SeussMeTub Reviews

Becoming Bond (2017)

A Dud

[1/10 · 3 August 2021]

What could have been an interesting documentary ends up being a boring piece of ****.

It's all about George talking about himself, and it features pointless reenactments of his life- why in God's name would you bother to do reenactments when he's already telling you what happened?

Also, the filmmakers didn't even bother to interview anyone else, so you never know whether what George was saying is even true or not. There's no different viewpoints and no insight except of what comes out of Lazenby's mouth.

What's even worse is that it completely glosses over what happened to George after he quit Bond.

Don't waste your time with this trash.

Mafiosa (II) (2006–2014)

Gets Better Every Season

[7/10 · 12 January 2017]

Mafiosa is a French TV series that ran for five seasons and deals with the Corsican mafia. The story revolves around Sandra Paoli (Hélène Fillières), a lawyer and the daughter of a mob boss who ends up inheriting most of her family's mafia assets after her beloved uncle is gunned down. Sandra is joined by her hot headed brother Jean-Michel (Thierry Neuvic) in an almost dysfunctional drama with your typical mobster subjects like murders, drug deals, extortion, gambling, etc.

Not quite as violent as Italy's Gomorra, nor does it have the complex characters of HBO's The Sopranos or the historicity of Boardwalk Empire, Mafiosa tends to go back and forth between being a soap opera and a mobster show. Sandra tends to fall in love with the hit men she employs and in the ludicrous first season- shuttles back and forth between being a defense lawyer and mafia queen.

The second season gets better as she finally ditches the lawyer subplot and goes full mob boss and the third season is actually quite good as the stakes go higher. But you just can't help but feel it's a little contrived when Sandra does things that no mobster would tolerate: like giving away information to cops, or dating her soldiers and allowing them to abuse her.

There are occasional side plots with goofy gangsters and family angst with her brother's teen daughter (the very hot Phareelle Onoyan), but on the whole it feels a little too tame for the subject matter its supposed to portray. Nevertheless if you're a fan of gangster shows you might want to check it out, just don't expect to be blown away by it.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

A Smorgasbord of Characters and Convoluted Action

[7/10 · 22 April 2015]

The original line-up of the Avengers are back for one last go: Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Hawkeye and Black Widow and a whole bunch of new unofficial heroes in Joss Whedon's final turn in the director's chair for Marvel's ensemble franchise.

What's the story about? Well it's pretty simple, in the wake of Loki's attempted invasion of New York City, Tony Stark attempts to create an artificial intelligence whose sole task is to protect Earth against future threats. Of course, this backfires and the Avengers end up creating their deadly enemy, Ultron. The rumors are true: one Avenger will die and it might not be who you expect.

Is it worth watching? Well, first the good stuff: the battle between an enraged Hulk and Iron Man in an unnamed African city is the highlight of the movie and it happens around the midpoint. Supporting characters in the first film like Hawkeye, Black Widow and the Hulk finally get center stage though at the expense of old stalwarts like Thor (who becomes an inadvertent comic relief throughout most of the movie) and Captain America (who turns into a one-dimensional boy scout). Iron Man is the Jimmy Neutron of the team- a tortured genius who tries to create a solution to a problem that has yet to exist and ends up creating a Frankenstein monster of sorts- it's not that Tony Stark is the villain but this does tie in nicely with the upcoming Captain America: Civil War movie.

This brings into focus the central weakness of the movie: namely too many characters and not enough screen time for each one to be fleshed out. The movie not only serves as an origin story for Ultron as well as new Avengers Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver and the Vision but it ends up making the story a paper thin pastiche of short character building vignettes around huge swirling chaotic battle scenes- many of them too enamored with fast editing to the point that they are almost too quick to follow with the mind's eye. Additional cameos by the Falcon, War Machine and Nick Fury only adds to its ad-hoc nature and myriad narrative.

In the end, Avengers Age of Ultron is ultimately satisfying but if you look closer, it seems to be nothing more than a placeholder for future plot lines in the upcoming Marvel Universe movie franchises.

RoboCop (2014)

Too Much Exposition, Meandering and Bland

[5/10 · 5 February 2014]

With Hollywood at a loss to make original movies, it was inevitable that the Robocop franchise would eventually get the reboot. In 1987, the original Robocop became an instant box office hit with its mixture of witty satire and over the top violence as well as top notch acting by Peter Weller, Kurtwood Smith and Ronny Cox; the deciding factor in what made that movie so fresh at the time was the addition of Dutch director Paul Verhoeven who seemed to understand what the audience at the time needed: a high tech cyborg (artfully designed by special effects whiz Rob Bottin and its robotic suit would become a cinema icon) who fought crime in a near future world overwhelmed by greed, hypocrisy, corruption and excessive, almost cartoonish violence.

In this reboot, the studios were able to acquire the services of Brazilian director Jose Padiha (who directed Elite Squad and its sequel, two intense police thrillers set in his native Brazil) but unfortunately they forgot to give him a good script to work with (there were rumors during production that Padiha had a lot of ideas that were nixed by studio bosses. Figures.). The other reason why the original movie also worked was because its R rating worked in its favor: the enormous amount of bloodletting added to its satirical view of the future as well as that of American culture which really spoke to the audience. With this reboot aimed at more family friendly crowds, the PG-rated violence is filmed using rapid jump cuts which makes it totally confusing, its like watching a video game on fast forward so that by the time your mind registers what's going on the scene is finished.

The movie itself also suffers from pacing problems- just when the narrative is about to steamroll forward, the scenes abruptly change so that any emotional momentum is lost because there just isn't much characterization of the main parts; everything that should have an emotional impact is glossed over by a jump to a new scene with way too much focus on explanations of what the characters are doing so that the audience fails to gain sympathy for anybody.

I can't really judge Joel Kinnaman's acting in the title role since there really isn't much for him to do other than walk around in the Robocop suit and utter a few words every now and then- he seems to spend too much time bug eyed and in shock more than anything else. The supporting cast also seems wasted, with Michael Keaton and Jackie Earle Haley's screen time largely limited to trying to explain whats going on rather than actually doing anything. Even Michael K Williams seems lost as Robocop's sidekick. Patrick Garrow as the heavy is pretty much a cardboard villain compared to the 1987 version with the menacing Kurtwood Smith and his gang of killer psychos. Gary Oldman's performance is pretty much average since he's also got nothing much to do.

Alas, the biggest disappointment is the movie's absence of any sort of humor: the 1987 film had boatloads of wacky commercials that interrupted the narrative yet provided a great view on how that future world was set up as well as crazy, sadistic villains and a pun on the name of the chief baddie (Dick Jones- best name ever). Instead, we get snippets of a news media show run by Samuel L Jackson whose presence in this movie is also wasted since he spends more time recapping what we already saw and his jokes fall flat.

The only good scene happens right at the beginning with a battle between Iranian insurgents and the robot army but soon after the movie quickly loses momentum and never regains it. Better to skip this one and wait for the rental, or better yet, watch the 1987 version- its way better.

The Counselor (2013)

Bleak, Nihilistic Coolness

[10/10 · 13 November 2013]

Don't listen to the critics! The Counselor is a bleak and unrelenting thriller of the first order that serves as an excellent companion piece to Cormac McCarthy's award winning No Country For Old Men. If the latter movie traces the beginnings of the drug war in Texas in the early 1980's then The Counselor serves as its inevitable aftermath; the drug trade has made many of its players rich and the competition has made killings far more widespread and fiercer than ever. With more money being made the more dangerous it has become- bankers and unscrupulous politicians are now in on the take and so the stakes have gone past heaven.

In this potential nightmare scenario exists the title character played by Michael Fassbender, he is a highly successful defense lawyer with a somewhat naive fiancée played by Penelope Cruz and his shady coterie which consists of a wisecracking middleman named Westray (Brad Pitt), nightclub owner and part time dealer Reiner (Javier Bardem) and his viper of a girlfriend Malkina (Cameron Diaz). The counselor is in a bit over his head due to his lavish lifestyle and so decides to do one drug deal to pay off his debts. Of course, with these amoral characters the inevitable betrayal begins and we follow each and every one as the downward spiral ends in a bloody orgy of pain and death.

Cormac McCarthy's novels have always been about life and death and the decisions one takes that leads to their respective outcomes- his books are perfect analogies of existentialism. With this, his first original screenplay, McCarthy essentially goes over the same territory that he covered in No Country For Old Men but this time everything has gone corporate- the Mexican Cartel now controls the drug trade in the southwest United States and anyone who dares to cross its path will face an unrelenting army of thugs and assassins until they meet a gruesome end. This pervading sense of doom permeates the entire movie and does not let go; I think the reason why most critics didn't like this film is because there is no humor, no catharsis to pull back the nihilism that pervades the entire storyline. Whereas in No Country For Old Men, the Coen brothers were able to inject their dark humor into the movie, Ridley Scott's directorial skills in this film allows no such reprieve.

Fassbender is excellent as the title character; its clear that all his skills as a top defense lawyer has come for naught as he gets involved with things way beyond his expectations; seeing his breakdown into a broken man is a thing to behold. Bardem is as quirky as ever as his best buddy Reiner- his tinted eye glasses, psychedelic clothes and puffed up hair is perfect for the role. Brad Pitt is adequate as the knowledgeable Westray (who seems to be playing a variation of the bounty hunter character that Woody Harrelson played in No Country For Old Men) but its Cameron Diaz who steals the show as the cunning and sociopathic Malkina- she seems to be the new embodiment of death- sultry, seductive and deftly using everyone towards her ultimate goal. Even the bit parts are played by popular actors such Dean Norris, Bruno Ganz, Rosie Perez, John Leguizamo, Edgar Ramirez and Ruben Blades.

The Bourne Legacy (2012)

Less Action, More Plot But Just As Good

[8/10 · 8 August 2012]

Since Matt Damon decided not to reprise his role as Jason Bourne the filmmakers decided to continue the Bourne franchise without him- the result is the Bourne Legacy. Although it has less action than Damon's earlier trilogy it is still quite entertaining and proceeds along a breakneck pace, never slowing down to be boring and is a welcome addition to the Bourne franchise.

Jeremy Renner takes over as lead protagonist Aaron Cross but Damon's presence is constantly being reminded to us since the previous supporting cast from the Bourne Ultimatum (Albert Finney, Scott Glenn, David Strathairn and Joan Allen) all make cameos to make sure that we are firmly within the same universe. In fact the whole movie's timeline takes place at roughly the same time as the Bourne Ultimatum and the constant narrative shifts makes one even anticipate a Matt Damon cameo.

So what's the story about? Well it seems that Jason Bourne wasn't the only assassin in the Treadstone project but now it is revealed that there were other projects beside that one too. Because of the public fallout with the Jason Bourne expose the powers that be decide to shut down these other projects by killing everyone involved. Naturally Renner survives and with the help of surviving scientist Rachel Weisz tries to make sense of it all before they themselves are killed.

Renner's assassin is slightly different than Damon's since he is neither conflicted nor does he have amnesia but is instead addicted to some sort of blue pills that makes him more deadly. Jeremy Renner does an able job filling in for Matt Damon and the plot and action whirls fast enough to satisfy most moviegoers (though a workplace shooting may hit too close to home for some) but the younger crowd might bemoan the lack of constant massive explosions. For everyone else, its good enough to warrant more. The only weakness is that the ending is somewhat abrupt and seems to hint at a sequel due to a number of unresolved plot and character issues.

Here's to hoping Matt Damon and Jeremy Renner teams up in the future with another Bourne movie!

Margin Call (2011)

Incredible and Riveting in a Very Subtle Way.

[10/10 · 12 May 2012]

If Oliver Stone's WALL STREET(1987) was the financial masterpiece that illustrated the excesses of the financial world then JC Chandor's smartly written and riveting MARGIN CALL(2011) would be its successor. The entire movie takes place over two days and one sleepless night within an unnamed Wall Street investment firm in a fictionalized retelling of the days just before the 2008 financial meltdown; the film starts with a very subtle bang: a mass firing of employees begins and one of them happens to be the head of the risk department, Eric Dale (Stanley Tucci plays him with a smoldering intensity), despite his protests that he is onto something big, they take away his cellphone coverage and he gets escorted out of the building by security. At the last minute he hands over a memory stick to his protégé, Peter Sullivan (Zachary Quinto) an MIT graduate in rocket science, with a dire warning. That night, Sullivan manages to piece together a puzzle that may very well be a portent to the firm's financial apocalypse. What follows next is a series of meetings and denouements as to whether the entire company will survive and sacrifice their clients or would they take the risk of keeping their toxic assets and hope to weather the storm.

It's an ensemble cast and a very powerful one at that. Quinto's Sullivan is smart and can put the numbers together but he is clearly out of his league on what to do next, since he can no longer reveal what has happened to Tucci (who has been let go and cannot be contacted due to the firm's arrogant incompetence) he then goes to the higher authority, the Brit supervisor Will Emerson (Paul Bettany in one of his best roles in years; Bettany plays Emerson as an amoral realist but with a charm and a coolness that makes him likable). Emerson in turn goes up to his boss, Sam Rogers (the ever reliable Kevin Spacey) and tells him about it; Rogers is the one moral focal point of the entire movie, he for one truly cares about the consequences of saving his own skin, namely he will have to lie to his clients, the very customers who entrusts him with their money, in order to save the company. Spacey plays Rogers as an old, worn down warrior, but still willing to put his morals aside for the sake of practicality- the fact that Spacey also appeared in the preeminent sales movie of the century GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS(1992) makes the impact of his presence more deserving here.

As the film moves up in the chain of command the morality, or the lack of it, becomes even more acute as we meet the higher ups: Roger's boss, Jared Cohen (played by Simon Baker in his best role ever) who happens to be younger than him- Cohen is near the top because he's reptilian and is in it for his ego- he's the closest character to a Gordon Gekko in this movie. Baker's counterpart, who happens to be a woman who was responsible for letting Tucci go is Sarah Robertson (Demi Moore, in what also happens to be her best role ever), a hard as stone corporate boss who just happens to be in over her head. But the man on top, an emaciated vulture named after the true to life last CEO of the now defunct Lehman Brothers is John Tuld (Jeremy Irons). Irons plays Tuld as a man who makes few but important decisions and will stop at nothing to make sure that the firm makes money, regardless of who gets thrown under.

JC Chandor makes excellent use of pacing and suspense and despite on what appears to be a complex storyline set in the world of international finance, is able to make it clear that any layman can understand what is going on and what the consequences will be. There's an ongoing joke within the movie that as the problem gets passed to the higher ups, the less they themselves seem to understand what is going on and consequently, asks that their subordinates explain it to them as if they would explain it to a child or a dog. While this movie may not be to everyone's taste, I would highly recommend it to anybody that wants to know just what exactly happens when one decides to use a bank or another financial institution in Wall Street: you may never trust a financial firm ever again after seeing this.

The Avengers (2012)

One of The Best Comic Book Movies Ever!

[9/10 · 28 April 2012]

A culmination of several movie franchises, THE AVENGERS certainly delivers. There could have been many ways that the studios could have screwed this movie up but they chose the right director: Joss Whedon (former helmer of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Firefly on TV as well as an actual comic book writer for Marvel Comics). Whedon knows his stuff and he creates what is probably the most compatible comic book movie ever; the whole film reads as if it was an actual Marvel comic book!

Whedon subtly melds the disparate elements from multiple other comic book movies and effortlessly creates an epic storyline that makes sense. The tesseract (known to comic fans as the cosmic cube) that was the focal plot point of CAPTAIN America: THE FIRST AVENGER (2011) has been recovered and being studied closely by the government when Loki (Tom Hiddleston), the villain of the previous THOR (2011) movie appears and takes control of it. In response, Col. Nick Fury (Samuel L Jackson, in his usual badass self) decides to form a small but lethal response team: Iron Man, Captain America, Hulk, Black Widow, Hawkeye and Thor. If they can get along and work together then they might have a chance to save the world.

Being the top billed character because of box-office receipts, Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) gets the best lines and almost steals the entire show. His wisecracks upends the traditional leader of the Avengers, Captain America (Chris Evans, playing the straight man to everyone else) and puts the latter character in a disadvantage- the movie's lone weakness is that Cap doesn't get to do much other than act as a foil to the larger than life Tony Stark. Thor (Chris Helmsworth) does shine in the few scenes in which he is at front and center while both Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) and Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) give much needed humanity since they are the only members of the team that don't have superpowers. But the one character that makes the most impact of his limited screen time is Mark Ruffalo, who plays the volatile Hulk- Ruffalo plays Bruce Banner as a smoldering Stanley Kowalski, always seemingly in control yet has a temper like nitroglycerine- his Banner is different from the brooding Eric Bana of 2003's HULK or the timid Edward Norton of THE INCREDIBLE HULK (2008); you don't get to see much of Ruffalo compared to the others but his character is the most intriguing of all. Hiddleston is adequate as the pouty, scheming Loki but you can't help but believe that he is simply outgunned with all these powerhouses surrounding him.

The movie is almost perfect but does fail to take chances with their characters. Evan's Captain America is a direct copy from the mainstream comic book but you wished he might have been given more of an edge, like the Ultimate Marvel incarnation of Captain America: a slightly racist do-gooder who prefers to smash heads when someone doesn't measure up to his 1930's morality. If only the movie had been longer there might have been more insight into his character but with this film running over 2 ½ hours it might have been a systematic one.

In the end though, there is something for everyone in this movie, from the constant action scenes to the quiet ones that add humanity to what would otherwise be cardboard clichés. Highly recommended!

The Iron Lady (2011)

Wasted Opportunity

[4/10 · 23 April 2012]

While Meryl Streep gives an excellent performance as Margaret Thatcher, the movie instead focuses on an old woman's dementia and senility while glossing over the important events of Thatcher's life. We never get to see the in depth events and reasons on how she was able to overcome the glass ceiling for women back then and become the first woman prime minister of the UK and many other events in her time have all been left out or given a very trivial send off. It would have been more interesting if we had been given more glimpses of what shaped her as well as the internal battles within her party and her decisions that gave her the chance to make the UK prosperous again.

Instead we are treated to over an hour of a hallucinating old woman! Abominable!

The Robber (2010)

A Mesmerizing, Existential Thriller!

[8/10 · 13 December 2011]

Most fans of Hollywood movies will probably not like this film because it doesn't contain massive explosions or a bombastic soundtrack (in fact it practically has none) but this stunner (based on the story of a real life bank robber) is one of the great thrillers of the decade. A sleek, sparse study of existentialism, THE ROBBER is a must see.

It begins rather abruptly, the first scene is a man named Johann (superbly played by Andreas Lust) running in what seems like a training center, but as soon as the camera pans back we realize he is in a prison and is about to be released after serving a 6 year sentence. As the story unfolds Johann is set free where he begins to win marathons but leads a double life as he returns to his old habits of stealing cars and then using them as getaway vehicles for his bank robberies.

As with European cinema, much of the pacing and characters are understated, there are times when nobody says anything but from the background noises and the looks on their faces you can clearly tell what they are thinking. Even though the few people he knows (his former girlfriend, his parole officer) deeply cares for him and pulls strings to get him to live a normal life it's clear that he does not want any of it. Johann just wants to rob banks and run because that is all he is. The whole movie takes place in Austria, the land of Heidi and Vienna coffee houses but with the movie being portrayed through Johann's eyes, Austria seems bleak, detached and robotic to make it look almost unbearable to be living in; while there are other characters in the story, they seem to be nothing more than minor twinkles in Johann's eye- he does not care for them and it almost seems like they are ghosts to him.

There were some professional critics that lambasted this movie for not revealing Johann's motivation on why he is what he is. But what they don't understand is that it really doesn't matter. Some people do things because it's the one thing (or two in Johann's case) that gives them meaning- everything else is of no consequence. I find the main protagonist/antagonist of this movie to be a combination of Johnny Depp's John Dillinger in PUBLIC ENEMIES and Barry Newman's Kowalski in VANISHING POINT. They exist only to do the one thing that matters to them and that's it.

Miami Vice (1984–1989)

The James Bond of Cop Shows!

[9/10 · 4 September 2011]

When it comes to police procedurals, TV history can subdivide it into two eras: before Miami Vice and after Miami Vice. Before Miami Vice came along procedurals would usually show cops as overweight, pudgy guys wearing ill-fitting suits (like in Hawaii Five-O, Kojak and Dragnet) or as incorruptible blue centurions in uniform (as in Hill Street Blues or Police Story) who were straight up god fearing boy scouts who did their job and nothing else. Shows about cops tended to be mechanical, with cops going about their daily, almost boring routines when it came to solving things like murders, robbery and such; undercover cops in these shows tended to look like street winos with their ragged clothes and even worse hair.

But when Miami Vice came along it changed everything. Essentially a show that focused on the drug war that engulfed (and still continues) Miami in the 1980's, this show turned the normally plodding police procedural up on its ear. The series centers on tough but sensitive Detective Sonny Crockett (Don Johnson) and his suave, streetwise partner Ricardo Tubbs (Phillip Michael Thomas). Gone were the ill-fitting cheap suits that cops of yesteryear wore, Crockett and Tubbs were handsome, hip and wore the best designer suits drug money could buy as well as having high powered speedboats and Ferrari sport cars as their vehicles of choice when it came to nabbing the bad guys. Miami Vice was also one of the first TV shows that had a cool, synthesizer rock score (courtesy of Jan Hammer) and regularly included the latest pulse pounding music by the original artists as part of its score. Vibrant pastel colors replaced the usual boring earth tones of other cop shows to the point where the series was actually responsible for the art deco renaissance of Miami Beach. It was also one of the first TV shows to have a series finale and their guns were always state of the art.

Despite their stylish clothes and fast lifestyle, there was a substance to the characters of Miami Vice that very few mainstream TV shows could match back then- both Crockett and Tubb's relationships with their women and their families, while looking fast and trendy from the outside almost always ended up in tragedy as the series wore on, by the end of the series both men were burned out that the whole show ended up as a microcosm of America's never-ending and ultimately futile War on Drugs; the constant betrayals of their friends and the ubiquitous corruption both within the police force and the courts and politicians ultimately took its toll. As the show finished its five year run, it went from hip and zany to nihilistic and dark; much like the wave of popular opinion as the cheerful Eighties turned into the cynical Nineties.

While never a ratings superstar and despite only lasting five seasons, the influence of Miami Vice lives on in the countless other TV shows that have been shown since then.

X: First Class (2011)

Meh...

[5/10 · 2 June 2011]

Bryan Singer needs to stop destroying the X-Men franchise.

It's bad enough that this movie throws continuity out the window (well, the previous X-Men movies already did that so it's not like its a new thing...) but what's even worse is that it recycles the EXACT SAME MESSAGE that occurred in the first three X-Men movies: yes, we know mutants are different, yes we know mutants have dangerous powers, yes we know there are good and bad mutants but... ENOUGH ALREADY!!! People are sick and tired of being pounded over the head with the same theme; this one-trick pony has had it's day. If you look at the X-Men comic books they fought a wide variety of villains, each with their own different agenda- unfortunately in this movie every villain has the same agenda just as before- destroy the human race- like, how many times has that been done? Why not just watch the first 3 X-Men movies? Why bother with this?

Prof X (James McAvoy) now is younger, can walk and has hair and is a free-loving hipster in the 60's while Magneto (Michael Fassbender) is a suave, James Bond-like assassin. Director Matt Vaughn tries a new retro look for a 60's era reboot of the franchise but unfortunately it falls back to the same clichés that screwed up the franchise in the first place- namely that the movies are totally different than the comic books they are based on. If you look at the best comic book movie adaptations such as Raimi's Spider Man or Nolan's Batman movies they are very faithful to the source material.

The X-Men franchise is almost totally different from its roots: with the exception of Beast this X-Men team is completely different from the X-Men's first class of the comic books (Havok is supposed to be Cyclop's younger brother but here it seems he is more like his father and his powers are completely different- and inexplicable and not to mention that his back story is never revealed so you don't even know how he fits in to all of it)- there are even massive logic gaps in continuity (in one scene the entire US government knows about the existence of Xavier and his mutants and towards the ending it seems only one CIA agent is aware of it and in another scene a secret agent spies on a mutant telepath in the other room and the mutant is completely unaware of it even though she's suppose to be able to read minds). With the exception of Xavier, Magneto, Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) and Beast (Nicholas Hoult) all the other characters in the movie are nothing more than plot pieces and exist solely as gimmicks. This points out to another weakness in the franchise: too many mutant characters and not enough script to develop their personalities so this means you hardly notice or care about them if they die.

Sure, the 60's retro look set pieces are nice and the special effects are up to par but the rest of it just isn't there.

The Count of Monte-Cristo (1975 TV Movie)

Lean But Highly Effective Version of The Dumas Classic

[9/10 · 10 April 2011]

Although this made for TV movie has been overshadowed by the other, more famous and lavish versions, this particular adaptation happens to be the most faithful to Dumas' novel.

Richard Chamberlain is quite effective as Edmund Dantes, the sailor who is wrongfully imprisoned by three of his former friends who happens to escape many years later to find the lost treasure of Monte Cristo- he dons a new identity as the Count and unleashes a complex but highly satisfying revenge on his enemies.

Because of its short running time, it dispenses with many of the novel's subplots but it actually makes this film better because it focuses on Dantes' revenge and does it quite well. The ending is ironic and it seems, the only version that keeps Dumas' original plot intact unlike the big Hollywood version with Jim Caviezel that was made in 2002.

Excellent supporting performances by Louis Jourdan as De Villefort (Jourdan actually starred as the Count in a 1961 version of this same movie!), Trevor Howard as the Abbe Faria and Donald Pleasance as the slimy Danglars while Tony Curtis hams it up a bit as the evil Mondego- but his exposure is limited and he is still quite good. Highly recommended.

Miller's Crossing (1990)

Underrated Gangster Film

[10/10 · 17 February 2011]

The Coen brothers are known as quality filmmakers and while this movie is one of their best it failed miserably in the box office when it first came out but has now become a cult classic.

Tom Reagan (Gabriel Byrne in his best performance) is a consiliere (trusted adviser) who gets into a heap of trouble when his boss Leo (Albert Finney) decides to protect shyster Bernie Bernbaum (John Torturro) from up and coming Italian mob boss Johnny Caspar (Tom Pollito). You see, Leo is in love with Bernie's sister Verna (Marcia Gay Harden) whom Tom happens to be having an affair with.

The plot is convoluted and complex as Tom is in a love triangle but also ends up having to take on another love triangle, this time a discreet homosexual one concerning Bernie, a fast-talking bookie named Mink (Steve Buscemi) and Johnny's top enforcer, The Dane (JE Freeman). It's a clash of idealism versus reality as Tom outwits them all, somehow staying above the fray as violence and chaos swirls all around him.

Every character is unique in which they have their own quirks and vices. Tom is far from perfect due to his gambling problem and yet he is superior to all the others due to the fact that he is a realist while everybody else is an idealist, meaning they tend to trust their allies and lovers too much while Tom knows the evil that lurks in the hearts of all men (and women). In the end, it is Tom who is the most ruthless of them all because of his cynicism.

If you like period drama, complex plot machinations and gangsters, this is a must see film. Don't be afraid if you don't understand it all, it takes several viewings for most people to get it.

The Dark Knight (2008)

Excellent Sequel to Batman Begins

[8/10 · 17 July 2008]

One thing's for sure: comic book based movies are here to stay. Once before they were B-movie, red headed stepchildren with very miniscule budgets and low grade actors, now these films regularly attract A-list talent both in front and behind the camera. The latest in this summer comic book slate is THE DARK KNIGHT, the sequel to the well received and awesomely successful Batman reboot BATMAN BEGINS and continues right where it left off.

Where the first movie dealt with the origins of how and why Batman came to be, this sequel now moves onto a larger canvas: the storyline now revolves around the consequences of Batman's appearance in a city gripped by crime and hopelessness. With the demise of former mob boss Carmine Falcone's power in Gotham City, the various crime syndicates are now leaderless and trying to reconsolidate as Batman (Christian Bale) AKA billionaire playboy Bruce Wayne continues his relentless assault to restore order. In the first film director Chris Nolan portrayed Gotham as a sort of cross between the slums of Hong Kong and Chicago of the Al Capone era with lots of rain and gloom, now Gotham is depicted as being very similar to New York, with many massive high rises and somewhat sunnier skies, it seems Gotham is literally coming back to life.

But even with new fearless district attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart in his best role to date), it seems the city is just a few steps ahead of the rising tide of criminality that is beginning to strike back against its newfound heroes and it manifests itself into a new and powerful adversary called the Joker (Heath Ledger in his final film role). I have always found that the main differences between the main comic book makers Marvel and DC is in the portrayal of their heroes- whereas Marvel superheroes tend to be average guys and gals who are thrust with superpowers and lots of responsibility, DC superheroes tend to be iconic representations of the human condition: Superman is a depiction of the ideals and greatness of mankind while Batman represents vigilantism and revenge. As the plot of the movie unfolds, the forces of law and order, represented by Lt. Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman once again reprises his role and it has been expanded considerably) and Harvey Dent, battle it out on the streets of Gotham city against the forces of criminality with mob bosses Eric Roberts and Michael Jai White (yes, the SPAWN guy is here too) allied with chaos and anarchy which is represented by the Joker with Batman the vigilante smack dab in the middle of it all. Despite Batman being on the side of order, his very methods create a copycat gang of vigilantes who style themselves after him which puts the city even closer to the brink. As all the swirling plot lines culminate into one big showdown, Batman must make his choices carefully as every action he takes creates unintended and sometimes tragic consequences.

The last great movie I saw since last year was NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN but I can say that THE DARK KNIGHT finally gives me a satisfaction that I had been missing for over a year now. The acting is superb with many old faces returning- Morgan Freeman is homely as Lucius Fox while Oldman has a larger role and consequently gets to shine even further. Maggie Gyllenhaal as the new Rachel Dawes is an infinitely better actress than her predecessor (though I thought Katie Holmes looked sexier even though she had zero talent) but her role is somewhat subdued and we never got more into her character. Christian Bale is adequate for the role of Batman/Bruce Wayne though he doesn't seem to put in anything new to the character (I still think Micheal Keaton was the best movie Batman). The big question is obviously on Heath Ledger and he delivers a deliciously wicked and sadistic Joker- very similar to Jack Nicholson's take on the character and that's a compliment; my only peeve is that he wasn't given a permanent smile like the previous Jokers in the movie and comic book- slightly different take but still very, very entertaining and fits in well with Nolan's more realistic version of the venerable Bat franchise. It is sad that Ledger will never be able to reprise his role and his makeup seems so similar to that of the equally late Brandon Lee in THE CROW that the parallels are eerie. Unlike the past incarnations of the movie and cartoon Jokers, Ledgers performance has transformed the Joker from a villain with a smile on his face into anarchy incarnate- he is no longer just a bad guy but a force of nature. The big surprise here is Aaron Eckhart's portrayal of Harvey Dent- he steals every scene he is in and watching his fall from grace is like seeing that of an epic Shakespearean tragedy.

Terrific action sequences and nail biting suspense adds to an epic sequel: 8 out of 10.

Wanted (2008)

Solid Action But Stock Characters and Story

[6/10 · 27 June 2008]

Based on the graphic novel by Mark Millar, WANTED is the latest in the long line of the summer onslaught movies based on comic books. But this isn't a movie for the whole family, it's more of like an adult version of JUMPER, which premiered a few months earlier and the simplistic plot is very close to its predecessor.

Wesley Gibson (James McAvoy) is a nobody- he works as a cubicle drone in a huge, nameless company, his only friend there happens to be having an affair with his girlfriend and his corpulent boss abuses him every chance she can get. No sooner are we introduced to him do we then get into a series of slam-bang action sequences as Wes learns that he is a son of a former high ranking member of a secret order of assassins and is endowed with special gifts: the ability to pump his heart rate faster than normal (which allows him to see everything in slow motion and with a faster response time) and has the ability to make precise shots with pistols by somehow bending the laws of physics that allow bullets to shoot behind obstacles to find their target. Wes is soon joined by his mentor, the deadly assassin Fox (Angelina Jolie) and head man Sloan (Morgan Freeman) who trains him in order to go after a renegade of their order (Thomas Kretschmann) but as the story unfolds, all is not what it seems…

The action sequences are very much MATRIX-like, with slow motion photography that makes each explosion seem like a work of art. Every headshot is graphically shown as each perfectly shot bullet goes through skulls which is why I wouldn't recommend this movie for young kids even though it's supposed to be a comic-book summer blockbuster. With Timur Bekmambetov's expert direction (he was the one who did the NIGHT WATCH series which turned into a smash hit in Russia and gained cult recognition in the West), the action scenes are very well done- it seems that foreign directors might actually be better imitators than the locally grown talent when it comes to creating such wild mayhem. Unfortunately, most of the characters are stock derived and with a movie that focuses on the action, there is very little character development. McAvoy has an acting range that is more versatile than other action stars in his generation (Vin Diesel and the Rock basically play themselves while Orlando Bloom and Hayden Christiansen are absolute bores) but he doesn't have much to do other than to scream when he gets beaten up (and he does get beaten up a lot to the point of sadomasochism in this film) but there may be hope in that he can blossom much further- although being short and wide eyed tends to go against the action hero mold. My problem is that I could not gain any sympathy for his character (other than the underdog symbolism) due to the fact that he was a nobody to begin with.

Angelina Jolie is probably the closest character with any sort of background in the film but it tends to get overshadowed by her TOMB RAIDER style of acting and her character seems to have a minor role in the entire story- I would have loved to see the movie focused on her character rather than McAvoy's. Morgan Freeman and Terence Stamp (who plays as a mysterious counterpart to Freeman's character) are both wasted since they get very little to do or say.

All in all, I would rate this a 6 out of 10- good solid action sequences but the lack of likable characters is a serious drawback.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

Vintage Indy But Nothing New

[6/10 · 22 May 2008]

George Lucas, Steven Spielberg and Harrison Ford team up for another Indiana Jones adventure in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull- how good is it? Well, its great to see Indy again but I find it the weakest in the series so far… Indy's adventures have now fast forwarded from the pre-World War II years to the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. Although it helps to explain the fact that Ford is playing an older character, one can't help but feel the saga of Indiana Jones is missing something (I wish they would make a movie set in World War II but it will obviously be a tall order with Ford being his age- perhaps with future technology they could make him younger like what they did with Ray Winstone in Beowulf) since so many years have passed. Although Indy is now much, much older he can still fight it out and win against people half his age it seems- the plot this time revolves around the Russians and their quest using a crystal skull to find a lost city somewhere in South America.

Since Ford has gotten older (I know, I know, that remark is getting thin), he is joined by a younger, rebellious James Dean type named Mutt (Shia LaBeouf- his character's name is an in-joke based on Indy's name) who is a qualified fencer and takes after Marlon Brando's Wild One with his Harley Davidson motorcycle. Karen Allen also marks a return as Marion Ravenwood (Indy's old flame from Raiders of the Lost Ark) and her scenes with Ford are nearly pulled off to perfection but Lucas and Spielberg unfortunately play it more for light laughs rather than poignancy; Allen is important to the story since Denholm Elliot and Sean Connery no longer appear in the movie even though their characters are mentioned a number of times- it makes one miss them even more. The aforementioned Ray Winstone also appears as Mac- Indy's new British sidekick- although there is more to his character as he appears.

The bad guys are led by Irina Spalko (played by Cate Blanchett wearing a black wig) who herself happens to be a fencer as well- her trademark rapier is in contrast to Indy's trademark bullwhip.

What did I not like? Well, since Ford's Indiana Jones is such a cultural icon now Spielberg and Lucas would never ever even attempt to kill off this character and it shows- although Indy is exposed to danger constantly we are never made to fear that he is (or any of his friends) are in danger at all; Raiders of the Lost Ark introduced him so he was new to us while Temple of Doom gave us some real frights as to whether he would live on while everyone was afraid for Connery in Last Crusade- but with this latest installment clearly elevating Indy as an immortal character you knew he would pull out in the end.

The action sequences are frenetic and well made as usual but they don't break new ground- we have seen Indy going after convoys full of soldiers to get what he wanted before, after all. Other than the first action sequence in Area-51, we no longer even see Indy use his bullwhip any more.

Although it is great to see Indy back, I hope they don't go with Lucas' plan to replace Ford with the younger LaBeouf- his character doesn't seem very smart or talented at finding clues like Indiana Jones. All in all, an above average movie with the ever likable Ford as Indy though I wish they would have tried something new or daring rather than just go for the formulaic treasure hunt.

Iron Man (2008)

Could Have Been Better Average Superhero Movie

[5/10 · 2 May 2008]

Well looks like it's not even summer yet but already there are superhero movies flying to a theater near you. And after what looks like a string of well made blockbusters that started with Bryan Singer's X-Men, it seems Marvel Comics has begun to run on empty with the recent spate of lousy films like Elektra, Ghostrider and Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer among others.

Now comes Iron Man, the heavily-hyped Jon Favreau directed movie starring the newly reformed Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark, the billionaire arms dealer who creates a suit of powered armor to escape his captors and predictably becomes a high powered superhero. Downey has been featured on many magazine covers lately as a former drug-addicted Hollywood bad boy who has now turned his life around and was lauded for landing a role as close to his character- in the ULTIMATES comic book version of Iron Man, Tony Stark is an alcoholic with a brain tumor who primarily becomes a superhero for corporate publicity and kicks.

So your question would obviously be: is it as good as the hype? Well, not really.

This looks to be the first Marvel superhero movie to ditch the opening credit sequence as we get thrust right into the action. In the original comic book, Tony Stark was a POW in Vietnam (hey, the comic was created by Stan Lee in the 60's after all) who created an armored suit to escape from his captors- the movie updates this to Afghanistan as we get rocked in the opening scenes with an IED attack on a military convoy. As Stark struggles with his terrorist captors (who seemingly are equipped with weapons built by his own company) to free himself, he unwittingly uncovers a conspiracy at the highest levels of Stark Industries and his seemingly loyal partner, Obadiah Stane (played with a bald palate and beard by industry veteran Jeff Bridges). With the aid of his trusty military sidekick James Rhodes (Terence Howard of CRASH) and voluptuous secretary Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow- what a name her character has!), Stark goes from right-wing military playboy to a humanitarian liberal after spending a few weeks in a cave.

I would think that a good formula for superhero movies would be that you need to have an interesting villain that people can empathize with- Spiderman I and II did this very well with both the Green Goblin and Doctor Octopus (the X-Men's Magneto was also a well-rounded bad guy- he had a noble cause even though he wanted to wipe out non-mutants to fulfill it). The problem with IRON MAN is that Obadiah Stane is just an average, greedy and corrupt run of the mill villain- you get no understanding as to why he does what he does other than just simple greed. Jeff Bridges tries (as Nick Nolte did in Ang Lee's HULK) but there isn't a lot in the writing to work with. Downey comes off as the occasional charmer in Tony Stark but the lack of any real emotion in the script reduces him to stock hero status. Paltrow is wasted as Pepper while Howard seems out of place playing a Colonel in the military. The action sequences are okay for the most part but they are few and far between and get cut short just as they are about to go into overdrive.

All in all, this is just an average superhero movie- better than FF: Rise of the Surfer, better than Ghostrider and Elektra, slightly less than the X-Men trilogy but well below the level of Spiderman and Batman Begins.

5 out of 10.

Jumper (2008)

A Waste Of Potentially Good Material

[2/10 · 13 February 2008]

Ever since BOURNE IDENTITY I have always been a Doug Liman fan and so I decided to head over and watch his latest film JUMPER, starring Hayden Christiensen; I figured that a talented director like Liman could make even a horrible actor like Christiensen good by the sheer "force" of skill… boy was I wrong.

The plot is about a young man named David Rice who happens to discover that he has a teleportation superpower which allows him to travel instantaneously anywhere around the world. The first twenty minutes of the film focuses on David as an even younger nobody (played by Max Theriot) in high school as he puts up with a bully and trying to hitch up with his crush as he accidentally discovers his superpower. Now if this sounds like Raimi's SPIDERMAN it pretty much is- except that you can obviously tell its been done before and Raimi had a better script and more talented actors to work with. The plot then shifts to an older David doing whatever he pleases until he realizes that not only are there other jumpers like him, there also happens to be a group of fanatics (led by Samuel L Jackson in white bleached hair, no less) that are out to kill him and his kind.

So where did this film go wrong? Well, there could have been a number of intriguing possibilities with regards to storytelling about a group of people who can teleport but unfortunately the movie focuses on Hayden Christiensen- his character is pretty much a spoiled brat who only uses his power to indulge in very basic stuff (chicks, money and TVs) and then when confronted by his enemies he makes a lot of mistakes that makes it easy for them to consistently find him. The other characters, including Jaime Bell as a vengeful and witty teleporter, are barely given anything as far as background for their characters which doesn't endear them much to the audience with regards to sympathy. Samuel L Jackson is likewise wasted as a leader of the Paladins, a cult of normal people who feel that it is their religious duty to kill jumpers- there are no revelations as to what motivates him or even how the whole conflict between jumpers and paladins got started in the first place. By the end of the movie there are at least three separate unresolved plot lines.

Rumor has it that Eminem was offered the lead role but turned it down. In light of this turd I applaud him for making a smart move.

No Country for Old Men (2007)

Superb Adaptation of a Master Storyteller

[10/10 · 10 February 2008]

For years Cormac McCarthy has been a literary sensation. While never achieving the massive success of Stephen King or Tom Clancy when he first began writing novels in the mid 1960's (perhaps because he churns out so few- NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN is only his 9th novel) he has been hailed as the literary successor to William Faulkner. I have read only two of his novels so far: the Appalachian Gothic horror novel OUTER DARK and his seminal masterpiece, the revisionist western BLOOD MERIDIAN. His novels sear into your very soul- they are not easily forgotten- and only the best writers can do that.

If there are any common themes in all of McCarthy's novels, they all point to a message of social Darwinism. His books are regularly downbeat, representing a world full of violence and despair, peopled by the most evil of men and the intertwining of ordinary folks who try their best to live their lives despite the bleak, unrelenting landscape (McCarthy is the only author I know who makes the land feel like a living, breathing person, just like his characters) that surrounds them.

NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN is the second adaptation of his works (the first was the pedestrian and forgettable ALL THE PRETTY HORSES which starred Matt Damon) and this time directed by Joel and Ethan Coen, two brothers who have become fixtures in the cult scene (one of their other movies is MILLER'S CROSSING, my favorite gangster movie next to the GODFATHER). While many literary critics regard NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN as one of McCarthy's lesser works, even a lesser McCarthy novel is still light years ahead of most other books in terms of quality. NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN is a purely straightforward thriller and in the hands of a lesser director (or in this case, directors) would have been just another movie that would have quietly gone on to the DVD rack (like Matt Damon's movie), but due to the fact that the Coens are great admirers of McCarthy's works, they were able to stay true to the spirit of the book and in a sense, made a masterpiece- this movie should be studied in film schools as to "How To Make A Proper Book Adaptation To Film And Not Muck It Up 101".

The plot is exceedingly simple: set in the southwest circa 1980, redneck loser Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin in his best role ever) stumbles upon the aftermath of a drug deal gone bad. He decides to take the drug money, but in a moment of conscience, gets identified by both sides who want the money back. In comes the deadly killer Anton Chigurh (ironically pronounced "sugar" and is played to perfection by Xavier Bardem) who goes on an interstate rampage (one of his most inventive weapons is a compressed air canister) as he sets his sights on the fleeing Moss to get the money back, whatever the cost. Not since Anthony Hopkins' Hannibal Lecter has there been a superb and deadly villain to ever come on screen, Bardem can scare you just by looking at you, he doesn't even need to utter a word; and if he doesn't win the Oscar it will be a travesty. The cat and mouse game between Moss and Chigurh is further complicated by the investigations of a local sheriff portrayed by Tommy Lee Jones in his usual stoic attire who tries to make some sense amidst all of the mayhem (but ultimately fails). The movie starts haphazardly and ends abruptly, which is just like McCarthy's books (and just like real life)- if you are looking for a formulaic Hollywood movie with a clear beginning and ending then its best to watch a Disney, a Michael Bay movie or ALVIN AND THE CHIPMUNKS- this one's not for you.

The Coen brothers perfectly captures the unrelenting harshness of Cormac McCarthy's world- a world in which the big fish eat the little fish and the bad sleep well at night- McCarthy may be a bit of a downer, but in my view he is right. In the last few years McCarthy has now finally gotten the attention he deserves, his newest novel THE ROAD won the Pulitzer prize and a movie adaptation of it is heading to the big screen soon- let us hope that they get it right just like this one and not make it end up like Matt Damon's movie. Now if only they would also make a faithful literary adaptation of BLOOD MERIDIAN- now that would indeed be a miracle