First preview screening of 2012 and unfortunately not off to a good start. Going to try and start writing these semi-regularly again as I expect writing to be a big part of my life this year.
So...
Through out my primary and secondary education I studied some popular works of classic literature which are considered to be essential reading material like Oliver Twist, Children on the Oregon Trail, Flowers for Algernon, Animal Farm, Carrie's War and many, many more. While I was always very capable when it came to reading and writing, most of my classmates used to cringe when they had to read out loud and the majority of them were the kind of people who, even at around ages 13-18, still had to follow the words with their fingers while reading. Suffice to say it's understandable that my high school chose to avoid enforcing any Shakespeare upon us. As I've never taken an active interest in the works of 'The Bard' myself, almost everything I do know about his work stems from what I've learned through popular culture references and modern adaptations.
This also means that Coriolanus was totally lost on me and unless you're intimately familiar with the dialogue in the play then I suspect it will be lost on you too. You may read the overview or watch the trailer and think that it's just an action packed, modernised update of the story with some choice dialogue being reproduced but what you aren't made aware of is that you're being misled and in actual fact, all of the dialogue used in the movie is taken directly from the play.
This immediately sounds out of place in a modern setting when lead actor (and director) Ralph Fiennes starts spouting off language more flowery than Alan Titchmarsh's back garden while dressed in full military garb and holding a machine gun. It's not just Fiennes that this effects though; when you witness any of the A-list cast reciting the full Shakespearean dialogue it causes you to instantly start sucking in air through gritted teeth.
The background scenery doesn't help make the old fashioned dialogue seem any less strange either. At first you see a clash between some soldiers, police and rioters and you think it's straight forward enough using these to replace ancient Roman citizens and centurians. Later on though, you see inside the titular Coriolanus' young son's bedroom and when you notice that he has a mac computer and an inflatable dartboard amongst other modern luxuries, you can't help but wonder how on earth he manages to rhyme off his Christmas list every year without deviating from only using lines written by Shakespeare.
Hopefully I've made it clear by now that Coriolanus will most likely only be accessible to those who have studied or understand the play in some form or another but that doesn't necessarily make it a good movie. I can see why a lot of fans would be attracted to this and I'm all for directors taking risks although it seems to me that making a modernised Shakespeare adaptation, which isn't a teen romcom with catchy musical numbers, would be edgy and/or original enough without sticking specifically to the Shakespearean dialogue too.
I suppose it would be easy to say that my dislike of Coriolanus comes entirely from my own ignorance of the source material but I did overhear several people, who clearly were familiar with it, discussing how the modern setting just didn't work well at all as they were leaving the cinema and several others did actually walk out during the screening too. I can't really comment myself on how well the story played out as I was only aware of what was going on around half of the time. I can appreciate that it's supposed to be a tradegy and I'm sure I would have been deeply moved by it if I could actually understand most of what was being said but as such, the only tragedy for me was that I'll never get those two hours of my life back.
Scott Pilgrim vs the World. There were a lot of movies in 2010 that had a specific area they excelled in, be it effects, storyline or comedic value (Black Dynamite counts as a close second here due to it's UK cinema release being in 2010) but for me only SPvtW had the perfect balance of everything. I still don't rate Michael Cera very highly as an actor and I don't think he brought anything special to the lead role but he was completely over-shadowed by the amazing supporting cast anyway, especially Jason Schwartzman, Kieran Culkin, Chris Evans, and Brandon Routh.
I think I enjoyed the movie so much because not only did it cater to the Nintendo fanboy in me but I was also able to connect with the storyline on a personal level as someone who has had his own share of drama caused by potential partner's exes.
For me it's been Boardwalk Empire by a mile. Forget sci-fi and fantasy shows this year, nothing has been more interesting than watching the rise to power of prohibition era crimelords in Atlantic City during the 20's. The clothes, the backdrops, the dialogue and of course the gritty violence had me riveted all season but what do you really expect when Scorsese is involved. All of that is before even mentioning a little bit of Al Capone thrown in for good measure! Steve Buscemi was a fantastic actor already but I'm confident that Nucky Thompson will be the defining role of his career.
I saw Paranormal Activity for the first time with some friends and while we were in the theater I was sitting next to the only girl in our group. I didn't know her very well and we'd only spoken briefly a few times but by the end of the movie she was squeezing my arm like it was made of kittens. The second time I saw it was at a friend's house and by the end she was also grabbing my hand so tightly that I was worried she might break it. This has led me to believe that Paranormal Activity is the ultimate date movie for guys that want to close the gap between awkward conversation and that all important first physical contact. My companion during the newly released prequel however was a guy and while not as pleasant as having a cute girl grabbing onto you out of pure terror, it can be quite hilarious seeing a grown man hide behind his hands and say things like 'my nerves are totally shot' or 'I can't handle much more of this'.
The first film tells the story of Katie and Micah. A young couple who find that their home is being haunted by a supernatural presence and they attempt to document all the events that occur via both a handheld and stationary video cameras planted all throughout their home. At first this presence is only indicated by subtle things like a door moving on it's own or a light turning on or off. Eventually though the inexplicable occurrences continue to build up until the movie reaches a terrifying conclusion.
The prequel starts out sixty days before the conclusion of the first film. We are introduced to Katie's sister Kristi as she brings new-born son Hunter to her family home which she shares with husband Dan, step-daughter Ali, Martine the housekeeper and their dog Abby. Things start out with the first months of the baby's life being shown through a montage of handy-cam footage and this serves as the initial slow build-up. Things really start kicking off after the family come home one day to find their house has apparently been burgled although nothing valuable has been taken apart from a necklace that was given to Kristi by her sister. After the burglary, Dan decides to install security cameras in several places in and around the house and this is how the viewer gets to observe all of the occurrences that take place in each room.
As with the first movie, things start out simple to begin with. A light will go off, a pot will fall off the hangar, a door will slam shut on it's own. While Paranormal Activity had a gradual build-up to one major fright at the end, Paranormal Activity 2 has several of these more 'full-on' moments scattered all throughout. It never seems to work quite as well over-all but you can appreciate that the movie had to follow a different formula this time around in order to separate it from it's predecessor.
Another change is the increase in special effects during some of the frightening scenes. Instead of keeping to this to a minimum and relying on realism and simplicity to scare the audience, a lot more CGI is used. Given the basic nature of how the movie is filmed this just looks silly and out of place sometimes thus resulting in people laughing instead of jumping or screaming.
This isn't to say that the movie isn't genuinely frightening in places. The scenes that have been kept simple still work very well and rely on playing on the viewers paranoia and anticipation of what might happen rather than the actual incidents themselves. These moments are made even more terrifying by a constant rumbling noise that quietly starts out whenever something may be about to happen and gradually gets louder and louder and plays with your mind until you end up begging for something to happen just so it can be over and done with. This technique also has a habit of teasing you as sometimes something will happen as it's going on and other times it'll just fizzle out or something perfectly normal will happen instead.
Other techniques used for building up tension include scenes where the audience's view is focused on an unoccupied room and you find yourself holding your breath as your eyes scan across every individual object. You try to guess which one will move of it's own accord or which door will suddenly burst open, often to be disappointed yet at the same time relieved when nothing happens at all and you can finally let out a sigh of relief.
I have no doubt that there are countless people out there who will suffer many sleepless nights after watching this film on DVD while alone in a dark room but for me, observing the rest of the audience's reactions in the cinema was a definite highlight. There's nothing quite like hearing the genuine screams and gasps of hundreds of fellow viewers around you when something scary happens on screen. When you can sense everyone cringing during the transitions between the daytime and nighttime scenes it really adds to the over-all atmosphere
In conclusion, Paranormal Activity 2 is a great prequel which is only let down by an over-reliance on CGI during certain scenes. Increasing the number of main characters was a risk, as was cranking up the number of big scare scenes but these changes are necessary for it to separate itself from the first film. The plot isn't a priority in a film of this genre and nature but for what it's worth it does tie in quite well with the over-all storyline. The ending is a little weak but the journey up until that point definitely puts it on par with the first movie.
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is the film adaptation of a series of graphic novels by Canadian writer/artist Bryan Lee O'Malley. The movie version is directed by Edgar Wright (Hot Fuzz, Shaun of the Dead, Spaced) and tells the story of Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera), an unemployed twenty-two year old slacker from Toronto who shares an apartment (and a bed) with his gay room-mate Wallace Wells and does nothing productive with his time other than practicing with his band Sex Bob-Omb.
When we first meet Scott he's just started dating seventeen year old high schooler Knives Chau, his first attempt at dating since he broke up with what he refers to as his 'big ex' over a year ago. Knives quickly becomes obsessed with Scott and his band but before Scott has a chance to start developing proper feelings of his own for her he literally meets the girl of his dreams, Ramona Flowers, a delivery girl for Amazon.ca that uses subspace portals as shortcuts on her delivery routes, one of which goes through Scott's brain.
Scott obsesses over Ramona and eventually the two start dating. What Scott doesn't realise is that Ramona's seven evil ex-boyfriends have formed a league to control the future of her love life and Scott must defeat them all if he wants to continue seeing her.
The movie takes on a stylisation which is heavily based on video game and comic influences from the unique take on the Universal opening title to the Batman style onomatopoetic effects displayed during the fight scenes. These are all amazingly choreographed and play out really well, especially as a lot of the battle scenes work alongside a great soundtrack usually provided by Sex Bob-Omb or a rival band playing in the background. You may start to question why none of the characters find it a little odd that a lot of the enemies Scott faces somehow have supernatural abilities or why they burst into coins when defeated. This is explained better in the graphic novels but in the movie you'll be far too engrossed in the action to dwell on this for too long.
The pacing of the movie starts out a little bit slow but it soon picks up once the evil exes are introduced and then it doesn't stop right through to the end. Luckily there's enough comical moments and witty dialogue to pull you through the first twenty minutes or so. Michael Cera does a decent enough job playing Scott although he often comes across as being a little too whiny at times. There are much better performances from the supporting cast though with Scott's room-mate Wallace (Keiran Culkin) standing out the most.
The storyline itself isn't just about a fictional character fighting over the top battles with evil villains in order to win the heart of the woman he loves. When you dig a little deeper you realise that the character of Scott Pilgrim is actually a metaphor for most twenty-something people who have had to face the trials of dating which often include having to come to terms with the insecurities and underlying issues leftover by previous partners on both sides. Scott Pilgrim just has a very imaginative way of portraying these situations and an interaction between the two lead characters describes it best when Ramona says to Scott "We all have baggage" to which Scott replies "Yeah well, my baggage doesn't try and kill me every five minutes".
While it may seem a little over the top at times for some people, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World really does have something there for everyone to enjoy although comic and video game fans will easily get the most out of it as there's always a reference to something geeky lined up around the corner. It provides a perfect blend of action, humour, dialogue, special effects and underlying meaning which by far makes it the best movie of the year.
Today I saw a movie at the Grosvenor cinema in Ashton Lane. They have large, comfy leather seats and I ate cherry Twizzlers and pretzel M&M's while drinking Mountain Dew Code Red. There were a grand total of four other people in the room. If I had been watching something like Predators or Inception then it would have most likely been the greatest cinema experience of my life. Unfortunately though I was watching...
The original The Karate Kid should be a title well known title to anyone born before the 90's. It's the story of a young lad trying to adjust to life in another city when his mother gets a new job forcing them to relocate. It's not long before the title character of the story meets a girl and runs into trouble while trying to protect her from a gang of local thugs. While our hero tries his best to defend the honour of the object of his affection he quickly faces a sound beating as his antagonists are highly skilled in Karate leaving him with no chance of victory.
This leads to the main character facing constant bullying from the gang while trying to develop his relationship. In one instance he decides to get revenge by pulling a prank resulting in the gang chasing and then attacking him to the point where he faces serious injury. It's at this point that the friendly caretaker of his building steps in and easily defeats the gang. The young boy goes with the caretaker to the dojo where the gang are being taught to make their sensei aware of how his students are abusing their skills. They find him to be less than sympathetic and realise that it's not the students who are bad but the teacher. However, they get him to agree to let the main character fight the leader of the gang one on one in a local Karate tournament. In preparation for this the caretaker takes the boy under his wing, training him in the art of Karate using his own unique methods before the final showdown at the tournament and they develop a close friendship in the process.
The 2010 version of The Karate Kid is neither a follow on from the original series or a reboot. It's basically a retelling of the 1984 version where the story is almost identical and even parts of the dialogue are exactly the same. The main differences are that instead of being sixteen the lead character is twelve. Instead of moving city, the lead character and his mother move from The United States to China and instead of Karate the martial art the movie centres around is Kung Fu.
The title role is played by Jaden Smith, son of Will and Jada Pinkett Smith who were both producers on the movie. Smith fills the role of twelve year old Dre Parker well and while he doesn't quite have as much personality as Ralph Macchio had playing a seventeen year old Daniel Larusso in the original, he makes up for it in attitude. The thing that makes his performance stand out is that Smith was only eleven years old while making the movie (Macchio was twenty-three). This is not Smith's debut role but it's definitely the one that will cause movie fans to keep an eye on him in future.
The role of the caretaker, in this case named Mr Han, is filled by Jackie Chan. While Dre's character tries to retain the charm and cockyness of Daniel in the original, Jackie Chan makes this role his own. In 1984 the late Pat Morita played Mr Miyagi and captured our hearts with his laid-back attitude, unique sense of humour and wise-ways. While Mr Miyagi seemed to have a sunny outlook on life despite his tragic past, Mr Han seems tortured and melancholy throughout the whole movie. The light-hearted and playful way in which Miyagi delivered key lines are re-created by Han in a dry, abrupt and almost sarcastic way. At first you may think is solely down to Chan not being as good an actor but it's something you may reconsider when Han's character is further developed later on.
The supporting cast don't seem quite as charasmatic as in the original however this is over-shadowed by the brutalness of the fight scenes and makes the choreography from the first version look very basic by comparison. The combat between Dre and his bullies can be quite harsh at times. It's broken up in the scene where Han comes to Dre's rescue and Chan utilises his typically slapstick style of Kung Fu but the harshness soon resumes and, as you cringe at every blow during the tournament scenes, you may find yourself surprised that the movie is rated PG considering the level of violence.
While the basic storyline is pretty much the same, the journey from point A to B is filled with some nice additions including some very impressive set pieces taking place on the Great Wall and a fantastic scene in a Kung Fu temple. As Han and Dre's relationship evolves from tutalage to friendship, we're shown some very touching scenes and are given the impression that Han starts to view Dre as a substitute for his own deceased son instead of just a pupil and a friend. There are of course some key moments which have been given a fresh lick of paint as well. While the way Dre subconsciously learns moves through repeating menial tasks doesn't seem to work as well, the climactic scene where he overcomes his broken leg definitely has a lot more impact. There's also an amusing twist on the chopsticks scene as well.
Overall this remake has things that can be enjoyed by both newcomers and fans of the original alike. A lot of the best scenes are all still there right down to the Cobra Kai (now known as the Fighting Dragons) dojo and tournament dialogue which veterans will appreciate but there's enough fresh material to make it worthwhile seeing and to modernise the already well-established storyline for younger viewers too.
Imagine if someone was somehow able to enter your dreams and could manipulate them in order to extract personal information from your subconcious and there you have the basic premise of Inception. The movie has drawn a lot of comparisons with The Matrix and while the actual plot and the way Inception utilises the manipulation of the human mind are quite different, there are still a lot of definite similiarities. However, the special effects used in Inception makes The Matrix look like the original Clash of the Titans.
Leonardo DiCaprio plays Dom Cobb who, along with a select team, is an expert in extracting information from people by entering their dreams. At the start of the movie we see him botch a job inside the mind of power company boss Saito (played Ken Watanabe). We then find out that the whole thing was actually what Saito calls an 'audition' in order to see if Cobb is capable of pulling off a much bigger job involving placing an idea into the mind of future rival company boss Robert Fischer Jr.'s (Cillian Murphy) subconcious instead of stealing one.
DiCaprio's acting is as solid as ever and he pulled off his role well. My only gripe is that his character has a sub-story involving him having difficulty coping with memories of his wife and becoming increasingly confused between his memories and reality. With any other actor you wouldn't give it a second thought but after seeing Shutter Island just a few weeks ago I was left with an enormous sense of deja vu.
Like any good heist movie the supporting cast are just as important as the lead and I felt it was a bit hit and miss. Joseph Gordon-Levitt did well but Tom Hardy easily steals the show as the eccentric Eames. On the other hand I found Ellen Page to be under-whelming as Ariadne who is built up to play a vital role in Cobb's team but then ends up actually doing very little. Likewise Michael Cane plays a very brief part and while it's obvious that Christopher Nolan likes to use actors he's worked with before (Cane, Watanabe and Murphy were all in Batman Begins), Cane seems to only be there to add some more weight to the cast list.
The movie has a lot of ground to cover and with just two and a half hours to do it in some sacrifices in the pacing are clearly made. As Cobb assembles his team we're given a little insight into each members speciality although we only get to see them utilising these on one or two occasions and we're not given any backstory on anyone else other than the main character. We find out where Cobb learned to enter people's dreams but we're not told much else about it. We also see the technology involved but it's never explained how this actually works.
As far as the basic concept goes we can see that the main characters are all aware of the possibility of accessing the dreams of another but we're never given any idea of how widespread this knowledge actually is as a whole. The movie seems to struggle to fully explore everything it tries to cram in and as such you're only ever given the bare minimum amount of information you need in order to set the scene and advance the plot. With this in mind you can't help wonder if it would have been better to break it up into two or three parts. This would allow the opportunity to fully explore everything it has to offer rather than simply rushing through it although, while Inception isn't as well paced as The Matrix you can understand why Nolan might have been wary of splitting it up considering how badly the sequels turned out.
The special effects all throughout are impressive and even something as ambitious as folding an entire street on top of itself is made to look believable. It's not all huge set pieces though. There are times when smaller effects are also used to pull off something as simple as manipulating a staircase into a paradox in order to defeat an enemy. For me, the way the characters deliberately defy the laws of physics while inside someone's subconscious are by far the most enjoyable moments and regardless of what you think of the plot, the acting or anything else about Inception you'll regret not seeing it on the big screen for those moments alone.
disappointed
satisfied
tired
geeky
amused