MY CALL: Pretty much a waste of time to any well-seasoned horror-goer. Kiddie horror, really. If you have a 7th grade neice who wants to watch a scary movie, start her on this. WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD: Just watch Final Destination 5 (2011). It accomplishes everything that this movie meant to, but did it exceedingly better. LOOKING FOR GOOD KOREAN HORROR? Thirst (2009), or the more sci-fi-ish The Host (2006). You can find many K-horror “top 10” lists online as well. LANGUAGE: Korean; subtitled in English on Netflix.
After moving into a new recording studio (which was cheap after a fire incident that killed someone), one of the “Pink Dolls” (a 20-something girl group) finds a music video called “White” that has never been released. It’s sort of catchy so they decide to pawn it off as their own.
The group has a catty relationship in which Eun-Ju, the oldest member and an ex-back-up dancer, gets most of the blame for their lack of success. But after just one performance of “White” they’re famous again. Working on refining the new hit, the lead vocalist (Jenny) starts having some strange heat strokes and dehydration issues. This results in an unexciting hospitalization.
This one’s eyelids get infected. Truly the work of a horrific and malevalent force.
As the group shrinks to uneventful casualties, each subsequent lead vocalist suffers from hot flashes until their eventual not-quite-deaths, which seem to go uninvestigated for some reason. However, Eun-Ju—the only one who never sought the lead spot in the group—connects the injuries to the fire that killed the original lead singer.
Eun-Ju embraces the role as the lead singer when, well, she’s the only one left.
White hair in an Asian horror flick…far from original.
The music and dancing has a trendy TRL appeal; almost like Lady Ga-Ga with some zombie moves. But, overall, this was very “vanilla.” The “scary” scenes are unsensational and the effects were unshocking—mostly just a bunch of bleeding from the eyes and spewing blood from the mouth; simple stuff. I often favor foreign horror for innovative story ideas and strange horror “flavors” produced by different writing/directing pedigrees. While nothing was really wrong with White, it showcased neither such attribute. With no cool deaths to speak of and mediocre scares that pale to the likes of The Grudge (which does get a nod in the end), but good production value and an untwisty followable plot (contrary to the often cerebral Japanese horror), I’d recommend this to younger, unseasoned viewers who are just starting to get their feet wet and aren’t yet looking for nightmare-inducing scares or meal-spilling gore.
Share this post:
Actor Spotlight: Felicity Jones
Anton Yelchin & Felicity Jones in Like Crazy // via
Felicity Jones- a tiny British dynamo of natural acting talent. And by natural I mean that she makes all of her roles like like an extension of herself- convincing, casual and just plain adorable.
I had never heard about Felicity Jones before early 2011 when Like Crazy premiered. Mark carried on for weeks about how much he anticipated the arrival of Like Crazy in our local independent theater. The movie did not disappoint expectations and that was, in large part, due to Jones’ performance. She plays out a story of first love in all of its complicated, messy, intoxicating, impulsive and selfish facets. It is simultaneously painful and captivating to watch her and Anton Yelchin (Fright Night, Star Trek) ride the highs and lows of an intercontinental relationship.
I was fascinated, which naturally led me to curiosity…which OF COURSE led me to Netflix. What better place to explore an actor’s career than in the library of cinema that is instantly accessible from my couch?
I then entered the world of British cinema and Felicity Jones…what I found- Cemetery Junction, Chalet Girl, and Albatross.
Cemetery Junction– In this 1970’s British set drama-dy, Jones is the daughter of a successful insurance executive who is ashamed of his humble beginnings. She is a young woman on the verge of marriage who still hasn’t figured out who she is or what she wants to do with her life.
Jones in Cemetery Junction // via
Chalet Girl– While this is in no way an example of film excellence, it is a fun little British romantic comedy. Felicity is an ex-skateboard pro who becomes a chalet girl to help her dad with the bills. In this new job she is exposed to a world of money, snowboarding and Bill Nighy’s wonderful (but all to infrequent) moments of humor.
Ed Westwick & Jones in Chalet Girl //via
Albatross– I was deceived by this movie…I thought that it carried some weight to be marketed by the IFC. I was wrong. Jones plays the sheltered good-girl to Jessica Brown Findlay’s (Downton Abbey) misguided, rebellious girl who is searching for her place in a small coastal community.
Jessica Brown-Findlay & Felicity Jones in Albatross // via
The most grounded and believable aspect in each of these four movies is the character played by Felicity Jones. In every situation–impulsive and in love, growing up and trying to break societal/parental ideals, a spirited girl with a sad past, or a sheltered kid trying to find a world outside of her dysfunctional family– Jones knows how to be what the story needs.
I have high hopes for her career. Mark and I like to play a game with movies. When we are unsatisfied with a choice of actor for a movie or an actor’s performance, we do not just sit and gripe about it. We try to come up with who we believe would be the perfect replacement. After watching Snow White and the Huntsman (and being underwhelmed by Kristen Stewart’s ‘Snow White’), we decided that jones would make the perfect Snow White for that film. She’s got it goin’ on: equal parts tough, innocent and ‘fairest girl in the whole kingdom.’
images via
Watch all four films, enjoy this spunky little British actress, let me know what you think!
Share this post:
Brave
Brave is inventive, joyous and beautiful looking. However, it is going to suffer from the Up/Wall-E conundrum. The critical consensus for this film is 76% and the majority of the comments are “it is good but not Up/Wall-E.” Recreating Up/Wall-E will be nearly impossible and it is a shame that every Pixar movie will have to live up to that hype.
Pixar has created a wonderful name for itself with the movie going audience. The word Pixar means success and quality. When one of the movies is not up to the expected excellence it gets bashed loud and often by the critics. Cars 2 for example took a critical beating but I guarantee it was better than the majority of animated films out there.
I think people forget that Pixar movies are meant for kids. The theater my girlfriend I saw Brave in was packed full of children who were laughing, cheering and laughing more at the nice film unfolding in front of their eyes. They were watching a smart little film about redemption and family. When walking out of the theater the little buggers were loudly proclaiming the funniness of the film. The majority of the laughs come from the three clans and their suitors that are visiting in hopes of gaining Merida’s hand. My favorite actor/Scotsman/host Craig Ferguson voices Lord Macintosh, he is the hairy fella on the far left.
The film centers around Merida. She is a ball of red hair which must have cost the animators 15 million because every wisp of hair has its own personality. She is an ace with an arrow, rides a Clydesdale and does not want to marry one of the three nerdy suitors looking for her attention. Merida runs away and meets a witch who does not want to cast any spells because they always go wrong. What follows is a cast spell and a daughter looking to repair the damage she has inflicted upon the family. The movie never loses its whimsy and is a marvel to look at. I’m not kidding when I say that each strand of Merida’s hair flies gracefully in the wind.
This ia Pixar’s first lead heroine and they got her right. I am a big fan of Kelly Macdonald (Trainspotting, Boardwalk Empire, No Country for Old Men) She uses her Scottish accent to full extent and took over when Reese Witherspoon had to drop out due to scheduling conflicts. MacDonald gives Merida loads of exuberance and nails the toughness of the character.
Brave is Pixars message to Dreamworks and How to Train Your Dragon. The film doesn’t reach the wonder of Dragon but it adds another outstanding addition to the medieval animated lore. As long as Pixar is making films I will continue to enjoy them and appreciate the wonder they incorporate. It still isn’t as good as Wall-E though.
Share this post:
Bad Movie Tuesday: Friends With Kids
If you read the weekly Bad Movie Tuesday you’ve noticed that I always find positives to bad movies. I like to know why the movies went wrong or why the dialogue is so bad. When watching Friends With Kids I found myself increasingly annoyed at the black and white creation by people who thought they were making a worldly film. The singular vision and the simplicity parading as depth prevented the film from becoming a stand out chapter in the romantic comedy world. So, the best thing you can take from this film is that singular visions can often elevate or hinder the material.
Two people who don’t want to deal with the responsibilities of marriage decide to have a kid without the hang ups of a relationship. Of course, this plan will not work and eventually one of them will make a quick u-turn and speed towards the other’s house while Shattered (turn the car around) by OAR plays on the soundtrack. Friends With Kids boasts progressive thought but is no different from every other romantic comedy. The achilles heal for this film is that it is too simple. Everything is black and white. There is very little grey. You can tell that it is the sole idea produced, directed and written by Jennifer Westfeldt who also stars.
Westfeldt is the long time partner of Jon Hamm and is known for Kissing Jessica Stein and Ira and Abby. Both of those films feature plots about people who are tired with their current situation so they try something new and it doesn’t work out. Friends With Kids is more of the same and centers around two wealthy good-looking people who have not settled down and have no plans because marriage and babies kills relationships. However, both want children so they decide to make a baby and share the responsibilities while they date other people. At this point of the film I was saying “oh, geesh.” I knew exactly what would follow. The three things include two best friends, two baxters (romantic foils) and a loving reunion.
Friends With Kids is a movie that alienates the audience with its characters and plot. From the beginning you know the plan will not work because it is not thought out at all due to absolute arrogance. The movie also takes likable characters and turns them into selfish people with little social tact. Adam Scott hates organized religion and broke up with a woman because she voted for Bush in 2004. He doesn’t want marriage because he is a Lothario who can woo anyone and pulls down Megan Fox after several sentences. He insults parents who bring their kids out to dinner and makes fun of his friends for only having sex once a month. Also, when he and Jennifer go to a ski lodge for a weekend they argue because each will be having loud sex and they don’t want the baby in the room.
This film reminds me of the strange film Larry Crowne. Crowne was so nice that you forgot that he has no real world problems, committed adultery with Julia Roberts and owned a beautiful house despite working at a Costco knock off. Friends With Kids features a hot ensemble cast and sweeping monologues that sound intelligent. However, when the facade wears away you are stuck with a preposterous plot, selfish rich characters and all the clichés you can dream of.
The strangest aspect of this film is that the children are treated as bratty, loud and life wrecking. They cry, they scream at restaurants and drive marriages apart. The parents have zero control and are driven mad. Kids are plot points and you feel bad for a kid that was produced out of convenience and not love. Roger Ebert wrote a wonderful review for this film and sums it up by saying:
“It feels like an artificial screenplay concoction that’s perhaps pitched at moviegoers 15 or 20 years younger than the stars — audiences who don’t have the experience to understand the whole child-sharing scheme is cockamamie.”
Watch Friends With Kids, Feel bad for the kids and realize the cockamamie.
Share this post:
The Hunter
Watching Willem Dafoe hunt a Tasmanian Devil while bonding with a family is well worth the four dollar rental. The movie feels familiar but works as a hybrid. Watching a man hunt an extinct creature is a neat concept. I guess it is the ultimate journey looking for an animal that may or may not exist. The lone hunter against the lone beast. Man vs. nature. Viewer vs. not thinking about Dafoe’s character from Life Aquatic while watching The Hunter.
The vistas of Tasmania are why I watched this film. It is a world unknown to me aside from a few pcitures and clips. I wanted to see a man immersed in it while hunting its most treasured creature. The movie moves slowly towards the inevitable showdown. Along the way the lone mercenary befriends a family, shoots several creatures and gets multiple dirty looks from Sam Neil.
The movie is a hybrid between a quiet hunting film and a man starting to belong in a community. It never reaches the blending of poetry and suspense it chases but it delivers us to a new world with a familiar plot. The Hunter is a showcase for Willem Dafoe and allows him to flex his acting muscles and beard growing skills.
Share this post:
Ted
Joel McHale calls Mark Wahlberg “squirt,” Flash Gordon punches through a wall then wrestles a man named Ming and Giovanni Ribisi dances creepily to I Think We’re Alone Now. Ted is a funny blast of fresh air that shows evidence of a first time director yet still manages to provide big laughs.
The main takeaway from this film is that Seth MacFarlane loves crane/jib shots. The sweeping shots seem out-of-place in a world where Mark Wahlberg smokes pot with a magical teddy bear.
Ted begins with a lonely young boy making a wish that his stuffed bear will come to life so they can be best friends forever. The next morning the wish comes true and they become instant best friends. The sweet little bear becomes a worldwide celebrity and eventually falls into the pitfalls that come with being a child star. fifteen years later the bear is unemployed, smokes copious amounts of weed and solicits prostitutes. His pal played by Mark Wahlberg is stuck in arrested development much to the annoyance of his understanding girlfriend played by MacFarlane regular Mila Kunis.
Ted is being praised for the humor that never lets up or diminishes. However, I’m amazed at how realistic Ted looks. The bear is a marvel of motion capture that raises the bar for CGI. MacFarlane was on set doing double duty as director and character. His lines were recorded on set and not in a studio. Thus, the voice work comes across naturally because he was there to guide the actors and riff during the moment. This movie is more accessible than Family Guy too. After twenty minutes of that show my brain is scrambled and I feel dumb. Ted is a dirty freight train of comedy that keeps chugging along.
21 Jump Street and Ted have made 2012 a very good year for comedies. There are moments in Ted that had me laughing out loud. Ted’s interviews with his grocery store boss are highlights of foul language and unexpected pay offs. Also, the wrestling match between Ted and a duck is fantastic. Mark Wahlberg proves he is up for anything and Mila Kunis holds her own as a character who could have been like every other annoyed girlfriend. She still is stuck with all the familiar notes but you appreciate how hard she works while her boyfriend does nothing. There are plot inconsistencies all over the place. For instance, Ted can beat up Wahlberg yet is no match for fat kids and angry ducks. However, all of these inconsistencies don’t matter because without them the laughs wouldn’t be so big.
What follows is a genuinely funny film that hits comedic highs but falters when it comes to the relationship business. This movie reminds me of Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant’s first film Cemetary Junction. These men all made a name for themselves on television and slowly jumped into movies. The similarities are the heavy-handed messages that are hammered home with all the subtly of a hammer crashing on a tin roof. It hurts when talented directors who have created memorable comedic characters stick to the tropes of the genre.
I laughed loud and often during Ted. The jokes come so fast that you barely have time to absorb the hilarity of the situation. Whether it be the Tom Skerritt references, Patrick Warburton’s odd habits or Lance Armstrong’s bronzed nut sitting in Joel McHale’s museum you will constantly be entertained.
So, sit back, relax and watch Wahlberg and Ted sit back and relax.
Share this post:
Movies, Films & Flix Roundtable: Alex Cross
Hello all, Mark here.
This weeks trailer talk is Alex Cross. I have a strange fascination for this film because Tyler Perry speaks entirely in a monotone voice while talking about following Mathew Fox to the gates of hell. Following somebody that far sounds like a lot of work. Another activity that is labor intensive is knowing every scenario that cops can think of. Fox has done just that and it all leads to him scuba diving in skyscraper pipes…..
Watch, read and enjoy!
Mark: Tyler Perry takes over Morgan Freeman’s role as Alex Cross. He has to battle a diabolical killer played by Mathew Fox who has done someting worse than Ben Stiller in Simple Jack. Fox has gone full “Christian Bale.” You will see. I love that this movie can be summed up as Madea, Dr. Cox and a Brothers McMullen chase down Dr. jack.
Sweet Sugar: If you tell a serial killer that he’s sick and twisted, wouldn’t that be a compliment? You might as well have said, “man, I love your shoes.”
Mark: What would be the best way to insult an insane killer?
Sweet Sugar: I would say “sorry, no time for tense banter right now, Keeping up with the Kardashians is about to come on”
John: Imagine saying to Kevin Spacey from Seven: “You know, dude, I’m impressed. You’ve just really got yourself together.”
Mark: Hey Hannibal Lector. Didn’t you know Chianti is a terrible choice for human body parts? Wouldn’t a chilled merlot be better with brains and fava beans? Or, Hey Buffalo Bill. You’re using the wrong lotion!
Chuck Finley: Hey Jason…uhh…nice mask. dammit I’m bad at this. shut up.
John: Who’s actually crazier? Matthew Fox the serial killer or Matthew Fox “Lost” on his magical island–or wasn’t he on an island, or is he in the afterlife, or was there ever really an island at all? Oh, I’ve got it. That’s why he wants to kill. That’s his motivation. He’s still mad that after 10 seasons and that cursed babbling finale that he still doesn’t know what the damned deal was with that island!
Mark: I think his character from Party of Five went crazy because Neve Campbell, Jennifer Love Hewitt and Lacey Chabret all starred in serial killer movies and he didn’t. So, on the island he trained medical, gun and beard growing skills in preparation for his battle with Madea.
Mark: “There is not one scenario that you have thought of that he hasn’t figured out.” That sounds like a lot of work….
O’Lasavath: That’s probably how he plays chess. He figures out all possible scenarios of his opponent’s moves, and then he kills them. It’s no wonder why he’s not invited to chess tournaments.
John: Well Gerard Butler evidently turned his pecs and eight-pack into extra brains so that he could do exactly that in Law Abiding Citizen.
Mark: Do these bad guys go to Starbucks with their Ipad and write down every scenario? They order a grande latte, listen to Mozart and check off sky diving, scuba in pipes and bad acting.
Sweet Sugar: This movie makes being a FBI profiler look really easy. I’d just drink coffee, smoke cigars, and say random things like “This guy is checking off the list” or “He’s focused” or “He’s got a clear path.” In the trailer, I think I also heard “We’ve got to get in his head – where will he be next?”
Chuck Finley: *four women dead* “he targeting women dammit!”
Mark: The killer has been targeting blond women with blue eyes who stand approximately 5’2…. What does it all mean? We’ve got to get in his head and wonder who he will kill next!”
John: Oh, not Kristen Bell. I like her.
Mark: Chief: “Manetti, get a patrol car on Kristen Bells house ASAP. I’m still hoping for a Veronica Mars movie.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Final Destination 5 (2011)
MY CALL: Can I get an amen? Wow! Horror fans, if you felt jaded after part 4 of this series, please give the franchise another chance. This time they not only got it right, but got it at least as well as they ever have. Check out the trailer from our August Preview post. I give this a B-horror “A+”. IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: Parts 1-3 of the franchise (2000-2006). But avoid part 4, The Final Destination (2009), like the plague. For methodical kills, I’d also suggest all three movies from the Cube franchise (1997-2004), of course, the Saw and Hostel series, and the very campy and hilarious Piranha 3D and Jennifer’s Body.
I really loved the first three movies in this franchise. Even though they recycled the same plot with different actors and kills scenarios, I always found them to be very fun. The fourth, however, really dropped the ball. I may have enjoyed a few scenes, but there was a noticeable drop in quality and I was left bitterly distrustful of the series. That said, I had high hopes for this fifth installment which was directed by new blood director Steven Quale, who has never been at the helm of a movie, but assisted Cameron on Avatar. I purchased my ticket willingly and with optimism.
These kids don’t stand a chance…
Not only did this movie make up for the Shakespearian tragedy of its immediate predecessor, but I enjoyed completely unexpected levels of quality. For one thing, they got some funny actors (David Koechner of Anchorman, Waiting; P. J. Byrne of BET’s The Game, Horrible Bosses) who delivered a degree of inter-kill-scene comedy which the other movies lacked. This comedy did not make the exciting anticipation of the next kill any less intense. In fact, these deaths mixed gasp-inducing red herrings, “oh shit” shocking moments, and comedic 80’s-esque execution with excellent CGI effects.
Acupuncture and Lasik surgery. What could possibly go wrong…?
P. J. Byrne really stole the show. To look at him, he’s clearly no womanizer. But the things he says to woman after woman over the phone remind us of our jackass frat buddies who couldn’t be more rude to the opposite sex. Then there’s Koechner, whose lines are as great as his death scene in the opening act.
Here’s an out-of-left-fielder. I actually enjoyed the 3D. This is the first time EVER that I have seen a movie in 3D without disfavoring it to the standard 2D. My Bloody Valentine was carefully made for 3D enjoyment, but it really seemed second to this. The writing, CGI, kill creativity, tactful cast, humor and production value made for a grippingly funny and overall well-made horror flick.
Very poor dismount. One of the out-takes from the 2008 Olympic trials. Little Suzy from Nebraska wanted it so bad.
For its high-budget-B-horror genre, the greatness of this movie was almost unwarranted. It reminded me of another movie which truly shocked me with overall quality: Jennifer’s Body. Both movies may have been deliberately campy, but both also had the actors, writers, direction and effects reserved for films of much greater magnitude and far displaced from the realm of modern horror. Also, the ending, following suit with the rest of the movie, was delivered with a twist so clever that I’ll bet no one sees it coming!
If you love horror see this movie. See it in theaters. Even pay extra to see it in 3-D.
Tony Todd will have a job as long as they keep making these movies. He’s basically a horror union rep. He does the same job day in and day out, he keeps getting paid more, and you can’t fire him without a lawsuit.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Living Dead Girl (1982)
MY CALL: God forbid…the utilization of nudity as an artistic mechanism—and by a pornographer, no less! An odd, very French morality tale from the antique horror section, this film manages to take a serious approach at what may be prematurely deemed a lesbian zombie exploitation flick. Although, it should have been cut down to a 30 minute short. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Although immature, I’m reminded of Return of the Living Dead 3 (1993). LANGUAGE: This flick is in French. Netflix has it with English subtitles.
Our story is about a young woman (Catherine) who rises from the dead after an earthquake causes a small toxic waste spill. Completely undecayed and looking quite lovely, she stabs two guys in the eyes and throat with her apparently deadly fingernails in some ultra-campy gored up scenes that should please with broad smiling Oh Gods. She then finds her way to a castle in which she once lived. Now this may feel like the beginning of some classic, trashy, Euro-horror smut with excessive gore, but this film actually offers us a lot more than that and shouldn’t be prematurely judged.
She sheds a few tears—as zombies do, if indeed that’s how we’re to classify her—as the house stirs up some memories of her childhood and best friend (Helene). She kills a few others, again with brusquely executed fingernail throat stabbings, then does some blood-feeding—not really sure if I’m supposed to say the word “vampire” here.
Now comfortable in her home, Catherine strips to nothing as if reborn into her new form. I’m not gonna’ lie. There is a lot of full frontal nudity in these scenes and, again, I’d remind you not to judge just yet.
Catherine’s beloved friend Helene arrives and knows that her best friend has been dead for a good while by now. But her reaction is not disbelief or panic. No, no, no. It’s are you okay? as she stands before her mute, naked, blood-soaked, clearly murderous, long dead friend like everything is normal. There is a serious suspension of reality now as Helene lays undead Catherine down to rest as she relocates the victems’ naked corpses to the cellar vault. Then, as if routine, she invites Catherine to bloodfeed on her wrist very much like a scene out of True Blood.
So you may have noticed a bit of a theme with the nudity here. However surprising, this is all done with a straight face as if the goal was to make a serious, even poetic horror film—as opposed to Tom Kincaid’s smutty horror (Mutant Hunt, Robot Holocaust, Breeders) when he’s not working on gay porn. As it turns out, after these first few scenes there is no more nudity in this film and the nudity that passed, in fact, served a tactful purpose in setting a heavy, dark, romantic tone.
Like a boudoir version of Regarding Henry or The Vow, Helene rehabilitates Catherine, teaches her to speak and tries to remind her of their love. And, like those movies, Catherine is overwhelmed and meets hysteria at times. Without a flicker of consideration, conscience or reason, Helene starts luring attractive women to the castle for Helene to feed (like in Let the Right One In or The Countess). Why young attractive women? Duh! They’re delicious!
As Catherine becomes more self-aware, she feels conflicted about her “evil” existence in which she must drain others of life to survive. Once she finds her humanity she doesn’t wish to continue. Meanwhile Helene, trying to preserve her friendship by any desperate means necessary, becomes more monstrous as she tries to force victems on Catherine, letting their blood before her as if to inspire her beast within, and killing any who may threaten the livelihood of her love—now more Helene’s obsession.
Directed and written by Jean Rollin, whose work includes The Nude Vampire (1970), Lips of Blood (1975), The Grapes of Death (1978), Zombie Lake (1982), Two Orphan Vampires (1997), La Fiancee de Dracula (2002) and a lot of porn, this film represents a pornographer’s foray into expressive film using, of all things, horror as a delivery mechanism. During this film our sympathies shift from the living to the dead and a loving friendship becomes a perverted, macabre husk of its former self; Rollin’s attention went to the moral dilemma of Catehrine’s being in place of the breastage no doubt inserted for commercial appeal. I’d say it was a success and should be included in any true horror fans’ resume. The somewhat poetic ending is neither predictable nor original, but it serves the story perfectly.
BELOW: Here is an example of a movie cover/poster that would quickly mislead folks into thinking this is a straight-up exploitation flick. It’s so not.
Share this post:
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
MY CALL: Not quite amazing. But exactly what I needed after that whole Spider-Man 3 debacle. Ditch the old trilogy + new cast = Good choice. Garfield is a confident and sensitive Spider-Man that all should enjoy. [B/B+] SIDEBAR: This is more of a comparison to the pre-boot than it is a review of the re-boot. I deemed this appropriate since most are likely wondering how they compare.
The Amazing Spider-Man follows suit in the not-so-amazing franchise reboot trend. One of the best things about the first Harry Potter or Matrix movies was that the audience got to be wowed by an unfamiliar world and characters that have never before graced the screen. When you watch a reboot, you buy a ticket and some over-priced concessions and hope that “this time they get it right”; you catch all the things they “still got wrong” instead of those that should impress. Even if the movie is great, we run the risk that our skepticism may negatively impact our enjoyment of the movie. Being quite pleased with this movie, I feel that most ho-hum reviews are a product of this jaded, can’t-be-impressed mentality.
Everyone should know the gist by now—angsty teen is bitten by a radioactive spider, with great power comes great responsibility, hey check out that cute girl, ahhh a bad guy, blah blah blah—so I’ll skip the grand overview. Fledgling action director Marc Webb does a fine job where I feel Sam Raimi (Drag Me to Hell)—who I LOVE as a horror genius—really just did okay or failed altogether.
1. Andrew Garfield (The Social Network) came off with all the expected teen angst that Peter Parker should portray, but without the annoying quality that came with Tobey Maguire (Spider-Man 1-3). I felt like Garfield’s Parker was a regular kid in that he felt the world didn’t get him whereas Maguire’s Parker was a kid that the world couldn’t get.
2. Parker’s relationship with Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone; Crazy Stupid Love, Friends With Benefits) felt natural. They liked each other, there was no major conflict, she was much more the a damsel in need of rescue, and we accept the delivery and conclusion when Parker decides that he cannot be with her since it would place her in too great a danger. All was the opposite in Raimi’s Spider-Man movies, wherein Parker’s conflict-overwhelmed romance with Mary Jane felt no more natural than passing a kidney stone and when they emotionally try to part ways it’s nothing but awkward and distracting. And “no”, I don’t mean in an effective way.
3. Amazing’s villain, The Lizard (Rhys Ifans; Anonymous), shifts from friend to foe in a manner no more dramatic than one should expect from a comic book adaptation. Likewise, Parker’s relationship with Captain Stacy (Denis Leary; Rescue Me) evolves simply, but smoothly. These characters, in combination, served the same role as The Green Goblin/Norman Osborn, which presented an over-complicated relationship with Parker exacerbated by the romantic triangle between his son, Parker and Mary Jane; what a mess.
4. In Spider-Man, even though I thought the movie was a lot of fun, I never once felt myself rooting for Parker. In Amazing I caught myself rooting for him all the time. The action and effects in the franchise pre-boot were fine, quite good in fact, but Amazing injected a more effective personality dynamic from Parker, more plausible fight dynamics (if only slightly), and a less cartoony-ridiculous villain. Amazing had a serious feelgood scene were Spider-Man saves a boy from a burning car; I actually believed Spider-Man might fail and was relieved and thrilled when (and how) he succeeded. Amazing made Peter Parker just that, “amazing,” as a big-hearted hero should be!
5. The character relationships worked—because there was a manageable number of characters. Raimi got stuck with a character-heavy script with each of them exerting some sort of unique stress on Parker.
6. Parker figures out the whole “with great power comes great responsibility” thing on his own, without Uncle Ben spelling it all out for him all the time in the pre-boot. Garfield’s Parker is less vulnerable than Maguire’s, but has all the sensitivity necessary for the role and all the confidence that Raimi had Maguire suppress.
Gotta’ carb up, Uncle Ben.
This was a striking success that will pave a solid future for Spider-Man movies. Decisions from casting to scripting were just right. If I had to craft a complaint, it would be that I have seen this movie before…it was just much better this time; as if Spider-Man got a mulligan; a re-do; a reboot. I’d add that Martin Sheen, Sally Field and Denis Leary (the supporting cast) all felt under-utilized. If you have a small part, don’t fill it with a big name unless we’re going to feel an impact.
Is there a little bit of silly in all this? Sure. First off, The Lizard is really Jekyll’n’Hyde-ish and outside of insanity I cannot explain his motives (which are to “help” the world and harm no one).
Good make-up. No muscles for the sake of muscles or rippled abs. But more loose, neck-wrinkled lizard skin. I dug it.
Gwen Stacy, a highschooler, has top tier security clearance at a private company researching morally questionable, world-changing interspecies genetic engineering. Oh, and she knows quite a bit about it. For example, if one were to, say, weaponize an aerosol species-hybridizing catalyst, no worries, because she could probably whip up a weaponized aerosol antigen for it in twenty minutes. But whatever! It’s a comic book adaptation. This sounds stupid now that I’m 31, but sounded way awesome when I was a teenager. I’m not saying don’t enjoy a giggle and roll your eyes, just remember that this is meant to instill a sense of satisfying fantasy to the younger generation.
Evidently she’s taking AP “PhD in all things science”!
I saw it in 2D. Because of the large amount of fast-paced, closeup-filmed action I would discourage 3D. I have never, NEVER, seen a 3D movie that could keep up with action like this without suffering to some degree of blurring or obscured detail. That said, I didn’t see it in 3D. So if you love 3D, maybe give it a shot.
Please go see this movie. See it, love it and feel young again; feel the way you should feel after seeing a superhero movie.
Movies, Films & Flix 