no threat to him unless it's justified why? He can kill the Air Force guys, that makes sense, but why civilians? What's his reason for hanging them upside down in his underground cave? So he can eat them? Because it's just a simple monster movie? Is he really just hungry? Okay, but I didn't buy it, even as I liked the alien wasn't much to think about. As explained, he was scared and just wanted to go home. Simple and eloquent, and it adds the whole horror aspect to the film ("Aliens"). The alien is an animal, a monster, and shouldn't be considered much when the kids are in the foreground anyway. But then why did he have some sort of human understanding (aka when Joe relates to him about his troubles.) And even as it is an alien monster, I still didn't understand why it would attack. The reason Abrams hints is when the alien does attack is to steal metal, like the sheriff's car engine, the power-lineman's engine in his bucket truck, and all other attacks were coincidental, and then ended up as snacks later. But then why did the alien attack the bus? Because it's made of mostly metal? Because he really does hate Nelec and the Air Force? But I didn't buy it! I understand it's better to show us stuff visually, and all explanations seemed to be there, but I never picked up on the answers until reading up on it. Abrams needed to do better by that. Another thing, the alien was stealing metal and building his ship below ground, right? Then why at the end did he just take all of it from around town in a flying sweep of CG atop the water tower to build his ship? Then what was he doing underground? Now, I heard it was a giant underground magnetic works, with the tower being the receiver, a means to successfully get all the cubes and metal. But I didn't catch it! Again, another important detail I didn't pick up on...

Should I be this upset about detail, and material that most likely has an explanation? I'll wait for the comments. And just so I could vent some more, some smaller detail...

7. Stoner Guy, Donny (David Gallaghar) was funny when he was around. Could we have had more of him? How about Charles' family, too?

8. Nelec and the Air Force never seem to track down the film found at the crash sight, linking it to the kids. They don't try very hard. Why couldn't Nelec, and the military, be a threat in this movie?

9. Why did Nelec take Joe's necklace. What importance is that to him?

10. Joe sees the alien making noise in a garage. Why doesn't he investigate?
11. Why weren't the kids scared shitless after the crash, even as they quipped stuff like "I don't want to die!" and the sequence itself was the most exciting in the movie. They all go home as if nothing had happened. Sure, they're supposed to act that way. But I would be scared, wouldn't you?

12. The actual super 8 footage wasn't really that important. If the story had hinged on the suspence of waiting for the film to develop and see what was on that footage...But it didn't.

Lastly, on a positive point for "Super 8" and on a negative one for most of you: The lens flares didn't bother me. Get over it.



The Way Back ☆☆☆ 1/2

Often excellent Australian director Peter Weir, whose new film "The Way Back" was steamed for not being too involving or character strong, and it's subject matter also has the misfortune of having been based on an inspirational trek biography that itself is getting critiques about it's authenticity, but the movie is a near-terrific - and still mostly exhilarating - journey adventure film, with a talented international cast and a Weir forte that isn't lacking - his grand use of landscapes, here the majestic and engrossing areas of Bulgaria and Morocco substituting for the hellish winter forests of Siberia and the scorching deserts of The Gobi Desert in Mongolia, images done by Weir and long-time DP collaborator Russell Boyd in sweeping wide shots. And just watching these few ragtag escapees up at odds with these dooming elements is a very old and compelling conflict; man against nature. That, at it's essence, is what the movie is. This is why it works, and why Weir and company should get more praise than just "the characters suck."

Actually, these guys weren't all that bad. I'd say the cast - from great to good, Ed Harris as wizened American Mr. Smith, Colin Farrell as aggressive Russian thug Valka, Saiorse Ronan as lost, slightly manipulative Polish girl Irena, and Jim Sturgess as Pole Janusz, determined to get back to his love, who was harassed into framing Janusz as a spy and he was sent to the Culag. It's his movie, it's his journey, and it's a good payoff as (SPOILER!) an old man finally making it back home, to the embrace of his wife.

I won't continue to talk about "The Way Back" much, it's been months since I've seen it. But it's a solid bet, already one of the best, ahead of it's class, as a sure good movie of the year. You can forget a lot of movies already out in the market right now. Most below are good, just not anywhere near this. But one you can surely avoid, and is no where near even the rest on the list...



The Roommate half star

Possibly the worst movie I've ever decided to walk into, the horrible rehash of the "Single White Female" idea in this teeny-bop thriller "The Roommate," where babe Rebecca starts life at a Cali college and ends up with a crazed, evil-intended roommate, who, for any reason that couldn't make any sense to me, is bent on having Rebecca as her friend, even if it means scaring away her posse and hunky boyfriends and killing cats and framing naughty teachers. With knockout young leads Leighton Messter as tortured Rebecca, Cam Gigandet as her swooning lovey Stephen, and Minka Kelly as tortuous title-roommate Sara, who all seem like they are in "too cute to act" mode, and maybe Kelly might have won me over if she herself didn't try so hard. Billy Zane is in there as a pervy professor, but he can't do a thing here. Lame script. Lame acting. Lame undertaking. As Roger Ebert trademarked, and I'll use it with vigor here, "Your Movie Sucks!" So, you want M. Night Shyamalan to go back to film school, well how about director Christian E. Christensen?


 
Rango ☆☆☆

Gore Verbinski's new movie after undergoing the whole "Pirates of the Caribbean" franchise (minus the latest) directs a pretty ingenious spaghetti-western-comedy/animated tale, the first from effects powerhouse ILM, about a lame, lanky chameleon (voiced by Johnny Depp in another high, whiny voice job) who has an identity crisis and gets lost in the western desert, wanders until he lands at ideal western-town Dirt, a place filled with all kinds of unscrupulous characters, ugly reptilians or otherwise. And Rango, out of some sheer brash courage that comes out of somewhere, blindly puts on a front and masquerades as a mean gun-tootin' baddie/sheriff and fools them all. Of course, he is tasked by these desperate folk to stop other baddies. A concept that sounds familiar, but you must if you're doing a riff on other, greater westerns, even spaghettis, like "Django" (Get it?) Or "The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly." Or "A Fitful Of Dollars." Or the "Kill Bill" movies.

And this one, "Rango" is clever, funny, well-written by Oscar-nom John Logan, and the voice cast - including Bill Nighy, Abigail Bresslin, Ray Winstone, Isla Fisher, Ned Beatty, Alfred Molina, Harry Dean Stanton, Stephen Root, and Timothy Olyphant - throw their weight around. Literally. They acted out the whole thing in character while a boom mike followed them around. Verbinski called it "Emotion Capture." The same was done for "The Fantastic Mr. Fox." Ha!

The worst I can say is I didn't love the movie, just liked it. I think the plot could have been better. One example: Someone's stealing the town's water. Only so many suspects, and it's the guy you suspect anyway, and his reasons are entirely homogeneous (I won't reveal it, but the trope is used over and over and over). Anyway, the knocks are both crude and culturally-noted, and Verbinski, Logan, and his cast make near-intelligent comedy that kids will like (if the ugly characters don't scare them) and adults will get more than they do. You know, I didn't care if these characters ugly to look at. They're reptiles, after all.  



Hanna ☆☆☆

"Hanna" is the indie "Bourne," directed by pedigree indie-guy Joe Wright (who did plush adaptations of "Pride and Prejudice" and "Atonement), and stars talented young Irish-actress Saorise Ronan (of "The Way Back," above, and "Atonement," pronounced sersh-sha) as the title girl-assassin on the run from nasty CIA operative Merissa Wiegler (Cate Blanchett, doing a cool American accent) trying to lethally track her down. Former CIA-now-deserter Erik (Eric Bana, who I really liked here) is Hanna's father, the man who secluded her in the Finland winter woodlands all her life and trained her for a life of deadly run-ins and escape at every opportunity. Why Hanna is such an importance and the secret surrounding her (as it always seems) was not too surprising and I found, even as it made some logical sense, wasn't too smart for me. Though the movie is. And it's nifty in it's action, with another cool, complicated one take by Wright of a fight in a subway, just a one bit of a lot of good action material. It's intelligent in it's script, by first-timer, Canadian Seth Lochhead. And it's cast is great, even with a nice supporting job by a Brit family that Hanna runs into in her escape; Olivia Williams as longing, once-hippie mom Rachel, Jessica Barden as teenage-to-the-T, gossiping, wild kid Sophie, and Jason Flemying as reserved dad, Sebastian. There's also Tom Hollander as assassin-for-hire, the quietly mad, whistling Issacs.

Hey, as assassin, or fugitive-on-the-run, or foreign espionage movies go, this one's a kicker. And there's the added element of Grimm's fairy-tales. And Hanna is our Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, Gretel or Riding Hood. And Merrisa is our Orgess,  Evil Queen, Wicked Stepmother, Witch of "H&G", or The Wolf. The movie is even complete with a hideout in a "H&G"-inspired themepark, easily homaging to that story and it's merits in the film. (SPOILER! Luckily, Gretel isn't stuffed in any oven, and outwits the Witch in the end to stuff her in instead).


 
The Adjustment Bureau ☆☆ 1/2

Matt Damon and Emily Blunt star in a adaptation of another Philip K. Dick alternate world sci-fi novella, "The Adjustment Team," now "The Adjustment Bureau," about rising-up young senator David Norris, who after a disappointing sector loss and permanent campaign slump, meets free-caring Elise in a spruced-up men's restroom. Love at first sight? You bet! They make out in that spiffy bathroom! But their love is not to be, as it is, because a supernatural agency of fedora-wearing, suit-doned gentleman who claim to monitor the earth to a specific plan and a destiny for each and every person on the planet, want to keep the lovers apart. Norris is supposed to be somebody someday, but his path altered to include the woman of his dreams, but that wasn't supposed to happen (a mishap by the Bureau). And so these immortal business-like men will stop at nothing to keep them separated without bumping them off or swiping their brains (known as a "reset"), as Norris constantly diverts from them, to keep him on a plan that is part of a bigger one by an all-powerful entity know as The Chairman (God?), who is the movie's biggest mystery (and - SPOILER! - still is).

First, "The Adjustment Bureau" has a greatly written script by "Bourne" series scribe George Nolfi, only with a faulty and non-climatic ending that may be what we should get in a smart movie like this - just more questions. But I didn't like it. The ending was waned. But the biggest setback? Nolfi also directed, and he didn't do too good a job as with his script treatment. As it is the movie is slow, tedious, and unexciting. Though I liked Nolfi's vision of a dystopian New York, with these Bureau agents secluded in a stone-clad building, hidden "Harry Potter" invisible charm-style from the unsuspecting normal world; and the secret portal of doors going from one place to another. Not a new idea, but it could have been something exhilarating in it's still pretty good ending set-piece as Norris and Elise run from door to door at break-neck pace, as the agents are hot on their tails, culminating in the Bureau Building itself, gaining steam atop the roof as the agents have them hemmed in...only to sputter on us. (SPOILER! Where was the confrontation? Where was The Chairman? Why did it have an "Okay, they made it this far, will let them go" attitude?)

Still, the script was good, best I've seen (or read) in a movie so far this year. I liked Norris' dilemma (of a simple life with Elise or a high-profile one as the - SPOILER - ruler of the free world), and the Bureau agents with cool, even friendly personas; man-just-doing-his-job Richardson (John Slattery), friend-to-David, Harry ("The Hurt Locker's" Anthony Mackie) and the great written villain part, calculated, malign Thompson (the steely Terrence Stamp). Emily Blunt wasn't too bad a part either. She has dreams, too, a life as a renowned ballerina dancer. Would David ruin their relationship to kill his and her dreams, as Thompson so stomach-plummeting truthfully puts it.

"The Adjustment Bureau" might have been a sci-fi movie to rival "Inception," or even "Source Code" or "Super 8," or a classic like "Blade Runner," but is lacking in a tackle by Nolfi to enthrall us and excite us and surprise us. Like all great science fiction, it has to, I think, marvel us in it's alternate state. It doesn't. Why couldn't this movie have an alternate ending on the DVD?


 
Rio ☆☆☆

The story of "Rio" is used so often it hurts to see it on screen again. But, the movie is fun.

A ♥ letter to Rio de Janerio, Brazil, the animated "Rio" is filled with pleasing sights of bright and popping color, and is super upbeat with lively, comical characters who dance and sing and populate a toe-tapping city and music scene that can't rival any other - Carnival! Oh yes, there is a scene in the famous samba parade. A not too good chase, but the visuals there, that spread and jut out like a story book, are still like watching the Carnival of your dreams. The movie had me won over once we got to Rio, as director Carlos Saldanha is a Rio native, and I'm sure couldn't resist telling his story without delighting in all that the city has to offer, including Carnival and it's sweeping vistas of downtown and the lush mountain views, and of it's famous Christ the Redeemer erection atop Corvacado Mountain, in wide looking out over the world and us sweeping around it. Still, with all this to behold, I wish we had a better story, and another thing I wanted more of: Music. "Rio" could have had more music numbers (maybe should have been a musical), and disappoints there. Though those amusing characters who belt that music!: George Lopez as friendly Rafael, Tracy Morgan as happy bulldog Luiz, and the crop of the cake, Will. I. Iam and Jamie Foxx as fast-talking, suave cooler birds Pedro and Nico, and Jemanie Clement (of "Flight of the Concords") doing a devilishly camp villain impression as Nigel.

And there's also our leads, with this familiar story about two blue macaws, Blu (Jesse Eisenberg as American bird raised in wintery Minnesota), and Jewel (Anne Hathaway as wild, free-spirited bird of her native Rio) who are brought together to meet-cute after Blu's owner, sheepish-looking book store runner, Linda (Leslie Mann) is convinced of the specie importance by sprightly, somewhat hapless Rio zoologist Tulio (Rodrigo Santoro, and how Tuilo found Linda and Blu is a story issue for me). The two, with Blu, head for Brazil, only to have the Blu and Jewel later snatched up by smugglers and out of his element, with the proceeding adventure nothing you haven't seen over a dozen times. Actually, another animated movie, similarly about two last-kind animals who must mate to keep the species going, "Newt," was a Pixar project scrapped, I would take it, as this movie was discovered to have had an earlier release schedule...Anyway, with all of "Rio's" summer-syrup visual treats, and the samba/pop rock that still jives an infectious rhythm, the movie has enough to enchant and entertain you.

And we'll always have Rio. Why don't you visit instead? It's probably better. I'd think so.



Sucker Punch ☆☆ 1/2

"Hotties In Tight Pants Hurtling Ass." That's my high-concept logline for this movie, Zack Snyder's follow-up to his success' "300" and "Watchmen" with this original idea and equally CGI/slow-motion action splendor of a highly-stylized bordello of costumed sexy-girl dance and alternate action-heavy lands scored by contemporary pop/rock music tunes, which all exists in the head of a cute-troubled young woman of a beddable name, Baby Doll (Emily Browning). She concocts this reality to fight and escape her surroundings after being forced into asylum by her scheming uncle and secludes into a dream-within-a-dream reality as she and her other Tight Pants cohorts and other beddables - resourceful Amber (Jamie Chung), non-blond Blondie (Vanessa Hudgens), disapproving/sensible Sweet Pea (Abbie Cornish), and her suggestible sister, Rocket (Jena Malone) - fight in a WW2 trench battleground of zombie/machine Nazi's and blazing zeppelins, a magnificent shinto temple of giant mutated samurai warriors, a dark fantasy-land/castle fortress swarming with Ork-like goons and a terrifying dragon, added again with a pelting railway of "I, Robot"-looking humanoid guards.

All of these action set-pieces are absolutely eye-catching, dynamic, and full of that swiftly zinging slow-motion, sometimes even exciting if you'll let it. And it's animation and practical dress are first-rate. Rick Carter, a famous designer and noted Spielberg collaborator, is the production designer here. Larry Fong, Michael Wilkinson, and William Hoy, who have done movies like "Super 8" and "Terminator Salvation" and "Dances With Wolves," are part of the crew cast. And there's also all the visual effects artists in several VFX houses in the industry that money can buy. None of this should surprise you, it's all ideal to the vision and what you need to create it. But there's always the problem with these things...

"Sucker Punch" is yet another prime example of a greatly realized world (and alternate worlds) so detailed and caring, and action that's pretty cool all by itself, but with a story that's just garbage. Of which I didn't hate the idea, with a structure that I didn't entirely disagree with (as the movie nears an end it surprises you a little), it's just the script wasn't too thought upon and has a cast of striking characters that I didn't give a damn about (especially, SPOILER!, as some meet their end). The cast is great-looking, but needs more direction, with a few really any good here, including Cornish, Carla Cugino as their mistress-host, Dr. Gorski, and Oscar Isaac, doing a variation of King John from last year's "Robin Hood," as sinister bordello runner Blue. Other than that, the movie fails to engage us at all, and mostly bores. Remember: Goes to show a stunning-looking movie isn't enough to propel your story along.

"Sucker Punch" was a huge flop, and Snyder hasn't really harnessed an equally huge movie since his breakout "300" ("Watchmen" was a modest commercial/critical success). I guess we're all asking the same question. How will this effect his next, the undertaking of "Man of Steel," his surely highly-stylized adaptation of another Superman film?... I don't know, but if auds and critics give that movie the pass (as with the last one, "Superman Returns), and ruined yet another expensive Super-take, then a career in big studio moviemaking might be over for him. But let's not hope so. Snyder is a talented director, and really hons great sights of action, like his good peers Michael Bay, Roland Emmerich and Stephen Sommers, who are great at what they do even as each couldn't find (or write) a decent script to save their life. And one visual-signature filmmaker who started off fledgling was Tim Burton, who has gotten better over the years and is now, I believe, at his peek and making the best movies of his career, even as most are adaptations also. Snyder just needs time, and more movies to make. Maybe something smaller, costing less, hardly any CG but all the panache he could muster out of sheer creative talent. Well... I think he'll stick with the big toys he's given, so my solution now with the movies of Zack Snyder is just he should concentrate on a good script and less on his too-intent zeal in his vision. Do less on the noted approach and more with the actors, who don't have much room to breath in "Sucker Punch." Than, Zack Snyder movies will be something to see.

(NOTE: I recommend seeing the extended version, with about 20 minutes of added material. There are two really good scenes that were entirely cut from the theatrical version. Added, they make the movie much better. It includes a montage of multiple stage acts inter-cutting with life in the bordello, as Cugino and Isaas sing Roxy Music's "Love is the Drug." It's near the beginning and is a good start to the the show, and is noted considering none of the girl dancers actually dance in the film at all, not even when Baby Doll goes into her trance-dance, something so mesmerizing in the movie that not seeing it kills those scenes. Why couldn't we see that? Also, there's a scene featuring John Hamm, who in the original cut wasn't featured much at all, as a high-profile suit named High Roller, a gentleman who is meant to be Baby Doll's first time. But seemingly friendly/manipulative Roller swoons Baby into it. It's a scene near the end (SPOILER! after Sweet Pea makes her escape) and shows exactly what happens to Baby Doll. Because, in the original, we don't know. Know we do, her character want: She is sent free.)



Battle: Los Angeles ☆☆

Alien Invasion films - or just movies with aliens, like this year's comedy "Paul" and "Super 8" as examples -  are something of a commodity now. Not as so often adapted as comics and graphic novels, but where it seems too much already, because there is only so many places you can go with it. In these outings our earth is stupefied by alien intelligence once they arrive and make no time in assaulting us in a wave of destruction, murder and terror that leaves us breathing "My god..." They ain't friendly, and have enough advanced technological electro-power to wipe us all out in a blip if they didn't consistently take their time. But earth usually has the right amount of time in those first hours or days to find a quintessential solution and save the world in a blaze of glory. Whether it be Will Smith, Jeff Goldblum and Bill Pullman of "Independence Day" or last week's big-camp adaptation "Cowboys & Aliens" and the Brit hoodies of "Attack The Block." Or the yuppies of next falls "The Darkest Hour." Or the military gung-ho's of "Battle: Los Angeles" - with Aaron Eckhart as anguished Sgt. Nantz, Michelle Rodriguez as "tank girl"-ready Sgt. Santos, and Ramon Rodriguez as inexperienced Lt. Martinez - who all wake up on a morning of comet-like atmospheric blasts splashing into the Pacific. They sink tankers and bring great global news stories and only interest everyday without panic until gyrating turbo-machines stomp up the shore and start shooting away. Giro-crafts appear and shock wave through the skies and explode buildings into rubble and streets into craters, soon with all of LA covered in billowing black smoke of a charcoal black cover worse than any smog. With some evacuated, most dead, and LA left to smolder, our band of a few soldiers with Eckhart as their leader stand to face off and bring down these extra-terrestrial nightmares alone. All they need is a plan, and the ultimate solution. (SPOILER! Does it include bringing down a massive, and massively detailed mother hip that erupts out of the ground and must be blown up? Sounds familiar? You bet!)

"Battle: LA" is (cue again) another example, like "Sucker Punch" above,  of quality filmmaking and great effects and knocked-up action, but doesn't have a creative story cell in it's body. In director Jonathan Liebesman's approach (of horror-knocks like "Darkness Falls" and "Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning" and next year's "Clash of the Titans" sequel), is typical high-octane jittery action fare, as the images move too fast and cut so hard making any sense of where anyone is and what they are saying drove will drive you nuts. Jonathan, you are no Paul Greengrass. Can't these movies for once have nicely composed shots, with action that's paced and meaningful? I guess not.

But I'll say this in defense. Overall, "B:LA" isn't as horribly, horribly bad as most make it out to be. Because the movie isn't too loud, or too jittery, or silly, or difficult to understand. It isn't a whirling kaleidoscope of terror and lame moviemaking. Roger Ebert got heat for reviewing the movie in as just a worse light. I say you can follow along fine, it's only hard to keep your bearings. Though, there is better effects fare out there ("Super 8," for instance), but I'll give you the choice on whether you want to spend your own time seeing "B:LA." Hey, you might like it,  and most auds have defended it. You might, too.

But I'll recommend you don't see it's counterpart, a movie made by former "B:LA" VFX guys who left to make "Skyline" - a similarly Aliens Invade LA With Nifty Computer Effects story - produced and released it even before this one. From what I've read it isn't any better. I haven't seen it, but take it from me that you shouldn't.

___________________________________________________

I really think it will be another year before I write for you again. Oi! I need a trainer.

No comments: