Friday, July 27, 2012
Pixar Slipping With 'Brave'
Brave
5/10
The wonderful animators at Pixar are at it again with an original story from the Highlands of Scotland. In this story, Young Merida is a free spirit who loves archery and roaming the vast lands of her beloved country. However, her queen mother, Elinor, has other plans for her daughter. Elinor believes that Merida must be a proper princess and with this comes a lot of etiquette lessons and telling her daughter what to do. Then comes the day when Fergus, the king/father, and Elinor invite three other Scottish clans to a tournament. In this tournament the first born sons must compete to win the hand of the young princess. Unfortunately, Merida does not like this and decides to change her fate. With the help of a old witch in the woods, Merida decides to change her mothers' mind about the betrothal in hopes that Merida may decide on her own who she will marry and when. But instead of changing her mind, Merida changes her mother into a bear. Now Merida must find a way to change her back without getting her mother slain in the process.
Pixar has created a new princess, Merida, to be added to a prestigious line of Disney princesses. Merida is not unlike any of the other princesses, she is young, strong willed, and wanting to be different. The only problem with Merida is that she is too unlike the other princess to even set herself apart from the rest. While watching the film I kept thinking of The Little Mermaid and how Ariel wanted to be different as well. Merida also has the red hair and a unique attribute that sets her apart from the rest of the characters. The writers of this film poorly executed the story and what I mean by this is that there was no real setup to the story. The leap into the main story was so fast that Merida just came across as a spoiled little teenager that wasn't getting her way. If this was the point, then they achieved it magically. Unlike other great Pixar films, there was no real connection to the characters and/or the story. As much as I would hate to say it, Cars set up a better connection with their characters than this film did. Also, there is a sub plot and character to this film that, by way of execution, seemed quite pointless. The sub plot is that of a prince that basically wanted the same as Merida. But here again, because the writers and/or directors don't delve to deeply into this story, the prince comes across as spoiled. This movie had so much potential to be one of the best Pixar films ever made. And I am talking up there with the likes of Nemo, Toy Story, and Up. The movie just doesn't live up to the Pixar name.
Now there are some good points to this film. First and foremost is the scenery to this film. Pixar has created a beautiful Scotland, not that the country needed any help bringing its beauty to the rest of the world. The landscapes that the artists develop at times almost become a character all their own. The second, is the mother/daughter story. I know that I kind of bashed this point in the beginning of this review, but toward the end of the film I began to see what the writers/directors were aiming to do. The one problem of this point is that it comes to late for you to even start to care. Of course the last good thing about this film is its humor. The writers do try to bring in a little humor to the story and it does work in most of the scenes its used.
This is truly a mother/daughter movie, just not a very good one. I have always found that Pixar never really aims their films to one gender or another. I personally think Pixar needs to stay away from that. With Pixar targeting a certain group of kids/adults, it takes away what truly made Pixar superb above all other animation studios including Disney and that is story and character. I will finish by saying this... If you are a fan of Pixar, do see this film for the fact that they tried to make what could have been a wonderful addition to a great line of films from this company. However, try not to expect to much from this film.
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Third Times A Charm For 'Men In Black'
Men In Black III
8/10
Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones are back for a third time in Men In Black III. This time they are joined by new comers Josh Brolin, Emma Thompson, and Jemanie Clement. In this time traveling sequel a villain, Boris the Animal, has escaped from Lunar Max prison to take revenge on Agent K for incarcerating him. Boris has discovered that time travel is possible and decides to eliminate K at their first encounter in 1969. After K is erased from the present Agent J needs to travel back a day before Boris and prevent the death of his partner. Oh yeah, and save the world.
Will Smith jumps right back into the role of Agent J has if he never left. He, as always, is the brightest spot in this movie. Smith brings more experience to J, but still has that unique sarcasm that makes J an awesome character. I mean seriously, if you did like his character in the first two then you will definitely like him in the third film.
The other staple of this series is back. Tommy Lee Jones' Agent K is the same grumpy, no nonsense agent as from the first two films. The only problem I have with Jones, is that he isn't in the film very long to actually critique his performance. The only reason why I have singled him out is because when he is on screen, he and Smith show that great chemistry as if the two have been doing these movies forever.
Newcomer Josh Brolin takes over very well in Jones' absence. It really was like Brolin studied both films and followed Jones around for a month. The only difference is that Brolin gives Agent K a little more light. His Agent K isn't burdened down by years of experience as Jones' K is.
Jemanine Clement is the villain Boris in this installment. Now I will fully admit that I am not too familiar with Clements work, so I can't really compare him in this film. I will say however, Clement does portray a pretty convincing bad guy. Clement also brings a little humor to his villainous role.
Can't really say too much about the director and the special effects because as said earlier, if you enjoyed the first two, then these will be just as enjoyable. Sonnenfeld took what worked in the first two and copied and pasted in this film.
The thing that I didn't enjoy about the film is the continuity. Besides the relationship between J and K, the writers seemed to rewrite the K past again. In this third film, K seems to have ANOTHER fling from the past. Didn't he have a wife in the first one? A child with an alien in the second? Why does K need another love interest? I kind of thought that maybe it would be time for J to have a love interest that isn't related to K. This love interest seemed to have no real purpose but to show that K gets around.
There is nothing really new with this third movie, but that isn't a bad thing. As long as Jones and Smith can continue to have great chemistry, Sonnenfeld can copy and paste what works for at least a couple more films. But please, Barry, lets keep K's love life out of it!
8/10
Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones are back for a third time in Men In Black III. This time they are joined by new comers Josh Brolin, Emma Thompson, and Jemanie Clement. In this time traveling sequel a villain, Boris the Animal, has escaped from Lunar Max prison to take revenge on Agent K for incarcerating him. Boris has discovered that time travel is possible and decides to eliminate K at their first encounter in 1969. After K is erased from the present Agent J needs to travel back a day before Boris and prevent the death of his partner. Oh yeah, and save the world.
Will Smith jumps right back into the role of Agent J has if he never left. He, as always, is the brightest spot in this movie. Smith brings more experience to J, but still has that unique sarcasm that makes J an awesome character. I mean seriously, if you did like his character in the first two then you will definitely like him in the third film.
The other staple of this series is back. Tommy Lee Jones' Agent K is the same grumpy, no nonsense agent as from the first two films. The only problem I have with Jones, is that he isn't in the film very long to actually critique his performance. The only reason why I have singled him out is because when he is on screen, he and Smith show that great chemistry as if the two have been doing these movies forever.
Newcomer Josh Brolin takes over very well in Jones' absence. It really was like Brolin studied both films and followed Jones around for a month. The only difference is that Brolin gives Agent K a little more light. His Agent K isn't burdened down by years of experience as Jones' K is.
Jemanine Clement is the villain Boris in this installment. Now I will fully admit that I am not too familiar with Clements work, so I can't really compare him in this film. I will say however, Clement does portray a pretty convincing bad guy. Clement also brings a little humor to his villainous role.
Can't really say too much about the director and the special effects because as said earlier, if you enjoyed the first two, then these will be just as enjoyable. Sonnenfeld took what worked in the first two and copied and pasted in this film.
The thing that I didn't enjoy about the film is the continuity. Besides the relationship between J and K, the writers seemed to rewrite the K past again. In this third film, K seems to have ANOTHER fling from the past. Didn't he have a wife in the first one? A child with an alien in the second? Why does K need another love interest? I kind of thought that maybe it would be time for J to have a love interest that isn't related to K. This love interest seemed to have no real purpose but to show that K gets around.
There is nothing really new with this third movie, but that isn't a bad thing. As long as Jones and Smith can continue to have great chemistry, Sonnenfeld can copy and paste what works for at least a couple more films. But please, Barry, lets keep K's love life out of it!
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Welcome/The Dark Knight Rises
Hello all to my movie reviews. I obviously love movies and I have always wanted to share my opinion with people. In these reviews I will give a small summary, my opinion and give critiques on the actors, director(s), and if need be the special effects. The first review I am so excited to start with is The Dark Knight Rises.
The Dark Knight Rises
9/10
The Dark Knight Rises starts 8 years after the events of The Dark Knight and Gotham City is in a sense of peace. From the lie that Commissioner Gordon has spread, The Harvey Dent Act has pretty much cleaned the streets and because of this, Batman is no longer needed by the people. However, when the fine people of Gotham are settled, a new villain emerges. Bane has come to give Gotham back to the people by separating it from the rest of the world and releasing all the prisoners of Black Gate Prison.
The reason why I am going to stop with the summary is because if I don't I will unfortunately give away a lot of major plot points and these are what make the film worth seeing. Before you see this movie please remember, this is NOT The Dark Knight. Please, oh please try and not compare these two films prior to seeing this one. The Dark Knight is an amazing film and is the best superhero film ever made, but this movie does stand on its own two feet. TDKR has a lot of great moments, action scenes, and characters. The story flows very well, even though the movie has a running time of 2 hours and 45 mins.
Christian Bale returns for a third and final time as the Caped Crusader and again he embodies both Bruce Wayne and Batman perfectly. I believe that these are two separate characters and need to be portrayed as such. Keaton was a good Batman, but a little lost as Wayne. Clooney was a good Wayne, however a little pansy as Batman. Lets face it folks, Kilmer was terrible as both. Kilmer's Batman/Bruce Wayne was way too whiny and never seemed like he fit. Bale has achieved the right balance of both characters in all three films. His Wayne is calm and collected to the outside world, but a mess of emotions on the inside. Because of this mask that Bale has created for Wayne, his Batman is able to express those emotions and intentions through his quest to rid the world of harm. Batman's passion to protect the city from destruction is more visible in this film. You can truly see that Gotham City is his city to protect from all that want to harm it.
Bane is portrayed in this movie by Tom Hardy. In previous films Bane has been nothing more than a thug in a mask. However, in this film Bane has a brain and an intelligent one at that. In the comics, Bane is a awesome strategist and physical fighter. Luckily that comes across in this film. I will fully admit that Bane wasn't my first choice from the huge Rogue Gallery. I thought at least Penguin or Hugo Strange would have been the main villain. Hardy, however, excels in every scene he is in. Hardy successfully takes this "mindless thug" and proves to the world that he is formidable foe for Batman. I really was please with Hardy's performance.
What I was most surprised with though was Catwoman. Ironically never mentioned by this name during the film. Anne Hathaway achieves the impossible, which is to project Selina Kyle as a true thief with a tiny conscience. This is the closest portrayal of the comic book version of Catwoman you are ever going to see. Kyle has always walked that thin line of good and bad. Hathaway gives Kyle an edge, yet also shows a little heart. I think that Hathaway's Catwoman should now be the bar that all other Catwoman's should aspire to be.
The other returning actors/characters play their parts very well as they did in the two previous films. Michael Caine's Alfred is filled with a little more emotion when it comes to Bruce and his "lifestyle", Gary Oldman's Gordon is a little tougher in this film compared to the previous two, and Morgan Freeman's Lucius Fox is spot on as always. The one supporting actor that caught my attention the most is Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Levitt does a wonderful job as John Blake. Levitt has definitely come a long way from 3rd Rock From The Sun.
Christopher Nolan... well what can I say really? He is my favorite director. He has taken a comic book character and created a set of films that shouldn't be classified as superhero movies. His Batman films have shown us that there is real character under that cowl and that this genre doesn't always have to be about the special effects or the action sequences. He has made these characters relatable and almost human. I am deeply saddened that this is the last of his Batman films.
Now comes the part where I explain what I felt was wrong with this film. The story is way to big. Nolan took inspiration from the comic books and more specifically major story arches "No Man's Land" and "Knightfall". If you are an avid Batman reader, such as myself, then you will know that these two arches are huge by themselves. I just think that drawing inspiration from one of these arches would have been sufficient enough, especially "No Man's Land". This story line is where Gotham is struck by a devastating earthquake, cut off from the outside world, and Batman must reclaim Gotham from gangs and villains one section at a time. I thought that "No Man's Land" would have be a perfect movie.
Except this only problem, I though TDKR was an amazing film and fits perfectly in the Gotham that Christopher Nolan has created. If you enjoyed the first two then please take the time and see this on the big screen.
The Dark Knight Rises
9/10
The Dark Knight Rises starts 8 years after the events of The Dark Knight and Gotham City is in a sense of peace. From the lie that Commissioner Gordon has spread, The Harvey Dent Act has pretty much cleaned the streets and because of this, Batman is no longer needed by the people. However, when the fine people of Gotham are settled, a new villain emerges. Bane has come to give Gotham back to the people by separating it from the rest of the world and releasing all the prisoners of Black Gate Prison.
The reason why I am going to stop with the summary is because if I don't I will unfortunately give away a lot of major plot points and these are what make the film worth seeing. Before you see this movie please remember, this is NOT The Dark Knight. Please, oh please try and not compare these two films prior to seeing this one. The Dark Knight is an amazing film and is the best superhero film ever made, but this movie does stand on its own two feet. TDKR has a lot of great moments, action scenes, and characters. The story flows very well, even though the movie has a running time of 2 hours and 45 mins.
Christian Bale returns for a third and final time as the Caped Crusader and again he embodies both Bruce Wayne and Batman perfectly. I believe that these are two separate characters and need to be portrayed as such. Keaton was a good Batman, but a little lost as Wayne. Clooney was a good Wayne, however a little pansy as Batman. Lets face it folks, Kilmer was terrible as both. Kilmer's Batman/Bruce Wayne was way too whiny and never seemed like he fit. Bale has achieved the right balance of both characters in all three films. His Wayne is calm and collected to the outside world, but a mess of emotions on the inside. Because of this mask that Bale has created for Wayne, his Batman is able to express those emotions and intentions through his quest to rid the world of harm. Batman's passion to protect the city from destruction is more visible in this film. You can truly see that Gotham City is his city to protect from all that want to harm it.
Bane is portrayed in this movie by Tom Hardy. In previous films Bane has been nothing more than a thug in a mask. However, in this film Bane has a brain and an intelligent one at that. In the comics, Bane is a awesome strategist and physical fighter. Luckily that comes across in this film. I will fully admit that Bane wasn't my first choice from the huge Rogue Gallery. I thought at least Penguin or Hugo Strange would have been the main villain. Hardy, however, excels in every scene he is in. Hardy successfully takes this "mindless thug" and proves to the world that he is formidable foe for Batman. I really was please with Hardy's performance.
What I was most surprised with though was Catwoman. Ironically never mentioned by this name during the film. Anne Hathaway achieves the impossible, which is to project Selina Kyle as a true thief with a tiny conscience. This is the closest portrayal of the comic book version of Catwoman you are ever going to see. Kyle has always walked that thin line of good and bad. Hathaway gives Kyle an edge, yet also shows a little heart. I think that Hathaway's Catwoman should now be the bar that all other Catwoman's should aspire to be.
The other returning actors/characters play their parts very well as they did in the two previous films. Michael Caine's Alfred is filled with a little more emotion when it comes to Bruce and his "lifestyle", Gary Oldman's Gordon is a little tougher in this film compared to the previous two, and Morgan Freeman's Lucius Fox is spot on as always. The one supporting actor that caught my attention the most is Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Levitt does a wonderful job as John Blake. Levitt has definitely come a long way from 3rd Rock From The Sun.
Christopher Nolan... well what can I say really? He is my favorite director. He has taken a comic book character and created a set of films that shouldn't be classified as superhero movies. His Batman films have shown us that there is real character under that cowl and that this genre doesn't always have to be about the special effects or the action sequences. He has made these characters relatable and almost human. I am deeply saddened that this is the last of his Batman films.
Now comes the part where I explain what I felt was wrong with this film. The story is way to big. Nolan took inspiration from the comic books and more specifically major story arches "No Man's Land" and "Knightfall". If you are an avid Batman reader, such as myself, then you will know that these two arches are huge by themselves. I just think that drawing inspiration from one of these arches would have been sufficient enough, especially "No Man's Land". This story line is where Gotham is struck by a devastating earthquake, cut off from the outside world, and Batman must reclaim Gotham from gangs and villains one section at a time. I thought that "No Man's Land" would have be a perfect movie.
Except this only problem, I though TDKR was an amazing film and fits perfectly in the Gotham that Christopher Nolan has created. If you enjoyed the first two then please take the time and see this on the big screen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)