Author: AmusedintheDark

Darke Reviews | Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

Posted by

6

I was wrong about many things over the years. I have even been questioning my own reviews of late as so many mediocre movies continue to come out and I don’t have the energy to write about them. To write about another film that is so middling and ‘meh’ that it isn’t even worth the energy or time to write about it. I’ve even wondered if watching movies knowing I will review them has soured me to good films. Then I think about films like The VVitch, Victor Frankenstein, The Last Witch Hunter, Krampus, and realized that it’s not me. Noticed I left off films like Deadpool and The Force Awakens? It’s because they are both critical and financial successes. They are too obvious a target to say “see I still like movies!”. The other four films are something new, something different and something to be celebrated as they try to rise and claw and bite into the sun of something more than mediocrity. Now we are living in the Snyder-Verse when we talk about the DC Cinematic Universe. This is an important distinction to make as their Animated Universe films are some of the best comic films being made these days. The Cinematic though? People seem divided.

I called it the Snyder-Verse specifically after a comment he recently made about Grant Gustin not being right for The Flash.

I just don’t think [Gustin] was a good fit. I’m very strict with this universe and I just don’t see a version where… that (tone is) not our world.

Even if Grant Gustin is my favorite guy in the world, and he’s very good, we made a commitment to the multiverse, so it’s just not a thing that’s possible.

Source: http://io9.gizmodo.com/why-zack-snyder-never-considered-grant-gustins-flash-fo-1766285179

My thoughts on Mr. Snyder.

The most polite version of the meme I could find…

I appreciate the fact that Snyder has a vision for the films. Just as Nolan did. I appreciate that the execs at DC/WB are supporting his vision. I even will go so far as to say I can understand his vision for the DCCU. I know what he is trying to achieve. It’s easy to see in the fan service to Jim Lee and Frank Miller. It’s easy to see in the colour palette, the designs, and the characterizations. This movie is going to make a boatload of money unless a miracle happens. So he will be allowed to continue his vision for the verse and the movies will maintain their dour tones.

I really wish that he was struck blind. Metaphorically speaking…

I think his vision sucks. I think that he is really good at lifting material from better writers and visionaries and tries to interpret it as his own. There are no less than six different scenes from Frank Miller’s Dark Knight Returns in this movie. This is the universe Snyder is putting us in. The Batman costume is literally the same design. Some of the best Bat scenes are here and truth be told they made me smile when I saw them, but what he failed to notice was that was a Batman story first and foremost. The Superman in that story is portrayed like this

Yes it’s cheesy, the comic even mentions it but…

Giants walk this earth.

That is a Superman. That is a man people can look up to. That’s a hero. That is not what we got.

I am tired of mopey, dull, non-heroic Superman. I don’t need him deconstructed. The world doesn’t need him deconstructed. I am not a huge fan of Four Colour comics as a whole, but Superman belongs there. He needs to be larger than life. He *is* larger than life, something Good and something to aspire to. Even Batman is larger than life, and in his purest form something to aspire to. A man who has perfected his body and mind to be one of the best humans on the planet and doing what he does to protect people. (I did say purest form….)

This review has turned into a diatribe against Snyder and his vision rather than the movie.

His vision is the movie.

Long -nearly 3 hours.

Dull.

Dreary.

Hopeless.

There are slight glimmers of brilliance. Slight moments where something becomes more than the director himself is capable of. More than the story is capable of.

Those moments typically involve Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot. Affleck is one of the best visions of the Bat we have had since Keaton in cinematic live action tellings. The costume looks good, his fighting is good, how he operates works so well. He is a tired Bat, but I believed he WAS both Batman and Bruce Wayne. Gadot gave me someone I thought was a nigh immortal Wonder Woman in Man’s world. She was warrior, she was beautiful, she was intelligent and elegant. I am happy with her performance – as I expected to be. Alexander Luthor, as portrayed by Jesse Eisenberg, was hit and miss with more hits than misses. Though the misses are significant and I cannot discuss without hitting spoilers. I liked him. I bought him – mostly. His performance is not nearly as complete, as whole, as Affleck and Gadot.

Technically the movie was a bit of a train wreck. The editor couldn’t keep a single frame in camera for more than 30 seconds. I literally started counting. The CG was strong with this one and the lines were showing. When they got to the titular fight I just didn’t care. It was all spectacle without any emotion or caring put into it. Sure there were beats that had me excited but those only created emotion because someone else had done them better in other material and in another media. There were just too many other technically flawed moments through the movie to give a damn. The Batman story arc is one of the more interesting ones we’ve had in a very very long time. The Superman story arc is more of the same that we got last time with the world being too hard for the poor boy and more moping.

TL;DR?

I am not angry at this film. I am angry at Warner Bros. I am angry at Zack Snyder. I want to hate the film, but I can’t. I blame the people behind the camera. They have failed us.

Sure it’s going to make bank. I wish it wouldn’t. Sure there will be people who forgive it’s flaws and like it. I am not one of those people. We *need* to expect more. To expect better. We need to stop being satisfied with this….whatever this was.

Should you see it?

No. You will anyway, some of you will like it. I bet fans may like moments, but the whole of the film no. No you won’t.

Will I buy it?

In the bargain bin, so I can make a fan edit and remove most all the material involving Superman.

 

I am tired. I am going to keep reviewing films and trying to find the ones that are good. This is not one of them.

Darke Reviews | 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)

Posted by

10

I owe you all an apology, I got home from London Has Fallen  last week and didn’t have the energy to write a review that night. The next day I still didn’t. The day after still no. I realized the movie was that mediocre that I had no energy to write it because I didn’t care enough. The action was ok. The effects were on the whole cheap. The tension was laughable. The acting, you don’t watch London Has Fallen for acting. You just watch it to see Gerard Butler kick butt – which he does. So there’s that.

Now during the Superbowl this year they revealed a trailer for a movie almost no one had heard of called 10 Cloverfield Lane. It’s rare in this day and age for a production to stay under the radar. Seeing the first trailer without any media hype a mere month and a half prior to the films release on something with names attached is even more unheard of. Then using the Cloverfield name in conjunction with J.J. Abrams automatically begins to conjures questions?

“Is it a sequel?”

“Is a prequel?”

“Is it tandem?”

“How is it related to the blockbuster first film?”

The producers then use that media buzz to let people talk about the movie – which is a smart play. They also spend their time answering all of those above questions “No it isn’t”. JJ has lied to us before (It’s not Khan) and cannot be trusted in that regard when it comes to a production. Why else call it Cloverfield when you have all the same names attached? “It’s a spiritual successor”, is a cheap answer. My feeling is that they wanted to created an anthology of movies around the “Cloverfield” conceit; which by it’s nature of real people in completely whacked out situations would wear thin. I mean the idea has merit once or twice, but to franchise the concept of Cloverfield can’t possibly work in the long term as a film series as you then need to spend time getting us to care (or not) about the characters then eventually have a reveal to the scale of their situation. Much like Shyamalan and his twists, when people come to expect them they spend the entire movie looking for the twist which then takes the wind out of it when it appears even if it is done intelligently.

400 words in and I haven’t discussed the movie I just watched. I’ve talked Hollywood, a movie I didn’t care to review to warn you to see or away from because it was that mediocre, JJ Abrams, and the concepts of how to build a franchise. I am really avoiding talking about the movie.

I didn’t like it. I wanted to. I really wanted to. I *like* the original Cloverfield. I didn’t get sick watching it. I liked the look of the monster. I cared about the characters and wanted to see Rob get to his girlfriend and them escape the monster. I wanted to see this and see how it ended.

I didn’t care here. The acting was fantastic. John Goodman was in full heavy mode and brought his impressive abilities to bear in a purely one dimensional role. He made it something more by using his physical presence and his acting to try to make it more than what was written. Mary Elizabeth Winstead’s character of Michelle was engaging. She was smart, she was willful, and clever. I have liked her since Wolf Lake, Sky High, and thought her Ramona Flowers in Scott Pilgrim was on point. She didn’t do anything out of character, she didn’t turn into a “Final Girl” she just was. It worked and I liked her. John Gallagher Jr. as Emmet was a solid everyman. I went to school with people like him, I’ve worked with folks like him. The acting was FINE. It was Solid. It was Good.

What they had to work with sucked. There’s no twists. The tension doesn’t hold because they let you see some of the elements too early. They, being Matthew Stuecken (producer of GI Joe Rise of the Cobra and the Mummy 3), Josh Campbell (editor of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and Van Helsing), and Damien Chazelle (writer of Whiplash) have invoked the three writer rule.  I lay blame on Dan Trachtenberg, in his big screen directorial debut, as well. They give you too much too soon of the wrong elements and it takes away from the movie. It breaks rather than builds the tension because you become certain of things and those things are only solidified rather than challenged when opportunity presented itself.

I verge into spoiler territory if I say more, and even though I dislike the film I need to keep to the rules.

If the intent here was to give novice writers and directors a chance to tell a story within the guardrails of a type of universe under the watchful eye of successful novices such as Matt Reeves (Cloverfield, Let Me In) and Drew Goddard (The Martian, Cabin in the Woods), and Bryan Burk (Star Wars the Force Awakens), then I feel they failed. They succeeded in the attempt, but they failed in the guidance. I found nothing beyond the acting enjoyable here. The movie struck emotional chords in the performances, but gave nothing else for me to do with them. It was not well constructed or articulated.

If anything I would compare it to…hmm no. That would be a spoiler.

TL;DR?

Don’t see it. Expect more from your sci fi. Expect more from your movies. They need to try harder.

This was an attempt to do something original, for that I could praise it, but when we have things like The VVitch out there which also do original and do it better. We need to expect more.

Do I recommend it? No. Save your money.

 Will I buy it? No.

Next two weeks have a chance to give some enjoyment with Allegiant and Superman v Batman. Here’s hoping.

Darke Reviews – The VVitch (2016)

Posted by

6

I won’t lie, I’ve been looking forward to this for a long time. The trailer captured my interest and had my attention in it’s two minutes and thirty one seconds.  That was in August of last year. half a year later the movie gets a wide release and we finally get it in Tucson. Of course the review is SPOILER FREE!!!

My original Facebook post said this:

Trailers in the Darke – The Witch (2016)

Solid cast. Good atmosphere. A few jump scares. Looks to have good tension.

I am on board.
https://www.facebook.com/TheWitchMov

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQXmlf3Sefg

Now….was I right? Did it live up to my expectations?

Written and directed by Robert Eggers in his first theatrical full feature film appearance. Eggers has worked across the behind the camera in Art Direction, Costume Design, Production Design, and Art departments prior. This explains much of how he was able to capture and evoke something very disturbingly primal in the film. He admits that much of the dialogue and plot come from journals, folk tales, and myths of early colonial New England. It felt it. I heard dialogue choices that felt appropriate, I heard people talking like people…but from another era.  I find myself hard pressed to think of another film in this genre and era that felt right…and oh so wrong at the same time. His script pulls no real punches and should it be found accurate, I would say this made me believe an aspect, a dark one at that, of Puritan colonial life could have looked like this. That a story such as this could inspire black emotions and torment, even if it was for private gain alone.

That I think is what struck me most in the plot and script. I can see all of the beats of a movie, but at the same time, I see a spark. I see that he touches on emotions and beliefs in the microcosm of this family that if explored wider could lead to a Salem, or worse Auto-da-fe. It was bizarrely natural and unnatural at the same time. The time is inferred, the place you only know as “The commonwealth”, leaving much to the imagination but also with acknowledgement that it’s irrelevant for the story. I was reminded of a conversation earlier this week where I mentioned I hated the Scarlet Letter in school, not just because I was forced to read it, but because I hated that Hester conformed to societal norms. This movie feels like the story I wanted to read. What happens when you take a devout family from their home, not once but twice, and force them apart from society? It was a fascinating, if not predictable, study.

Three of the main characters must carry the brunt of the work of the film. Ralph Ineson (a character actor from Game of Thrones, and many other films in sci fi and fantasy) and Kate Dickie (Lysa Arryn from Game of Thrones) are the parents who must ride a certain balance between fanaticism, family, and despair. They do so quite well and strike the balance better than most “significant” actors would. I find their performance more passioned, more honest, and in times more raw than many critical actors performances in similar roles. As the eldest daughter, Anya Taylor-Joy gets the brunt of the work and watching her performance as her character grows through the film kept me in my seat. I would like to see more of what she can offer Hollywood based on the performance here.

From a technical perspective, the movie is as near as I could tell 100% practical. The house, the farm, everything was practical. This goes a long long way when doing a supernatural suspense and horror film to give you the right feelings and evoke the proper tension as it’s all in camera for you. That of course leads to one of the few downfalls of the movie – it is the living definition of slow burn. The burn pays off, but watching the build up, watching the tension keep getting ratcheted higher took effort, and sadly a lot of the time. The music was a little too much sometimes reminding me a touch of Dark Knight with the strained violins.  The camera work on the other hand is on point with great usage of frames for the scenes telling you what you need to know rather than dialogue.

TL;DR?

I find myself surprised. Not at the quality, but that the film was mostly American made. It feels more like a project I would see come out of Spain, Paris, or German cinema. It’s a tight film and feels like Eggers worked for it and simultaneously had clear vision of what he wanted and was passionate about it. I am really happy with this movie. I found myself liking this movie more as I wrote the review. That’s rare!

Do I consider it scary though? No. Suspenseful – yes! It’s also not scary in the traditional sense we’re used to. The jump scares, the gore, that kind of horror? It’s not the only kind. This is a more real and all too relatable kind of horror. It is unsettling at times.

Do I think it worthy of the critical acclaim? Absolutely.

Is Jess going to buy it? YES!

Should you see it?

 If you need something in this supernatural suspense genre, you should watch it. Consider this a superior counter offering to another Conjuring or Insidious. We all complain about not enough original coming out of Hollywood, well here you go. It’s original. It’s not based on a book, a remake, real events, etc etc etc… this is new. Celebrate it.

If this is your genre – please go see this and tell Hollywood we want more! I might go see it again just for that alone.

 

 

Darke Reviews | Deadpool (2016)

Posted by

1

Deadpool: The Apology. No..no. Not quite right. Deadpool: Forgive us for Wolverine Origins, mmm closer. Captain Deadpool, the amazing man in a red suit. Too long. I guess we stick with Deadpool. Oh hey readers, it’s me again and I am bringing you the review many of you geeks have been waiting for. Zoolander 2. Kidding. I would need to be on every narcotic known to man, possibly dead, and definitely kidnapped while wrapped in barbed wire to see that. No, this is the review for Deadpool. The first R Rated film from the superhero comic verse based on a major character/comic line.

First thing before I talk about it. This is not a movie for kids. Do not take the kids.

Do not take the kids.

Ok…

So should you go see it without the kids?

Ryan Reynolds himself has a production credit on this. That means he ponied up investment money to get it made. It was made because fans demanded it, literally. What could go wrong with a fan based product? That’s a laundry list for another time. This time though we have Tim Miller at the helm in his directorial debut. He’s a new guy true, but he has worked in the industry in the visual effects departments on such work as Hellgate: London (beautiful trailers), Mass Effect 2 (*happy sigh*), and Scott Pilgrim vs. The World.  These are good things as they show an eye for motion and framing, with a good cast a director like this can go well. A script helps as well and for that we have Paul Wernick (Zombieland), and Rhett Reese (also Zombieland). These two clearly must be fans of the comic or have been forced to read it until their minds border on Lovecraftian gibbering. They really seemed to capture the essence of Deadpool. This is more than the slapstick dialogue and 4th wall breaking, but knowing how to write scenes in which this is appropriate and other scenes that still fit with the character to give you a break from the rollercoaster.

So we have a new director, writers with one hilarious hit, but what about actors? Ryan Reynolds was genetically engineered to play Deadpool. Period. This can broach no argument in any conversation ever. Just as Patrick Stewart was Charles Xavier a full decade before X-Men was thought about seriously as a movie, Reynolds is the Merc with the Mouth. There are people who know this to be true and people who are wrong. Nothing is amiss in his performance, including mocking himself as the actor. A good hero(?) needs a good villain. The movie went to Transporter Refueled’s Ed Skrein and….he is ok. You will forget him or any of his lines a few minutes after the movie.  Brianna Hildebrand, T.J. Miller, and Gina Carano all do well and actually were kinda fun in their varied performances. Of course we must talk about Morena Baccarin and how much chemistry I feel she had with Reynolds. There’s something about this woman and men named Reynolds…clearly. Seriously though she does well enough and plays perfectly to the role and the film leading to a few memorable scenes.

From a tech perspective, the makeup is good. The fights are over the top, a little hard to see a times, but generally worth it. Colossus is actually one of the best iterations of him to date visually. Some may complain about the CG on him, but he’s a 9 foot tall walking mountain of organic steel – they haven’t done a make up job yet that can make that work. Just about everything else in the production is rather solid, you can tell they had a bit of a budget but spent it wisely.

TL;DR?

It’s Deadpool, I am only confirming that you should see it (without the kids). There’s enough foul language, sexual innuendo, blood, and nakedness in the film to make an 80’s movie question itself. Actually, that is a pretty good summation. This is an 80’s movie done with the budget and production values of 2016.

Did I enjoy it? I laughed from the opening credits until the credits rolled.

Will I see it again? Yes. Sunday as a matter of fact. It’s Gal-entines day.

Will I buy it? Without a doubt!

Thank you Ryan Reynolds. Thank you Hollywood for taking this chance. My audience applauded when the credits rolled. That doesn’t happen that often. Just…don’t try to do it too often ok?

Go see Deadpool if you were interested folks. It’s worth it.

Darke Reviews | Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016)

Posted by

1

2nd review of the year. Only took a few weeks for the cinematic ball to get rolling to things I want to see. Per the usual rules, I have not read the book here – either of them. Either being Jane Austens original Pride and Prejudice or Seth Grahame-Smith’s zombie “cover” of her material. Now SGS is known to us thanks to the train wreck that was Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter, and I was thankful to not see his name in the writing or directors credit. He may write a good novel, but not so much on the film material. Unsurprisingly my tastes do not go for the period or romantic dramatic style film, so Austen and her body of work is and shall remain a mystery to me for some time. I did, however, watch Pride and Prejudice (2005 Kiera Knightley/Matthew Macfadyen) a few weeks ago when a friend was over and put it on while I was playing Fallout. I admit. I enjoyed it far more than I ever anticipated. It was shot so remarkably well, music, acting, everything top notch. I have absolutely no idea how that director gave us last years Pan.

So how was this movie?

Well, we’ve covered who wrote the book, who added zombies to the book, and who shouldn’t touch it as a movie. The man who did is named Burr Steers, as both screenplay credit and director. Not familiar with the name? Don’t expect you to be with two Zac Efron movies, no one I know of saw to his credit, 17 again and Charlie St. Cloud. Having watched the 2005 film adaptation made me judge what I saw far less harshly than I would. The dialogue was stilted, the actors stiff as a corpse, and the pacing was beyond awkward. Just like the source material. Honestly, the ability to match parallels between the last adaptation of the real source material and this one really allowed me to acknowledge the designs in this movie which would be painful otherwise were purely intentional. Changes must be made to incorporate zombies into the structure and with that a new world history which is glossed over nicely; but all in all the film does a remarkable job of being in step with the materials previously published. A feat that must be given credit to Seth Grahame-Smith and Steers himself.

From an actors point of view, Lily James shines. I thought she was a saving grace in Cinderella and I can tell now the critique there squarely falls on the production. The movie lives and breathes around her performance; she is as capable of the romance, the language, and action simultaneously. She does quite a bit with her eyes, which is a requirement for the role of Elizabeth Bennet. She was absolutely believable for both her battle prowess and will. I really want her to have a long and distinguished career in good movies; though her next film has Jai Courtney so I worry there. Sam Riley, Diaval from Maleficent, whom I loved there and love here. What is it with the leads in this film being the standouts in previous Disney live-action adaptations?  His Mister…sorry Colonel Darcy, is engaging despite the required stiffness. He too does a lot with subtle expressions that are all too intentional and very well delivered. Two other roles are also handled well by Douglas Booth (Jupiter Ascending) as Mr. Bingley and Jack Huston (George Wickham); both of whom I could deal with more of.

Rounding out the cast in supporting roles are some true heavies who have minor, but important roles, such as The Doctor (Matt Smith) as Parson Collins, and two Game of Thrones alumni in Charles Dance and Lena Headey. Dance gets to be nice this time as Mister Bennet, while Heady continues to be one of the scariest people on screen as Lady Catherine deBourgh. All three castings were absolutely perfect and all three easily let you know THEY were on screen in just the right ways.

Costuming was solid, a little too much emphasis on being sexy a couple of times, but overall beautiful as the weapons being carried. Sets were good, but I could tell when the budget was thin as some shots that were supposed to be different looked the same just from another angle; but I could be wrong. The fight choreography was good and gave us a scene that in my mind rivals the Zorro fight between Banderas and Zeta-Jones. A little more steady cam would have been nice. Some more creativity in the shots would have been nice beyond the opening sequence. Transitions were handled really well. The make up effects were also top notch. There’s a lot of trainees in the credits, but the film really was one of the better looking zombie films I’ve seen.

TL;DR?

For a movie that has been in production hell and switched directors multiple times; this is actually pretty good. The more I talk about it the more I find myself liking it and overlooking its flaws – which are there. It isn’t risky. It isn’t particularly daring with a PG-13 rating, but despite that…it’s watchable.

That said, this is a Zombie movie for fans of Pride and Prejudice. This is not necessarily a zombie movie for someone who hates P&P or otherwise can’t stand a more british drama style pacing. If you DO like Downton Abbey or other British drama’s and also like Zombies this may be right up your alley.

It wasn’t particularly scary or funny, but it was entertaining. I enjoyed myself and really isn’t that what you are supposed to do at the movies?

 

Darke Reviews – The 5th Wave

Posted by

3

So the first review of the year. January release. Not good usually. Examples? Sure!

Let’s face it January is mostly garbage so the Oscar bait at Christmas and whatever other studio juggernaut came up at the end of the month. *stares at Star Wars* It just isn’t a good month for film. You can fully expect that the studio just dumps something they have no faith in and hope they get another Cloverfield.

Did they get it here?

 

Based on a YA sci fi novel by Rick Yancy, the film covers the story of a young teenage girl who survives several waves of an alien invasion and her quest to save her brother. The first wave is an EMP that takes out technology, the second is an earthquake/flooding to take out coastal regions, the third disease, and fourth …well watch the movie to learn about the 4th and 5th waves. It’s not a bad setup and the overall execution is pretty solid on the narrative with the story taking place in two places with simultaneous arcs happening with the girl and her brother.

The novel was adapted for the screen by Susannah Grant (Erin Brokovich, Pocahontas – yes that one), Akiva Goldsman (Insurgent, I Am Legend, and…and), and Jeff Pinkner (Amazing Spiderman 2 and a lot of TV). Most of these guys are also producers in their own right and spent a lot of time with the TV crowd.  They have a pretty good pedigree of things just above mediocre as the group with Grant being lauded for Brokovich. So with that in mind how is the overall plot so…Ok? I mean the dialogue is Ok. The Plot is  Ok. The contrivances are  Ok. It’s Ok. Ok?

Maybe it’s the director? J Blakeson, who gave us the less impressive sequel to The Descent. I can see so much in the writing and direction that wants to be more than it is. There’s nuggets of something more here that just don’t come to fruition. One of the plot points requires everyone’s IQ to drop by about 50 points. The entire row of people in front of me in the theatre had the same reaction I did in one of the moments with a Spock level eye brow raise.

SpockEyebrow

Sense. That made none.

 

That being said, it annoyed in the moment and was gone. That is because of the actors involved. Chloë Grace Moretz leads the cast in admirable fashion bringing a natural charm and humanity in what typically is a blandish role without much character. She (with some help from the script) deftly avoids some tropes and charms us as she glides into others. Helping the movie along is also Nick Robinson (the older brother from Jurassic World); and while his role is largely reserved he does a lot with a few expressions which keeps him from being a cardboard cut out with lines. The same cannot be said of Alex Roe, who tries. He really really tries and just can’t be more than the stereotype his role gave him.

Production wise? The effects are just slightly better than average. The flooding is getting to the point of being over used. Since the Japan disaster a few years back and Sumatra before that everyone is in awe and fear of the Tsunami so any disaster needs one now that we can see what they look like. A few other tricks aren’t bad, not great, just not bad. There’s very few eye rolls from the effects side which made me happy. Some of the transitions were done fairly well. I had to admit there was a good colour palette from the cinematographer to reinforce which of the two arcs you were dealing with. Very intentional and very functional. The music does what you expect, but otherwise is simply pleasant.

TL;DR?

Despite how middle of the road this sounds, the movie was kinda enjoyable. I had moments of fun amidst moments of meh. While this may seem like a compromise (and it kinda is), I am ok with that. I do expect more of movies. YOU should expect more of movies. But if I even have a bit of fun I have no problem rewarding the film with that faint praise. It’s better than a meh and that means something since at least I felt *something* about it.

It does some things I haven’t seen before. There is inspiration here, I think if the Three Writer rule had not been invoked it may have been an even better film. Something more than Ok.

Though for a January? OK is good. I will take the win I can get.

Will you buy it?

Actually – yeah. I think I will. There’s stuff to the main characters arc I really enjoyed seeing handled.

Do you recommend it?

Ahhhh maybe. If you like Young adult style films? Sure. Go right ahead. You’ll probably like this more than some Hollywood has tried to give.

 

So that’s it. First review of the year. Could have been A LOT worse.

Darke Reviews – The Hateful Eight (2015)

Posted by

3

My official last review of the year 2015 comes in 2016, I didn’t get to see until yesterday in a double feature starting with that and finishing with Star Wars The Force Awakens again. Yes, a third time seeing that. I have to admit some irritation that some markets got this particular film on Christmas Eve and Tucson didn’t get it until New Years Eve. I understand that he also filmed this in classic 70mm which for the true film buffs is an awesome thing. Sadly my viewing was in standard digital format.

But should you see it in any format?

Quentin Tarantino has been hit or miss for me on his movies and my overall appreciation of them since the beginning. I missed Reservoir Dogs on its first outing and have since seen and loved it. Pulp Fiction I fell asleep during the first two times I watched it at the theatre in Towson; though to be fair they were both midnight screenings after long days. I have come to appreciate it since. Kill Bill Vol 1 amazing slice of flashback Kung Fu theatre. Kill Bill vol 2 was ok after that with the superman speech being kind of fantastic. Inglorious Basterds was incredible and Django was…ok.

No one can argue that he is an unconventional director that has brought and/or revitalized certain styles of film making back into popularity with only his compatriot Robert Rodriguez able to truly ape the style with any particular success. I had the realization during the Kill Bill saga, that what Tarantino writes is the internal monologues we all go through during conversations, but he allows them to be external dialogues with the appropriate reactions to them. No one and I mean no one in my life talks like they do in a Tarantino film – aside from those actively trying to be Tarantino esque. In addition the concept of non linear storytelling has become his bread and butter that we have come to expect and appreciate.

I go through this explanation of that which is Tarantino and what I see, understand, and appreciate from him to say that in this case he failed miserably. The dialogue is atrocious, none of the characters are likable or even remotely charismatic while being prats. Tarantino has reached full parody of himself in this film and it seems both intentional and ignorant of this change. He has become the child who has learned a bad word and uses it repeatedly to the point of discomfort and making it a punchline. He is trying to make a word ok while being as offensive as possible about it and it just is not working. Just because you CAN do something doesn’t mean you should.

Yes, I used the Goldblum

None of the dialogue in this film worked for me in any real way shape or form. This isn’t to say the actors didn’t do well. We all know these are well trained, gifted actors, who turn in remarkable performances otherwise. So with that in mind everyone performed well with the role they were given and direction they were given. No one stood out, no one fell behind, even Michael Madsen – who looked surprisingly aware of his surroundings in this one. The violence was well violent but not necessarily more or less graphic than Kill Bill or Inglorious Basterds was. Perhaps I am desensitized or just perhaps he didn’t quite hit the mark of over the top he was shooting for. It was bloody but kinda meh on the amount? There is supposed to be suspense in the film and there isn’t. There’s supposed to be a mystery and there isn’t. It just does not work for me.

All of that said, the movie SOUNDS and LOOKS amazing. This is some of Tarantino’s best cinematography to date. He really captured the Spaghetti western style of film making he was going for with gorgeous wide shots and intense tight shots of the cast that worked with the ensemble. Even within that he doesn’t always frame shots for the best impact against the type of ensemble he is shooting. Musically of course he made the brilliant choice to use Ennio Morricone as his composer.

TL;DR?

I am the contrary opinion. I do not like this movie. I do not recommend it. I did not find it enjoyable.

From a film making standpoint the movie is well done. It could be analyzed on MUTE from any film making class. The moment you add dialogue…the movie fails horrifically.

If you enjoy this movie I am glad. I am curious for those who read my reviews and liked it, if you sound off to why. I want to see what I missed.

Darke Reviews | Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015)

Posted by

6

This review is of course SPOILER Free.

SPOILER FREE got it?

Good.

On top of that since anyone who reads my reviews is seeing this as a foregone conclusion the review will take a different tone and style than usual.

It’s been a full decade since the debacle that was George Lucas last run at the helm of the Star Wars franchise. His prequel trilogy is rightfully lambasted by many, though they do have a few redeeming qualities here and there. A few. By and large they deserve to be confined into cell block AA-23 and then thrown into a trash compactor. The acting was bad, the effects were bad, it was over produced and under directed.

J.J. Abrams comes along in 2006 and gives us Mission Impossible 3. He then goes in 2009 and writes his resume cover letter with Star Trek; a film many acknowledge (and bemoan) is more Wars than Trek. Lo and behold he lands the impossible job of reinvigorating a franchise many felt might be irredeemable. Talent is brought in to write in the form of Michael Arndt (Oblivion, Hunger Games: Catching Fire) and, in a brilliant move, Lawrence Kasdan. The man who gave us what is critically considered the best of the Star Wars franchise, Empire Strikes Back. Kasdan was also the pen behind other greats, such as Raiders of the Lost Ark, Silverado, and Return of the Jedi. This is what was missing.

Here’s what you need to know:

  • The parts that were supposed to be intentionally funny – were funny. I laughed. The theatre laughed.
  • The reveals of old favorites – the audience cheered.
  • There is no Jar Jar, there is nothing like Jar Jar, if you consider that a spoiler…well deal with it.
  • The effects are PRACTICAL when they can be and there are A LOT of practical
  • That which must be CG is and the movie is largely better for it. The flight sequences with the X-Wings look so much better on the big screen than they did when I first saw the trailer.
  • John Williams returns to do the music.
  • Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, and Oscar Isaac have real chemistry. I want to see more of them.
  • Girls can look up to Daisy Ridley’s Rey. She’s a good character.

The movie could be called

Star Wars: The Force Apologizes

Is it flawless? No. There are a small score of issues  I have with it. Some of the CG isn’t as good as it could be. Some of the acting isn’t as good as it could be. Some of the editing isn’t ..ok a lot of the editing isn’t as good as it could be. There are flaws. Yes.

That said, the movie makes every single attempt it can to make up for the last three movies and does so with great passion.

Should you see it?

Yes. Yes. Yes. I really enjoyed it. It took me back with Nostalgia and then gave me some new things as well.

Should you see it in 3-D?

If you don’t have a problem with 3-D, absolutely. There are shots that beg for the 3D treatment and shine because of it.

Should you wait?

Eh…no. Mostly so people can talk about it with you. They will want to.

Are you buying it?

Yes. Yes. Yes.

 

Trailers in the Darke| X-Men: Apocalypse

Posted by

0

I am literally bouncing in my seat watching this.

 

  • Archangel – looks…ok
  • Jubiliee
  • Mohawk Storm – looks incredible
  • Nightcrawler
  • APOCALYPSE looks better than I thought he would.

Also the final shot…..Yeah. this needs to be out already

Darke Reviews | Krampus (2015)

Posted by

3

What may, or may not, surprise many of you is that I am a traditionalist about my holidays. I celebrate Halloween the way it is meant to by the romanticized American traditions and I also celebrate Christmas the same way. I have a real tree every year, there’s a fire in my fireplace, stockings, nut crackers, egg nog, the whole deal. It’s what I grew up with, the Rockwellian holiday. Even had a White Christmas once as I recall. Watch that every year. Watch Bing Crosby and David Bowie sing together. It really is my second favorite  holiday even if it will be alone for a long time coming.

Christmas

                The stockings were not yet hung by the fire with care.

So how what do I think of a horror movie not based around Christmas, but based ON the holiday?

Let’s discuss my bias for the director Michael Dougherty and his previous work Trick R Treat; which is the only other major directorial role he has. This is a loss. The man knows how to shoot a scene and build tension. He has a clear love for the holidays like I do, and takes that into the film. As one of the three writers on Krampus I can see his influences throughout as he writes in such a way to relish that what makes the holiday and simultaneously comments on the darker aspects of it as well. Todd Casey, one of the other writers, comes from a background in grown up animation with work on GI Joe Resolute, Green Lantern Emerald Knights (really good), and even the Thundercats reboot. This tells me he remembers what it was like to be a kid, the moments of joy, and laughter, and fun and knows how to bring it to screen in a way that’s appreciable by adults. The last writer is Zach Shields, a producer of The Conjuring. By their powers combined….something got pooched. Dougherty was the sole writer on Trick R Treat, so I don’t know where it went …ok.

This is the story of white above middle class suburbia and that Rockwellian over produced Christmas. The story of how one well to do white collar family is visited by their obnoxious blue collar family and the loss of innocence and faith and hope from the one of the children. A child who knows Santa doesn’t exist and still wants to believe. I think I am that child some days as my two favorite holidays near. This is what went wrong; the characters literally are stereotypes, they don’t feel real. They feel like what the media tells me families like this are. Except not, the suburban family is played straight as if they have very few faults, with the blue collar family being so painfully obnoxious I was counting the moments until the carnage I anticipated coming. I wanted to watch them die. They have next to no redeeming qualities and are just so over the top it is clearly the script, not the actors at fault; it’s that bad. Conversely the suburban family does have flaws, but play much more loving and overall healthy….ish. The only thing that these families have in common is that they do love their kids; which was a pleasant surprise. I don’t consider that a spoiler as it has no bearing on the film and truth be told falls into one of those redeeming qualities mentioned before.

Adam Scott (Parks and Recreation, Black Mass) plays the movie beautifully straight; so whilst I vex over the characters themselves, the actors do what they can to elevate it. Scott does his part, along with Toni Collette (Hostages, Fright Night). Emjay Anthony, as the child Max, turns a performance that could have been painful and hard to watch into something just a touch more without being unrealistic either. He’s still a kid and the part doesn’t forget that. The presence of the grandmother Omi, as played by Krista Stadler whom is a veteran actor of German films and TV brings the connection to the original myth of the Krampus fairly deftly. There’s a beauty in the fact most of her dialogue is in German with subtitles.

There are parts of the production that feel over produced and too clean to be real. There are some significant logic (and physics) fails a few times in the film that made my eyebrows arch and took me out of the moment; but otherwise the technicals are solid. Some poor fool over at Weta studios had to take this and make it not totally laughable.

 

Krampus_Old

Good luck with that…

Turns out they did. He has a physical presence that time is spent to maintain. I won’t say he isn’t ridiculous looking, but with what they had to work with they did good. They made the minions kinda terrifying as well in a way I found pleasing to my aesthetic. They didn’t go for the overt gore either which was another joy. There is one scene, however, that the CG work is beyond ludicrous; but in the context of the moment I didn’t really care considering the events transpiring right then.

TL;DR?

Krampus is a fantastic holiday horror. It mocks much of how we spin modern christmas while telling us point blankly what to cherish. It does some things I didn’t expect and am glad they did. The biggest weakness is the characters themselves at times, I want to see a horror movie where I don’t wish death on the majority of the cast. The movie lacks most of the fun black humor that lived in Trick R Treat, but it does have moments where I heard the audience and myself laugh. It was pin drop silent the rest of the time as it does a good job with tension.

All in all, if you are looking for some alternative fare of the horror variety, give Krampus a chance. It isn’t particularly new but does tell an old story in a modern way. I find as I talked about it I enjoyed it more than I thought I did.

Also I am adding a new segment to the TL;DR; after some look back at my DVD purchases this year, or lack there of.

Would Jessica buy this? Yes