My favorite director, Ridley Scott, seems to be rebooting his resume by revisiting his previous films – starting at the beginning (never mind The Duellists). Ridley’s next film, Prometheus, was originally a prequel to one of my favorite films Alien, and once he’s finished with that he’ll apparently be revisiting Blade Runner. It is unknown whether the film will be a remake, reboot, prequel, sequel, or whatever else Hollywood is asking for these days, and it is also unknown whether Harrison Ford will be involved.
The Dark Knight Rises, The Avengers, Man of Steel, Bond 23, World War Z, Django Unchained. These are just a few of the films that I’m looking forward to in 2012, what appears to be an uprecedented year for my bank account in terms of movie ticket purchases. However, Ridley Scott’s Prometheus is, without a doubt, my most anticipated film of 2012.
Yesterday, Comic-Con got its first look clips from Prometheus, and while I’m still waiting for those clips to hit the internet, we did get a little bit of information about the film. Scott told Comic-Con attendees (in a video conference) that Prometheus was shot entirely in 3D, and that he liked it so much he’ll never shoot another scene again in 2D. I am no defender of 3D but in Scott I trust, so I’m expecting Prometheus to look incredible. One concern I do have is the use of light, or lack there of, to create tone. Evident by the recent rants about the projector lenses, 3D works best with high contrast and bright lighting; not something we should be expecting from a Ridley Scott sci-fi picture. But if Ridley Scott can get so excited about the 3D of Prometheus to proclaim he’ll never work without it again, I can’t help but get excited.
When James Mangold was announced as the official director to take on The Wolverine, the next installment in the X-Men franchise, his work on Walk the Line, Girl Interrupted, and 3:10 to Yuma were often mentioned in the same breath. While the often unmentioned Cop Land may not be his best or most recognized work, it deserves to be mentioned as one of Mangold’s many great movies. Cop Land is the nickname for Garrison, NJ a small suburb of New York city that is the home to a number of NYPD officers. The sheriff of the town Freddy Heflin, idolizes most of his constituents and their profession, but is limited to his role as Sheriff because he is deaf in one ear due to an accident. His opinion of the officers and his abilities soon come into question as he starts to uncover corruption and conspiracy amongst them. Aided by NYPD Internal Affairs officer Mo Tilden (Robert DeNiro), Freddy has to restore order to Cop Land.
The only way Stallone knows how.
Mangold put together a phenomenal cast for this film that works really well as an ensemble, supporting Stallone in the leading role. Throughout the film these characters felt really close to one another, and as an audience member it is easy to connect with their group and believe they are all neighbors and coworkers. In addition to Stallone and DeNiro, who are outsiders to the ensemble due to their characters’ role; Harvey Keitel, Ray Liotta, Peter Berg, Michael Rapaport, Frank Vincent , Robert Patrick , Noah Emmerich, John Spencer, and Janeane Garofalo round out the cast.
This is a surprising turn for Stallone, who plays a much more subdued and humble character than he’s typically known for. He does well in the role but his physical stature at times did not feel it suited the role, ironic because he actually gained forty pounds for the part. Still, it may be Stallone’s best performance to date; it’s a shame he hasn’t done more roles with this much depth over the course of his career.
Then again, who needs depth...
Cop Land is a movie that can be enjoyed through repeat viewings, because it is technically sound but also very entertaining. While still at the beginning of his directorial and writing career, it is clear that Mangold took notes from his predecessors (Martin Scorcese in particular) and adapted those notes well into his own work. While not a masterpiece, Cop Land is a great film that is definitely worth a viewing on Netflix.
There is a lot we’ve yet to post this week and will be coming to you soon (New to Blu Ray, 2 Take Two’s, and a WFR), we promise. However, I thought that this took precedent as a lot of new trailers have been released on the internet, one making quite a buzz. Here’s a look:
I’m not too familiar with the series of novels from which this film is derived, but there have been a lot of people petitioning for this film in one way or another for about 8o years. There seem to be a lot of elements from other films and stories including: The Book of Eli, Prince of Persia, and Avatar. The director/writer, Andrew Stanton has had a pretty succesful run of animated films for Disney/Pixar so it will be interesting to see if he can translate that success to live action.
I’ve been waiting for Guy Ritchie’s follow up to 2009’s Sherlock Holmes since I first saw it in theaters and we finally get a first look here. In fact, I look forward to anything Guy Ritchie directs. Though Daniel Day Lewis won’t be appearing as Professor Moriarty as originally rumored, Jared Harris seems suitable as an alternative, and the cast still remains stellar. One face that is featured prominently in the trailer is Noomi Rapace, who seems to be making her breakout in America with Sherlock Holmes and Prometheus after her turn as Lisbeth Salander in the Sweedish version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and its 2 sequels (Rooney Mara will play the same role in David Fincher’s American version later this year).
The prequel to arguably the greatest horror movie ever made (though I’d argue against it, but not strongly), 2011’s The Thing chronicles the expidition of the Norwegian team that’s heavily referenced in John Carpenter’s 1981 film of the same name. It appears from the trailer that they stayed true to Carpenter’s version and made sure the details of this film matched the references from his film. One subtle not I noticed from the trailer, they even made sure to keep the old school flamethrowers that Carpenter featured. Even though it’s sure to be heavier on the blood and gore to appease the new generation, this film looks like it could be a worthy successor to the original.
BONUS:
If you haven’t heard by now, the first teaser for the highly anticipated The Dark Knight Rises will preview prior to screenings of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2. So far only bootlegged versions of the teaser are on the net and the quality of them are poor, so I won’t include it here. Nothing about the plot of the film is revealed the teaser but it does include brief glimpses of Bane, Selina Kyle, and Commisioner Gordan in the hospital.
Christopher Meloni, of Law & Order: SVU fame will be joining the increasingly impressive cast list for one of next years most anticipated films Man of Steel. Meloni recently relinquished his longtime role on NBC’s popular drama and looks to be making a smooth transition back into full length features. Accompanying Meloni in the next Superman film will be Henry Cavill, Michael Shannon, Amy Adams, Kevin Costner, Diane Lane, Russell Crowe, and Julia Ormond.
While Deadline announced the news on Friday, they did not have any insight into which role Meloni would play. This of course lead to various speculations, the most obvious being that he would possibly play Lex Luthor. However, Latino Review is now reporting that Meloni’s role would be as a general. No other specifics were released about the role, like whether this general would be Human or Kryptonian, but that does suggest that the role of Lex Luthor is either absent from this film, or still up for grabs.
Meaning Mad Men fans will still be petitioning for this to happen
As far as Christopher Meloni’s role is concerned, I have my own speculation. There is one military General already well established within the Superman lore, General Sam Lane. In addition to being a high ranking military officer, Sam Lane also happens to be Lois Lane’s father. His involvement in a fight against a Kryptonian invasion led by General Zod (Shannon) would provide more conflict and emotional depth to the Lois Lane character (Amy Adams) and possibly also provide emotional conflict for Superman (Cavill). With every casting announcement I get more and more excited to see this film, and it is closely battling Ridley Scott’s Prometheus for my most anticipated movie of 2012. Man of Steel is directed by Zack Snyder and is scheduled for release in December of 2012. Now excuse me, I’m gonna go fondle my sweaters.
There are a lot of home video releases the past two weeks, so just like the last entry, I’ll keep the posts brief for the interest of time. Here we go:
Synopsis from IMDB: A married man is granted the opportunity to have an affair by his wife. Joined in the fun by his best pal, things get a little out of control when both wives start engaging in extramarital activities as well.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: You can check out our Take Two on Hall Passhere.
Synopsis from IMDB: A Marine Staff Sergeant who has just had his retirement approved goes back into the line of duty in order to assist a 2nd Lieutenant and his platoon as they fight to reclaim the city of Los Angeles from alien invaders.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: You can check out our Take Two on Battle: L.A.here.
Synopsis from IMDB: Set in a medieval village that is haunted by a werewolf, a young girl falls for an orphaned woodcutter, much to her family’s displeasure.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: It still baffles me that Gary Oldman would accept such a role. That being said, he is the only thing that remotely interests me about this movie.
Synopsis from IMDB: FBI agent Malcolm Turner and his stepson Trent go undercover at an all-girls performing arts school after Trent witnesses a murder.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: I will avoiding this movie like the plague and I suggest you do the same.
Synopsis from IMDB: A man awakens from a coma, only to discover that someone has taken on his identity and that no one, (not even his wife), believes him. With the help of a young woman, he sets out to prove who he is.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: Another film I missed during its theatrical run, I loved Taken so I’ll definitely be adding this to my queue.
Synopsis from IMDB: Back in middle school after summer vacation, Greg Heffley and his older brother Rodrick must deal with their parents’ misguided attempts to have them bond.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: I actually enjoyed the first film, but this sequel was and unnecessary, rushed, cash grab.
Synopsis from IMDB: Tim Lippe has no idea what he’s in for when he’s sent to Cedar Rapids, Iowa to represent his company at an annual insurance convention, where he soon finds himself under the “guidance” of three convention veterans.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: As a limited release, I wasn’t able to track this down in theaters, but it is a film I’m excited to see now that it is on Blu Ray.
Synopsis from IMDB: Captures a generational moment – young people on the cusp of truly growing up, tiring of their reflexive cynicism, each in their own ways struggling to connect and define what it means to love and be loved.
Starring: Ryan Reynolds, Blake Lively, Peter Sarsgaard, Mark Strong
Director: Martin Campbell
Chris’ Take: Green Lantern is the latest film to delve into the superhero genre, whose returns seem to be diminishing with every reboot and reimagining, especially when it comes to some of the lesser known heroes. While Green Lantern is one of the most intricate of comic book series, and is popular among comic book fans, it never really gained appeal outside of that, and Warner Bros. did their best to bring it to that wider audience.
Ryan Reynolds stars as Hal Jordan, a hot shot pilot whose father died flying test planes when he was younger. When an alien life form crash lands on earth and hands him a mysterious green ring and lantern, his life is turned upside down. He is whisked away to the planet Oa and is inducted into the Green Lantern Corps, a group of intergalactic peace keepers, who inform him that the ring allows the wearer anything that they can imagine and that the ring chooses someone without fear to carry it. Hal is placed as protector of Earth and soon has to deal with the rising threat of Hector Hammond (Peter Sarsgaard), a professor who was infected by yellow energy found in the crashed aliens’ body, and also the greatest threat the entire galaxy has ever faced, Parallax, a mysterious lifeform that preys on fear.
Kind of like Fox News.
The writers certainly tried to cram as much as they could in the two hours or so that the movie ran. They tried to squeeze as much mythology and background about the Green Lantern Corps and the rest of the galaxy as possible in before actually being able to tell the story of Hal Jordan. Then, with what time they had left, they tried to build an extra villain into the story to occupy some time before Hal had to fight off Parallax and save the world. The structure felt very uneven and it seemed like there were gaps of time that were unaccounted for which made for a flimsy story when it could have been enriched.
Going into the film, I thought that the previews made the CGI look distracting, and while there times when it seemed overbearing, once you enter the world of Green Lantern, it is much more acceptable. While the graphics for the film were stunning, I thought that the extent of the ring’s power wasn’t portrayed to its full potential. Martin Campbell (Goldeneye, Mask of Zorro, Casino Royale) is an accomplished action director, and while he shot the scenes with visual flair, he failed to live up to the expectations that I had for him. With Goldeneye he had a knack for using over-the-top action sequences to entertain an audience, and Green Lantern seemed like a great opportunity for him to return to that and get away with it a bit more, but he seemed to rush each action scene as opposed to taking his time and putting his excessive budget to good use.
Ryan Reynolds did a formidable job as Hal Jordan, bringing a little bit of humor to the role as well. Peter Sarsgaard really let his freak flag fly as Hector Hammond, and it was enjoyable to watch him finally completely let loose, but he was in the movie less than I anticipated. They didn’t introduce him until 30 minutes into the film, and then when it came time for him to realize his superhuman powers he hardly got to use them before he had to make way for the even bigger villain, making his role seem unnecessary. Blake Lively, while I praised her work in The Town last fall, I have to say that they probably put a cardboard cutout of an attractive woman in there and there would’ve been the same amount of sincerity to the love story between her and Hal.
"Oh Hal, I like love you and stuff." "Get off me, woman."
All in all it wasn’t as bad as I was led to believe going into it, and maybe that’s why I was able to sit back and enjoy it a little bit more. It certainly is not among any of the greatest superhero films, it is distinctly average in just about every aspect, but I wouldn’t call it “bad” either. If anything, it left me hoping to see more of this series to see if they can move on from back story to make a richer story, which they set up extremely well by already making Sinestro (Mark Strong) a developed character, and handing him a yellow ring. I think since I was more interested in seeing the conflict between Sinestro and Hal develop, I will be more interested in Green Lantern 2 (already greenlighted) than I was in watching this film.
OVERALL: C+/B-
Pac’s Take: D.C. comics doesn’t bring their comics to the big screen nearly as much as Marvel does, and as a fan of their work more so than Marvel, I’m always excited to see a new film. This is the first time in the history of cinema where we’ve had the technological capability to bring the Green Lantern to live-action movies and as a first effort, it wasn’t terrible. The biggest concern that I had coming into the film was that the focus on the visual effects would hinder the development of the story of Hal Jordan becoming the Green Lantern. I don’t think that I was wrong about that this assumption either, while there were times that the film impressed me with its story development, I often felt cheated by its lack of depth. Hal Jordan didnt’ seem to be any different from many other superheros we’ve seen hit theaters recently, but his comic book character is one of the more complex.
As Chris mentioned above, I took issue with some of the time gaps, suggesting there may have been some very important scenes left on the cutting room floor. For instance, there was one scene where Hal, as the Green Lantern, showed up at Oa coincidentally at the perfect time to talk Sinestro down (I won’t go into further detail). More importantly, the movie suggested a friendship between Hammond and Hal Jordan, as well as a love triangle between them and Carol Ferris (Lively), but the relationships were never explained beyond a passing hello between the characters. For the general public who is not a fan of the comic, these relationships are foreign and needed to be developed better, I actually thought the film could have benefited from 15 more minutes and this was most likely a case of the studio trying to keep the run time under 2 hours.
In the first scene of the film I was a little put off by the graphics, but once actual human actors were introduced the film began to feel more grounded and my concerns were put to rest.
Like gingers, animated lifeforms have no soul.
Ryan Reynolds did a fine job as Hal Jordan, however his face and character may be oversaturating the superhero market because at times I had a hard time seeing the character and not the actor. Peter Sarsgaard was definitely the most entertaining to watch on-screen and it is a shame that Hector Hammond didn’t get more screen time. While Chris’s least favorite casting decision may have been Blake Lively, I was extremely distracted by the casting of Tim Robbins as Senator Hammond. There’s not enough movie magic in the world to make me believe that Tim Robbins (52) could be the father of Peter Sarsgard (40). While this disparity in age may work in an episode of Teen Mom, the disgruntled father-son relationship between the two did not work.
This seems like as good a time as any for a paternity test
On a final note, the fanboy in me was geeking out to see Angela Bassett as Amanda Waller. For those of you unfamiliar with the character (potential future spoiler alert), Amanda Waller is a major villain in the D.C. universe and becomes the leader of both the Suicide Squad and Checkmate (as the White Queen). Hopefully we’ll see her in future installments of the Green Lantern and possibly in other D.C. franchises.
It is no secret my love for horror films and the Scream franchise in particular. Going to the midnight showing of Scream 4 and watching Ghostface terrorize a new group of teens, as well as some franchise favorites, may be my movie-going experience of 2011. That experience may take on a bit more nostalgic importance now that Scream 4 appears to be the last installment of the current franchise.
As far as modern horror films, particularly as far as sequels and slashers go, Scream 4 was a cut above the rest. Arguably the best Scream film since the original (though Rotten Tomatoes suggests Scream 2 is superior), Scream 4 revitalized the self-aware and all but replaced the panned Scream 3. However, money talks in Hollywood and Scream 4‘s poor box office showing thus far has left the future of Scream 5 about as promising as one of Ghostface’s victims. Rumor is that Dimension plans on ending the Scream franchise here, for the moment.
Well I guess that answers that one.
For a franchise that reveled in being “meta” and depending on its irony to keep the viewer engaged, it is being dealt a bit of irony itself. The disappointing revenue from this latest Scream film support the trend that horror remakes have a much higher rate of success than franchise sequels, suggesting that if we do see Ghostface again on-screen it will be in the form of a remake. Isn’t this exactly what Scream 4 was trying to avoid by mocking the current craze?
If there is, in fact, no Scream 5 in the future, let’s hope that the Weinsteins and Dimension let the franchise rest without a reboot.
Synopsis from IMDB: As Harry races against time and evil to destroy the Horcruxes, he uncovers the existence of three most powerful objects in the wizarding world: the Deathly Hallows.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: The release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1 to home video will probably be the ramp up to the marketing campaign for the release of …Part 2 to release this summer. The first installment of this two part chapter was a well made, engaging film for franchise die-hards and casual fans alike. Those who want to watch or re-watch part 1 before heading to theaters for the finale of the Harry Potter saga will make up most of this DVD/Blu-Ray’s buyers, but is likely to do pretty well. For those of you die-hard fans who can wait, however, you may be better served waiting for the 2nd part to release on Blu-Ray, as you’ll probably be able to get a collector’s set with both films. You can read our Take Two of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1 by clicking here.
Add Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1 to your Netflix Queue.
Synopsis from IMDB: The story of King George VI of Britain, his impromptu ascension to the throne and the speech therapist who helped the unsure monarch become worthy of it.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: The King’s Speech was one of the best films of 2010 as indicated by its multiple Academy Award nominations and wins. Everything about this film is noteworthy when discussing cinematic achievement, and it is extremely entertaining to boot. There’s not much else needed to say about this film except that it is a must watch. Though there isn’t much else needed to say, we still managed to think of a few things in our Take Two of The King’s Speech.
Synopsis from IMDB: A hard-living Hollywood actor re-examines his life after his 11-year-old daughter surprises him with a visit.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: I didn’t think I had heard of this film until I re-watched the trailer and was reminiscent of seeing it once. Though the trailer doesn’t tell you much, except that the film is written and directed by Sophia Coppola, it does have a certified fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes and the description of the film does minimally peak my interest. This film will probably make its way to the lower half of my Netflix queue. However, being written and directed by Sophia Coppola and featuring a song by The Strokes in the trailer will probably grab the attention of some viewers more than it did my own.
Synopsis from IMDB: Life for a happy couple is turned upside down after their young son dies in an accident. Based on a play by David Lindsay-Abaire.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: I feel obligated to mention when a film is nominated for an Academy Award because it is a prestigious honor and does provide the film (and my take) credibility. I am starting to feel like a broken record though as every week at least one Oscar nominated film is released to home video. This week seems like every film, including Rabbit Hole, as Nicole Kidman was nominated for best actress. I know Rabbit Hole will be a great film but I often have a hard time putting these types of films high on my Netflix queue simply due to their often melancholy themes and tone.
Synopsis from IMDB: Travel writer Lemuel Gulliver takes an assignment in Bermuda, but ends up on the island of Liliput, where he towers over its tiny citizens.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: I have not had the (dis)pleasure of seeing Gulliver’s Travels so I’m going to try hard not to pass too much judgment, though every inclination tells me this movie is terrible. Jack Black once was able to carry a movie as a lead (that one time being School of Rock), now I can only handle him in supporting roles or animated features. Judging by the trailer it seems they took a lot of creative liberties with Jonathan Swift’s book as well, which typically isn’t a good thing.
Synopsis from IMDB: Siberian gulag escapees walk 4000 miles overland to freedom in India.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: Though I have seen Harry Potter and The King’s Speech, of all the films releasing this week, The Way Back interests me most. Peter Weir is a very good director, as indicated by the abridged filmography in the trailer, and Ed Harris has a very strong screen presence and rarely chooses bad roles. Colin Farrell even seems to be moving past his Miami Vice days and is choosing his roles more wisely (though back to back remakes of Fright Night and Total Recall may prove otherwise). Despite its limited release in theaters this should prove to be worthy of at least a rental.
Synopsis from IMDB: Lucy and Edmund Pevensie return to Narnia with their cousin Eustace where they meet up with Prince Caspian for a trip across the sea aboard the royal ship The Dawn Treader. Along the way they encounter dragons, dwarves, merfolk, and a band of lost warriors before reaching the edge of the world.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: I thoroughly enjoyed the first Chronicles of Narnia film, mostly because it was a book I was forced to read during childhood and was interested to see C.S. Lewis’s masterpiece on-screen. However, my distaste for reading prevented me from completing the other two novels and therefore my interest in the films has deteriorated. If you were a fan of the first two films you’ll probably want to complete the trilogy, though this film was less critically praised than the other two. For those of you new to the franchise, check out the first two then make your decision from there.
On a related note, Liam Neeson is the most bad*ss man alive
Add Voyage of the Dawn Treader to your Netflix Queue.
Synopsis from IMDB: A drama centered on a rising country-music songwriter (Hedlund) who sparks with a fallen star (Paltrow). Together, they mount his ascent and her comeback, which leads to romantic complications involving her husband/manager (McGraw) and a beauty queen-turned-singer (Meester).
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: What a terrible segue from Liam Neeson and all his glory. Despite there only being two major releases this week, Country Strong still manages to be the lesser of the two. It is a wonder why Little Fockers didn’t get pushed back to compete with this instead of the laundry list of last week’s releases. The novelty of Gwyneth Paltrow singing country has worn off since the film’s theatrical release and her appearance(s) on Glee. Throw in Gossip Girl star Leighton Meester and I’ll be skipping this one for sure.
Starring: Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, David Arquette, Hayden Panetierre
Director: Wes Craven
Pac’s Take: The day finally came, after all the anticipation and build-up leading to the Scream 4, I can’t say I was disappointed. Scream 4 picks up 10 years after the events of Scream 3 with Sidney Prescott returning to Woodsboro on a book tour for her new self help book “Out of Darkness”. Expectedly, upon her arriving in Woodsboro, the Ghostface Killer returns and the bodies start to pile up. Among them is a new crop of teens who revel in the infamy of their town and celebrate the anniversary of the Woodsboro massacre with a “Stabathon”, a movie marathon of the “Stab” films based on the events of the actual Scream films (a film within a film). Now it is up to throwbacks Gale (Courtney Cox), Dewey (David Arquette), and Sidney (Neve Campbell) as well as Woodsboro’s new teens to survive and track down the identity of Ghostface.
I can’t say that someone who hasn’t seen the first three Scream films won’t enjoy this movie, but as a die hard fan of the franchise I can say that I felt this film was written for me, and others like me. Most of its brilliance is in the film’s ability to recapture moments and emotions from the first film and reboot them into this film. While Scream 4 is a sequel and not a reboot, it’s self-awareness and satire of the horror genre, particularly the reboot craze, allowed it to blend the two forms of franchise installments almost effortlessly. This film was a lot like Wes Craven’s New Nightmare, where Craven’s intention was to return the franchise to its original state by being self-satire.
Thank God Scream didn't get to this point first
Not unlike any other Scream film, Scream 4 had its flaws. A lot of the critical reviews I read before the film indicated that the film was overlong, and at 108 minutes I completely disagree. The pacing of the film was great but I felt like there were 15, or so, minutes missing from the film. While the characters were developed to the point the audience was able to connect and care (some more than others), some of the relationships between the characters seemed to be lacking. Since a certain character’s death in Scream 2, the franchise has suffered from this, never being able to recapture the charisma he/she brought to the screen (though Hayden Panetierre’s character Kirby comes close). Some of that missing fifteen minutes was lost in the kill scenes as well. One thing most sequels always forget is the concept of quality over quantity. Sure the absence of drawn out chases and killings made the film a bit more realistic, but a lot of the suspense is lost by removing the dramatic irony of the audience seeing the killer stalk its victims.
If I'm the killer I'm definitely stalking these two
What Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson created with Scream 4 was a love letter to themselves and the throwback slashers, as well as a big middle finger to the modern horror genre (particularly the Saw franchise). Also, Scream 4 seems to acknowledge the below-average to mediocrity of Scream 3, something I particularly enjoyed in hindsight. Scream 4 seems more like the concluding chapter of the original trilogy much more than Scream 3 ever did, and in a way (being Kevin Williamson’s third effort in the franchise) it is. In time, I think Scream 4 will stand out as the best sequel in the franchise, second only to the original. If you’re a fan of the Scream films be sure to see Scream 4 in theaters.
Characters: B
Cinematography: B+
Directing: B+
Plot: A-
Performances: B
Script: A-
OVERALL: B+
Chris’ Take: There are a lot of people recently who have decided that the theater experience is not worth it anymore. With all the new advancements in Video On Demand and Home Theater Entertainment, combined with the rise in ticket prices, people seem to be more inclined to wait for Netflix, or just pay the $5 a couple of weeks after the movie comes out to enjoy film without the ever present distractions and talkative jerks in the theater. I for one, still enjoy going to the theater, mainly because I am impatient to see new films, but also, if the crowd is right for the type of film, they can add something to the experience as well, and there is a sense of community. That’s how I felt last night as I sat in the packed theater for the newest installment in the Scream franchise. Slasher films don’t require the type of thought or attention span that a “good” horror film requires, and I think that’s why all the buzz going on in the theater didn’t bother me. It really felt more like a communal gathering that brought back the nostalgia of the experience of watching the first film. It was just plain fun.
I think critics’ reactions to this film will be based on their expectations. Scream is a horror movie, that isn’t a horror movie. That’s what was so fresh about the first one, it was parody and serious slasher film combined into one; in the same vein (but not quite on the same level) as Shaun of the Dead. Scream 4 returns that freshness to the slasher genre, even if it does it in a self-referential and predictable way.
Hmmm...it's a movie within a movie.
Kevin Williamson’s script was really the backbone of the film. While it wasn’t anything deep or super intelligent, it seemed like he took care in making sure that it didn’t feel like a lackadaisical sequel that was forced into production. Wes Craven only seemed to build on that, using his skill behind the camera to make the scares come to life. Craven’s last written effort, My Soul to Take, made him sound disconnected from the younger audience, and I’m glad that he wasn’t the one to pen the Scream sequel. Williamson kept the playfully gory tone consistent with that of the first two films, and fortunately polished up the tarnish left by the third one.
While the acting was only mediocre, it fit the film. I don’t think anyone has come to expect Oscar Winning performances from horror films, just that the actors at least try, and they did that. I thought that the younger talent in the film, the new faces in Scream, were more interesting and charismatic than the returning cast of Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox and David Arquette, who just seemed to deliver their lines to get their paycheck.
I thought the pacing of the film was perfect. The slasher scenes came fast and frequent, but they never felt like overkill, and they managed to keep the tension consistent. I actually thought they improved some of the slasher scenes as well. In some of the other films, the chase scenes seemed to drag on and became more and more ridiculous. This time, they were shortened and that made them a little bit more realistic, even if the characters still have the combined intelligence of a 1st grader.
Actually, I think even 1st Graders would be smart enough to follow the buddy system if a killer is on the loose.
I cannot say that this film was spectacular, but it was certainly entertaining and very enjoyable. Like I said earlier, I think the vibe in the audience really said a lot about it as well. A midnight showing is usually comprised of die hard fans, and there was no one that seemed disappointed. However, I think for anyone else who isn’t in on the self-referential humor, it would probably seem mediocre at best. Since I am in the former crowd, I thought it felt like Kevin Williamson had taken a look at what slasher films had become in the last ten years, shook his head saying, “Come on guys, really?” then knocked out a killer script in an awesome fit of spite.
I have gone on record on this site as a defender of the remake/reboot/prequel craze. While I understand why many people are upset with Hollywood’s infatuation with turning the movie-goers nostalgia into a quick buck, I also believe that, when done right, a rebooted film can be much better than any “original” work. However, with the most recent rumors being that there is a The Crow reboot in the works potentially starring Bradley Cooper, I may have finally reached my boiling point.
I am a fanboy of many franchises so I can understand supporting a film despite its obvious flaws. However, it is my personal belief that The Crow is a terrible movie. The product of the popular grunge scene in the mid 1990s and the untimely death of star Brandon Lee while filming; The Crow is not a film that transcends the era in which it was made. With a 7.6 user rating on IMDB and an 83% rating on Rotten Tomatoes I may go as far to say that The Crow is one of the most overrated films I’ve ever seen. Somehow, the original spawned a series of sequels as well as a television franchise and is now going to be rebooted; but will it be a success, I doubt it.
Not to mention one professional wrestling career
Let me again point out that the success of the original film was catapulted in large part due to the popularity of grunge in 1994 and the death of the film’s star. Consider The Dark Knight as a modern day example, yes the film was infinitely better than The Crow, but the untimely death of star Heath Ledger made his dark and destructive portrayal of the Joker seem all that more eerie (not to say Ledger did not deserve the acclaim he received).
CAPTION DELETED: Still too soon
It is worth noting that the film, The Crow, was adapted from a comic book written by James O’Barr and that source material does not dictate the “reinvention” remain stylistically similar to the first. In fact, script writer Stephen Norrington has stated that he wants his version of The Crow to be “realistic, hard-edged and mysterious, almost documentary-style.” Still, given the tradition of most franchise reboots, I imagine the studio would rather stay true to the original film and not anger the franchise’s cult following.
Welcoming us after this weekend is a trio of superhero news to kick the week into full gear…
Edgar Wright & Joe Cornish have Written Ant-Man:
In order for an Ant-Man film to be successful, there has to be a great creative team working on the project. Ant-Man is one of the quirkier and less-known superheroes of the Marvel franchise so relying on name recognition won’t be enough to draw the average movie goer. Fortunately, Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish are part of that creative team as they have recently submitted a 2nd draft of their Ant-Man script to Marvel. Edgar Wright is the creative mind behind Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, and Scott Pilgrim vs. the World while Joe Cornish is making his feature writer/director debut this year with Attack of the Block. Hopefully, in addition to writing the script, one (or both) of these men will also be involved as director. This could be one of the most fun superhero adaptations to come to the big screen.
In the tradition of Fox studios, they continue to make questionable decisions regarding the X-Men franchise. After X-Men and X2 the franchise has completely taken a turn for the worse with X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine. This summer we’ll see if Matthew Vaughn can right the ship with X-Men: First Class; but even if he can another disaster is likely to follow. Recently, Darren Aronofsky backed out of directing the 2nd Wolverine film (smart) leaving the film without a director, and the other origin story no one cares about is X-Men Origins: Deadpool. With Ryan Reynolds still attached, apparently Fox still cares (sort of) because they’ve named Tim Miller their director. This will be Tim Miller’s directorial debut with all of his previous film experience being in visual effects. Just what we need, another director who thinks good story telling is about explosions…
One of the biggest questions surrounding Superman: The Man of Steel has been who will be cast to play the lead villain General Zod, well this weekend we got our answer. Other names surrounding the role have been Viggo Mortensen and Daniel Day Lewis, but the Kryptonian general will be played by none other than Michael Shannon. Shannon was rumored for a villain role in the film but the part was not specified until he was officially cast as Zod. Shannon is a fantastic choice for the role, an Oscar nominated actor who has recently delivered some strong performances in Revolutionary Road, The Runaways, and Boardwalk Empire among others. Shannon will join the star studded cast including: Ashley Judd, Kevin Costner, and Amy Adams (oh yeah and some guy named Henry Cavill will play Superman).
Synopsis from IMDB: A ballet dancer wins the lead in “Swan Lake” and is perfect for the role of the delicate White Swan – Princess Odette – but slowly loses her mind as she becomes more and more like Odile, the Black Swan.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: The last of the Oscar nominated films to be released to home video in March, Black Swan is a must see. It was one of the best films of 2010, boasted a great cast and wonderful direction from Darren Aronofsky. If the film itself isn’t enough to encourage you to at least rent the DVD/Blu-Ray, recent controversy swirling around Natalie Portman, the dance sequences, and her Oscar campaign might encourage you to check out some of the bonus features.
Synopsis from IMDB: CIA operative Valerie Plame discovers her identity is allegedly leaked by the government as payback for an op-ed article her husband wrote criticizing the Bush administration.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: This film flew under the radar with it’s limited release in October, only grossing 9.5 million to-date. Despite the limited release, Fair Game received high praise from the critics and boasts a “Certified Fresh” at 80% from Rotten Tomatoes. The trailer is very compelling and the two leads, Watts and Penn, typically excel in any role. Fair Game appears to be a top-notch political thriller, and will surely find it’s way into my Netflix queue.
Synopsis from IMDB: The magically long-haired Rapunzel has spent her entire life in a tower, but now that a runaway thief has stumbled upon her, she is about to discover the world for the first time, and who she really is.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: Animated films that attract my attention are few and far between, and Tangled is no exception to that rule. However, Walt Disney studios seemed to get the “Shrek” formula right with this film because it was well received by audiences and critics alike. Tangled will surely boast an entertaining viewing for children as well as their parents, bringing enough laughs for both audiences. Since I am neither a child nor a parent, I probably won’t be rushing to see this any time soon.
Synopsis from IMBD: A love story and murder mystery based on the most notorious unsolved murder case in New York history. The original screenplay uses newly discovered facts, court records and speculation as the foundation for a story of family, obsession, love and loss.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: The synopsis for this film seems to make it half love story, half murder mystery, and the trailer doesn’t shy away from that concept either. If the ratio tips further into the latter then I may be compelled to give this a viewing, but as of now I am hesitant. Ryan Gosling, though critically praised, is missing the versatility that would make him a must see actor in my eyes; I consider him the male Zooey Deschanel in a lot of ways. Kirsten Dunst hasn’t done many quality roles in a few years so her name doesn’t attract me to this film either. Add in a director who is making his first full-length feature, and a rating of %33 from Rotten Tomatoes, and I’ll probably pass on this film; at least for a while.
Synopsis from IMDB: The story of notorious French gangster Jacques Mesrine.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: Part 2 of a pair of films starring Vincent Cassel chronicling the French gangster Jacques Mesrine. The film is French and can be viewed as such with subtitles or dubbed in English. Cassel and this film are getting a lot more attention because of the success of Black Swan, which ironically also released on March 29. Boasted by the critics named in the trailer to be on par with De Palma, Scorcese, and Coppola’s gangster classics, it is very doubtful that it will be able to live up to that hype. However, it’s 84% rating on Rotten Tomatoes suggests those claims aren’t too farfetched, and this may certainly be worth a watch for those who enjoy the genre (as I do).
Synopsis from IMDB: A dramatization of the 1968 strike at the Ford Dagenham car plant, where female workers walked out in protest against sexual discrimination.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: In threat of probably sounding chauvinistic, I have no interest in seeing this film. While the film looks well made, the performances look worthy, and the critical acclaim was high (80% on Rotten Tomatoes), this story simply does not compel me. Primarily targeted to the female and feminist demographic, this indie British period piece appears to have all the elements to be a worthy rental. However, so does Tangled but I doubt I’ll be adding that to my queue either.
Synopsis from IMDB: Three teenagers are confined to an isolated country estate that could very well be on another planet. The trio spend their days listening to endless homemade tapes that teach them a whole new vocabulary. Any word that comes from beyond their family abode is instantly assigned a new meaning. Hence ‘the sea’ refers to a large armchair and ‘zombies’ are little yellow flowers. Having invented a brother whom they claim to have ostracized for his disobedience, the über-controlling parents terrorize their offspring into submission. The father is the only family member who can leave the manicured lawns of their self-inflicted exile, earning their keep by managing a nearby factory, while the only outsider allowed on the premises is his colleague Christina, who is paid to relieve the son of his male urges. Tired of these dutiful acts of carnality, Christina disturbs the domestic balance.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: Nominated for best foreign language film at this year’s Academy Awards, Dogtooh becomes one of only 5 Greek films, and the first since 1977, to be nominated. The film appears to be a blend somewhere between dark comedy, drama, horror, and fantasy. The trailer claims it to be a satire, I’m assuming about parenting and sheltering your children or something. Based on its Academy Award nomination, festival awards, and critical acclaim (93% on Rotten Tomatoes); it is probably worth a viewing. Not interested in watching a foreign film with subtitles? Don’t worry; I’m sure the American remake will hit U.S. theaters in the next 2 years.
It seems these days, in the age of the reboot, that a franchises last film isn’t even able to make it to the network television circuit before it is already being rebooted. Tobey Maguire hasn’t even been able to live down his future “Dancing with the Stars” audition tape in Spiderman 3 before Marvel cast Andrew Garfield to play The Amazing Spiderman in 2012.
Actually he may never live this down
If that wasn’t bad enough, Warner Bros. has announced that they are already interested in going back to Bruce Wayne’s origins and rebooting Batman. Not only is interest in the caped crusader at an all time high due to the success of The Dark Knight; but Christopher Nolan’s third and final film in the franchise, The Dark Knight Rises, hasn’t even begun shooting. However, Christopher Nolan and his producing partner/wife Emma Thomas will remain attached to the Batman reboot as producers, suggesting that Warner Bros. is interested in maintaining some continuity with the saga, or at least maintaining the quality that we’ve come to expect from the current Batman franchise.
If it weren’t for Nolan and Thomas’s involvement in the reboot I would find this announcement extremely disrespectful to Nolan and all those involved in the current Batman trilogy, instead I find it just mildly obnoxious. With the upcoming release of Thor and Captain America, it seems that Warner Bros. is attempting to keep the potential of a Justice League movie in its sights; and with this being the last Batman film for Christopher Nolan and star Christian Bale, the WB needed to be prepared. Regardless, it would be appropriate for the company to be more focused on the current Batman film in production than looking past it for a potential reboot. The Dark Knight Rises is possibly the most anticipated comic book movie of all time, and with fans of the series chomping at the bit for next summer’s release, you’d think Warner Bros would concentrating all Batman efforts on making this the best (fiscally and critically) film possible.
They should just use this film's title and make a double reboot
Executive Jeff Robinov has stated that they are aiming for a 2013 team-up of the Justice League on-screen, and if this were a realistic goal then it would make sense for them to be considering a new Batman at this point. However, The Green Lantern is just making its debut this summer, and Zack Snyder’s Superman reboot won’t hit theaters until December 2012; additionally, Justice League members The Flash and Wonder Woman have proposed motion pictures but aren’t yet in development. To go the marketing route of The Avengers, Warner Bros would have to release a motion picture for each of these four superheroes and reboot Batman into a new film before releasing a Justice League movie in 2013, impossible.
As a final thought, here’s a suggestion for following up the current Batman trilogy. Rather than reboot the franchise with a new Bruce Wayne and a re-telling of the origin story, why not pick up where Nolan leaves off. With Christian Bale not returning for a fourth film either; you’d have to re-cast Batman, but not necessarily Bruce Wayne. At two separate instances in the Batman comics Dick Grayson, formerly Robin and Nightwing, has taken up the Batman mantle. Once after Bruce Wayne’s “death” and once after his back was broken by Bane (a villain in Nolan’s upcoming film). It might anger a lot of fans of current and past Batman films to see someone other than Bruce Wayne parading as the Caped Crusader, but it would maintain continuity within the franchise and eliminate some of the stigma of a reboot.
What do you think? Do you find it justifiable that Warner Bros. is already considering a Batman reboot a year before TDKR is released? Do you want to see a Justice League movie in 2013? How would you like to see the Batman legacy carried on in film?
On cue coming out of the weekend is our DC Comics/Warner Bros. casting news of the week. After speculation going into the weekend that Michael Shannon is in consideration for an unidentified villain in Superman: Man of Steel, possibly the most anticipated role (aside from Superman himself) has been officially cast. Amy Adams (The Fighter) will play famed reporter Lois Lane in Zack Snyder’s adaptation releasing next December.
Amy Adams is an inspired choice for the role and beat out a list of many other high profile actresses that included: Diana Argon (Glee), Malin Ackerman (Watchmen), Kristen Stewart (Twilight), Rachel McAdams (Wedding Crashers), Kristen Bell (Forgetting Sarah Marshall), Jessica Biel (The A-Team), Mary Elizabeth Winstead (Scott Pilgrim vs. the World), and Olivia Wilde (House). Amy Adams will be yet another high powered name added to the picture and will join fellow Oscar nominees Kevin Costner and Diane Lane. Adams is coming off an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress for her role in The Fighter.
Today marks the opening of Zack Snyder’s newest film Sucker Punch and with the early reviews being brutally scathing, it’s possible this rumor was leaked intentionally to keep the hype for his next project, Superman: Man of Steel, positive. Between Superman and Batman, Warner Bros seems to have new villain casting news every week; and while this news is more speculation than last week’s announcement of Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s role in the The Dark Knight Rises, it is fulfilling its duty of keeping me excited about Superman.
OMG!!! It's a bird...
According to Deadline, Michael Shannon (Boardwalk Empire, The Runaways, Revolutionary Road) is reportedly a strong contender for a villain role in the upcoming Superman movie. The role was not specified but so far all speculation has been that Zod will be the primary villain. Earlier rumors had Viggo Mortensen and Daniel Day Lewis in contention for the role of Zod, but those rumors have quieted; could Shannon now be the primary contender for the Kryptonian General?
No matter what role Michael Shannon will occupy in this film, it appears to be a promising choice. Shannon is a veteran actor whose name has flown under the radar for some time – suggesting he can carry a villainous role without overshadowing Superman and the other supporting roles in the film. Shannon would be a suitable replacement to the other high profile names attached to the Zod role, but it is possible the interest in him is for a second villain. One wonders what he would look like bald?
Synopsis from IMDB: Revolves around Frank, an American tourist visiting Italy to mend a broken heart. Elise is an extraordinary woman who deliberately crosses his path.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: It is kind of baffling how this film was nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Picture in the Comedy/Musical genre considering that it isn’t really either a comedy or a musical. However, in terms of entertainment value, The Tourist could have done a lot worse. Carried by the stars, Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie, this film is an interesting heist mystery with all the standard cliches in place. The two leads have good chemistry and the backdrop of Italy looks fantastic on-screen, but there isn’t much substance behind this film. Good for an entertaining 103 minutes if you’re willing to check your brain at the door.
Synopsis from IMDB: A documentary filmmaker travels to Jellystone Park to shoot a project and soon crosses paths with Yogi Bear, his sidekick Boo-Boo, and Ranger Smith.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: Ushered in by the likes of Garfield and Alvin & the Chipmunks, Yogi Bear attempts to bring the nostalgia of our favorite childhood cartoons to the big screen. I skipped this in theaters expecting more of the same with cheap slapstick jokes for the kids, sexual innuendo for the adults, and probably a song and dance for good measure. However, I’ve heard that Yogi Bear stacks up a little better as a complete film compared to some of the aforementioned predecessors so if you’re having a family movie night, this may be the perfect rental for this week.
Synopsis from IMDB: After being cut from the USA softball team and feeling a bit past her prime, Lisa finds herself evaluating her life and in the middle of a love triangle, as a corporate guy in crisis competes with her current, baseball-playing beau.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: This week’s romantic comedy release is How Do You Know. The stars of this film make it somewhat attractive as a DVD/Blu-Ray rental but it is sure to be more of the same when it comes to the standard rom-com formula. Maybe James L. Brooks (writer/director) can breathe some fresh air into this film especially since he has a handful of very capable actors on his hands. However, with a rating of 30% from Rotten Tomatoes I’m not getting my hopes up.
Synopsis from IMDB: Strange lights descend on the city of Los Angeles, drawing people outside like moths to a flame where an extraterrestrial force threatens to swallow the entire human population off the face of the Earth.
Trailer:
Pac’s Take: “The early bird gets the worm” and “Good things come to those who wait” are conflicting expressions, but the latter applies here if you decided to skip Skyline and wait for Battle: Los Angeles. Skyline may capitalize in home video revenue, though, with it’s release not being too far removed from the theatrical release of Battle: LA. Though critically the lesser film, there may still be some value in seeing this on Blu-Ray as the special effects make this film at least worthy of a viewing.
Coming off a weekend where box office numbers indicate that no one was really interested in the movies (Limitless finished #1 at 19 million), presumeably because the nation has been consumed with March Madness, we transition into the week with some big news coming from the Nolan camp.
Speculation has been swirling since the announcement of Inception star Joseph Gordon-Levitt to the cast of The Dark Knight Rises as to which role he would play in Nolan’s third and final installment to his Batman trilogy. Worst Previews (aka Variety) is now reporting that JGL will in fact play Alberto Falcone in next summer’s blockbuster. This casting does not come as a huge shock to those following the film closely, as it was previously reported that Levitt would be playing a villain.
We Can See the Resemblence
Including Alberto Falcone in the next Batman film creates another link back to Batman Begins and further suggests this film to be the concluding chapter in a trilogy. Alberto’s father, Carmine Falcone, was an antoginist in the first film and was sent to Arkham at the hands of Batman (before being drugged by Scarecrow). For fans of the comic, Falcone’s role also suggests the story may incorporate parts of The Long Halloween, which features Alberto Falcone as the Holiday Killer, tells the origins of Two-Face (seen in The Dark Knight), and has an appearance from Selina Kyle.
Also referred to as "the long Halloween"
Surely the plot of The Dark Knight Rises will stay under lock and key, likely until a full-length trailer is released for the film. However, with the casting fully taking shape, Warner Bros. and Nolan are succeeding flawlessly at keeping this the most anticipated film of 2012.
Starring: Aaron Eckhart, Michelle Rodriguez, Michael Pena, Ne-Yo
Director: Jonathan Liebesman
Chris’ Take: Watching this film reminded me of a scene from the sitcom Arrested Development where one of the characters opens a refrigerator to see a paper bag marked “Dead Dove: Don’t Eat”. Despite the warning, his curiosity is piqued and he opens the bag to see a bludgeoned bird and says, “Well, I don’t know what I was expecting….”. Perhaps when I saw the trailer for Battle: Los Angeles, I was drawn to the hope that it would return me to the teenage wonderment of when I watched films like Independence Day. Whatever it was, I probably should’ve heeded the looks of the previews to determine that this would be a clunker.
Battle: Los Angeles starts off quickly, launching right into the alien attack with very little build up. SSGT Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) is on his way out of the Marines after being haunted by some tough decisions he had to make earlier in his career, but before the paperwork is officially filed he is brought in to assist with evacuating civilians from a mysterious meteor shower. As his platoon approaches the area they find out that this is no ordinary meteor shower and that it has brought alien invaders bent on colonizing Earth.
As you can probably tell from the description, this film throws almost every cliché in the book at you. You have the crusty old Staff Sargeant who is about to retire and is called in for that fateful last mission. Then there is the badass strong-willed chick (Michelle Rodriguez).
According to her contract, this is the only type of character she will play.
Throw in the rookie whose inexperience endears him to his squadmates and the man who has a personal vendetta against the leader which will no doubt cause issues at the worst possible time, and boom….action film gold. Unfortunately, it doesn’t even try to do anything different with these characters. Instead it only feels comfortable on ground that has already been tread and fails to make anyone care about the soldiers in the attack.
What I did like is the Black Hawk Down style approach to the combat. While there are plenty of special effects to go around, it doesn’t use lasers and aerial battles and it doesn’t focus on the President or civilians, but instead hones in on the urban warfare aspect of the invasion that hasn’t been done before in an alien invasion film. The bad part of this was mentioned before, the characters weren’t interesting enough to put any sort of emotional attachment to them, which is what makes the best warfare films so intense.
I feel bad for Aaron Eckhart. He did his best with a horrible script, overacting to compensate for the lack of ability that surrounded him. What I found funny about his role is that he was constantly trying to separate himself from the group, which may have been a call on the actors’ part instead of actually in the script. The film would have actually been a lot better if Aaron Eckhart had just gone off on his own to take on the aliens, even though I never really pictured him as an action star.
Still more believable than this guy.
The only other actor that I was remotely interested in seeing, Michael Pena, was on-screen for a short while and his talents were completely wasted on a stock character.
Again, I don’t know what I expected from this film. I may have been duped by that haunting song in the original preview that made it appear more thoughtful than a movie written by the guy who wrote the horror film atrocity Darkness Falls. The film had its merits in its visuals, creating a gritty environment for anti-alien warfare, but it was lacking in almost every other area. I really shouldn’t have expected a whole lot, but I did kind of expect a little bit more than this. 2011 continues to disappoint.
Pac’s Take: The satisfaction you’ll get from seeing Battle: Los Angeles, like with almost any other movie, is determined by the expectations you set for it. The director, Jonathan Liebesman, has The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning and Darkness Falls as his only notable credits, while the writer Christopher Bertolini has a resume that reads a lot like mine. I can just imagine the first few meetings with this brilliant duo before production.
I’m not opposed to small bill casting, especially when a film has other means to draw box office revenue, but typecasting actors into stock characters only accentuates the lack of effort put into the character development. Michelle Rodriguez played her best Michelle Rodriguez and Ne-Yo was nothing more than a poor man’s Will Smith from ID4 (right down to the pending nuptials).
Ne-Yo's glasses were uncredited
Aaron Eckhart and Michael Pena did their best with the lack of depth their characters were given and tried to carry the rest of the cast and the script through to the credits, but not without some unfortunate missteps. Give the actors credit though because despite the aforementioned criticisms they did manage to make a terrible script at least watchable. Cheesy dialogue, plot clichés, and little to no character depth made this film all flash and no substance.
However, much like a lens flash, the cinematography and direction of this movie left the user at least temporarily blind to the rest of the films flaws. Normally I’m not a fan of shaky handheld cameras and extremely tight shots, but Liebesman seemed to make it work. In doing so, and by focusing on a small contingent of Marines as opposed to the large-scale destruction and mayhem (one plus to the script), Battle: Los Angeles felt more like a war film than an invasion flick. The inspiring elements of Black Hawk Down and Saving Private Ryan were obvious in the cinematography and were welcomed. I applaud Liebesman for salvaging what had the potential to be a disastrous film and making it watchable by blending the invasion and war genres nicely and using innovative concepts from inspiring films to put together what was actually a visually appealing work. Part of the fun I got from watching this film was trying to identify the various elements of every film he listed as inspiration. I’m more encouraged with the decision to allow Liebesman to direct Wrath of the Titans and hope that he can continue to improve as his directorial resume lengthens.
Battle: Los Angeles feels more like a video game than it does a motion picture. Action sequences and shootouts interjected with brief cut-scenes for plot development (not character development), the death of a few ancillary characters to alert the user/viewer that they’re in a dangerous environment (not to elicit emotion), and a patriotic but anticlimactic ending leaving the series open for a sequel. The film is a seamless blend between COD: Modern Warfare 2 and Halo, in fact the overpass scene looks a lot like the end of the campaign from the first Modern Warfare.
My favorite director, Ridley Scott, seems to be rebooting his resume by revisiting his previous films – starting at the beginning (never mind The Duellists). Ridley’s next film, Prometheus, was originally a prequel to one of my favorite films Alien, and once he’s finished with that he’ll apparently be revisiting Blade Runner. It is unknown whether the film will be a remake, reboot, prequel, sequel, or whatever else Hollywood is asking for these days, and it is also unknown whether Harrison Ford will be involved.
It is no secret my love for horror films and the Scream franchise in particular. Going to the midnight showing of Scream 4 and watching Ghostface terrorize a new group of teens, as well as some franchise favorites, may be my movie-going experience of 2011. That experience may take on a bit more nostalgic importance now that Scream 4 appears to be the last installment of the current franchise.
Brian Pac Sostak
Chris Petersen
Sarah Higgins
stjerome03
Chris and Pac Take on Hollywood 