For comic book movie fans, it is hard to remember a time before BATMAN. Warner Bros.' other superhero film franchise had gone completely down the toilet, and fans were clamoring to see what would come next. What ended up coming next was one of the most entertaining superhero films, and one of the most entertaining films in general, of the past twenty-five years.
BATMAN is the story of Batman taking on a crime syndicate in Gotham City that is led by his archenemy, The Joker. For all intents and purposes, this is a Joker origin story. The character of Batman has already been established, albeit briefly, as Alexander Knox (Robert Wuhl) says in the film, "Eight sightings...in just under a month", so The Joker is the first enemy that poses a real threat to Batman and the decency of Gotham City. I enjoy the tiny visual clues that inform us of Jack Napiers' (Jack Nicholson) fate. Early in the film, we see him playing with a deck of cards and wearing a purple suit. I have to say that I think this film does have its problems, and most of them are with the script. At the beginning of the film Batman witnesses a crime being committed that is similar to the one he experienced as a child, but he does not rescue the victims, and he waits until AFTER the crime is committed to fight off the muggers!!! I also would have liked to see more of how Gus Grissoms' (Jack Palance) crime syndicate is connected to AXIS CHEMICALS. That is not clear at all in the film. Later in the film, there is a scene at Bruce Waynes' (Michael Keaton) party where Knox and Vicki Vale (Kim Basinger) are introduced to Bruce Wayne in his armory room. While this scene does set up the character relationships, and we as the audience are introduced to Wayne and the characteristics of the character, this scene does feel forced because not ten seconds earlier Knox told Vale to follow Commissioner Gordon (Pat Hingle) to AXIS CHEMICALS. Why exactly do they need to stop at the armory?? I also feel that the love angle between Wayne and Vale progresses too quickly. Look, I have no problem with "love at first sight", However, when Alfred (Michael Gough) says things like, "I feel that there's a certain weight that's lifted when she's here" and how special she is, I cannot help but think to myself, "You feel all of this after meeting her only once?" It all seems a bit far-fetched for me. Also, the entire sequence where the Joker meets Vicki Vale at the museum is full of editing errors and plot holes. Batman comes crashing down through the skylight to.....rescue Vicki Vale and not battle the Joker at all?!?! What the damn hell??? Then, when Batman and Vickie are about to escape in the Batmobile, Batman holds the communicator up and says, "Stop", then drops the communicator However, in the next shot he is still holding it close to his mouth. This is a major editing gaffe. And why does the Batmobile have two seats?? I feel like the writers could not create another way for Vicki to get to the Batcave, so the producers went "Ah, we'll just add another seat to the Batmobile. Nobody will even notice." Guess what, folks? I NOTICED!!! Also, how did Batman figure out what cosmetics products combinations would be toxic??? This is a CRUCIAL part of the plot, and we do not see a bit of it!!! Also, just before the climax of the film, Alfred voluntarily lets Vicki Vale into the Batcave of his own free will. I am sorry, but the day Alfred violates Bruces' secrecy like that, he is FIRED!!! Next, when the Joker is interfering with The Mayors' (Lee Wallace) speech, The Mayor is looking to his left as if the Joker is actually standing there!!! WHAT?!?!?! He should be looking around attempting to figure out where the Jokers' voice is coming from!!! Speaking of the climax of the film, where and how did Batman get the Batwing?? He used the Batmobile to blow up AXIS CHEMICALS, and then he magically shows up in the Batwing, yet we never actually see him go and get it. Also, why does the Joker cover up his face with skin tone makeup some of the time??? If he is "a lot happier" as he claims to be, would he not let his true form show all of the time??? This does not make any sense to me. None of these issues, though, compare with my biggest complaint about the film: MAKING THE JOKER THE KILLER OF BRUCE WAYNES' PARENTS!!!! Look, I get it. Doing this adds more weight to the conflict between these two characters. However, as far as staying true to the source material goes, this is the stupidest thing that anyone has ever done. If you make the Joker the killer of Bruce Waynes' parents, then when the Joker is killed, Bruce Wayne theoretically does not need to be Batman anymore. The whole reason Bruce Wayne fights crime as Batman is so that no one will ever experience what he went through when he was a child. If the killer of his parents is either killed or brought to justice, then he has done his job. Adding even more confusion to this matter is when the Joker says, "I was a kid when I killed your parents." How does he even know that Batman is Bruce Wayne??? I am sure that Bruces' parents are not the only people he killed, so how can he be sure he has the right people in mind???
Earlier today, I posed a question on social media: can you forgive a film for having continuous plot holes if the movie is entertaining? Is entertainment more important than story structure? It is because of the tone and the performances in this film that make BATMAN endlessly entertaining. However, I cannot look past all of the aforementioned plot holes. Personally, I think this film is overrated.
In one of his most memorable roles, Jack Nicholson plays the Joker/Jack Napier. In many ways, Nicholson is the perfect person to play the Joker because of his natural tendency to make people laugh in real life. Every joke lands beautifully on its feet, and Nicholsons' "Joker laugh" is truly haunting. However, it is when the Joker does truly maniacal things that you see how great Nicholson is in this role. The scene where he shakes hands and burns his business partner alive is a prime example of both of these qualities. Nicholson is half the reason this movie is so entertaining. Frightening and hilarious at the same time, he steals the entire show, which is exactly what the Joker would do. This is an absolutely unforgettable performance.
In an equally famous role, Michael Keaton plays Batman/Bruce Wayne. Keaton does a great job of playing both of these characters. He displays a wonderful charm and wit as Bruce Wayne, and he is menacing and imposing as Batman. When he looks at the Joker and says, "I'm gonna kill you", you believe it. Keaton and Basinger also display great chemistry, playing off of each other beautifully. Keaton will always be the originator (in a theatrically released movie, that is), and I really do not think that is so bad.
Kim Basinger plays Vicki Vale. I will say this right off the bat (no pun intended): I HATE this character. When we are first introduced to this character, she comes off as incredibly intelligent and passionate about her work. As the movie progresses, you realize that that is where her intelligence ends. For a majority of the film, she does nothing but run and scream. In fact, she plays the quintessential "dumb blonde". I mean, she throws cold water on the Joker. For Odins' sake, this is not the Wizard of Oz. Throw BOILING water on him!!! Do not misunderstand me: Basinger is great at playing this character, but seeing her play a character that is so one-dimensional is heartbreaking because she is a talented actress.
Tim Burton is the director of BATMAN. The tone of this film is the other reason why this movie works so well from an entertainment perspective. This film is about as dark as a BATMAN movie could be in 1989, and the spirit of the character is alive and well. Danny Elfmans' music helps quite a bit, as well. The last twenty minutes of the film are spectacular, and gives fans what they have always wanted to see: Batman and the Joker duking it out. To say that BATMAN was a smash hit would be the understatement of the century, and it is all thanks to Burtons' wonderful directing.
Batman should always fight the Joker, and the first theatrically released BATMAN movie gave us exactly that. This movie does have a laundry list of problems, but it is so much fun to watch. It is only because of the entertainment factor that I slightly recommend this film to those who have not seen it.
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Thursday, February 23, 2017
How The West Was Wayne
I have always had a great deal of respect for John Waynes' legacy, even though I had never seen any of his films until now. Westerns are one of my favorite genres, and I would love to see them make a comeback. After watching True Grit for the first time, I have to say that my love for both the genre and Waynes' career has increased dramatically.
True Grit is the story of a teenage girl who gets help from a U.S. Marshal and a Texas Ranger to track down her fathers' killer. I love the way that each of the characters are introduced in the movie. The film takes the time to set up the characteristics and the intentions of each of the characters. Also, from a cinematic and storytelling point of view, I like that John Waynes' Oscar winning role is not some grand, epic entrance. The introduction of Rooster Cogburn is treated like a typical character introduction, that is to say there is nothing overly special about his introduction. As wonderful as this film is, there are a couple of flaws that I have with this film. I would have liked there to be a scene where Mattie Ross (Kim Darby) actually finds out that her father has been killed. The time jump from when he is killed to when Mattie and Yarnell (Ken Renard) are preparing his funeral is a tad jarring. Also, shortly after the funeral, there is a scene where Mattie is having dinner somewhere with some friends, and is being taken care of after her fathers' death. We later find out this was at the boarding house, but this should have been established earlier. Despite these minor flaws, when it comes to the characters and the story, True Grit is an American classic.
In his Oscar winning role, John Wayne plays Rooster Cogburn. While Cogburn certainly has a mean demeanor, he also has a wonderful sense of humor. John Wayne blends these traits perfectly. It is also because of Waynes' performance that he has such good banter with Mattie, who is incredibly straight-laced. This is a bravura performance from Wayne that certainly deserves its praises.
Glen Campbell plays La Boeuf. I love this character because you are never quite sure about his intentions. Campbell plays the character with such charm, and he has such a mysterious introduction, that you are second-guessing him right up until the end of the film. It is only then that his true nature is shown. Campbell plays La Boeuf as a smooth talker, and he also has good wits about him, which makes for an excellent performance.
In my opinion, Kim Darby steals the show as Mattie Ross. As I mentioned before, Mattie is incredibly straight-laced, and is also a strong character as well. This role shows you that there can be strong female characters that do not lose their femininity. Mattie may not kick ass physically, but she knows what she wants and will stop at nothing to get it. There is actually a beautiful moment where Mattie shows a vulnerability in herself. This is a private moment that is not in front of other people, which speaks volumes about her character. Darby completely disappears into the role, and steals every single shot that she is in. Quite honestly, she gives one of the best female performances I have ever seen. In a time where cinema needs more strong female characters, it is nice to watch a film that is nearly fifty years old and know that there was a day where these kinds of characters were commonplace.
Henry Hathaway is the director of True Grit. I have to say that I love the scope of this film. This is a relatively small movie that feels like an epic. Part of that has to do with the beautiful sweeping shots of the landscape. Also, Hathaway knows that this is truly Mattie Ross' story, and to see her travel the countryside, and go on this journey of justice for her father is quite breathtaking. The final forty minutes of the film have enough tension to fill a covered wagon. We see Cogburn confront Ned Pepper (Robert Duvall) and his gang in the manliest of ways, we see Mattie fall into a deadly snake pit, and the death of Tom Chaney (Jeff Corey). All of this is edited in a way that makes your knuckles turn white, and also feel a great sense of relief for Mattie finally getting what she wanted all along. Hathaway does a fantastic job of bringing all of these characters and elements together.
I cannot begin to express how much I am looking forward to watching more John Wayne movies now that I have seen True Grit. This film is a classic in every sense of the word. Even though John Wayne has long since past away, his legacy lives on. This is a well-deserved Oscar win. If you have not seen True Grit, I highly recommend that you do as soon as possible.
True Grit is the story of a teenage girl who gets help from a U.S. Marshal and a Texas Ranger to track down her fathers' killer. I love the way that each of the characters are introduced in the movie. The film takes the time to set up the characteristics and the intentions of each of the characters. Also, from a cinematic and storytelling point of view, I like that John Waynes' Oscar winning role is not some grand, epic entrance. The introduction of Rooster Cogburn is treated like a typical character introduction, that is to say there is nothing overly special about his introduction. As wonderful as this film is, there are a couple of flaws that I have with this film. I would have liked there to be a scene where Mattie Ross (Kim Darby) actually finds out that her father has been killed. The time jump from when he is killed to when Mattie and Yarnell (Ken Renard) are preparing his funeral is a tad jarring. Also, shortly after the funeral, there is a scene where Mattie is having dinner somewhere with some friends, and is being taken care of after her fathers' death. We later find out this was at the boarding house, but this should have been established earlier. Despite these minor flaws, when it comes to the characters and the story, True Grit is an American classic.
In his Oscar winning role, John Wayne plays Rooster Cogburn. While Cogburn certainly has a mean demeanor, he also has a wonderful sense of humor. John Wayne blends these traits perfectly. It is also because of Waynes' performance that he has such good banter with Mattie, who is incredibly straight-laced. This is a bravura performance from Wayne that certainly deserves its praises.
Glen Campbell plays La Boeuf. I love this character because you are never quite sure about his intentions. Campbell plays the character with such charm, and he has such a mysterious introduction, that you are second-guessing him right up until the end of the film. It is only then that his true nature is shown. Campbell plays La Boeuf as a smooth talker, and he also has good wits about him, which makes for an excellent performance.
In my opinion, Kim Darby steals the show as Mattie Ross. As I mentioned before, Mattie is incredibly straight-laced, and is also a strong character as well. This role shows you that there can be strong female characters that do not lose their femininity. Mattie may not kick ass physically, but she knows what she wants and will stop at nothing to get it. There is actually a beautiful moment where Mattie shows a vulnerability in herself. This is a private moment that is not in front of other people, which speaks volumes about her character. Darby completely disappears into the role, and steals every single shot that she is in. Quite honestly, she gives one of the best female performances I have ever seen. In a time where cinema needs more strong female characters, it is nice to watch a film that is nearly fifty years old and know that there was a day where these kinds of characters were commonplace.
Henry Hathaway is the director of True Grit. I have to say that I love the scope of this film. This is a relatively small movie that feels like an epic. Part of that has to do with the beautiful sweeping shots of the landscape. Also, Hathaway knows that this is truly Mattie Ross' story, and to see her travel the countryside, and go on this journey of justice for her father is quite breathtaking. The final forty minutes of the film have enough tension to fill a covered wagon. We see Cogburn confront Ned Pepper (Robert Duvall) and his gang in the manliest of ways, we see Mattie fall into a deadly snake pit, and the death of Tom Chaney (Jeff Corey). All of this is edited in a way that makes your knuckles turn white, and also feel a great sense of relief for Mattie finally getting what she wanted all along. Hathaway does a fantastic job of bringing all of these characters and elements together.
I cannot begin to express how much I am looking forward to watching more John Wayne movies now that I have seen True Grit. This film is a classic in every sense of the word. Even though John Wayne has long since past away, his legacy lives on. This is a well-deserved Oscar win. If you have not seen True Grit, I highly recommend that you do as soon as possible.
Sunday, February 12, 2017
Keeping Up With The Doctor: Part 1
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is my personal favorite movie of the entire series. I love the story, the cast, and I especially love the dark tone of the film. I love when directors step out of their comfort zone, and when you think about the kind of movie that The Temple of Doom was at the time of its release, it is a movie that you did not think even the mighty Steven Spielberg was capable of doing. Needless to say, the movie is pure spectacle at its finest.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom finds Indy uncovering a secret cult in an ancient palace he was asked to investigate. I have found that many fans of the series do not realize that, chronologically speaking, this is the first Indiana Jones film. This explains his behavior about collecting the Sankara stones. He intends to use them for "fortune and glory", to get rich, instead of putting them in a museum where they can be viewed by all. As I mentioned before, the dark tone of the film is something that I personally respond to. The Temple of Doom is incredibly intense at times, and it gives me goosebumps every time I watch it. As much as I thoroughly enjoy this film, however, there are some flaws in it. There are a few times when the editing does not make any sense. In one shot one of the actors would be in one place, and in the next shot they are someplace else. For example, at one point in the film, Mola Ram (Amrish Puri) is standing and then in the next shot, he is lying down on the ground going through a trap door. Granted, these editing mistakes only happen about three times in the film so it does not become a big issue, but it is still noticeable. The only other issue I have is with a line of dialogue. At the climax of the film, when Indy (Harrison Ford), Willie Scott (Kate Capshaw) and Short Round (Ke Huy Quan) are climbing up the cliff escaping the Thuggee cult, Indy yells, "Head for the bridge!". How does he know there is a bridge? Anyway, those problems aside, I personally feel that The Temple of Doom is a cinematic wonder with great characters and an imaginative take on the "dungeon lair" scenario.
Steven Spielberg is the director of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Again, as I mentioned before, I love when directors step out of their comfort zones. This film is dark and brutal, and Spielberg does not shy away from it. The scene with the human sacrifice may be one of my favorite scenes in cinematic history. I love the way the chanting slowly builds as the victim gets lowered into the fiery pit, and then his heart bursts into flames. I also love the shot where the camera pulls back as the victim is screaming for his life. It puts a stamp on the fact that no one is going to save this man. This is just one of those scenes that puts a twisted smile on my face. However, as dark as the movie is, Spielberg balances the film with a good deal of levity in the form of Indy and Willies' relationship. Harrison Ford and Kate Capshaw have great chemistry together, so much so that you just burst into laughter. I also think that the mining cart chase is one for the ages. The way Spielberg uses the camera, and the way Indy has to improvise ways to escape the Thuggee cult, make this quite an innovative sequence. The Temple of Doom is one of the countless reasons why Steven Spielberg is the most dominant filmmaker in history.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is one of those rare pieces of cinema that did not get the love it deserved when it was initially released, but has since garnered a great deal of respect from both fans and critics. This movie also has one of the best musical numbers in a non-musical film. If you have not seen this film, I cannot begin to express how much you should go check it out.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom finds Indy uncovering a secret cult in an ancient palace he was asked to investigate. I have found that many fans of the series do not realize that, chronologically speaking, this is the first Indiana Jones film. This explains his behavior about collecting the Sankara stones. He intends to use them for "fortune and glory", to get rich, instead of putting them in a museum where they can be viewed by all. As I mentioned before, the dark tone of the film is something that I personally respond to. The Temple of Doom is incredibly intense at times, and it gives me goosebumps every time I watch it. As much as I thoroughly enjoy this film, however, there are some flaws in it. There are a few times when the editing does not make any sense. In one shot one of the actors would be in one place, and in the next shot they are someplace else. For example, at one point in the film, Mola Ram (Amrish Puri) is standing and then in the next shot, he is lying down on the ground going through a trap door. Granted, these editing mistakes only happen about three times in the film so it does not become a big issue, but it is still noticeable. The only other issue I have is with a line of dialogue. At the climax of the film, when Indy (Harrison Ford), Willie Scott (Kate Capshaw) and Short Round (Ke Huy Quan) are climbing up the cliff escaping the Thuggee cult, Indy yells, "Head for the bridge!". How does he know there is a bridge? Anyway, those problems aside, I personally feel that The Temple of Doom is a cinematic wonder with great characters and an imaginative take on the "dungeon lair" scenario.
Steven Spielberg is the director of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Again, as I mentioned before, I love when directors step out of their comfort zones. This film is dark and brutal, and Spielberg does not shy away from it. The scene with the human sacrifice may be one of my favorite scenes in cinematic history. I love the way the chanting slowly builds as the victim gets lowered into the fiery pit, and then his heart bursts into flames. I also love the shot where the camera pulls back as the victim is screaming for his life. It puts a stamp on the fact that no one is going to save this man. This is just one of those scenes that puts a twisted smile on my face. However, as dark as the movie is, Spielberg balances the film with a good deal of levity in the form of Indy and Willies' relationship. Harrison Ford and Kate Capshaw have great chemistry together, so much so that you just burst into laughter. I also think that the mining cart chase is one for the ages. The way Spielberg uses the camera, and the way Indy has to improvise ways to escape the Thuggee cult, make this quite an innovative sequence. The Temple of Doom is one of the countless reasons why Steven Spielberg is the most dominant filmmaker in history.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is one of those rare pieces of cinema that did not get the love it deserved when it was initially released, but has since garnered a great deal of respect from both fans and critics. This movie also has one of the best musical numbers in a non-musical film. If you have not seen this film, I cannot begin to express how much you should go check it out.
Monday, February 6, 2017
Fathers and Sons: Part III
Among Star Wars fans who despise the prequels, Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith is known to be the best of the three movies. The film certainly has its problems, but it also feels more like Star Wars than the previous two films. This is the story that every Star Wars fan was waiting to see from the beginning.
Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith is the third installment in the Star Wars saga, and is the story of Anakin Skywalkers' turn to the dark side and conversion into Darth Vader. While this certainly is the most predictable film in the Skywalker story, it does have some moments of surprise. We already know what happens in the movie, but we do not know how or why. This movie explains everything in detail, and wraps everything up in an Imperial bow at the end. So let us begin, as always, with the good parts of the film.
As in all the Star Wars films, the action sequences and lightsaber duels are absolutely thrilling to watch. More specifically, the opening shot in the film is something I find quite breathtaking. Visually speaking, everything (including the kitchen sink if you watch closely) is included in the shot. This leads us to a 2-on-1 lightsaber duel with Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) and Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) battling Count Dooku (Christopher Lee). If the first fifteen minutes of the film do not feel like Star Wars, I do not know what does. It also goes without saying that the planet and sound design is top-notch. Because this movie is much closer to A New Hope in the timeline, certain ships have familiar sounds. I also love all the different noises the creatures and droids make. The planets of Mustafar and Utapau are extremely creative, and are inhabited by beings that are equally as creative, and look quite menacing. Speaking of the ships, I like seeing early versions of X-Wings and TIE Fighters, and knowing that these ships existed long before we saw them in A New Hope. I also enjoy seeing the bond that has formed between Obi-Wan and Anakin. They no longer argue with one another, and have become more like brothers. We also see Anakin pilot, as Obi-Wan puts it, half a ship into the atmosphere and land it. We have seen Anakin pilot ships in the previous films, but this sequence shows that George Lucas being off his rocker is not necessarily a bad thing. I remember being in complete awe of this sequence when I saw this movie in the theater. Also, and maybe this is just me, I find the scenes between Anakin Skywalker and Padme Amidala (Natalie Portman) to be quite good. Anakin is still hesitant about expressing his feelings, but Padme is always there to comfort and reassure him. Padme also sports a hairdo towards the beginning of the film that will make fans of the original trilogy smile. Speaking of Padme, this is where I would like to start talking about the "how and why" of Star Wars. We all know from the original trilogy that Anakin Skywalker turned to the dark side and became Darth Vader, and we also know that Luke and Leias' mother is not in these films. Revenge of the Sith explains all of this. Anakin Skywalker begins to have visions of Padme dying in child birth, and turns to the dark side so that he can learn its power to save her. This is an incredibly emotional hook that I find to be quite dark, and I particularly like it. As far as Padmes' death is concerned, this is where you can start to psychologically analyze this movie. At the climax of the film, Emperor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) briefly touches the forehead of a mutilated Anakin Skywalker who is lying on the cliffs of Mustafar. There is a theory among Star Wars fans that, because of how powerful the Emperor is, he drained Padmes' life-force from Anakin when he did this, and in so doing, the Emperor killed Padme. I must admit that I cannot completely discount this theory. There are several other theories including: Padme dying from Anakins' force-choke, Padme actually dying in child birth, and Padme dying from a broken heart which is the one I like best. I do not find it completely implausible that, after learning that her one true love committed such horrible acts, Padme could not deal with it, and was so overcome with grief that she could not bear to live anymore. Is it a little too science-fictiony for Star Wars? Maybe. However, one could argue that using mosquito blood to create dinosaurs was too science-fictiony for Jurassic Park but it works for that movie. Also, during the lightsaber duel between Palpatine and Mace Windu, Palpatine just so happens to lose his lightsaber and supposedly give up the fight right when Anakin arrives. Did Palpatine know that Anakin was going to show up to save him? Also, there is so much mystery as to how and why Palpatine ends up looking the way he does. Did Mace Windu really do that to him, or was he using the Sith Mask technique to conceal his true features? Perhaps more importantly, did he know that Anakin was going to get mutilated by Obi-Wan on Mustafar? He always said that Anakin was going to be more powerful than him, so perhaps he sent him there on purpose so that Anakin would not overthrow him. Moving on, I also love the fact that Anakin turns to the dark side while Obi-Wan is away on a mission. I feel that it adds more emotional weight between the characters because Obi-Wan was not around to witness Anakins' acts because had he been there, he might have been able to help him. This is the part of the blog where I address a major complaint about this movie among Star Wars fans. There is a moment in the film where Yoda (Frank Oz) says, "Into hiding I must go. Failed, I have", and to this day I hear people ask how and why he says this. Let me explain: During Yodas' duel with the Emperor, we quickly see a close-up on Yoda where his eyes narrow and he is visibly getting angry. It is because of his anger that he is able to deflect the Dark Force Lightning back at the Emperor. It is also because of his anger that Yoda realizes he can only defeat the Emperor if he turns to the dark side, which he refuses to do. Yoda knows that if he turned evil, he would be even more powerful than the Emperor and the galaxy would be in even worse shape. So, there. Do with that explanation what you will. Whew. Okay, now I shall examine the negative aspects, and see if this movie really is the best of the prequels.
It always bugged me that we did not get to see the Clone Wars in Star Wars movie. We saw the beginning of it in Attack of the Clones, and the end of it in Revenge of the Sith. Now, was that made up for by the 2008 Clone Wars animated series? Absolutely. I just would have wanted to see more of the actual war on film. One of the big problems I have with this film is the lack of time we see Darth Vader in his black suit. The marketing campaign for the movie promised that we were going to see it, even going so far as to feature it prominently on the poster. Then, it is only in the movie for five minutes!!! What the damn hell?!?!?! Now, towards the beginning of the film, Obi-Wan says, "Chancellor Palpatine, Sith Lords are our speciality." Really? Because I seem to remember you and Anakin got your butts whooped three years ago by Count Dooku. Also, towards the beginning of the film, Chancellor Palpatine reminds Anakin of the time Anakin told him about what he did to the sandpeople after they killed Anakins' mother. When did Anakin tell him this? It was not during the last film, and it sure was not during the battle with Dooku. In regards to the battle, why does General Grievous (Matthew Wood) not kill Anakin and Obi-Wan??? It seems to me that the situation would be more grave if they were killed, and Grievous escaped with the Chancellor. Oh, right. The Chancellor is really Sidious, and the battle is all one big test for Anakin to see if he is worthy of being Sidious' apprentice. So, why was this not set up previously in the film? It would have made the entire sequence less confusing. Also, why is Obi-Wan nicknamed "The Negotiator"? What events transpired for him to receive that title?? Moreover, why does Anakin not get a nickname?? What did he do wrong?? Also, what is the "business on Cato Neimoidia" that Obi-Wan refers to towards the beginning of the film after Anakin crash lands the ship?? When the hell did that "business" happen?? Later in the film, Obi-Wan tracks General Grievous to Utapau because the Jedi Council received a message that he was there. The only thing is, before this scene happens, Yoda tells the Jedi Council, "Hiding in the Outer Rim, Grievous is". How did Yoda know Grievous was there BEFORE they got the message??? Then, General Grievous sends the Separatists to Mustafar. He says, "It is a volcanic planet. You will be safe there." How the blazes is a volcanic planet safe??? After that, Obi-Wan drops in on Grievous but does not kill him. He instead gets surrounded by droids in the process. It seems to me that Obi-Wan and Grievous get plenty of chances to kill each one another, and they do not follow through. And how the hell is Grievous trained in the Jedi Arts??? He is a robot!!! While Obi-Wan is on Utapau, Yoda goes to Kashyyyk. Only, Yoda already has an escape pod hidden on the planet before he gets there! How did it get there? I am fairly certain Yoda did not arrive in it. There is also a scene in the film where Obi-Wan says that Anakin has never let him down. I mean, really?? Does he not remember three years ago when Anakin disobeyed him and left Naboo with Padme, thus getting the both of them captured??? Later, during the opera scene, Palpatine tells Anakin to remember his early lessons. What lessons??? When did those happen?? Also, the scene where Anakin tells Mace Windu (Samuel L. Jackson) that Palpatine is a Sith Lord has several writing issues. Anakin says, "I've just learned a terrible truth. I think Chancellor Palpatine is a Sith Lord". How can it be a truth if you only think it is?? Should you not know it?? Then, Mace Windu says, "We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive". Then they proceed to SLOWLY WALK down the hangar bay. Why are they not running as fast as they can to the Chancellor's office to arrest him??? Speaking of which, why did they Jedi not investigate what was going on with the Senate, and arrest Palpatine sooner?? Why did Anakin have to spy on Palpatine? Also, in the hangar bay scene, Mace Windu says, "If what you have told me is true, you will have gained my trust". So, all that business three years ago about sending Anakin on his own mission and being confident with that decision was all a lie??? Next, in the duel between Palpatine and Mace Windu, Palpatine loses his lightsaber. However, when he fights Yoda later he magically has it back? How is this possible? And when did he get it back. Finally, during the lightsaber duel between Obi-Wan and Anakin at the climax of the film, Obi-Wan says, "It's over, Anakin. I have the high ground." What does that mean? Has Anakin had bad luck going uphill before? Also, I would liked to have seen some dialogue between Anakin and Padme where they discuss naming the babies instead of Padme just coming up with them on the spot. And why does the fact that Padme is carrying twins such a mystery for a majority of the film? There should have been a scene where Anakin and Padme find this out.
Well, there you have it. In terms of the narrative and plot points, I personally think that Revenge of the Sith is the worst of the prequels. It certainly feels more like Star Wars than the other two, but I just cannot get past the clunky dialogue and gaping plot holes. I know that I have said in the past that I despise comparing sequels and prequels to one another, but if other Star Wars fans are doing it, so will I.
For me personally, the standout performance is Ian McDiarmid as Palpatine/Darth Sidious. McDiarmid lets all the evil flow in this movie, and it is glorious to watch. I love what he does in the opera scene when he is talking about Darth Plaeguis because you can tell that Sidious was Plaeguis' apprentice, even though he never actually says it, just by the way he delivers the dialogue. Also, the scene where he gives Anakin his new title as Darth Vader is delightfully creepy. If there is one good thing about this movie, it is McDiarmids' performance.
George Lucas returns to the directors' chair for Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. There are actually a number of things Lucas does well with this film. I love that we see several tie-ins to the original trilogy, such as Obi-Wan saying, "So uncivilized" when he uses a blaster to kill General Grievous. Next, the sequence where Anakin is at the Jedi Temple and Padme is at home, and they are both looking across Coruscant at one another is particularly moving. You get the sense that even though Anakin does not want to do these evil things, he will because he wants to save his wife. The sequence with The Great Jedi Purge is also emotional, although I would have preferred it look more practical and not so computer-generated. I also enjoy the scene where Palpatine creates the Empire. This scene shows how much influence he has over the Senate, and having him raise his hands in glory is so brilliant. I have to say that what I love the most about this movie is that Lucas does not shy away from showing the consequences of Anakins' arrogance. The scene where Anakin gets burned alive on the slopes of Mustafar is haunting to watch. Every Star Wars fan wanted to know how Anakin got inside the black suit, and it was important to show those reasons on screen. For the record, I would just like to say that I claimed that Anakin would be knighted Darth Vader before he got the suit BEFORE I saw the film. I also love that the film is edited in a way that shows the birth of Vader, if you will, while Padme is dying at the same time. The choice to cut back and forth between these events is extremely emotional, and gives off a different feeling than if they showed Padmes' death AFTER Vaders' birth. Also, after Vader receives his armor, there is a scene where he shows his full fury with the Force on the medical bed and destroys everything. This feels very much like an homage to Frankenstein, and Vader is the monster. I love it. Finally, at the end of the film, Yoda tells Obi-Wan that he will teach him how to commune with Qui-Gon Jinn, his old master. It is reasonable to assume that communing with Qui-Gon is how Obi-Wan learns to become one with the Force, and speak to Luke in the original trilogy. George Lucas puts forth his best effort in this film, and that is probably because this is the part of the story that he always wanted to tell.
Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith brings the original trilogy full circle, and blends the old with the new in a beautiful way. Unfortunately, there are so many problems with the story line that you cannot help but roll your eyes at what George Lucas is thinking. If you enjoy the original Star Wars trilogy, and want to see how Anakin turned to Vader and all that jazz, you will at least like this film. If you hated the other two prequel movies, you will hate this one too. That is all I have to say about this cinematic dungheep.
Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith is the third installment in the Star Wars saga, and is the story of Anakin Skywalkers' turn to the dark side and conversion into Darth Vader. While this certainly is the most predictable film in the Skywalker story, it does have some moments of surprise. We already know what happens in the movie, but we do not know how or why. This movie explains everything in detail, and wraps everything up in an Imperial bow at the end. So let us begin, as always, with the good parts of the film.
As in all the Star Wars films, the action sequences and lightsaber duels are absolutely thrilling to watch. More specifically, the opening shot in the film is something I find quite breathtaking. Visually speaking, everything (including the kitchen sink if you watch closely) is included in the shot. This leads us to a 2-on-1 lightsaber duel with Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) and Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) battling Count Dooku (Christopher Lee). If the first fifteen minutes of the film do not feel like Star Wars, I do not know what does. It also goes without saying that the planet and sound design is top-notch. Because this movie is much closer to A New Hope in the timeline, certain ships have familiar sounds. I also love all the different noises the creatures and droids make. The planets of Mustafar and Utapau are extremely creative, and are inhabited by beings that are equally as creative, and look quite menacing. Speaking of the ships, I like seeing early versions of X-Wings and TIE Fighters, and knowing that these ships existed long before we saw them in A New Hope. I also enjoy seeing the bond that has formed between Obi-Wan and Anakin. They no longer argue with one another, and have become more like brothers. We also see Anakin pilot, as Obi-Wan puts it, half a ship into the atmosphere and land it. We have seen Anakin pilot ships in the previous films, but this sequence shows that George Lucas being off his rocker is not necessarily a bad thing. I remember being in complete awe of this sequence when I saw this movie in the theater. Also, and maybe this is just me, I find the scenes between Anakin Skywalker and Padme Amidala (Natalie Portman) to be quite good. Anakin is still hesitant about expressing his feelings, but Padme is always there to comfort and reassure him. Padme also sports a hairdo towards the beginning of the film that will make fans of the original trilogy smile. Speaking of Padme, this is where I would like to start talking about the "how and why" of Star Wars. We all know from the original trilogy that Anakin Skywalker turned to the dark side and became Darth Vader, and we also know that Luke and Leias' mother is not in these films. Revenge of the Sith explains all of this. Anakin Skywalker begins to have visions of Padme dying in child birth, and turns to the dark side so that he can learn its power to save her. This is an incredibly emotional hook that I find to be quite dark, and I particularly like it. As far as Padmes' death is concerned, this is where you can start to psychologically analyze this movie. At the climax of the film, Emperor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) briefly touches the forehead of a mutilated Anakin Skywalker who is lying on the cliffs of Mustafar. There is a theory among Star Wars fans that, because of how powerful the Emperor is, he drained Padmes' life-force from Anakin when he did this, and in so doing, the Emperor killed Padme. I must admit that I cannot completely discount this theory. There are several other theories including: Padme dying from Anakins' force-choke, Padme actually dying in child birth, and Padme dying from a broken heart which is the one I like best. I do not find it completely implausible that, after learning that her one true love committed such horrible acts, Padme could not deal with it, and was so overcome with grief that she could not bear to live anymore. Is it a little too science-fictiony for Star Wars? Maybe. However, one could argue that using mosquito blood to create dinosaurs was too science-fictiony for Jurassic Park but it works for that movie. Also, during the lightsaber duel between Palpatine and Mace Windu, Palpatine just so happens to lose his lightsaber and supposedly give up the fight right when Anakin arrives. Did Palpatine know that Anakin was going to show up to save him? Also, there is so much mystery as to how and why Palpatine ends up looking the way he does. Did Mace Windu really do that to him, or was he using the Sith Mask technique to conceal his true features? Perhaps more importantly, did he know that Anakin was going to get mutilated by Obi-Wan on Mustafar? He always said that Anakin was going to be more powerful than him, so perhaps he sent him there on purpose so that Anakin would not overthrow him. Moving on, I also love the fact that Anakin turns to the dark side while Obi-Wan is away on a mission. I feel that it adds more emotional weight between the characters because Obi-Wan was not around to witness Anakins' acts because had he been there, he might have been able to help him. This is the part of the blog where I address a major complaint about this movie among Star Wars fans. There is a moment in the film where Yoda (Frank Oz) says, "Into hiding I must go. Failed, I have", and to this day I hear people ask how and why he says this. Let me explain: During Yodas' duel with the Emperor, we quickly see a close-up on Yoda where his eyes narrow and he is visibly getting angry. It is because of his anger that he is able to deflect the Dark Force Lightning back at the Emperor. It is also because of his anger that Yoda realizes he can only defeat the Emperor if he turns to the dark side, which he refuses to do. Yoda knows that if he turned evil, he would be even more powerful than the Emperor and the galaxy would be in even worse shape. So, there. Do with that explanation what you will. Whew. Okay, now I shall examine the negative aspects, and see if this movie really is the best of the prequels.
It always bugged me that we did not get to see the Clone Wars in Star Wars movie. We saw the beginning of it in Attack of the Clones, and the end of it in Revenge of the Sith. Now, was that made up for by the 2008 Clone Wars animated series? Absolutely. I just would have wanted to see more of the actual war on film. One of the big problems I have with this film is the lack of time we see Darth Vader in his black suit. The marketing campaign for the movie promised that we were going to see it, even going so far as to feature it prominently on the poster. Then, it is only in the movie for five minutes!!! What the damn hell?!?!?! Now, towards the beginning of the film, Obi-Wan says, "Chancellor Palpatine, Sith Lords are our speciality." Really? Because I seem to remember you and Anakin got your butts whooped three years ago by Count Dooku. Also, towards the beginning of the film, Chancellor Palpatine reminds Anakin of the time Anakin told him about what he did to the sandpeople after they killed Anakins' mother. When did Anakin tell him this? It was not during the last film, and it sure was not during the battle with Dooku. In regards to the battle, why does General Grievous (Matthew Wood) not kill Anakin and Obi-Wan??? It seems to me that the situation would be more grave if they were killed, and Grievous escaped with the Chancellor. Oh, right. The Chancellor is really Sidious, and the battle is all one big test for Anakin to see if he is worthy of being Sidious' apprentice. So, why was this not set up previously in the film? It would have made the entire sequence less confusing. Also, why is Obi-Wan nicknamed "The Negotiator"? What events transpired for him to receive that title?? Moreover, why does Anakin not get a nickname?? What did he do wrong?? Also, what is the "business on Cato Neimoidia" that Obi-Wan refers to towards the beginning of the film after Anakin crash lands the ship?? When the hell did that "business" happen?? Later in the film, Obi-Wan tracks General Grievous to Utapau because the Jedi Council received a message that he was there. The only thing is, before this scene happens, Yoda tells the Jedi Council, "Hiding in the Outer Rim, Grievous is". How did Yoda know Grievous was there BEFORE they got the message??? Then, General Grievous sends the Separatists to Mustafar. He says, "It is a volcanic planet. You will be safe there." How the blazes is a volcanic planet safe??? After that, Obi-Wan drops in on Grievous but does not kill him. He instead gets surrounded by droids in the process. It seems to me that Obi-Wan and Grievous get plenty of chances to kill each one another, and they do not follow through. And how the hell is Grievous trained in the Jedi Arts??? He is a robot!!! While Obi-Wan is on Utapau, Yoda goes to Kashyyyk. Only, Yoda already has an escape pod hidden on the planet before he gets there! How did it get there? I am fairly certain Yoda did not arrive in it. There is also a scene in the film where Obi-Wan says that Anakin has never let him down. I mean, really?? Does he not remember three years ago when Anakin disobeyed him and left Naboo with Padme, thus getting the both of them captured??? Later, during the opera scene, Palpatine tells Anakin to remember his early lessons. What lessons??? When did those happen?? Also, the scene where Anakin tells Mace Windu (Samuel L. Jackson) that Palpatine is a Sith Lord has several writing issues. Anakin says, "I've just learned a terrible truth. I think Chancellor Palpatine is a Sith Lord". How can it be a truth if you only think it is?? Should you not know it?? Then, Mace Windu says, "We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive". Then they proceed to SLOWLY WALK down the hangar bay. Why are they not running as fast as they can to the Chancellor's office to arrest him??? Speaking of which, why did they Jedi not investigate what was going on with the Senate, and arrest Palpatine sooner?? Why did Anakin have to spy on Palpatine? Also, in the hangar bay scene, Mace Windu says, "If what you have told me is true, you will have gained my trust". So, all that business three years ago about sending Anakin on his own mission and being confident with that decision was all a lie??? Next, in the duel between Palpatine and Mace Windu, Palpatine loses his lightsaber. However, when he fights Yoda later he magically has it back? How is this possible? And when did he get it back. Finally, during the lightsaber duel between Obi-Wan and Anakin at the climax of the film, Obi-Wan says, "It's over, Anakin. I have the high ground." What does that mean? Has Anakin had bad luck going uphill before? Also, I would liked to have seen some dialogue between Anakin and Padme where they discuss naming the babies instead of Padme just coming up with them on the spot. And why does the fact that Padme is carrying twins such a mystery for a majority of the film? There should have been a scene where Anakin and Padme find this out.
Well, there you have it. In terms of the narrative and plot points, I personally think that Revenge of the Sith is the worst of the prequels. It certainly feels more like Star Wars than the other two, but I just cannot get past the clunky dialogue and gaping plot holes. I know that I have said in the past that I despise comparing sequels and prequels to one another, but if other Star Wars fans are doing it, so will I.
For me personally, the standout performance is Ian McDiarmid as Palpatine/Darth Sidious. McDiarmid lets all the evil flow in this movie, and it is glorious to watch. I love what he does in the opera scene when he is talking about Darth Plaeguis because you can tell that Sidious was Plaeguis' apprentice, even though he never actually says it, just by the way he delivers the dialogue. Also, the scene where he gives Anakin his new title as Darth Vader is delightfully creepy. If there is one good thing about this movie, it is McDiarmids' performance.
George Lucas returns to the directors' chair for Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. There are actually a number of things Lucas does well with this film. I love that we see several tie-ins to the original trilogy, such as Obi-Wan saying, "So uncivilized" when he uses a blaster to kill General Grievous. Next, the sequence where Anakin is at the Jedi Temple and Padme is at home, and they are both looking across Coruscant at one another is particularly moving. You get the sense that even though Anakin does not want to do these evil things, he will because he wants to save his wife. The sequence with The Great Jedi Purge is also emotional, although I would have preferred it look more practical and not so computer-generated. I also enjoy the scene where Palpatine creates the Empire. This scene shows how much influence he has over the Senate, and having him raise his hands in glory is so brilliant. I have to say that what I love the most about this movie is that Lucas does not shy away from showing the consequences of Anakins' arrogance. The scene where Anakin gets burned alive on the slopes of Mustafar is haunting to watch. Every Star Wars fan wanted to know how Anakin got inside the black suit, and it was important to show those reasons on screen. For the record, I would just like to say that I claimed that Anakin would be knighted Darth Vader before he got the suit BEFORE I saw the film. I also love that the film is edited in a way that shows the birth of Vader, if you will, while Padme is dying at the same time. The choice to cut back and forth between these events is extremely emotional, and gives off a different feeling than if they showed Padmes' death AFTER Vaders' birth. Also, after Vader receives his armor, there is a scene where he shows his full fury with the Force on the medical bed and destroys everything. This feels very much like an homage to Frankenstein, and Vader is the monster. I love it. Finally, at the end of the film, Yoda tells Obi-Wan that he will teach him how to commune with Qui-Gon Jinn, his old master. It is reasonable to assume that communing with Qui-Gon is how Obi-Wan learns to become one with the Force, and speak to Luke in the original trilogy. George Lucas puts forth his best effort in this film, and that is probably because this is the part of the story that he always wanted to tell.
Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith brings the original trilogy full circle, and blends the old with the new in a beautiful way. Unfortunately, there are so many problems with the story line that you cannot help but roll your eyes at what George Lucas is thinking. If you enjoy the original Star Wars trilogy, and want to see how Anakin turned to Vader and all that jazz, you will at least like this film. If you hated the other two prequel movies, you will hate this one too. That is all I have to say about this cinematic dungheep.
Saturday, February 4, 2017
One Film Trilogy To Bind Them: Part I
For many film fans, the journey to Middle Earth ended in 2003. Of course, there was always hope that The Hobbit would be adapted into a film, but nobody ever thought it would actually happen. It goes without saying that we were all pleasantly surprised when Peter Jackson decided to make not one, but THREE films out of what is generally considered a childrens' book.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is the first chapter in The Hobbit film trilogy, and is the story of a dwarf named Bilbo Baggins who sets out with the dwarves of Erebor to help them reclaim their homeland. I have heard complaints from many film fans that this film does not feel like The Lord of the Rings. My response is that it is not supposed to. This film takes place sixty years prior, and it is before the darkness of Mordor begins to sweep through Middle Earth. This entire trilogy is about Bilbos' adventures as a young man, and because of that, this film and the other two have a completely different feel to them. I actually love the fact that, as far as this film trilogy goes, Bilbo (Martin Freeman) is recalling his adventures as he is writing them in his book. The film starts out with him getting ready for his 111th birthday, and Frodo (Elijah Wood) going off to surprise Gandalf (Ian McKellen), and it is quite wonderful to see these Lord of the Rings alumni back in this small scene. For all intents and purposes, Bilbo is not the main character of this story. That part falls to Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage). Doing this actually works for these movies because we are essentially seeing the story unfold through Bilbos' eyes. I also love that the songs from the book are incorporated into the film. I am a big fan of Far Over the Misty Mountains Cold, and it is delightful to hear it in the film. Seeing Rivendell appear again is a sight that will bring tears to your eyes, as will the appearance of the eagles at the end of the film. My only complaint about the film would be that it feels like Bilbo decides to go with Gandalf and the dwarves too quickly. A solid portion of the film shows that Bilbo is dedicated to staying at home, and then out of nowhere he decides to go along. I would have perhaps liked to have seen a sequence where Gandalf persuades Bilbo to go. Other than that, this is a magical film that will take your breath away with every shot, and remind you why you love Middle Earth so much.
Martin Freeman plays a young Bilbo Baggins. What Freeman does in the film, and the entire trilogy, is quite incredible because he completely disappears into the character. I do not see Martin Freeman. I see Martin Freeman playing a young Ian Holm as Bilbo Baggins, right down to the body language and the way he delivers the dialogue. At times, I personally am brought to tears because of how moving his performance is. When he yells, "I'm going on an adventure!" you cannot help but smile and get excited. Freeman brilliantly captures the essence of Bilbo throughout the entire trilogy.
Peter Jackson is the director of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Jackson does a magnificent job bringing you back to the world of Middle Earth. There are epic shots of the landscapes, and the attention to detail in the costumes, makeup and sets are exquisite. He also does an annoyingly good job at giving us glimpses of Smaug without actually letting us see what he looks like. There are a number of sequences in the film that are quite memorable. I love everything that takes place in Goblintown. The attention to detail and the visual effects are breathtaking. Goblintown feels very much like an underground part of Middle Earth that no one dares to enter. There is a grittiness that feels unpleasant. Also, the pivotal scene between Bilbo and Gollum (Andy Serkis) feels like it is ripped from the pages of the book. It is humorous and tense at the same time, and it feels like you are watching theatre. This is also probably Serkis' best performance as Gollum. For me personally, though, the best scene in the film is when Gandalf, Saruman (Christopher Lee) and Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) are discussing the darkness that is beginning to spread through Middle Earth. Each character has a different point of view on the subject, and they all have opinions about the graveness of the situation. The characters argue, but are never angry. The dialog is crisp and the acting is superb. You also get just a hint of the kind of character Saruman will become. Peter Jackson has not lost one step since he last brought us to Middle Earth.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey gives you a wonderful return to Middle Earth. However, because of the story, some things feel similar while others feel quite different. If you enjoyed The Lord of the Rings movies, you will absolutely fall in love with this film.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is the first chapter in The Hobbit film trilogy, and is the story of a dwarf named Bilbo Baggins who sets out with the dwarves of Erebor to help them reclaim their homeland. I have heard complaints from many film fans that this film does not feel like The Lord of the Rings. My response is that it is not supposed to. This film takes place sixty years prior, and it is before the darkness of Mordor begins to sweep through Middle Earth. This entire trilogy is about Bilbos' adventures as a young man, and because of that, this film and the other two have a completely different feel to them. I actually love the fact that, as far as this film trilogy goes, Bilbo (Martin Freeman) is recalling his adventures as he is writing them in his book. The film starts out with him getting ready for his 111th birthday, and Frodo (Elijah Wood) going off to surprise Gandalf (Ian McKellen), and it is quite wonderful to see these Lord of the Rings alumni back in this small scene. For all intents and purposes, Bilbo is not the main character of this story. That part falls to Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage). Doing this actually works for these movies because we are essentially seeing the story unfold through Bilbos' eyes. I also love that the songs from the book are incorporated into the film. I am a big fan of Far Over the Misty Mountains Cold, and it is delightful to hear it in the film. Seeing Rivendell appear again is a sight that will bring tears to your eyes, as will the appearance of the eagles at the end of the film. My only complaint about the film would be that it feels like Bilbo decides to go with Gandalf and the dwarves too quickly. A solid portion of the film shows that Bilbo is dedicated to staying at home, and then out of nowhere he decides to go along. I would have perhaps liked to have seen a sequence where Gandalf persuades Bilbo to go. Other than that, this is a magical film that will take your breath away with every shot, and remind you why you love Middle Earth so much.
Martin Freeman plays a young Bilbo Baggins. What Freeman does in the film, and the entire trilogy, is quite incredible because he completely disappears into the character. I do not see Martin Freeman. I see Martin Freeman playing a young Ian Holm as Bilbo Baggins, right down to the body language and the way he delivers the dialogue. At times, I personally am brought to tears because of how moving his performance is. When he yells, "I'm going on an adventure!" you cannot help but smile and get excited. Freeman brilliantly captures the essence of Bilbo throughout the entire trilogy.
Peter Jackson is the director of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Jackson does a magnificent job bringing you back to the world of Middle Earth. There are epic shots of the landscapes, and the attention to detail in the costumes, makeup and sets are exquisite. He also does an annoyingly good job at giving us glimpses of Smaug without actually letting us see what he looks like. There are a number of sequences in the film that are quite memorable. I love everything that takes place in Goblintown. The attention to detail and the visual effects are breathtaking. Goblintown feels very much like an underground part of Middle Earth that no one dares to enter. There is a grittiness that feels unpleasant. Also, the pivotal scene between Bilbo and Gollum (Andy Serkis) feels like it is ripped from the pages of the book. It is humorous and tense at the same time, and it feels like you are watching theatre. This is also probably Serkis' best performance as Gollum. For me personally, though, the best scene in the film is when Gandalf, Saruman (Christopher Lee) and Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) are discussing the darkness that is beginning to spread through Middle Earth. Each character has a different point of view on the subject, and they all have opinions about the graveness of the situation. The characters argue, but are never angry. The dialog is crisp and the acting is superb. You also get just a hint of the kind of character Saruman will become. Peter Jackson has not lost one step since he last brought us to Middle Earth.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey gives you a wonderful return to Middle Earth. However, because of the story, some things feel similar while others feel quite different. If you enjoyed The Lord of the Rings movies, you will absolutely fall in love with this film.
Secret Agent Man: Part 1
The James Bond film series is one of my favorite franchises. For more than fifty years, it has amassed thousands of fans of multiple generations. It is a series that has set the standard for action movies ever since its inception in 1962 with Dr. No.
Dr. No is the first film in the James Bond series, and is the story of James Bond investigating the disappearance of a fellow colleague and the disruption of Cape Canaveral rockets. This is a solid first entry in the series that introduces our favorite British spy perfectly. The action is thrilling, the locations are breathtaking and the villain is as evil as they come. Speaking of which, the film also does a nice job of introducing S.P.E.C.T.R.E., the terrorist organization that Bond battles for the next few films. There are a few minor flaws with the film. At one point in the film, the hotel receptionist tells Bond that the car he ordered has arrived. The problem is we never actually see him order the car. Also, towards the climax of the film, Honey Ryder (Ursula Andress) and Bond pass out on the floor from drinking drugged coffee. Then, in the next scene he is sleeping in his bed. How in the world did he manage to get there?? Anyway, these are extremely minor flaws in an otherwise groundbreaking film that would go on to define an entire genre.
Sean Connery ignites the screen in his first performance as James Bond. This first iteration of Bond is a tad more nervous and jittery than what we know him to be, but he still brings all the charm, wit and lethalness that has since become the blueprint for the character. Connery shines in the role, and brings all these different layers of emotion to life brilliantly while also having good chemistry with the other actors. I particularly like what Connery does as an actor in the dinner scene with Dr. No (Joseph Wiseman). James Bond will, for better or worse, always be Connerys' signature role, and it is this career-defining performance that set him on that path.
Terence Young is the director of Dr. No. Young beautifully shows us what have become staples of the franchise: exotic locations and exciting action sequences. During the climax of the film, when the characters are investigating Crab Key, the lush environments are absolutely gorgeous. Also, the chase sequences in the film are thrilling to watch, as is the climactic sequence at Dr. Nos' lair. There are also some other key moments in the film that I would like to point out. The scene where the tarantula is climbing on James Bond in bed is so tense to watch because of the slow cuts. Also, in the scene where Professor Dent (Anthony Dawson) tells Dr. No of Bonds' impending arrival, I love the way the camera slowly zooms in on Dent as Dr. No grows increasingly aggravated. Young does a wonderful job of introducing us to the world of James Bond.
The release of Dr. No. set forth a series of films that would go on to be the longest running franchise in cinema history. While the film has its flaws, no one can deny its success. If you are a Bond fan and you have not watched this movie in a while, or ever, do yourself a favor and treat yourself to it. You will not regret it.
Dr. No is the first film in the James Bond series, and is the story of James Bond investigating the disappearance of a fellow colleague and the disruption of Cape Canaveral rockets. This is a solid first entry in the series that introduces our favorite British spy perfectly. The action is thrilling, the locations are breathtaking and the villain is as evil as they come. Speaking of which, the film also does a nice job of introducing S.P.E.C.T.R.E., the terrorist organization that Bond battles for the next few films. There are a few minor flaws with the film. At one point in the film, the hotel receptionist tells Bond that the car he ordered has arrived. The problem is we never actually see him order the car. Also, towards the climax of the film, Honey Ryder (Ursula Andress) and Bond pass out on the floor from drinking drugged coffee. Then, in the next scene he is sleeping in his bed. How in the world did he manage to get there?? Anyway, these are extremely minor flaws in an otherwise groundbreaking film that would go on to define an entire genre.
Sean Connery ignites the screen in his first performance as James Bond. This first iteration of Bond is a tad more nervous and jittery than what we know him to be, but he still brings all the charm, wit and lethalness that has since become the blueprint for the character. Connery shines in the role, and brings all these different layers of emotion to life brilliantly while also having good chemistry with the other actors. I particularly like what Connery does as an actor in the dinner scene with Dr. No (Joseph Wiseman). James Bond will, for better or worse, always be Connerys' signature role, and it is this career-defining performance that set him on that path.
Terence Young is the director of Dr. No. Young beautifully shows us what have become staples of the franchise: exotic locations and exciting action sequences. During the climax of the film, when the characters are investigating Crab Key, the lush environments are absolutely gorgeous. Also, the chase sequences in the film are thrilling to watch, as is the climactic sequence at Dr. Nos' lair. There are also some other key moments in the film that I would like to point out. The scene where the tarantula is climbing on James Bond in bed is so tense to watch because of the slow cuts. Also, in the scene where Professor Dent (Anthony Dawson) tells Dr. No of Bonds' impending arrival, I love the way the camera slowly zooms in on Dent as Dr. No grows increasingly aggravated. Young does a wonderful job of introducing us to the world of James Bond.
The release of Dr. No. set forth a series of films that would go on to be the longest running franchise in cinema history. While the film has its flaws, no one can deny its success. If you are a Bond fan and you have not watched this movie in a while, or ever, do yourself a favor and treat yourself to it. You will not regret it.
Friday, February 3, 2017
Learning What Matters
Jersey Girl is a movie that I had not seen until recently. I have always been a fan of Kevin Smith as a director, and I also think Ben Affleck is a sorely under-rated and under-appreciated actor, so I was very much looking forward to watching it. I cannot express how pleasantly shocked I was to discover how much heart this movie has. This film is absolutely delightful.
Jersey Girl is the story of a publicist whos' life gets turned upside-down after a personal tragedy. This film shows us that Kevin Smith is not just a filmmaker who makes raunchy comedies. He can tell stories with real heart and emotion. Personally, as much as I love his comedies, I wish he did more films like this. This film also sends a profound message to anyone that feels conflicted about whether or not they are doing a good job with balancing their career with their personal life. It does not matter how important your career is to you. It does not matter how important your personal goals are to you. What matters is being there for your family, and if you cannot do that, then you need to do something about it. It is this overall theme of the film that had a strong affect on me, as it is something that I struggle with every day. Thank you, Kevin Smith, for giving me a cinematic boot up the ass. I just have one minor issue with the film. There is a scene where Ollie goes off on Gertie, and then Bart ridicules him for it. I would have liked to see a scene between Ollie and Maya take place after this where they argue about his behavior, and then she leaves. I think this would have added more depth to their relationship. Other than that, I adore this film.
Ben Affleck plays Ollie Trinke. What makes this movie so remarkable is Ollie's character arc in the film. Ollie starts out as being quite an unlikeable guy and then, through a series of life lessons thanks to his father Bart (George Carlin) and his friend Maya (Liv Tyler), realizes his mistakes and learns from them. This is a staggering performance by Affleck who serviceably displays a wide range of emotions. The scene where Ollie tells his baby daughter Gertie (Raquel Castro) that he misses his wife (Jennifer Lopez) is quite well-acted. He also has great chemistry with Carlin and Tyler, which adds to the enjoyment of the film. To anyone who does not think Ben Affleck is a good actor, I encourage you to watch some of Kevin Smiths' films.
Liv Tyler plays Maya. I love Tylers' performance so much because she displays a wit and a sense of humor that we have not seen in previous films. Her banter with Affleck adds levity to the film, but she is also a crucial character to the story. I actually like that, at the end of the movie, we are not sure if Maya and Ollie get together. I think that would have been incredibly cliche. This is such a charming performance by Tyler. I think every man should have a friend like Maya in their lives.
In a show-stealing performance, George Carlin plays Bart Trinke. Bart is a man who has, naturally, been through it all in his life. While he is always there to support his son, he is also not afraid to give him tough love and openly criticize him of his behavior. Carlin chews up every scene and every bit of dialogue, as only he can. This is one of those performances that really makes you miss him because it feels so genuine.
Jason Biggs plays Arthur Brickman. While Biggs appearance in the film is brief, the character of Arthur is an important one. Arthur is always there for Ollie in his time of need, and he is also the guy who sees potential in Ollie. Even though Ollie has been somewhat of a jerk in the past, Arthur is always there to lend a helpful hand. I like the fact that Biggs goes against type with this role, and quite honestly I would like to see him do more dramatic work. Again, this is a character that resonated with me because there have been a number of people in my life that hung around with me even though I was not the most popular guy. The character of Arthur helped me realize that it is those kinds of people that you want to keep around.
Kevin Smith is the director of Jersey Girl. I love that a majority of this story takes place at Barts' home outside of the city because it shows that Smith can tell a good story in a tight-knit space. Do not get me wrong, the rest of the film is quite enjoyable, but there is something special about these scenes that hearken back to Smiths' early days of making movies. There is also a scene towards the beginning of the movie that shows that the ending of one life is also the beginning of another. This is quite an emotional and powerful scene, and it shows that Smith understands the depths of human emotion. Each character and their role is also clearly defined, and that is due to Smiths' wonderful writing. It is a shame that Smith does not get more credit for his dramatic work because I think he is brilliant.
I have quite a hard time deciding what my personal favorite Kevin Smith film is. I know that I would put Jersey Girl right up there with Chasing Amy. So, I would say that if you enjoyed that film you will most likely enjoy this one.
Jersey Girl is the story of a publicist whos' life gets turned upside-down after a personal tragedy. This film shows us that Kevin Smith is not just a filmmaker who makes raunchy comedies. He can tell stories with real heart and emotion. Personally, as much as I love his comedies, I wish he did more films like this. This film also sends a profound message to anyone that feels conflicted about whether or not they are doing a good job with balancing their career with their personal life. It does not matter how important your career is to you. It does not matter how important your personal goals are to you. What matters is being there for your family, and if you cannot do that, then you need to do something about it. It is this overall theme of the film that had a strong affect on me, as it is something that I struggle with every day. Thank you, Kevin Smith, for giving me a cinematic boot up the ass. I just have one minor issue with the film. There is a scene where Ollie goes off on Gertie, and then Bart ridicules him for it. I would have liked to see a scene between Ollie and Maya take place after this where they argue about his behavior, and then she leaves. I think this would have added more depth to their relationship. Other than that, I adore this film.
Ben Affleck plays Ollie Trinke. What makes this movie so remarkable is Ollie's character arc in the film. Ollie starts out as being quite an unlikeable guy and then, through a series of life lessons thanks to his father Bart (George Carlin) and his friend Maya (Liv Tyler), realizes his mistakes and learns from them. This is a staggering performance by Affleck who serviceably displays a wide range of emotions. The scene where Ollie tells his baby daughter Gertie (Raquel Castro) that he misses his wife (Jennifer Lopez) is quite well-acted. He also has great chemistry with Carlin and Tyler, which adds to the enjoyment of the film. To anyone who does not think Ben Affleck is a good actor, I encourage you to watch some of Kevin Smiths' films.
Liv Tyler plays Maya. I love Tylers' performance so much because she displays a wit and a sense of humor that we have not seen in previous films. Her banter with Affleck adds levity to the film, but she is also a crucial character to the story. I actually like that, at the end of the movie, we are not sure if Maya and Ollie get together. I think that would have been incredibly cliche. This is such a charming performance by Tyler. I think every man should have a friend like Maya in their lives.
In a show-stealing performance, George Carlin plays Bart Trinke. Bart is a man who has, naturally, been through it all in his life. While he is always there to support his son, he is also not afraid to give him tough love and openly criticize him of his behavior. Carlin chews up every scene and every bit of dialogue, as only he can. This is one of those performances that really makes you miss him because it feels so genuine.
Jason Biggs plays Arthur Brickman. While Biggs appearance in the film is brief, the character of Arthur is an important one. Arthur is always there for Ollie in his time of need, and he is also the guy who sees potential in Ollie. Even though Ollie has been somewhat of a jerk in the past, Arthur is always there to lend a helpful hand. I like the fact that Biggs goes against type with this role, and quite honestly I would like to see him do more dramatic work. Again, this is a character that resonated with me because there have been a number of people in my life that hung around with me even though I was not the most popular guy. The character of Arthur helped me realize that it is those kinds of people that you want to keep around.
Kevin Smith is the director of Jersey Girl. I love that a majority of this story takes place at Barts' home outside of the city because it shows that Smith can tell a good story in a tight-knit space. Do not get me wrong, the rest of the film is quite enjoyable, but there is something special about these scenes that hearken back to Smiths' early days of making movies. There is also a scene towards the beginning of the movie that shows that the ending of one life is also the beginning of another. This is quite an emotional and powerful scene, and it shows that Smith understands the depths of human emotion. Each character and their role is also clearly defined, and that is due to Smiths' wonderful writing. It is a shame that Smith does not get more credit for his dramatic work because I think he is brilliant.
I have quite a hard time deciding what my personal favorite Kevin Smith film is. I know that I would put Jersey Girl right up there with Chasing Amy. So, I would say that if you enjoyed that film you will most likely enjoy this one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)