The A-Team always looked like being a hammy, cheesy affair, it is a pity that the film-makers decided to try to add credibility to this endeavour by casting well-known and respected actors, some of whom rise above the material, some are smothered by it. They would have been better served to have gone all the way and made it a cheese-fest, in short cast Richard Gere and Hannibal. Though I will say this for the film, it is fun.
So many of the current crop of blockbusters are moving toward darker tones with the success of Christopher Nolan’s Batman films and the over-whelming success of his latest release, Inception, is only likely to increase this trend, however it is good to have some escapist silliness to alleviate the complexity and stodginess of some modern box office draws.
The general plot is well known, a crack team in the US military, are imprisoned for a crime they didn’t commit, and must clear their name by breaking out of jail and finding those that framed them, modernised to include a private security group termed "Black Forest" and while this has the benifit of reminding us of the real private security group operating in Iraq "Black Water", however it does present the problem that the audience are also reminded of a rich desert whenever they appear. Stepping in to the roles for this modern re-imagining are Liam Neeson as Colonel Hannibal Smith, Bradley Cooper as Lt. ‘Faceman’ Pack, Quinton ‘Rampage’ Jackson as B.A. Baracus and Sharlto Copley as Captain H.M. Murdock, supported by Jessica Biel and Patrick Wilson.
The only problem with this unrelenting daftness is that the plot pains you, it is calculated with great precision to draw in the audience in the most clumsy way possible, so the central thrust of the story takes place in Baghdad in the last days of the war, which the audience recognise as newsworthy, this central thrust is over the means to create untraceable US Dollars, which in a recession makes it even more prevalent to the viewer, and then one of the antagonists is a shady Arab, so the audience think ‘that’s bad’ and then he conducts dealings in a German bank, so the audience think ‘that’s doubly bad’.
This poor script work also leads to some truly painful dialogue, in one scene a US Army officer remarks to Hannibal “your Alpha Division or ‘A-Team’...” is a perfect example of the unrealistic dialogue which plagues this film, even worse are the scenes set in Mexico where the characters pepper their dialogue with the word “gringo” due to it being the only word an audience who didn’t come to the cinema to read can recognise, it is only surprising their weren’t more references to cojones, these characters also mix liberally between Spanish and English as an Officer orders his men to “fire” instead of yelling “fuego!”
The film also has pacing issues as the story merely throws up more and more set-pieces, so there is very little opportunity for character development and little conflict among the main cast, which would have added new layers of interest. The film-makers are also confused between which of the characters they want to focus on, they know that the audience is more interested in the iconic character of Bosco B.A. Baracus, but that they are also more interested in Bradley Cooper as the main box office draw, leading to the plot not serving either of these characters in an interesting way.
Patrick Wilson plays one of the chief antagonists, and clearly enjoys one of his few forays into mainstream cinema as he plays his character with obvious pleasure. Sharlto Copley similarly does good work with the little opportunity the film presented him with, the character is chiefly used as a comic device, but Copley provides in droves, making the film twice as enjoyable as it would have been without him. The rest of the cast are treading water, which due to the poor script is more akin to treading custard.
There is also a problem with the Computer Generated (CG) elements of the film, while it is no doubt cheaper and easier to create massive explosions and set-pieces in a computer, rather than the special effects used in the past; as such it leaves them feeling flat and takes away from the dramatic and impressive nature of some of these scenes.
The characters are very thinly drawn and one dimensional, which they even almost comment upon at one point as Liam Neeson’s ‘Hannibal’ calls some of the other characters like “cartoons” which seems like a very introspective and self aware moment, as the film is populated with these cartoonish characters.
The film’s lack of realism and general absurdity make it entertaining, but they mean the film lacks any real threat and as such the audience feels there is no jeopardy and consequently do not engage fully, which is just as well, because there is not much to engage with.
Wednesday 4 August 2010
Thursday 1 July 2010
Retro Review: Terminator Salvation
As penance for failing to blog for 3 months I am going to post another review I wrote last May, in a series of retro reviews in which I post reviews of films released around this date in history. So here follows a "Retro Review" of Terminator Salvation (Released May 2009).
While enjoyable The Terminator films have always been popcorn-fodder part of the burgeoning box office tradition of the 1990s, an innovation in the delivery of cyber-punk theology in the cinema, many would argue that without The Terminator there would be no Matrix. While not having the perceived depth of The Matrix, or the ground-breaking effects and fight scenes, The Terminator delivered a tense action film, akin to Duel, merely replacing a big truck with a giant German, whose requests for clothing and machinery aren't to be taken lightly.
While the original's 80s fashions seem dated, Terminator 2 was a more glossy affair, with an interesting twist on the original's premise. What Terminator 2 is remembered for though is the effects; audiences were blown away when the T-1000 rose up from a pool of liquid metal.
T3 was the cash-in giving the movie-going public a plain action film, loosely bridging us to the point where Terminator 4: Salvation begins.
The events foretold in Terminator 2 and shown in T3 appear to have taken place as told, we rejoin John Connor as the leader of a group of soldiers, who are part of a worldwide resistance against the machines. Connor learns that his time travelling future/past father (this area of time travel is classically difficult to define in writing), Kyle Rees (Anton Yelchin) is being targeted by the machines, threatening John's very existence.
Meanwhile in the early 21st century a man called Marcus Wright (Sam Worthington), is condemned to death is given the chance to donate his body to science, a chance he takes, he then awakes in the post-apocalyptic world, seemingly unchanged and soon comes into contact with the aforementioned Rees, as they battle to survive against the menacing machines.
The benefit of the Terminator films is that there is so much time travel, each film can redefine what happened and how it has affected the world. The resistance are a well supplied army in this film, and there is seemingly quite a large human population. To this extent the choice of the film-makers was wise, the weapons are fairly conventional, and recognisable, the machines aren't the shape-shifting monsters of T2 and 3.
Many of the post-apocalyptic clichés are present, overtures of Waterworld and Mad Max are abundant, the coveting of oil, and small mute children that represent just how bloody terrible the situation is that even the kids aren't whining constantly about ice cream.
The film is really struggling between two stories, one is an interesting study of what it is to be human and issues of redemption, and how someone from our time would react to this dystopian future, with some juicy fighting thrown in, nothing too original, but enjoyable nonetheless. The other story is Christian Bale yelling in your face ">
In the original draft of this story the John Connor part was far smaller, focusing on the more interesting story, with the Connor part very much peripheral to the central story, however when they hired Bale there was a drastic re-write, which crow-barred his character in and tried to make it the focus, when it was clear that what they had before was so much better.
Christian Bale comes fresh from his performance in last summers' smash success, The Dark Knight, and is seemingly still doing the Batman growl, which was so distracting in that film. Every line is growled or yelled, and all delivered as if it were the most important thing in the world, and while in the context of the film they are important the audience simply don't care. Bryce Dallas Howard is under-used as Connor's girlfriend, and subsequently the audience doesn't know what to think of her, so when she tearfully kisses John goodbye as he goes on a mission it falls flat. She was clearly told she would have a more substantial role, most of which was probably left on the cutting-room floor.
There isn't a good performance to pick between them, the film plods along to its inevitable conclusion, going through all the beats in a very conventional fashion, and often detracting from the story we want to see about the Marcus Wright character. Director McG, doesn’t even offer the audience an interesting camera shot.
Thoroughly uninspired directing a conflicting script and poor performances have made this film a huge disappointment, given the pedigree of its star and the first two films. The main problem is that unlike T1 and 2, we've seen it all before, the squid-like robots from the Matrix, the conflicts with leadership which could almost have been lifted directly from every cop film from the 1980s, with the exception of no badges and guns being requested. We're left with characters we don't care about, playing out a story that we all saw coming a mile away. It’s a pity that the focus fell on John Connor again, there are other stories to tell in a post-skynet world, many would have been more interesting than this.
Overall a poor sequel to such a seminal sci-fi film, this could have been so much better, there’s no salvation for this film.
While enjoyable The Terminator films have always been popcorn-fodder part of the burgeoning box office tradition of the 1990s, an innovation in the delivery of cyber-punk theology in the cinema, many would argue that without The Terminator there would be no Matrix. While not having the perceived depth of The Matrix, or the ground-breaking effects and fight scenes, The Terminator delivered a tense action film, akin to Duel, merely replacing a big truck with a giant German, whose requests for clothing and machinery aren't to be taken lightly.
While the original's 80s fashions seem dated, Terminator 2 was a more glossy affair, with an interesting twist on the original's premise. What Terminator 2 is remembered for though is the effects; audiences were blown away when the T-1000 rose up from a pool of liquid metal.
T3 was the cash-in giving the movie-going public a plain action film, loosely bridging us to the point where Terminator 4: Salvation begins.
The events foretold in Terminator 2 and shown in T3 appear to have taken place as told, we rejoin John Connor as the leader of a group of soldiers, who are part of a worldwide resistance against the machines. Connor learns that his time travelling future/past father (this area of time travel is classically difficult to define in writing), Kyle Rees (Anton Yelchin) is being targeted by the machines, threatening John's very existence.
Meanwhile in the early 21st century a man called Marcus Wright (Sam Worthington), is condemned to death is given the chance to donate his body to science, a chance he takes, he then awakes in the post-apocalyptic world, seemingly unchanged and soon comes into contact with the aforementioned Rees, as they battle to survive against the menacing machines.
The benefit of the Terminator films is that there is so much time travel, each film can redefine what happened and how it has affected the world. The resistance are a well supplied army in this film, and there is seemingly quite a large human population. To this extent the choice of the film-makers was wise, the weapons are fairly conventional, and recognisable, the machines aren't the shape-shifting monsters of T2 and 3.
Many of the post-apocalyptic clichés are present, overtures of Waterworld and Mad Max are abundant, the coveting of oil, and small mute children that represent just how bloody terrible the situation is that even the kids aren't whining constantly about ice cream.
The film is really struggling between two stories, one is an interesting study of what it is to be human and issues of redemption, and how someone from our time would react to this dystopian future, with some juicy fighting thrown in, nothing too original, but enjoyable nonetheless. The other story is Christian Bale yelling in your face ">
In the original draft of this story the John Connor part was far smaller, focusing on the more interesting story, with the Connor part very much peripheral to the central story, however when they hired Bale there was a drastic re-write, which crow-barred his character in and tried to make it the focus, when it was clear that what they had before was so much better.
Christian Bale comes fresh from his performance in last summers' smash success, The Dark Knight, and is seemingly still doing the Batman growl, which was so distracting in that film. Every line is growled or yelled, and all delivered as if it were the most important thing in the world, and while in the context of the film they are important the audience simply don't care. Bryce Dallas Howard is under-used as Connor's girlfriend, and subsequently the audience doesn't know what to think of her, so when she tearfully kisses John goodbye as he goes on a mission it falls flat. She was clearly told she would have a more substantial role, most of which was probably left on the cutting-room floor.
There isn't a good performance to pick between them, the film plods along to its inevitable conclusion, going through all the beats in a very conventional fashion, and often detracting from the story we want to see about the Marcus Wright character. Director McG, doesn’t even offer the audience an interesting camera shot.
Thoroughly uninspired directing a conflicting script and poor performances have made this film a huge disappointment, given the pedigree of its star and the first two films. The main problem is that unlike T1 and 2, we've seen it all before, the squid-like robots from the Matrix, the conflicts with leadership which could almost have been lifted directly from every cop film from the 1980s, with the exception of no badges and guns being requested. We're left with characters we don't care about, playing out a story that we all saw coming a mile away. It’s a pity that the focus fell on John Connor again, there are other stories to tell in a post-skynet world, many would have been more interesting than this.
Overall a poor sequel to such a seminal sci-fi film, this could have been so much better, there’s no salvation for this film.
American - The Bill Hicks Story
Synopsis - "American" is details the life of legendary stand-up comedian Bill Hicks, known for his forthright style and his rage at the American "Dream", Hicks is one of the best loved stand-ups of all time, achieving great success in a life cut tragically short by pancreatic cancer.
The Review
I first heard Bill Hicks’ comedy when I was about 14 or 15, and my reaction was the same as my reaction to many of the other introductions to great comedy that I’ve experienced, “Why did nobody tell me this existed?” I spent my meagre savings on Hicks’ “Salvation” album, having almost randomly chosen the album among many others like the better known (though not to me) “Arizona Bay” or “Sane Man”. At a time when mainstream stand-up was all that was available to a kid living in sub-urban Warwickshire, and this was populated by poor satirical stand-ups and was being dominated by Peter Kay, Hicks’ loftier ambitions and finer craft were like a bolt of lightning to me, and perhaps as one loves the “Doctor Who” of their generation, I still believe that “Salvation” recording in Oxford to be Hicks at his best. I listened to the album repeatedly learnt it by word and wanted to learn more of the man behind the laughter. I learnt of the substance abuse, growing up in Texas, his feud with Dennis Leary, his being dropped from the David Letterman show, and of course of his untimely and tragic death.
“American” gives the audience an interesting insight into Hicks and his roots, friends and families, it almost takes it as red that the audience have some knowledge of Hicks. It is notable that outside of the clips of Hicks’ performing (much of which to me as a Hicks fan was new) we do not hear much of Hicks talking about himself, instead we are shown Hicks through his friends and family. We aren’t subjected to the fawning adulation of other stand-ups who Hicks influenced, instead we hear from the other comedians who were close to him and who performed with him.
The film-makers have unearthed some fantastic archive footage of Hick performing at a very young age, as well as a lot of photographs of Hicks. The photos are animated in a very interesting way, which has some similarities with the great “The Kid Stays in the Picture”, bringing movement and dynamism to static photos, while Hicks’ friends and family talk about him in voice-over, it isn’t until far later in the film that we see these people as they are today, discussing Hicks with the film-makers, instead we see them in photographs as they were and as Hicks knew them.
The film was made by two English fans of Hicks and they provided a new perspective on Hicks, from that in other documentaries made about Hicks, which often fail to reflect that Hicks gained his greatest adulation, not in his native America, but on the other side of the Atlantic. The film strikes a good balance between stand-up clips and interviews with those who knew him best, this stems from a good understanding that the main audience for this documentary is fans of Hicks who have seen almost all of the footage of him performing, and those that haven’t will be inspired by the segments which do feature to seek out more of Hicks.
It is incredible to see the subjects Bill talks about and how much of it has not lost its relevance, his main philosophy on the power of love over fear, feels particularly poignant when one thinks of the events in the world in the years since Bill’s death.
The film is possibly a little too light on some detail, his feud with Dennis Leary isn't mentioned at all, I can understand why the film-makers preferred to focus on the positives of Bill, and not on the stodgy allegations that Leary plagiarised some of Bill's material and the persona of Hicks, however a friend I had gone to see the film with (who wasn't familiar with Hicks' work) remarked to me that he seems very similar to Leary, I worry that in the years since Hicks' death that some viewers will not be as knowledgeable of Hicks' career as the film-makers clearly are.
The film has had a very limited release, being shown for only one night in Lincoln and this only coming almost two months after its initial release, where I was one of fewer than twenty viewers enjoying the film, which is a tremendous pity as the film cleverly shows Hicks through his friends, providing the audience with a new outlook on Hicks, which has been missing in other documentaries which focus on his style and his legacy, while not providing viewers with information on what Hicks was like as a person, away from stand-up.
If there was ever a time when Hicks’ viewpoint and outlook on life was required it is now, at a time when this enjoyable and informative documentary on his life has been crowded out of the cinema by the likes of the rampantly materialistic Sex and the City 2, it is clear we need Bill now more than ever.
The Review
I first heard Bill Hicks’ comedy when I was about 14 or 15, and my reaction was the same as my reaction to many of the other introductions to great comedy that I’ve experienced, “Why did nobody tell me this existed?” I spent my meagre savings on Hicks’ “Salvation” album, having almost randomly chosen the album among many others like the better known (though not to me) “Arizona Bay” or “Sane Man”. At a time when mainstream stand-up was all that was available to a kid living in sub-urban Warwickshire, and this was populated by poor satirical stand-ups and was being dominated by Peter Kay, Hicks’ loftier ambitions and finer craft were like a bolt of lightning to me, and perhaps as one loves the “Doctor Who” of their generation, I still believe that “Salvation” recording in Oxford to be Hicks at his best. I listened to the album repeatedly learnt it by word and wanted to learn more of the man behind the laughter. I learnt of the substance abuse, growing up in Texas, his feud with Dennis Leary, his being dropped from the David Letterman show, and of course of his untimely and tragic death.
“American” gives the audience an interesting insight into Hicks and his roots, friends and families, it almost takes it as red that the audience have some knowledge of Hicks. It is notable that outside of the clips of Hicks’ performing (much of which to me as a Hicks fan was new) we do not hear much of Hicks talking about himself, instead we are shown Hicks through his friends and family. We aren’t subjected to the fawning adulation of other stand-ups who Hicks influenced, instead we hear from the other comedians who were close to him and who performed with him.
The film-makers have unearthed some fantastic archive footage of Hick performing at a very young age, as well as a lot of photographs of Hicks. The photos are animated in a very interesting way, which has some similarities with the great “The Kid Stays in the Picture”, bringing movement and dynamism to static photos, while Hicks’ friends and family talk about him in voice-over, it isn’t until far later in the film that we see these people as they are today, discussing Hicks with the film-makers, instead we see them in photographs as they were and as Hicks knew them.
The film was made by two English fans of Hicks and they provided a new perspective on Hicks, from that in other documentaries made about Hicks, which often fail to reflect that Hicks gained his greatest adulation, not in his native America, but on the other side of the Atlantic. The film strikes a good balance between stand-up clips and interviews with those who knew him best, this stems from a good understanding that the main audience for this documentary is fans of Hicks who have seen almost all of the footage of him performing, and those that haven’t will be inspired by the segments which do feature to seek out more of Hicks.
It is incredible to see the subjects Bill talks about and how much of it has not lost its relevance, his main philosophy on the power of love over fear, feels particularly poignant when one thinks of the events in the world in the years since Bill’s death.
The film is possibly a little too light on some detail, his feud with Dennis Leary isn't mentioned at all, I can understand why the film-makers preferred to focus on the positives of Bill, and not on the stodgy allegations that Leary plagiarised some of Bill's material and the persona of Hicks, however a friend I had gone to see the film with (who wasn't familiar with Hicks' work) remarked to me that he seems very similar to Leary, I worry that in the years since Hicks' death that some viewers will not be as knowledgeable of Hicks' career as the film-makers clearly are.
The film has had a very limited release, being shown for only one night in Lincoln and this only coming almost two months after its initial release, where I was one of fewer than twenty viewers enjoying the film, which is a tremendous pity as the film cleverly shows Hicks through his friends, providing the audience with a new outlook on Hicks, which has been missing in other documentaries which focus on his style and his legacy, while not providing viewers with information on what Hicks was like as a person, away from stand-up.
If there was ever a time when Hicks’ viewpoint and outlook on life was required it is now, at a time when this enjoyable and informative documentary on his life has been crowded out of the cinema by the likes of the rampantly materialistic Sex and the City 2, it is clear we need Bill now more than ever.
Thursday 1 April 2010
Trailers
Before last night's film (see my review of Kick-Ass here) the trailers came up and I, as ever, absolutely destroyed my friends at the trailer game (guessing what it's a trailer for before the trailer tells you), admittedly I had seen all but two of them before, so I thought I'd share my views on them and what we can tell from them here.
Iron Man 2
The big film this summer sees an expanded (and in one case altered) cast, which now boasts Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Sam Rockwell, Scarlett Johansson, Mickey Rourke and Samuel L Jackson, and with that expanded cast seems to be a far expanded story, while many had expected that the film would feature the "Demon in a bottle" storyline from the comic book (in which Tony Stark becomes an alcoholic) however there is only the mildest reference that this is to feature (perhaps the idea of alcoholism in a trailer for a Summer blockbuster was rejected).
What is to feature is a presumably slightly lengthy Senate hearing into getting the Iron Man design given to the US armed forces, as well as Rockwell's character Justin Hammer being set-up and his rivalry with Tony Stark.
Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard (a cost-cutting measure after Howerd earned more for Iron Man that Downey Jr.) as Stark's friend Rhodey, who it is clear will become War Machine.
There is also the budding romance between Stark and Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) added to this the intervening Natasha Romanov/Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson).
So this could be pushing the limits in terms of time, and may ultimately suffer from the pressure of time and see the story rushed, however the film does look exciting it will be interesting to see what comes of the finished product (coincidentally director Jon Favreau is set to deliver the film today, according to his Twitter posts).
Inception
This film has been kept well under wraps and the new trailer poses more questions than it answers. Before the trailer the main question people had about the new film by Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, The Prestige) was "what's this film about?" after the trailer the questions are "what's this film about?" and "no seriously, just what the hell is this film about?"
Everything about this trailer is puzzling, it doesn't show much of the supporting cast, such as Michael Caine and Marion Cottilard. It seems that the events within the mind are that they are able to enter a person's dreams in this sci-fi world.
It's certainly one of the most intriguing trailers and films in general ever, it is also to be released in IMAX, which Nolan experimented with in The Dark Knight. I for one am looking forward to the mystery being revealed (most likely on the third or fourth viewing).
Robin Hood
This trailer is quite new, they were showing a somewhat old one last night, but I couldn't find it on YouTube, but calling Robin Hood Gladiator 2 doesn't seem too far off the mark. It's clear that Russell Crowe is attempting a Nottingham accent (said as someone who lives in the East Midlands), and that there are certainly scenes which bear a striking resemblance to Gladiator, the sea front scenes perhaps hint that the film will open with us seeing Robin fighting in the crusades.
It's also clear that the "Marian" character will not be in the vein of the damsel in distress, but more of the warrior-woman we saw Blanchett play in Elizabeth: The Golden Age.
The film has many similarities with Gladiator, a brave leader of men fights the oppression of a cowardly ruler who has usurped the rightful ruler, however will it have the emotional punch of Gladiator? We will only find out when the film opens on May 14th.
The A-Team
Perhaps the most disappointing of the trailers, the idea of a film version of a rubbish, but kitschy 80s TV show is never one that appealed, but this looks like it may well be the stinker of the summer.
The trailer begins by focussing on B.A. Baracas, then giving us a rubbish orchestration of the A-Team theme, and then Liam Neeson giving the only line which really indicates that this is an A-Team film. As a huge fan of Sharlto Copley's performance in District 9 it is disappointing that he is in this film and featured so little in the trailer, preferring a gratuitous shot of Bradley Cooper with his top off.
I may well be proved wrong, and I certainly hope I am, but from these indications its not looking good.
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World
This is a film which I'm incredibly excited by, but will people unaware of the comics be as enthused?
The adaptation of the popular comic series is directed by Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz) and stars Michael Cera (Arrested Development, Juno) as Scott Pilgrim who meets the girl of his dreams, but discovers a significant caveat to his affections, he must defeat her seven evil ex-boyfriends in a fight. The fights are all different but strongly resemble video game-style fights, and anyone familiar with Wright's work in Spaced will remember the scene where Daisy and Tim square off in a Tekken 3-style fight.
The trailer is good indicator of what is to come in this off-beat and visually dazzling comedy, I doubt it will have enticed many others though, but perhaps the intrigue of a film so clearly different will spur people into the cinema. I look forward greatly to it.
Iron Man 2
The big film this summer sees an expanded (and in one case altered) cast, which now boasts Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Sam Rockwell, Scarlett Johansson, Mickey Rourke and Samuel L Jackson, and with that expanded cast seems to be a far expanded story, while many had expected that the film would feature the "Demon in a bottle" storyline from the comic book (in which Tony Stark becomes an alcoholic) however there is only the mildest reference that this is to feature (perhaps the idea of alcoholism in a trailer for a Summer blockbuster was rejected).
What is to feature is a presumably slightly lengthy Senate hearing into getting the Iron Man design given to the US armed forces, as well as Rockwell's character Justin Hammer being set-up and his rivalry with Tony Stark.
Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard (a cost-cutting measure after Howerd earned more for Iron Man that Downey Jr.) as Stark's friend Rhodey, who it is clear will become War Machine.
There is also the budding romance between Stark and Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) added to this the intervening Natasha Romanov/Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson).
So this could be pushing the limits in terms of time, and may ultimately suffer from the pressure of time and see the story rushed, however the film does look exciting it will be interesting to see what comes of the finished product (coincidentally director Jon Favreau is set to deliver the film today, according to his Twitter posts).
Inception
This film has been kept well under wraps and the new trailer poses more questions than it answers. Before the trailer the main question people had about the new film by Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, The Prestige) was "what's this film about?" after the trailer the questions are "what's this film about?" and "no seriously, just what the hell is this film about?"
Everything about this trailer is puzzling, it doesn't show much of the supporting cast, such as Michael Caine and Marion Cottilard. It seems that the events within the mind are that they are able to enter a person's dreams in this sci-fi world.
It's certainly one of the most intriguing trailers and films in general ever, it is also to be released in IMAX, which Nolan experimented with in The Dark Knight. I for one am looking forward to the mystery being revealed (most likely on the third or fourth viewing).
Robin Hood
This trailer is quite new, they were showing a somewhat old one last night, but I couldn't find it on YouTube, but calling Robin Hood Gladiator 2 doesn't seem too far off the mark. It's clear that Russell Crowe is attempting a Nottingham accent (said as someone who lives in the East Midlands), and that there are certainly scenes which bear a striking resemblance to Gladiator, the sea front scenes perhaps hint that the film will open with us seeing Robin fighting in the crusades.
It's also clear that the "Marian" character will not be in the vein of the damsel in distress, but more of the warrior-woman we saw Blanchett play in Elizabeth: The Golden Age.
The film has many similarities with Gladiator, a brave leader of men fights the oppression of a cowardly ruler who has usurped the rightful ruler, however will it have the emotional punch of Gladiator? We will only find out when the film opens on May 14th.
The A-Team
Perhaps the most disappointing of the trailers, the idea of a film version of a rubbish, but kitschy 80s TV show is never one that appealed, but this looks like it may well be the stinker of the summer.
The trailer begins by focussing on B.A. Baracas, then giving us a rubbish orchestration of the A-Team theme, and then Liam Neeson giving the only line which really indicates that this is an A-Team film. As a huge fan of Sharlto Copley's performance in District 9 it is disappointing that he is in this film and featured so little in the trailer, preferring a gratuitous shot of Bradley Cooper with his top off.
I may well be proved wrong, and I certainly hope I am, but from these indications its not looking good.
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World
This is a film which I'm incredibly excited by, but will people unaware of the comics be as enthused?
The adaptation of the popular comic series is directed by Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz) and stars Michael Cera (Arrested Development, Juno) as Scott Pilgrim who meets the girl of his dreams, but discovers a significant caveat to his affections, he must defeat her seven evil ex-boyfriends in a fight. The fights are all different but strongly resemble video game-style fights, and anyone familiar with Wright's work in Spaced will remember the scene where Daisy and Tim square off in a Tekken 3-style fight.
The trailer is good indicator of what is to come in this off-beat and visually dazzling comedy, I doubt it will have enticed many others though, but perhaps the intrigue of a film so clearly different will spur people into the cinema. I look forward greatly to it.
Review: Kick-Ass
The team behind the enormously entertaining Stardust return with an adaptation of, Mark Millar's graphic novel, Kick-Ass.
The film is about Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson), a nerdy comic book loving outcast living in New York, who decides after being mugged one-too-many times that he shall become a costumed super-hero, and names himself Kick-Ass. One of his first crime-fighting excursions is caught on a video-phone and he soon becomes an internet phenomenon, attracting the attention of gangster Frank D'Amico (Mark Strong), and father-daughter team of masked vigilantes Big Daddy (Nicolas Cage) and Hit-Girl (Chloe Moretz). See the trailer below.
Kick-Ass really delivers a great comic-book film that is thoroughly entertaining. The film effortlessly blends humour, violence and even very dramatic scenes. Matthew Vaughan's direction is fantastic, showing the failings of other comic-book films, for example Vaughan shoots New York in a way that has never been achieved in the Spider-Man trilogy, and the fight scenes are far more dramatic and interesting that in last year's Watchmen adaptation.
There are some faults in the opening, as the story takes some time to get going and there is a lot of jumping between present and past events, however as in all superhero films the payoff makes this only a minor complaint, in fact the opening set-up is what sets out so many of the parameters for what’s to come.
The soundtrack and score are great however there are some times in the film where it feels like there is a conflict between the two, and some of the soundtrack choices are slightly uninspired like the growing film cliché that whenever a girl is fighting "Bad Reputation" has to be played.
The film has numerous nods to other comic-book films, which is fitting in a film that so much plays on the conventions established in other superhero films, one of the most obvious homage is that Nicolas Cage as Big Daddy (a character who's outfit is modelled on Batman's) impersonates Adam West while in the costume.
The performances are all outstanding, and the interplay between the actors is great, and Chloe Moretz as Hit-Girl shows why she is a rising star, with a performance which shows a tremendous amount of maturity in what is a very demanding role. Aaron Johnson also performs well giving a very convincing American accent, and working well with the actors playing his friends.
The storytelling is brilliant, allowing for moments of great comedy amongst tragedy and the variation in style is also achieved well, and it also makes the balance between the light-hearted moments of the film and the darker portions work.
Overall the film is entertaining, thrilling, thoroughly engrossing and hugely impressive.
The film is about Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson), a nerdy comic book loving outcast living in New York, who decides after being mugged one-too-many times that he shall become a costumed super-hero, and names himself Kick-Ass. One of his first crime-fighting excursions is caught on a video-phone and he soon becomes an internet phenomenon, attracting the attention of gangster Frank D'Amico (Mark Strong), and father-daughter team of masked vigilantes Big Daddy (Nicolas Cage) and Hit-Girl (Chloe Moretz). See the trailer below.
Kick-Ass really delivers a great comic-book film that is thoroughly entertaining. The film effortlessly blends humour, violence and even very dramatic scenes. Matthew Vaughan's direction is fantastic, showing the failings of other comic-book films, for example Vaughan shoots New York in a way that has never been achieved in the Spider-Man trilogy, and the fight scenes are far more dramatic and interesting that in last year's Watchmen adaptation.
There are some faults in the opening, as the story takes some time to get going and there is a lot of jumping between present and past events, however as in all superhero films the payoff makes this only a minor complaint, in fact the opening set-up is what sets out so many of the parameters for what’s to come.
The soundtrack and score are great however there are some times in the film where it feels like there is a conflict between the two, and some of the soundtrack choices are slightly uninspired like the growing film cliché that whenever a girl is fighting "Bad Reputation" has to be played.
The film has numerous nods to other comic-book films, which is fitting in a film that so much plays on the conventions established in other superhero films, one of the most obvious homage is that Nicolas Cage as Big Daddy (a character who's outfit is modelled on Batman's) impersonates Adam West while in the costume.The performances are all outstanding, and the interplay between the actors is great, and Chloe Moretz as Hit-Girl shows why she is a rising star, with a performance which shows a tremendous amount of maturity in what is a very demanding role. Aaron Johnson also performs well giving a very convincing American accent, and working well with the actors playing his friends.
The storytelling is brilliant, allowing for moments of great comedy amongst tragedy and the variation in style is also achieved well, and it also makes the balance between the light-hearted moments of the film and the darker portions work.
Overall the film is entertaining, thrilling, thoroughly engrossing and hugely impressive.
Introduction
Hello reader.
This is a new blog from a long-time film fan. I will be blogging on film news and posting film reviews, with the occasional expansive feature.
So if you want to keep up with all things celluloid then read on and come back for regular updates.
For twitter users I shall be posting updates about new posts there, so follow me by clicking StefanKijewski
Thanks, Stefan Kijewski
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
