Category: review

Two All-American heroes in action movies of their own eras! (ok, that’s debatable for Bruce Willis) Let’s see how they turn out head to head.

Die Hard 4.0 (a.k.a. Live Free or Die Hard)

Die Hard has been updated for the Net generation, and, in the UK and Australia at least, it’s even pitched with a software-esque version number (for the record, I prefer the American name). The scenario is a “fire sale” – a comprehensive hack of all the systems we depend on in our modern life. John McClane gets dragged into it involuntarily while escorting a white-hat hacker to Homeland Security, and as soon as there’s bullets flying from helicopters it’s on.

The action only breaks for plot exposition to advance the action to the next location. As America collapses, McClane is the only one with a clue, apparently, and it’s up to him to save the day, again (only since this movie is rated PG, he can’t swear). Stuff gets blown up on a regular basis and quite spectacularly at that, often for little rhyme or reason. And out of it all, Bruce/McClane finally almost gets to utter his complete line, “Yipee kay yay, mother-“, but remember, it’s PG, so that’s all you get =)

I hope it’s not a spoiler to say good triumphs over evil and  you walk out of the theatre feeling like you could jump off a building and walk away with a scratch. Bullet to the foot? Tis but a flesh wound!

★★☆

Bullitt

When Bullitt came out in 1968, I’m sure it was a revelation – this is how you do a proper car chase, building the tension, speed and action up steadily throughout. As soon as the chase proper begins, the music shuts off, and the note of the cars is what holds up the soundtrack. It’s sweet music – the Ford Mustang and the Dodge Charger were proper muscle cars, and it shows in the low rumbling bass-line that pervades the chase.

Indeed, that’s a point to note about the movie as a whole – while the sound in modern movies is very crisp and focused, in a sense, the soundtrack in this movie is a whole lot more organic, with background sounds allowed to creep in, and just ordinary sounds to be heard. The pace of the movie as a whole reflects this – it doesn’t move anywhere near as fast as Die Hard above – characters take their time waking, or walking – scenes are properly established before action begins. Things just feel more paced and real.

The realism continues to the damage caused by guns. Being an American cop movie, it has certainly got gunfire – but unlike Die Hard, where it seems to take 20 shots to hit anything and 50 to actually do any damage, a single gunshot has a pretty severe effect. Almost refreshing to see after Die Hard, actually.

Overall, a good old-fashioned hard-boiled-cop movie with one of the best (and first) car chases around.

★★★☆

Pixar have a history of telling stories which take the ordinary and recast it into something far more wondrous – who didn’t, after watching Toy Story, take a second look at their toys and imagine their lives when they were alone? It is perhaps a unique advantage of animation to be able to do these things in a believable way and be able to get away with it consistently.

Ratatouille continues in that tradition, perhaps only broken by The Incredibles, which was a movie that could have been done with ordinary techniques (though of course nowhere near as fun). It’s the story of a French rat, Remy, who would be chef, and if that doesn’t twig every sense of improbability then perhaps you’ve just watched Cars. Which was about a world of cars and cars alone (only in America would that concept be even raised, let alone considered bankable).

Naturally with the progress of technology, Pixar’s films look more and more gorgeous as they go, and this movie is no exception to the trend. However, things are still painted in an exaggerated palette, and the Paris of this movie is altogether a lot cleaner than the reality, even if populated with rats =) It’s not approaching the uncanny valley, but that may simply be a result of a conscious effort to ensure the movie retains its cartoon nature. I would like to see though how far Pixar could push it.

The plot on the other hand stretches credibility even for Pixar. Cars was a world where many little things were entirely papered over, and since it qualified as a kids film, no-one really thought about it twice. Ratatouille, continuing in this fine tradition, doesn’t bother to explain how a rat came to learn to read, or prepare meals of all sorts – he just can. The way Remy, the rat, helps out Alfredo, the clueless human hero of the story, is also entirely inexplicable. For the sake of the plot however, you’re willing to forgive – but then, the plot is so loaded with cliche and by-the-numbers “twists” that within 15 minutes you can pretty much predict right up to the movie’s end credits rolling.

If there’s anything the Shrek films, produced by Dreamworks, show us, it is that animation can be both appealing to old and young and on many levels. Pixar however tend to go down a very predictable route, and it is to their ultimate detriment. While these are films more in line with Disney animation’s history, it could have been so much more – there’s potential here, it’s just not used.

As much as I enjoyed The Incredibles, and Ratatouille is miles ahead of Cars, this remains a bit of a disappointment. ★★★☆

“The Deathly Hallows? What on earth is Rowling on about?” was roughly the first thought through my head when I heard of the last Potter book’s title. The second was how massive this book would be given how large the previous one had been. Rowling is many things, but concise is not one of them.

Indeed, even having read the books, I don’t get why it’s “The Deathly Hallows”. All credit to Rowling though, she’s good with coming up with names and the like.

However, she’s also good with coming up with plot tangents, and this book definitely doesn’t feel like it truly wants to wrap up right until the final few chapters, when things suddenly come together all in a rush. And that’s precisely the problem lies – right to the end, Rowling introduces new characters and revisions of plot that aren’t “ah ha! that earlier passage makes sense now,” so much as “what? but that… ok ok let’s move on before we get too tied down.” It’s as though she went back over all the previous books to find any gaps that would allow the completely new convolutions of the final plot to fit.

Characters are for the most part black and white, and even the few grey ones fall to one side or the other when it’s all told – there’s no room for moral ambiguity here. Deus ex machina raises its ugly head many a time to resolve sticky situations.

All said though, it does wrap the series good and proper – the final climatic battle truly does shape as a final fight of the desperate – it is tightly focused, and Rowling isn’t pulling punches, with favourite characters readily dying, and while the final twist remains a bit of an unexplained cop-out, it’s not too bad all considered. This will make for a spectacular movie finale (as long as they leave out the “19 Years Later”).

Lord of War

Nicholas Cage plays the good-bad-guy as an arms dealer. And, um, that seems to be about it.

Ok, so maybe that’s underplaying it a little, but this is fundamentally a bio-pic of a guy that doesn’t really exist (except for the fact that he’s a little like this guy). Cage is working with a story that’s been cobbled together, and bits of this film certainly feel like that.

Ah sure morality tale yadayadayada, action sprinkled in as appropriate, but at no point does this movie get tense. It’s got a cynical message to deliver that can play into whoever’s hands it is so desired, given the right spin (“Gun running is evil” or “We should control the gun running trade to ensure amatuers don’t cock it up for us.”, say). Deceptively complex (and not in a good way). ★★☆

The Bourne Ultimatum

Exactly unlike Lord of War, this movie doesn’t really ever let up. There’s hardly a moment to breathe easy or ponder implications as the action rushes from city to city, crossing Europe in a single bound before coming home to roost in New York.

Bourne is back, and this time, he’s really not happy. Ultimatum picks up exactly where Supremacy left off – Bourne is running from the Russian cops in Moscow, where Supremacy finished with a high-octane pursuit through the streets. The plot weaves its way back and forth between the action on the street (in various cities and continents) and the offices of the CIA in New York before culminating in New York, where it all comes to a head. Excellently driven, the script is minimalist and focused. Only tangentially related to the Robert Ludlum novels, but the times have moved on and it can be excused.

However…

For a movie with this much of a budget, someone should’ve got a fricken steadycam. Yes, the handheld camera has its place, but for dialogue scenes, the bob of the hand is completely unnecessary and simply distracting. And while the characterisation is excellent for the most part, some are single-dimensional – Julia Stiles gets a bare handful of lines, half of which are on the phone in one scene; the “assets” don’t speak a word, making Bourne practically Shakespearean in comparison.

And what ever happened to the lost art of finishing a story off? It’s almost a mandatory requirement these days to leave some threads dangling for the next sequel. I dislike sequelism for the sake of sequelism, and this movie could have wrapped & tied the bow on Bourne. Greed got to the producers in the end, I believe.

★★★★

Double header review!

Transformers: The Movie (1986)

The animated cult classic! This movie was cool, man.

Except when you’ve grown up, and you look back, and realise how lame it really was. Plot? What plot? Characterisation? They’re robots… that transform! Oh and there’s a goofy kid to give you the human interest story. Um. Deus Ex Machina!

★☆

Transformers (2007)

Now this, this is proper summer blockbuster. CGI, stuff blowing up, not-quite-b-grade-but-not-A-grade acting talent, and to give it some credibility, it’s got multiple legs to its plot that all tie up together at the end.

Sorta.

So lemme put it this way: don’t go into this movie expecting to use your brain, because you will be too caught up in the many ways in which the plot is just pure dysfunctional that you just won’t enjoy it. This really is a popcorn thriller – you’re here for the ride. While it escapes the animated original’s major foible, in that it actually has breaks between the action to let you calm down, and it also has a much larger human cast, it doesn’t escape from the fact that shit just isn’t explained.

There are three main plot threads: (a) the US soldiers in the Middle East (Qatar, to be exact), consisting of The Guy from Las Vegas (TV show), The Guy from The Fast and the Furious, and The Guy from Prison Break. (b) is the computer analyst team, consisting of no-name stereotypes, an Aussie blonde who doesn’t look like she belongs at all, and eventually that funny overweight black guy that crops up in so many movies. Oh and they’re working with the Pentagon, so we have the Secretary of Defence, Jon Voight. Finally, we have (c), Sam, the high school kid who just wants a girlfriend, and the girl that just so happens to be the one that he wants happens to be available just as the action kicks in and Sam can be a hero.

Notice the lack of names? Only Sam, our main hero that we are supposed to identify with, is with a name that is memorable; and that’s only because it’s repeated so many times as to be drilled into you. If you remember the other names without looking it up on IMDB, lemme know.

Don’t come here looking for real plot, or indeed even proper conclusions and explanations for major characters (fer instance, we have no idea what happens to Aussie Hacker Babe). About the only thing that makes sense is that… no, no, I got nothing. Typical summer blockbuster fluff, but somehow, it’s a fun ride, right? There’s plenty of action and stuff getting blown up, no-one gets hurt too bad, and there’s a few decent jokes in there too. (Just try to keep your eyes blinkered from the product placement while they’re at it). The Deus Ex Machina at the end is entirely plausible because it makes so much sense compared to the alternative courses of action.

★★★

Oh yeah, bring the Fuzz :) I totally ♥ Simon Pegg and his team of creative bastards.

★★★★★!

There are times when you want sequels to break from the format of the original – when the series is supposed to be a cohesive single plot effectively and each “sequel” is actually more like a volume of a epic, a self-contained story in each that is different, but the key plot points tying it together keep it a single story overall. This is the Bourne movies, the Pirates, what the Matrix series aspired to be. (Star Wars or LotR don’t count because they’re effectively one movie cut up for convenience)

And at times, you want sequels to be munch-on-popcorn formulaic because you know what you’re in for and you know why and you’re just there to enjoy the ride, be it the Lethal Weapon or Die Hard style, or indeed the Police Academy series. These are the sequels that don’t need to sell themselves as requiring a knowledge of the original, but that knowledge helps to get you in the door.

(Warning: there may be spoilers ahead. click through at your own risk)

Continue reading “Movie Review: Ocean’s Thirteen“