‘Sanctum 3D’ Review

Screen Rant’s Ben Kendrick reviews Sanctum

Sanctum, the new underground action-thriller from executive producer James Cameron is working with a lot of different marketing angles: it’s inspired by true-life events, filmed with the same 3D cameras as Avatar, and shot on-location in one of the most breathtaking and dangerous places on Earth.

But do the various talking points come together for a cohesive and compelling cinematic thriller?

In case you’re unfamiliar with Sanctum, here’s the official synopsis:

The 3-D action-thriller Sanctum, from executive producer James Cameron, follows a team of underwater cave divers on a treacherous expedition to the largest, most beautiful and least accessible cave system on Earth. When a tropical storm forces them deep into the caverns, they must fight raging water, deadly terrain and creeping panic as they search for an unknown escape route to the sea.

Master diver Frank McGuire (Richard Roxburgh) has explored the South Pacific’s Esa-ala Caves for months.  But when his exit is cut off in a flash flood, Frank’s team—including 17-year-old son Josh (Rhys Wakefield) and financier Carl Hurley (Ioan Gruffudd)—are forced to radically alter plans. With dwindling supplies, the crew must navigate an underwater labyrinth to make it out. Soon, they are confronted with the unavoidable question: Can they survive, or will they be trapped forever?

It’s no surprise that the buzz for Sanctum is most commonly associated with Cameron’s influence as executive producer rather than the film’s actual director, Alister Grierson – especially considering Grierson has only one other feature film to his name (Kokoda). But Cameron’s shadow looms large over Grierson’s movie – resulting in an extremely uneven final product: For every remarkable 3D shot or terrifying moment of real-life horror there’s a flat line of dialogue or cheesy plot device that drowns any chance the film will reach the emotional complexity either filmmaker intended.

Fans hoping for something more philosophical, like The Abyss 3D, will probably be disappointed. In general, Sanctum is a precautionary action tale that follows the same structure (and message) as every man vs. nature thriller pic that ever screened before it – except with better and more immersive visuals.

The characters are mostly caricatures: the brilliant adventurer/disconnected father Frank, the angry and impulsive son Josh, and the well-to-do/in-over-his-head financier, Carl. In some cases, despite being mostly one-note, the characters serve their basic purpose: the principles, Josh and Frank, have a likable dynamic and Crazy George, Frank’s right-hand-man (played by Dan Wyllie), provides the film with some much-needed yet subtle humor. Unfortunately, Gruffudd’s Carl is unforgivably flat and poorly written -- his lines represent some of the most generic and unintentionally laughable dialogue moviegoers will see in a film this year.

As a result, the majority of the characters in Sanctum serve as meat for the figurative -- and at one point literal -- grinder. Their roles are established early on, with zero room for character growth – and audiences will not be surprised by who does and does not make it out of the cave in one piece.

Similarly, deaths are somewhat easy to foresee, lowering the effectiveness of well-crafted tension. In terms of character focus, Sanctum follows a horror-film structure to some extent: picking one person off at a time and forecasting the death with bad choices, overly insensitive behavior, or a callback to an earlier problem. How a character will meet their demise manages, at times, to still surprise (some of the deaths are pretty disturbing) but who is next to die is usually pretty clear ahead of time.

That said, what Sanctum is lacking in dynamic character development, it almost makes up for with chilling anxiety. The confines of the underground, and at times underwater, ratchet up the tension in even the most straightforward of scenes. The ever-present danger of the environment as well as the subsequent rules for survival are established early on -- even before the freak storm sends the characters on a desperate life and death journey. Overall, Sanctum does a good job of riding this tension to the conclusion -- while never breaking the rules that were established at the onset.

Mixed in with flat characters and tense action is an incredible 3D visual component – which is where Cameron’s interest in the project is most apparent. The 3D adds little to the more frantic action scenes, but the effect is beautifully showcased in many of the film’s incredible cave shots. Whether showcasing a grandiose underwater cathedral or looking down through a slim and jagged crack in a cave wall, the added depth is impressive. While there are certainly some CGI shots in Sanctum, it’s clear that Cameron’s 3D tech holds up in the real world as well as computer-generated ones, and lends further credibility to his claim that the format is here to stay.

Moviegoers who aren’t turned-off by limited character development will certainly enjoy Sanctum and the film rightly earns its place as a tense and engaging pre-spring thrill ride. However, there’s no doubt that a combination of poor dialogue, flat characters, and cheesy story mechanics will see many moviegoers laughing at inappropriate times, and overall the ending falls somewhat short of the emotional peak that Grierson was clearly working toward.

If you’re still trying to make up your mind, check out the trailer for Sanctum below:

Sanctum is now playing in wide release in Real 3D and IMAX 3D.

Follow us on Twitter @iambenkendrick and @screenrant and let us know what you thought of the film.

View the original article here

‘Being Human’ Series Premiere Review & Discussion

With much care and great consideration for the source material, Syfy has successfully re-imagined Toby Whithouse’s hit BBC series Being Human for the American television viewing audiences.

Set in the heart of Boston, Being Human follows three supernaturally disposed outcasts who, after failing to obtain any sense of normalcy on their own, come together in an attempt to support each other throughout their superordinary tribulations that result from attempting to survive daily life.

Aidan (Sam Witwer), the vampire; Josh (Sam Huntington), the werewolf and Sally (Meaghan Rath), the ghost all serve as the reluctant protagonists for this series. In addition, providing wonderful depth to not only the multiple preternatural worlds that this series attempts to realize, but also the main characters are Bishop (Mark Pellegrino), Aidan’s one-time master; Emily (Alison Louder), Josh’s sister – whom he ran away from – and Danny (Gianpaolo Venuta), Sally’s now ex-fiancé.

With a series of beautiful introductory tracking shots, the initial tone of the premiere is perfectly set by the accompanied voice-over and supplemental visuals of Aidan and Josh attempting to survive the hardest moments of their paranormally inflicted lives. In this case, turning into a werewolf (Josh) and drinking an unsuspecting victim’s blood (Aidan).

Unfortunately, as the series jarringly transitions past its wonderfully elegant opening, viewers may find themselves initially put off with the intentional direction with the core series. Instead of the familiar single-camera look that many television series have, SyFy’s Being Human consciously decided to set itself apart by using handheld cameras for its visual stylings.

To its credit, the handheld camerawork does succeed in providing a richer, more intimate depiction of Being Human’s colorful characters. Although, considering the original British series also makes use of handheld cameras, this could become a point of contention for those already weary of this American re-imagining simply replicating the source material.

Fortunately, this perfectly cast series instantly proves to supersede any inclinations that Syfy’s re-imagining may simply be another poor British adaptation. The combination of Witwer, Huntington and Louder – who in their own right, are all able to portray exceptionally personable depictions of ambit characters – allows Being Human to consistently deliver deep emotional storylines, no matter how fantastical the subject matter.

Aside from Being Human’s pilot serving as an introduction to the series main and recurring characters, much of the episode is centered around Aidan and the repercussions that result from unintentionally murdering his fellow co-worker. With film and television already filled with numerous depictions of vampires and like-kind, it’s refreshing to see that Being Human is attempting to distant itself from Hollywood’s typical sensationalistic portrayals of these other-worldly creatures. Instead, Being Human focuses on using vampires, werewolves and ghosts as integral elements for providing rich character progression.

In the age of worldwide televisual availability, comparisons between Syfy’s version of Being Human and its original BBC counterpart are inevitable. Despite being completely unwarranted and categorically incorrect, there will be some who wrongfully choose to relegate this series down to simply being an uninspired copy. For those that are willing to put aside all natural Anglophilian instincts and arrogance, a truly wonderful television experience awaits you.

While American remakes of popular British series are typically a poor re-imagining of the series’ core elements, Syfy’s Being Human has proven itself to most certainly be the exception to that rule. With terrific casting, fully realized characters and an emotional depth not typically seen in a series with such fantastical surroundings, Being Human has become the benchmark that all future British adaptations should strive to meet.

-

Being Human airs Monday @9pm, on SyFy

Follow me on Twitter @anthonyocasio
Follow Screen Rant on Twitter @screenrant

View the original article here

The Green Hornet Review

Screen Rant’s Vic Holtreman reviews The Green Hornet

Hey, are you old enough to remember when everyone freaked out about Michael Keaton being cast as Batman because he was a comedic actor, didn’t have the look nor the stature to play the iconic masked vigilante – but in the end it turned out to be a daring bit of casting and pretty damned cool?

Well that didn’t happen with The Green Hornet.

The Green Hornet movie has a (troubled) history going back to mid-2007 when rumors first floated that Seth Rogen would be playing the titular hero (and writing the script). Initially Stephen Chow (director of the hysterically funny Kung Fu Hustle) was set to play the role of Kato (the sidekick), and then came word that Chow would be directing as well. Well a few months passed and that sequence reversed itself: Chow was not going to direct (due to creative differences) but would still play Kato. A few more weeks go by and Chow bowed out of the project completely.

Having seen the final product, I am left seriously wondering what a Stephen Chow-directed Green Hornet film would have been like.

I’m sure I will be hit with the standard “Hey, can’t you just enjoy a fun movie?” argument, so let me preface this review by saying that I am a fan of director Michel Gondry’s very funny Be Kind Rewind. And while I’m not a huge Seth Rogen fan, I did enjoy Superbad, which he co-wrote.

Enough preamble. In this latest incarnation of The Green Hornet, Britt Reid (Rogen) is the son of a newspaper magnate who didn’t have time for him as a child (his mother died when he was young). Dad is stern and has high standards – and Britt rebels by going the opposite direction and ending up as a 30 year old, irresponsible party boy. After one last “I’m disappointed in you” his father dies of a bee sting (he’s allergic), leaving the newspaper and wealth to a son who is not only unprepared for the responsibility – he doesn’t want it.

He comes to know Kato (now played by Jay Chou), who was not only his father’s auto mechanic (garage full of gorgeous, rare automobiles), but he makes an incredible cup of coffee using an espresso machine he built himself. Britt comes to learn that his father was paranoid about security and has had Kato build some pretty hard core defenses into “Black Beauty” – a very cool black sedan from the late 60s. They become friends (kind of) and with both of them feeling the need for some excitement (and maybe, purpose) one thing leads to another and they decide to form a crime-fighting duo. But in order to be more effective (and this really doesn’t make much sense) they decide that the best way to help people and be “the good guys” is to pretend to be bad guys.

While Kato has extreme martial arts skills in addition to apparently being able to assemble multiple heavily armored and weaponized cars from scratch in the span of days (by himself), Britt has basically zero skills. Of any sort, whatsoever. While this is obviously to be milked for laughs, within the context of the film (especially as it moves ahead) it seems more ridiculous and annoying as it goes on.

Jay Chou and Seth Rogen in 'The Green Hornet'

While their goal is to disrupt gang crime in Los Angeles, they draw the attention of an old school crime boss named Chudnofsky (played by Christoph Waltz, who was amazing in Inglourious Basterds). Chudnofsky, while seemingly on his way out as young up and comers try to take over is not someone to be trifled with – in fact he’s even more dangerous than ever because he feels like he’s losing respect and authority among the crime bosses in the area. Also drawn into the fray is Cameron Diaz (less annoying than usual) as Britt’s secretary/assistant. Britt and Kato are clueless about the workings of the criminal mind and she happens to be very well versed in that based on her degree in journalism.

As you can probably guess, eventually the duo gets in over their head and have to not only figure out how to save themselves from being killed, but how to overthrow Chudnofsky as well.

I have to say, Green Hornet started out (surprisingly) on a very high note. The opening scene with Waltz as the older gangster meeting with a younger, disrespectful younger crime boss (who I won’t name to keep the surprise) started out cautiously, but just got better and better as it went on. It was, in fact, damn funny. But immediately on its heels comes the aftermath, in which there are a lot of people killed, which kind of hits you upside the head right as you come off a very funny scene. That point notwithstanding, the film does an excellent job of introducing and establishing the main characters within the span of the first 10 minutes or so. Films have tried to do that before and failed (*cough* The Losers *cough*).

We see that yes, Britt is a complete ass and Kato is a faithful, hardworking guy. We soften a bit (JUST a bit, and temporarily) towards Britt as he wants to learn about Kato and what he did for Britt’s father, and it’s fun to watch Kato introduce Britt to the cool stuff he worked on and did for dear, departed dad, and gives insight into what sort of person he was. Although it starts down the “ridiculous” slide, their excitement about doing something exciting and adventurous is almost contagious – and their first experience taking down a bunch of street punks is fun and a super-cool action/fight scene.

Unfortunately, that right there (about 20-30 minutes in) ends the “high note” and is where the downward slide begins.

Reid continues to be an insufferable ass throughout the entire film, and the longer it goes on the dumber it seems that he’s out there risking his life against seasoned criminals. Sure, Kato is there to watch his back – but that brings up another point: Why in the world is this supposedly very grounded and intelligent guy sticking around a flighty, irresponsible egomaniac who takes him for granted?

There are many car chase scenes, all very hyper-kinetic with lots going on – and here is another sticking point: There was more than one instance where their chase through the city causes police cars to go flying into other vehicles – if they’re truly trying to be “the good guys,” what about all the collateral damage they’re causing? Bystanders just driving nearby, taking the bus, etc. whose vehicles get totally destroyed (with passengers within)? Oh and there was one scene included to show off the bullet proof glass where during a police chase, a cop pulls up next to them and opens fire. Really? Cops shoot at you when you just try to outrun them without having shot first? And don’t get me started on the scene where they use missiles in an unconventional manner to get out of a tight spot.

Cameron Diaz seemed almost like a character inserted after the script was written, and James Olmos didn’t make much of an impact, even with his built in gravitas. Christoph Waltz also seemed almost like his scenes were spliced in from a different film – all very disconnected and odd-feeling.

There were other things that didn’t work, either… It seemed quite seriously like those involved (Rogen?) really, REALLY wanted this to be an R-rated movie, but were locked into PG-13 due to the subject matter. Why do I say that? Because I can honestly not remember the last time I watched a PG-13 with so much profanity. I didn’t try to keep count of the number of s-bombs Rogen drops in the film, but I would have lost it anyway – had to be at least a couple dozen. Add to that one or two a-holes, b*tch and I don’t know what else. Frankly, it felt completely superfluous and it just added to the obnoxious, unlikability of Rogen/Britt. You can have an obnoxious protagonist, but when you start rooting for the bad guys, you have a problem.

Cameron Diaz and Seth Rogen in 'The Green Hornet'

And that’s the problem with Rogen’s Reid – the guy is such a monumental jerk that it’s hard to get past it. He treats the guy who is keeping him alive in the field like he should be happy to be allowed to come along, he’s a disgusting example of an over-cocky, sexually harassing pig with his secretary (Diaz), and just all around supremely annoying. By the end of the movie you’re not hoping for redemption, you’re hoping someone puts him in the hospital.

Also, this was pretty violent for a PG-13 movie that is sure to attract parents to bring their kids. Sure, you have violence in PG-13 movies, even superhero movies – but do we need close ups of two different people who’ve been crushed to death in a “light-hearted” semi-superhero comedy? If you’re thinking this looks like a “fun” romp the kids would enjoy, I recommend you reconsider and leave them at home for this one.

Will you like it? Maybe. Some of the audience I attended the screening with seemed to enjoy it. Am I saying it’s not funny or not worth seeing? No. There were moments beyond the first act where I laughed – not a lot, but a couple. There were tons of cool action scenes and Jay Chou’s martial arts fights were exciting (when you could tell what was going on due to the super fast editing in some scenes), and director Michel Gondry did some interesting things, visually. These items and the first act are why I’ve gone as high as 2.5 stars on this.

But overall, The Green Hornet is an uneven mix that’s not nearly as funny or enjoyable as it could have been.

-

 Loading ...

View the original article here

‘Californication’ Season 4 Premiere Review & Discussion

David Duchovny returns as playboy author Hank Moody on Californication tonight. How does the fourth season of Showtime’s opus to excess start? Read on to find out.

After three years of sincerely trying to redeem himself in the eyes of his girlfriend and daughter, Hank reached a low point in Season 3's finale over a year ago. Arrested after assaulting a police officer with dwindling hope of reuniting with Karen and Becca, the author emerges from jail in “Exile on Main St.” with little remorse and even less tact. As he tries to hold his career together after his scandalous and now public affair with a manipulative underage author, Hank and Charlie negotiate for the screenwriter position of the book that Mia stole from him in season one. At the same time, the two try to beat the rap and make amends to their significant others. They don’t try very hard.

The appeal of Californication lies in its brazen and unapologetic approach to money, sex and drugs on the West Coast. There’s plenty of that in the fourth season premiere: Hank begins indulging his vices mere moments after leaving jail, while simultaneously proclaiming his love and devotion for his estranged girlfriend and daughter. Fans tuning in for the show’s quick wit and brazen dialogue won’t be disappointed as Hank and Charlie, along with seemingly everyone in the movie business, rattle off as if they’re swearing on commission. The cable-only dialogue is enjoyable, and after the extended melodrama of the latter half of season 3 it’s good to see the writers returning to one of the series’ hallmarks. There’s also plenty of visual candy on display for those who want it – of Duchovny and his bedfellows.

Throughout the episode Hank continues to speak of his noble intentions while charging headlong into the habits and situations that made them leave in the first place. For example, Karen spares just enough time to Hank to explain her revulsion at his relationship with a then-16-year-old Mia. The girl had intentionally concealed her age, so at the time Hank wasn’t guilty of much more than an overactive libido and extremely poor judgement. But by the time the episode ends we once again see him bedding a girl half his age mere moments after appealing to her – and the audience – that he just wants his family back. For a brilliant writer, Hank seems to have a remarkably dim appreciation of cause and effect.

Hank treads water just above personal ruin and far below his own potential. While it certainly makes for a believable character, I take issue with the fact that the show expects us to sympathize with him. We’ve seen Hank make the same mistakes for years, topping himself in almost every episode. The series began with Hank as a talented man trying to overcome his own shortcomings and the obstacles others place in front of him. But now Hank is four years older and apparently none the wiser, and all the problems he faces at the beginning of the fourth season are of his own making. Why should the audience continue to care about a man who refuses to better himself? At this point, the show is simply presenting us with Hank’s (admittedly enjoyable) character traits and letting Duchovny loose in Los Angeles.

There’s no more character development to be found in the series’ lead – it’s time to either introduce a game-changing element or give us a look at the other players. Sasha, the actress hoping to play Mia’s role in her book’s movie adaptation, may fit the bill. She’s hopelessly infatuated with Hank, even as he explains that his heart lies elsewhere. She goes so far as to mimic the book’s tagline (and Hank’s own life) in an attempt to endear him to her. When Hank inevitably breaks her trust, be it with his estranged family or someone new, there should be some good drama to be had. Look for Sasha to play an increasing part in the coming season.

Charlie comes off as more annoying than endearing as he tries to fix Hank’s life while commiserating on his own misfortunes. The attorney he hires makes for some great dialogue, and since women are powerless to resist Hank in Californication, it’s almost certain that she’ll be an intimate part of this season’s plot. Karen and Becca, the characters I do feel sympathy for, are almost completely absent. While they may finally be gone from Hank’s life, it would have been nice to see more of their reactions to his continually collapsing situation.

Californication is as raunchy as it ever was as it begins its fourth year. The adult-only themes and humor are still enjoyable, but if the main character continues his unapologetic slide downwards, it’s hard to see how the plot will stay compelling.

Californication premieres tonight at 9:00 PM on Showtime.

View the original article here

‘Merlin’ Season 3 Premiere Review & Discussion

SyFy’s BBC import Merlin has captured its fair share of fans on this side of the pond, and American audiences can see Season 3's 13-episode run on Frinday nights at 10.

How does the first episode fare? We review the Season 3 premiere episode “The Tears of Uther Pendragon” and discuss in the comments.

-

-

The season starts off a year after Morgana’s betrayal and dramatic disowning of King Uther Pendragon. Unbeknownst to Uther and everyone else, Morgana has been with her half-sister Morguese plotting the kingdom’s downfall. Young Prince Arthur and Camelot’s knights have been searching for the king’s ward for a year, with Merlin keeping quiet in the hopes that no one discovers his nascent magical powers – or that he poisoned Morgana to end the curse Morgause had placed on the castle. When she’s welcomed back to Camelot with open arms, Morgana begins the machinations of a plot to drive Uther insane and topple the kingdom.

Morgana uses her impressive skills of manipulation and her own emerging powers to achieve her nefarious goals. With help from her sister, she hides an enchanted mandrake root under Uther’s bed which begins to warp his mind. At the same time, Morgues recruits a neighboring warlord to invade the kingdom while its king is incapacitated. In Camelot, Merlin begins to suspect Morgana as the cause of the king’s malady while Arthur struggles to rise to the challenge of assuming command. Merlin follows Morgana and discovers the sisters’ plot, only to be captured and left for dead. The episode ends with Merlin rescued by the dragon Kilgharrah and an army besieging a leaderless Camelot.

The story and acting are par for Merlin‘s course: solid but not outstanding. The compelling part of this series, and certainly what will bring fans back for its third season, is its modern take on legendary characters. Merlin has this in abundance. The first season was spent cementing the relationship between Arthur and Merlin, and the second season was largely concerned with fleshing out the rest of the core characters. As the third season begins, it’s clear the writers intend to capitalize on the work they’ve done setting the stage for some more earth-shaking story developments.

Morgana’s treachery and skillful deception is entertaining to watch. We’ve seen this character evolve from a naive ward of Uther to a villain in her own right, and it’s clear that her classically nefarious side will be on full display as the season continues. Uther’s paranoid and often brutal reigning serves as a good reminder of whose actions set up most of the conflict in Camelot. But the two main draws leave something to be desired – Arthur and Merlin squabble like schoolyard kids, and Arthur continues to berate and tease Merlin for his lack of fighting prowess. Yet, when faced with the gargantuan task of assuming his father’s throne and fighting off a potential invasion, Arthur becomes immediately serious and contemplative. The back-and-forth between the two is entertaining, but the sudden shifts in character are hard to reconcile with an Arthur who is still very much a boy.

Some of the best parts of the episode are seeing Uther Pendgragon get his comeuppance. Much of the drama in the series is set up by Uther’s ruthless slaughter of hundreds of magic users, and when the women and children he drowned in his rage begin to appear as cold and terrifying hallucinations, you begin to sympathize with the warlocks and sorceresses intent on toppling his throne. Merlin remains the only magic user in Christendom who isn’t out for Uther’s blood, and even that’s only in the hope that Arthur fulfills his destiny as Camelot’s greatest king.

The production design, cinematography and costumes are among the best seen yet in the series. It’s clear that the crew has hit its stride with Merlin and are becoming comfortable in its medieval world. And then there are the special effects. There’s no nice way to say it: the CGI in Merlin is awful, and continues to be so as the series progresses. cramped action shots and greenscreen effects abound. In part two of the episode there’s a scene where sword-wielding skeletons animate and attack the castle, presumably having just finished their gig on Jason and the Argonauts. It’s hard to fault bad effects on a TV budget, especially in something as difficult as a period piece, but the CGI just doesn’t match the impressive fit and finish of the rest of the series.

However, Merlin fans don’t tune in for blockbuster-level production values – they want story. And for the most part, the episode delivers. We get to see more of the blossoming relationship between Arthur and Guinevere, and Uther’s bipolar love for Morgana and hatred of magic is compelling. There isn’t much for Merlin to do except react to the antagonists, but the tension created by his secret keeps you wondering how he’ll stay undercover. There are, unfortunately, a couple of sore spots. The writers seem to reach for poison more often than the average Castle Elsinore tenant; Morgana poisons a guard that she failed to murder, marking what must be the dozenth use of the plot device in the series. And the climax that sets up for part two sees the villains ride off in the sure knowledge that their intricate trap will finish off Merlin once and for all. That trick was old when The Once and Future King was published, and it’s disappointing to see it here.

All in all, the episode is a decent reintroduction to Merlin‘s core characters with an excellent set-up to next week’s concluding episode. Those hungry for the continuing adventures of the wizard and the would-be king will be delighted, and eager for the next piece of the story – which, trust me, will pay off on the premiere’s setup.

Merlin airs Fridays at 10 PM on SyFy.

Note: If you’re new to Merlin, or if you just want to catch up on the story, Hulu is currently streaming all of season 1 and 2 for free.

View the original article here

Season of the Witch Review

Rating:

2 out of 5

Screen Rant’s Paul Young reviews Season of the Witch

Traditionally January is set aside as the month studios release movies for which they have low expectations of success. Every once in a while a rare gem will emerge from the dross that is usually offered at this time of year – unfortunately or maybe unsurprisingly, Season of the Witch isn’t that rare gem.

However, that’s not to say that the film was a total letdown. Even though Season of the Witch is wrought full of problems ranging from weak dialog via poorly delivered, uninspired one-liners – to under developed characters and CG effects reminiscent of a Saturday night SyFy channel original film… I managed to walk out of the theater pleasantly surprised at how much I actually enjoyed it.

Season of the Witch stars Nicolas Cage as Behmen, a knight in the time of the 14th century Crusades, who along with his best friend and battle partner Felson (Ron Perlman) grow tired of killing sinners and unbelievers in the name of God for the Church of England. After 12 years of fighting side-by-side they decide it’s time to break their vow by leaving “God’s” army and are branded as deserters.

Soon after, their travels bring them to a village which is besieged by a mysterious plague which the local monks are certain was brought about by the appearance of a girl whom they accuse of being a witch. After Behmen and Felson are revealed as traitors to the Church, they strike a bargain with the Cardinal D’Ambroise – a virtually unrecognizable Christopher Lee. In exchange for their freedom, the knights agree to escort a monk named Debelzaq (Stephen Moore) and a local man named Eckhart (Ulrich Thomsen) to a monastery which is four days away.

Before they leave they pick up a guide named Hagamar (Stephen Graham) and an altar boy named Kay (Robert Sheehan). Along the way the witch, Anna (Claire Foy), gets into their heads and uses their weaknesses against them in an attempt to escape. Ultimately Behmen, Felson and Kay have a final showdown with Anna as they realize there is more to her evil ways than they first suspected.

Nicolas Cage and Ron Perlman prepare to battle evil in a scene from 'Season of the Witch'

Season of the Witch should have been a better film because the story had good potential. Writer Bragi Schut does a decent job of keeping the story moving along without letting it get bogged down in one place for too long – unfortunately, the dialog for the film comes across as very heavy – every word seems to trip and bumble off of  the actors lips. Director Dominic Sena (Whiteout) doesn’t seem to help much; it feels like he told the actors to OVER. EMPHASIZE. EVERY. WORD. THEY. SAY as if each line was a witch they should be stabbing with a sword.

Even though Cage and Perlman’s characters are supposed to be long time friends there is very little chemistry between them and most of the “buddy” style banter – “You’re buying the drinks tonight” or “She stole a year’s worth of your salary” – feels forced and doesn’t come across with any emotion at all. I know I’m supposed to care about the relationship between these two long time warriors but at the end of the day I just don’t.

On a positive note, despite of all the above mentioned flaws there was something about Season of the Witch I found to be entertaining in a Beastmaster or 13th Warrior sort of way – when all is said and done, isn’t a film supposed to entertain?

A lot of other critics and reviewers – OK almost all of them – are giving this movie a very, very low score. It’s currently sitting at a 3% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a 6.2 on IMDb but the film opened in third place on Friday while only showing on half the number of screens as True Grit and Little Fockers. Once again it turns out that while it might be fun to totally trash a film during a review, it doesn’t always mean the critic or reviewer has their finger on the pulse of what audiences are interested in seeing.

Season of the Witch may not be worth seeing for full price at an evening show, but if you’ve already watched everything else available in theaters right now and you happen to catch the midday matinee, then you should have a pleasant enough time.

View the original article here

‘The Cape’ Series Premiere Review & Discussion

NBC’s The Cape is the network’s newest attempt at perfecting the serialized superhero television format. Set in the fictional Palm City, The Cape is centered around the soon-to-be masked vigilante Vince Faraday (David Lyons) – the last remaining “good cop” in a city filled to the brim with corruption.

Following the explosive death of the Chief of Police at the hands of Palm City’s super villain Chess (James Frain), Faraday must seek employment with Ark, the corporation seeking to privatize every governmental element of this struggling city.

After stumbling upon Ark’s secret transportation of illegal weapons, Faraday comes face to face with the mysterious Chess – who turns out to be none other than Peter Fleming, the billionaire owner of Ark and Faraday’s most recent (and final) employer.  Follow Fleming’s framing of Faraday as the nefarious Chess, Faraday loses his family, reputation and almost his life.

With the help of Max Malini (Keith David) and a gang of circus performing bank robbers, Faraday is able to transform himself into his son’s favorite comic book superhero and Palm City’s only hope at redemption, The Cape.

Series creator Tom Wheeler, the scribe of the upcoming Dreamworks Shrek spin-off, Puss in Boots, fortunately took a note from the numerous fans complaining about the long, drawn-out storytelling that plagued the now-forgotten Heroes and was able to include all of this back-story and Faraday’s subsequent transformation into The Cape within the first 15 minutes of the series premiere. This implementation of quick-paced plot progression, while typically resulting in disjointed storytelling, resonates perfectly within the graphic novel stylings of The Cape and thankfully continues throughout.

Helping along this accelerated rhythm is the investigative blogger and The Cape’s pseudo sidekick, Orwell (Summer Glau) who, with her police corruption-revealing website and Watchtower-esque handling of information, serves to quickly highlight our protagonist’s next objective and makes sure there is never a scene that lingers too long. Unfortunately, there are some exceptions where a heavy-handed attempt at emotion slows the story down to a crawl.

In terms of supervillains, Chess/Peter Fleming proves to be the most poorly realized nemesis of the series’ many. While his role as the main antagonist and proverbial patriarch is clearly defined, it is his stable of caricaturized henchmen that provides much of the great suspense and intrigue contained within The Cape’s two-hour premiere.

Despite Scales (Vinnie Jones) perfectly embodying the typical brooding enforcer for Chess’ malevolent plans, it is Cane, the master poisoner for the secret society known as Tarot, that not only provides the most enjoyment, but also offers viewers a glimpse at what intriguing subplots will be touched on as the series progresses.

Of course, one rhetorical question that persists throughout is whether The Cape is reveling in its inherent campiness or attempting to be seen as an equal to some of television’s best dramas. Whether intentional or not, the numerous scenes of awkward dialogue, obvious jokes and over-emphasized emotional sincerity makes for an endearing viewing experience, akin to the 1960s version of Batman, starring Adam West.

Unfortunately, it still remains to be seen whether or not television viewing audiences will warm to a series such as this. While there are enough action scenes to keep everyone on the edge of their seats, a musical score equal to that of many theatrical releases and a unique take on television’s superhero genre, the overall jocular delivery may cause many to wrongly dismiss The Cape for being a poorly executed series, rather than the enjoyable ride that it most surely is.

Without seeing any episodes following the premiere, it’s hard to tell whether or not this quirky, yet entertaining, style of storytelling will continue. But, if one thing can be unequivocally said about The Cape, it’s that it has promise.

Final Thoughts

Despite preconceived notions of skepticism and disappointment from potential viewers, The Cape delivers – for those able to suspend disbelief – a thoroughly entertaining viewing experience, with solid action scenes, a terrific score and an intriguing plot paced so quickly, you’ll feel as if you’re watching a visual representation of a graphic novel.

-

The Cape premieres January 9 @9pm, on NBC. Following its premiere, the series will move to its normal timeslot on Mondays @9pm, starting January 17.

Follow me on Twitter @anthonyocasio
Follow me on Twitter @screenrant

View the original article here

‘V’ Season 2 Premiere Review & Discussion

Tonight, the Visitors return and we finally see what became of Anna’s burst of human emotion in the season 2 premiere of V.

When we last left the world, Erica had taken it upon herself (with the help of Joshua and Lisa) to do one thing you probably shouldn’t even do to a dictator alien that wears human skin – kill her children. Of course, that lizard-headed figure of fallacy deserved it – considering her intentions to take over the planet Earth.

That being said, not everyone made it out of the first season finale of V intact. Following Anna’s capture of Valerie and her unborn baby, Ryan had to watch as both his alien child was taken from him and his fiancé was murdered. Unfortunately things became even more complicated when Joshua revealed himself as being one of the Fifth Column. Even though Anna killed and then, er, unkilled Erica’s main alien contact, I’m sure that Joshua will never be the same freedom fighting reptile that he used to be.

As for Lisa and Tyler, these two love birds need to sit down and have a discussion. With Lisa forming an alliance with Erica to take down Anna, and Tyler becoming completely engulfed in Anna’s rhetoric, it’s only a matter of time before things take a turn for the worse.

With Red Sky unleashed on the planet, the world is on the brink of war and there is chaos all around. Ryan is being kept in isolation on the mothership since Anna wants to experiment on his hybrid baby. Seeking redemption for being used by Anna, Chad wants to fight with the Fifth Column. Erica goes on a journey to find a scientist who can give her the answers to what Red Sky is and it’s there she learns the horrifying secret of what the Visitors are planning to do.

With the revelation of “red sky” at the hands Anna’s burst of human emotion, the second season of V begins with a more angry tone. Gone is the general acceptance from the public that highlighted much of the first season. Something such as this is an interesting and welcoming move that certainly sets the feeling and pace as the series ventures into what might be its final season.

Of course, the aggressive focus is one that could not last, as it would prematurely progress the series story-arc beyond the central focus, so that element is quickly removed. While the proverbial “pep-talk” from Anna to cover her underlying intentions with “red sky” was a little simplistic, it felt well within the character’s obvious traits.

Unfortunately, this was not the only thing that felt simplistic. In the first season’s series finale, many of the main characters went through intense emotional hardship. When we visit them in the second season premiere, those elemental references are somewhat touched upon, but generally not given the focus that they needed.

Instead of dedicating a specific amount of time to highlight any of the personal struggles that Erica, Ryan, Joshua, Lisa, Tyler, Chad or Anna are currently dealing with or attempting to overcome, each character was given their own minute scene to provide some kind of personal perspective and halfhearted progression. After that, the focus returned to the general “bigger picture” storylines, with multiple characters in each scene and their personal struggles highlighted, but mostly hidden.

With that, one cannot mention “bigger picture” storylines without touching upon the highly anticipated reveal of what the adult Visitors look like beneath their skin covering (not to mention a Visitor skeleton). On both accounts, the long-awaited reveal was everything that fans of the series could hope for. They revealed more than enough to satisfy all those interested, all while providing the skeletal base to help fans completely picture the actual reptile-based Visitor in their mind.

At first glance, the use of a much younger actor to portray the lab-rat Tripp Donovan (who found the Visitor skeleton) seemed a bit odd compared to the general make-up of our familiar Fifth Column segment. Fortunately after a few interesting scenes and copious amounts of scientific dialogue with the word “phosphorus” in it, the character felt like one of the team.

Unfortunately, the continual references to this sage chemical element is still one of the weakest elements of the entire series. Despite the fact that the series completely explains the reasoning and purpose behind it, there’s still something odd about aliens relying solely on something that is part of household baking powder.

Despite rattling off numerous faults of the season 2 premiere of V, the episode was actually a great start to the second season. Sure, certain elements were missing, but that can happen with any series. What’s important is that what made it to the screen is not only entertaining and intriguing, but also provides the audience a bit of uneasy anticipation about what’s to come and a touch of excitement about actually seeing it when it does.

In that respect, V delivers completely… they just had best not do this every week. (Which they don’t. The subsequent episodes that I’ve seen are completely enjoyable and have few faults.)

-

V airs Tuesdays @9pm, on ABC

Follow me on Twitter @anthonyocasio
Follow Screen Rant on Twitter @screenrant

View the original article here

‘Southland’ Season 3 Premiere Review & Discussion

Southland returns to TNT for its third season premiere tonight. The show has made a name for itself as a hard, no-compromise cop drama that doesn’t shy away from brutal crimes and honest characters. In stark contrast to lighter fare on both network and cable TV, Southland aims to bring the audience on a ride-along with the beat cops and detectives of the LAPD, showing every tense moment and hard choice. (which may be why it made the jump to cable last year.) The season 3 premiere of Southland delivers on the points that made the previous two seasons excel: showing the monotony, frustration and occasional terror that police experience in a city rife with gang violence and apathy.

The synopsis, courtesy of TNT:

SOUTHLAND Season 3 Episode 1 “Let It Snow” – Detective Lydia Adams (Regina King) endures a stressful adjustment period with her new partner, Josie Ochoa (Jenny Gago), as they investigate the disappearance of an illegal immigrant. Detective Russell Clarke (Tom Everett Scott), Lydia’s former partner, adjusts to a new desk job on the force. Meanwhile, Detectives Sammy Bryant (Shawn Hatosy) and Nate Moretta (Kevin Alejandro) look for the killer of two gangbangers and Officer Ben Sherman (Ben McKenzie) catches the eye of an attractive woman during a traffic stop, while his partner, John Cooper (Michael Cudlitz), struggles with increasing pain.

The show treads familiar ground as the story follows the disconnected story lines. Those who tune in for the unflinching looks at street-level violence won’t be disappointed, though those looking for more development after season 2's finale may find the first new episode a little lacking.

Cooper’s continuing injury is the most prevalent theme of the beat cops’ plot, and his developing addiction to his pain meds becomes problematic. The show follows along as he and Sherman start a typical day of traffic control. When Cooper needs a moment to try and augment his medication supply, he assigns the junior officer a trivial traffic stop. Sherman pulls the speeding Porche over, but in a predictable move lets the attractive and showy female driver off with a warning. The scene feels forced and more than a little stereotypical – how many times have we seen a hot woman talk her way out of a ticket? – but serves to show Sherman’s own moral failings as he tries to convince Cooper to seek help.

From here the two are called to a shooting and we’re treated to an excellent action set piece. There isn’t a lot of set up; bad guys have automatic rifles, a cop is down and Cooper and Sherman are under fire. Southland manages to show off an impressive bit of screenwriting as the cops pull out some unconventional tricks to rescue the fallen officer and take down the suspects. The scene is tense and tight, with exactly the right amount of action and restraint, making for the best part of the episode by far. After the crescendo, the two accompany the downed man to the hospital where Cooper tries to convince his estranged wife to grant him more medications and Sherman (rather inexplicably) comes across the woman in the Porche again.

Detective Adams remains the upright and uncompromising investigator, but her new partner puts her off balance. Southland newcomer Jenny Gago delivers a sympathetic and believable performance as detective Ochoa. The two are a microcosm of the tense relationship between Latinos and African-Americans in the city, a contrast that the show isn’t shy about showing off as the pair investigate the disappearance of an illegal immigrant who is raped and murdered at her workplace. There’s an excellent scene as the two are driving to a suspect’s home that tells you everything you need to know about the new detective in a few short moments. The dialogue in this exchange shines. The animosity between the two is palpable while being subtle, even as their contrasting skills allow them to close in on the suspect. The women’s storyline proves to be the most compelling of the episode, as both are dealing with stressful home life while following the viscous deeds of their quarry.

The third sub-plot, following detectives Hatosy and Moretta, is dry and relatively uninteresting. Two gang members found murdered under a bridge are found to have raped the daughter of another powerful gang member. Aside from some tense moments while apprehending the suspect, this storyline left a lot of potential on the editing room floor. There’s no sympathy for the murder victims, there’s no sympathy for the violated girl – everything here is disappointingly procedural. Even the normally solid cinematography seems to take a dive, as several shots cross the line from cinema verite to downright bad camerawork. All in all, this one should have bee nleft alone to give the audience more time with the other two teams.

It’s worth noting that series regulars Arija Bareikis and Tom Everett Scott barely make an appearance in the premiere. They aren’t really missed; there’s enough solid action and dialogue going on that their absence goes largely unnoticed. But this could be an indication that there characters will be taking a backseat this season. If that means more screen time for Cooper and Ochoa, the third season is shaping up to be a memorable one.

All in all, “Let it Snow” is a solid return for Southland. It delivers on the points that make it a favorite for those who want more gritty realism than the likes of Law and Order can provide. Excellent pacing and storytelling allow the show to clip along, with only a couple of sore spots. The police drama isn’t always completely accurate, but seems to nail the feel of LAPD life down pat. Characters develop on a slow burn that doesn’t get in the way of the action. If this episode is an indication of things to come, viewers will be delighted with the new season.

View the original article here

‘Blue Valentine’ Review

Screen Rant’s Kofi Outlaw Reviews Blue Valentine

Blue Valentine is a love story for our times – a film which examines the elusive nature of love and the weighty burdens of commitment, while also examining the complexity of modern gender roles and new attitudes about the bonds of marriage and family.

Best of all, the film manages to feel both timely and timeless, without ever going so far as to be preachy.

The story centers around Dean (Ryan Gosling) and Cindy (Michelle Williams), a couple living in small town Pennsylvania with their small daughter, Frankie (Faith Wladyka). Dean is a high school dropout who makes his living laboring as a blue collar worker – he has many creative and artistic talents, but no drive to be anything more than a good father, husband and provider. Cindy, on the other hand, is a girl who has always had ambition – she’s been studying medicine for years and is a dedicated nurse on the verge of a promising new career opportunity.

The film jumps back in forth across the timeline of Cindy and Dean’s relationship, sketching a portrait of who they were as individuals first, how they eventually met, fell in love, and ultimately began to face the hardships of marriage. Between flashbacks, the film follows modern-day Cindy and Dean, as they attempt to rekindle the flickering ember of their relationship before it goes out.

Director Derek Cianfrance has just one prior feature film on his resume, with most of his work behind the camera being a few short films and a handful of TV documentaries. It’s that latter body of work that serves Blue Valentine so well: if nothing else, the film is a wonderful documentary study of one couple’s relationship, and Cianfrance knows (like any good documentarian should) exactly what moments to highlight, and all the subtleties of thought and feeling that need to be acknowledged onscreen. And so, like a good, experienced documentarian, Cianfrance simply pulls back and observes, rather than trying to dictate.

Of course that voyeuristic approach would be wasted if the director didn’t have two skilled performers in the lead roles, providing strong emotional subject matter worth observing. Gosling and Williams are arguably two of the best actors of their generation, and here they put on a serious tour de force of human interaction and emotion – the new war of the sexes.

Both Cindy and Dean come across a fully-formed, richly complex people. There is no “good guy” or “bad guy” and gone are many of the past stereotypes and flat, two-dimensional tropes you find in so many other romantic dramas. Dean may be a rugged, street-smart guy who drinks a little bit too much, but he’s also a good father, a loving and dedicated husband, with shades of an artist coloring his soul. Cindy is a bit selfish, a bit cynical and a bit of a mess as a woman, but she’s also smart, ambitious, strong and a dedicated wife and mother.

It’s the fact that both wife and husband are in their own ways “good” (if not flawed) people that makes Blue Valentine so refreshingly complex and interesting. The notion that something in love can go wrong, even if nobody does wrong, is one that movies rarely dare to explore; having “the cheater” or “the beater” tends to be a much easier route to take. This film has the lofty ambition of questioning how a love that starts off so sweet can over time ferment into something so bitter. And here, it’s a question worth exploring.

The writers and the actors work together to approach these characters in a way that also addresses the shifts in modern gender roles, and how those changes have altered the modern family dynamic. Cianfrance co-wrote the script for Blue Valentine along with Joey Curtis and Cami Delavigne, and included in the story is a particularly great subplot that juxtaposes Cindy and Dean’s marriage to that of Cindy’s aging parents, who come from a generation where the commitment of marriage tended to stay unbroken, no matter how heavily “for worse” outweighed “for better.” Subtle touches like this elevate the story to a level which speaks to the dilemmas faced by many young adults today, struggling with questions of who they want to be vs. who they are expected to be, as families, couples, and/or individuals.

Gosling and Williams follow the writers into this unexplored terrain, and some of Blue Valentine‘s rawest and admittedly realest moments come from the arguments the couple have about what it means for Dean to “be a man” and how much of one he is or is not, based on the choices he’s made in life and what kind of attitude he has. While I would have liked to see some of what is implied about Cindy and the woman she is explored at greater depth, Williams’ fantastically subtle and thickly layered performance is enough to keep you thinking.

I must say that the MPAA initially giving this film an NC-17 rating is ridiculous. In terms of nudity, Blue Valentine is very conservative with what or how much it shows, and not one moment of sex or skin is offensive in any way. To me, the rating controversy only serves as a stamp of authenticity; the “offending” scene in the film didn’t ruffle feathers because it was gross or gratuitous – it ruffled feathers because what it depicts is so spot-on, almost too real for comfort. This is a movie that will get under a lot of people’s skin, for sure – but only because of how well they’ll be able to relate.

In the end, Blue Valentine hits all the right chords to keep you engaged with its characters and invested in their journey. The movie offers no real answers – it doesn’t try to preach to us about love, life, commitment and how they sometimes become entangled. Rather, this is a film that motivates us to examine our own beliefs about those very subjects, and maybe, hopefully, possibly, find a way to conquer the challenges of love and life for ourselves.

View the original article here

Casino Jack Review

While TRON: Legacy may be dominating the television airwaves with trailer after trailer for Disney’s big-budget sci-fi adventure, Casino Jack, George Hickenlooper’s stranger-than-fiction story of real-life “Super Lobbyist” Jack Abramoff has been quietly racking up award season buzz – with several nominations already on the table (including one Best Actor nod for Kevin Spacey).

The true story of Abramoff’s downfall is certainly compelling source mater – but does Casino Jack deliver as enjoyable film entertainment?

A film based on the story of one of the most greedy, and charismatic businessmen to ever set foot on Capital Hill may not sound like something a lot of moviegoers would want to see following one of the worst recessions in America’s history. However, with the late George Hickenlooper at the helm, Casino Jack manages to find an intriguing balance between cautionary tale and comic revelry -- letting the loony events of the actual SunCruz Casinos scandal speak for themselves.

If you’re unfamiliar with Casino Jack, or Jack Abramoff himself, here’s the official synopsis from ATO Pictures:

“Inspired by true events that are too over-the-top for even the wildest imaginations to conjure, Casino Jack lays bare the wild excesses and escapades of Jack Abramoff. Aided by his business partner Michael Scanlon (Barry Pepper), Jack parlays his clout over some of the world’s most powerful men with the goal of creating a personal empire of wealth and influence. When the two enlist a mob-connected buddy (Jon Lovitz) to help with one of their illegal schemes, they soon find themselves in over their heads, entrenched in a world of mafia assassins, murder and a scandal that spins so out of control that it makes worldwide headlines.”

In a world where the “based on a true-story” founding of Facebook movie, The Social Network, might live-on as the “true story” for many viewers, it’s becoming increasingly important for films, based on real events, to work hard at both telling a convincing story while being careful with the liberties they’re taking. It’s no surprise that Hickenlooper successfully balances the facts with intriguing story-telling, given the success of the director’s critically acclaimed documentary, Hearts of Darkness -- which chronicled the production of Apocalypse Now.

While this film is obviously not a documentary, that privilege already belongs to documentarian Alex Gibney’s Casino Jack and the United States of Money (which will undoubtedly get a bump in visibility following the buzz around Hickenlooper’s film). Casino Jack still manages to hit all the necessary story beats and fill-in the gaps with fictionalized, but honest, emotional performances by the cast.

As Jack Abramoff, Kevin Spacey succeeds in a nearly-impossible challenge: finding humanity and charm in a man who is genuinely guilty of a laundry list of selfish and abhorrent ongoing criminal activity: bribing public officials, defrauding American Indian tribes, as well as devious business practices that, although Abramoff didn’t know at the time, led to the murder of SunCruz Casinos’ owner, Konstantinos “Gus” Boulis.

However, despite the enormous number of people who Abramoff hurt or took advantage of – Spacey manages to keep the character grounded, tapping into his devout Jewish Orthodox beliefs, his devotion to his family, as well as his penchant for movie-character impersonations. Whether frank, charming, or angry, Spacey captures a real man, not the media caricature many have come to know, who could not see the forest for the trees.

Barry Pepper also delivers as Abramoff’s business partner, Michael Scanlon, who acts as an enjoyable foil for the mostly cool and crafty character portrayed by Kevin Spacey. Pepper’s Scanlon is often in-over-his-head, which drives Abramoff into dangerous waters without anything substantial to cling to when all of their shady dealings begin to catch up with them. Similarly, Jon Lovitz utilizes his usual comedic shtick, offers a performance that isn’t too over-the-top and successfully compliments the rest of the cast. Sure, it’s still type casting and not all that different from other roles that Lovitz has portrayed in the past, but he finds the right line between smarmy mattress salesman and the kind of person that could conceivably stand alongside a big-wig like Jack Abramoff.

This balance between the unconscionable Abramoff dealings and the comedy of the insecure, as well as desperate, men behind them is what makes the story of the real-life Casino Jack such a compelling film. The ultimate message of the film can be heavy-handed at times; but if nothing else, the film raises awareness and prompts discussion, regarding the influential role of lobbyists in Washington D.C. – and the dangers that arise when backdoor deals take precedent over the well-being, and best interest, of the American people.

With so many high-profile films vying for moviegoers’ attention in the coming weeks, Casino Jack may get a bit lost in the shuffle. The film may not have 3D effects or CGI cartoon characters, but as a result of Hickenlooper’s approach to the subject matter, coupled with a terrific performance by Kevin Spacey, Casino Jack manages to be both enjoyable comedic entertainment as well as thought provoking social commentary.

If you’re still trying to make up your mind, check out the trailer for Casino Jack below:

-

Follow us on Twitter @iambenkendrick and @screenrant and let us know what you thought of the film.

Casino Jack is currently playing in Los Angeles and New York and will open for wide release on Wednesday, December 22nd.

View the original article here

‘TRON: Legacy’ Review

Screen Rant’s Vic Holtreman reviews TRON: Legacy

TRON: Legacy has to be one of the most hyped, if not highly-anticipated movies of the year. It’s been teased at the San Diego Comic-Con for three years in a row – where the footage shown wowed the crowd. It’s obvious how much hard work and dedication went into the visual aspect of the film, but unfortunately that’s about all it has going for it.

The original TRON was released way back in 1982, and at the time was considered groundbreaking for its use of computer graphics in a live-action film. If you’ve never seen the film and watch it for the first time today, you’ll probably find yourself laughing at the “hokey” visual effects – but remember that back then they didn’t have the advantage of being able to create virtual worlds via CGI motion-capture that could be translated into a computer-based character, etc.

Those who love the original film (myself included) may be infected by a bit of movie nostalgia – it’s not a great film, but it’s entertaining enough and actually managed to explore some interesting concepts at a time where computers were still “new” to most people.

Legacy is a sequel that starts out about seven years after the end of the first film. Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges) has taken over Encom and with the help of Alan Bradley (Bruce Boxleitner) has made the company wildly successful. Flynn has a young son named Sam, who he’s regaled with stories of his exploits “on the grid,” and he promises to take his wide-eyed son there one day. Flynn is also on the verge of bringing a “miracle” to the world that will redefine everything – science, religion, medicine, etc.

After sharing this with his son, Kevin Flynn disappears – never to be seen again.

Cut to Sam (Garrett Hedlund) at age 27, now a loner bad boy who’s only involvement with Encom (despite being the majority shareholder) is to hack into it once a year in an attempt to disrupt the now greedy corporation (as opposed to the wonderful, benevolent company it was when his father ran it) in one way or another.

Sam is led to a secret lab at Flynn’s Arcade, where he repeats his father’s last computer command on the dusty console – which transports him into the cyber-universe of the grid. Director Joseph Kosinski makes this universe seem even more “special” in an effective way: The “real world” scenes are in 2D, but once we move into the computer world the 3D in the film finally kicks in – and it really makes for an effective transition. Think about the scene in The Wizard of Oz where Dorothy emerges from her house into Oz – on steroids.

Once in the cyber world Sam is understandably overwhelmed, but adapts quickly being the athletic guy we met in the real-world scenes. Sam soon meets Clu, the program his father created to run the system, who looks like a much younger Jeff Bridges (more on that, later). It seems Clu has turned into a dictator in search of perfection, and is not satisfied with pursing/enforcing it only in the computer realm.

Eventually a program named Quorra (Olivia Wilde) brings Sam to see his father, who has been trapped there since he vanished so many years ago. Of course Sam wants to return to our world with his father, but dear old dad is reticent because his “identity disc” contains the information that Clu needs to invade our world – and he doesn’t want to risk that. The trio race to find a way to stop Clu, and escape the cyber world, before Clu can execute his terrible plan.

TRON: Legacy is a visual treat – at least until you get used to it. Visually, the highlight of the film takes place not long after Sam’s arrival in the computer world. The scenes in which the battles take place on the grid, both the hand-to-hand and the lightcycle racing, are truly amazing. As I watched that part of the film I thought “this is the techno answer to Avatar.” The 3D here is used to excellent effect, including a multi-level, transparent race track where the lightcycles do battle.

The musical score by Daft Punk is an excellent match for the film. Being an old guy, the first time heard of them was in reference to this film, but their techo-rock, pulsing soundtrack matches the otherworldly look of the film. As a bonus, they actually appear in the film (the club scene).

This world is much more detailed than that of the original film, reflecting the increase in computing and graphics power we have today compared to the vector graphics of almost 30 years ago. Updates to the ships and the suits worn by the programs are all well done and are visually impressive – there are also some new designs introduced  to keep things fresh.

There are many nods to the original film – I’ll leave them unmentioned so you can discover them as you watch the movie. However, there are also many things taken from lots of other films that came before – some so similar that it’s difficult not to think “rip-off” instead of “nod.” Those films include Star Wars, The Matrix, 2001: A Space Odyssey and more. In fact, in one scene I thought Garrett Hedlund was channeling Hayden Christensen as Anakin Skywalker.

The world of the film is filled with many perfectly pretty people – and I felt little connection to most of them. If I had to pick one person who generated a sense of connection above the others, it would be Bruce Boxleitner reprising his role as Alan Bradley – and he was barely in the film. Michael Sheen as Castor had an excess of personality that made him seem like he was far more advanced than “just a program.” Olivia Wilde generated no connection and her character was no better. With a collection of the greatest written works of all time having been read by her (as provided by old Flynn), she professed her favorite author to be Jules Verne. Nothing against Jules Verne, but compared to the other books there and her apparent hunger to understand the real world, it seemed like an odd (lame) choice.

Then there was the quest to get home – was old Flynn’s data disc required or not? Was it important enough to guard with one’s life (because at one point it seems like an “oh well”), and do we even care?

Finally we get to the CGI recreation of Jeff Bridges as a young man. Have we finally gotten past the “uncanny valley” (where the mind/eye discerns that something is just not quite “real”)? Sadly, no. As long as young Kevin Flynn wasn’t talking, the face looked great – but as soon as he spoke, the creepy factor pops up. He looked like he had a face full of Botox – think Joan Rivers as seen recently on The Apprentice. One could argue that Clu was a computer program and should have been “stiff” compared to a human, but even in the opening scene of the film where we see the real-world young Kevin Flynn, the same effect is present.

Really, if you’re going to see the film, try to make it to an IMAX theater if you have one available – and if there isn’t one you really should see the film in 3D, as TRON: Legacy is an example of 3D done right. It was shot in 3D and there is use of both subtle and overt 3D in the film, an overall effect that looks impressive and adds to the feeling of being in a world that is not ours.

But if you’re looking for characters and a story that will draw you in, wait and go see that other Jeff Bridges movie: True Grit.

Here’s a trailer for TRON: Legacy:

-

 Loading ...

If you want to talk about the film without worry about spoiling it for others, head over to our TRON: Legacy Spoilers Discussion.

View the original article here

‘The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader’ Review

‘Voyage of the Dawn Treader’ is on par with the two previous Narnia films. If you’re a fan of the books, you’ll probably enjoy it.

Rating:

3 out of 5

Screen Rant’s Vic Holtreman reviews The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

Will this be the final Narnia movie? I suppose the box office will tell -- While the first film, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe grossed $745MM worldwide, Prince Caspian did little better than half of that. The consensus is that each film is not quite as good as the one that came before, and we’ll see if Dawn Treader’s box office goes along with both the financial and critical trend.

In this third film (and the order of the films does not match the chronology of the books), Lucy and Edmund Pevensie (Georgie Henley, Skandar Keyne) are stuck living with a dismissive uncle and bratty cousin Eustace Scrubb (Will Poulter) in England, while older brother and sister Susan and Peter (Anna Popplewell and William Moseley, who are limited to brief cameos in this film) are off living in America. At 17, Edmund is still suffering from “younger brother complex” while Lucy is transitioning from being a girl to a young woman. Lucy also suffers from older sibling envy, wishing she was as beautiful as Susan.

Edmund is having a tougher time adjusting to life as a regular teenager in WWII England -- after having been a prince in Narnia, having fought battles, etc. It is especially difficult in light of having to cow-tow to cousin Eustace, who is played with delightful annoyance by young Poulter. Eustace is a “realist” who makes fun of Lucy and Edmunds’ “fantasies” about Narnia. This may as well be a brother and sister version of Harry Potter living with his terrible extended family -- of course this story was written LONG before the Harry Potter books.

Soon (of course) Lucy and Edmund find themselves drawn back into the world of Narnia, where they once again meet Prince (now King) Caspian (Ben Barnes). The CGI rat Reepicheep (voiced by Simon Pegg) is back as well. A bit of a wrench is thrown in the works as whiny Eustace has made it into Narnia with our intrepid young veterans. It seems a darkness is descending across the land, and since Susan and Peter are now too old, Edmund and Lucy have been summoned back to put things right.

We’ve got hand to hand combat, sword fights, a dragon-shaped ship and a giant, tentacled creature that will give the Kraken a run for its money. It’s a beautifully shot film, but once again the heroes are not the highlight. Will Poulter as Eustace steals the film -- he’s the kind of character that you’ll love to hate… the epitome of smarmy. And of course it’s no spoiler to say that he has a change of heart by the end of the film. Another highlight (for me, anyway) is Simon Pegg as Reepicheep -- maybe because so much of his time was spent with Eustace.

So what about the leads? I just don’t know… while they demonstrated more depth than in the previous films, there is still some magic ingredient missing here. I’ve always felt that these Narnia films seem to be devoid of a soul -- ironic considering the source material. While the Harry Potter movies (for example) feel rich and deep, these films seem to have everything on the surface. I’m not saying all the blame rests on the shoulders of the young leads -- but there’s definitely a spark I’ve yet to find in these films.

And then there is the good old 3D issue. The film was not shot in 3D, but had it added in post production. I’ve said many times that I’m not a fan of “after the fact 3D” -- but I will say that this film had the best of that variety that I’ve seen to date. It wasn’t AS distracting as the post 3D I’ve seen in other films, but that’s still not to say that it’s good in an objective sense. To me, even the best post-production 3D makes me think of the pictures I used to see when I looked at those little circular slides in those old stereoscopic Viewmaster toys: A number of 2D items each placed at a different distance from the camera.

Here’s a trailer for The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader:

-

 Loading ...

View the original article here

‘The Tourist’ Review

The defining characteristics of ‘The Tourist’ are its overt efforts to emphasize that Angelina Jolie is beautiful and that Johnny Depp is a ‘regular guy.’

Rating:

2.5 out of 5

Screen Rant’s Vic Holtreman reviews The Tourist

Usually, it’s a Sci-Fi or superhero film that comes along from time to time which relies primarily on its “look” above everything else – one doesn’t usually expect a drama, romance or semi-action/adventure story to rely on its visual aspect to carry it. The Tourist does just that, whether that was director Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck’s intention or not.

Of course there are worse things than a film which stars Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp relying on its appearance.

We begin in the beautiful city of Paris, with the most beautiful Angelina Jolie (it’s the eyes I tell ya). She is so aristocratic here that she fairly glides across the screen – and she is under heavy surveillance by the Parisian police. Under the oversight of Scotland Yard (with Paul Bettany in charge of the case), they are hoping she will lead them to her lover, who is involved in some sort of major, epic financial crime.

As the film begins, it seems like we might be in for a decent ride – a game of cat and mouse between her, the unseen lover and the police. She receives a note at a cafe with instructions on what to do and where to go in order to evade those who are following her – and it doesn’t take long for the advice to prove accurate. The plan as dictated to her, is to find someone of similar build to him in order to have the authorities believe it IS him. They don’t know what he looks like because he’s stolen over $2 billion and the assumption is that he’s had extensive reconstructive surgery in order to hide from the police – and the British mob boss from whom he stole the money.

Of course she decides to select Johnny Depp as her “victim” – he plays a Wisconsin math teacher, and he does it quite well. Following a string of so many… stylized roles, it was actually impressive to watch Depp play a “regular joe.” He is somewhat shy and taken aback by Jolie’s beauty. Just as we think she is done with him, she decides to string him along further – or is she somehow intrigued by this simple little man?

As a matter of course he ends up in harm’s way – being chased by both the Italian police (they’re now in Venice), the mob gangster’s thugs and Scotland Yard. Believe me when I tell you that in this film, it is NOT as exciting as it sounds.

The Tourist just kind of plods along from one locale/scene to the next, seeming almost random. There are unexciting chase scenes and a bit of romance between Jolie and Depp that feels very one-way… it’s clear why Depp’s character would fall for Jolie’s, but why she would be interested in a guy like him never rings true.

If you’re going to see this film, you really, really need to be a fan of both of these actors because it’s very much focused on them. Jolie, as stated previously, is quite gorgeous in the film – but it seems like you’re not allowed to figure that out for yourself, as there are multiple scenes of her walking down the street, entering rooms, arriving at a ball, etc. where the men part like the Red Sea, and they turn in unison to gaze at her. As if to “help” us to understand that she is utterly and completely captivating in case we poor movie viewers don’t get that already.

One thing I did like about the film is that it felt like it was trying for that late 1950s, early 1960s romance/thriller vibe. It had the look of those and it even felt like a throwback to those by being what I would consider a mild PG-13 (well, other than one pretty brutal strangling). There were also some great actors on hand like Steven Berkoff, (an underutilized) Rufus Sewell and Paul Bettany. I know some people are interested in seeing this as much for Bettany as the two stars – but what I found amusing was that the few scenes Timothy Dalton appeared in as Bettany’s boss were totally stolen by Dalton despite very little dialog or time on screen.

One thing that I believe could have helped this film “pop” would be a better musical score. It was very conventional and generic and didn’t add much needed soul nor energy to the film. Speaking of the score (and films with those that excel), what The Tourist reminded me of was a much watered-down version of The Thomas Crowne Affair, with the genders reversed.

I don’t think it was as awful as many are making it out to be – it was certainly pretty to look at, but in the end, utterly forgettable.

Here’s a trailer for The Tourist:

-

 Loading ...

View the original article here

Facebook Fortunes System REVIEW Social Media Marketing Jobs that Make Money Online Easily

December 1st, 2010 | Social Media Jobs

First time here? Subscribe to Social Media eXchange for more interesting content

fbfort­un­e­s.bon­uscb.com­ - Fa­ce­book­ Fort­un­e­s Sy­st­e­m­ RE­VI­E­W Soci­a­l M­e­di­a­ M­a­rk­e­t­i­n­g Jobs t­ha­t­ M­a­k­e­ M­on­e­y­ On­li­n­e­ E­a­si­ly­ De­a­r Frust­ra­t­e­d I­n­t­e­rn­e­t­ M­a­rk­e­t­e­r, Ha­ve­ y­ou e­ve­r won­de­re­d how Fa­ce­book­, a­ si­t­e­ t­ha­t­ wa­s st­a­rt­e­d off by­ a­ re­gula­r guy­ i­n­ hi­s dorm­ room­, i­s n­ow va­lue­d a­t­ Bi­lli­on­, ha­s a­ block­bust­e­r holly­wood m­ovi­e­ docum­e­n­t­i­n­g i­t­’s i­n­ce­p­t­i­on­ a­n­d ha­s m­a­de­ 1 out­ of e­ve­ry­ 14 p­e­op­le­ on­ t­he­ p­la­n­e­t­ a­ re­gula­r use­r? Fa­ce­book­ ha­s t­he­ la­rge­st­ a­m­oun­t­ of da­i­ly­ t­ra­ffi­c on­ t­he­ I­n­t­e­rn­e­t­… M­ore­ t­ha­n­ Google­ ! I­t­ i­s e­a­si­e­r t­ha­n­ e­ve­r be­fore­ t­o com­m­un­i­ca­t­e­ wi­t­h hun­dre­ds, t­housa­n­ds, e­ve­n­ M­i­lli­on­s of p­e­op­le­. P­e­op­le­ a­re­ fre­e­ly­ sha­ri­n­g t­he­i­r i­n­t­e­re­st­s, wa­n­t­s a­n­d de­si­re­s p­ubli­cly­ 20 Vi­de­o M­odule­s 20 St­e­p­-By­-St­e­p­ Wa­lk­t­hroughs - Y­ou Wi­ll Li­t­e­ra­lly­ Wa­t­ch Ove­r M­y­ Shoulde­r A­s I­ M­a­k­e­ M­on­e­y­ On­ Fre­sh A­ccoun­t­s A­n­ E­x­a­x­ct­ Blue­p­ri­n­t­ Of T­he­ M­on­e­y­ M­a­k­i­n­g Fa­ce­book­ Sy­st­e­m­ Whi­ch Con­si­st­e­n­t­ly­ Bri­n­gs I­n­ 4 Fi­gure­s a­ We­e­k­ How T­o T­urn­ M­a­ssi­ve­ A­m­oun­t­s Of Fa­ce­book­ T­ra­ffi­c I­n­t­o Ca­sh Wi­t­h A­ P­he­n­om­i­n­a­l Li­st­ Bui­ldi­n­g M­a­chi­n­e­ Cre­a­t­e­ A­ K­i­lle­r Sa­le­s Fun­n­e­l Whi­ch Wi­ll K­e­e­p­ Y­our Cust­om­e­rs Buy­i­n­g Ove­r A­n­d Ove­r A­ga­i­n­ I­n­de­fi­n­i­t­e­ly­ Le­a­rn­ T­he­ Se­cre­t­s Of Hi­ri­n­g Out­source­rs Whi­ch Wi­ll Gi­ft­ Y­ou A­ Fully­ A­ut­om­a­t­e­d M­on­e­y­ M­a­k­i­n­g M­a­chi­n­e­

View the original article here

‘Tangled’ Review

Tangled is a perfect pick for the family over the holiday weekend, a movie that includes all of the essential ingredients of a cherished Disney classic, with an infusion of all of the best that updated technology and contemporary humor have to offer. This film truly does deliver the best of both worlds.

At its core, Tangled is a tale as timeless as it is timely. It is a story of self discovery, flight from the nest, and coming of age -- it’s also a film that speaks to anyone who has faced, or is facing, the trials and tribulations of growing up.

The movie focuses on Rapunzel (voiced by Mandy Moore), who is cusping on her 18th birthday and has never seen the world beyond the tower that the duplicitous Mother Gothel (voiced by Donna Murphy) spirited her away to as a baby.

Rapunzel has been gifted with a mane of magical hair, which Gothel needs in order to maintain her youth and avoid the inevitable perils of mortality. The hair has been imbued with the essence of our very source of life, the sun. When Rapunzel’s mother, the Queen, was pregnant, she became deathly ill, so all in the kingdom were sent forth to find a cure. What they found was a flower that had been nourished by one drop of pure sunlight.

Gothel had been using the flower to stay young and alive, but it was taken to the Queen for healing and the Queen passed the healing magic to her daughter. So Gothel stole the child and raised her as her own, determined to never again lose the source of her youth.

Rapunzel experiences a traditional “awakening” (in a sense) when the dashing Flynn Rider (voiced by Zachary Levi), sails into her tower and illustrates the vitality and life that is out there in the world just beyond her window; that awakening is more of a mutual exchange in this film.

Flynn and Rapunzel awaken each other to who they really are, and what they truly desire. Thus, it is a romance born of the most ideal circumstances: two people who bring out the best in each other, rather than a traditional “one needs the other” arrangement.

Long gone is the traditional “damsel in distress” tale. For decades now, films have taken the archetype of the shrinking violet and turned it on its head; in most live-action films she is now -- more often than not -- replaced by a female who is instead shrieking and violent. Certainly, fairytales are often “untangled” and retold with an eye on contemporary tastes (Shrek being the most notable and successful example). What is lovely about Rapunzel is that she maintains the innocence and sweetness of a traditional Disney princess, and yet represents the independent spirit and ingenuity of a modern heroine.

What is also fascinating about this film is that the villainess (Gothel) masks her villainy in the guise of love. She does not have the wealth of Cruella De Ville, nor the magic of Sleeping Beauty’s Maleficent. She is only equipped with an arsenal of emotional manipulation and self-esteem grenades, designed to keep Rapunzel afraid of the world and herself. As such, she is an amazing archetype for the devouring mother that many women must (to greater or lesser degrees) face in order to get free, and fully come into their own.

The character of Flynn Rider provides much of the humor in the film, as well as the swashbuckling adventure. As I said in my interview with Zachary Levi, Flynn has more in common with a G rated Han Solo, than a bland Prince Charming. His (still somehow innocent) cynicism and Rapunzel’s intelligent naivete  give them both somewhere to travel as characters. Their voyage ultimately leads them to themselves, and each other.

Tangled is also full of fresh enchanting characters who don’t talk: Maximus, a dog-like horse who is as “dogged” and relentless in his pursuit of justice as he is loving, loyal, and physically reprimanding; and Pascal, an expressive chameleon who is always ready to gently or forcefully guide Rapunzel, and educate Flynn as needed.

Finally, the King and Queen, Rapunzel’s original parents, bring the “one tear, for every laugh” that Walt Disney prescribed for his movies.

In terms of story, Tangled successfully translates Grimm’s classic tale of a young woman trapped in a tower into a fast moving, sprawling, and charmingly comedic adventure; one that is as emotionally evocative and archetypal as any of the beloved Disney tales. Writer Dan Fogelman (Bolt, Cars) has crafted a script that is alive with rich characters, an accessible sense of irony, and an abiding tale with a twenty-first century twist.

Directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard (Bolt) use the 3D CGI to draw the audience into the story and the emotional state of the characters. The film has some of the most well-developed character design in recent animation (including Rapunzel’s subtle, and endearing, slight overbite), and yet it still has the organic feel of hand-drawn animation. Alan Menken’s music is as catchy, uplifting and effecting as one would expect.

The film makes gorgeous use of light as a visual motif, and metaphor for all that we are capable of, and hold within us if we accept, and make use, of our own unique nature; both its majesty and its limitations.

Persnickety teenagers may not be ready to love this film, but on the whole Tangled offers audiences a much needed respite from the normal marquee staples, and reaches past our defenses to the part of ourselves that still wants to believe in magic.

Tangled Trailer:

 Loading ...

View the original article here