Stars Channing Tatum, Jaime Foxx, Maggie Gyllenhaal, James Woods, Richard Jenkins, Jason Clarke, Michael Murphy, Lance Reddick and Joey King Directed by Roland Emmerich Die Hard in The White House… again. At least this is far closer to what the actual Die Hard was than either Olympus Has Fallen or A Good Day To Die Hard. Why? Here, we actually have a what amounts to a cop, in the wrong place at the wrong time, with an estranged family member in jeopardy and the odds really heavily against him. Oh, and he gets support over a phone. Only thing extra is that he's got to rescue the President of The United States at the same time. One of the bad guys even play Beethoven's music! Also, the nature of the villainous plot hews far closer to Die Hard than the other two Die Hard pretenders this year. Speaking of the villainous plot tho, could there have been a more appropriately dastardly plot suited for a Malaysian audience? One that highlights money politics and cronyism? Spoiler alert? In any case, we do have out hero (Channing Tatum) who does eventually end up in the white singlet vest, and it does get rather mucked up. Not by much. Tatum manages to carry the movie, doing what he has to in order to rescue, then protect the POTUS (Jaime Foxx) while trying to rescue his daughter (Joey King). There are the bad guys and their devious plot (not saying what it is) which is different from the previous Die Hard in The White House flick. Come to think of it, the US President is having a tough summer (see also Iron Man 3 and Olympus Has Fallen) Director Roland Emmerich does what he does best with the given material from James Vanderbilt (The Rundown, The Amazing Spider-Man, , definitely delivering the bang for the buck and churning out some decent action set-peices. I did enjoy the movie immensely and I was hard pressed to come up with something negative about it. It's not perfect and how much one can tolerate Channing Tatum can determine how much you'll enjoy the movie. The support cast, however, fill out the numerous characters fairly nicely, from the classic forms of James Woods and Richard Jenkins, to the sassy Maggie Gyllenhaal and the ever dependable like Michael Murphy and Lance Reddick. Joey King may be carrying the precocious kid role, but even she acquits herself very well. If anything, the action and the plot does strain itself as the movie wears on, and unlike Die Hard, Tatum's hero doesn't seem to be as worn down by the events, and the fights, and the explosions as one would expect. He does come across as nigh invincible which is something of an issue with action movies these days. The heroes barely come across as human anymore. It's like we're really back to the 80s with all our muscle-bound tough guys who can get gut-shot and call it a scratch. Still, this is an above average, slightly more than generic action film with Emmerich at the helm, wrecking havoc on, in and around his favourite landmark. It might deliver what you'd expect from the director of the action likes of Universal Soldier, Independence Day, 2012 and The Day After Tomorrow (not Anonymous). And yes, check half your brains at the door.
0 Comments
Stars Brad Pitt, Mirielle Enos, Daniella Kertesz, Fana Mokoena with James Badge Dale, Matthew Fox, David Morse and Peter Capaldi Directed by Marc Forster When is a zombie not quite a zombie? The word is bandied about, although often in jest, as if there really is no such thing as a zombie. Where this movie is concerned, it's just a word (among others) used to describe the plague of undead humans. Plague is the key word tho, where these creatures are concerned. They're not out to eat anyone in particular. They bite, spread whatever disease they have, and move on. So, if it's a zombie movie you're expecting (like any of George Romero's "…of The Dead" movies), you might want to reconsider. Brad Pitt is Gerry Lane, ex-UN Special Investigator (I think) who had left his job for his family (wife and two girls - who aren't all that significant). When the outbreak hits his home town in rather rapid fashion, one quick escape later and he's dragged back into service to help find a way to combat this plague of undead who appear to have the speed and stamina of Usain Bolt. It is a quest that takes Lane all across the world (or at least, four countries), in and out of a series of close calls with death. His drive is the safety of his family. What came to mind is that this movie is, essentially, partly a disaster movie (but from the point of view of just one person instead of tracking several characters over the event) and partly a mash of 28 Days Later (plague driven undead) and Outbreak (searching for the cause/cure but without the background politicking interference). It does try to have some small emotional moments for the lead actor to play on, and Pitt manages to keep the movie going on sheer will alone. Emotionally? Not so much. We know he cares about his family. His wife and kids are important to him, but we are given very few snippets into that life. Not really enough to invest emotionally with him - at least, for me. If anything, there feels a lack of urgency in the proceedings. In watching the "zombie" horde, it's hard to imagine if much of it was done in a practical way with real people aside from the simple running around. They don't just run and chase, these undead swarm like army ants piling on one another if need be just to reach their goal, be it over a massive wall, up a building, or - as evidenced in a poster and trailers - reaching for a helicopter. It isn't until the final set-piece do we get up close and personal with one of these creatures. Ultimately, despite the given nature of the concept, this is not a horror movie. It is fairly bloodless for one, and it sure doesn't really try to go for the shocks or jumps. Instead, we fall back to the disaster movie mould. Something bad has happened, it concerns the whole world, and we track just one particular individual as he makes his way across the world, following what little obscure clue he has and ultimately using a little bit of brain power, some ingenuity and lots of movie luck to reach to a conclusion that seems appropriate. It leaves the door open for more stories and more possibilities while squandering what little opportunity it has here. Given the nature of the concept, and this being a star vehicle, it's hard to see this going any other way, unless it was a TV series event. Much like Battle Los Angeles, World War Z entertains but fails to do more. One can only hope that someone can do something better with the concept (28 Weeks Later, anyone?) taking slightly different approaches and different characters. (like The Fast and Furious: Tokyo Drift maybe?). From what I heard about the book, lots of other (and way better) stories there. Stars Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Diane Lane, Henry Lennix, Richard Schiff, Christopher Meloni, Antje Traue, Laurence Fishburne with Diane Lane, Russell Crowe and Kevin Costner Directed by Zack Snyder The cinematic journey of Superman has been fairly rocky, even taking into account the Richard Donner classic that brought Christopher Reeve to public consciousness. When Bryan Singer, who had guided the X-Men to big screen glory took on the Big Blue, the result was too referential and reverential to Donner's version that the movie barely soared. Brandon Routh did give it a good old try, had the looks too, but couldn't lift it from the doldrums. So now, with the writer of the most recent Dark Knight trilogy, the director of that holding the producer reins, and the director of fairly successful comic book adaptations, 300 and Watchmen, at the helm, it looks like the Man Of Steel has a chance to prove just how relevant he is on the big screen today. With an all new vision, a remarkable cast and a visionary visual director, this is a daring new take on the old hero. So, what works? Henry Cavill does a remarkable job as our hero, be it Clark Kent, Kal-El or Superman. Given the new take on the character, Cavill delivers a mostly emotionally grounded performance, delivering a far more 'real-world' take on the Superman character than ever. The approach is intriguing enough to carry through the story and Cavill does well to carry the movie on his fairly broad shoulders. But he is very ably supported by a trio of truly superb stars that run the gamut of emotional mirrors to Cavill's performance. Russel Crowe lends gravitas to Jor-El, a role that leans close to being God-like, especially in the holographic form he takes throughout the film. It doesn't help the religious undertones either that usually accompany the Superman origin story (from baby Kal being put in the 'basket' and sent away as the future hope of a race to the Christ-like pose Superman takes right before moving to save the world). Kevin Costner surprises as Jonathan Kent, who gives Clark his humanity and heart. It is a very strong performance here, but the surprise is Michael Shannon as General Zod. Zod isn't just some megalomaniac out for power. There is a drive there, a purpose to his actions, and Shannon delivers a chilling villain. It's not quite the amazing camp of Terrence Stamp, but it is definitely his own. Then there's Amy Adams as Lois Lane and in comparison, this is a Lois Lane that is truly a hardcore reporter who is not some lovesick damsel occasionally in distress. The nature of the story itself gives Adams breathing room to create a Lois that lives and breathes her job and ply her investigative skills, delivering quite a surprise, plot-wise. Diane Lane (as Martha Kent) also gives us a solid foundation, a home for Clark to return to and protect. The cast is remarkable here. Writer David Goyer does some interesting things with the overall plot - although Star Trek (2009) did pop into my head at several points throughout the entire film. Some might say that because of Zod and some of his actions, it might be Superman II that was the source material. But for me, it was similarities to Star Trek - not quite beat for beat, but close on certain points (birth of Kal as he loses his father, hero finding his place, taking out the bad guys) but peppered with loads and loads of massive destruction as the super-powered beings bash it out all over the place. And it was really a lot of destruction that went from the "wow" to "really?" to "enough already!" in fairly quick succession. It could have been just me tho. As spectacular some of the action scenes are, the fatigue did set in for me after a while. The destruction that happens is so massive, to reflect the power of the combatants, that it just seems… excessive. Snyder does a great job at wrangling everything, keeping a grip on the reins of his own style. So there isn't any of his usual 'speed-ramping' and the action is all the better for it. Backed by Hans Zimmer's pounding score, quite reminiscent of the Dark Knight soundtracks, the movie does cut its own path to create a visual feast with a well worn and proven story and some solid characters. I do have some other issues, but for that, click through to the Wordpress site for a more spoiler-filled write-up and other reflections. In all, Man Of Steel hits the mark at creating a Superman for the ages, dealing with some truly emotional and moral issues where the character is concerned. The few flaws are minor and everything else is close to perfect. For the comic fans, there are some easter eggs to spot too (particularly with one particular satellite). Not so sure about a 3D presentation tho, especially at the pace that the action plays out. And just be mindful about bringing the very young 'uns along. It may be PG-13 but it does get very intense, especially towards the end. |
Archives
December 2017
|