Director: James Gunn Writers: James Gunn, Nicole Perlman Studios: Marvel Studios, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures Cast: Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Vin Diesel, Bradley Cooper, Lee Pace, Michael Rooker, Karen Gillan, Djimon Hounsou, John C. Reilly, Glenn Close, Benicio del Toro Release Date (UK): August 1, 2014 Certificate: 12A Runtime: 122 min
“Guardians of the Galaxy” is an exhilarating blast of pure sci-fi pulp, stuffed full of thrilling outer space mayhem, driven by a commitment to unabashed nuttiness, and topped off with a kick-ass retro mix-tape soundtrack guaranteed to put a big, stupid grin on Quentin Tarantino’s face. It’s been widely proclaimed that this was a big risk for Marvel Studios, and from the outset it’s easy to see why: among its main characters are a walking, talking tree and a gun-toting, anthropomorphic raccoon, its setting is a bunch of weird whatchamacallit, thingamabob alien planets somewhere, and it’s based on a nerd property hitherto known only to the most hardcore of basement dwellers. Hardly an easy sell for the average Jane or Joe Movie-Goer. Then again, halfway through watching director James Gunn’s action-crammed comic-book space opera, I did begin to wonder, how is a film this stupendously entertaining in any way a risk?
I mean, it’s weird: certainly the weirdest film in Marvel Studios' 6-year, 10-film history. And it’s the most “out there” project they’ve ever embarked upon: it does, after all, take place in the far reaches of the galaxy and it stars a bunch of funky looking extraterrestrials. But it’s *fun*. Like, really, really fun, with an infectious sense of excitement, humour and adventure akin to the original “Star Wars” and “Indiana Jones” trilogies. Our hero, Chris Pratt’s Peter Quill/Star Lord, is even introduced in his adult form as a sort of intergalactic Indiana Jones, shown thieving a mysterious spherical artifact from a ruined temple on a desolate alien terrain -- though it should be said, his roguish swagger and sarcastic tongue come straight from Han Solo. In the opening scene set in 1988, we watch as his younger self is plucked from Earth by a pirate spacecraft. 26 years later, he wanders the galaxy as a self-proclaimed legendary outlaw, stealing goods while his Walkman blares a mix-tape of ‘70s and ‘80s pop tunes.
He’s a misfit, and unashamedly so. And he’s just a flat-out fun character, with quips galore and Pratt nailing both the wise-ass routine and the action-man heroics. And yet, frequently the show is stolen from under his rocket-powered boots by his fellow Guardians, who are brought together in a high-security prison following a very public tussle. They’re your typical ragtag team of misfits, though to call this bunch typical would be to do them a great disservice. There’s Drax the Destroyer (Dave Bautista), a vengeance-seeking, muscle-bound maniac oblivious to his own social ineptness. His species take everything literally -- fling a halfhearted metaphorical quip at him and risk getting your spine ripped out. There’s slick, green-skinned assassin Gamora (Zoe Saldana), who betrays the bloodthirsty radical Ronan the Accuser (Lee Pace) when his thirst for power becomes too much. There’s Rocket (voiced by Bradley Cooper), a genetically engineered, wise-cracking raccoon with an undying love of explosions and gun violence. And then there’s Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel), a humanoid tree whose vocabulary consists solely of three words: “I,” “am,” and “Groot,” and in that exact order. Anyone not especially into the film’s comic book shenanigans is bound to have their hearts won over by this walking, talking houseplant: he’s equal points adorably sweet and unstoppably deadly -- he’ll slaughter an army of badguys then turn around and flash you the goofiest, most lovable grin you’ve ever seen.
They join forces to defeat Ronan, who seeks the mysterious artifact stolen by Quill. See, that artifact, it turns out, contains an all-powerful orb called an Infinity Stone, which Ronan plans to use in a quest for vengeance against an entire populace. As an embodiment of heartless, power-hungry malevolence, Ronan works well; as a fully rounded character, he’s a little lacking, and Pace doesn’t quite have the gravitas to pull of such an underwritten character. Karen Gillan fares better as Nebula, the blue, mechanical equivalent to Gamora’s green assassin. Not just Ronan’s right-hand robot mercenary, she’s also Gamora’s jealous sister, and Gillan plays her with both sadistic glee and a deadly grace.
But it’s the Guardians who really shine here: they’re such an enjoyable collection of clashing personalities, and watching them butt heads and grow as a team is a real joy. Groot and Drax in particular are a joy: Bautista, a former pro wrestler with little acting experience, makes for a great comic relief, completely oblivious to his frequent insensitive remarks and social misunderstandings; and as he did as The Iron Giant, Diesel proves himself to have a knack for saying so much while saying so little. Gunn, meanwhile, infuses the film with style, energy and a nutty gusto, and handles the hectic outer space spectacle like a pro. The highlight, I would say, is the prison escape sequence, a stand-out set-piece full of thrills, laughs and gorgeous visual effects in a film absolutely bursting at the seams with all three of those. For sheer, unadulterated fun, the film gives “The Avengers” a run for its billion-dollar box office sum. “The Guardians of the Galaxy will return,” is displayed across the screen before the end credits roll. I for one await their return with eager anticipation.
Rating: 9/10
Showing posts with label adventure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label adventure. Show all posts
Tuesday, 5 August 2014
Tuesday, 1 July 2014
How to Train Your Dragon 2 - Review
Director: Dean DeBlois Writer: Dean DeBlois Studios: DreamWorks Animation, 20th Century Fox Cast: Jay Baruchel, Cate Blanchett, Gerard Butler, Craig Ferguson, America Ferrera, Jonah Hill, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, T.J. Miller, Kristen Wiig, Djimon Hounsou, Kit Harrington Release Date (UK): 27 June, 2014 Certificate: PG Runtime: 102 min
DreamWorks’ gorgeously animated follow-up to their 2010 hit “How to Train Your Dragon” is a soaring success, a sequel which provides the same level of high-flying spectacle, rib-tickling humour and heartfelt poignancy as its marvellous predecessor while taking us on a new and exciting adventure through its mythical land. Of course, with the once-feared dragon community now trained and fully integrated into everyday Viking life, that fantasy world has gotten a whole lot bigger since last we saw it. Riding on the backs of its titular winged beasts, “How to Train Your Dragon 2” further explores the isles surrounding the village of Berk, and in doing so, widens the scope of its fantasy world, expands on the mythos behind its dragon species and throws new, intriguing characters into the mix. Though to give away too many details would be to spoil some of the surprises in store for one-legged hero Hiccup (voiced by Jay Baruchel) and his dragon companion Toothless.
They’re a delightful pairing, our two intrepid heroes: Hiccup, the awkward outcast turned plucky and adventurous dragon rider, and Toothless, a handsome Night Fury who’s adorably goofy but also brave and unwaveringly devoted to his human friend and master. Together, they share a loyal bond that’s sweet and endearing, and watching them talk, play and ride through the clouds together is a real joy. In “How to Train Your Dragon 2,” they face a powerful threat, a fearsome “dragon master” with the formidable name of Drago Bludvist (Djimon Hounsou). He’s assembling his own dragon army with the aim of conquering all who oppose him. While searching for new land, Hiccup and Toothless stumble upon his plans for domination and band together with the villagers of Berk to put a stop to his evil ways.
As per the rule of the sequel, “How to Train Your Dragon 2” is bigger than its predecessor: it features, for example, gargantuan, ice-spitting super-dragons so phenomenally huge they’d pick up Gareth Edwards’ Godzilla and gobble him up for breakfast. But as he did with the first film, director Dean DeBlois keeps the breath-catching spectacle grounded in the emotions of his characters, whose relationships he maintains a firm grip on. Hiccup and his remarkably burly father, the fearless warrior Stoick the Vast (Gerard Butler), again make a fully believable father-son duo, butting heads in the previous movie but brought closer now that Stoick's not all stabby-stabby kill-kill towards dragonkind (he's actually quite enthusiastic about them now -- he even has them race each other!). And there’s some seriously touching stuff in here, surprisingly so for a film aimed primarily at the younger crowd -- it's great to see an animated movie willing to enter really intimate and emotional territory. On two occasions I actually found myself teary eyed: I won’t spoil anything, but there’s a reunion in the film that’s beautifully handled and is one of the most moving things I’ve ever seen in an animated movie -- or, heck, any movie.
And all the way through, DeBlois impressively maintains the first film’s enchanting sense of wonder: John Powell’s score is again a spellbinding treat, and the scenes of Hiccup and Toothless soaring through the skies together have a real graceful beauty to them. The great Roger Deakins is credited as having been a visual consultant on the film; looking at the results, that’s not surprising in the slightest. DreamWorks have shown a knack for sequels over the years, with “Shrek 2” witty and hilarious, “Kung Fu Panda 2” exhilarating fun and “Madagascar 3” pleasingly brisk. Now in swoops “How to Train Your Dragon 2,” the best of the lot: emotionally resonant, properly thrilling and just plain flamin’ gorgeous, it's a triumph in family entertainment, just like its predecessor was. The question remains, however, as to why all the adults in this mythical world speak with a thick Scottish brogue while all the youngsters speak with squeaky clean American accents. Then again, one is very likely to become too swept up in the magic and majesty of the film to dwell on such silly nitpicks.
Rating: 9/10
DreamWorks’ gorgeously animated follow-up to their 2010 hit “How to Train Your Dragon” is a soaring success, a sequel which provides the same level of high-flying spectacle, rib-tickling humour and heartfelt poignancy as its marvellous predecessor while taking us on a new and exciting adventure through its mythical land. Of course, with the once-feared dragon community now trained and fully integrated into everyday Viking life, that fantasy world has gotten a whole lot bigger since last we saw it. Riding on the backs of its titular winged beasts, “How to Train Your Dragon 2” further explores the isles surrounding the village of Berk, and in doing so, widens the scope of its fantasy world, expands on the mythos behind its dragon species and throws new, intriguing characters into the mix. Though to give away too many details would be to spoil some of the surprises in store for one-legged hero Hiccup (voiced by Jay Baruchel) and his dragon companion Toothless.
They’re a delightful pairing, our two intrepid heroes: Hiccup, the awkward outcast turned plucky and adventurous dragon rider, and Toothless, a handsome Night Fury who’s adorably goofy but also brave and unwaveringly devoted to his human friend and master. Together, they share a loyal bond that’s sweet and endearing, and watching them talk, play and ride through the clouds together is a real joy. In “How to Train Your Dragon 2,” they face a powerful threat, a fearsome “dragon master” with the formidable name of Drago Bludvist (Djimon Hounsou). He’s assembling his own dragon army with the aim of conquering all who oppose him. While searching for new land, Hiccup and Toothless stumble upon his plans for domination and band together with the villagers of Berk to put a stop to his evil ways.
As per the rule of the sequel, “How to Train Your Dragon 2” is bigger than its predecessor: it features, for example, gargantuan, ice-spitting super-dragons so phenomenally huge they’d pick up Gareth Edwards’ Godzilla and gobble him up for breakfast. But as he did with the first film, director Dean DeBlois keeps the breath-catching spectacle grounded in the emotions of his characters, whose relationships he maintains a firm grip on. Hiccup and his remarkably burly father, the fearless warrior Stoick the Vast (Gerard Butler), again make a fully believable father-son duo, butting heads in the previous movie but brought closer now that Stoick's not all stabby-stabby kill-kill towards dragonkind (he's actually quite enthusiastic about them now -- he even has them race each other!). And there’s some seriously touching stuff in here, surprisingly so for a film aimed primarily at the younger crowd -- it's great to see an animated movie willing to enter really intimate and emotional territory. On two occasions I actually found myself teary eyed: I won’t spoil anything, but there’s a reunion in the film that’s beautifully handled and is one of the most moving things I’ve ever seen in an animated movie -- or, heck, any movie.
And all the way through, DeBlois impressively maintains the first film’s enchanting sense of wonder: John Powell’s score is again a spellbinding treat, and the scenes of Hiccup and Toothless soaring through the skies together have a real graceful beauty to them. The great Roger Deakins is credited as having been a visual consultant on the film; looking at the results, that’s not surprising in the slightest. DreamWorks have shown a knack for sequels over the years, with “Shrek 2” witty and hilarious, “Kung Fu Panda 2” exhilarating fun and “Madagascar 3” pleasingly brisk. Now in swoops “How to Train Your Dragon 2,” the best of the lot: emotionally resonant, properly thrilling and just plain flamin’ gorgeous, it's a triumph in family entertainment, just like its predecessor was. The question remains, however, as to why all the adults in this mythical world speak with a thick Scottish brogue while all the youngsters speak with squeaky clean American accents. Then again, one is very likely to become too swept up in the magic and majesty of the film to dwell on such silly nitpicks.
Rating: 9/10
Tuesday, 3 June 2014
Maleficent - Review
Director: Robert Stromberg Writer: Linda Woolverton Studios: Walt Disney Pictures, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, Roth Films Cast: Angelina Jolie, Sharlto Copley, Elle Fanning, Sam Riley, Imelda Staunton, Juno Temple, Lesley Manville Release Date (UK): May 28, 2014 Certificate: PG Runtime: 97 min
So enormously watchable is Angelina Jolie in Disney’s “Maleficent” that one is awfully tempted to pardon the film for its myriad storytelling hiccups based solely on her lead performance. As the iconic villainess who in the classic 1959 animation cursed Sleeping Beauty into an endless slumber, Jolie is magnificent: lavishly wicked, devilishly elegant and with a fiery glare that could turn any man to pure stone, her performance is dead-on, so much so that one suspects she might have actually been born to play the role -- watching her glower and prowl about in her extravagant costume is like watching Maleficent herself step out from her animation cels into our reality. Jolie also reminds us why she became such a superstar in the first place: though she’s often dismissed as nothing but a tabloid beauty, people forget that she truly is a terrifically talented actress with real screen presence, and that taking your eyes off her is a tough ask -- especially when she has thick, twisting horns growing from her crown and pointed cheekbones that could sharpen an HB pencil.
So it’s a damn shame that the rest of Disney’s live-action fairy tale reimagining, which shines its titular Mistress of All Evil in a new and more sympathetic light, does her performance little justice. Somewhere in here there’s a dark and intimate character study ready to burst out and spread its wings; sadly, its wings are clipped by rushed storytelling which races through Maleficent’s untold tale, skipping over character beats in favour of pretty CG visuals. Her transformation from angelic innocent to vengeful villain to loving mother is rendered rather limp and could have benefited from a longer, more fleshed out runtime (at 97 minutes it’s one of the shortest blockbusters of recent years). We can put this down to the inexperience of first-time director Robert Stromberg: previously a production designer on “Avatar” and “Alice in Wonderland,” Stromberg crams the screen full of colourful fantasy landscapes and magical creatures, and somewhere along the line, Maleficent’s story gets lost in the spectacle -- that the bogstandard fairy tale setting feels largely artificial doesn’t do well to help matters either.
The film does have an admirable revisionist feminist streak akin to last year’s “Frozen,” with a rape-revenge plot tied in with Maleficent’s tragic backstory (an early moment of surprising bleakness the film never quite recaptures) and the “true love’s kiss” cliche given a neat spin. Along with that, it’s easy to see what it was about the project that appealed so much to Jolie: as Maleficent grows close to the growing Aurora, aka Sleeping Beauty (the talented Elle Fanning, sadly given nothing to do), the film delves into themes of adoptive parenting and maternal love, which the three-time adopter ought to know a little something about. But the execution lacks true enchantment and for a film called “Maleficent,” it disappointingly only scratches the surface of its anti-heroine’s intriguing psyche. Jolie is a joy to watch, her performance a darkly exquisite, ferocious treat; trouble is, whenever she prowls off-screen, you find yourself willing her to prowl straight back.
Rating: 5/10
So enormously watchable is Angelina Jolie in Disney’s “Maleficent” that one is awfully tempted to pardon the film for its myriad storytelling hiccups based solely on her lead performance. As the iconic villainess who in the classic 1959 animation cursed Sleeping Beauty into an endless slumber, Jolie is magnificent: lavishly wicked, devilishly elegant and with a fiery glare that could turn any man to pure stone, her performance is dead-on, so much so that one suspects she might have actually been born to play the role -- watching her glower and prowl about in her extravagant costume is like watching Maleficent herself step out from her animation cels into our reality. Jolie also reminds us why she became such a superstar in the first place: though she’s often dismissed as nothing but a tabloid beauty, people forget that she truly is a terrifically talented actress with real screen presence, and that taking your eyes off her is a tough ask -- especially when she has thick, twisting horns growing from her crown and pointed cheekbones that could sharpen an HB pencil.
So it’s a damn shame that the rest of Disney’s live-action fairy tale reimagining, which shines its titular Mistress of All Evil in a new and more sympathetic light, does her performance little justice. Somewhere in here there’s a dark and intimate character study ready to burst out and spread its wings; sadly, its wings are clipped by rushed storytelling which races through Maleficent’s untold tale, skipping over character beats in favour of pretty CG visuals. Her transformation from angelic innocent to vengeful villain to loving mother is rendered rather limp and could have benefited from a longer, more fleshed out runtime (at 97 minutes it’s one of the shortest blockbusters of recent years). We can put this down to the inexperience of first-time director Robert Stromberg: previously a production designer on “Avatar” and “Alice in Wonderland,” Stromberg crams the screen full of colourful fantasy landscapes and magical creatures, and somewhere along the line, Maleficent’s story gets lost in the spectacle -- that the bogstandard fairy tale setting feels largely artificial doesn’t do well to help matters either.
The film does have an admirable revisionist feminist streak akin to last year’s “Frozen,” with a rape-revenge plot tied in with Maleficent’s tragic backstory (an early moment of surprising bleakness the film never quite recaptures) and the “true love’s kiss” cliche given a neat spin. Along with that, it’s easy to see what it was about the project that appealed so much to Jolie: as Maleficent grows close to the growing Aurora, aka Sleeping Beauty (the talented Elle Fanning, sadly given nothing to do), the film delves into themes of adoptive parenting and maternal love, which the three-time adopter ought to know a little something about. But the execution lacks true enchantment and for a film called “Maleficent,” it disappointingly only scratches the surface of its anti-heroine’s intriguing psyche. Jolie is a joy to watch, her performance a darkly exquisite, ferocious treat; trouble is, whenever she prowls off-screen, you find yourself willing her to prowl straight back.
Rating: 5/10
Thursday, 27 March 2014
Divergent - Review
Director: Neil Burger Writers: Evan Daugherty, Vanessa Taylor Studios: Summit Entertainment, Lionsgate, Red Wagon Entertainment Cast: Shailene Woodley, Theo James, Ashley Judd, Jai Courtney, Kate Winslet Release Date (UK): 4 April 2014 Certificate: 12A Runtime: 139 min
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: in a future dystopia ruled by a twisted totalitarian government, one resilient teenage girl finds herself plunged into life-threatening danger; with the odds stacked against her, she soon becomes a symbol of resistance and bravely rises up against society’s cruel oppressors. For a film which so fervently promotes individualism over conformism, and for a film called flippin' “Divergent,” it's ironic how slavishly — and hypocritically — Neil Burger's teen-oriented sci-fi blockbuster complies with proven Hollywood formula. The latest in a long line of big-screen YA adaptations, “Divergent” is, let's be honest, filling the gap between the previous and upcoming “Hunger Games” movies, which would be fine if Burger had given the film a voice all for itself — as he hasn't, it comes across as little more than a cheapo clone of the Suzanne Collins-adapted movie series.
The premise is solid enough, derivative though it may be: in a world where society is divided into five distinct “factions,” Shailene Woodley’s 16-year-old heroine Beatrice Prior discovers that she’s a Divergent, fitting into no specific category and thus a threat to the powers that be. Trouble is, the execution is so blandly generic that differentiating it from the rest of the YA crowd proves a difficult task; stick this next to “The Host,” “Twilight,” “The Mortal Instruments” or any other film of that ilk and you’ll go cross-eyed. The gifted Woodley tries her darndest, adding a little personality to the largely lifeless mix, but it’s a losing battle; this is “The Hunger Games” lite and at no point is it as exciting, gripping or interesting as that series has proven to be. Do yourself a favour: “Catching Fire” recently came out on DVD and Blu-ray; watch that instead and see how it’s really done.
Rating: 4/10
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: in a future dystopia ruled by a twisted totalitarian government, one resilient teenage girl finds herself plunged into life-threatening danger; with the odds stacked against her, she soon becomes a symbol of resistance and bravely rises up against society’s cruel oppressors. For a film which so fervently promotes individualism over conformism, and for a film called flippin' “Divergent,” it's ironic how slavishly — and hypocritically — Neil Burger's teen-oriented sci-fi blockbuster complies with proven Hollywood formula. The latest in a long line of big-screen YA adaptations, “Divergent” is, let's be honest, filling the gap between the previous and upcoming “Hunger Games” movies, which would be fine if Burger had given the film a voice all for itself — as he hasn't, it comes across as little more than a cheapo clone of the Suzanne Collins-adapted movie series.
The premise is solid enough, derivative though it may be: in a world where society is divided into five distinct “factions,” Shailene Woodley’s 16-year-old heroine Beatrice Prior discovers that she’s a Divergent, fitting into no specific category and thus a threat to the powers that be. Trouble is, the execution is so blandly generic that differentiating it from the rest of the YA crowd proves a difficult task; stick this next to “The Host,” “Twilight,” “The Mortal Instruments” or any other film of that ilk and you’ll go cross-eyed. The gifted Woodley tries her darndest, adding a little personality to the largely lifeless mix, but it’s a losing battle; this is “The Hunger Games” lite and at no point is it as exciting, gripping or interesting as that series has proven to be. Do yourself a favour: “Catching Fire” recently came out on DVD and Blu-ray; watch that instead and see how it’s really done.
Rating: 4/10
Thursday, 13 February 2014
The Lego Movie - Review
Directors: Phil Lord, Chris Miller Writers: Phil Lord, Chris Miller Studios: Warner Bros. Pictures, Village Roadshow Pictures, Lego System A/S, Vertigo Entertainment, Lin Pictures Cast: Chris Pratt, Will Ferrell, Elizabeth Banks, Will Arnett, Nick Offerman, Alison Brie, Charlie Day, Liam Neeson, Morgan Freeman Release Date (UK): 14 February 2014 Certificate: U Runtime: 100 min
ZOMG: “The Lego Movie” is awesome. Like, properly, amazingly, heart-soaringly awesome. Like, I-wanna-go-get-out-my-old-official-Lego-bucket-and-build-a-rocket-ship-with-some-brightly-coloured-interlocking-building-blocks kinda awesome. It’s so awesome its theme song is literally called “Everything is Awesome.” And this song is so infectiously catchy I can’t for the life of me imagine it ever vacating my earholes — not that I’d want it to. Sing it with me: everything is awesome, everything is cool when you’re part of a team...
Ahem. But seriously, “The Lego Movie” is super-fun. It’s like bottled joy — a bottle made of Lego! Save your silly, cynical rants about commercialism and corporatisation and let “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs” duo Phil Lord and Chris Miller take you on an exhilarating sugar rush through their giant Lego playset. In fact, any and all cynicism should be quick to drown in the sea of awesome we’re invited to plunge into here; even the toughest and most doody-headed of cynics should have their veritable pants charmed off by the subversive wit and the boundless invention “The Lego Movie” boasts by the bucketload; not to mention the sheer, explosive enthusiasm bursting out from the screen and into your face.
The vividly vibrant and thrillingly hectic world of “The Lego Movie” is a seamless mix of stop-motion and computer-animation, and it is dazzlingly gorgeous. Living in this colourful land is Emmet, a sprightly but hopelessly ordinary Lego construction worker voiced by Chris Pratt who finds himself at the centre of an age-old “chosen one” scenario. Apparently he’s “the special,” the one prophesied to defeat the evil Lord Business (Will Ferrell), who schemes to glue everything and everyone into place using a secret weapon called the Kragle. On his quest, Emmet teams up with the fugitive Master Builders, among them a kooky old mystic (Morgan Freeman), a free-spirited punk chick called WyldStyle (Elizabeth Banks), Lego Batman (Will Arnett), Lego Wonder Woman (Cobie Smulders) and a robo-pirate called Metalbeard (Nick Offerman), and is pursued by a one-man good cop/bad cop duo voiced by Liam Neeson.
Sound fun? You bet your tiny plastic caboose it is. And the whole thing whizzes along at an unstoppably exuberant pace — in fact, it moves with such frenzied ferocity you half-worry it’s all going to crash at any minute but it never does and it just keeps going and it’s utterly thrilling. All the while Lord and Miller giddily undermine the clichés of the plot at every step — in one scene, Emmet daydreams through important backstory exposition, and it’s rather strongly suggested that the central prophecy was maybe, possibly, probably made up by Morgan Freeman’s mad mystic — and generate enough geeky (Lego-owned) pop culture nods and send-ups to keep any fanbase squeeing in their seats. Where else could you see Dumbledore and Gandalf sharing the screen together and Superman getting annoyed by a clingy Green Lantern?
It’s fantastic to see a family movie which values and promotes creativity, individuality and imagination so fervently, especially when it’s attached to the wise and surprising message that although being creative can be good, sometimes simply following the instructions works too. It’s also fantastic seeing a family movie which is just this funny and witty and clever in its comedy: with rapid-fire gags, Lord and Miller’s whip-smart script has a stonking laugh-a-minute hit rate. At the end, my sides were sore from all my hysterical giggling and my face was stuck in an expression of pure, child-like glee. Put simply, “The Lego Movie” made me feel like a little kid again, playing with my Lego blocks on the floor of my bedroom, building spaceships and supercars and making up wild and crazy stories. If there’s a funner film this year I will literally shit a brick (not literally). All together now: everything is awesome, everything is cool when you’re part of a team...
Rating: 10/10
Sunday, 15 December 2013
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug - Review
Director: Peter Jackson Writers: Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson, Guillermo del Toro Studios: Warner Bros. Pictures, New Line Cinema, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, WingNut Films Cast: Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage, Benedict Cumberbatch, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lily, Luke Evans Release Date (UK): 13 December 2013 Certificate: 12A Runtime: 161 min
“I do believe the worst is behind us” were the last words spoken in last year’s “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey,” uttered by Bilbo Baggins as he, Gandalf and their band of thirteen hairy dwarves looked at their near future in the shape of The Lonely Mountain. And indeed Bilbo may be right: though sufficiently spectacular and delivered with gusto, the first chapter in Peter Jackson’s epic new fantasy trilogy, the prequels to his earth-shattering “Lord of the Rings” films, was a slight disappointment, lacking a little oomph in its narrative; it took forever to get going and once it did the story lacked focus and took on an all too episodic structure, with lengthy, inconsequential brawls with trolls and goblins and a pointless Rivendell pit-stop that wasn’t even in Tolkein’s book.
Thankfully, follow-up “The Desolation of Smaug” eradicates these problems, Jackson reducing the episodic structure and giving its narrative a smoother flow. Continuing the dwarves’ quest to reclaim their lost homeland, this second chapter is a superior creature, romping along at a brisker pace and journeying towards a clearly defined destination: The Lonely Mountain, where lowly hobbit Bilbo, again played wonderfully by Martin Freeman, must thieve the precious Arkenstone from under the snout of the dreaded dragon Smaug; the dragon whose eye, you may remember, burst open in the final moments of the last movie as he slumbered peacefully in a tomb of stolen gold worthy of Scrooge McDuck.
But it’s a good while until we get to him — a solid two hours, in fact. In the meantime, our vertically challenged heroes get into all sorts of perilous scrapes in their trek across Middle-earth, from a terrifying encounter with a hungry family of giant tarantulas to imprisonment in the dungeons of the Elvenking Thranduil (Lee Pace). All the while they’re pursued by a party of Orcs working under orders from a mysterious, whispery Necromancer who rises from the darkness.
Along the way we’re treated with a series of high-energy action set-pieces, the sheer bravura of which, combined with Jackson’s twisting, turning camera and dollops of gorgeously rendered special effects, is exhilarating and dazzling. Particularly spirited is our heroes’ intrepid escape from the dungeons of the Elvenking: chased by battling Orcs and elves, they ride wine barrels down a thrashing river. Pudgy dwarf Bombur (Stephen Hunter) really gets his chance to shine here, given a spectacular moment in which he, trapped inside a rolling barrel, pummels through Orc warriors left, right and centre like a bowling ball knocking down pins (which is then followed by Orlando Bloom’s Legolas jumping on the dwarves’ heads while firing arrows at Orcs). It is, if you’ll excuse the pun, a barrel of fun, and one of the most unashamedly joyous sequences in the history of Jackson’s Middle-earth.
In amongst the grand spectacle there’s nothing quite as compelling as the central relationship between Frodo and Sam in the “Lord of the Rings” films, but there is Bilbo, whose transformation from a cosy Shire-dweller to a brave and bold adventurer is these films’ real journey. And Freeman is utterly brilliant, nailing Bilbo’s timidness, his growing courage and his creeping corruption from the One Ring. I had my doubts about Freeman, but after his performance here I can’t for the life of me remember why; he’s fantastic and absolutely vital to our connection to the story (the mostly interchangeable dwarves don’t quite cut it, though I do like Ken Stott’s Scottish dwarf Balin and Richard Armitage’s brooding leader Thorin).
They’re all joined by a couple of newcomers: there’s Luke Evans as the handsome smuggler Bard who sneaks our heroes into Lake-town in barrels of stinky fish, and Evangeline Lily as the elf warrior Tauriel. Both are very welcome additions, in particular the pointy-eared Lily, who makes for a kick-ass heroine with an impressive gift for taking down Orcs with a bow and arrow (side note: there’s a ton of nifty, wildly imaginative Orc decapitations in this. You can tell this is directed by the guy who made “Braindead”).
But undeniably, the best newcomer is Benedict Cumberbatch as the voice — and, if those rather embarrassing photos are to be believed, movement — of the gargantuan fire-breather Smaug the Magnificent. And magnificent he is: another miracle creation of WETA, he’s a fearsome beast of startling size, sporting a booming voice, dripping with arrogance and grinning with sadistic glee as he taunts and teases his tiny prey. His face-off with Bilbo inside The Lonely Mountain is gripping stuff as Bilbo’s newfound courage is really put to the test. Their interaction is seamless and the bombastic set-piece that follows is a ton of fun. It’s a finale worth the trek that preceded it, and considering what a lengthy trek it was, that’s saying something.
Indeed, Jackson’s undoubtedly self-indulgent desire to turn Tolkein’s slim story into another epic, 9-hour blockbuster trilogy still shows strain — there’s some definite padding here, some pointless filler here — but as long as the results are as consistently thrilling and immersive as this, you won’t hear me complaining (well, not too much, anyway). I’m kind of excited for “There and Back Again;” after all, “Return of the King” was my favourite of the “Lord of the Rings” films, and given that this will be the third and final entry in the “Hobbit” series it has every chance of being the best of them. Let’s hope Jackson can pull it off — I mean, if anyone can, it’s most certainly him.
Rating: 8/10
“I do believe the worst is behind us” were the last words spoken in last year’s “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey,” uttered by Bilbo Baggins as he, Gandalf and their band of thirteen hairy dwarves looked at their near future in the shape of The Lonely Mountain. And indeed Bilbo may be right: though sufficiently spectacular and delivered with gusto, the first chapter in Peter Jackson’s epic new fantasy trilogy, the prequels to his earth-shattering “Lord of the Rings” films, was a slight disappointment, lacking a little oomph in its narrative; it took forever to get going and once it did the story lacked focus and took on an all too episodic structure, with lengthy, inconsequential brawls with trolls and goblins and a pointless Rivendell pit-stop that wasn’t even in Tolkein’s book.
Thankfully, follow-up “The Desolation of Smaug” eradicates these problems, Jackson reducing the episodic structure and giving its narrative a smoother flow. Continuing the dwarves’ quest to reclaim their lost homeland, this second chapter is a superior creature, romping along at a brisker pace and journeying towards a clearly defined destination: The Lonely Mountain, where lowly hobbit Bilbo, again played wonderfully by Martin Freeman, must thieve the precious Arkenstone from under the snout of the dreaded dragon Smaug; the dragon whose eye, you may remember, burst open in the final moments of the last movie as he slumbered peacefully in a tomb of stolen gold worthy of Scrooge McDuck.
But it’s a good while until we get to him — a solid two hours, in fact. In the meantime, our vertically challenged heroes get into all sorts of perilous scrapes in their trek across Middle-earth, from a terrifying encounter with a hungry family of giant tarantulas to imprisonment in the dungeons of the Elvenking Thranduil (Lee Pace). All the while they’re pursued by a party of Orcs working under orders from a mysterious, whispery Necromancer who rises from the darkness.
Along the way we’re treated with a series of high-energy action set-pieces, the sheer bravura of which, combined with Jackson’s twisting, turning camera and dollops of gorgeously rendered special effects, is exhilarating and dazzling. Particularly spirited is our heroes’ intrepid escape from the dungeons of the Elvenking: chased by battling Orcs and elves, they ride wine barrels down a thrashing river. Pudgy dwarf Bombur (Stephen Hunter) really gets his chance to shine here, given a spectacular moment in which he, trapped inside a rolling barrel, pummels through Orc warriors left, right and centre like a bowling ball knocking down pins (which is then followed by Orlando Bloom’s Legolas jumping on the dwarves’ heads while firing arrows at Orcs). It is, if you’ll excuse the pun, a barrel of fun, and one of the most unashamedly joyous sequences in the history of Jackson’s Middle-earth.
In amongst the grand spectacle there’s nothing quite as compelling as the central relationship between Frodo and Sam in the “Lord of the Rings” films, but there is Bilbo, whose transformation from a cosy Shire-dweller to a brave and bold adventurer is these films’ real journey. And Freeman is utterly brilliant, nailing Bilbo’s timidness, his growing courage and his creeping corruption from the One Ring. I had my doubts about Freeman, but after his performance here I can’t for the life of me remember why; he’s fantastic and absolutely vital to our connection to the story (the mostly interchangeable dwarves don’t quite cut it, though I do like Ken Stott’s Scottish dwarf Balin and Richard Armitage’s brooding leader Thorin).
They’re all joined by a couple of newcomers: there’s Luke Evans as the handsome smuggler Bard who sneaks our heroes into Lake-town in barrels of stinky fish, and Evangeline Lily as the elf warrior Tauriel. Both are very welcome additions, in particular the pointy-eared Lily, who makes for a kick-ass heroine with an impressive gift for taking down Orcs with a bow and arrow (side note: there’s a ton of nifty, wildly imaginative Orc decapitations in this. You can tell this is directed by the guy who made “Braindead”).
But undeniably, the best newcomer is Benedict Cumberbatch as the voice — and, if those rather embarrassing photos are to be believed, movement — of the gargantuan fire-breather Smaug the Magnificent. And magnificent he is: another miracle creation of WETA, he’s a fearsome beast of startling size, sporting a booming voice, dripping with arrogance and grinning with sadistic glee as he taunts and teases his tiny prey. His face-off with Bilbo inside The Lonely Mountain is gripping stuff as Bilbo’s newfound courage is really put to the test. Their interaction is seamless and the bombastic set-piece that follows is a ton of fun. It’s a finale worth the trek that preceded it, and considering what a lengthy trek it was, that’s saying something.
Indeed, Jackson’s undoubtedly self-indulgent desire to turn Tolkein’s slim story into another epic, 9-hour blockbuster trilogy still shows strain — there’s some definite padding here, some pointless filler here — but as long as the results are as consistently thrilling and immersive as this, you won’t hear me complaining (well, not too much, anyway). I’m kind of excited for “There and Back Again;” after all, “Return of the King” was my favourite of the “Lord of the Rings” films, and given that this will be the third and final entry in the “Hobbit” series it has every chance of being the best of them. Let’s hope Jackson can pull it off — I mean, if anyone can, it’s most certainly him.
Rating: 8/10
Thursday, 8 August 2013
The Lone Ranger - Review
Director: Gore Verbinski Writers: Justin Haythe, Ted Elliott, Terry Rossio Studios: Walt Disney Pictures, Jerry Bruckheimer Films Stars: Johnny Depp, Armie Hammer, William Fichtner, Tom Wilkinson, Ruth Wilson, Helena Bonham Carter Certificate: 12A Release Date (UK): 9 August 2013 Runtime: 149 min
Anyone vaguely familiar with the multibillion-dollar “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise will feel more than a touch of déjà vu while watching Disney’s “The Lone Ranger:” a $250-million reboot of the vintage ’30s radio show and ’40s TV serial, it sees director Gore Verbinski and producer Jerry Bruckheimer retooling the much-loved, age-old western adventure stories to fit the mould of their enormously successful swashbuckling blockbusters. Once again, we're presented with the same overblown action set-pieces, slapstick comedy, bloated length and overstuffed plot, only this time it’s set in the Wild West rather than the seven seas, and instead of the swaggering Captain Jack Sparrow swinging his sword we have Tonto the noble savage with a dead bird on his head.
Indeed, there’s more than a hint of Johnny Depp’s popular pirate captain in his portrayal of the iconic Indian sidekick as he confidently strides between (and hangs on underneath) speeding runaway trains with nary a flinch — his red bandana and long black dreadlocks certainly won’t help quell comparisons, although that lifeless ex-crow perched atop his crown is an interesting addition. But Depp’s Sparrow-mimicking Tonto is the least of this film’s multitude of problems, and I’m not just talking about the disastrously low US box office takings — Depp’s deadpan performance is in fact the film’s most entertaining aspect, even if his casting as a Native American has the slightest whiff of whitewashing about it.
No, the problem with “The Lone Ranger” is that it in refitting the classic adventures of Tonto and Kemo Sabe for the “Pirates” brand, Verbinski and Bruckheimer have robbed the project of anything fresh, new or exciting — we’re now four movies into that mega-franchise, with a fifth arriving next summer, and so in “The Lone Ranger," we’ve seen it all before. This strips the film of any sense of unpredictability and essentially leaves us with a “Pirates of the Caribbean” movie that's not quite a “Pirates of the Caribbean” movie but is sort of “The Lone Ranger” — and who's going to be satisfied by that? On top of that, the storytelling is clunky as Depp’s Tonto and Armie Hammer’s by-the-book lawman turned masked vigilante John Reid, aka the Lone Ranger, partner up to pursue the scar-faced, human heart-eating outlaw Butch Cavendish (William Fichtner) against the sweltering backdrop of mid-19th century Texas.
Depp and Hammer make for an amusing odd couple team-up, even if their constant bickering grates after a while, and Helena Bonham Carter does good in a small role as a gun-legged runner of a whore house. But they, alongside Verbinski’s energetic visual stylings and the excellent costume design, are one of the few redeeming features of this misguided, tediously overlong, two-and-a-half-hour mess, which is sure to leave the target teenage audience feeling bored and confused, and long-time “Lone Ranger" fans wishing for the simple and innocent heroics of the old shows. Verbinski and Depp fared much better in the Wild West with their 2011 computer animation “Rango” — and they didn't lose $190 million while doing so.
Rating: 4/10
Anyone vaguely familiar with the multibillion-dollar “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise will feel more than a touch of déjà vu while watching Disney’s “The Lone Ranger:” a $250-million reboot of the vintage ’30s radio show and ’40s TV serial, it sees director Gore Verbinski and producer Jerry Bruckheimer retooling the much-loved, age-old western adventure stories to fit the mould of their enormously successful swashbuckling blockbusters. Once again, we're presented with the same overblown action set-pieces, slapstick comedy, bloated length and overstuffed plot, only this time it’s set in the Wild West rather than the seven seas, and instead of the swaggering Captain Jack Sparrow swinging his sword we have Tonto the noble savage with a dead bird on his head.
Indeed, there’s more than a hint of Johnny Depp’s popular pirate captain in his portrayal of the iconic Indian sidekick as he confidently strides between (and hangs on underneath) speeding runaway trains with nary a flinch — his red bandana and long black dreadlocks certainly won’t help quell comparisons, although that lifeless ex-crow perched atop his crown is an interesting addition. But Depp’s Sparrow-mimicking Tonto is the least of this film’s multitude of problems, and I’m not just talking about the disastrously low US box office takings — Depp’s deadpan performance is in fact the film’s most entertaining aspect, even if his casting as a Native American has the slightest whiff of whitewashing about it.
No, the problem with “The Lone Ranger” is that it in refitting the classic adventures of Tonto and Kemo Sabe for the “Pirates” brand, Verbinski and Bruckheimer have robbed the project of anything fresh, new or exciting — we’re now four movies into that mega-franchise, with a fifth arriving next summer, and so in “The Lone Ranger," we’ve seen it all before. This strips the film of any sense of unpredictability and essentially leaves us with a “Pirates of the Caribbean” movie that's not quite a “Pirates of the Caribbean” movie but is sort of “The Lone Ranger” — and who's going to be satisfied by that? On top of that, the storytelling is clunky as Depp’s Tonto and Armie Hammer’s by-the-book lawman turned masked vigilante John Reid, aka the Lone Ranger, partner up to pursue the scar-faced, human heart-eating outlaw Butch Cavendish (William Fichtner) against the sweltering backdrop of mid-19th century Texas.
Depp and Hammer make for an amusing odd couple team-up, even if their constant bickering grates after a while, and Helena Bonham Carter does good in a small role as a gun-legged runner of a whore house. But they, alongside Verbinski’s energetic visual stylings and the excellent costume design, are one of the few redeeming features of this misguided, tediously overlong, two-and-a-half-hour mess, which is sure to leave the target teenage audience feeling bored and confused, and long-time “Lone Ranger" fans wishing for the simple and innocent heroics of the old shows. Verbinski and Depp fared much better in the Wild West with their 2011 computer animation “Rango” — and they didn't lose $190 million while doing so.
Rating: 4/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)