The movie gets off to a wonky start with Superman talking to camera - not a bad idea itself but he's got this wonky face thing happening which I gather was because the CGI'd out the actor's beard. Then it gets worse with a cover version of "Everybody Knows" which smells of try hard cool for trailers, and a silly slow mo sequence of a fat bald man smashing up a store which I think is meant to show disintegration of society.
The film doesn't work. It feels just silly - Wonder Woman and Batman and Aquaman. I didn't buy that they lived in the same world and knew each other. It was tired and uninvolving.
The villain was so dull - some creature who wants a box for world domination. No complexity, no shade. A bunch of Amazons get killed. Then underground people. I did worry for the Russian family. There's random terrorist attacks like the silly one led by the Game of Thrones guy who is beaten by Wonder Woman.
Ben Affleck looked tired. Jeremy Irons is miscast - I don't buy him as a servant; the lacks the warmth someone like Michael Caine or Billy Connolly would have brought to the role. Gai Gadot tries but struggles without a decent emotive plot like rebelling against her family or falling in love or clashing with the new world. Amy Adams feels wasted. Diane Lane looks wasted.
Ezra Miller is lively as the Flash - he at least has a clear relationship with the others, clingy with Batman, a crush on Wonder Woman, bewildered by Acquaman. I wasn't sure how Batman felt about anyone. I guess it was cool Acquaman mocked Batman - the film could've used more of this interpersonal stuff. But he kind of stuck out in the group. Jason Moama is okay in the role - his character feels weird.
Ray Fisher isn't very good as Cyborg but he had the best character - a teenager moody and lonely because he was half machine. That's a great emotional core around which to build a film - surely he would be more annoyed at dad (Joe Morton)? But he doesn't get enough screen time.
A film that tries to do too much and none of it well.
Monday, July 16, 2018
Tuesday, July 10, 2018
Movie review - "Dr Strange" (2016) **1/2
Solid Marvel entry benefits from a strong origin story - brilliant surgeon gets injured and becomes super hero - an ideal star in Benedict Cumberbatch, and excellent support cast including Rachel McAdams and Tilda Swinton.
Cumberbatch goes off to a mystical land and learns super powers - you'll feel as though you've seen it before. The ending, with Strange using a time loop, was quite clever. There's plenty of spectacle and color. It's hard to care as the film went on. The cast are very likeable but it's noisy rather than moving.
Cumberbatch goes off to a mystical land and learns super powers - you'll feel as though you've seen it before. The ending, with Strange using a time loop, was quite clever. There's plenty of spectacle and color. It's hard to care as the film went on. The cast are very likeable but it's noisy rather than moving.
Movie review - "Ready Player One" (2018) **
I wanted to like this, I did. I'm trying not to be a grumpy old man. Is it because I'm old? Would I simply have not liked this if I was twelve.
There are some good bits - the visuals are amazing and clever. Some of the action scenes, the ones where you're in a video game, are very good. The effects people did an excellent job. I liked the nuttiness of The Shining sequence.
But I didn't like it. The future the film is set in is depressing - full of grime and slums and everyone is desperate for escape by playing video games. Instead of improving water or jobs or life (or even just good old fashioned over throwing an evil government) the stakes are about ensuring access to the main game people play - and that an Evil Corporation don't take it over and... charge money.
Spielberg seems to struggle to get the tone right - it's as if he's second guessing himself as director. I got confused by the pop culture stuff - it was meant to be stuff that inspired Mark Rylance, right? But it was such a grab bag of stuff - music and The Shining and so on. It didn't feel as though it had any thematic consistency (maybe I'm missing something).
The heroes were depressing - kids who play video games all day and are obsessed with the Steve Jobs like guy played by Rylance who was a nerdy idiot. And really, no one else figured out clues.
I wasn't wild about the acting. Tye Sheridan was annoying; they throw in an overacting aunt and her lover who beats up Sheridan. Mark Rylance's performance was ticks and wigs and gestures. Simon Pegg doesn't save the day. Ben Mendhelson does okay in bits but Hannah John Kamen goes over the top and when she and Mendo get together it all gets silly and campy. I did like the other kids, such as Olivia Cooke (she's flawed! she has a birthmark!)
It was just kind of depression. Poor script with endless narration, insufficient dramatisation.
There are some good bits - the visuals are amazing and clever. Some of the action scenes, the ones where you're in a video game, are very good. The effects people did an excellent job. I liked the nuttiness of The Shining sequence.
But I didn't like it. The future the film is set in is depressing - full of grime and slums and everyone is desperate for escape by playing video games. Instead of improving water or jobs or life (or even just good old fashioned over throwing an evil government) the stakes are about ensuring access to the main game people play - and that an Evil Corporation don't take it over and... charge money.
Spielberg seems to struggle to get the tone right - it's as if he's second guessing himself as director. I got confused by the pop culture stuff - it was meant to be stuff that inspired Mark Rylance, right? But it was such a grab bag of stuff - music and The Shining and so on. It didn't feel as though it had any thematic consistency (maybe I'm missing something).
The heroes were depressing - kids who play video games all day and are obsessed with the Steve Jobs like guy played by Rylance who was a nerdy idiot. And really, no one else figured out clues.
I wasn't wild about the acting. Tye Sheridan was annoying; they throw in an overacting aunt and her lover who beats up Sheridan. Mark Rylance's performance was ticks and wigs and gestures. Simon Pegg doesn't save the day. Ben Mendhelson does okay in bits but Hannah John Kamen goes over the top and when she and Mendo get together it all gets silly and campy. I did like the other kids, such as Olivia Cooke (she's flawed! she has a birthmark!)
It was just kind of depression. Poor script with endless narration, insufficient dramatisation.
Book review - "Five Weeks in a Balloon" by Jules Verne (1863)
Verne's first hit novel hasn't aged as well as his other classics, though it has some good bits. There's three characters - Dr Ferguson, Dick Kennedy and Kennedy's black servant Joe... who is admittedly a "yes massa" type but also gets to be heroic.
The basic plot is travelling over Africa in a balloon - but there are some lively set pieces: rescuing a missionary, Joe getting sucked down by quicksand, a missionary is rescued, Joe is rescued. There's lots of description of the places they travel and the balloon - this quasi-documentary approach (for lac of a better term) I think sold the piece as more realistic to viewers.
So some good bits but not that good.
The basic plot is travelling over Africa in a balloon - but there are some lively set pieces: rescuing a missionary, Joe getting sucked down by quicksand, a missionary is rescued, Joe is rescued. There's lots of description of the places they travel and the balloon - this quasi-documentary approach (for lac of a better term) I think sold the piece as more realistic to viewers.
So some good bits but not that good.
Sunday, July 01, 2018
Movie review - "Dark Mountain" (1944) **1/2
This starts off with stock footage of burning forests and I thought it would be a typical Pine Thomas flick set in the world of a macho profession - to wit, working as a forest ranger and involve fire fighting. But it isn't really.
It is about two men in love with the one girl, their favourite story - here played by Robert Lowery (not a bad leading man, stepping in for Richard Arlen presumably) and Regis Toomey (replacing Chester Morris) and Ellen Drew (stepping in for Jean Parker presumably).
The difference here is the girl has married one of the guys - Toomey. But it's okay because Toomey is involved in criminal activity and has killed some people (including Elisha Cook Jnr!). So he goes on the run and most of the film's running time - the entire second half really - consists of Drew helping Toomey hide, Lowery helping Drew thinking she's alone and not noticing Toomey is hiding in the next room.
So this is more an "on the lam" type movie. (To save money? A lot of scenes of just two-three people in a room).
It's not bad - the acting is professional and the acting brisk. I thought the climax would be more forest-y but is really just a car driving fast down a road. The film ducks drama in a few places - no final fight between Lowery and Toomey, Drew kind of goes along with what Toomey does and changes sides out of opportunism than anything else (felt she needed to be more active) and I was surprised gangsters didn't go after Toomey at the end - that would've been a good complication.
Anyway, it was fine.
It is about two men in love with the one girl, their favourite story - here played by Robert Lowery (not a bad leading man, stepping in for Richard Arlen presumably) and Regis Toomey (replacing Chester Morris) and Ellen Drew (stepping in for Jean Parker presumably).
The difference here is the girl has married one of the guys - Toomey. But it's okay because Toomey is involved in criminal activity and has killed some people (including Elisha Cook Jnr!). So he goes on the run and most of the film's running time - the entire second half really - consists of Drew helping Toomey hide, Lowery helping Drew thinking she's alone and not noticing Toomey is hiding in the next room.
So this is more an "on the lam" type movie. (To save money? A lot of scenes of just two-three people in a room).
It's not bad - the acting is professional and the acting brisk. I thought the climax would be more forest-y but is really just a car driving fast down a road. The film ducks drama in a few places - no final fight between Lowery and Toomey, Drew kind of goes along with what Toomey does and changes sides out of opportunism than anything else (felt she needed to be more active) and I was surprised gangsters didn't go after Toomey at the end - that would've been a good complication.
Anyway, it was fine.
Thoughts on Ralph Meeker
Ralph Meeker isn't a very well known name to buffs today unless you're a fan of Kiss Me Deadly. At one stage though he had a real buzz around him - he replaced Brando on stage in Streetcar Named Desire, and had a key role in Mr Roberts on Broadway as well as the lead role in Picnic (with Paul Newman supporting him).
Why did never become a star?
He was a burly tough guy in a decade when that was a plus. Other Brand replacements, Jack Palance and Anthony Quinn, became famous. Meeker's Picnic co star Paul Newman became famous.
Why not Meeker?
Well, they did try - MGM hired him to a contract in the early 50s. His starring vehicles did not perform well (unlike say Palance who got lucky with Sudden Fear and Shane right off the bat).
Maybe he was difficult, but I've got no proof of that.
I also think maybe he lacked a certain... affability. He seemed mean. He never had say Brando's or Newman's on screen gentleness. Maybe he could've and I haven't seen it. Maybe it was just role selection. Too many guest shots on TV not enough solid directors.
But it is a puzzle. He has his fans - Quentin Tarantino liked that Aldo Ray/Meeker/Brian Keith type. But Meeker's career never seemed to hit even Aldo Ray heights.
Anyway, still, made some great movies - anyone would be happy to have Kiss Me Deadly and Paths of Glory on their resume.
Why did never become a star?
He was a burly tough guy in a decade when that was a plus. Other Brand replacements, Jack Palance and Anthony Quinn, became famous. Meeker's Picnic co star Paul Newman became famous.
Why not Meeker?
Well, they did try - MGM hired him to a contract in the early 50s. His starring vehicles did not perform well (unlike say Palance who got lucky with Sudden Fear and Shane right off the bat).
Maybe he was difficult, but I've got no proof of that.
I also think maybe he lacked a certain... affability. He seemed mean. He never had say Brando's or Newman's on screen gentleness. Maybe he could've and I haven't seen it. Maybe it was just role selection. Too many guest shots on TV not enough solid directors.
But it is a puzzle. He has his fans - Quentin Tarantino liked that Aldo Ray/Meeker/Brian Keith type. But Meeker's career never seemed to hit even Aldo Ray heights.
Anyway, still, made some great movies - anyone would be happy to have Kiss Me Deadly and Paths of Glory on their resume.
Movie review - "Tropic Zone" (1953) ***
Bright, colourful "south of the border" banana plantation film in the mode of Torrid Zone. Try to put aside thoughts of what the United Fruit Corporation got up to and enjoy Rhonda Fleming have one of her best roles and give one of her best performances as a woman who inherits a banana plantation and goes for lots of swims and showers (I guess it is the tropics).
Ronald Reagan isn't exactly the ideal Mr Hard-bitten Adventurer in the third world - too affable - but the affability has its pleasures and he and Fleming make an excellent team; they have real camaraderie and chemistry. At first I thought it seemed a little suss Reagan couldn't get it up for the hot local who wanted him (Estelita) but he does seem to like Fleming.
For the most part this was enjoyable - lots of color and movement and shady characters hanging out in bars. Noah Beery has the third lead as an alcoholic and there's a surprising number of song and dance numbers from Estelita. It slows down towards the end when it really should speed up and there's too many scenes of rallying extras. But I didn't mind it.
There's some extra fun too in having Reagan play a character on the run from the political rulers of another country, and having to whip up the local natives to help them serve the interests of an American fruit company.
Ronald Reagan isn't exactly the ideal Mr Hard-bitten Adventurer in the third world - too affable - but the affability has its pleasures and he and Fleming make an excellent team; they have real camaraderie and chemistry. At first I thought it seemed a little suss Reagan couldn't get it up for the hot local who wanted him (Estelita) but he does seem to like Fleming.
For the most part this was enjoyable - lots of color and movement and shady characters hanging out in bars. Noah Beery has the third lead as an alcoholic and there's a surprising number of song and dance numbers from Estelita. It slows down towards the end when it really should speed up and there's too many scenes of rallying extras. But I didn't mind it.
There's some extra fun too in having Reagan play a character on the run from the political rulers of another country, and having to whip up the local natives to help them serve the interests of an American fruit company.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)