Directed by Richard Donner
Starring Paul Walker, Frances O'Connor, Gerard Butler
Yes, it's been a while. Yes, I've got 3 movies to write reviews for. Yes I've been sitting on the next two I need to watch for a while now. You try having a kid and keep up with your Netflix queue... I'd like to see it.
Well maybe not... I'd really rather see you spend some quality time with your kid.
Story
Funny that I should mention Jurassic Park and Hollywood's treatment of technobabble in movies in my review of Primer...
I've long been a fan of Michael Crichton's writing (well, except for Congo) and Hollywood has smiled favorably on him with hits on both the big and small screens (he's one of the creators of "ER" in case you didn't know). Unfortunately, Hollywood has a way of completely sucking the life out of most of his stories, mostly by removing the science (or quasi-science) that is such an integral part of the story.
Yes, there are times - like in Jurassic Park where a few chapters on Genetics and Chaos Theory are reduced to a few lines and a 30-second "Mr. DNA" cartoon - where the science isn't really all that important and it's really the spectacle of what's made possibly BY that science that's on display. This works if you're talking Dinosaurs... not so much for time travel. If they ever turn his novel "Prey" - about sentient nanomachines that evolve the ability to not only combine to replicate the appearance of humans, but also weave a skin around actual humans to mimic them while simultaneously feeding off of them - into a movie, it will probably do well as a horror/shocker type film and the science will be secondary, but when you're talking about Time Travel... that's the gimmick... and if you're not going to get into the science, then why make a movie at all.
Hollywood also likes to sugarcoat Crichton's darker moments when they convert to film. John Hammond, the billionaire owner of Jurassic Park, gets eaten by Procompsognathus (Compys) in the book, but in the movie he lives and we don't get to meet this little killer dino until the second film. In the Timeline book, the owner of the company that made the Time Machine is more sinister and what happens to him at the end is also darker. And don't get me started on how they RUINED the ominously dark ending of Sphere.
Acting
Watching this movie all I could see was the guy from The Fast and The Furious trying too hard to win the affection of the girl from Bedazzled (no, not Liz Hurley... the other gal, the one that Brendan Frasier sold his soul for which introduced him to Liz Hurley... where do I sign?...) Their chemistry is awkward and they also just felt out of place in the movie.
It was like when you hear that bit of trivia about other actors that were considered for a famous part (Christopher Walken as Han Solo anyone?) and wonder how oddly different the entire movie would have been... well, in this case, in some alternate reality, there's this kick ass movie called Timeline and can you believe that they were originally planning to cast Paul Walker and Frances O'Connor? How oddly different would that have been? Oh, right.
That, and after seeing "300" I just get disappointed when I see Gerard Butler not shouting all his lines.
"THIS ... IS ... THE PAST!!!"
Effects
Amazingly, there really isn't much in the way of effects here, which is quite an accomplishment. Most of the Time Machine effects are achieved by mirrors and camera angles and having the actors fall or drop down followed by underwater shots for maximum disorientation. Nothing quite as cheesy as Star Trek IV though. The rest of the movie takes place in 12th century France, so there's not much in the way of effects that's necessary, except for some cool flaming trebuchets during a battle sequence.
Atmosphere and Immersive Detail
It's hard not to see that you're watching a period piece, though there are a few things that irked me. The budget of the film had to have been hurting based on the minimal special effects, but especially the fact that several scenes where the characters are escaping from hostile forces all seemingly take place from different angles of the same few houses while trying to look as if there was a small town outside the castle walls. I can only imagine what it must have looked like to anyone watching on set without the benefit of editing.
Otherwise, the English are savagely barbaric and the French are aristocratically barbaric, which gels with the stereotype from Braveheart and so many other period movies, so why not run with it.
Summary
Not the best "Crichton" movie, but not the worst (Congo's still a loser in both book and movie form as far as I'm concerned). I'll need to read the book-version of Timeline to decide how it plays out as an adaptation, though various online summaries that I've seen would seem to indicate that the movie's pretty close to the book plot-wise. Ultimately, I liked the film because it connected all the dots well with a relatively satisfying ending and because they weren't afraid to kill characters you'd become invested in, making it more uncertain who would really make it to the end of the film. But it's not going to change your life or send you on a non-stop roller coaster of action and adventure. If you're a Sci-fi or Crichton fan, I'd suggesting renting it just to be a completist. Otherwise, you can safely skip this one without wondering "what if..." for the rest of your life.
Unless you've got a thing for Medieval re-enactment...
Showing posts with label Liked It. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Liked It. Show all posts
Friday, March 21, 2008
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Primer (2004)
Directed by Shane Carruth
Starring Shane Carruth, David Sullivan
Before I begin, let me start by saying that this film was made for a grand total of $7,000, most of the crew seems to consist of the actors' family members (including special mention in the credits to the Carruth family caterers) and yet won the Grand Jury Prize in the Dramatic Film category at Sundance Film Festival in 2004.
Story
The movie's story begins simply enough, assuming you're an engineer. Aaron and his friend Abe are engineers, working at home in the garage to try and find the next big discovery without having to surrender it to their company, thereby losing the opportunity to cash in on the new technology.
One of their devices - quite literally a black box - has the immediately observable effect of reducing the weight of any object placed inside it. They're not sure how it does that, only that it does. But the more they experiment with the box, the more mysterious it becomes. It runs without power; it collects mold faster than it should; a watch placed inside it comes out telling the wrong time. Yes, Aaron and Abe have made time travel possible. So they build a box big enough to climb into and then the fun begins.
The movie progresses steadily from this point, examining the potential for exploiting such a technology in multiple ways and the steps one must take to avoid disrupting the standard flow of time. There's not too much damage that can be done since the box can't send you back to a time before you turned it on and you're limited by the amount of oxygen in the box (which can be supplemented by bringing along a canister of compressed oxygen).
I don't want to give too much more away, but suffice it to say things start to get a little confused (one of the characters remarks that he hasn't eaten since "later this afternoon"), a little personal, a little paradoxical, and a lot paranoid.
By the time the movie is over, the physical and mental stresses of such an existence catch up with not only the characters, but also the audience. You may need to watch the ending a few times to figure out exactly what's going on, and even then you might not be right.
Acting
Considering the budget for this film and the fact that the writer/director was also the lead actor (and that members of his family are credited as the caterers), you'd expect that the acting would suffer. Well, while it's not something to write home about, it certainly wasn't phoned in. You can see that the actors did make an effort to learn their lines and deliver them well. Everyone with lines does a good enough job to make you forget that this is a low budget film festival entry. Also, they acted better than I ever could, so I salute them for that.
Effects
Not much in the way of effects here. Even the props are pretty low budget. I'm pretty sure that they used CDs to construct the large version of their invention.
Atmosphere and Immersive Detail
Over the course of the film, the characters display a sense of displacement, never quite being comfortable with which timeline they're in, what they need to do to avoid a paradox, what happens when 2 copies of the same cell phone receive a phone call, etc. Their disorientation helps, but isn't completely necessary, to make you feel just as turned around and upside down as they are.
Summary
A good - albeit confusing - film. Not something I'd recommend for everyone though. If you subscribe to a science magazine or have ever read a book on physics, you're likely to enjoy this film. If your idea of science is something nerds do, then I'd skip this one. This film is my answer to why Hollywood always glosses over science, even when it was central to the source material (i.e.: Jurassic Park)
Starring Shane Carruth, David Sullivan
Before I begin, let me start by saying that this film was made for a grand total of $7,000, most of the crew seems to consist of the actors' family members (including special mention in the credits to the Carruth family caterers) and yet won the Grand Jury Prize in the Dramatic Film category at Sundance Film Festival in 2004.
Story
The movie's story begins simply enough, assuming you're an engineer. Aaron and his friend Abe are engineers, working at home in the garage to try and find the next big discovery without having to surrender it to their company, thereby losing the opportunity to cash in on the new technology.
One of their devices - quite literally a black box - has the immediately observable effect of reducing the weight of any object placed inside it. They're not sure how it does that, only that it does. But the more they experiment with the box, the more mysterious it becomes. It runs without power; it collects mold faster than it should; a watch placed inside it comes out telling the wrong time. Yes, Aaron and Abe have made time travel possible. So they build a box big enough to climb into and then the fun begins.
The movie progresses steadily from this point, examining the potential for exploiting such a technology in multiple ways and the steps one must take to avoid disrupting the standard flow of time. There's not too much damage that can be done since the box can't send you back to a time before you turned it on and you're limited by the amount of oxygen in the box (which can be supplemented by bringing along a canister of compressed oxygen).
I don't want to give too much more away, but suffice it to say things start to get a little confused (one of the characters remarks that he hasn't eaten since "later this afternoon"), a little personal, a little paradoxical, and a lot paranoid.
By the time the movie is over, the physical and mental stresses of such an existence catch up with not only the characters, but also the audience. You may need to watch the ending a few times to figure out exactly what's going on, and even then you might not be right.
Acting
Considering the budget for this film and the fact that the writer/director was also the lead actor (and that members of his family are credited as the caterers), you'd expect that the acting would suffer. Well, while it's not something to write home about, it certainly wasn't phoned in. You can see that the actors did make an effort to learn their lines and deliver them well. Everyone with lines does a good enough job to make you forget that this is a low budget film festival entry. Also, they acted better than I ever could, so I salute them for that.
Effects
Not much in the way of effects here. Even the props are pretty low budget. I'm pretty sure that they used CDs to construct the large version of their invention.
Atmosphere and Immersive Detail
Over the course of the film, the characters display a sense of displacement, never quite being comfortable with which timeline they're in, what they need to do to avoid a paradox, what happens when 2 copies of the same cell phone receive a phone call, etc. Their disorientation helps, but isn't completely necessary, to make you feel just as turned around and upside down as they are.
Summary
A good - albeit confusing - film. Not something I'd recommend for everyone though. If you subscribe to a science magazine or have ever read a book on physics, you're likely to enjoy this film. If your idea of science is something nerds do, then I'd skip this one. This film is my answer to why Hollywood always glosses over science, even when it was central to the source material (i.e.: Jurassic Park)
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
The Jacket (2005)
Directed by John Maybury
Starring Adrien Brody, Keira Knightley
I remember seeing the previews for this movie and thinking initially that it would be a horror film. I mean, what other genre is there where you're tortured in a straight jacket? The premise seemed strange as well, and in hindsight still does, but perhaps that's what sets this movie apart from others like it and makes it memorable, even if other similar movies could be considered better.
Story
A gulf war (the first one) veteran (Adrien Brody), wounded in the line of duty and discharged, is charged with a heinous crime and committed to an institution because he has been found to suffer from a delusional state and deemed mentally unstable. As part of his treatment he is routinely drugged, strapped into a full body straight-jacket and slid into a morgue drawer where the boundaries of reality break down and allow him to travel to another time. During his time in the drawer, he comes to find out about his own impending death and helps a woman (Keira Knightley) who is haunted by the semi-abusive relationship she had with her mother.
Ultimately this is a movie about self-sacrifice, good deeds and redemption, though it does break a few of time-travels unspoken rules in Hollywood. Namely that the future is either flexible or immutable in any given movie, but in The Jacket, it's seemingly both.
Acting
I still haven't seen The Pianist, Brody's Oscar-winning performance (though it is in my queue) so I can't compare this performance to what can be assumed to be his best work, but he does a good job playing crazy and off balance in this role. Keira Knightley does a good job and isn't her usual monotone self. She plays dark and damaged decently, but not convincingly. It's like when they try to ugly up an actor/actress to play a role... you still know they're good-looking underneath.
I was impressed by the supporting cast which included Kris Kristofferson, Jennifer Jason Leigh (who amazingly stays fully clothed... though she isn't a starring role so maybe this doesn't count) and Daniel Craig (the new James Bond). Kristofferson plays his usual grizzled old man who could kick your ass and Leigh's character is good but relatively forgettable, serving as the yin to Kristofferson's yang. (Ok, that sounded bad.) Craig was a bit of a surprise in the sense that it's always fun to go back and see movies that now-famous actors were in before they became the big names they are today. Like watching Kevin Spacey in The Ref. One thing's for sure, I'm glad they left him blond as Bond, he's a bit odd looking as a brunette (or is that just him playing his role as a fellow patient well?)
Effects
There are plenty of flashes and surreal effects while Brody's character is in the morgue drawer. They're quite disorienting, which I'd imagine is a pretty good representation of what the character is supposed to be going through. Flashes of the past, the present, the future, the war, etc. A few of these sequences tend to go on for a while, but that just helps you to empathize I guess. There are no effects when the character arrives in or leaves a different time, he just disappears between camera cuts.
Music
I seem to remember a lot of very quiet scenes with sound effects playing a bigger role in this movie than music, especially during the time in the morgue drawer to try and bring you into the character's experience in a sort of sensory deprivation chamber. Amusingly, the song that opens the credits seems to be an answer to the question posed in the final spoken line of the film.
Atmosphere and Immersive Details
You really feel you're in the drawer with Brody. The silence, the darkness, the flashes of light and images and staccato noises all really draw you in. Character motivation was weak, with some apparently sadistic orderlies who took a bit too much pleasure in their work and some reversals that seemed to come out of left field in the usual "I hate you, I love you" fashion.
My biggest issue is the premise of the movie: that if you're drugged and restrained and stuck in a dark cramped "womb-like" place, you'll actually start traveling through time. They hinted at the fact that one of the drugs causes visions and hallucinations, but I'd have been happier if they'd explored that avenue a bit further, really making you question if the character was actually traveling or just simply delusional as everyone else believed.
Summary
A good movie, but not a rewarding movie. I'd recommend it to anyone who is a fan of the actors or the genre, but if you're looking for a really good "mental patient traveling through time" movie, go check out 12 Monkeys. 3 Stars (Liked It)
Starring Adrien Brody, Keira Knightley
I remember seeing the previews for this movie and thinking initially that it would be a horror film. I mean, what other genre is there where you're tortured in a straight jacket? The premise seemed strange as well, and in hindsight still does, but perhaps that's what sets this movie apart from others like it and makes it memorable, even if other similar movies could be considered better.
Story
A gulf war (the first one) veteran (Adrien Brody), wounded in the line of duty and discharged, is charged with a heinous crime and committed to an institution because he has been found to suffer from a delusional state and deemed mentally unstable. As part of his treatment he is routinely drugged, strapped into a full body straight-jacket and slid into a morgue drawer where the boundaries of reality break down and allow him to travel to another time. During his time in the drawer, he comes to find out about his own impending death and helps a woman (Keira Knightley) who is haunted by the semi-abusive relationship she had with her mother.
Ultimately this is a movie about self-sacrifice, good deeds and redemption, though it does break a few of time-travels unspoken rules in Hollywood. Namely that the future is either flexible or immutable in any given movie, but in The Jacket, it's seemingly both.
Acting
I still haven't seen The Pianist, Brody's Oscar-winning performance (though it is in my queue) so I can't compare this performance to what can be assumed to be his best work, but he does a good job playing crazy and off balance in this role. Keira Knightley does a good job and isn't her usual monotone self. She plays dark and damaged decently, but not convincingly. It's like when they try to ugly up an actor/actress to play a role... you still know they're good-looking underneath.
I was impressed by the supporting cast which included Kris Kristofferson, Jennifer Jason Leigh (who amazingly stays fully clothed... though she isn't a starring role so maybe this doesn't count) and Daniel Craig (the new James Bond). Kristofferson plays his usual grizzled old man who could kick your ass and Leigh's character is good but relatively forgettable, serving as the yin to Kristofferson's yang. (Ok, that sounded bad.) Craig was a bit of a surprise in the sense that it's always fun to go back and see movies that now-famous actors were in before they became the big names they are today. Like watching Kevin Spacey in The Ref. One thing's for sure, I'm glad they left him blond as Bond, he's a bit odd looking as a brunette (or is that just him playing his role as a fellow patient well?)
Effects
There are plenty of flashes and surreal effects while Brody's character is in the morgue drawer. They're quite disorienting, which I'd imagine is a pretty good representation of what the character is supposed to be going through. Flashes of the past, the present, the future, the war, etc. A few of these sequences tend to go on for a while, but that just helps you to empathize I guess. There are no effects when the character arrives in or leaves a different time, he just disappears between camera cuts.
Music
I seem to remember a lot of very quiet scenes with sound effects playing a bigger role in this movie than music, especially during the time in the morgue drawer to try and bring you into the character's experience in a sort of sensory deprivation chamber. Amusingly, the song that opens the credits seems to be an answer to the question posed in the final spoken line of the film.
Atmosphere and Immersive Details
You really feel you're in the drawer with Brody. The silence, the darkness, the flashes of light and images and staccato noises all really draw you in. Character motivation was weak, with some apparently sadistic orderlies who took a bit too much pleasure in their work and some reversals that seemed to come out of left field in the usual "I hate you, I love you" fashion.
My biggest issue is the premise of the movie: that if you're drugged and restrained and stuck in a dark cramped "womb-like" place, you'll actually start traveling through time. They hinted at the fact that one of the drugs causes visions and hallucinations, but I'd have been happier if they'd explored that avenue a bit further, really making you question if the character was actually traveling or just simply delusional as everyone else believed.
Summary
A good movie, but not a rewarding movie. I'd recommend it to anyone who is a fan of the actors or the genre, but if you're looking for a really good "mental patient traveling through time" movie, go check out 12 Monkeys. 3 Stars (Liked It)
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
When Harry Met Sally (1989)
Directed by Rob Reiner
Starring Billy Crystal, Meg Ryan
I remember watching this film in high school at a friend's house one night. There were a bunch of us over and we couldn't decide what to watch. The girls eventually won the battle and tossed in When Harry Met Sally. Trouble was, they decided to fast forward through all the "couple on the couch" scenes, so until today I've never really watched this movie in its entirety.
Story
"Men and women can't be friends, the sex thing always gets in the way." That about sums up the movie. Tracking the lives and romances and on-again-off-again friendship of Harry (Billy Crystal) and Sally (Meg Ryan) from college graduation to their early 30s. There's the famous "fake orgasm in the diner" scene with Rob Reiner's mom playing the woman who orders "what she's having" at the end. But oddly, that wasn't the laugh for me. I got a good chuckle watching Meg Ryan switch instantly from "Passion" to deadpan, the quick change was comedy timing gold in my opinion.
The "couple on the couch" scenes I mentioned earlier are scattered throughout and seem to be interludes separating long chunks of time in the lives of the main characters. The couples are cute and their stories somewhat interesting, but ultimately forgettable. They're sharing an intimate moment of their lives - how they met - and though you feel their love, you really either go maudlin remembering how you met your sweetie or depressed that you don't have a story like theirs to tell.
Having gone down the "friends before lovers" road with my wife, we have our own stories to tell, though some are a bit complicated if you delve into the details. Better to glaze the surface and find that happy romantic nostalgia that this movie aims to bring out in its viewers.
Lots of witty banter and monologues make the movie fun and heart wrenching throughout, but ultimately you get that feel good moment at the end, even if it's somewhat ruined by the penultimate "couple on the couch" scene that you knew was coming all along.
Acting
That witty dialogue I was talking about? Some of it is really good and you have to wonder if they were delivering lines or ad-libbing some of what the scene called for. There are a few scenes when you really see some great acting from Meg Ryan. Billy Crystal only falls into his usual shtick a few times, notably in a museum when he starts up one of his accents and at a Sharper Image when he starts up a karaoke machine with "Surrey With A Fringe On Top" from Oklahoma.
Effects
The only thing I'd call an effect is the awful hairpiece they gave to Crystal for his college scenes. Looked like a cat crawled on his head and died.
The only romantic comedy I can remember with Special Effects was Sleepless in Seattle and that was pretty bad. You're supposed to "Aww..." not "Ooh!" at these movies for a reason.
Music
Lots of old Louis Armstrong songs and songs from that vein depicting either couples in love or at odds but still in love (Tomato/Tomahto). Fitting to the story of course. Personally, I love these songs and they were all over this genre a while back. Makes me wonder if 40 years from now I'll be watching a romantic comedy with my wife and hearing "Do me baby, one more time" as the background music. Nah...
Atmosphere and Immersive Details
This movie used the story to move you along and there's really not much care for small details or even the large ones. During an early scene when Harry & Sally are driving down Lake Shore Drive in Chicago, they're approaching the city from the north and the Hancock Tower is looming in front of them. On this point of that road as you are driving south, there are apartments to the right of you and Lake Michigan to your left. But as the camera changes to view the actors through the windshield, there are buildings where the lake should be. In another scene early on, the two are in a diner (not THE diner) and the diner is full of patrons, but when they leave and go back to their car in the parking lot, the lot is practically empty.
Summary
All said, this is a classic flick, though not one that I'd be wanting to bring out over and over. For this reason, I've given it 3 Stars (Liked It). There's just enough romance and just enough comedy between the moments when they're at eachother's throats and moments when they're depressed to make watching this movie enjoyable, but not with enough warm fuzzies to want to watch it again any time soon. Maybe I'll trot this out again in 40 years on Interactive 3-D YouTube Blu-ray and splice in my wife and I on the couch for good measure.
Starring Billy Crystal, Meg Ryan
I remember watching this film in high school at a friend's house one night. There were a bunch of us over and we couldn't decide what to watch. The girls eventually won the battle and tossed in When Harry Met Sally. Trouble was, they decided to fast forward through all the "couple on the couch" scenes, so until today I've never really watched this movie in its entirety.
Story
"Men and women can't be friends, the sex thing always gets in the way." That about sums up the movie. Tracking the lives and romances and on-again-off-again friendship of Harry (Billy Crystal) and Sally (Meg Ryan) from college graduation to their early 30s. There's the famous "fake orgasm in the diner" scene with Rob Reiner's mom playing the woman who orders "what she's having" at the end. But oddly, that wasn't the laugh for me. I got a good chuckle watching Meg Ryan switch instantly from "Passion" to deadpan, the quick change was comedy timing gold in my opinion.
The "couple on the couch" scenes I mentioned earlier are scattered throughout and seem to be interludes separating long chunks of time in the lives of the main characters. The couples are cute and their stories somewhat interesting, but ultimately forgettable. They're sharing an intimate moment of their lives - how they met - and though you feel their love, you really either go maudlin remembering how you met your sweetie or depressed that you don't have a story like theirs to tell.
Having gone down the "friends before lovers" road with my wife, we have our own stories to tell, though some are a bit complicated if you delve into the details. Better to glaze the surface and find that happy romantic nostalgia that this movie aims to bring out in its viewers.
Lots of witty banter and monologues make the movie fun and heart wrenching throughout, but ultimately you get that feel good moment at the end, even if it's somewhat ruined by the penultimate "couple on the couch" scene that you knew was coming all along.
Acting
That witty dialogue I was talking about? Some of it is really good and you have to wonder if they were delivering lines or ad-libbing some of what the scene called for. There are a few scenes when you really see some great acting from Meg Ryan. Billy Crystal only falls into his usual shtick a few times, notably in a museum when he starts up one of his accents and at a Sharper Image when he starts up a karaoke machine with "Surrey With A Fringe On Top" from Oklahoma.
Effects
The only thing I'd call an effect is the awful hairpiece they gave to Crystal for his college scenes. Looked like a cat crawled on his head and died.
The only romantic comedy I can remember with Special Effects was Sleepless in Seattle and that was pretty bad. You're supposed to "Aww..." not "Ooh!" at these movies for a reason.
Music
Lots of old Louis Armstrong songs and songs from that vein depicting either couples in love or at odds but still in love (Tomato/Tomahto). Fitting to the story of course. Personally, I love these songs and they were all over this genre a while back. Makes me wonder if 40 years from now I'll be watching a romantic comedy with my wife and hearing "Do me baby, one more time" as the background music. Nah...
Atmosphere and Immersive Details
This movie used the story to move you along and there's really not much care for small details or even the large ones. During an early scene when Harry & Sally are driving down Lake Shore Drive in Chicago, they're approaching the city from the north and the Hancock Tower is looming in front of them. On this point of that road as you are driving south, there are apartments to the right of you and Lake Michigan to your left. But as the camera changes to view the actors through the windshield, there are buildings where the lake should be. In another scene early on, the two are in a diner (not THE diner) and the diner is full of patrons, but when they leave and go back to their car in the parking lot, the lot is practically empty.
Summary
All said, this is a classic flick, though not one that I'd be wanting to bring out over and over. For this reason, I've given it 3 Stars (Liked It). There's just enough romance and just enough comedy between the moments when they're at eachother's throats and moments when they're depressed to make watching this movie enjoyable, but not with enough warm fuzzies to want to watch it again any time soon. Maybe I'll trot this out again in 40 years on Interactive 3-D YouTube Blu-ray and splice in my wife and I on the couch for good measure.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
The Brothers Grimm (2005)
Directed by Terry Gilliam
Starring Matt Damon, Heath Ledger
Honestly, the previews for this one looked pretty bad and the reviews were bad to match, but I put this on my list because it was directed by Terry Gilliam, one of my favorite directors. I'll have to admit, it wasn't the best movie I've ever seen, but it wasn't the worst either.
Story
The beginning has a twist that you'll probably see coming a mile off. Needless to say, the Grimms' reputation is more noble than they are and the characters are setup to take you down the road of a buddy-cop film format.
Wilhelm Grimm (Matt Damon), the elder brother, is the realist, the thinker and mastermind behind the Grimms' successes to date. Jacob Grimm is the dreamer, his head always in his book and his mind on his stories, tormented by his brother and his conscience over the death of their sister when they were younger. Jacob went to sell the family cow to get money for medicine and came back with "Magic Beans" instead. And so the first fairy tale corruption is foisted upon the audience.
The references come faster than you can recognize them at times: Red Riding Hood, Hansel and Gretel, Rapunzel, The Princess and the Pea, Snow White (sooo many references here from the mirror to the woodsman to the apple), Sleeping Beauty and Cinderella somehow get thrown together, and even The Wizard of Oz makes a pseudo-appearance when a girl repeatedly clicks her glass slippers together at the climax of a scene near the end.
Most of these are twisted, either together to help frame the story, or darkly in a bizarre manifestation more like a nightmare. The Gingerbread Man sequence is especially dark with a girl's face falling off into the mud only to be absorbed by a mud creature so it can see and capture her. Once the capture is complete, the creature flattens and hardens and shouts out the famous "you can't catch me I'm the Gingerbread Man" line, totally out of left field.
The key to the ending is hinted at early and some of the lines are almost expected (how many times have you heard "Well that went well" after something that didn't?) but overall it's an imaginative yarn and that counts for something, doesn't it?
Acting
Nobody's winning an Oscar for this movie and let's face it: you didn't go see it for the incredible performances.
Effects
Overall not bad. There is one notable CG glitch that I saw immediately (mentioned below) and a few bad green-screen shots, but considering how many effects were necessary in this film it's not a bad effort.
Music
Most of the memorable moments of the soundtrack are variations on children's songs like "Lullaby, and Goodnight". Kinda creepy when the evil man with the axe is coming to take/kill the little girl and whistling a lullaby.
Atmosphere & Immersive Details
Gilliam is here in force, bringing back imagery from Time Bandits and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen. Even the most microscopic details are not overlooked for the most part, such as an egg rolling out of a gargoyle's mouth filled with a bird's nest when Jacob Grimm grabs it to keep from falling. Other moments are dramatically presented in a dreamlike manner seen through the eyes of a character, such as a regal dinner seemingly attended by innumerable guests at an infintely long table, only to be revealed as a very small gathering of people seated on large, tall mirrored chairs when the dream is shattered by an interruption. Gilliam's over-characterization and seeming contempt of the empiric Napoleonic French is everywhere, from their thick exaggerated accents to their bloated pride. It makes me wonder how he would portray colonial Americans in a movie like Dances with Wolves if given the opportunity.
However, some details are missed or just plain missing such as a moment during an upward shot of the tower Jacob is scaling. The needlelike spire on top (in the "background" of this specific shot) appears from nowhere during a quick cutaway. I couldn't believe what I was seeing and had to rewind to double-check, but it wasn't there and then suddenly it was.
Summary
All in all, I liked this film, if only for the facts that Gilliam directed it and that it wasn't painful to watch. It could have been better, but it might have been a lot worse. In the end I gave it 3 Stars on Netflix (Liked It).
Starring Matt Damon, Heath Ledger
Honestly, the previews for this one looked pretty bad and the reviews were bad to match, but I put this on my list because it was directed by Terry Gilliam, one of my favorite directors. I'll have to admit, it wasn't the best movie I've ever seen, but it wasn't the worst either.
Story
The beginning has a twist that you'll probably see coming a mile off. Needless to say, the Grimms' reputation is more noble than they are and the characters are setup to take you down the road of a buddy-cop film format.
Wilhelm Grimm (Matt Damon), the elder brother, is the realist, the thinker and mastermind behind the Grimms' successes to date. Jacob Grimm is the dreamer, his head always in his book and his mind on his stories, tormented by his brother and his conscience over the death of their sister when they were younger. Jacob went to sell the family cow to get money for medicine and came back with "Magic Beans" instead. And so the first fairy tale corruption is foisted upon the audience.
The references come faster than you can recognize them at times: Red Riding Hood, Hansel and Gretel, Rapunzel, The Princess and the Pea, Snow White (sooo many references here from the mirror to the woodsman to the apple), Sleeping Beauty and Cinderella somehow get thrown together, and even The Wizard of Oz makes a pseudo-appearance when a girl repeatedly clicks her glass slippers together at the climax of a scene near the end.
Most of these are twisted, either together to help frame the story, or darkly in a bizarre manifestation more like a nightmare. The Gingerbread Man sequence is especially dark with a girl's face falling off into the mud only to be absorbed by a mud creature so it can see and capture her. Once the capture is complete, the creature flattens and hardens and shouts out the famous "you can't catch me I'm the Gingerbread Man" line, totally out of left field.
The key to the ending is hinted at early and some of the lines are almost expected (how many times have you heard "Well that went well" after something that didn't?) but overall it's an imaginative yarn and that counts for something, doesn't it?
Acting
Nobody's winning an Oscar for this movie and let's face it: you didn't go see it for the incredible performances.
Effects
Overall not bad. There is one notable CG glitch that I saw immediately (mentioned below) and a few bad green-screen shots, but considering how many effects were necessary in this film it's not a bad effort.
Music
Most of the memorable moments of the soundtrack are variations on children's songs like "Lullaby, and Goodnight". Kinda creepy when the evil man with the axe is coming to take/kill the little girl and whistling a lullaby.
Atmosphere & Immersive Details
Gilliam is here in force, bringing back imagery from Time Bandits and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen. Even the most microscopic details are not overlooked for the most part, such as an egg rolling out of a gargoyle's mouth filled with a bird's nest when Jacob Grimm grabs it to keep from falling. Other moments are dramatically presented in a dreamlike manner seen through the eyes of a character, such as a regal dinner seemingly attended by innumerable guests at an infintely long table, only to be revealed as a very small gathering of people seated on large, tall mirrored chairs when the dream is shattered by an interruption. Gilliam's over-characterization and seeming contempt of the empiric Napoleonic French is everywhere, from their thick exaggerated accents to their bloated pride. It makes me wonder how he would portray colonial Americans in a movie like Dances with Wolves if given the opportunity.
However, some details are missed or just plain missing such as a moment during an upward shot of the tower Jacob is scaling. The needlelike spire on top (in the "background" of this specific shot) appears from nowhere during a quick cutaway. I couldn't believe what I was seeing and had to rewind to double-check, but it wasn't there and then suddenly it was.
Summary
All in all, I liked this film, if only for the facts that Gilliam directed it and that it wasn't painful to watch. It could have been better, but it might have been a lot worse. In the end I gave it 3 Stars on Netflix (Liked It).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)