Wanted

Since it is my policy not to reveal plot points when reviewing a film, this review is going to be short. Wanted is a terrible film because it’s unbelievable, the stunts are nothing that we haven’t seen before and the storyline is way too predictable. As a viewer this is one of those films that leaves you saying, “oh, that wouldn’t happen,” too often, followed by laughter. The film just doesn’t work.

I don’t blame the acting, or even the directing, since the script is that poorly written. The premise of an all-telling loom revealing the fate of the peace-loving world should have shelved this film before it ever got to production. Since it didn’t, director Timur Bekmambetov didn’t have much choice but try and make the production values strong. They are, and the stunts are kind of cool to watch (even if they aren’t that original) which is why I’m giving the film a little more than one projector. The acting is what you expect from an action film; nothing special but good enough, however, even Morgan Feeman and Angelina Jolie can’t save this film.

Rating: 1/2

Film’s website: http://www.wantedmovie.com

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Welcome back Indy, thanks for the great times, now enjoy your retirement. The fourth installment of the Indiana Jones saga is great fun to watch, but doesn’t live up to the quality of its previous three chapters. There’s no need for a lengthy review here, other than to say that if you loved the first three films you will enjoy this one for all the same reasons. Harrison Ford is as good as ever and the action is amazing.

What’s not up to par in this installment is the story and the villain. In the first three films the story centered on a monumental journey in search of some mythical item that could destroy the world if captured by evil hands.  In the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, the journey seems way too easy and the protagonist too wimpy.

While the search for the famed “city of gold” is a great myth to center a story around I just never felt like the world was going to end if the Russians got there first. It certainly didn’t feel like the race to get the Ark or the Grail. I guess I didn’t understand the power that was at risk. I also didn’t feel like Cate Blanchett’s character was all that menacing. Her “evil” was so comical she actually made me laugh a few times. And what was that whole psychic thing with her?

In the end, this film was as much about reliving some great childhood cinema memories, and for a lot of young parents, introducing their children to a movie hero from their childhood. All good reasons to catch Indy on his farewell tour!

Rating:

Film’s website: http://www.indianajones.com/site/index.html

Iron Man

So after all the hype, did Iron Man stand up? Kind-of. I have to admit that I had HUGE expectations coming into this film and I’ve discovered that I’m usually disappointed when I do, but I couldn’t help it with this film. Marvel Comics making their first film on their own and Robert Downey Jr. as a super hero? I couldn’t wait. Now that it’s over, I had a good time, it was worth the price of a ticket but it is nowhere near as great as so many people have said. I think it seems great because, quite frankly, 2008 has been a terrible year for films so far and this is the best of a bad year (at least so far).

What’s good? Downey, the special effects and the general plot line.

What’s not good? The length, the direction and the script.

Let’s start with Downey. He is as good as I thought we would be, adding that touch of sarcasm and self-awareness to his character that hardly any actor today could pull off. He is a delight to watch and without him this film would be a disaster. The special effects, as you would expect, are amazing. The scenes of Iron Man flying around and doing battle with jet fighters is just stunning. The depth of the picture makes it seem like 3D and the editing is quite strong. It’s a visual paradise to watch. I also like the general story, that is, the story of Iron Man. I don’t give credit to anybody on the film for this, that credit belongs to Marvel and the legendary Stan Lee.

Where the film falls flat is in it’s writing and directing. Jon Favreau is a bit over his head with this film and it shows in the wasteful use of such actors as Gwyneth Paltrow, Jeff Bridges and Terrence Howard. When you are handed these three as your supporting cast you have to get more out of the script for them to act with. Their characters were almost unnecessary and why you would cast such great actors into these roles is beyond me. And that brings up my biggest complaint. When you have Downey as your lead, you had better deliver a script befitting his talents. It wasn’t nearly smart enough to really take advantage of Downey’s best acting traits - that sarcastic, self-awareness that makes his characters seem bigger than life. If the supporting roles don’t have much to do, why not them make this a Downey film? Favreau should have seen this from reading the script and had the changes made to either showcase Downey better or beef up the supporting roles.

I also had a problem with the length of the film… just over two hours and it could have been 30 minutes shorter. I know it’s the trend these days - longer films - but I wish directors would show some restraint and make the film shorter when the story screams out for it. For the two hours that I did watch, I sure wish I could have seen more action scenes, or at the very least additional plot development.

In the end, I felt like I was watching a film that is just setting up a new franchise. Maybe Iron Man 2 will be better. I certainly hope so, but for now this one will do if you are looking for a fun movie to beat the Summer heat.

Rating: 

Film’s website: http://ironmanmovie.marvel.com/

Into the wild

I missed this film in the theaters and couldn’t wait to watch it on DVD when it came out. While I did enjoy the film, I was somewhat under whelmed which may be because this is a “big” film that loses some of its appeal on the small screen, but I think it’s because of some sloppy storytelling.

First, however, I did love a couple of things. The acting is amazing. Why this film did not get nominated for more acting awards is beyond me. Emile Hirsch is wonderfully subdued as the idealist, thoughtful, yet troubled young Chris McCandless. While Hal Holbrook received most of the praise for his supporting role I found that Catherine Keener and Brian Dierker’s performances as a hippie couple mesmerizing. All of the acting was subtle, powerful and delicate, not surprising since the film is directed by just such a great actor, Sean Penn.

I also found the cinematography beautiful. Instead of going for the glamour nature shots, Eric Gautier, goes for more of a natural, gritty feel that adds an element of tension to the film. All too often Hollywood films go for a look that is too vibrant and melodramatic rather than real. It’s nice to watch a film that pays homage to the beauty of the locations rather than trying to manipulate it.

So what didn’t work? Well, Penn seemed to be enamored with a romanticized version of McCandless. Maybe this is exactly what this guy was like, but as a leading character in a film some changes were needed. He is set up to be this incredibly intelligent, over-achieving young man who then makes a couple of very dumb decisions that lead to his death. This is where I lost the film. It was already getting long in the tooth and beginning to drag about two-thirds of the way through when McCandless’ character makes two decisions which seem out of character and ultimately lead to his death. I’m not questioning that someone in his position wouldn’t make these bad decisions, but the character in the film was set-up in a way that they seemed totally out of character. This is where Penn’s romanticized vision comes into play. I get the feeling that Penn didn’t want to dive into the dark side, or impulsiveness, of McCandless’ character which could have cast the lead as a less-than romantic figure. As a result, the climax of the film is weakened when, as viewers, you stop and ask “why didn’t he just…” Never something you want your audience asking at the end of a film. Despite the awkward ending, this film is worth watching for the acting and cinematography alone.

Rating:

Film’s website: http://www.intothewild.com/

Vantage Point

I’m conflicted by this film. I really want to love it, but I just can’t. Pete Travis directs this mystery-thriller with a nod toward Kurosawa’s “Rashomon” and falls short of the mark when he reverts to a stereotypical Hollywood ending when anything but that was needed. I love it when writers and directors take creative chances and try something new with an old formula (which is why I loved Atonement, Crash and Traffic), but Travis doesn’t seem to trust himself with the ending. It’s either that, or the studio got in the way and wouldn’t allow a non-traditional ending. The more I think about this film the more I think this is true. I just can’t fathom a director making the first two-thirds of this film and then suddenly deciding to deviate from his narrative style so drastically in the final third. It’s either this or Travis got so lost editing that he forgot what kind of film he set out to make. So, did I hate it? Actually, no… for the first half. I really liked the idea of seeing this event unfold from several different points-of-view. While there were moans in the audience the third time the clock was reset (I heard an “oh, jesus” more than once) I had no problem with it. It was unique, original and kept me thinking where we were going next. The acting is strong, the cinematography and editing flawless and the narrative pacing fine. Where the film begins to fall apart is when we get to the third story and begin seeing too much of the same thing. I wanted the narrative to go much further with each “vantage point” and provide me with significant new information. Each one spends too much time recapping the mayor’s speech and not enough time moving the narrative forward. And then there is the end. It’s just absurd. Too impossible to believe and way too coincidental. It was forced, like somebody said, “ok, let’s end the film now” without regard to how the story had been developing. Some of the stunts were so unbelievable the audience was actually laughing. This is a film that started strong, had all the makings of a great movie, and then crashed and burned in the end. If you like the beginning, go out and rent Kurosawa’s “Rashomon” and see what this film could have been if made by a master director.

Rating:
Film Website: http://www.vantagepoint-movie.com/index.php