Darke Reviews | Annie (2014)

In the land of unasked for and unneeded remakes we have our newest entry – Annie. It was interesting to initial reactions to this particular remake as the traditional white girl with freckles and red curly hair was being replaced with a black girl with her brown curly hair. Original stories talked about how producers Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith wanted their daughter Willow in the role. Ah Hollywood nepotism and the Smith family. Karate Kid, After Earth (*shudder*), and then Annie. We add Jay Z to the mix for – reasons – to help produce the movie. I kind of like to imagine that Jay Z was the reason Willow isn’t flipping her hair back and forth and instead we got a different young actress.

If you are not familiar with the original 1982 movie, comic strip, or musical from 1976, or comic strip from 1924 it is the story of Little Orphan Annie. Surprise I know! It covers the adventures of a young girl, her dog Sandy, her benefactor “Daddy” Warbucks, and a few other characters that would be extraordinarily racist these days.

For the new film, we have  couple of updates. She’s no longer an Orphan, she is a Foster kid. The satire of the New Deal and FDR is gone, replaced with mobile phones, modern politics, and social media. Also gone is the risk and the charm. Replacing it is a sense of bitterness of the world.

From an acting perspective, it doesn’t suck. Quvenzhane Wallis is the bright spot in this film. She really does light up the screen the way Annie should. She affects peoples lives around her the way that Annie should. She is everything I wanted from an Annie. Rose Byrne (X-Men First Class, Damages, Insidious) plays Warbucks assistant Grace and seems to be the only person really trying to have fun aside from the kids. Both Jamie Foxx and Cameron Diaz I think were given wrong notes by the director. Diaz plays obnoxiously over the top for the better part of the film finally coming down to a low simmer in Act III. Diaz may be a good actress but she is no Carol Burnett. Foxx for his part seemed to miss the mark on how to perform; which is odd for such a talented man. Where everyone else was singing in an almost Glee sense as if it was part of the scene, Foxx sings and performs his songs as if he is on stage – which creates a serious disconnect with the costars.

That disconnect continues through most every performance in the film. Sometimes they break the 4th wall, sometimes they don’t. Sometimes people react to those singing. Sometimes they don’t. It is all so random and arbitrary as to if the song is Glee style, performance style, or improv. It just doesn’t make sense as to when or where people will react to the songs being performed. That makes the performances awkward to watch and at times uncomfortable because you don’t know the rules. Only one or two are an exception to this and even they don’t make sense. Most  of this of course falls on director Will Gluck.

I am really not sure how Gluck got the unfortunate seat at the table on this one. His directorial roles stick to RomCom fare with Easy A and Friends with Benefits. He has produced more but none of them are musicals. So most, if not all, the problems with this film come down to Gluck and the producers not having a good idea of what to do, or how to do it. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that the Smith’s checked out after Willow wasn’t cast. I would have thought Jay Z or Will would have better been able to influence the musical moments with their own experience, but apparently not.

TL;DR

The movie is an awkward, uncomfortable mess. It has so many tonal shifts and character shifts you have trouble keeping up and have no real desire to. In a common critique of modern films, it takes no risks. I remember the original where Annie was on the train tracks being threatened by Rooster (Tim Curry) and for a moment I was actually worried and felt real threat. Nothing comes close to that here. It’s as if Hollywood is afraid to show any form of risk or harm.

The movie suffers and honestly, isn’t that good. I can’t recommend the film to anyone – even if there are a few bright spots, because so many just fall flat or are painful to sit through.

 

 

 

 

 

Darke Reviews | The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (2014)

Alright as we begin this review let me remind people of the rules:

  1. No spoilers from me. Even if I want to.
  2. I don’t typically read the book. It’s rare when I do. This lets me judge a movie strictly on its merits as a film.

So where do I judge this film? I don’t think it will be long into this review before you know how, but let us go through the motions. I say go through the motions as much with Hunger Games, you are either 3 or 5 movies in and thus committed to this franchise. I have absolutely no illusions I will keep anyone from seeing this or encourage someone to see it who is not already invested. The reality is I was just as invested, which is why I saw this. I am freelance, no one pays me. I see what I want, when I want, and review what I want. Phenomenal cosmic power, itty bitty budget.

I think there was a time that Peter Jackson was heralded as being the savior of the Fantasy Genre. We have come here not to praise Jackson, but to bury him. Bury him in the mounds of money he has made on our faith. Bury him under the weight of his own misguided creativity. Jackson has stepped over the line from savior to damnation. He has saved us from films such as Eragon only to deliver us into the hands of a three movie franchise for something that at most should have been two. George Lucas has stepped aside from franchise and good will destroying madman to allow the King of Hobbits to take the throne. Any goodwill that Jackson built with the first franchise has long since been thrust into the fires of Mt. Doom. The movie with Jackson at the helm and at the pen, fails on so many levels.

But if you are still with me, allow me to explain:

Peter Jackson is director, producer, and screenplay writer.  With his collaborators (and wife) Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, and Guillermo del Toro. This is a fantastic combination for two things – cranking out the works of Tolkien into something digestible to the mass market and not being able to say no to each others ideas. I am sure there was some disagreement in the writing circle, thats inescapable. But if you are a writer like me, your friends can be the worst people to have read your work. They will support bad ideas (usually) and tell you how great it is when what you really need is the one friend who says “No.” I don’t think this crew had that. I don’t think they put limits on themselves and the studio certainly wasn’t about to after the dragons hoarde of money they have raked in over the past decade.

Background done, the movie fails on the simple level of evocative storytelling. A writer must have an understanding of the rollercoaster that is their story. There are rises and falls. Beats and pauses. This movie lacks that. I grew up in Maryland with my grandparents and due to that I watched probably more war movies from the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s than most kids my age. I have seen all the greats. I have seen all the new greats in that genre as well. What they all have in common is the action beats are interrupted by relatively long pauses to let you breathe, to let you grasp what is going on, and most importantly to make you care and get to know the characters that are in this plight. Let me take you to Saving Private Ryan for a moment. A modern classic and that is an opinion that is hard to argue. I would be willing to bet most people have a character they remember and like. For me it was the sniper. I got him and his death was powerful and meaningful. Another film. Enemy At the Gates, under rated movie of Russians vs. Germans about one of the greatest snipers that has ever lived. Again everyone on both sides you get to know them and care or wish for their death. Classic film from a time before mine – Battle of the Bulge. Fantastic (in more ways than one) movie. You meet both sides and even can learn sympathy for some of the Germans in it, which is nigh unheard of at the time.

Not so here. I couldn’t tell you who half of the people were in the over an hour of battle this movie gives you. I also couldn’t care. Filli, Killi – which is which? It doesn’t matter. The movie doesn’t let you care. There was no stake in this film. There was no passion to the story to let me care beyond a cursory level if *anyone* lived or died. The movie had no risk because you knew some characters couldn’t die. The ones beyond that you couldn’t care about, with few exceptions thanks to the actors. The story didn’t do them justice.

Second major failure. If you want to introduce things not in the book, by all means do so. I *encourage* it. You will be damned if you mirror the book near perfect (Zack Snyder) or deviate wildly (Jackson here). Might as well take the risk and do something fascinating; just make sure it is fascinating and for the love of all that you hold dear – have a plan. If you want to introduce all these new elements make sure you know what to do with them when you have to wrap the bow around the whole package. There were too many stories started here and so few of them were closed. There won’t be another film so why leave them hanging?

Now these two failures combined pretty much left me bored and not caring. There are other factors I will get too in a minute. The movie succeeds in two places. The first is Martin Freeman. I know he is not at risk, but at all times he makes me care. He manages to strike the chords that make me feel something while watching this. His acting is fantastic end to end without ever missing a beat that he is on screen. The second is Evangeline Lilly as Tauriel. Yes I know she is created for the film, but again she actually makes me care.  I wish there was more to her and for her to work with because it actually worked.

No one else did. Really. They didn’t. Even Armitage a Thorin just doesn’t really do it. He gets close, but he almost tries too hard.

From a technical standpoint please allow me to say: DEAR GOD WHAT HAPPENED TO BIGATURES?! CGI IS NOT THE ANSWER TO EVERYTHING!!!! It along with your high frame rate and 3D makes every single flaw look even worse. It isn’t good. If Manu Bennet (who is awesome in person) is wearing a make up while playing Azog its a really bad make up because it looks CG. If the make up is only enhanced by CG, then they failed. It looked bad. It looked really bad. Honestly, not a single shot in the movie looked good. They were trying too hard. They tried so hard they hit the ridiculous barrier. It wasn’t SyFy movie of the week bad, but it was way too much money spent on it bad. With all that WETA digital has done over the years, they apparently have not mastered light. It made every shot “enhanced” by the artificial light look worse. The CG horseback ride, was easy to see the green screen!

Creature design. What. The. Frak. It was patently ridiculous. I remember the first time you gave us a Cave Troll. It was bloody terrifying, even if it doesn’t hold up. The Battle of Helms deep?

TL;DR

As I said before you will see this anyway if you were going to. If you were on the fence, please heed my advice – Don’t see it.

I don’t actually hate the film, but I can’t give it more than an Ok. It didn’t make me smile. It didn’t actually entertain with only a handful of scenes as an exception. It gave me a solid meh and only a few eye watering moments to show for it.

If you absolutely must see this movie; if it is a moral imperative of Chris Knight proportions then go see it. Avoid the high resolution/frame rate, there were times it almost made me nauseous. 3D is ok, but you can save SOME money by catching the 2D and I don’t think you’ll be too upset.

So there it is…the end of a trilogy (hexology?). It started epic and ends with a whimper.

 

 

 

Darke Reviews | The Pyramid (2014)

This is a 3 review week folks. Today you get the Pyramid, Wednesday you get the Hobbit (Goddess help me), and Thursday or Friday you will get Annie (Its a hard knock life for me). Now obviously, this film came out a few weeks ago, but I had neither the desire nor time to see it when it first came out. Tonight, I really wanted a break from DragonAge:Inquisition (120 hours does that). Only one of the theatre managers at my local cinema was in, but we chatted and he tried to warn me. Was he right?

In what seems to be quickly becoming the trend in found footage genre, Archaeology! Reminder, if I could have any other career – it probably would be archaeology. Archaeologists discover something, go exploring against better judgement, and bad things happen with a hint of a supernatural bent. Archaeologists are our new paranormal researchers. Maybe we will get someone to go to the Mausoleum of Qin Shi Huang? Petra? Some lost site in ancient Persia, with the Iranian and Iraqi conflicts as a back drop? Perhaps the Shore Temple in Mahabalipuram, India? Chavin in Peru? All of these places are ripe for it. I mean we’ve already had the Catacombs beneath Paris and now Egypt.

Really the synopsis is the same. So called Archaeologists, one who prefers old techniques and his daughter who believes in state of the art, uncover an unusual pyramid with only 3 facings amidst the Arab Spring and events in Cairo. They are far enough away and honestly, based on the satellite image they showed, I am not sure they were actually in egypt but it was only a glimpse; yet that provides a pressure based backdrop to allow for poor decisions. Really beyond that and the film crew with them trying to get a documentary on the unusual pyramid and these new techniques for discovery we’ve tread this ground before. They enter the pyramid. They get trapped. Something is in there with them. These are not spoilers, this is in the trailer. Bad things happen.

It’s almost like Thunderdome, X people enter. Y people leave. The uninspired script is by Daniel Meersand (nada to credit really) and collaborator Nick Simon (same deal). I won’t say the script was bad, but it was uninspired. You need to make at least some of the characters likeable for me to wonder if they will live; or more precisely care if they die. I shouldn’t be eager to watch them die just for them to shut up. Every – last – one just needed to die. Combinations of ignorance, self righteousness, and general panic just made for bad combinations in dialogue and personalities. Along with that many of the questions the movie tries to ask are never quite answered. Plots are introduced, but never followed up on satisfactorily or at all. They become just another wasted detail.

Obviously the writers can’t take all the blame, but they will get most of it here. First time director Gregory Levasseur is no stranger to horror, as he was a writer on films such as High/Haute Tension, The Hills Have Eyes, and P2. With that pedigree I expect something more. I also think he might be able to be blamed for script decisions. A writer who is now a director should have seen the script and known to make changes. If he did make the changes that result in this final product, then he is equally to blame. If he ignored problems and filmed as is with only minor edits, then by omission of action he is guilty. I also must blame him for the performances he coaxed out of his actors. None of it worked. Honestly, nothing in this movie worked.

Even the acting was mediocre at best. I would list the actors, but I don’t want to chance ruining them for people if they have actually seen anything these individuals are in. There’s just so many bad decisions made and the performances they give only amplify my aggravation. Compounding that is some fairly horrific CG work at times. It just fails.

TL;DR

This movie fails on every conceivable level, beyond its pure concept. I love the concept, the mystery of a lost pyramid of a design we’ve never seen before? Buried in such a way it must predate the trio on the Giza plateau? Awesome. Then…well failing on every other possible level.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t hate the movie. That kind of vitriol is saved for other films. I was just bored and annoyed.  I would expect to see this as a SyFy movie of the week. Actually – thats about it. This is a SyFy movie of the week with a better production budget. If you want to see this done better – see As Above, So Below.

Do not enter the Pyramid folks. The curse is boredom and annoyance.

Darke Reviews – Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014)

I apologize for the semi fake out on the title everyone. I have not seen this movie, nor am I going to; what I want to do is tell you why *you* shouldn’t see it. I have been planning this rant / boycott effort for months now and still never settled on what I was going to say. I want this to be eloquent yet short enough you read it. I want it to stick in your mind but not be shoved down your throat. Please bear with me those who keep reading. I will even have a TL;DR at the bottom as usual.

You may notice I will be trying to be painfully careful with my words here. Using more words than might be needed. I have seen several other posts on this topic where the concepts of Race/Ethnicity/Skin Color/Heritage begin to blend and be used interchangeably. There is a fascinating article over on Io9 on such a topic here, admittedly the author does blend the two a little bit more than I think they realized or wanted. I also admit as I write this longer I may do the same – so I apologize again.

Hollywood has a problem. It loves to white wash cultural history. Now if you are not familiar with the term white washing beyond painting a picket fence white, it is the concept of placing a white or rather Caucasian European into a role that could also be played by someone of any other skin colour and in fact probably should be played by someone of another ethnicity or level of melanin in their skin based on genetics. This was most famous in older Hollywood films with black face, red face, and other methods to cast white actors in roles that should go to people that are being portrayed. Now in some context this could be almost excused due to societal bias at the time.

I think excused is the wrong word here, it should neither be excused nor forgiven. Instead remembered as being wrong. Remembered as being racism, plain and simple.

Much like Disney’s Song of the South is all but banned in the United States for it’s extraordinarily strong racist overtones, other Hollywood films had similar racist and white washing behaviors. If you aren’t sure what I am talking about – The Ten Commandments (direct corollary to the film we are discussing sort of) with Charlton Heston as Moses, Yul Brenner (He’s Russian folks) as Ramses, and Anne Baxter as Nefretiri. Warner Oland in the old 1930’s Charlie Chan movies, David Carradine beating out Bruce Lee for Kung Fu, Mickey Rooney as Mr Yunioshi in Breakfast at Tiffany’s. Of course there is Sir Laurence Olivier as Othello, John Wayne as Genghis Khan…the list goes on. (source: my own IMDB research, Buzzfeed , and Smosh ).

You might say, or hopefully just hear the argument – Times have changed! Have they really? Excluding Exodus for the moment, let’s look at Avatar the Last Airbender the movie. Two white actors ( I use that word loosely here) were cast as what should be Inuit or native arctic circle people. This is intentional, as the rest of their village seems to be right. The animated series has four distinct cultures and countries displayed throughout, yet the movie white washes the main casting for no rational reason. Arnold Vosloo as the Mummy? He’s fun, but he is South African. Even more recently (and more lamented) The Lone Ranger with Johnny Depp as Tonto. Now, this isn’t disparaging his performance, but instead the casting. How many Native actors would have wanted that role? Could have had that role. But no it goes to a man who for all intents and purposes is Caucasian Western European – despite any heritage. Sorry I think half of the people I know claim to be XX% Native American. What of Dominic Cooper in The Devil’s Due or Dracula Untold? Great actor (bad roles sometimes) but really?

Why was this done? Well…the Producers mostly. They don’t think that non white people are bankable in these roles. Think I am interpreting something that isn’t there? Lets take this quote from Ridley Scott himself on Exodus.

Scott, 77, previously said of Exodus: Gods and Kings: “I can’t mount a film of this budget, where I have to rely on tax rebates in Spain, and say that my lead actor is Mohammad so-and-so from such-and-such. I’m just not going to get it financed. So the question doesn’t even come up.” (Source: The Guardian )

Hollywood does not cast main actors who are not white in major films because they don’t think we, as an American audience, will see it without that. Hellboy, for instance, had an entire character created just to be the audience foil. The FBI agent was there because they didn’t think we’d be able to identify with the host of characters without our white male lead. So with Exodus we get Christian Bale as Moses because, thanks to Batman, he is bankable. We don’t get to a single non Caucasian Western European until you get into the tertiary characters.

IMDB_exodus

 

Please don’t try to argue that Sigourney Weaver or Ben Kingsley are bankable right now? They are fantastic actors, I love them both, but do they put butts in seats? Lets look at the casting of Ramses. Joel Edgerton what has he done? Actually quite a bit as a secondary character. He is another good, solid, talented actor – but really does he have an audience draw to put butts in seats? How many of you could tell me without checking IMDB that he was in the Great Gatsby, Zero Dark Thirty, or Star Wars Episode 3? I don’t imagine there are too many hands raised in front of the computers. So we had to cast him? I am not doubting his talent. I am doubting the choice and others when we have:

Oded Fehr (Israeli) , Faran Tahir (Pakistani), even Wentworth Miller (Syrian/Lebanese), Salma Hayek, Tony Shaloub, Corte Di Pablo (Chilean, but famous for playing Ziva David on NCIS), Natalie Portman (Israeli). I would even take Greek actors such as Melina Kanakaredes. Most of this list would at least give credence to Scott’s other even worse excuse for the casting choices (source: Yahoo)

Q: What was in your mind when you set about creating this international cast?

Egypt was – as it is now – a confluence of cultures, as a result of being a crossroads geographically between Africa, the Middle East and Europe. We cast major actors from different ethnicities to reflect this diversity of culture, from Iranians to Spaniards to Arabs. There are many different theories about the ethnicity of the Egyptian people, and we had a lot of discussions about how to best represent the culture.

Now…Scott himself is taking all of this criticism from other more famous sources than I in stride. In fact at The NY Premiere on December 7th he told Critics to “Get a life” (Source: The Guardian )

 

Is Hollywood the only problem here? No. We are as an audience. Surprisingly Christian Bale gets it and can sum it up quite well:

“I don’t think fingers should be pointed, but we should all look at ourselves and say, ‘Are we supporting wonderful actors in films by north African and Middle Eastern film-makers and actors, because there are some fantastic actors out there.

“If people start supporting those films more and more, then financiers in the market will follow. The audience has to show financiers that they will be there, and [then] they could make a large-budget film.

“To me, that would be a day of celebration. For the actors, it would be wonderful. It would be a wonderful day for humanity, but also for films and for storytelling in general.” (Source: The Guardian)

We have the power here people. We have the power to make this change and tell Hollywood we WANT to see representation of more diverse individuals in our movies. Many of the people I know complain about this sort of thing, but don’t know how to do something about it…so let me get to the

TL;DR

If we want to fix white washing in Hollywood – Boycott this movie. DON’T See it. Don’t rent it. Don’t buy it. Tell your friends not to see it. Tell your family not see it. The movie IS problematic and we can be part of the solution to that problem through the simple act of – not doing anything. We don’t have to see it. We can tell Hollywood producers and Ridley Scott that we want change by not seeing it. Let the movie bomb and bomb hard.

If you want to see a similar film (albeit with similar casting choices for voices) that is done better and at least depicts people of the right colors and shows some levels of cultural awareness – see Prince of Egypt instead. It is an awesomely underrated animated film from the late 90’s.

If you decide to see it, if you absolutely want to and are OK with the problem – I get it. It’s not your problem to have. I hope you enjoy it and get your monies worth. If nothing else with this post I hope I have made you think a bit. Maybe opened a few eyes to some problems out there – and they are problems.

Sorry for the longer than usual post, but I am passionate on this. I love movies, but I want to see them get better not stick to old stereotypes of casting.

 

PS: Thanks to Sorah Shibao Art for being my editor on this one. I have the ‘luxury’ of white privilege and didn’t want to be talking out my rear.

 

Trailers in the Darke – Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

George Miller, the man who created Max has returned to what he does best. Seriously, look at his IMDB credits, he does this best.

He has promised us a near 90 minute long car chase with every feasible and possible effect that can be done Practical as Practical. Almost every car stunt you see is done with real cars and real explosions. I don’t think I even care what the story is here other than we have Tom Hardy as Max (Aussie as an Aussie, this is good). Charlize Theron with a cybernetic/steampunkish arm – looking awesome and bad ass.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you George Miller.

Trailers in the Darke | Terminator Genisys (2015)

I Don’t….hate it.

Emelia Clarke seems to be a good Sarah Connor. I don’t mind the concept of the timeline being altered in this way. It should bother me, but doesn’t.

Jai Courtney still doesn’t work for me at all, much less as Kyle Reese. He just fails. Michael Beihn felt like a solider who had been fighting a very long long time. Courtney still looks like an Abercrombie model.

Jason Clarke is close enough to the older John Connor. I can buy him as the leader who has seen too much.

 

Darke Reviews | The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part I (2014)|

Most of you are readily familiar with my reviews, for those new to the page bear with me. I love writing reviews. They are a hobby which I want to turn into something more. There are movies of course which I watch and wonder “whats the point?”. In some cases it is because it is so bad no one wants to see it. In some cases it is so obscure even if you wanted to see it you couldn’t. There are some films, which despite my best efforts you will see *coughs* Bayformers *coughs* and Hollywood will take as a check to make another despite anything else. Then there are movies like Mockingjay.

In Hollywoods ever growing quest for a chance to milk a franchise for every drop of its sweet, precious, blood they have taken to a new trend of splitting the finale film into two. Twilight, Harry Potter, Hunger Games, and even Marvel is doing it with the Infinity War. Though it has not yet been announced the Divergent finale, Allegiant will probably be split in two. I would be surprised if it wasn’t. Don’t get me started on the Hobbit where we took one movie and made it into three. Of the ones made already, Hobbit included, the first of the films tends to have an issue.

It’s dull.

Not saying it is a bad movie, but that they use the film to lay all the groundwork for the epic finale. There’s enough action you are not entirely bored. You are already invested in the characters thus far and for once you do get a deeper amount of time with most of them, but at the same time they lack a certain punch. They lack a real weight because you know they aren’t over. Mockingjay is no different. Oh there’s some action here, but not to the level or intensity we’ve gotten used to. This one tries for more emotional punches and a lot of focus on Katniss after the events of the past two movies.

The story of course is by Suzanne Collins who also adapted it for the screen. There’s two screenplay credits with The Town’s Peter Craig and Danny Strong. Strong was Jonathan on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but has also become a talented writer with Lee Daniels’ The Butler as a written by credit. So with the idea of this particular story needing to be told in mind, these two men are a perfect choice. They do have a keen sense of drama and how to use action to accent it and that is what Mockingjay is – a drama with action added to ease the tension that is building for us until Part II.

Good writing only takes you part of the way with Francis Lawrence taking up the directors chair again after his success on Catching Fire. I also think we get to see his weak points a bit more, much like we did with I Am Legend. We have a very solid film here, with very solid – well – everything. The movie is just lacking something and I think thats a combination of the director, writer, and producers not having a clean and clear idea on how to appropriately split the movie into two. We also have enough tonal shifts and pacing issues in the movie to make it a bit jarring at times. The opening to close shifts just a bit too much and it runs a bit too long in the tooth.

Saving it from these technical, production, and directorial issues are the actors. Ok. Actor. Jennifer Lawrence. 1 Academy award, two nominations and two Golden Globes, with one additional nomination make us think she might be a good actress. This movie reminds us she is. She carries the film and is beautifully doing what she does. Every emotion feels real. Nothing is phoned in or left to chance with her. She just is that good and has no choice but to carry the movie as the rest of the cast, while good, don’t have nearly enough development or screen time. I would have rather seen more of Woody Harrelson’s Haymitch, Elizabeth Banks Effie, and certainly more of Sam Claflin’s Finnick. That boy exudes charisma even when he is pulling it all in. Hutcherson, Hemsworth, Sutherland, Hoffman, Moore, and Tucci all do well enough and really could phone it in if they wanted to. Hutcherson does get a few beats and I enjoyed what I saw there. For my Natalie Dormer fans, yeah there is not enough Cressida, but what we do get is excellent and a huge departure from her Tyrell role. All of the actors do well with what they were given. I can’t say I am a fan of Hemsworth but honestly, I am finding more and more I am not a fan of the Hemsworth clan outside of Thor. All of the power in the film resides with Lawrence. Banks and Harrelson get some shining moments that I wanted so much more of that I was disappointed I didn’t get it.

Not much to talk on the technicals. Nothing new, but at the same time nothing bad either. Actually, I type corrected. The make up effects. Flawless. Not surprised with Ve Neill in charge. Season 1 Face/Off winner Conor McCullagh gets a credit as Key Make Up Artist, with my personal favourite Face/Off contestant Laura Dandridge having a special make up effects artist credit.  Glen Hetricks Optic Nerve studios was also involved. We are all better for it. There are a few choice shots were some amazing talent were needed and the effects are subtle going through it so they were worth mention. I know this is a review of Hunger Games, but I have to give credit to Face/Off for actually furthering careers of really talented people.

TL;DR?

As I said before, there are movies like Mockingjay. Face it, you are already invested and nothing in my review will stop you from seeing it. Nor should anything in my review stop you from seeing it. You need to for the finale which by all accounts should be filled with enough action and intensity to make you want to cry.

If you haven’t gotten into Hunger Games before, this one is NOT the one to start with. Then again who starts with the 3rd movie out of four?

Otherwise, yeah go see it and be the completionist. It is a solid film but suffers what I now dub The Deathly Hollows curse. Good but not great. Solid, but not quite fun or entertaining. It exists as a filler and placeholder for additional material coming soon to a theatre near you. I did enjoy it, but I wasn’t blown away by any one thing.

So there we go. May the odds be ever in your favor.

 

Trailers in the Darke – Cinderella 2015

Yes. Just yes. It looks like it may be up there with Ever After for live action Cinderella movies, but with far more of the Disney animated version brought in.

 

Darke Reviews | Nightcrawler (2014)

Sure this movie came out two weeks ago, but I hadn’t had a chance to see it, and honestly – I wasn’t all that interested. Someone I consider a friend at my local theatre recommended it last night when I saw John Wick again. I believe her exact words were: “Why aren’t you seeing Nightcrawler instead?” So here we go, went back tonight and saw it.

Was it worth it?

Well this has a writer/director combo credit with Dan Gilroy, who for me is a mixed bag of work. I like his work on Freejack and Real Steel, but am not a fan of Bourne Legacy. He is also credited with the screenplay for The Fall, which a friend recommends, but I haven’t seen. The odd thing here is that the body of work I am familiar with is nothing even remotely like this film. They are bright, sharp, even sarcastic, but not this moody, gritty, and intense psychological piece. Perhaps it is because the others are studio films and this is not, instead it is a truly indy film that got a wide release and distribution at the theatres. The film has a rather low production budget of only $8.5 million, which as made up on it’s opening weekend.

The story focuses on Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), a down on his luck man living in LA. During his quest to find a job he comes across an accident on the highway and watches a freelance/stringer film crew grab for footage of the moment to sell it to a TV station. The idea crosses his mind that he can do this too and he recruits a second in  Rick Garcia (Rick Garcia…no I am not kidding) to help him navigate while he tries to be the first on the scene and get better, bloodier footage to sell to news producer Nina Romina (Rene Russo). His success grows as does his ambition – what will he do for a check, for his ego?

More on that in a second.

I want to talk about performances. There’s only one worth mentioning here and thats Gyllenhaal. I have not seen nearly enough of his body of work, but with Prisoners, Zodiac, Jarhead, and Donnie Darko to his credit he has shown a huge range of dramatic roles requiring different facets of his ability to execute them well. This film gave him yet another facet to explore and give us and that is of someone like Louis. People might be tempted to compare his acting in this to Ryan Gosling in Drive or Only God Forgives. While both show incredible reserved performances I would be forced to disagree as Jake gives us both reserved but an incredibly nuanced performance that shows great levels of emotion and the psychology of his character with rather deft skill. I spent the entire time watching the film trying to understand what makes him tick, even in act three when he tells us (or does he?) what makes him work. It’s a fantastic performance that everyone else tries to keep up with.

Most of the cast could be credited as themselves if they were not playing just slightly fictional versions of their own lives; with many of the local Los Angeles news personnel playing themselves. The more major actors, such as Rene Russo and Bill Paxton are playing secondary roles within the film that truly centers on, lives, and breathes because of Gyllenhaal. Anyone could have played those parts with little effort or change in the outcome, I am not sure about Jake’s part.

From a technical perspective the film hits it’s most major snag from a wide audience acceptance point of view. It is slow. This is a psychological drama with the pacing to match and I was quite honestly bored more than a few times in the movie. It’s shot well, acted well, even written well, but it’s just so slow that it almost becomes unwatchable. If you do watch it though, it does leave you with some questions. The entire drive home I kept thinking

“What would I do?” / “What could I do?”

So from that perspective I can speak to the movies writing as it made me think, by its design, even if it bored me the rest of the time. I think at its heart aside from the psychology of the main actor the movie is a subtle satire on modern news and it’s audiences. What sells. What we consume. What we want to see even if we say otherwise. What the news gives us because it is what we tell them we want by our ratings. There’s something interesting in that line of thinking and I am curious if it is intentional satire or I am just overthinking it.

TL;DR?

Nightcrawler is an interesting movie that makes you think. I cannot and will not say I was really entertained by it, but I was intellectually stimulated by it. I sort of expected that going into the movie to not see something actiony, but that it would be dramatic. The movie more than a few times made me feel uncomfortable in a not good way – which I  think it should. What is it with October movies this year making me feel uncomfortable and “off”, between this and Fury. Both films really do not hold back on the what if.  I have to thank my friend next time I see her, because while I didn’t necessarily enjoy the movie; I enjoyed the concepts and performance. I suppose that is something.

Do I recommend  you see it though?

Some – but you need to know what you are getting into. This is a very cerebral film that is designed to make you think and do a little introspection. If you enjoy such things then yes, see the movie. You might be bored at times, but the payoff is there for discussion with like minded individuals.

If you don’t like that kind of movie or want something a bit better paced – give it a pass. Nightcrawler is a good, well made, and mostly well executed movie, but not entirely a watchable one for most audiences. Ironic, I think, that a movie about what the media gives us and what we want them to give us is not a movie most people want to or will see.

 

If you have already seen it, let me know in the comments. I would love to discuss with you! Bearing in mind the comments are not spoiler free zones. Read at your own risk.