Jun 142011
 

Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader

After not getting a chance to get to the theater to catch this movie, I carved out some time last night to watch the latest installment of The Chronicles of Naria movies with my wife.  Now, let me preface the remainder of this review by saying that it’s been about five years since I last read through the entire Chronicles, and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader was far and away my favorite of the books.  I felt it read like an abridged Odessey, with lots of rich imagery and varied adventures in an epic manner.  

That said, I didn’t have real high hopes for the movie for several reasons:

  • Hollywood struggles with storytelling, which C.S. Lewis excelled at.  It seems that you either start with a complex story that gets skimmed over, or start with a simple story that gets “jazzed up” with unnecessarry add-ins from the movie studios (see Spiderman 3, which killed that series/storyline).  The Dawn Treader would fall into the first category.
  • While The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe, by far the most popular of the books, was a solid movie, the follow up with Prince Caspian came across very “meh”, and very often sequels get caught in that downward spiral.
  • The franchise was also switching from being Disney-backed to being a part of 20th Century Fox, and changing directors, and you never know how that’s going to play out.
  • I read the book first.  I already knew what to expect and had images of how things should look.  Very rarely do movies live up to one’s imagination.

So, after watching the movie and hoping against hope, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader was still an OK movie.  It clearly lacked in storytelling depth (they spent about 12 seconds explaining why they were sailing into uncharted waters, and it felt like the characters were just jumping from one island to another), and the big fight scene was overly drawn out (you’d think someone would speak up and say “they spend more time fighting the giant serpent/bug thing than they do talking to each other…what is this, LOST?”), but it was sufficiently entertaining.

The two highlights for me were the early sword duel between Eustace and Reepicheep, which I found very amusing, and the final scenes, which did manage to depict the “edge of the world” by “Aslan’s country” almost exactly as I had imagined (my brain had no land, and a mirror-like wall of water).

In the end, I do have a hard time recommending Dawn Treader unless you’ve seen the previous movies, and are a fan of the books.  The movie is like the Cliff Notes version with every fifth word redacted, and that doesn’t make for a great standalone movie experience.

Nonetheless, I do hope they continue to move forward and create the entire series.  Word on the street is that The Magician’s Nephew is next on the docket, which is a great prelude to The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe and gives the whole backstory on Narnia, which should be interesting and possibly bring back those who may have been lost by the slow pace of Prince Caspian.  The Silver Chair would be another one that could be very interesting to see, which is more of an fantasy adventure in other parts of Narnia.  Let’s hope they can get a better grasp on those movies, and be able to do them justice in a 150-minute window.

May 292008
 

I enjoy the work of Michael Crichton. I've read most of what he's published, and I think his combination of science and imagination is fascinating.

The Andromeda Strain is one of his most understated works of suspense, as he puts a team of scientists in a high-security lab as they try to figure out what exactly killed off an entire small town in a matter of minutes and how to stop it before it kills more. It's an interesting mix of science, humanity and nature all put together in a solid novel.

Now, the book did get a movie treatment back in the day. I've seen it, and it sticks pretty closely to the book, but it's kinda hard to watch any more because the look of it is just so dated.

Well, recently A&E and Ridley Scott decided to try and turn it into a two-part, four hour TV movie with all the fixins. They even got a solid bunch of actors (Benjamin Bratt, Daniel Dae Kim and several others who have made a career of being on various TV shows). Even the special effects weren't bad for a made-for-a-cable-TV-channel movie.

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure the screenplay writer lost his copy of the book…

Maybe a quarter of what went on in this movie comes from anything found in the the original work. Instead of being a story about science, the unknown, and immense pressure, they turned the whole thing into a government conspiracy pseudo-science piece of crap. They even made the leap to wormholes and time travel (probably from Chrichton's Sphere) and nanoparticle communication in neural networks (probably from Crichton's Prey) and even stole the deep sea drilling protests from the Cloverfield backstory. It all turned into a hodge-podge of pure, unfettered crap.

If you've never read the book, this movie might even seem excusable. However, the story was so mutated and corrupted that it just ruined my night.

So, if you see this on TV, make sure to keep on passing by. You'll thank me later…




Jan 192008
 

Well, I just got back from seeing the highly anticipated Cloverfield monster movie, and it was definitely an interesting flick.  I really liked the perspective it was shot from and the situations they put the characters in.  Nothing was over-the-top phoney; the characters actually acted like people, which was refreshing.

It was also nice that the monster didn't stay hidden, like it has throughout the marketing campaign.  So, if you thought they might try and keep you in the dark about the monster, don't worry.  There's quite a few good shots of it.

cloverfield_posterThey even did a nice job of weaving in some of the background as you see clips of video that avoided being taped over the night of the attack.  They really helped to develop the main characters, which in turn helps to drive the story.

Even the ending was fine.  If you think about the text you see at the beginning about the film being recovered in Central Park (also found in several of the trailers), you already knew about what was going to happen.

However, if you're looking for answers and everything wrapped up in a neat little package (which I'm sure many of my fellow LOST fans can relate to), then you're not going to get it.  While it is nice to know that stuff (and hopefully all the Tagruato, Slusho and TIDOwave stuff eventually come to fruition and explain where the monster came from), but having the movie come from the perspective of someone experiencing the attack (not involved in it) and the fact that the movie was going to be two hours or less, you really couldn't expect all those details when they weren't all that relevant.

So, I definitely recommend going to see Cloverfield.  Just don't go in with the expectations that it will be the greatest monster movie ever.  After all, the movie really isn't even really about the monster, it's about the people.

However, it would be really awesome if they were to put together a sister movie that explains how the monster got there, and what happened to it after the end of Cloverfield.

May 292007
 

Pirates of the Caribbean 3Well, after three days of reading bad press and reviews, I caught a matinee of the third Pirates of the Caribean movie. Initially, upon leaving the theatre, I didn't think all the negative press was quite as called for. Yes, there was a lot that could have been done better given the acting talent involved, but at least it was entertaining.

And I held that view for a few more hours until the details started to haunt me. Honestly, there were just too many loose threads, plot holes, and indescrepancies for me to just simply overlook. And they were the result of disjointed storytelling, making one line regarding main character Jack Sparrow very ironic: "Do you think he plans ahead or just makes it up as he goes along?"

Here's a few of my biggest problem with the movie (some with the final two together, since they are invarably intertwined…WARNING: some spoilers involved):

  • The writers completely lost sight of the main storyline from the first movie (the young couple, Will and Elizabeth, doing whatever it took to persue love) and instead focused on the most entertaining character, Jack Sparrow. I can understand it to a point, but to doom Will to virtual banishment from the living, leave Elizabeth without her husband, and let Jack off the hook was inexcusable. That made this movie a tradgedy, and I'm not sure the writers even realized it.
  • The writers opened up too many side stories that never went anywhere, got closed or were even examined. What was the point of Will going to rescue his father from the Dutchman if his father was just going to stay there once released? When Calypso was released, all she did was create a whirlpool? Furthermore, what does a naiad from Greek mythology doing in a movie about pirates well over a thousand years later? What was the point of the priate council, especially if the result of their efforts was the anti-climatic Calypso pool? What killed the Cracken, the fearsome beast from the second movie that was simply found washed ashore an island?
  • Let's not outsmart ourselves here. Characters switched sides in this movie more often than a double agent.
  • I just have to say for all the Davey Jones' Locker scenes, and any scene where there was more than one Johnny Depp on the screen, I'm pretty sure the writers were high on something.
  • And for the rest of the movie, I'm pretty sure their ADD set in, because they weren't able to focus on any storyline for more than a few minutes.

In the end, if you can go see a movie and then immediately turn off your brain, you'll probably enjoy this third, and hopefully final installment (though they left the door open again…Undecided), in the Pirates of the Carribean series. However, if you think about this movie at all, you'll likely be like me, and wonder how they could have gone so wrong after making a very good movie in the original, The Curse of the Black Pearl.

May 052007
 

Hotel RwandaI just got done watching Hotel Rwanda, and I must admit that it was excellent. It deserved every bit of acclaim that it got and then some, and it should be required viewing for anyone living in a civilized nation.

Many times, it can be hard to understand the infighting that goes on in a number of African nations. ER tried to do Darfur justice in the fall, but still felt disconnected from the whole situation because it was outsiders going into the situation. However, Hotel Rwanda tells the story of the pain of a genocidal situation from the perspective of a man who was caught up in the middle, and really throws you into the middle of everything.

Oddly enough, the whole situation revolved around the distinctions of Hutu and Tutsi, labels which originate from european colonists who marked some Africans as genetically superior to others. And just like Christian denominations, there are people who will die believing that their label is the best one, and there are those who don't see the distinctions as being signifigant at all. However, the situation in Rwanda was clearly carried out to an extreme.

In all, there were two things about this movie that hit me most:

  1. This only happened 13 years ago, while I was about to start High School, and I don't remeber hearing a single thing about it then and nearly ONE MILLION PEOPLE DIED in the conflict. Clearly, this says something about our, and our media's, priorities.

  2. The lengths that these people had to go to to get assistance and even get to a refugee camp was mind-boggling. However, the citizens of Western countries were pulled out of the situation as soon as possible.

Take the time to see this movie, and you'll be glad you did. I may never watch it again, because it was so hard to watch the first time, but I don't think I'll ever forget it.

 

Aug 282006
 

IdlewildSaturday night I got a chance to check out the new movie Idlewild, starring the guys from Outkast. Even thought I had read a good review of the movie on Friday, I have to admit that I wasn't expecting anything more than a "fun" movie.

Boy, was I wrong. While there was a fair amount of comedy in the movie, there was also plenty of action and drama. Even the ending should at least sadden the most jaded of individuals, if not induce tears.

And the thing I was most impressed with was the acting of the Outkast duo. Both seemed to take on roles that did not seem to fit their musical personalities, and they pulled them off flawlessly. And their music blended into the movie well. While definately not time specific music (with the movie being set during prohibition), the music seemed to fit with most everything in the mood and atmosphere of the movie.

So if you're looking for a movie to check out this week, try Idlewild on for size. You'll be much happier you did than if you wasted your cash on Snakes on a Plane.

Aug 072006
 

Talladega NightsSaturday night I got a chance to get out and see Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby starring Will Ferrell. I was already in the mood for a stupid-funny movie, and this flick definately didn't disappoint. In fact, it was the hardest I've laughed at a movie in the theatre in as long as I can remember. And it's not just a "guy movie". My wife was also laughing so hard she was almost crying.

Once again, Will Ferrell was brilliant, and the supporting cast really held up their end. All in all, they managed to keep the movie from feeling like a spoof on a profession (like Anchorman: The Legend Of Ron Burgandy), but instead created a good story with many hillarious moments. I found myself even rooting for him to succeed. Not many movies manage to succeed do that and keep me laughing. Plus, it's got a solid soundtrack!

Talladega Nights is well worth the trip to the local megaplex and plopping down your $9, or $15 if you can't escape that sweet, sweet aroma of buttered popcorn (I'm not sure what they put on it, but I'm pretty sure it has to be illegal because it's addicting).

Let the countdown to the DVD begin!

May 082006
 

Your mission, should you choose to accept it:Mission Impossible

  • Make a movie that is actually worth the $9 I'd have to pay and go see.
  • When you make a movie that isn't worth that, then don't complain that people like me didn't go see it.

This industry will self-destruct in 10 years.

This has always been one of my pet peeves with the movie and music industries. They have this bizarre sense of entitlement, and when we don't buy a poor product of theirs, they always blame the consumers. So when I don't throw down $15 for Brittney Spears screaching into a microphone, it's because I'm a fickle consumer and not because the music is terrible.

So, in a year when gas prices are already through the roof, movie companies can't understand why that might make me less likely to go see a movie of questionable quality (especially now that Cruise has publicly proclaimed his insanity). As far as Mission: Impossible goes, I really enjoyed the first edition of the movie with Cruise because there were a lot of mind games going on along with the action. Unfortunately the sequel became Ethan Hunt Goes To The Special Effects Show with no plot. After that, I have no interest in a third edition.

Oh, and if the studios believe that Cruise and his scientology antics have had no effect on the ticket sales are kidding themselves anyway. He's alienated a large number of his fans over tha past year.

But the industry as a whole needs to adjust, or it will find itself as a dinosaur in a progressively modern world.

Apr 142006
 

I just wanted to do a quick highlight of the recently released DVD for WallaceWallace and Gromit and Gromit – The Curse of the Were-Rabbit. This was a movie that I originally had low expectations for when I saw it in the theatre, but since it has become one of my favorites. And no, it's not an "Easter movie", but the rabbits are actually part of the plot.

With a great combination of story and humor, this is a great movie for children and adults alike. In addition, the outstanding claymation is well worth the viewing. The rewatchability factor of Were-Rabbit is also very high. Each time I watch this movie, I catch a new pun or joke that is subtly inserted in the background, props, or dialogue.

If you're a fan of humor or of just good, clean family-oriented movies, then Were-Rabbit is definately a movie you should check out. If nothing else, you'll probably get a kick out of the cute but crazy bunnies!

Mar 102006
 

Bad Movie SalesAh, the great minds of our time who reside in Hollywood are once again complaining about poor box office returns after a fall of 6% from last years sales. And this was in a year where ticket prices rose 3.2%! So, in essence, they lost about 9% of their viewers.

How could this possible happen? Just look at all the gems that are in the theatres right now:

  • Failure To Launch – A movie about a guy who lives with his mama. Yea…I'll pass on that one.
  • The Hills Have Eyes – All I know is that it's a horror movie and the only ad I saw for it was a poster in the theatre.
  • The Shaggy Dog – Been there, done that.
  • 16 Blocks – Looked like it had some promise, but I'm not spending $7.50 on a "maybe".
  • Aquamarine – Let's see…I'm a male older than 13, so no thank you.
  • Ultraviolet – Think The Matrix, with all the effects and none of the plot.

The list goes on, but those are the 6 that are being pushed the most right now. So, I think it's pretty clear that the problem is that too many lousy movies are being made right now. Too many people have been disapointed in the theatres now and are being more discressionary. However, when the public has changed it's viewing habits, Hollywood has not changed and tried to make the experience more worthwhile, but instead continued to do more of the same. And then they complain about the fall in revenue.

Well Hollywood, here's some suggestions that might get you back on your feet:

  1. Make Better Movies – Seriously, instead of spending a billion dollars on making 30 questionable movies, spend it on making 10-15 quality movies with the best writers, directors, actors, and production values you can.
  2. Make New Movies – I'm almost ready to hear an announcement for the Matrix being redone next year because it did well the first time around. Some remakes are fine because they're a generation removed and out of date, but others are still great movies (like The Shaggy Dog and Herbie The Love Bug) and don't need to be redone. Many times, this just makes people upset if the original was a great movie (like The Longest Yard).
  3. Don't Force Your Agenda – Can we cast more movies with people who can act instead of the star of the hour? If the actor/actress becomes a joke or forgotten between the release of the movie and the DVD release, then they probably weren't worth having in the first place.
  4. Advertise What Your Movie Is About - If I have no clue what a movie is about from it's ads, then I'm probably not going to go see it. If I go to see a movie and felt mislead by the ads, I'll probably avoid those types of movies in the future.

Ok, I think that's enough to get you all started. Now straighten up before I give up on the theatre and subscribe to Netflix!