How many great film trilogies have been ruined by an inferior third installment, what is it about these films that managed somehow to tarnish the memory of the films that came before them:
the final...disappointing...Installment
The Matrix Trilogy; well this one cannot be ignored, Revolutions has to be one of the most anticlimactic 'threequels' in cinematic history, long pondering, lacking any innovative fight sequences, and not containing any of the philosophical questions of its predecessors, and not being able to answer any of the questions raised in its predecessors, the film slowly becomes a depressing and flaccid story which lacks the complexity of the stellar original Rating: D-
The Pirates of the Caribbean Trilogy; not including the fourth disastrous outing, the third installment failed to be as original or as imaginative as its two predecessors which manage to illustrate various pirate myths, such as the legend of Davy Jones, and the Kraken. Unfortunately 'At Worlds End' is simply unimaginative and attempts to simply 'follow on' from its predecessor without any original material, and without attempting to delve further in to pirate myths Rating: C-
Shrek; Shrek the third was undoubtedly a disaster, its plot was unrealistic and uninspired, and whereas its two prequels attempted to parody fairy tale culture, with an imaginative treatment of its characters, and was essentially a spoof of the 'Disney' style fairy tale story. This film doesn't even try to develop its characters, and presents them as two dimensional litteral representations of these characters, ie: Fiona's group of cohorts and Charming's group of villain friends. Rating: C+
X Men; Here the series suffers from a change of director, and new director Ratner attempts to create a sequel which is exciting by adding a whole bunch of villains, and in the ends the film suffers the same affliction as Shrek the Third, in that the many cameos leave us feeling unfulfilled and wanting, the film is only partially redeemed by Famke Janssen and Halle Berrys performances as Phoenix and Storm, as well as of course Stewart and McKellen as the films main protagonist and antagonist respectivley. Rating: B-
Spider-man: Here the third installment of Rami's trilogy falls to the fame fate as X3, in that it attempts to do too much story wise, and contains too much story and not enough length. This episode contains three villains, two love interests, two huge set pieces, and a dance scene. While all this should add up to a thrilling conclusion, it ends up feeling crammed, and as if the filmmakers knew that this was their final chance, and that they should try to cram as much as possible into this film, without really developing the characters. the film descends into mushy self searching; with the end of the film, much like spider-man 2 being a cop-out, with the villain simply deciding to be a good guy...seriously? Rating B-
And now for the ones that got it right, to prove there is at least a little hope for the film industry:
The Dark Knight; her, hris Nolan manages to wrap all of the ends up nicely, with Batman handing the mantle over to Robin, and deciding to live out the rest of his life in peace. The film manages not to descend into the too many villains scenario, and doesn't attempt to replicate its predecessors frenetic qualities or psychotic villain, with the story taking place over an extended period of time, and the villain instead being controlled and mechanical, the film is entertaining and action packed, with a focus on performance and special effects rather than an over reliance of over-the-top CGI or 3D gimmicks. Top Marks! Rating: A
Toy Story: There is relatively little to say here, except that with metascore ratings of 100 for its predecessors, and a decade long wait,anticipation for this film was high, an it didn't disappoint, with the film being heartfelt and tying up the ends of the story neatly for all its characters, leaving us satisfied yet not longing. Rating: A
The Bourne Trilogy: Here the story reaches its zenith with the third film being arguably the most successful, and with the film being action packed, thrilling, and providing us with some real answers about the real identity of Jason Bourne, providing us with some great strategic sequences along the way, whilst maintaining a cliffhanger at the end and providing us with the hint of a sequel (lets put 'The Bourne Legacy' out of our minds, just for now)Rating A-
I will conclude in saying that the final conclusion of a film trilogy is not simply an excuse to cram in all the crap that you couldn't fit into the previous installments, yet must tie up all the unanswered questions and plot lines from the previous installments.
As the title suggests this post is about 2006's hit V For Vendetta, having seen the film many many times and also being a fan of the original graphic novel by Alan Moore, and is a tale of anarchism, and rebellion in a totalitarian state. I recently reviewed Cloud Atlas, a film with which V for Vendetta shares many thematic, cinematic and conceptual elements with Cloud Atlas, firstly the film is written by Andy and Lana (formerly Larry) Wachowski, who both co-directed Cloud Atlas and of course the Matrix Trilogy. Both films also contain references to totalitarian states, and show us individuals who show immense courage to reveal the truth; Evey in V for Vendetta, and Somni-451 in the "An Orison of Sonmi~451" (2144) segment of Cloud Atlas. The two films are also both rather good!
The role of the title villain V is played by Hugo Weaving, who manages to give a stunning performance despite only showing his face in one short scene, and Natalie Portman plays Evey, a young woman who shows incredible strength and who by her courage manages to help our anti-hero bring down a regime of terror. The film deviates from the graphic novel in many ways, firstly the novel is set in the 1990's, and deals with themes such as Anarchy and fachism, whereas the film is set in the future, around the 22nd century, when America has been destroyed, and neo-conservativism is Britain's response to the fear of nuclear war and multiculturalism.
The film shows us less of a post cold war environment as shown in the graphic novel, and more of a post Iraq war, and is incredibly current in its criticism of the bush doctrine and the state of world politics, it was these things that led Alan Moore to distance himself from th project, yet i feel that these additions help make the film current and exciting to a film audience, the novel is incredibly 'of the moment' and was a response to the division of the world at the time, and to how the world would end up if the cold war did not end, yet it raises questions about divisions and the harmful nature of the division of the world into two factions.
The reason that this change works to well in this film also has to do with the universal nature of the character of V, in the novel Evey takes up the mask at the end and takes up the mantle of becoming V, this universality means that the characters identity is not defined by time or place or political concept, but by bravery, courage and an avidity for justice, the scene in which all the free peoples of London put on the Guy Fawkes masks and march on the houses of parliament, show us that V is not so much a character as he is a symbol, and as he says 'Symbols are invincible'
This use of the character as a symbol justifies the changing of the time and placement of the novel, and the sense that the mask is a symbol which represent freedom, justice and the fact that if we group together, we can do anything. after all, governments should be afraid of their people. I am impressed that watching this film 7 years after its creation, the film is still incredibly current, and means more now that ever, and i feel that the Wachowski's deft and thorough understanding of the material helps to create a current and entertaining cinematic sculpture,which manages to be current and which 7 years on and which is still 'of the moment', top marks! Rating: A-
V: The only verdict is vengeance, a vendetta, held as a votive not in vain.
There are movies, and then there is Cloud Atlas... This epic and unique film adaptation takes David Mitchell's 2004 acclaimed novel, and adapts it with a deftness that shows a true understanding of the core material. Instead of talking about the film in itself i will attempt to decode the differing storylines and the overall philosophy of the film.
Cloud Atlas is a film which uses an ensemble cast, each playing six different characters in 6 different centuries of past, present and future. The overall theme of the film is on our actions, and the repercussions our actions can have on the future, and how our past influences our present.
One of the main themes of the film is repetition, using the same actors for the different roles, and having continuing themes throughout the 6 storys, such as the birthmark shared by the characters, the directors show us how the way we behave throughout time is always the same, Halle Berry's character, Luisa Rey, states, whilst reading old letters; 'i'm trying to understand why we keep making the same mistakes' and Tom Hanks character in the same vingette says that he is falling in love with Luisa Rey,and is incredulous of this given that he met her once for a brief moment. We as an audience understznd though it is not implicitly stated, thet he falls for her so easily, because it is not the first time that he has fallen in love with her, and nor will it be the last. The character of Robert Frobisher states that;
I believe there is a another world waiting for us, Sixsmith. A better world. And I'll be waiting for you there, and Jim Broadbents character states that as a race, we simply cross our paths like figureskaters, doing the same thing over and over.
Another facet is destiny, and the idea that we each have a path that is set out for us, and that we each have something that we have to do; Luisa Rey believes that uncovering the truth is her destiny, and that she must find out about the forces behind this nuclear power plant, interestingly enough the other main character that Berry plays has the same role, she wants to scale to the top of the mountain despite the fears of the tribes in order to uncover the truth. Sonmi-451, a clone who works in a diner has a destiny to fulfill, and sees that her actions have consequences beyond this time or the next, and who believes that death is but a door, which leads on to something else, and that her destiny is to essentially blow the lid on this totalitarian regime.
Which brings us to the next facet of this epic story, The Abess states that our life is not simply our own, and that our actions and the way we make decisions can have repercussions which affect the near and distant future and how the past affects us and the way we behave, an important theme in the film is that of nuclear power, and the 6th vignette takes place after 'the fall' when most of civilization have been killed off, and has now returned to living in huts and caves, and have resorted to tribe like behavior. This is important in two senses, one because it shows us that our actions can have major repercussions for the future, and secondly because it shows us that the circle of life sung about in the lion king doesn't just describe that our life cycle goes; 'from womb to tomb' as Sonmi-451 dscribes, but that the life cycle of civilization also does the same, and that everything comes full circle, and that we always end up back where we started.
Another theme in the movie is that of falling and ascending, Luisa's car falls after it is forced of the bridge, Chang falls of of the walkway after he is shot at, Sonmi-451 ascends from her underground prison to the real world where she finds a world that is equally as horrible as the world she has left, and she decides to make a difference in the world, and in doing so she ascends in the eyes of the tribes who live beyond her, and who worship her as a deity. The human race experiences a fall from grace in that it goes back to its most basic roots of savagness, after experiencing an event known itself as 'The Fall' interpreted by most to be a representation of nuclear holocaust. This idea of ascent and descent is a representation of the ways in which society succeeds and fails, and the way just as our successes are by our intelligence and creativity, our failures come from our inherent flaws, answering Luisa Reys question as to why we keep making the same mistakes.
The number six is an important facet of this story, six main characters, with 6 different storylines, set in 6 different times and places, Sixsmith is the name of a main character, we know from the novel that he is 66 years old, and Frobisher writes the Cloud Atlas Sextet, a 6 part symphony with 6 overlapping soloists, much like the film, which contains 6 overlapping story's.
Finally we come to the large and talented ensemble cast. Doona Bae plays sonmi-451, and shows us a portrait of a tragic yet strong and stubborn young woman, Tom Hanks plays a multitude of characters, prominently he plays Zachry, a man who seems to be running from a tragedy in his past. Jim Sturgess plays Adam Ewing, infusing the role with a deftness, and showing us a man who is struggling with issues of equality and fairness, and who must live out his destiny in order to free the world from the evils of slavery. Halle Berry shines as Luisa Rey, as does James D'Arcy as Rufus Sixsmith. Hugo Weaving and Hugh Grant play a variety of villains in entertaining performances, and it is great to finally see Grant acting in a role that is not a romcom. Finally we come to the terrifyingly beautiful Ben Whishaw, who is stunning as Robert Frobisher, a musician dealing with a talent that threatens to consume him as he works for the spoilt and egotistical Vivyan Ayrs, (played by Jim Broadbent) and whose story is told in letters that he writes to his lover, Rufus Sixsmith who is studying at Cambridge.
Overall this film is stunning, a deftly handled adaptation that manages to successfully weave together 6 differently storylines, and which manages to keep a visual identity for each, whilst still being coherent as a piece of art, this instant classic and what will surely be a cult film is a breathtaking testament to what connects us as humans and to the repercussions that our actions can have on the future. Rating A+
Robert Frobisher:
I believe there is a another world waiting for us, Sixsmith. A better world. And I'll be waiting for you there.
There doesn't get to be more anticipation than this, when i heard about the release of this film, i instantly rushed out and bought the original book, and read it in about a day. The book didn't disappoint, and i found it to be engaging, bright interesting and unique. The film is very similar in a lot of ways, and is great fun.
The film is for one interesting for its cast, the three leads of the film manage to be charming and sincere in their roles as adorable yet deeply flawed characters, Emma Watson and Ezra Miller shine as Charlies insecure yet funny friends. Emma Watson truly manages to take a character which could easily become superficial and two dimensional, and adds an insecurity and a depth to what is her first major film role since the end of the Harry Potter series. And Ezra Miller plays Emma Watson, or more correctly Sam's gay and sensitive stepbrother.
The novel is very unusual in it being an epistolary novel, rather than trying to replicate this format, the film uses the essence of this format, without needing to explain exactly why Charlie is writing these letters, yet his letters act as a form of narration, which i feel is smart. The film is noteworthy in that the director is Stephen Chbosky, author of the original, i feel that this comes across in the movie, as the treatment of the story and the diversions that the script makes from the original shows a sure handling and a director who truly knows the source material and the deviations necessary to make the film palatable for a film audience and not for the format to feel 'forced'.
Overall this is a feel good serio-comedy with strong performances from its lead actors and a really good soundtrack, (much like Mr Mudd's last hit film Juno, which i gather most of you have seen) and which overall is entertaining and fun, yet which portrays a strong method and which shows us an insight into the lives of disparate and misfit teenagers, much like me! Rating: A-
Charlie:
Right now we are alive and in this moment I swear we are infinite.
Well it really seems that there are a ludicrous amount of trends in the film idustry right, now, and im not talking 3D or a ridiculous amount of CGI or digital backlots. Film executives have become so enamoured by profits that they think of nothing of jumping on the latest trend in cinema beurocracy, ie; whatever last made a profit.
Really one of the most ridiculous trends has to be basing films on bord games, one at least hopes that this trend will have subsided with the critical and commercial disaster also known as battleship, where Razzie winner Rihanna acted as herself for two hours and everyone pretended that she was acting. Does it not seem more than a little ridiculous to base a movie on a game that has not been played by anyone below retirement age, and even the addition of an alien species couldn't push this film above a 50% approval rating. Many other films were reported to be in development, including movies based on Monopoly, Risk, Candyland, and the occult favorite Ouija. A remake of the cult classic Cluedo is even in developpment, in fact, Cluedo could even be seen as perhaps the genesis of all these projects, however given the lackluster response to battleship, it is unknown if these projects are still on the go.
Another HUGE trend is for movies based on fairytales, allegedly a response to Tim Burtons megahit, Alice In Wonderland. The last year alone gave us a string of films which were mostly flops based on fairy tales, including Hansel and Gretel, Red Riding Hood, Mirror Mirror, Snow White and the Huntsman, Oz the Great and Powerful, Jack the Giant Slayer, and a host of others, Disney also has in development 3 more adaptations of animated classics, including Sleeping Beauty (Maleficent), Beauty and the Beast, and Cinderella. Dreamworks also produced an animated film called Rise of the Guardians, which was nougt but a monumental flop, and resulted in the layoff of 300 staff from Dreamworks offices. Do the math, you will see that many of these films were huge flops, with the exception of Alice and Oz, both produced by Disney oddly enough. All this really concludes that fairy tale based films are really nothing but a trend, and that viewers have relatively little interest in them.
The conclusion that we can really draw from all this is that studio executives really are more than anxious to make a profit, and will literally turn to the latest trend in order to make money, ironic given that very few of these films had big box office returns! Though is anyone else really excited to see Angelina Jolie in Maleficent?
It is very rare that a film can touch one so intensely as does The Hours, a film which manages to be uplifting, inspiring, and yet tragically moving. The film was directed by Stephen Daldry, and based on the much lauded novel by Michael Cunningham. The film wallowed in development hell for many years, with some believing it to be unfilmable, due to the many issues raised in the film, and the films three part structure, portraying three different characters in three different decades on two different continents.
The first story deals with a bored housewife in 1951 Los Angeles, the overall theme of the film is the novel Mrs Dalloway, and the way it connects women in different times. Mrs Brown, played by Julianne Moore, is a housewife, whose life seems to be perfect from the outside, yet who is dealing with intense depression, and who is comtemplating suicide, she is reading the novel, Mrs Dalloway. Her life relates to the novel in the way that everyone, including we as an audience, think that she is spoilt and that she doesnt see what she has: a son, a daughter on the way, and a husband who worships her. Her relationship that she has with her friend Kitty is also mirrored in the novel, the illicit kiss that they share is also mirrored.
The next story is that of new york hostess Clarissa Vaughn, who is planning a party for her AIDs ricken friend Richard Brown, a poet. Her life in many ways mirrors that of Mrs Dalloway in the novel, and the way in which her path is resolved; Clarissa Vaughn is played by the ravishing Meryl Streep, however her performance fails to be as memorable or as intreguing as that of either of her costars.
Finally we come to the ravishing Nicole Kidman, who manages to create a distinguished and memorable portrait of famed writer Virginia Woolf, struggling with mental illness and depression as she attempts to finish her novel. What makes Kidmans perforamance so astounding is the way in which she interprets the character, rather than portraying the character at face value, Kidman, realising that the person here is used as a character, gives us a loose interpretation of Woolfe, and manages to portray the character with such depth that we are completley invested in her story, and we feel her every suffering as she falls deeper and deeper into suffering.
Finally this movie, manages to take a wonderful novel, and translate it into a superb stunning movie, a difficult task, it also includes stunning performances from its three leads, especially Nicole Kidman, who has the difficult task of portraying a fictionalized version of a historical figure, yet she does it with a grace and a deftness which allows us to see into her pain, without the portrayal becoming comical. A stunning picture, a visual treat, with simply incredible acting. Rating:A+
Sorry for the delay in new posts, a recent cinema retrospective of the Orson Welles canon would take me to a small art house cinema to see the 9oclock showing of the alleged masterpiece Citizen Kane.
I must admit i was disappointed, despite being a perfectly good film, the film simply doesn't match up to all the hype surrounding it, in fact i can think of 10 films released in the last decade which were far superior, the film is about a publishing magnet who has recently died, the film shows a journalist who attempts to find the meaning of Kane's last word, 'Rosebud'. Being a child of the 90's i cannot really comment on the significance of the film in cinema history, only to say that at the time it was released, Citizen Kane was seen to be highly experimental due to its innovative cinematography and use of a non linear storyline, a tool that is common to a modern audience in films such as 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' (see here) and the cinema of Christopher Nolan.
Besides the innovation of the film, the acting, even that of Welles himself, seems to me to be typical pre 1950's style film acting, overacted and false, a far cry from the twitching, mumbling method acting of Marlon Brando & Co. All this leads me to believe that this film, despite of course being significantly important, due to the way it influenced modern cinema, and despite being a perfectly good film, is just not that good, and will never be able to overcome all the hype and stand on its own two feet independently. In short i liked it, i didn't love it. Rating: B
I have been told that my reviews were too polite, so here i am going to write Popcorn@Movies first truly damning review.
Temptation: Confessions of a Marriage Counselor, is due to be released on march 29th, this story is about a married marriage counselor who falls in love with one of her clients. I have no problem with the basic premise of this story, though it is a little insipid, however the problem arises when we look at the casting, the trailer gives us Vanessa Williams with i ridiculous german? accent. Kim Kardashian who basically just plays herself, someone should have reminded her that this was not one of her reality show, but I guess we should just be thankful that she didn't try to put on a weird accent too.
Errm now we come to the two main characters, the marriage counselor and her rich investor. Lets overlook the absolute lack of chemistry between these characters, rmemebreing that this is supposed to be the better of the two relationships in this womans life, and we come to her husband, a man who seems to be completley devoid of personality, no wonder she got bored.I'msurprised she didn't leave sooner.
The trailer also shows a series of one liners which are cringe worthy and unintentionally hilarious at the same time, such as what do you dream of? You... Seriously? Are you kidding me Tyler Perry? So overall this trailer is a bit/lot of a train wreck, lets just hope that they chose the worst moments of the movie for the trailer, because if the final film is as bad as this... yet even longer, then god help us. Any opinions? Comments below.
Trailer Review: C- Film prediction: D- Current Rotten Tomatoes score: 6%
Now this is a stellar film, Katheryn Bigelow, first and only woman to win an Oscar for directing, and famed director of 2008's The Hurt Locker, brings her talents to a film about the decade long hunt for Bin Laden.
One of the important facets of this film is the story, the screenplay was developped by Mark Boal who also developped The Hurt Locker, one of the interesting and amazing parts of this script is the way in which the film manages to focus singularly without attempting to add any kind of subplot.
Jessica Chastain is spectacular in this movie, and the lack of a subplot is what makes her performance so powerfull, she is literally in every scene, and manages to hold up the film with her stunning and deft performance. Her performance is truly stellar in the way that she manages to play a woman who is on one hand simply a machine, and yet still a person, we feel for Maya, we understand her plight and the amount that she has invested in her journey, yet we also admire her strength and control.
The film is also strong in the way it doesn't present bin laden as a victim, a villain, or even a human in that sense, this presentation is powerful, because it means that the film doesn't become a political statement, and becomes a journalistic representation of a period of time. I feel that the ending of the film is noteworthy, (i dont feel that this is a spoiler as i guess everyone knows what happens at the end) instead of ending the film with a patriotic 'we did it' message, the film ends with a simple close up of Maya, as a tear runs down her cheek. This is really a question, about wether it was worth the price we all payed, and we are forced as an audience to confront the fact that this woman has put a decade of her life into this battle, and is left with almost nothing.
I feel in conclusion that it is Bigelow's neutral journalistic position and straightforward non-convoluted approach to film making which is what makes this film so great, and it is also the focused performance of Jessica Chastain which is what makes this film so stunning. As usual comments below Rating: A+
This blog will be about a film that i actually saw for the first time a year ago in philosophy class! Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. This cult film starring Kate Winslet and Jim Carey poses philosophical questions about how important our memory is, and about if we could remove those memories, should we?
The film uses a typical non linear structure, the first half of the movie chronicles the first half of the relationship between the main character Joel Barish, (played by Jim Carey) and Clementine Kruczynski (played by the ravishing Kate Winslet) This part of the film chronicles how the two of them meet, and the early part of their relationship.
The second half of the film starts at a time when the relationship seems to be going strong, this part of the film takes place a certain time after the first part. This part of the film takes us to the exact point when the main character goes to have his memory of Clementine removed. The rest of the film is then described backwards; as he has his memories removed, he relives them with her and descovers what it was that bought them together in the first plave.
It would be impossible to talk about this film without talking of the remarkable performance of the divine Kate Winslet, her performance as Clementine is nuanced, and brash, and rather a different role for Kate, who is mainly known for period films. Interestingly so that we know what point of the relationship we are watching, the filmmakers change the color of Clementine's hair.
Winslet was nominated for an Oscar for her role in the film, however in a huge snub, given his also subtle performance, Jim Carey was not! In conclusion the film is intelligent yet nuanced, and has an intellectual non-linear storyline, which benefits hugely from the performances of its talented cast, in particular that of Kate Winslet. Rating: A As usual, comments below!
Before we get started a word on reviews, i will now be rating all films and trailers on an A+ to D- scale (so Movie 34 would be a D- and The Lord of the Rings an A+!)
Here i am going to analyze the trailer for Disney's upcoming western epic The Lone Ranger, starring Johnny Depp and Arnie Hammer
I must confess that i have never seen the original tv series however i do quite like westerns, ie Zorro and Django Unchained. However before i talk about the content of the trailer, i feel i simply must talk about money, doesnt disney ever learn? John Carter was a failure of epic proportions, i mean really epic, yet the next two live action films Disney produces are Oz, the Great and Powerful, and The Lone Ranger, both of which have budgets well over 200 million. Thankfully Oz was a success during a period of disastrous box office recipts, however i don't see the same success for The Lone Ranger, as Oz was based of a film that was still beloved and popular, whereas The Lone Ranger? Less so...
The trailer looks quite good, and seems action packed and amusing, and shows what seems to be a good yet predictable performance from Depp, the trailer looks epic, and shows many 'wow' moments, whether these are the only big scenes in the movie or whether there are others remains to be seen (it is very annoying to see a comedy where the only funny bits are in the trailer).
Let me now talk about casting, I already said that Depps performance seems to be very predictable, yet time will tell if this is simply the same performance as in Pirates. Arnie Hammer, whom most will know from the Social Network is an interesting choice, yet again time will tell if his performance shows any nuance. The casting which really excites me is that of Helena Bonham-Carter, as Red Harrington.
The trailer is a visual delight, like the last three of Disney's live action offerings, yet time will tell if critics will have the same lackluster response to the story and character development. Trailer Rating B
Is anyone excited for The Lone Ranger? Leave your comments in the box below.
