Before Bryan Singer's 2006 film "Superman Returns", J.J. Abrams was originally scheduled by Warner Bros. to reboot the franchise. He did complete a screenplay, which I had the pleasure of reading after I found it on www.simplyscripts.com. Perhaps it was too many liberties he took from the source material that made them reject it. Nevertheless, I found the plot very original and compelling.
Probably the biggest problem they had with his take is that Krypton is not destroyed in this story. Instead, the home planet of DC's greatest hero is plagued by civil war. A rebellion under the leadership of Jor-El's brother Kata-Zor wreaks havoc upon the Kryptonians, forcing Kal-El's parents to send him to Earth to be safe. From here, Jonathan and Martha Kent adopt the young child and give him the name Clark. Keep in mind, his biological parents are still alive, with the script actually including an encounter between the Kents and Jor-El later on.
What I really liked though was how Abrams developed Clark's character. We see him as a young boy struggling to control his powers, and continue to have difficulties as an adolescent in Smallville. One scene features him as a young boy lash out and beat up his parents' landlord with little to no effort, after the man sexually harassed and attacked Martha Kent in the middle of a parking lot. This moment comes to scar him, as he realizes how dangerous he is.
The story continues, and when he discovers the red and blue suit in his basement, Jonathan and Martha Kent realize they must tell him the truth. Hearing that he's from another planet is overwhelming to say the least, and he does nothing but hide his powers over the next decade or so. After briefly meeting incoming Freshman Lois Lane his senior year in college, her determination to become a reporter for the Daily Planet helps him choose a career path.
Years later, he reunites with her his first day on the job. He also meets a homosexual Jimmy Olson (this was a little weird and unnecessary), and the classic, grumpy old Perry White barking orders at him as soon as they face one another. In Metropolis, the charismatic, yet mysterious Lex Luthor announces his plans to seek out alien forms so as to protect Earth from extraterrestrial threats. Although he meets a great deal of opposition from Lane and many government agencies, he has allies nonetheless. Not long after his introduction, Superman is forced to reveal himself to the world in order to save a helpless Lois Lane when her plane breaks down (this scene is very reminiscent of that in the 1978 Richard Donner film). The next portion of the script is what we expect. The world marvels at the heroic feats Superman is able to accomplish, and no one is more entranced with him than Lane. However, the moment of Superman's first strike is followed by the death of Jonathan Kent.
Yet while the humans glorify the Man of Steel, Krypton is flooded with tyranny under Kata-Zor's totalitarian reign. After receiving news of Kal-El's heroism, the tyrant is beyond delighted to discover his whereabouts, and sends his son Ty-Zor to do the honors of killing the Prince of the ancient Kryptonian prophecy. A great battle follows, and the mighty Superman does fall. What comes next is quite interesting. Jor-El committs suicide upon the knowledge of his son's death, and he and Kal-El meet for the first time in the afterlife. It is this moment when the hero discovers his true destiny, and resurrects upon receiving his father's touch. We then watch him return to defeat his menachial cousin, as well as bring Luthor to justice (who actually turns out to be Kryptonian, another plot aspect I wasn't fond of). The script concludes with Kal-El leaving behind his home on Earth to return to Krypton.
Hence, there's definite originality in this piece. I found myself incredibly compelled by the uniqueness of Abrams' work, and I'm quite disappointed this one was not produced. Nonetheless, you can still read this script online, which I would recommend any comic book movie lover to do.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Wrath of the Titans
*
Dir. Jonathan Liebseman
Well, there's 90 minutes of my life I'm never getting back. Jonathan Liebseman makes movies that are as pathetic and obnoxious as Michael Bay's, and this garbage is no exception. The sequel to the already atrocious 2010 Blockbuster Clash of the Titans is nothing more than poorly executed visual effects and a virtually nonexistent plotline.
Liebseman and screenwriters Dan Mazeau and David Johnson continue the story of Zeus' son Perseus (Sam Worthington), in a time where the power of the gods is quickly diminishing. Having chosen the simple life of a mortal, the mighty Kracken slayer realizes he cannot escape his destiny, as great peril stirs within the Underworld. The humans lose faith in the gods, and Zeus (Liam Neeson) and Poseidon (Danny Huston) find themselves unable to stand their ground against the forces of Ares (Édgar Ramírez), the god of war.
As if the "plot" isn't watered down and underdeveloped as it is, but the way it's presented makes the experience of watching this disaster feel like torture. The characters from the previous installment are reintroduced, and from there we see a series of terribly executed action sequences up until the credits. Combine the essence of Transformers and the Twilight saga, and that'll give you a pretty good idea of what this excuse for a movie is like.
The cast is really the only element that strives to save this epic failure. Between Worthington, Neeson, Ralph Fiennes as Hades, and Rosamund Pike as Perseus' love interest, they each make an effort to combat the long list of mistakes in this film. Yet despite their best attempts, it's difficult for any actor when they have a script and director like this to work with.
Furthermore, the cinematography is a reflection of the garbage CGI used in this "film". We've seen other films related to Greek mythology such as Troy and various Odyssey adaptations that are much more gripping, and it's pretty sad that this falls in the same genre. I have seen worse, but it's movies like these that are made for people without any intellectual approach to the cinema.
Dir. Jonathan Liebseman
Well, there's 90 minutes of my life I'm never getting back. Jonathan Liebseman makes movies that are as pathetic and obnoxious as Michael Bay's, and this garbage is no exception. The sequel to the already atrocious 2010 Blockbuster Clash of the Titans is nothing more than poorly executed visual effects and a virtually nonexistent plotline.
Liebseman and screenwriters Dan Mazeau and David Johnson continue the story of Zeus' son Perseus (Sam Worthington), in a time where the power of the gods is quickly diminishing. Having chosen the simple life of a mortal, the mighty Kracken slayer realizes he cannot escape his destiny, as great peril stirs within the Underworld. The humans lose faith in the gods, and Zeus (Liam Neeson) and Poseidon (Danny Huston) find themselves unable to stand their ground against the forces of Ares (Édgar Ramírez), the god of war.
As if the "plot" isn't watered down and underdeveloped as it is, but the way it's presented makes the experience of watching this disaster feel like torture. The characters from the previous installment are reintroduced, and from there we see a series of terribly executed action sequences up until the credits. Combine the essence of Transformers and the Twilight saga, and that'll give you a pretty good idea of what this excuse for a movie is like.
The cast is really the only element that strives to save this epic failure. Between Worthington, Neeson, Ralph Fiennes as Hades, and Rosamund Pike as Perseus' love interest, they each make an effort to combat the long list of mistakes in this film. Yet despite their best attempts, it's difficult for any actor when they have a script and director like this to work with.
Furthermore, the cinematography is a reflection of the garbage CGI used in this "film". We've seen other films related to Greek mythology such as Troy and various Odyssey adaptations that are much more gripping, and it's pretty sad that this falls in the same genre. I have seen worse, but it's movies like these that are made for people without any intellectual approach to the cinema.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Act of Valor
***
Dir. Mike McCoy, Scott Waugh
The nature of war films has changed dramatically over the last twenty years with pictures such as Saving Private Ryan and Courage Under Fire.
In Act of Valor, directors Mike McCoy and Scott Waugh go the extra mile to honor our armed forces by using active U.S. Navy Seals as the stars of the movie. The film tells the story of a special forces unit that fight to prevent a large-scale terrorist plot, after rescuing a federal agent from a band of foreign mercenaries. Screenwriter Kurt Johnstad's script tells a great story of honor, justice, and freedom which we as American citizens too often take for granted.
As far as pacing, it does lack a certain essence most viewers would expect. McCoy and Waugh structure it more like an independent film, an aspect I was quite fond of. While I've seen other war pictures that are more character driven, there were many aspects in this one which I found to be quite compelling.
The way the action scenes are shot make it look almost like a reenactment of U.S. missions. I would compare it with films like The Hurt Locker, which I felt did a great job of capturing the reality and essence of war, something that many million dollar budget Hollywood movies have failed to do.
While the acting is pretty sorry, given that these are military men, not theatre majors, it's a unique film nonetheless. Watching it will help viewers acquire a deeper respect for the men and women serving in our armed forces (and hopefully get all the hippies out there to shut up and show some respect for their country!). God bless America!
Dir. Mike McCoy, Scott Waugh
The nature of war films has changed dramatically over the last twenty years with pictures such as Saving Private Ryan and Courage Under Fire.
In Act of Valor, directors Mike McCoy and Scott Waugh go the extra mile to honor our armed forces by using active U.S. Navy Seals as the stars of the movie. The film tells the story of a special forces unit that fight to prevent a large-scale terrorist plot, after rescuing a federal agent from a band of foreign mercenaries. Screenwriter Kurt Johnstad's script tells a great story of honor, justice, and freedom which we as American citizens too often take for granted.
As far as pacing, it does lack a certain essence most viewers would expect. McCoy and Waugh structure it more like an independent film, an aspect I was quite fond of. While I've seen other war pictures that are more character driven, there were many aspects in this one which I found to be quite compelling.
The way the action scenes are shot make it look almost like a reenactment of U.S. missions. I would compare it with films like The Hurt Locker, which I felt did a great job of capturing the reality and essence of war, something that many million dollar budget Hollywood movies have failed to do.
While the acting is pretty sorry, given that these are military men, not theatre majors, it's a unique film nonetheless. Watching it will help viewers acquire a deeper respect for the men and women serving in our armed forces (and hopefully get all the hippies out there to shut up and show some respect for their country!). God bless America!
The Lorax
****
Dir. Chris Renaud, Kyle Balda
I was able to see an advanced screening of this adaptation of the Dr. Seuss classic, and was quite impressed by what I saw. Directors Chris Renaud and Kyle Balda do a fantastic job of bringing this story to the big screen, in a way that captivates a wide variety of audiences. The animation is very reminiscent of "Horton Hears a Who" and other films of that genre, and is just as visually gripping.
Screenwriters Ken Daurio and Cinco Paul compose a great script, which includes a string of original songs that you'll find yourself singing along to. I especially recommend parents to take their kids to this film, as it examines a wide range of ethical issues; such as capitalism, humanity's lust for power, and the nature of ambition. Furthermore, the voice talents of Danny Devito, Zac Efron (this is probably the only time I'll compliment the star of that garbage Disney Channel franchise), Taylor Swift, Ed Helms, and Betty White make the picture all the more intriguing.
Films like these not only provide good family entertainment, but more importantly invoke the imaginative spirit within a person. I did like it in 3-D, but again, it doesn't enhance the cinematic quality of a film, just makes the viewing experience slightly different. Hence, I would definitely recommend this one for viewers of all ages.
Dir. Chris Renaud, Kyle Balda
I was able to see an advanced screening of this adaptation of the Dr. Seuss classic, and was quite impressed by what I saw. Directors Chris Renaud and Kyle Balda do a fantastic job of bringing this story to the big screen, in a way that captivates a wide variety of audiences. The animation is very reminiscent of "Horton Hears a Who" and other films of that genre, and is just as visually gripping.
Screenwriters Ken Daurio and Cinco Paul compose a great script, which includes a string of original songs that you'll find yourself singing along to. I especially recommend parents to take their kids to this film, as it examines a wide range of ethical issues; such as capitalism, humanity's lust for power, and the nature of ambition. Furthermore, the voice talents of Danny Devito, Zac Efron (this is probably the only time I'll compliment the star of that garbage Disney Channel franchise), Taylor Swift, Ed Helms, and Betty White make the picture all the more intriguing.
Films like these not only provide good family entertainment, but more importantly invoke the imaginative spirit within a person. I did like it in 3-D, but again, it doesn't enhance the cinematic quality of a film, just makes the viewing experience slightly different. Hence, I would definitely recommend this one for viewers of all ages.
Saturday, February 4, 2012
The Iron Lady
***
Dir. Phyllida Lloyd
After seeing this film, I say the Oscars should just go ahead and give Meryl Streep best actress for this year.
A stirring and emotionally gripping portrayal of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, director Phyllida Lloyd and screenwriter Abi Morgan illustrate the true nature of the craft in The Iron Lady. Centered around the events surrounding Thatcher's political career as well as her personal life, the film does a remarkable job of depicting this historical figure in a unique and intriguing manner. I really liked how it went back and forth between the past and present, and I thought the transitioning was very well executed.
Lloyd really utilized various cinematic techniques to present the story, including implementing actual footage at certain points. Furthermore, the score by Thomas Newman (The Shawshank Redemption) really complimented Lloyd's artistic vision for the film. Yet the highlight was definitely Streep's performance. Not that she isn't great in all her films, but the way she embodied the character in this one was absolutely fantastic. Having been a theatre student for seven years now, I could see her applying methods by acting teachers such as Constantin Stanislavski and Uta Hagen. Her physicality and diction really makes viewers believe her presentation of the character. All in all, this was a truly invigorating film, which I hope to see take something away at the Academy Awards.
Dir. Phyllida Lloyd
After seeing this film, I say the Oscars should just go ahead and give Meryl Streep best actress for this year.
A stirring and emotionally gripping portrayal of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, director Phyllida Lloyd and screenwriter Abi Morgan illustrate the true nature of the craft in The Iron Lady. Centered around the events surrounding Thatcher's political career as well as her personal life, the film does a remarkable job of depicting this historical figure in a unique and intriguing manner. I really liked how it went back and forth between the past and present, and I thought the transitioning was very well executed.
Lloyd really utilized various cinematic techniques to present the story, including implementing actual footage at certain points. Furthermore, the score by Thomas Newman (The Shawshank Redemption) really complimented Lloyd's artistic vision for the film. Yet the highlight was definitely Streep's performance. Not that she isn't great in all her films, but the way she embodied the character in this one was absolutely fantastic. Having been a theatre student for seven years now, I could see her applying methods by acting teachers such as Constantin Stanislavski and Uta Hagen. Her physicality and diction really makes viewers believe her presentation of the character. All in all, this was a truly invigorating film, which I hope to see take something away at the Academy Awards.
Sunday, January 1, 2012
War Horse
***
Dir. Steven Spielberg
Between this and Tintin, it seems as though Spielberg is competing with Scorsese and Eastwood for another Oscar. Although this film lacks a certain essence that makes his classic works so captivating, it is very well done nonetheless.
War Horse tells the story of a farm boy named Albert (Jeremy Irvine) seeking to reunite with his beloved horse Joey, after the creature is recruited by British forces at the start of WW1. When Joey's second master is killed in action, he is then rescued by a young French girl and her grandfather. From there, the plot merges these stories together until fate returns the adventurous horse to his faithful master and friend.
The central problem with this, the Broadway musical, and the novel, is that the plot is an overtly outlandish sob story that tries to present itself as a compelling drama. Despite being dragged across the European continent and coming close to death more than once, the horse still manages to magically find its owner in the midst of a battleground at the conclusion. Then there's the fact that Albert's not that interesting a character. Other Spielberg films like E.T. explore misunderstood adolescents much more effectively. This guy is a mopey-dopey wimp lacking a lot of depth and intrigue.
However, from a cinematic standpoint, Spielberg once again demonstrates his innate ability as a visual storyteller. The best scenes are at the end when he gives a great depiction of trench warfare, much in the same manner as Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers. His methods of immersing audiences into the setting are executed brilliantly. Having teamed up with long time producer Frank Marshall once more, the team utilizes a very artistic vision to make this film.
And of course, a Spielberg picture wouldn't be complete without a great soundtrack by John Williams. The legendary composer's work here enhances the mood very effectively, and is definitely one of the movie's highlights.
Being one of the most celebrated and iconic directors in film history, it's only natural for Spielberg to make a just okay picture every now and then. Although the quality of this one is high, it's certainly no classic or masterpiece.
Dir. Steven Spielberg
Between this and Tintin, it seems as though Spielberg is competing with Scorsese and Eastwood for another Oscar. Although this film lacks a certain essence that makes his classic works so captivating, it is very well done nonetheless.
War Horse tells the story of a farm boy named Albert (Jeremy Irvine) seeking to reunite with his beloved horse Joey, after the creature is recruited by British forces at the start of WW1. When Joey's second master is killed in action, he is then rescued by a young French girl and her grandfather. From there, the plot merges these stories together until fate returns the adventurous horse to his faithful master and friend.
The central problem with this, the Broadway musical, and the novel, is that the plot is an overtly outlandish sob story that tries to present itself as a compelling drama. Despite being dragged across the European continent and coming close to death more than once, the horse still manages to magically find its owner in the midst of a battleground at the conclusion. Then there's the fact that Albert's not that interesting a character. Other Spielberg films like E.T. explore misunderstood adolescents much more effectively. This guy is a mopey-dopey wimp lacking a lot of depth and intrigue.
However, from a cinematic standpoint, Spielberg once again demonstrates his innate ability as a visual storyteller. The best scenes are at the end when he gives a great depiction of trench warfare, much in the same manner as Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers. His methods of immersing audiences into the setting are executed brilliantly. Having teamed up with long time producer Frank Marshall once more, the team utilizes a very artistic vision to make this film.
And of course, a Spielberg picture wouldn't be complete without a great soundtrack by John Williams. The legendary composer's work here enhances the mood very effectively, and is definitely one of the movie's highlights.
Being one of the most celebrated and iconic directors in film history, it's only natural for Spielberg to make a just okay picture every now and then. Although the quality of this one is high, it's certainly no classic or masterpiece.
Friday, December 30, 2011
The Adventures of Tintin
****
Dir. Steven Spielberg
From the visionary minds of director Steven Spielberg and producer Peter Jackson, The Adventures of Tintin is storytelling at its best.
Based on the comic book series by Hergé, this film features pirates, a lost treasure, a canine companion, and many more elements that captivate audiences of all ages. When young Tintin (Jamie Bell) purchases a model of a 17th century pirate ship, he comes across other characters who are after the same object. Among these is Rackham (Daniel Craig), a dastardly villain seeking an ancient treasure which the ship holds a clue to, and to avenge his long time rival Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis). When Tintin and his faithful dog Snowy join forces with Haddock to find the lost treasure, they find themselves on the adventure of a lifetime.
I'll go ahead and confess that this is one comic which I have yet to read; but it is certainly on my list nonetheless. Yet whether or not you are familiar with these characters, the screenplay by Steven Moffat, Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish does an effective job of chronicling the events depicted. Tintin is an inquisitive journalist with an adventurous spirit, eager to unravel mysteries and exploit the corrupt. The manner in which the story is structured is very well executed, providing the basis for Spielberg and Jackson's vision.
For a film like this, excessive CGI is inevitable. Spielberg and Jackson stated early on their intentions of stepping outside the 2-D world of the comics, in order to do animation similar to that in Robert Zemeckis' Beowulf and Polar Express. While I'm typically not a big fan of modernized animation, this one's an exception. Although there's heavy emphasis on the technical aspects, I didn't think that it undermined the story. Rather, it complimented the fantasy world created by Hergé. Yeah, there's too much action, but that's expected for an adventure picture like this. This film proves that digitalized effects have their place in cinemas, when used appropriately.
The voice-over performances were another highlight. Bell exemplified the youthful complexion of the character's spirit, and the scenes between him and Haddock were great. Listening to Serkis, viewers wouldn't even recognize the Gollum in there. He instead plays a drunk, washed up sailor, providing the film with a nice element of humor. Craig presented Rackham as a sort of Jason Isaacs type villain, perfect for the tone of the story. The film also features the iconic duo of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost as a pair of slapstick detectives.
Furthermore, John Williams' score is right up there with his classics. All in all, I think it's fair to call this film the Indiana Jones of this generation.
Dir. Steven Spielberg
From the visionary minds of director Steven Spielberg and producer Peter Jackson, The Adventures of Tintin is storytelling at its best.
Based on the comic book series by Hergé, this film features pirates, a lost treasure, a canine companion, and many more elements that captivate audiences of all ages. When young Tintin (Jamie Bell) purchases a model of a 17th century pirate ship, he comes across other characters who are after the same object. Among these is Rackham (Daniel Craig), a dastardly villain seeking an ancient treasure which the ship holds a clue to, and to avenge his long time rival Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis). When Tintin and his faithful dog Snowy join forces with Haddock to find the lost treasure, they find themselves on the adventure of a lifetime.
I'll go ahead and confess that this is one comic which I have yet to read; but it is certainly on my list nonetheless. Yet whether or not you are familiar with these characters, the screenplay by Steven Moffat, Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish does an effective job of chronicling the events depicted. Tintin is an inquisitive journalist with an adventurous spirit, eager to unravel mysteries and exploit the corrupt. The manner in which the story is structured is very well executed, providing the basis for Spielberg and Jackson's vision.
For a film like this, excessive CGI is inevitable. Spielberg and Jackson stated early on their intentions of stepping outside the 2-D world of the comics, in order to do animation similar to that in Robert Zemeckis' Beowulf and Polar Express. While I'm typically not a big fan of modernized animation, this one's an exception. Although there's heavy emphasis on the technical aspects, I didn't think that it undermined the story. Rather, it complimented the fantasy world created by Hergé. Yeah, there's too much action, but that's expected for an adventure picture like this. This film proves that digitalized effects have their place in cinemas, when used appropriately.
The voice-over performances were another highlight. Bell exemplified the youthful complexion of the character's spirit, and the scenes between him and Haddock were great. Listening to Serkis, viewers wouldn't even recognize the Gollum in there. He instead plays a drunk, washed up sailor, providing the film with a nice element of humor. Craig presented Rackham as a sort of Jason Isaacs type villain, perfect for the tone of the story. The film also features the iconic duo of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost as a pair of slapstick detectives.
Furthermore, John Williams' score is right up there with his classics. All in all, I think it's fair to call this film the Indiana Jones of this generation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)