Archive for February, 2005
192 – The Chronicles of Riddick
Posted by frothy in Chronicles of Riddick on February 12, 2005
In this follow up to Pitch Black (2000), criminal-on-the-run Riddick (Vin Diesel) finds himself in the middle of a crusade of by the Necromongers, led by the Lord Marshall (Colm Feore), who wishes to convert – or kill – all on the planet of Helion Prime.
As we learned in Pitch Black – which was set five years prior to the events in this movie – Riddick can see perfectly in the dark. Which comes in handy on this planet, which is in darkness most of the time. By his side is Kyra (Alexa Davalos), who was named Jack in the first movie, who’s been imprisoned deep in the bowels of the planet. Will Riddick be able to bust her out and stop the Necromongers? As Elemental Aereon (Judi Dench) says, sometimes you have to fight evil with a different kind of evil. Enter Master Riddick.
The action never lags, and the special effects are magnificent, really much better than I thought they’d be. As with any other action/adventure/sci-fi hodge-podge, the plot might not stand up to close scrutiny, but my interest was surely held over its two-hour running time, which is no mean feat. Diesel may not be John Wayne (yet), but he’s got this role down pat already. Dench adds class where class is needed (although she’s not on screen enough), and Feore makes a suitable villain. This movie is sort of a low-rent version of the Star Wars movies. It’ll entertain, but don’t expect it to knock your socks
off.
The Chronicles of Riddick: ***
The Train, Trancers, Twelve o’Clock High
Posted by frothy in Uncategorized on February 12, 2005
The Train (1964) ***1/2 Burt Lancaster plays a member-in-good-standing of the French Resistance during German occupation of France. The Germans have raided France of its greatest art treasures – Matisse, Cezanne, Picasso, Monet – and put them on a train bound for Germany. The colonel in charge (Paul Scofield) is obsessed with getting the art to Germany, where it would be treated as war booty. Since the art collection is portrayed as representing the heart of France, Lancaster – a railroad man by trade – does all he can to stop the train from reaching its destination.
There’s not a lot glossed over here, as many people are killed onscreen. The brutality of war is not ignored, but is rather put into a context that non-soldiers can appreciate – saving something that is part of normal, everyday life, not a war treasure like planes or guns.
John Frankenheimer scored big with this movie, and it was due to his own insistence on reality that the effects were as good as they were. We get to see trains collide in a massive wreck, and Frankenheimer used REAL trains! Add the effects to a plausible story line and a clever, pungent script, and you have a classic.
Trancers (1984) *** This low, low budget sci-fier is somewhat derivative, but it’s kind of a take-off on Bladerunner-type movies, rather than a ripoff of them. Jack Deth (Tim Thomerson) is a detective in the future who’s sent back to 1985 to stop a madman who’s decided to kill the ancestors of the city council of Deth’s time. With the help of Lena (a young Helen Hunt), Deth fights Trancers (who have fallen under the control of the madman) and his own culture shock.
It’s a short movie (76 minutes), and things move pretty quickly; plot isn’t so much of a focus as a annoying gnat that appears from time to time. But for being so short, the characters are pretty well developed – and one huge bonus is that Deth isn’t an no necked, shoot-first idiot, as renegade cops are often portrayed.
Trancers is original, often-funny sci-fi cheese. It’s great to see Thomerson and Hunt – especially Hunt, who looks great.
Twelve o’Clock High (1949) **** There have been many films produced about World War II; some about the ground assault, some about the air raids, some from Allied viewpoints, some from German viewpoints. Many have had ensemble casts in them that took a back seat to the wartime action. This classic focuses on bombers being pushed to their absolute physical and emotional limits. Their commander, Gary Merrill, begins to show signs of the strain and is replaced by his superiors, who feel he’s becoming too attached to the soldiers (as opposed to focusing on the war objectives). The man who ordered the replacement, Gregory Peck, is ordered to take over for Merrill. But how long before Peck falls become what he loathes – a commander who runs on emotion and defies logic and orders?
Like many wartime movies, this one is chock full of action scenes. Peck pushes his soldiers to accomplish their bombing goals, doing all he can to improve morale and give his men something to fight for. Unlike many war movies, which had the soldiers fighting blindly, going grimly into battle without knowing why, this one makes the point that the men perform better knowing what their objectives are. In other words, the whole issue of war as reducing man to his basest state is touched on very neatly. These are not automatons programmed to do battle, these are real, thinking, breathing humans.
The acting is fantastic, with Peck getting a chance to play a little out of character as the tough commander. He’s supported ably by Merrill, Dean Jagger (who won an Oscar), and Hugh Marlowe. Recommended for action and war-movie fans.
Poison (1991), Pride of the Yankees, The Prisoner of Second Avenue
Posted by frothy in Uncategorized on February 5, 2005
Poison (1991) * Todd Haynes’ Poison is three movies in one. Word to the wise, though: When your movie is only 85 minutes, maybe splitting it into thirds ain’t such a hot idea. What you’re left with is just an anthology of unrelated short films.
“Hero” is about a strange seven-year-old boy who murders his father and then flees; “Homo” is about (surprise!) a relationship between fellow prisoners; “Horror” is about a whiz-kid scientists who somehow drinks a potion containing the human sex drive – and inexplicably turns into a murderous leper.
None of these sounds like a “normal” movie, and that’s all well and good. “Hero” is shown in documentary style, trying to lend an air of authenticity to the story. “Horror” is told in fifties’ sci-fi style, with the usual theme of “science run amuck.” Each is very well filmed; with “Homo,” a real lurid atmosphere is created. You can almost feel the actors breathing on you.
That’s about it as far as positives go. “Horror” might have worked if it had been played as a parody of those old films. Instead, it took itself completely seriously; instead of mocking, it was mockable. And to tell the truth, I wasn’t the least bit interested in the characters of either of the three stories.
Some may look at this as fine independent film-making. All I see is a tortured, inescapably dull undertaking.
Pride of the Yankees: ***1/2 In today’s era of greedy athletes and their employers, the story of Lou Gehrig seems almost quaint. Here’s a young man who by all accounts was selfless, kind-hearted, and rather introverted. And, of course, it didn’t hurt that he was also a very good baseball player too. Put him on a lineup card today and he might not be the same player. Up until a few years ago, Gehrig’s record of 2,130 consecutive games played was a record, a record that many thought would stand forever. For 16 years he was in the lineup as the Yankees’ first baseman, never asking out for any reason. That alone should show you how special a person Gehrig was.
This biography is pretty straightforward. Unlike many of its kind, it doesn’t show its protagonist somehow succeeding against all odds. Gehrig didn’t have an abusive mother, he wasn’t beaten up by kids at school, he wasn’t learning-disabled, he didn’t have attention-deficit disorder, he didn’t come from abject poverty. He was simply a son in a working-class, immigrant family, as many were during the early decades of this century. And that’s why Gehrig is so special to so many people – he symbolises their own hopes.
Gary Cooper is aces as Gehrig, and Teresa Wright is wonderful as his wife, Eleanor. If there’s anything imperfect about the movie, it’s that it is…well, a little predictable. That’s something biopics can’t avoid, of course, so it’s no big problem. But even if most of the film doesn’t impress you, the final speech at Yankee Stadium – when Gehrig was suffering visibly from the disease that would eventually be named after him – will move you past tears. And even better, when Gehrig’s done his brief speech, he walks offscreen. If that movie were written today, he’d play another game and hit a game-winning home run. It’s this film’s honesty and sincerity that win you over.
The Prisoner of Second Avenue (1975) ** Ordinarily, you would think a movie adaptation of a Neil Simon play starring Jack Lemmon as a very harried New Yorker would be perfect cinema – and ordinarily, you’d be right! Think of The Odd Couple and you have a good idea of a ‘good’ Simon film.
Lemmon’s character, Mel, is a Manhattan businessman who’s going through a bit of a midlife crisis. We’ve seen this sort of thing before in the movies – Lord knows we have!! – but the problem is, we’ve seen it much better. There’s a fine line to be walked here between maudlin and funny/touching, and sadly that line is crossed early on in the movie and never recrossed.
Mel suffers through a lot of problems in this movie, and your closeness to NYC life will dictate just how much sympathy you have for his plight. But be warned: Simon doesn’t combat these problems with wit and wisdom; to me, Mel just yells and screams and basically is thoroughly obnoxious – only Anne Bancroft as his suffering wife gives an appealing performance.
Bottom line is that unless you’re a diehard Simon or Lemmon fan, you might want to avoid this collection of angst, agita, and aneurysms waiting to happen.
191 – Alone in the Dark
Posted by frothy in Alone in the Dark on February 3, 2005
It should come as no shock to you when I say that Alone in the Dark is a crappy movie. To put it bluntly, it’s as if a monster made of dung defecated, ate the result, and then vomited. The final product would still outshine this movie.
Seemingly based on an ancient (!) Atari video game, the movie has something or other to do with a portal to the bowels of the earth, the unleashing of demons, and ancient civilizations. Something about there being two worlds, that of darkness and that of light. (Guess which one’s ours.) Oh, and 10,000 years ago a really super-duper advanced civilization opened the portal, demons came over and had a blast, then wiped out the civilization. Which is why we’ve never heard of them, conveniently enough.
Christian Slater, perhaps pining for the days of Heathers and Pump up the Volume, plays Edward Carnby, a paranormal researcher to whom Something Bad happened when he was 10 years old. He’s hot on the trail of one of the artifacts of said advanced civilization. Carnby used to be part of a secret institution called 713, which has been trying to figure out what happened to that long-ago civilization. But Carnby believed he wasn’t going to be able to find the answers he sought, so he left the group.
But see, these beasties are out, and they get their prey in varying ways, such as gutting them, splitting them down the middle, implanting neurological control devices in them, or just turning them into killing zombies. Yes, it’s another zombie movie.
That’s about as distilled I can make the plot. It’s pretty convoluted and incomprehensible. In similar movies, one might see the intrepid researcher/adventurer figure things out a step at a time, and when we the audience are mentally with the researcher, it’s a lot of fun. But when the scenes shift from attack to attack with no perspective or context… not so much fun.
The acting is dreadful, save for Slater, who (although he almost seems embarrassed to be in the movie) showed he was capable of carrying the acting load. He had to; get this – Tara Reid is cast as a museum curator! Honest to goodness, I thought I’d seen the casting of a lifetime when Denise Richards was cast as a nuclear physicist in Tomorrow Never Dies. But Reid here matches Richards, crappy emoting for crappy emoting. Highlights include Reid pronouncing “Newfoundland” as “New Fownd Land,” Reid delivering most of her lines in a dazed, throaty monotone (kinda like she’d been on an all-night bender for the past week before filming), Reid – a museum curator, mind you – spending a lot of the movie in a midriff-bearing top and hip-hugger jeans. Oh yeah, she was as believable as Jessica Simpson giving stock quotes. Oh, why must the pretty ones be so dumb? (Note: I don’t think Tara Reid’s all that good looking. She looks like she’s in perpetual need of food.)
Almost everyone else in the cast is completely forgettable, except perhaps for Steven Dorff, who played Burke, one of the leaders of 713. Dorff’s character wasn’t terribly well developed, but nothing in the movie was, from the sets to the characters to Tara Reid. But I digress.
Anyway, the perplexing and utterly preposterous storyline is tough enough to follow with the film moving at such a breakneck pace, but director Uwe Boll tosses in a pounding, mind-deadening soundtrack; it’s so loud you can’t hear what the actors are saying in some of the scenes! That can’t be right. Given the acting level, however, perhaps thanks are in order to Mr. Boll.
Oh, and a fun note. The opening moments of the movie include narration… of the words that are crawling across the screen at the same time. Remember the first Star Wars? You heard that now-familiar Star Wars theme while the prologue crawled. There was surely no need for narration; why do I need some doofus to read what’s on the screen for me? Were the producers simply looking out for blind people? Maybe that also explains why the soundtrack was so loud – they were also looking out for hard-of-hearing people. Also, the narrator had a lisp for the first few lines of the crawl – then inexplicably lost it. Bizarre.
Alone in the Dark is a loud, dopey mishmash of dreadful acting, an incoherent script, and ham-handed directing. Hardly a note rings true. There’s so much chaos that the audience simply gives up caring about the characters and roots for their demise. Even in the dark, the demonic creatures seem cooler and much more developed by comparison. Ironically, since there were only three other people in the theater, I watched this Alone in the Dark. I wonder if Uwe Boll planned it that way?
I can’t quite give this the lowest rating, because I had low hopes for it to begin with – and because it never grabbed me enough for me to get worked up about it. It’s atrocious, although Slater redeems himself a tiny bit.
*1/2
190 – Alien versus Predator
Posted by frothy in Alien versus Predator on February 2, 2005
Finally, the two sci-fi franchises meet, as was prophesied in Predator 2., when the head of an Alien was seen in the Predator’s trophy room. This was in 1990. For fanboys, it’s been a long 14 years.
Having seen one other crossover movie (Freddy versus Jason!), I wasn’t too stoked for this one. When you take two movies that have their own histories and mush them together into the same movie, there are going to be some inconsistencies.
I’m not a fanboy of either series, so I can’t speak to the movie’s accuracy in that sense. All I know is that Alien = bad (i.e., attacks humans) and Predator = bad (i.e., attacks humans).
The basic story here is that a group of scientists discovers an ancient pyramid in Antarctica, and when they explore it they find themselves in a battle between the Aliens and the Predators. Place your bets, kids! The over/under on bloodshed is forty gallons; the Predators are favored by 19 vats of slime.
As with all disparate casts, the expedition is composed of scientists from varying backgrounds: a mechanical engineer, a couple of archaeologists, a mountain climber/guide, and do forth. Oh, and men with guns. Their mission is to get to the pyramid and see what’s what. Leading them is Lex Woods (Sanaa Lathan); she’s a tough, strong leader. You know right away she’ll make it through this ordeal alive, because much of the pre-expedition focus is on her. You know, to endear her to the audience. Other characters are given short shrift by comparison.
Neat little trivium: Lance Henriksen, who was in a couple of the Alien movies, here plays industrial billionaire Charles Weyland, whose company found the pyramid and is financing the expedition. Lance looks pretty haggard. I mean, he always did, but now he looks like Clint Eastwood before Clint got his Botox injections. But I digress.
Anyway, long story short – they get there, find Aliens have attacked the previous expedition (from 1904!), and then all hell breaks loose as everyone has to fight to survive. There are plenty of good things to say about this movie. For one thing, the set design and special effects are fantastic, making the viewer forget the pedestrian plot and the shallow characters. Come to think of it, though, the characters really aren’t all that shallow, compared with other recent sci-fis. Take Supernova or Event Horizon. No, seriously, take them. Same idea – heterogeneous crew, Something Evil afoot – and yet the effects weren’t good enough to distract us from the crappy dialogue. In AvP, there aren’t many memorable lines (if any), but it didn’t matter.
And here’s why. By now, we all know what the Predator looks like (seen near the end of P2). And we’ve always known what the Aliens looked like. So there was no sense in keeping either hidden from view. This is Alien versus Predator, so let’s see ‘em fight! And fight they did, with our feckless humans stuck in the middle. This time, since we’ve seen some of what either species can do, some human characteristics are attributed to them, particularly the Predators (yes, Predators plural), such as war paint, honor, and rituals.
AvP is a very diverting, action-packed movie – there aren’t any slow moments, and it follows through on its own premise.
Alien versus Predator: ***





People Had This to Say