Darke Reviews | Legend of Hercules (2014)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

The world, my readers, everyone owes me for this one. Brace yourselves, my review is coming. Not since Die Hard 5 have I felt this way about a film. My cohort tonight thought it was better than she expected, however that scale was against something like Sharknado. Me…well let’s go through the usual breakdown shall we.

The director, Renny Harlin, who is best known for some of my favourite films of the 90s. He can claim Die Hard 2, Long Kiss Goodnight and Cutthroat Island. He can even claim Jaws 2000 er …Deep Blue Sea. He also can claim underrated films like The Covenant, Driven and Mindhunters. Sadly Cliffhanger is in his credits as well. Now, after watching his take on Hercules I have but a few lingering thoughts about this once brilliant action director.

One, did Uwe Boll challenge Harlin to a boxing match and cause brain damage? Did Uwe Boll perhaps kill Harlin and begin impersonating him. Did he hear the song transcendental dream and the line “I’d rather have this bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy” and go “Let’s try both!” These are but some of the likely possibilities for how this film turned out. Sad to say that I think some of Boll’s films are actually better.

Of course no film of this caliber is complete without its script. There are four writing credits and if you’ve read my reviews before you know what that means. We Daniel Giat on his first (and likely last) feature film. Giulio Steve (as IMDB credits him) an Italian producer with his first and only credit for writing. Harlin himself who has minimal experience in this field; which may explain a few things. Sean Hood is the final credit. He has a written by on the recent Conan adaptation and screenplay credits on the 4th Crow movie Wicked Prayer. By some chance and random boredom one day I watched that travesty of film and waste of celluloid and investor dollars. It explains, in its raw derivativeness (that should be a word) what I witnessed tonight.

Please good readers know that I fell on my spear for you. I bore witness to this abomination and did not walk out. This is how much I love you. I watched a film in which the writers and director clearly had this conversation:

“You know that scene from Troy?”
“Use it.”
“You know that shooting style of 300?”
“Use it.”
“What about Immortals? I mean it kinda ripped off 300 but had Gods.”
“Use it.”
“How about this epic shot from 300?”
“Use it.”
“Can we use this shot from the 300 sequel that hasn’t even come out yet?”
‘Sure. Then we can claim we did it first.”

This conversation clearly happened shortly after some drug addled producer at Summit and Millennium films drank themselves into a stupor on the worst possible grain alcohol they could find. These two sloshed and brain damaged individuals heard the Rock was making a Hercules movie and thought they could make one too. It might confuse audiences and perhaps even make them some money on the side. It could ruin the Rocks chances (as if). Much like before, these are the explanations I must surmise from that festering pile of film that was shown tonight.

Every year there are two films that it’s clear are ripped off one another. It’s only a challenge to figure out which came first and which is the rip off. Last year was White House Explosions, this year it is Hercules.

Surely the acting held some redeeming value? You can ask yourself that now. Its ok I understand. Sadly Kellan Lutz (Hercules) may have found that his career peaked with his role in the twilight films. I can believe he took acting lessons on range from Kristen Stewart. Oh his body is fine to look at and you are given opportunity after opportunity after opportunity to watch it; but the boy just cannot act. Stewart is a better actress. You know how hard that is to write? No one else in the cast is even worth mentioning aside from the unknown actress who plays his love interest. Gaia Weiss (Princess Hebe) actually shows more range and emotion than the movie deserves. She also takes more personal action than anyone else in the film. Despite the fact there were at least three scenes the costumer clearly confused this girls costume with that from the She-Ra Princess of Power costume Gaia is actually worth watching once or twice.

Technicals? Don’t hold your breath. I knew how bad this film was going to be when the computer generated archers were firing shot after shot without even getting new arrows from their quivers. Completely arbitrary and abysmally rendered computer overlays of characters and backgrounds took you right out of the experience in just how bad they were. SyFy does a better job blending their actors with the movie events. Then there’s the lightning whip sword scene. Let those words sink in a moment as I move to the 3D rendering.

If anyone actually goes to see this en masse it could destroy the 3D market for movies everywhere. Every bit of the usage was a gimmick. Chains, Blocks, spears, arrows coming at you. The artist was also obsessed with Motes of dust and flower pollen on screen at all times. I think it was an addiction. More Dots he cried! Then the orderlies came and gave him his sedatives. The rendering was so bad in post-production there were parts of frames that were still blurry WITH the 3D glasses on. I didn’t even know that was possible.

Alright, how to sum this up.

TL;DR

As I have had time to really dwell on the film I can say that the smell of curdled milk has more appeal. The raw, festering, bilious mass that took up two hours of my night tonight gives me hope for one thing alone.

That if this putrid production is how the year opens it can only get better from here.

Avoid this film. Do not redbox it. Do not Netflix it. Don’t even try to watch it through other means. Just….don’t. You will thank me for it.

Now, please excuse me I need to pour some acid into my sinus cavity and find a power drill to get this thing out of my head.

Darke Reviews | Mass Effect 1,2, and 3 (Video Game/Bioware)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

I debated this and thanks to a couple of replies the debate is over. I have never done a game review before even in conversation really so this is sort of new territory for me. I think this will be closer to a “this is my experience on it” and I doubt I will talk about game play (controls/combat) much as what got me the most here was the story. For this review I know I am quite a bit late to the game as everything that could come out for it long since has and I will be talking about a game first published back in November of 2007 with Mass Effect 3 in March of 2012. That being said there will be spoilers through this as the statute limitations is long since dead and buried. That means I am going to talk about *my experience* with the controversial ending to the game. It may not be what you expect.

Now I started playing the first one around Thanksgiving weekend this year and just finished Mass Effect 3 last night around 2am after starting it the night of Christmas. It’s important to know what I ran as well.

Female: Lydia Shepard
Class: Infiltrator
Earth Born / Lone Survivor

Why did I post that? Well because every decision you make from the beginning of the game has some influence on the dialogue you experience through the entirety of the game. It’s fascinating since I’ve been playing games off and on since the very inception of home consoles and computer gaming I have never really encountered this. There are regular references to your experiences even in passing as you move through the amazingly complex story. You may hear something in a news broadcast, a single line from someone, or even a mini arc involving a part of your past. By the time you have reached Mass Effect 3 and its finale all your dialogue choices, all your roads taken or not have influenced how the world sees you and how you see the world.

I have only one play through right now, I am planning another with a male shep to see what’s the same and different with another background and some different decisions. It’s also important that I try it with a male as the romance options are now different for the male vs. female. This is probably one of my biggest gripes with the game play and story is that certain characters were not available in your crew for romance depending on gender. I hope that as BioWare is gearing up for DragonAge 3 that they consider the option to allow you to romance anyone in your party regardless. I love the fact that Romance is an option at all so don’t get me wrong, but when I looked at the dialogue in Mass Effect 1 between my Shep and Ashley Williams and always felt there was something there yet it could not be acted on. I suppose that’s somewhat like life, but to be hard coded against the option itself is…bothersome? Perhaps it’s my own psychology (likely) but I never felt through the dialogue anything with Kaidan Alenko. Instead I chose Liara, the Asari archaeologist; perhaps again due to my own psychology and attraction to that profession in my own game play choices, which I carried through to the finale.

Mass Effect:

The story of the first game I found largely to be straight forward and a solid opener to the trilogy in retrospect. You begin as a space marine drafted to investigate an attack on a colony world where a ship never before seen appeared. During the course of the mission you uncover that one of the Galaxy’s special ops members has gone rogue but as a human no one believes you. This was a nice touch where humans aren’t seen as equal and in fact generally speaking not liked. You also are touched by an ancient alien artifact which hints are something far more vast and threatening on the horizon. You are tasked with putting a crew together and finding the betrayer and stopping this new threat to the galaxy.

What I found impressive is the dialogue options with your crew and their unique personalities. Each one truly had a unique world view and I found it worth it to talk to each one between missions in the game. You could feel like these were real people that you were interacting with, not just static constructs. They had backstories, they have lives and they had opinions. They didn’t always approve of what you were doing and in some cases you even had the ability to convince them and give them faith in you and your decisions. This culminated into a few major decisions as the game nears its climax. You spend hours upon hours getting to know these people and fighting alongside them in a relatively immersive experience. Then, you are given a choice. A no win situation in which you must sacrifice one of your crew members. Sure other games have you make choice A or choice B and maybe people die, but here its someone you know and it resonates. Perhaps not as well as it could or should by comparison to the ones in ME3, but it still feels important. One of the final decisions you get to make actually has Galactic spanning results. Do you save the Council of leaders who have generally been dicks to you or let them die and humanity takes more control over leadership? I selected to keep them alive, it felt logical. They were jerks, but to be fair they had rights to be if you stop for even a moment to think about it. Which I did, so they lived. The end of course had the heroic score and reveal that some movies of this caliber and nature fail to achieve.

I really thought it all played out well and that victory was earned and sacrifices in the end worth it. Even the side missions you deal with carry through the rest of the game series. People you save, people you don’t. People you talk to may or may not live to see the end and have their own destinies altered by your impact on their life. The game play and graphics are solid and of course a bit dated six years later. They were intuitive enough for me, who hasn’t played a non MMO computer game in a decade, to adapt and use them effectively. I actually enjoyed the planetary exploration missions, but wished they were a bit “faster”. In types of gamers I tend to be a Lore/Exploration hound. In City of Heroes, for example, I was in the top 20 badge collectors. They had no real impact, but I loved getting the lore. Same holds true here. I did enjoy the sniper rifle mechanics and it lent itself to my style of combat in gaming.

The game, as I said, was a solid story and introduction to the world. Which leads us to Mass Effect 2

It opens with your death.
Then your resurrection.

It has a very Ripley like vibe, since I was playing a female Shep. The story here, I have some issues with. You spent a portion of game 1 uncovering the activities of a group of relatively bad mercs named Cerberus. You find out that they were responsible for the death of your own platoon once. Yet, here in the second game, they are the group that resurrects you and you work with them. You are allowed to have reservations and state them, but the railroading continues to the very end of the game. What kills me here in the story is the fact and lack of communication. It’s frustrating to watch people not want to talk to you that you once saved the Galaxy with. To have options removed because of a lack of conversation is odd in a game where conversation drives it.

The story here is that an alien race has begun Borg like attacks on colonies through the galaxy. Your job is to find out who they are, how to stop them and of course well stopping them. Once again you need to build a crew for your ship an equally resurrected SSV Normandy putting their skills and experience to the limits and trying to save the Galaxy once again.

The BioWare team wisely continued the option of letting your choices change the fates of so many individual stories. Decisions made in the prior game carry over and new decisions can be made that save the lives of entire colonies and you just “know’ will have an impact on the future. The romance options expand a bit in this one and are also sadly somewhat restricted once again. You don’t have the option to romance all members of your crew and those you were in a romance with may not be there this time – which is again unfortunate if you want to stay “loyal” to them knowing that you are playing through a trilogy. It’s my nature.

Also the scale of the decisions you must make are greatly increased. One that sticks in my mind is a side mission you have the option to take on. It seems relatively simple stop the alien race from firing two missiles at a planet. Sure thing. Except you can only stop one missile. You get to choose which target it hits and then have to see the ramifications. Another one in in a DLC isn’t much of a decision really, but again has some true impact if you let it. Save the Galaxy now or let 300,000 people die. When one of your crew is on trial, options for saving them become available based on conversations you’ve had and the decisions you’ve made thus far. Honestly, decisions like that seem to have more weight to them than some of the end game choices you get to make.

The art is greatly improved with cinematics that are better than some films I’ve watched. This is not unusual in games as their “between scene” graphics tend to be just shy of amazing. I did find myself having to remap about half the controls though as they were changed dramatically between games and muscle memory didn’t allow or like the changes made. The changes to the planet exploration were Ok. It was considerably faster than the driving around trying to find things, but took away from some of the immersion. I know many complained about the driving around so this worked but wasn’t as fun.

The addition of loyalty missions were interesting. A personal mission for each member of your crew. By doing them you increase the odds of your crew surviving the finale of the game most accurately called the suicide mission. Doing the missions having a result on the finale is not a math equation that makes sense but there it is. What confuses me is why players wouldn’t do them? From a strictly mechanical sense they provide experience points for your character and theirs and are interesting story. It doesn’t make sense to me to NOT do them, but I guess some folks don’t. They are fun and deeply personal and really add to the depth of the game. I love that doing them *can* cause conflict in your crew – that can also be resolved. If the crew conflicts were unresolvable I’d be less than thrilled.

Going back to one of my original points, while the story is awesome and compelling and driving the rail roading and lack of communication bothers me. Yes, this group is helping to save the ‘verse when everyone else is busy with politics and not believing you (again). I just really didn’t like sticking with them the entire time. It felt wrong through the length and there was nothing I could do about it.
Of course that’s resolved by Mass Effect 3.

The conclusion for the trilogy is an object lesson for storytellers, writers and directors out there. Everything that has happened before has built to this and it feels like it. The stakes were never higher and the dialogue, choices, and sacrifices you must make reflect on it. The fascinating thing here as it culminates is that you are allowed to see the strain on your character. While they are by no means weak, they wonder if they are strong enough. The bonds you have made over three games are there to support you and lift you up and dust you off when it’s all said and done. It feels epic. It feels like the weight of the galaxy is on your shoulders.

Importantly, as much as you continue to win and find things to beat back the coming galaxy wide genocide, there are losses. You don’t always win. You must sit and watch helplessly at one point as an entire civilization is laid to waste. There are people you’ve grown to care about that die. I cried quite a bit as Mordin died, just because of how artfully the dialogue was done and the callbacks that were made in his final lines. Thane’s death was equally poignant as his last action was to have a prayer of forgiveness read. Not for himself, but for you. This is something in all the films I’ve watched, the stories I’ve written and read not seen done.

There’s barely a choice made through it all that doesn’t have some form of resonance in this one. You may encounter them for a scene, it may be an email, a news blast, but almost all of it matters. This is complex story telling my friends. This is how it should be done. Make things matter, make your choices matter in a game. It worked on so many levels with me and made me want to keep playing until the end. I wanted to know how it would all end. To know that the things I fought for 150 hours of total game play worked. More on that in a moment.

Graphically this is a step above and beyond the other two games. It nearly seamlessly can move from a cinematic to live game play without much issue. The body motions and conversations are pretty good as are the expressions. There are more graphical glitches in this one where characters vanish or rubber band during cinematics than I have seen before in the other two. The game play itself was good. I found myself rekeying the controls again, but minor issue. Enemy AI seemed better as well with them actually trying to move out of the way of your blasts. Conversation options taken actually benefit you in a new way this time as you get the option to learn new abilities.

Now….the ending. I can see why there’s controversy. So much time has been spent on the development of choice, being Paragon or Renegade with appropriate color coding to match. So much time has been spent in the development of a rich complex mythology that you’ve explored as fully as possible. So what do they do?

The introduction of the ghost child is left unexplained in a game that really has explained everything else thus far. It can be read as a manifestation of Shepard’s guilt allowing her to translate the input from the machine. I am ok with that explanation, but as with everything else it probably should have been explained rather than left as a gaping question of interpretation. Then there is the color reversal. Your decision to destroy is color coded as the bad or renegade option and the option to control is the blue/paragon option. It strikes me odd that in the various stories I’ve read on this since I completed last night no one made this correlation.

Everything you’ve done for the three games has been about the preservation of life. The option to live. The option to be more than the past. You’ve (potentially) brokered peace between the Cylons and Humans, er Geth and Quarians. You’ve become part machine yourself (a slight failure here as this is rarely referenced in game). So if the “Red” option is to destroy ALL synthetic life in the Galaxy, including the Geth, including your friend EDI why is it surprising that a decision that wipes out things that you’ve helped live is the bad option? There are dozens of sacrifices you’ve made to date but genocide? Granted it’s for the sake of the Galaxy, but still after all the death you’ve faced all you’ve done, why is it surprising that this is not the good option to take?

Of course there’s control. You die in the process, assimilated is more like it, but you save everyone. You can become the protector or ruler of a new galaxy. You’ve preserved life, even the Reapers. Why is this a surprise?

Then there’s the unexpected third option, synthesis. You can choose to merge all life, organic and synthetic into a single biomechanical wonder of nature. EDI existing and her evolution prove it’s viable. Legion as well and his last moments before his own sacrifice. It was never hinted this is an option, so it’s a bit jarring to be sure. It, to me, seemed the logical option. Much like Control everyone lives. The decision is huge, however, but everyone in the Galaxy has come to depend on you. Depend on your decisions and to save them from obliteration. The lack of appreciation of this before making the choice and awareness of that in the dialogue seems a bit of a failure, but again this is my interpretation of why it is a viable decision to make. I shouldn’t HAVE to interpret. The fact you must die for this one however, seems to be the right thing. It’s sad I don’t get to see the little blue babies in the conclusion but after all the sacrifices you’ve made thus far, this one, the ultimate one is right. Sad as expected, but right. Seeing the final art prints be defined by the choices you’ve made so far was good.

The seeming fact that this final choice though can invalidate everything and be contrary to everything you’ve done is a bit off. The final “old man and child” thing as well. I get that it adds to your legend. It also implies that there’s more, which is unfortunate because there isn’t.
***TL;DR***
This ended up considerably longer than anticipated and I still don’t feel I’ve said all I could say. Ultimately I love all three games and will be going through on a second run, hopefully with more sleep. I love all the nods and jokes to Sci Fi fans. Some of them verge on being a bit rip off ish with the Quarians being so Battlestar Galactica it hurts. Star Wars, Star Trek, Aliens, Alien, Firefly, nothing was left out. Felicia Hannigan as an alias? Beautiful.

The games are fantastic and while the ending does have issues, it isn’t the catastrophe I expected from the kerfuffle I heard. I highly can recommend it anyone and also recommend that folks play through all three.

I want to thank my friends Abby and Amelia for reintroducing me to console/computer gaming and to the beauty that is BioWare games.

To the folks at BioWare, please please consider this an open letter of appreciation for all the hard work that went into these games and that I am looking forward to DragonAge 3. Your teams’ ability to weave a comprehensive story and one that carries emotional impact should NOT be taken lightly and is worth praise. I hope that some of the choices become more open in the romance category and are less restrictive and more able to be referenced through game play.

And if anyone actually read this all the way through, thank you for putting up with my rambling. Now to start on a male Shep….this is going to be odd.

Darke Reviews | 47 Ronin (2013)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

The other day I did a review on a movie where the trailer made the movie look so good and compelling that I had no choice really but to see it. This one, the trailer actually made it look fairly horrible. It told you truly nothing about the tonal quality of the film and focused on a 300-esque glitz and “Oh Shiny” factor. It focused on creatures and magic that left me confused as to what I was going to get aside from Ted ‘Theodore’ Logan in Japan. Now that I have seen the film I have this to say.

The trailer failed spectacularly.

Even the After Earth trailer made that film look more interesting until the directors name showed up. The last time (I recall) a trailer completely misrepresenting a movie this horrifically was the movie Lord Of War with Nicholas “Not the Bees” Cage. That movie was sold as a high comedic center piece with crazy eyes. Instead it was a twisted black/dark drama. with 47 Ronin we were offered as a I mentioned magic and monsters, bad CG work and oversaturated color palettes starring Keanu Reeves as an oddly white samurai. What I got was something else.

First time director, Carl Rinsch, with writers Chris Morgan (Fast & Furious 5 and 6, Wanted), Hossein Amini (Drive), and Walter Hamada (producer on the Conjuring) bring us a high concept mythological retelling of the story of 47 Ronin in the Tokugawa Era Japan. While the visuals are close in many respects (too many) to 300, the style of the story is closer to Clash of the Titans or and hear me out here, Dracula.

They took an event from Japanese history, which is legend and hazy at best to the true events, and elevated it to a truly legendary quality. I cannot say they were successful 100% of the time, but they should not be asked to commit seppuku for the attempt. Thats the comparison. When taking a true event and adding a twist to it, inserting a world where witch craft, Tengu and dragons not only exist but are believed in by the people. While the trailers showed those elements they failed in letting us know they were but backdrop to a far more interesting film about Bushido and Revenge.

For his part Reeves as a half breed named Kai, does well. He is not a nail in the coffin and the personality (or lack of) that he is often criticized for is a strength in this movie. He is reserved is his emotions and when he acts it is with commitment and intention, as a Samurai should. While I try to remain spoiler free I feel the need to throw a trivial one. Kai is not Samurai. As is appropriate for the period a half-breed like him is considerably lesser and is treated as such.

That is one of the truly major successes of the film. It captured as much as it could of what western historians have let us know of “true” feudal japan. I am not an expert by any respects. I have read the Book of Five Rings, and played some relatively well respected games around it. That’s really it, but from that I did observe some things that I have found to be culturally appropriate throughout the film, including Reeves portrayal of what he is. Granted the mystic elements throw some of it out the window and the dialogue isn’t always great but there is a lot of attention to detail.

The costuming and make up are amazingly well done and appear to be period appropriate from hair and make up to the shoes. The fight sequences while cut a little quickly are at least watchable through a lack of noticeable shaky cam. When the production team decided to go practical with the effects they looked rather good with the Tengu monk being one of the most nuanced make up of its kind. I do find that the computer enhancements were a bit much for it and took away some of the beauty of the application.

The movie is not however flawless. It is quite good, better than I thought so that might be why I am able to keep talking about it, but far from flawless. The Hollywood need to oversaturate the colors is getting nearly old as Shaky cam and I will not miss it if it goes tomorrow. The script at times and the lines some are forced to read is painful and comes off ridiculous or awkward when heard. It makes sense for what they are doing, it just doesn’t sound right is all. There are elements in the graphics that of course do take away and the CG while detailed still isn’t clean against a real set and real actors.

The acting is either appropriately reserved or so far over the top to nearly be comical. If it was intended this way then it succeeded, if not well….had they given Tadanobu Asano (Hogun in Thor) a mustache to twirl as Lord Kira I wouldn’t have blinked. Rinko Kikuchi (Pacific Rim) as the Witch is nearly delightful in how over the top she is. I wish they had done more with her as it feels some of her screen time or plotlines were cut from the film. All of the Samurai themselves are fine, if not a bit of a stereo type, nothing to really write home about. They met expectations.

Time for yours? TL:DR

47 Ronin is better than it has rights to be. It’s not a great film but it was an entertaining one and certainly in the good category. It fails in marketing end to end so you can’t judge this by what you’ve seen so far. A little Japanese education does go a long way in appreciating some of the nuances of the film and the details that went into it.

Overall, I wouldn’t recommend this one for most people.

It’s good enough just not most folks cup of tea. If you do see it, I’d recommend matinee at best and avoid the extra cost of 3D, the animation will make your eyes bleed. It can safely be Cheap Seated, Netflixed or Redboxed without much in the way of disappointment.

—–

As a very geeky aside, I now want to play Legend of the Five Rings again as this movie fits perfectly in that world.

Darke Reviews | The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

I normally wouldn’t see a Ben Stiller movie, let me start with that. He is on the list of actors I only watch if forced to by friends, alcohol, and/or being bound to a chair. As most folks who know me are aware modern comedy really isn’t my thing. Embarassment humor, bullies, or frat humor are lost on me to the point I had to have multiple people explain to me why This is the End (not to be confused with Worlds End – which was hillarious) is funny. Even after explaining it, I still don’t get it. Yet there was something about the trailers for The Secret Life of Walter Mitty had me intrigued.

For those keeping score, thats what a trailer is supposed to do. Get you interested and intrigued in seeing a film. These succeeded. I saw a Ben Stiller in a serious, relatively so, role in something that appeared heart felt. That was most likely helped by a wise musical choice for the trailer utilizing Of Monsters and Men (“Dirty Paws”) and Jose Gonzales (“Step Out”); both of which appear in the film. If you didn’t know thats actually kind of rare that trailer music also appears in the film.

The movie both stars and was directed by Stiller himself. I think that was a really wise choice in this case as it allowed him to pull back and know what had to be done for every shot. It’s also important as he truly is the center of the film and while the camera does shoot others from time to time, he is on screen the entirety of the film. Normally this comes across a bit ego centric by actor/directors, but in this film its needed and it works.

The story of course focuses on a middling every man, wage slave going through the motions every day in corporate america. He fills his time with never truly taking a chance and day dreaming of what could have been. His imagination is powerful and takes the audience with him in often pleasantly comedic ways. As Walter finds out his company has been acquired he, his friends and the object of his unrequited affection find their jobs on the line. His especially over something simple. Will Walter continue to fantasize or will he embrace life?

Well, for that you will need to watch. What? You know me spoiler free.

The movie has little to nothing to do with the Danny Kaye, 1947 version. The heart of the original short story by James Thurber (I am pretty sure I read it in 6th grade) is clearly here in the writing of Steve Conrad (The Weatherman, Pursuit of Happyness). There are times it pushes the envelope almost too much with the fantasies, they get just shy of too silly. Too much. Then it brings you back in at the half way point and brings you the rest of the way.

It is not Forrest Gump for the now. Gump was about a man through no true concious decision in his life found himself in amazing and incredible situations. He was special in many ways and his life is one to some extent that many would want just to see what he had seen. Mitty on the other hand is about an average man, the average man who makes a choice. He decides. He takes action. Yes, there are plot holes from a few technical standpoints, but those aren’t the point.

What is it? Whimsy. Wonder. To stop think of and start doing.

It’s a bit ironic I think. Bear with me a moment. I was getting pizza the other day with a new friend. She was telling me about the adventures of her life (which are amazing) and I was thinking of all the things I *could* be doing. She has an awesome guy and has done some amazing things. In that moment I was Walter Mitty and didn’t even see it. So to my new friend, Thank you. To all of you out there, like me, working every day and dreaming of doing; let me skip right now to the

TL;DR

I really enjoyed the film. I laughed. I cried a bit. More importantly than any of that is I took a bit of it home with me, in me. It’s that kind of movie.

This movie isn’t for everyone. The imagery is amazing as is the sublime storytelling, but it won’t attract a lot of audiences. If you need an escape this movie might actually be it. You can live vicariously through Walter Mitty and then at the end, like me, decide maybe it’s time to stop dreaming and start doing.

Overall – I do think this is a very good film but not for all audiences and personalities. If the review is enough to get you curious I hope you enjoy. If not, take a chance when it hits your direct media of choice.

Darke Reviews | The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

Sorry for the lateness on this one folks, I had every intention to get this out to you yesterday. The usual disclaimers apply here and need to be covered especially as I am aware of some significant changes in the core story. I have not read, nor am likely to read the original book The Hobbit. I have not read the revisions written by Mr. Tolkien that brought the story in line with the Lord of the rings trilogy. I have not read The Silmarillion, from which I understand material was used. This movie will be judged on its cinematic narrative alone and how it flows as part of its own trilogy. Also I am going to remain spoiler free as always.

I am at the moment undecided if this movie breaks the rule of too many writers and still being really good in the script department. We have Peter Jackson and his wife Fran Walsh, Phillipa Boyens, and Guillermo del Toro (HellBoy/Pacific Rim). The first three of this quartet have the entirety of the Lord of the Rings and Hobbit films as their credits. del Toro, who was originally brought in to direct but left to do Pacific Rim, is a surprising credit. While this work is partially out of his normal realm, when you consider the environment and world of Pans Labrynth it almost feels like elements of that could have been middle earth. While the four have screenplay credits, the bulk of the work was done by Tolkien himself. Adaptation of the core material is difficult in many respects and they did well, not perfect, but well. The problem I find in the writing is that with very few exceptions I dislike the characters and there are too many to care about. More on that in a bit.

Directing of course falls on the shoulders of Peter Jackson himself. The primary complaints I had about An Unexpected Journey seem to have been resolved; where he has decided to stick to a single tonal style. The last one couldn’t decide if it wanted to be for kids, for adolescents, for adults or in the vein of the previous trilogy. A single voice was used here which focused on the similar style choices to the original trilogy. The lighting tends to be a bit brighter in palette with less muting of the colours throughout. It creates an atmosphere that shows the world has not become the bleak place where the armies of Sauron march – yet. The one exception is what I am going to forever call the Donkey Kong moment, where while very fun was almost a bit too silly.

I want to talk more on the technicals for a moment as they were a clear decision he made in this regard. I understand that he wants to push the visual medium of film to the next level and elected to use the 48 frames per second (FPS) as he did in Unexpected Journey. Normal film you watch is done at 24 FPS. By shooting the film this fast it creates a clarity that we are not used to. It’s almost more real than real and its actually a bit jarring for most movie going audiences. It’s too clean and we aren’t used to it yet. Thats one of the problems, the other is because it creates such crystal clarity of image you can see things on screen you don’t want to. You can see lighting rigs at times from the set and elements that are clearly from sets rather than real life actually look fake; which they are but a slower frame rate hides that. Real life, wide angle shots of walking (yes there’s more walking!), look great. CG imagery and obvious sets, clearly look apart from the reality that is the actors and natural stone and wood. It’s problematic to say the least. The 3D added little to the overall effects and was used more for gimmick than anything.

The CG work is overall more clean than it was in the first. It is still not great and I wish they had trusted practical effects and make up more. Many of the characters that are given a CG overlay truly do not look like part of the world. One day someone will also figure out that moving people in “nimble” ways through CG doesn’t look natural. Ten years or so ago when Neo fought a few hundred Smiths in the apartment basketball court everyone thought the fight was cool, but it was painfully evident when it was computer generated bodies. That effect hasn’t improved and really needs to be avoided until someone gets it right. The skin “looks right” but is off and you can tell it’s not natural.

The other technical flaw and it comes with the high frame rate is camera movements. The pan and sweeps move too fast and that makes it hard on the eyes. They don’t look completely bad, they just are disorienting.

The acting is nothing to write home about. Everyone is “just fine”. It’s hard to be impressed when there are so many characters to keep track of. There are some notable characters in the mix though. Ken Stott’s Balin (the really old looking one) is perhaps the most heart filled of the Dwarves and brings a gentle wisdom and compassion to the screen that had it been lacking would have been detrimental to the film. Aidan Turners Kili (the..cute one?) is probably given more screen time than was written before and I am thankful for it. The story between him and the elven guardsman Tauriel is one of the more interesting stories through the movie and honestly that’s problematic. When you create a new character (Tauriel) and create a story with an existing character and it’s far more interesting than many of the other arcs going on something has failed in the rest of the plot. That being said, Tauriel is someone I’d honestly want to see more of. Legolas addition to the film neither helps nor hurts the narrative much other than a quick nod to the future nearly a century down the line. I think its an odd choice to have him, but if it makes sense in the history I know nothing about so be it.

Now for the part everyone has really been waiting for.

Smaug.

The dragon is awesome. It has scale , it has weight and it has power. Even in 48 FPS because of the lack of natural lighting he is amazing looking. Cumberbatch’s voicing of the creature does add an additional gravitas that only a handful of other actors could have delivered. To say much more risks spoilers and lets face it, you are going to this movie to see the Dragon and I do not think you will be disappointed with what you get.

TL;DR?

Alright Barrel riders, I have to say this one is significantly better than the first. It is not the best film of the year, but it is truly solid film making and still entertaining. I question the need to make three movies, but it has worked thus far.

It’s worth seeing without a doubt.

DO not see it in the High Def 3D, I think it actually takes away for the most part. Save yourself the $5 extra per ticket. 2D should be fine, or if you must regular 3D.

I still recommend this one as being ok for an all ages show, but be wary if the little ones are sensitive to some of the darker/scarier moments the film hits.

I know I will be seeing it again with others and I don’t regret it in the least. Its the movie to see this December with not much coming out to challenge it for weeks to come.

Darke Reviews | Frozen (2013)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

What? The Vampire Princess can’t like animation? Honestly, I have a weak spot for animated musicals. I was born in the dark ages of Disney animation where Black Cauldron was one of the highlights. I do remember watching Fox and the Hound, and all the classics. I stared in awe at the animations of The Little Mermaid and had a crush on Aladdin. I cried when Simba’s father died, I dreamed of running through the mountains of western Maryland as Pocahontas and even wanted to find Atlantis and stay there as Milo in Atlantis. I wanted to be taken away by a Beast and live in castle full of books as Belle – He could stay a beast too thank you very much. So obviously this girl had to see Frozen.

I understand there’s some people who are annoyed by the whiteness of it and the fact that many of the character models are rendered using the same skeletons as Tangled. It is true. I would say at least half of the models are re skinned versions of half the side characters of Tangled. Even the sideburns and hair color are there. The two main female characters are also somewhat similar but I am going to outright disregard the criticisms. Here’s why: most of the Disney princess art/characters are so bloody similar to begin with many of them have just subtle alterations anyway unless there are drastic art style changes (Pocahontas/Hercules).

So what?
Does it take away from the beauty? No.
Does it take away from the narrative? Not in the least.
What does it take away from? If anything perhaps a bit of originality.
It makes the toy makers lives easy as they only have to make a few changes and lets be honest folks, Disney is still a company and they want to make money and the movies are giant commercials for the toys for kids. I am ok with this. They don’t really pretend otherwise.

It only takes away if you let it and I won’t let it.

As far as the movie is concerned, lets get to the review a bit. Its a touch light as I am still trying to remain spoiler free.

Frozen is based on a story titled The Snow Queen, by the often adapted Hans Christian Anderson (Little Mermaid as an example), written in 1845. When I say adapted, I mean to say that it involves a Snow Queen, a Reindeer, take place in the far north of Andersons Scandinavia and has snow. This story focuses on two princesses Elsa and Anna. Elsa was cursed with the ability to freeze things with a touch and is forced into isolation from her little sister Anna. The whys and wherefores of the curse matter little. One fateful night, as they often are, Elsa’s secret is revealed and she runs from her castle and her family into the north. Her leaving triggers a massive freeze in the kingdom. Her sister Anna is determined to save her sister even if it means her own life. Along the way she is helped by Kristoff (an ice merchant), Olaf (a snowman) and Sven (a reindeer). Can she save Elsa, herself and her kingdom?

Well you need to watch to find out, duh.

Lets talk writing and direction for a minute since they are the same. Chris Buck (Tarzan) and Jennifer Lee(…nothing before) direct with an additional writing credit from Shane Morris. They’ve taken a tact similar to what other recent Disney movies have done where they went very tongue in cheek with blatant nods to Disneys traditional ridiculousness. An example is Tangled where Flynn Ryder is the only one to be bothered by all the singing and the hyper intelligent animals. Frozen picks on the conceit of love at first sight and has more than one character call attention to how silly it can be. There isn’t a lot otherwise to the film beyond a solid story that at times got a little jumbled. Its solid, but not perfect. The fact that the musical numbers stop a little before the halfway point is a bit disappointing.

The voice actors are spot on with Kristen Bell (Veronica Mars) as Anna carrying the brunt of the voice work. Idinza Menzel (Enchanted, Rent, Wicked) sings her heart out as Elsa. I was pleasantly surprised at Kristen holding her own in a duet with Idina. Both are always fun to listen to through the movie and bring the emotions they need to the performances they have. Jonathan Groff (Jesse from Glee) must have been brought along with Idina from her time on Glee and sadly isn’t used for all the musical potential he has. He does bring a certain charm to the movie and grounds the film where it needs to be. The rest of the cast isn’t really worth mentioning sadly, but the focus isn’t on them. It is, however, worth mentioning that I had expected to be annoyed by the Snowman and the Reindeer and was happily surprised that they didn’t annoy me and actually were quite endearing.

This is where I normally talk effects, shooting, etc. So instead lets talk animation. Yes, the character models themselves are from Tangled. Moving on. The actual “skins” are really quite beautiful with an ever increasing attention to detail on how fabric moves and how hair looks. There is a clear and conscious decision to separate the faces from realism while hyper attention to detail has been placed on the finer details and lighting. The snow is rendered like someone who has been in a blizzard and knows how it moves; while the ice. Wow. It is incredibly beautiful and perfect. Many people will miss how you can see reflections in the ice of all the objects that should be; all the while able to see through it at the proper places. There’s a scene where Elsa makes a dress (that I want) out of ice and walks through a door and you can see how the ice on the walls distorts the image from inside. Even the simple stomp of her foot and the explosion of ice seems to have a weight and gives the ice life like it does if you were to watch something freeze at high speed.

The musical numbers are a mixed bag for me. Some of them truly resonated and I’ve listened to one track twenty times already while writing this review. Others did not and thats all that keeps me from buying the CD right now. It is sad that the musical beats stop about halfway and they don’t use Groffs talents more, I have distinct feeling there are some serious edits to the film as there are a few seconds/scenes in the trailers that didn’t make it into the final film. Live action movies aren’t the only ones who run into that.

TL;DR?

I really enjoyed it. It isn’t perfect by a long shot, but it was a solid film for its two hour running time and I feel right in recommending it for evening or matinees. It is most certainly kid friendly and still enjoyable for adults.

There is a warning of course to those who don’t like cold. If you have a thing about the cold, this is not a good movie for you.

If you are like me and think Ice and Snow are two of the most beautiful things to be surrounded by – I promise during Let It Go (Elsa’s solo) you will stare in awe as I did and fall in love with the beauty and wonder of it as she is.

…Now if you will excuse me I need to see who I can bribe to make Elsa and Anna’s dress for me….

Darke Reviews | The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

This was probably the most anticipated movie of the fall. Yes, I know Thor 2 came out and Desolation of Smaug is coming, but based on overall buzz this movie was the one to watch and the one to beat. Thankfully, like I mentioned in a previous review theatres are giving “midnight” showings earlier and earlier. Tonight’s began at 8 in nearly every time zone. The usual new release rules apply, no spoilers and the book has not been read. There is an embargo in the comments on spoilers, so if you comment – NO SPOILING For those who need to see this. Granted, any comments I make about the first film are not subject to this.

Catching Fire picks up an indeterminate amount of time after Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark snubbed their nose at 74 years of tradition and survived The Hunger Games together. Things seemed to have settle down in an awkward norm for the Victors until the Tour of the Districts begins. Katniss and Peeta are once more thrust together in order to not only save their own lives but those they care about. President Snow already disturbed by their ability to inspire hope, with the assistance of his new Games Master Plutarch Heavensbee, decides that the 75th Hunger Games will be special. This Quarter Quell will star not innocent children but previous Victors from each district to end the threat of hope Katniss, Peeta and the other survivors can represent. Let the Hunger Games begin and may the odds be ever in your favor.

Yes, I know if you’ve read the story there’s more to it. “Spoilers” /end Riversong.

Let’s talk about the writing, unlike last time Suzanne Collins does not get a screenplay credit; merely the novelization. The writers Simon Beaufoy (Slumdog Millionaire, 127 Hours) and Michael Arndt (ToyStory 3, Little Miss Sunshine) clearly spent time studying the material and the nature of the characters. Their previous works show they have both an understanding of how to make a movie entertaining, gripping and really get into the head space of the mains. While I cannot speak to the adaptive nature of their work yet, I can say that this successfully continues the story. No line seems wasted and all the blocking and scenes work in rather stunning ways. Their script is not dumbed down and successfully builds the right tension in the right places. The storytelling kept me guessing in the right places and made me smile, clap and laugh with the audience in others. It also brought up tears in the right place which is just as important.

Some of that credit needs to go to the director on this project, Francis Lawrence. Probably best known for the critically acclaimed hit I Am Legend and the woefully underrated Constantine. In I Am Legend the director shows he grasps what it takes to take a charismatic actor and let them break down. Let them be strong, let them be vulnerable and show humanity in a world that wants to deny them that. He did apparently listen to the people who criticized the camera work of the first and did not make those mistakes. Actually, in this reviewers opinion he made no mistakes I can tell aside from a few weird pacing issues in the first half of the movie. It drags in a couple of places while rushed in others, but that may be due to the needs of the adaptation- hard to say. I do know that the shots were beautifully orchestrated and the performances of each cast member were perfectly nuanced to deliver the right emotions in the best way possible.

Granted you need talented actors for that and this movie has them. Between films Jennifer Lawrence went and got herself an Oscar for her work in Silver Linings Playbook. She clearly is one of the best new actresses in Hollywood and I am looking forward to watching her career grow. She leaves everything exposed and holds nothing back in this performance of Katniss. She redefines the bar for what it means to be the reluctant hero. She is still as bad ass as ever and never loses her humanity in the process or that vulnerability I loved in the first film. She is doing whatever it takes to survive and shows that she is both smart and attentive to the details. Her loyalty to her friends and family never truly gets diminished. All the while she uses her eyes and expressive face to the fullest and you know what she is feeling and thinking.

Josh Hutcherson (Peeta) is actually given a bit more meat to work with in his interactions with the heroine. Hutcherson makes you believe in Peeta and what he stands for, feels and even pity him at times. Its interesting to see a male character play the role traditionally ascribed to the female in other action pieces. I want to see more of this and other directors, producers and writers to look for Hutcherson to show them the way. All of the returning cast members turn out good performances with Elizabeth Banks as Effie Trinket actually showing some real character development and making you like someone you all but hated in the first.

The new cast fits in well with some familiar faces such as Jeffrey Wright (Casino Royale) and Amanda Plummer (The Prophecy) making memorable appearances. Sam Claflin (Pirates of Caribbean: On Stranger Tides) is a relatively new actor but is actually nearly instantly endearing as Finnick Odair; a man with motives of his own and secrets to keep. Jena Malone (Contact, Sucker Punch) as Johanna Mason brings some much needed levity to the film and is one of the more interesting characters to watch for all her brutality in both action and word. This review would not be complete without discussing another Oscar Winner, Phillip Seymour Hoffman (Moneyball, Pirate Radio) as Plutarch. There is an archetype in writing known as the magnificent bastard. Hoffmans Plutarch is such an archetype and even Donald Sutherland has trouble sharing the screen with him. Its a credit to the director and the actor that Hoffman doesn’t dominate more, because he easily could.

Much like the director and the camera work the team on Visual Effects learned as well. No single effect took me out and made me roll my eyes. Some things were clearly effects but really in the context of the Games that is almost acceptable.
Alright then TL;DR?

This movie is arguably one of my top 5 movies of the year, perhaps top 3. It handily beats everything from May of this year. It *is* better than Thor and really I have to tell everyone.

See.
This.
Movie.

See it soon and if possible see it often. It has a great story, great acting, and honestly deserves the support we as the audience can give it. This series of movies is what we need to have made with characters like Katniss becoming the norm rather than a rarity.

May the odds be ever in our favor.

Darke Reviews | The Hunger Games (2012)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

I thought I would take a page from folks like CinemaSins and do a review on an earlier movie when its sequel or remake is coming out. With a viewing tomorrow at 8:30 of Catching Fire, I thought I would review the first of the films. There will be spoilers – the statute of limitations is long since gone by and while I have read the book I thought it was close enough to not need a comparison. I read the book after the movie, much like I plan to do with Catching Fire. Also I got some feedback on the fact I don’t talk as much about the actors and such because of my desire to avoid spoilers in my newer reviews. I want to try something a little different if I can ( and you notice). Let me know what you think in the comments below.

Let’s talk Story:

The movie takes place in a dystopian future in the land of Panem. Roughly 74 years ago a war ended between the Capitol and its 13 districts. One was wiped out entirely leaving the twelve, but in case that wasn’t enough the lovely individuals who run the government decided as a lesson we are going to make each of the 12 districts that are left sacrifice one boy and one girl between the ages of 12 and 18 every year. It’s a Thunderdome like battle, where only one child lives after slaughtering the others. If you win though, you get to live a life of luxury, so they say. To add to the fun Capitol broadcasts it across all of Panem for the districts to watch on a nearly mandatory basis – and the people of Capitol really think nothing is wrong with it. In the 74th Hunger Games, Katniss Everdeen volunteers to be her districts “Tribute” to save the life of her sister. She and the son of a baker, Peeta Mellark, are shipped away to Capitol to prepare for all the glitz and glamour of the Hunger Games before an almost certain death. The build-up includes full make overs by stylist Cinna, training by a former victor from their district named Haymitch, and the joy of talk show appearances with host Ceasar Flickman. When it’s all said and done Katniss must enter the Games and do what she must to survive.

Suzanne Collins, the author of the books, is actually listed as a screenplay credit and it doesn’t hurt that the book was written to be easily translated into a screenplay from novel, which is more rare than you would think. The forethought in writing shows in the final product that makes it to screen. Writers Billy Ray and Gary Ross (who also directed) have some credits as well and if I had to guess they were responsible for some necessary adaptations and final on screen changes to dialogue and sets. I really want to talk about this as per the normal rules I have to watch a film prior to the review. People have been complimenting Enders Game on it’s realistic portrayal of children put in danger and in high tension situations pushed on them by the adults and how both deal with it. While the books for Enders did this a long time ago and the movie did it well, I have to say I think Hunger Games does it a bit better in film. Hold on, hold on.

Look at the execution of the characters, the performances of which I will get to soon enough. Katniss, a young girl forced to adulthood by a nigh catatonic mother, a deceased father and a sister to take care of. She has skills as a hunter, a survivalist and generally is a rebel but quiet about it. She volunteers to be part of a thing that she mocks and loathes to protect her sister. This is a death sentence, but its worth it to her for her family. She resigns herself to death and only plays the game of popularity begrudgingly. In a conversation with Peeta, who has also resigned himself, he is willing to die but doesn’t want to change who he is to survive the games. Katniss’s reply – “I can’t afford to think like that.” There is a tremendous amount of weight in that line and the actors delivery. You have a sixteen year old girl who knows she must and will do anything to survive no matter what it takes with the odds so very much not in her favor. Then as the Games progress she never loses the vulnerability of being human, despite competitors who barely are. The film allows us those quiet moments of pain (which some mock, but I enjoy), grief and loss as a beautiful counterpoint to the action, the romance (faked or not), and manipulations of those around her. The story is not gentle on the characters and it really does not pull punches either. Haymitch even remarks when someone threatens Kat with punishment – “They already have been. What else are they going to do them?” I think that in Enders some of those quiet elements were lost in the spectacle and the pacing where Hunger Games took the time needed to show the characters breaking and being reforged.

Those decisions likely game from director Gary Ross, probably best known for emotionally deep films such as Big, Pleasantville and Seabiscuit. With Pleasantville especially he manages to draw some incredibly emotional performances from his cast and does so in black and white. It has both heart and humor. Hunger Games lacks a lot of humor aside from a snark here or there for your consideration, but has the heart. Matched with it is a profound visual style and orchestration of this dystopian future and a type of horror that comes with putting children in peril. Sadly some of his choices are not perfect and many complain about the shaky cam throughout the film. On my first five watching’s of the movie, I only noticed it back in District 12. This time I did notice that it was throughout the majority of the film with the intent to show the instability of Katniss’s emotions as she’s put through the events. It doesn’t work. It actually made me nauseous the first time I saw it. It’s probably the single most complained about element of the film and hopefully director Francis Lawrence learns from that in Catching Fire. I doubt it, but a girl can dream.
One other visual effect fails in such a spectacular way I must reference the “million dollar wolves” of The Day After Tomorrow. The director of that film laments in the commentary about the “wolves” that attack the protagonists at the end of the film whilst they run from the cold. The dogs at the end of this film are atrocious. That is being generous. I know what was in the book was even worse by description and Collins herself regrets it. This creation though surprises me that someone on a VFX team thought “these look good enough, if we make it night, no one will notice how bad they look.” The problem is you bothered to use the wire frames for the dogs as another establishing shot so we could see how bad the design is before you added the skins and texture mapping; which was botched. Quite literally every other effect I love. The Girl on fire sequence, the dress, the hover train, the dome, the fire in the woods are all good. Even the distortion of her perceptions after the Tracker Jackers was well done.

Now for the acting.

Nearly the entire movie rests on the shoulders of Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss. She is the perfect young (21 at the time) actress to carry that burden. She had very few major acting roles prior. True X-Men First Class and her try at Mystique came out the year prior, so some geeks already knew her, but this movie made her a household name, an icon, and role model to quite a few girls out there, myself included. She does so much with her body language through the film to keep Katniss from being a two dimensional bad ass. She IS bad ass, but she’s made relatable by Lawrences performance. You can identify with her when she mourns Rue and can be just as amazed a few minutes prior when she reflexively and naturally fires a bow. She makes it look natural and effortless. The closest comparison I can think of is how Ryan Reynolds performed in Smokin’ Aces with a level of complexity to the character and ability to shift between Snark, Pain and someone who WILL Survive. She even makes the romance between Katniss and Peeta something that, if you didn’t have the books as a guide, you could believe to be true until the moment that she makes it uncertain. This is all the actresses’ ability to deliver and she succeeds.

Josh Hutcherson (Bridge to Terrabithia, Vampires Assistant) lets a male lead be more vulnerable than the female, which is nice. He doesn’t really have much of a personal driving arc in this one and instead plays second fiddle to Katniss and the wallflower who watches his desire from afar. If anything he succeeds at seeming genuine and charming rather than creepy in his adoration of the girl of his dreams (I’m looking at you Twilight). Liam Hemsworth, Chris’s younger brother is flat as Gale Hawthorne, pretty but not much too him. He could stand on screen and that’s enough. When he opens his mouth he’s really kind of a jock jerk if you really listen to the characters lines. Stanley Tucci is absolutely scenery chewing as Caesar Flickman the talk show host with the insane hair; that is not too insane for the people of Capitol. Singer Lenny Kravitz turns in a sublime performance as designer Cinna and brings some of the movies more heartfelt quiet moments with him. Everyone else is passable in their roles, even Donald Sutherland as Satanic Santa, er President Snow; save one.

Woody Harrelson, whom I normally don’t enjoy, plays one of the former victors of the games Haymitch Abernathy. He has the responsibility to teach Peeta and Katniss what it takes to survive, to be likeable so the viewing public may sponsor them and send them emergency gifts and pass on whatever else he may know to give them the best odds. Aside from Katniss, he actually shows a character with one of the most in depth and subtle character arcs in the movie. He starts as a drunkard, bitter, lost and alone; tired of watching children from his district die year after year when he alone lived. As Katniss grows into the symbol she is to become, he begins to grow as well. There are subtle things like him covering a drink cup to avoid additional alcohol that are in the background but still there. He really brought something to this character that I want to see more of in the movie tomorrow.

It’s worth mentioning quite a few folks complained about how this film seems a lot like the Japanese film Battle Royale. It has some elements in common this is true: Dystopian Future, Corrupt Amoral government, children in peril to teach a lesson. There are other aspects which bear similarity as well, but there’s a concept out there where writers at a similar time will write similar stories. I think that is what happened here. Some get more famous than others, but there are always those threads that can be looked at and compared to. While Battle Royale is a good film (sequel not so much) where the two films go and how they focus are two wildly different things and that is all on the writers themselves. I seriously doubt that Suzanne Collins watched BR and thought “Hey let me make a teen friendly, Americanized version of this.” What’s possible, and more likely, is in a conversation someone went “what if” and that someone may have known someone who talked about it based on someone who had seen it. The two films are different and should not be compared and Collins did not rip off BR no matter how much some folks would like to say so.

So at nearly 2100 words so far, and trust me I could keep going I think we’ve hit:

TL;DR

Hunger Games is in my mind an iconic film. It’s this generations Superman (Reeves version folks). Katniss is a character for now that we can let our children want to be. Loyal, loving, and strong. She and the movie are a fantastic modern fairy tale and one I cannot recommend enough.

I have to admit writing that seems odd, but when I really think about it and all I’ve written here I believe it. This is the modern mythology of the 2000s and the new Perseus is a girl named Katniss Everdeen.

Now, I sleep and prepare for tomorrow night and it’s review. Did you like this new more in depth and longer format?

Darke Reviews | Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

Ah how I love Hollywood and its need to get even a few more dollars to make the opening weekend look even better. First it was Midnight showings, technically making them released on the official release day. Then the 11PM, 10pm and 9pm showings came; now we have 8pm. Soon a Friday release means noon thursday! Though in all fairness and sarcasm aside it’s nice for an amateur like myself to see a film “early” so I can give my dear readers a review before they take the opportunity themselves. It’s even better when I can see it with friends who do not keep my hours. Let’s get to the review shall we?

Honest Trailers really nailed Thor in their recent video. This movie exists so you know who the Point Break guy will be in Avengers. It had a difficult job ahead of it and quite honestly not the best director to do it. Kenneth Brannagh had to find a way to introduce Thor, Jane Foster, Loki, Odin, The Warriors 3, Sif, the realms of the universe, tie it to the current continuity of the Marvel verse and still not introduce the concept of magic. That’s a tall order for any director. It’s also interesting that both Marvel and DC have explicitly avoided the mystical characters to date in their successful films. Brannagh did alright, not great, but alright with the first film. It created an unexpected bonus where Loki was the most interesting thing about the film, a trend to be repeated apparently. I really think us girls love him because hes adorable and would be a project we can try to fix. That’s a discussion for another time.

The sequel picks up where The Avengers left off and while my spoiler free disclaimer remains for Thor 2, the Avengers is beyond the statute of limitations. Loki has been imprisoned back on Asgard. Thor has not returned to Jane since he left her in New Mexico. Jane for reasons we cannot tell fully is not working for, with or even near SHIELD. Thor, The Warriors Three and Sif have been battling across the Nine Realms trying to bring peace and order to them after the Bifrost was destroyed during the events of the first movie. Everyone seems happy to tell Thor he needs to stop pining for Jane and Jane herself is doing a poor job of trying to move on. She still has loyal and snarky wingman and intern Darcy helping to track anomalies with a slightly off kilter (justifiably) Erik Selvig. During an investigation Jane is reunited with Thor and an ancient enemy resurfaces in a ploy to destroy the known Universe. Pushed to his very limits Thor is forced to obtain the aid of the one person he knows he cannot trust, his brother.

There is the high level synopsis spoiler free. Marvel handed the reins (reigns?) of this film to Alan Taylor. Don’t know the name? Neither did I. He is mostly a TV director who did 6 episodes of Game of Thrones and 9 of the Sopranos. How they picked him? I do not know. What I do know is he didn’t do a bad job. The shots were good, the acting was good, the fighting was watchable, all in all good direction on a script that had me scratching my head a few times.

The movie does fall prey to the too many writers problem in which we have 5 different writing credits; not including the comic books three credits. The story is by Robert Rodat (Saving Private Ryan, The Patriot) and Don Payne (Thor, Fantastic Four 2). Knowing this in retrospect I can see where certain script elements appeared and why other elements were the way they were. The story was then adapted to screenplay by three men. Stephen McFeely (Captain America, Pain & Gain), Christopher Markus (same), and Christopher Yost (a slew of animated Marvel shows). This to me explains why there were scenes where the entire theatre erupted in laughter ( for good reason). sadly it also explains between the five of them why there was a women in fridges moment and a certain air of ..a very unwanted love triangle. I know that the film is supposed to be about Thor, but the Warriors 3 and Sif were his companions more than any other and they are woefully and painfully under utilized here. Granted they get more to do here than in Thor, but its still not good. And Love Triangles! Gah. I was annoyed when I suspected it, then it was confirmed. They aren’t needed, they are rarely liked and even more rarely handled well.

Ok, lets talk the actors. Tom Hiddleston’s Loki steals every bloody scene he is in. No one can keep up with him even if they try. One particular shape-shifting scene brought the house down. He is the absolute best thing about the movie. Hemsworth is delicious to look at and really acts well beyond the looks. There are times I think he was sick when his accent gets so thick and his voice drops an octave or two. It’s clear he gets the arrogance that Thor is to have, but has also learned humility over the years. Portman plays the fish out of water and love interest remarkably well and in a way that isn’t annoying. I was hoping to see more proactiveness from her early on but they deliver well enough at the end.

Anthony Hopkins seems to be showing his age beyond the make up in this turn as Odin. Rene Russo is actually given something to do briefly and gets more than two lines which is nice to see as she’s the bloody Queen of Asgard. I reiterate that Jaimie Alexander isn’t utilized well enough through the film as Sif and some of the times she is I want to hit a writer. Zarchary Levi (Chuck) replaces Josh Dallas (Once Upon a Time) as Fandral seamlessly and he even gets to buckle some swashes. Hogun and Volstag are barely used thus their actors have little screen time or epicness that could have been given. Kat Dennings returns from being a Broke Girl to playing Darcy the snarky. She’s almost overused.

Christopher ( Dr. Who) Eccleston plays the villain Malekith. I will be honest, through the trailers and much of the film I did not recognize him. The make up was superb and the post production work on his voice were really well done. He actually brings a suitable air of menace to the film that we didn’t have in the first much.

The technicals. Le sigh. During one sequence I half expected to hear a young Jake Lloyd go “Yippee” and some bad commentator talk about the Pod Racing. The sound mixing and effects were so completely unoriginal it took me out of what should have been a fun sequence. Visually Asgard looked slightly less CGI than before and overall was rather well done. The effects of the big bad however. Not so much. While they did for the most part have some of the best lighting for it that made it match the atmosphere and environment around it – it just wasn’t working. There were times it reminded me of Blade or Fantastic Four 2. Hmmm…

Also – Puppeh!!!

TL;DR?

Despite some of the harsh comments above, it really is an enjoyable two hours. It’s far from a perfect film and still less flawed than the original. I don’t regret the time or the price unlike another Marvel film this year. I can safely tell everyone go see the film; I doubt you will be as critical as I am. I think this one is a movie people of all ages can enjoy but I do recommend watching Thor and or The Avengers first.

No breakdowns on this one, just see it. Matinee or full price, I think you will get your monies worth.

Stay allllllllllllll the way through the credits. Two scenes in this one.

Darke Reviews | Enders Game (2013)

Posted by AmusedintheDark

For those who know my opinion on the writer of this book, his stances and my own choices regarding this film: I have not changed nor violated them. I am, however, working to become a professional reviewer of film. While I can choose to watch or not watch any film I wish and will continue to do so should someone foolishly think they could pay me to watch a movie I do not support, I will need to review it. That day is a long way off, but in the meanwhile, we have a Sci-Fi movie released which had I *not* known about the original author would have likely seen. So I feel I owe it to my readers to cover this film.

All of this disclaimer aside let’s talk about Enders Game the movie.

The movie is based on a critically acclaimed and award winning book released in 1985. The author Orson Scott Card has written twenty two different stories along the arc of Ender and the world around him. The subsequent releases were not always told in chronological order and may not even involve the titular character directly. I cannot comment on the contents of the book, its arc or how much the film is different from the source; though I am told by my best friend it is a good book.

The story itself focuses on a young boy, approximate age 12 in the movie, named Ender Wiggin (Asa Butterfield – Hugo) . He is a cadet in some form of military academy where every move is monitored. The monitors are Colonel Graff (Harrison Ford) and Major Anderson (Viola Davis). After being put through an uncomfortably vicious and devious test by the monitors he is given the chance to attend an advanced school. The ultimate goal in this world is to use the youth and adaptability of children to create the next generation of military leaders in order to defeat an insect like enemy called The Formics who invaded us years ago and nearly destroyed us. Ender is put through even more challenges that grow increasingly difficult and separate him from his support structures. His sister Valentine (Abigail Breslin – Zombie Land), his classmate Petra (Hailee Steinfeld – True Grit), and any other friends he makes. The entire time creating enemies of other classmates. Eventually Ender graduates to command school and is put through even more simulations that pit his computer avatars against avatars of the enemy. Graff is determined to make Ender some form of messiah for the human race capable of ending the war with the Formics.

Ok thats the background and if you think its complex, the movie only does a marginally better job of executing on the principles. I lay that on a screenplay by the movies director Gavin Hood. This is the same director who gave us X-men origins: Wolverine in 2009. The rest of the review will wait for you to finish bashing your head on your desk from being forced to remember that abomination of celluloid. Hood is given the gift of good actors and solid source material that made it hard to screw up. He almost does at times and I am not sold on the ending in any way shape or form. There are some elements mid way through the film that even when fully explained make no bloody sense. There are also significant pacing issues that made me feel like I was in stop and go traffic on a California highway. Thats where actors come in.

The movie is absolutely dependent upon its children. Sixteen year old Asa Butterfield must carry this film on his shoulders. It lives and dies on his ability to cover the complexity of Ender. He shows the stress the character is placed under in one moment and then shifts to a calculating and tactical genius in the next. There are times he doesn’t work as well, where the character comes across just a bit too strong and others insufferably weak. It could be due to the age of the character, the way the character was written, bad directing or bad acting. I can’t say specifically, but it is a flaw. Sadly both his female costars (Breslin/Steinfeld), whom are both Oscar nominated for previous works, are given precious little screen time. They do well with what they have and again this may be directorial or story that keeps them out. I wish I could have seen more of both young women as they are quite talented and make the most of the time they are given.

As far as the adults. Hrm. I am torn. I want to say they did well. It’s Harrison Ford for crying out loud. Viola Davis and even Ben Kingsley. This performance almost lets me forgive BK for Iron Man 3 earlier this year. Almost. There’s just something about them in this movie that feels too much. Just a bit over the top and a bit shallow at the same time. The actors are fine, there’s just something intangibly wrong with it.

The technicals on this one are fine. The “Game” visuals are entertaining as is the 3D training battle ground.

TL;DR

I cannot in good conscience say to anyone see this movie as I want to deny Orson Scott Card any residuals. That being said, the movie was engaging until the last fifteen minutes and surprisingly entertaining. Those last few minutes are critical and completely destroy any goodwill the previous two hours brought.

Overall – the movie is an ok entry into the Sci-Fi genre this year. We’ve had better and we’ve had worse. It exists and some folks will truly enjoy it. Others don’t share my opinions on the author and do not have the same issues I do with seeing it.

For those folks, I respect your opinion and right to have them, I will say see it as a Matinee. I really do believe the end of this one hurts the overall narrative. (even if it was in the book, it was really ham handed).

Anyone else…

Curious – Cheap Seats (most of the money then goes to the house not the studio)
On the Fence? – Netflix
The rest of ya’ll – Give it an absolute pass.
Tomorrow night I review one of the most anticipated movies of the fall – Thor 2: The Dark World

Amused in the Dark

Theatrical, DVD, and Netflix Reviews with the odd LGBTQ life post thrown in for fun

Reviews

Darke Reviews | Legend of Hercules (2014)

Darke Reviews | Mass Effect 1,2, and 3 (Video Game/Bioware)

Darke Reviews | 47 Ronin (2013)

Darke Reviews | The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)

Darke Reviews | The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Darke Reviews | Frozen (2013)

Darke Reviews | The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)

Darke Reviews | The Hunger Games (2012)

Darke Reviews | Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Darke Reviews | Enders Game (2013)

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: