Some of you may be familiar with my personal feelings concerning the adventures of the intrepid archaeologist, Dr. Henry Jones Jr. Those of you who are unfamiliar are welcome to read of my feelings here.
Back again? Good. Now we can commence with the discussion of the latest adventure of Indiana Jones, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. When the film was first announced, my first impression was one of "huh?". I mean, it has been almost 20 years since the release of the last Indiana Jones film, and the final scene from that film (the image of Brody, Sallah, Henry Jones Sr. and Indy riding off into the sunset was the perfect coda to the film. What could possibly be a good reason for bringing Indy out of retirement? Surely it could not be mere box office, for both Lucas and Spielberg have more money than they can use at this point in their careers. It also could not be the fact that they "happened" across a good story finally, because a lack of a good story did not stop them from making Temple of Doom. All in all, the decision to make another Indiana Jones for both Lucas and Spielberg might possibly be found in one reason-they are two old friends who wanted to work together on the film series that both rode to incredible waves of success. Lucas would always have Star Wars and Spielberg...well, he would have pretty much everything else. This return would perhaps allow them to poke fun at the changes that age has brought in both of their lives. Who better to use as the symbol of these changes than Henry Jones Jr.?
I will cut right to the chase. If you harbor any expectations that this film will rise to the level of Raiders of the Lost Ark, please place those expectations in check. Raiders was, and is, a special movie, the kind of movie that jockeys with maybe 2 others atop my list of favorite films of all time. When Raiders came out, there was nothing else like it. It was a film that captured the spirit of the great movie serials of early motion picture history while imbued with the storytelling and technical expertise of Spielberg and Lucas. The best way to assess my feelings about Skull is to compare it to Doom and Crusade.
When we meet Indy in this film, it was as if I was being reintroduced to an old film. Spielberg perfectly captured the iconographical and lofty status the character has attained in the intervening years since his last adventure. Wisely, Spielberg and Lucas chose to set the film the same number of years after the last of the Indy films. In other words, Indy has aged as Harrison Ford has aged. It was great to see Ford back in form as Indy, albeit with a few more miles. The story quickly progresses (I will leave out the fun of the warehouse action scenes for your own enjoyment), and we are introduced to Mudd, a young man who seems to idolize James Dean a bit too much. He and Jones escape from KGB agents and make their way to South America, where Mudd's mentor and a former colleague of Indy's has disappeared. Indy and Mudd make some compelling finds before they are captured by more Soviet agents in the jungles of South America. The main villain is played by Cate Blanchett, doing her best imitation of Natasha from the old "Bullwinkle" cartoon. Now, a lot of commentators have remarked at how over the top her performance appeared, but I enjoyed it. It brought to mind the cartoon Nazis who enjoyed slapping Indy's face with their always handy pairs of leather gloves. This is escapist fantasy, so why not make the Soviet agent someone who is cartoonish in her villainy? We also catch up with Marion Ravenwood, Indy's love interest from Raiders, and we are immediately reminded as to the reasons why she was so perfect for Indy in the first place. Many chases later, we are introduced to the main action setpiece for the film, the lost fabled city of gold deep in the heart of the Amazon. Cue the main climax, another perfect coda to the Indy legend, and the "Indiana Jones March" over the end credits, and you have a nice little summer film.
I enjoyed the story itself, the MacGuffin of the Crystal Skull, and the adventures of Indy, Mudd and the rest. I also loved the twists and turns of the action sequences and the backstory of the history of Marion and Indy recounted during quiet moments of exposition. I loved the sequences in the Area 51 warehouse and all of the characters, both hero and villain. At the same time, I found something a bit lacking in the film. Granted, there was NO WAY this would even APPROACH the greatness that was Raiders of the Lost Ark, but something was missing.
I figured out the missing piece during the end sequence of the film. Indy is supposed to be a "globetrotting archaeologist," and the best of the series took us from South America to Chicago to Nepal to Cairo and then to a secret Island. It was truly a globe trotting adventure. In Crusade, we followed Indy from his childhood in New Mexico to a ship in the Sea of Cortez to Chicago to Venice to Germany (all the way to Berlin!) and then to Cairo and the Middle East. Here, we follow Indy from Nevada to Chicago to South America. That's it. This was the worst globe trotting since Indy went from China to India. The best of the Indy films were told on the grand canvas of the world in the middle of the 20th Century. It felt like a bit of a cheat when the only true glimpse of the world at the time was a needless nuclear explosion, Lucas' insistence on a 50s drag race (enough already, George), and a brief glimpse in a Peruvian village. That was it. Pacing also seemed to be a problem, as some of the action sequences went on too long. At other times, it seemed as if Spielberg was trying to build suspense but there was little payoff.
In the end, however, Crystal Skull was exactly what I wanted it to be: another chance to hang out with an old friend for a couple of hours. I went to see the film with my parents, and they agreed that the better films were Raiders and Last Crusade. With that having been said, I think that this film is better than the atrocity that was Temple of Doom, for there was no annoying kid sidekick and no insulting of an entire ethnic race. In addition, the story held my attention to the point where I was surprised when the climax arrived. The two hour run time passed by quickly (though not as quickly as it did with Iron Man).
Next up? Sex and the City.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Sunday, May 11, 2008
My Review of Speed Racer, or, WHERE THE HECK IS THE MACH 5???
Whenever filmmakers adopt properties famous in other media (comics, cartoons) into live action films, they are pretty much caught in the devil's alternative. Should they attempt to be faithful to the source material, thereby ensuring that the built-in audience of fans of the property in the alternate media will be satisfied, but run the risk of alienating viewers who may be less familiar with the source material? Should they jettison some aspects of the varied history of said pop culture property, keeping the essentials intact and make a story faithful to the underlying ideas of the property? Or should the filmmakers be COMPLETELY faithful to the point of serving the underlying source material to the point where, in their zeal to perfectly replicate the environments and "feel" of the source material, they sacrifice story and forget about what really made the source material special in the first place?
Unfortunately, Speed Racer falls into the latter trap, and IMAX could not save it. I went to see the movie with Eddie, my brother, and another pair of friends at the IMAX. Of the people who were there, I can attest that only my brother and I were well versed in the history and story background of Speed Racer. We knew what the film SHOULD be about, and perhaps this made us much harsher critics than we should be. From the blindingly colorful spectacle of the first race until the predictable finale, I was most impressed with how the Wachowski brothers had painstakingly recreated the world of a colorful anime program through their generous use of green screen-based CGI. The colors just seemed to pop from the oversized screen of the IMAX and overwhelm the senses. It was our world-but not. The special effects and music were perfectly matched to the story of Speed Racer, so the story should be slam dunk solid right?
Unfortunately, this was not the case. The film, which clocks in at close to 2.5 hours, was overlong by at least 30 minutes (maybe more). In their zeal to include so much from Speed's vast history and in their quest to cram every bit of CGI into every frame, the Wachowski's forgot about basic story pacing and dialogue. There were many painful moments where I felt as if I were listening to the stilted dialogue from the Star Wars prequels (yes, Emile Hirsch even sounded, at moments, like Hayden Christiansen-but even WORSE). It was as if someone were off screen showing Hirsch the cue cards for him to read. With the exception of John Goodman's Pops Racer, every single actor in the film really let me down. Remember what I said in my review of Iron Man that any filmmaker who tries to adapt something need not change everything about the property in order to make it a success? I was really struck by how Favreau had adhered to the Iron Man mythos without having to "Hollywoodize" it. Speed Racer had the opposite problem-TOO MUCH verisimilitude. The story should have been tighter and need not have included so many expository scenes that did nothing to establish character motivations, plot, etc.
The true impact of how the Wachowskis "just didn't get" came to me two hours after leaving the theater. I went to the suburbs to test drive some cars with my brother (a fitting denouement to a day that began with Speed Racer). While staring at an Aston Martin DB9 and thinking of how Aston Martins had become synonymous with Bond, the most glaring issue in the entire film clarified itself, and I realized that the film missed the mark completely with me.
THE MACH 5 WAS NOT FRONT AND CENTER!!!!!
Any true Speed Racer fan would tell you that the star of the original source anime and manga was not any of the human (or simian, for that matter) characters. It was the Mach 5-the coolest car ever in the history of animation (yes, this includes the various incarnations of the Batmobile-funny how I always come back to that). During the first 1/2 of the film, the Mach 5 is a non-entity, a cool "almost makeout" car for Speed that seemed to be there solely because it had the requisite trunk space for Spritle and Chim-Chim's famous stowaways. When Inspector Detector and his team of scientists got their hands on the Mach 5 prior to Speed's rally race, my interest in the movie, which had been waning, was quickly piqued, and the film had me again, The rally scenes with the Mach 5 were great, as they allowed the Mach 5 a showcase for its amazing gadgetry. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a big tease. The rally was short, and more time was spent on a lame mass kung-fu scene than on the race itself, Just as quickly as it arrived, the Mach 5 receded into the background. For the grand finale race, Pops announced "but you don't have a car." I felt like screaming from the seats "YOU HAVE THE FREAKING MACH 5, YOU FAT FOOL! THE COOLEST CAR IN THE HISTORY OF CARTOONS! USE IT! USE IT, I SAY!" Unfortunately, Pops built the completely lame Mach 6, and I was denied again. The Mach 5 never made another appearance in the film. The omission of the true star of the Speed Racer series, the Mach 5, was what made the film a loser in my eyes. I mean, IT IS IN THE FREAKING THEME SONG for the cartoon, as illustrated by these 2 lines from the opening theme song:
He's gaining on you so you'd better look alive
He's busy revvin' up the powerful MACH 5 (emphasis)
Heck...Mach 6 doesn't even RHYME with "alive", now does it? Oh well. So the first turkey of the summer is here, and as they did with the final 2 Matrix films, the Wachowski brothers completely snowed me with cool trailers. I can now understand Eddie's aversion to trailers. Much has also been made of this film as being the perfect family film. Well, if your perfect family film experience includes viewing a man being pummeled by mob heavies, profanity, an attempt to feed a man to a tank of piranha as he screams in defiance, the loss of a finger to said piranhas by another man, and an obscene gesture by young Spritle, then this IS a family film. Otherwise, keep your kids away from this movie.
One final note. There were some major annoyances provided by a school class that was here no doubt on the dime of Chicago taxpayers. As with most school trips, there appeared to be one chaperon for every 40 kids, and the kids could not sit still for any appreciable amount of time. That in itself would not be so bad, but when most of the children are constantly moving back and forth in front of me and my friends during the film itself, and where the space between the seats in the IMAX is not generous by any stretch of the imagination, and where the kids could be poster children for America's childhood obesity epidemic..well, you get my point. I thought that they distracted from my enjoyment of the film, but I cannot blame them. The film had enough faults in it such that the kids may have distracted me from noticing even more things wrong.
All I can say is thank God for Iron Man. I might have to see Iron Man again just to wipe out the experience of Speed Racer. As much as I was hoping for a sequel to Iron Man, I am hoping that Warner Brothers will let Speed Racer rest in Cartoon Network heaven.
Unfortunately, Speed Racer falls into the latter trap, and IMAX could not save it. I went to see the movie with Eddie, my brother, and another pair of friends at the IMAX. Of the people who were there, I can attest that only my brother and I were well versed in the history and story background of Speed Racer. We knew what the film SHOULD be about, and perhaps this made us much harsher critics than we should be. From the blindingly colorful spectacle of the first race until the predictable finale, I was most impressed with how the Wachowski brothers had painstakingly recreated the world of a colorful anime program through their generous use of green screen-based CGI. The colors just seemed to pop from the oversized screen of the IMAX and overwhelm the senses. It was our world-but not. The special effects and music were perfectly matched to the story of Speed Racer, so the story should be slam dunk solid right?
Unfortunately, this was not the case. The film, which clocks in at close to 2.5 hours, was overlong by at least 30 minutes (maybe more). In their zeal to include so much from Speed's vast history and in their quest to cram every bit of CGI into every frame, the Wachowski's forgot about basic story pacing and dialogue. There were many painful moments where I felt as if I were listening to the stilted dialogue from the Star Wars prequels (yes, Emile Hirsch even sounded, at moments, like Hayden Christiansen-but even WORSE). It was as if someone were off screen showing Hirsch the cue cards for him to read. With the exception of John Goodman's Pops Racer, every single actor in the film really let me down. Remember what I said in my review of Iron Man that any filmmaker who tries to adapt something need not change everything about the property in order to make it a success? I was really struck by how Favreau had adhered to the Iron Man mythos without having to "Hollywoodize" it. Speed Racer had the opposite problem-TOO MUCH verisimilitude. The story should have been tighter and need not have included so many expository scenes that did nothing to establish character motivations, plot, etc.
The true impact of how the Wachowskis "just didn't get" came to me two hours after leaving the theater. I went to the suburbs to test drive some cars with my brother (a fitting denouement to a day that began with Speed Racer). While staring at an Aston Martin DB9 and thinking of how Aston Martins had become synonymous with Bond, the most glaring issue in the entire film clarified itself, and I realized that the film missed the mark completely with me.
THE MACH 5 WAS NOT FRONT AND CENTER!!!!!
Any true Speed Racer fan would tell you that the star of the original source anime and manga was not any of the human (or simian, for that matter) characters. It was the Mach 5-the coolest car ever in the history of animation (yes, this includes the various incarnations of the Batmobile-funny how I always come back to that). During the first 1/2 of the film, the Mach 5 is a non-entity, a cool "almost makeout" car for Speed that seemed to be there solely because it had the requisite trunk space for Spritle and Chim-Chim's famous stowaways. When Inspector Detector and his team of scientists got their hands on the Mach 5 prior to Speed's rally race, my interest in the movie, which had been waning, was quickly piqued, and the film had me again, The rally scenes with the Mach 5 were great, as they allowed the Mach 5 a showcase for its amazing gadgetry. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a big tease. The rally was short, and more time was spent on a lame mass kung-fu scene than on the race itself, Just as quickly as it arrived, the Mach 5 receded into the background. For the grand finale race, Pops announced "but you don't have a car." I felt like screaming from the seats "YOU HAVE THE FREAKING MACH 5, YOU FAT FOOL! THE COOLEST CAR IN THE HISTORY OF CARTOONS! USE IT! USE IT, I SAY!" Unfortunately, Pops built the completely lame Mach 6, and I was denied again. The Mach 5 never made another appearance in the film. The omission of the true star of the Speed Racer series, the Mach 5, was what made the film a loser in my eyes. I mean, IT IS IN THE FREAKING THEME SONG for the cartoon, as illustrated by these 2 lines from the opening theme song:
He's gaining on you so you'd better look alive
He's busy revvin' up the powerful MACH 5 (emphasis)
Heck...Mach 6 doesn't even RHYME with "alive", now does it? Oh well. So the first turkey of the summer is here, and as they did with the final 2 Matrix films, the Wachowski brothers completely snowed me with cool trailers. I can now understand Eddie's aversion to trailers. Much has also been made of this film as being the perfect family film. Well, if your perfect family film experience includes viewing a man being pummeled by mob heavies, profanity, an attempt to feed a man to a tank of piranha as he screams in defiance, the loss of a finger to said piranhas by another man, and an obscene gesture by young Spritle, then this IS a family film. Otherwise, keep your kids away from this movie.
One final note. There were some major annoyances provided by a school class that was here no doubt on the dime of Chicago taxpayers. As with most school trips, there appeared to be one chaperon for every 40 kids, and the kids could not sit still for any appreciable amount of time. That in itself would not be so bad, but when most of the children are constantly moving back and forth in front of me and my friends during the film itself, and where the space between the seats in the IMAX is not generous by any stretch of the imagination, and where the kids could be poster children for America's childhood obesity epidemic..well, you get my point. I thought that they distracted from my enjoyment of the film, but I cannot blame them. The film had enough faults in it such that the kids may have distracted me from noticing even more things wrong.
All I can say is thank God for Iron Man. I might have to see Iron Man again just to wipe out the experience of Speed Racer. As much as I was hoping for a sequel to Iron Man, I am hoping that Warner Brothers will let Speed Racer rest in Cartoon Network heaven.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Movie Review: Iron Man
Every time a comic book hero's stories are translated for the big screen, the powers-that-be in Hollywood figure that their control over the film grants them license to make whole sale changes in the characters, story, and even the costumes. Superman's film costume lacked the distinctiveness of its comic book counterpart and the malevolence of the comic book's Luthor, the character of Johnny Blaze in "Ghost Rider"-well the less said about THAT travesty the better, and the X-Men went the black spandex route instead of wearing the distinctive costumes from the comics series. The film version of "Spider-Man" wore the distinctive colors of the comics hero, but the costumes themselves cost Sony pictures $10,000 each to produce. Does that sound like something a freelance photographer like Peter Parker could afford? Even one of my favorite comic movies, "Batman Begins," took artistic liberties with both the story and the costume. While the liberties taken with the story were understandable (and even created a serviceable background to the Batman legend), I have never understood the repeated failure to replicate the color scheme of the classic Batman costume. In fact, no superhero film has treated its audience to a perfect translation of the hero's costume...until now.
Iron Man's various armors in the film (the Mark I, Mark II, and Mark III) mirror their comic book counterparts perfectly. Stan Winston and ILM worked hand in hand to create the perfect illusion of functionality in bringing the comic book icon to life. Several times during the film, I found myself catching my breath at the amazing likeness the costume bore to the comics version.
What about the film itself? In a word, AWESOME. All too often, special effects are used as a crutch to cover up poor storytelling or character development. Here, director Jon Favreau used the special effects in service of the plot rather than the other way around. The character of Tony Stark, Iron Man's alter ego, is perfectly inhabited by the immensely talented Robert Downey, Jr. The character's transformation from billionaire industrialist to superhero could not have been successfully accomplished by too many young actors. Downey convincingly evinces the character's flaws, his struggles when he realizes his own role as a global death dealer, and his need to make things right through the construction and use of his Iron Man armor.
And what about the supporting cast? Gwyneth Paltrow does an amazing job as Pepper Potts (yes, that is her character's name and yes, that is straight from the comics). One gets the sense of her unrequited love for her boss and the chemistry between Paltrow and Downey is palpable, but Paltrow never allows the character to fall into the cliche of the damsel in distress. Even while Iron Man is in the middle of a battle, Potts is there helping him out. For once, there is a completely realized comic book female played by an A-list actor (well, if not A-list, at least one who has excellent acting instincts). Jeff Bridges played the over-the-top villain Obadiah Stane, but this is something that one could glean from the previews. If anything, the story's development of Stane into the main villain seemed almost rushed. That, in itself, is the only thing that the filmmakers could have done better...that and have more shots of Iron Man in action. Terence Howard is excellent as Jim Rhodes, Stark's good friend and confidante who promises to be around in the sequel (please let there be one).
Strange. I have gone almost the entire review thus far and have not even talked about the story. Well, I do not think I am going to. I want everyone to experience it for themselves. I will, however, share with you 2 of my favorite scenes from the film. The first scene was that of Stark building the Mark I armor as a captive in Afghanistan. The shots of Downey's face, covered in sweat, his brow furrowed in concentration and determination, as he molds and shapes the mask of the Mark I is an indelible image from the film that I will keep with me. That one scene nicely summed up the character of Tony Stark. My second favorite scene? Stark's first flight over Malibu at night. This first flight sequence made me forget, for a moment, that I was watching a film. It represent the perfect marriage of special effects, music, and storytelling. What a great sequence.
There is one thing that I want to make clear. I know a lot of friends who do not want to see "Iron Man." They see it as "just another superhero film." I am here to tell you that it is so much more. The story, the acting, the action..everything raises this to a different level. I could not be more pleased with the first summer film of the season. I will see this a few more times in the theater. I hope that they keep the cast together. I can only assume that this is what results from a comic book publisher having control over the films. This was the first film completely financed by Marvel Comics, and they had final say on all decisions. They made a comic book movie for comic book fans. Lo and behold-it translates well for the masses. More publishers should take a page from Marvel's book. If this is what we have to look forward to from Marvel, then "The Incredible Hulk," being released on June 13, may be enough to wipe the horrible taste left over from Ang Lee's horrible "Hulk" film from a few years back.
A final note. Be sure to stay through the end credits. You will be rewarded for your patience.
Iron Man's various armors in the film (the Mark I, Mark II, and Mark III) mirror their comic book counterparts perfectly. Stan Winston and ILM worked hand in hand to create the perfect illusion of functionality in bringing the comic book icon to life. Several times during the film, I found myself catching my breath at the amazing likeness the costume bore to the comics version.
What about the film itself? In a word, AWESOME. All too often, special effects are used as a crutch to cover up poor storytelling or character development. Here, director Jon Favreau used the special effects in service of the plot rather than the other way around. The character of Tony Stark, Iron Man's alter ego, is perfectly inhabited by the immensely talented Robert Downey, Jr. The character's transformation from billionaire industrialist to superhero could not have been successfully accomplished by too many young actors. Downey convincingly evinces the character's flaws, his struggles when he realizes his own role as a global death dealer, and his need to make things right through the construction and use of his Iron Man armor.
And what about the supporting cast? Gwyneth Paltrow does an amazing job as Pepper Potts (yes, that is her character's name and yes, that is straight from the comics). One gets the sense of her unrequited love for her boss and the chemistry between Paltrow and Downey is palpable, but Paltrow never allows the character to fall into the cliche of the damsel in distress. Even while Iron Man is in the middle of a battle, Potts is there helping him out. For once, there is a completely realized comic book female played by an A-list actor (well, if not A-list, at least one who has excellent acting instincts). Jeff Bridges played the over-the-top villain Obadiah Stane, but this is something that one could glean from the previews. If anything, the story's development of Stane into the main villain seemed almost rushed. That, in itself, is the only thing that the filmmakers could have done better...that and have more shots of Iron Man in action. Terence Howard is excellent as Jim Rhodes, Stark's good friend and confidante who promises to be around in the sequel (please let there be one).
Strange. I have gone almost the entire review thus far and have not even talked about the story. Well, I do not think I am going to. I want everyone to experience it for themselves. I will, however, share with you 2 of my favorite scenes from the film. The first scene was that of Stark building the Mark I armor as a captive in Afghanistan. The shots of Downey's face, covered in sweat, his brow furrowed in concentration and determination, as he molds and shapes the mask of the Mark I is an indelible image from the film that I will keep with me. That one scene nicely summed up the character of Tony Stark. My second favorite scene? Stark's first flight over Malibu at night. This first flight sequence made me forget, for a moment, that I was watching a film. It represent the perfect marriage of special effects, music, and storytelling. What a great sequence.
There is one thing that I want to make clear. I know a lot of friends who do not want to see "Iron Man." They see it as "just another superhero film." I am here to tell you that it is so much more. The story, the acting, the action..everything raises this to a different level. I could not be more pleased with the first summer film of the season. I will see this a few more times in the theater. I hope that they keep the cast together. I can only assume that this is what results from a comic book publisher having control over the films. This was the first film completely financed by Marvel Comics, and they had final say on all decisions. They made a comic book movie for comic book fans. Lo and behold-it translates well for the masses. More publishers should take a page from Marvel's book. If this is what we have to look forward to from Marvel, then "The Incredible Hulk," being released on June 13, may be enough to wipe the horrible taste left over from Ang Lee's horrible "Hulk" film from a few years back.
A final note. Be sure to stay through the end credits. You will be rewarded for your patience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
