Reviews

Darke Reviews | Oblivion (2013)

Posted by

0

So there I was leaning on the railing of the front row as the credits rolled on Oblivion tonight. I am listening to the score by M83, which keeps reminding me of the epicness of Dune (Lynch 84), it’s powerful, it’s moving and fitting. I look back on the past two hours and twenty minutes and wonder – is big budget science fiction making a resurgence? We’ve had some OK Sci-Fi in the past year or so and some really good Sci Fi. Where does Oblivion fall?

It’s a trick question. It doesn’t quite fall in the mix because it *is* the mix. Writer/Director Joseph Kosinski (Tron Legacy) is clearly and strongly influenced by the science fiction cinema of his age – which happens also to be mine. As an aspiring writer trying to find my voice and my style for the so-called original vampire novel I am working on; I understand how challenging it is to write a purely original story in a world where so many have been told. I am aware like few others that its nearly impossible to not lift elements from your favourite works of fiction that you are trying to tell a story within. I see Kosinki’s love for Dune, all the cinematic works based on Phillip K Dick (if I name specific ones it’s nearly a spoiler), 2001, 2010, Event Horizon, and so many more sci fi films of the late 70s and early 80s. I almost want to say this movie is his love letter to the works of that time. Yet, it isn’t quite that either, he has managed to tell a beautiful three act story with elements of so many others in his own way and in his own narrative vision.

Let me tell you about his vision. We have Jack and Vickie, “the clean up crew” and an “effective team” on an earth ravaged by a war with an alien race. Because there are still aliens on earth, hiding and attacking that which Jack and Vickie protect our protagonists have their memory wiped to protect the security of the mission. Jack has a curious streak a mile wide and during his routine patrols explores areas of the ruined earth in his hi-tech ornithopter. Kosinki’s vision of a ruined earth years after the war is nothing short of breathtaking. I’ve never seen anything quite like it and that is no small feat. There are a flybys that had me scratching my head on the environment they presented, but I let it slide for the beauty and wonder it brought.

Now we get to act two of our story and we introduce the survivor of a crashed ship. She knows something and hiding it. Jack and Vickie both know she’s hiding something but react differently. Vicky just wants to complete the mission according to protocols and head to Titan with the rest of the survivors of the war. Jack, well Jack needs to know. This takes him deeper into the rabbit hole and where the story really starts to bloom. I would tell you more of act two and act three but to do so risks spoilers even with the most careful of writing. Suffice to say I didn’t see a few elements coming; while others I saw in the trailer and figured out instantly.

Breaking it all down –

While I normally could rant about trailers for hours, the trailers here did the movie justice and kept hidden what needed to be kept hidden.
The visual design of the world – nothing short of astounding.
The tech – I have problems. You won’t be able to unsee it once I say it, but I consider it lazy on the prop department so I cannot forgive. Jack’s rifle is a modified Nerf Longshot. The thrusters on his craft are the ear pieces to a standard call center headset.
Music – Nearly overpowering when it needed to be subtle, but it fit the movie.
Science – I often rant about the science in science fiction. This one has a few elements leaving me wondering, only one of which truly bothered me. A storm system that was fairly persistent.
Pacing – hit and miss.

So at the end of another day in paradise we have a film that embraces all the things we love about science fiction. We have a director that knows how to get a good performance of his three main actors and has a visionary eye that needs to be encouraged by the studio and fans. Is it flawless? No. Is it something that hearkens back to the best of the 80s sci fi? Without a doubt.

For the TL;DR crowd

Sci Fi fans – See it
Tom Cruise Fans – See it
Kosinski fans – You have already seen it and are just reading my review to confirm or refute me.

If you are a die hard cruise hater – pass
Sci-Fi not always your thing? – pass, this won’t change your mind.

If you aren’t sure on this – Matinee it and let me know what you thought below.

I do think people need to see this movie so that the studios take more chances on science fiction. It’s nearly a lost genre and when we lose it we lose something special. I think in the end I am looking forward to the Blu Ray release already so I can add this to my collection and watch it in my living room with the surround sound and a smile on.

Darke Reviews | The Host (2013)

Posted by

0

I’m of two minds on this film. It has plenty of elements that appealed to me and more than a few that drove me batshit crazy while watching it. Some basic facts first.

1. I have not read (nor do I intend to) the source material. Unlike Beautiful Creatures this didn’t drive me to need to read it.

2. I have not read Twilight (nor will I).

3. I have seen all of the Twilight films (by choice).

Writer/Director Andrew Niccol (Lord of War, Truman Show) has a love affair with Sci Fi concepts but something always goes wrong with the final production. The films would fall completely flat if not for a few saving graces here and there. Be it studio interference, trailers that are lousy, or perhaps his directing? I do not know. In his hands once again the film which could have so much potential never quite reaches it.

The failure however, I blame on the source material. I was hoping after the Twilight novels Stephanie Meyer had taken a correspondence course in writing. Sadly, my hope was dashed like a Tripod against the ruins of a plague ridden New York (that’s a non Host reference, but Sci Fi related). This woman is clearly and deeply in need of a Menage Trois. She apparently needs to have her female protagonist follow the same elements:

1. She’s ready for action when Male #1 isn’t.
2. Male #1 must put up token argument against.
3. There’s a male #2 who is ready and willing.
4. Female protagonist wants both.
5. She’s a Mary Sue.

That said the movie isn’t all bad. It is quite literally saved by the talents of young irish actress Saoirse Ronan (the Lovely Bones, Hanna) and actor Jake Abel (I Am Number Four, Percy Jackson) bring the most heart and soul to this film. Their relationship most of all and interactions between Ian, Melanie and Wanderer bring the most entertainment into what would otherwise be a rather plodding paint by numbers invasion of the body snatchers.

There are some highly irritating directorial, scripting or editing failures I cannot forgive. The movie showcases the most bizarre case of Stockholm syndrome I have ever seen. The film does not earn some of the beats in the final act. I find that a cardinal sin as there is much they could have done.

As we are dealing with both Melanie and Wanderer in Melanies head there is quite a bit of voice over work in the film. Many other reviews have ripped that element apart. I enjoyed it save for the volume and reverb put on it; however it doesn’t take it far enough. See the cardinal sin above. It also hosts (pun intended) the largest logic fail in the film – “We can’t tell them I’m alive in here….they won’t believe it.” – yet….everyone does??

So where does that leave us? (TL;DR crowd, this is what you want)

We have a middle to high concept movie that executes as well as the material that inspired it. All the flaws in dialogue and plot can be pointed there. The acting is what I expected, the cinematography is sufficient. The love story more bearable than the other film inspired by this novelists work. A single look from Ian (Jake Abel) in the final act shows more emotion than Kristen Stewart AND Robert Pattinson did in all the twilight films combined.

If you are a fanatic about the books – Give it a matinee or a pass
If you enjoyed the book – Give it a shot
If you are a teen or like paranatural teen romance – You should be good.

If you hate Twilight. – Wave off, wave off.
If you don’t like your love stories with the paranatural – Negative Ghost Rider, the pattern is full

If you didn’t want to see it before, don’t see it now. Otherwise, Matinee it up. It’s not as horrible as other reviewers make it out to be.

Darke Reviews | Olympus Has Fallen (2013)

Posted by

2

If you haven’t heard of it, I am not surprised. The studio didn’t market this one heavily and after watching it I am left with a burning question – Why the frak not? We could not escape the advertisements of the wanna be Die Hard movie and it was an apocalyptic piece of celluloid garbage next to this. AGDtDH (I refuse to type it out) director John Moore needs to talk to Olympus has Fallen director Antoine Fuqua on how to do a Die Hard movie, much less how to direct an action movie.

This film is what Die Hard 5 should have been. Antoine (Shooter, Training Day) delivers in his usual directorial sense an action movie with no holds barred and no F-Bombs left behind. This movie is a bloody, brutal love letter to the original Die Hard. I swear there’s even a handful of scenes where I think the script writers paused writing, watched the original Die Hard and went – “How can do we do a scene like that?”. John McTiernan (director of the original Die Hard) would be proud of the bromance between these two films if he was allowed back in the U.S. Notice all my references to Die Hard? You should – this movie truly is Die Hard in the White House.

Fuqua pulls together a list of actors you know that is really quite impressive – Gerard “300” Butler, Aaron “Two Face” Eckhart, Rick “Ninja Assassin” Yune, Melissa Leo, Radha Mitchell, Angela “should have been Storm” Bassett, Cole Hauser, Dylan McDermot, Ashley Judd, and Morgan -mother frakin- Freeman. The movie starts with a car accident on an icy bridge after letting you get to know a few of the characters and their relationships. We have President Asher (Eckhart) and the head of his Secret Service detail Mike Banning (Butler). A few months later after things went pear shaped, we have tensions with the 21st century boogeyman – the North Koreans, on the rise. Approximately 20 minutes of time is devoted to character introductions. After that, it’s time for the bang. There is a lot of Bang. And Boom. And “Ow!!!!” Butler is everything we should expect of our action stars these days. The quips are few. The fights are brutal and efficient. The fights actually make you believe this guy has been trained to, oh I don’t know kill every person in the room that isn’t supposed to be there.

For all my enjoyment the movie is not flawless. It required one specific leap that would not happen. Once the Secret Service goes into action to protect the President, the President no longer gets a say in what happens to those around him. Their job is him, no one else. There are a handful of other moments that had me ask Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, but then I remembered I am watching a movie where the White House is getting attacked and taken over. I let some of the logic fails slide. One I cannot let slide is the subplot of the movie; where the moment the McGuffin is introduced I as the audience member understand the plan. Generals, Secret Service and other people ostensibly smarter than I am (character wise) do not see this “twist” coming. It angered me. With everything else executed so well, this Fail is kinda a let down.

for the TL;DR crowd –

If you are an action movie fan – see the first action movie worth a damn this year!!!
If you are a fan of any of the actors mentioned – See the damn thing!!
If you like the director – see the damn thing!

If you are not a fan of violent action – Give this a pass. I did mention the fight scenes are brutal. I am not joking. Knives are not to be messed with.

And for gods sake, if anyone who does read these reviews of mine knows anyone in Hollywood – point them to THIS movie on how to do an action movie or the next Die Hard the RIGHT WAY.

Olympus may have fallen, but thankfully the action movie has not.

Darke Reviews | Oz The Great and Powerful (2013)

Posted by

0

No one can accuse director Sam Raimi of not having a visionary mind full of wonder and weirdness. To be perfectly honest I think Tim Burton could learn a thing or two from Raimi these days. The man who in 1981 brought us the original Evil Dead and showed us low budget horror at its finest and in 2002 brought the worlds most famous web slinger to screen and made more than a few of us believe in heroes again has taken us to Oz.

I am a fan of Wicked and the story of Galinda and Elphaba. I am a fan of the brilliance of Victor Fleming’s 1939 spectacle with Judy Garland and Margaret Hamilton. I need to let you know now, this is neither of those stories. This is a new Oz.

This is an Oz with water faeries, witches, Winkies, China Dolls and let us not forget flying monkeys This is an Oz with impossible cloud formations and even more impossible geography. One where the day is warm, kind and clearly magical; and where the night is intimidating, menacing and you know you don’t want to see what goes bump in the night.

The opening of this movie in a 1905 Kansas made me smile. It could be because I was a carnie for a summer once and that in a century some things never change. It could be the nice call back to the original and a hint of things to come. One twist(er) later and we are in Oz. The CG landscape while bright and colorful was jarring in it’s rendering. I had trouble accepting the world at first but it grew on me as I realized what it was for – Wonder.

Oz is Wonderful. Not the man, he’s a bit of a schmuck. The land of Oz is truly wonderful. When I stopped caring about the CG and listened to the reeds play carnival music. When I saw the majesty of the Emerald City given form more than a painting it started. What truly sold me was the China Doll. I’ll be damned if the FX team didn’t do an amazing job. There were only a handful of times where I knew she was CG rather than Practical, but I truly lost myself in a world with a China Doll who could walk, cry and may be one of the most memorable and endearing characters in the movie.

That isn’t to say that James Franco as Oz isn’t good, he turns in a performance we know he is more than capable of as a man who doesn’t know what he is capable of. Rachel Weisz is ravishing as Evanora the Guardian of the Emerald City and gives us what we expect, but surprisingly she is upstaged by Mila Kunis. Mila’s turn as Theodora, sister to Evanora, was for me nothing but heart breaking as she devours scenery like pop corn. Some have said Michelle Williams as Glinda is a bit flat but that is only in her delivery and dialogue. Let’s be honest Glinda isn’t exactly the most dimensional person in the world no matter what version you like. I do disagree that she’s flat though. Her performance isnt to be found in the dialogue. It’s Michelle’s body language and expressions. This is a woman who knows her face, her shoulders and blocking and can use it.

Was the CG heavy handed at times and took me out of the world? Sure.

How about the 3D? This one uses it in interesting ways a few times, some tricks I haven’t seen done. A lot of it is the classic “thing coming at your face” but there are some nice depth of field effects. I don’t think you will miss much if you can’t stand 3D. If you could go either way, see it in 3D and let me know what you think?

Can I take Kids to it? – Yes. Yes. Yes. This movie is for them more than Jack the Giant slayer ever could have hoped to be.

Will I get something out of it as an adult? No promises, but I know I did. The movie made me smile, it made me laugh, it let me look at the world and remember what movies are here for. To let our minds wander and wonder. Let that inner child that watched the Wizard of Oz and saw someone travel by Bubble or Broomstick and go “that would be cool”.

So there it is, I recommend this one for kids of all ages; inside and out.

I plan to catch this one again, sans 3D with friends later. Making this one of the few movies I will see more than once in the theatre. Between this and Beautiful Creatures earlier this year ((see it damnit)) – I think some directors have realized we don’t always need darkness. Sometimes we do need a Wonderful Wizard.

Darke Reviews | Jack the Giant Slayer (2013)

Posted by

0

In the past few years there have been many movies where the trailer for the movie made it far far better than it is (I am looking at you Clash of the Titans). There are others where the trailer fails to deliver a pitch for movie that generates a positive reaction. Jack the Giant Slayer is the latter of the two types.

The trailer for the movie had me doubting Bryan Singers sanity. He wanted to do this? This was his passion project. The man who brought me one of the greatest crime movies in twenty years (Usual Suspects), the man who brought us Professor Xavier, Magneto and Wolverine to screen? This was what he wanted?

Thank whatever deity there is that listens to me that I don’t necessarily trust trailers anymore. (I am still glaring at you Clash of the Titans).

Now, there are things to take into account if you want me to get into the movie. I am by no means its target audience. I am a 36 *cough* 25 year old female. This movie is targeted to boys between the ages of 8 and 15. It has humor in it that adults can enjoy, so you can make it a family affair if you like the work of Stanley Tucci, Bill Nighy and Ewan McGregor.

The director brings us the classic tale of Jack, the sweet, but spacey farm boy with dreams of something bigger. Nicholas Hoult, recently of Warm Bodies and XMen First Class, is as charming as ever. He brings a much needed earnestness to the role. We have our forgettable princess in peril and Jack determined to save her from unexpected Beanstalk growth that takes us to the land of Giants. There and Back Again…oh wait, wrong review.

This is one of the points where the trailers failed, or perhaps TV does, as the giants looked MUCH better in the theatre than they did on screen. The plot is actually deeper than I gave it credit for. I forgive some of the physics and engineering fails that occur within the film as we are dealing with a movie that has Giants, Beanstalks miles upon miles high, and a land above the clouds.

So by now you are asking “Well should I see it?”

– If you have possession of an aforementioned male childling – Yes, though careful if you are worried about their sensibilities at a young age. There are some implied scenes that some parents won’t like.

If you are an aforementioned male childling, in spirit, mind or body (or all three) – Yes.

If you enjoy watching Ewan McGregor ham it up with his best Eddie Izzard impression (intentional or not, I couldn’t quite tell) – Then yes.

If you are a completist for all things Bryan singer – Yes

Otherwise, you can give this one a pass until it’s on Netflix. You aren’t missing a lot that can’t wait.

Darke Reviews | A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)

Posted by

2

Have you ever cooked your favorite meal, or ordered it from a restaurant and brought it home only to forget about it and have it go bad on you? That face you make when you open the container and smell how rotten its gotten? That moment of despair when something you truly enjoyed has gone bad? The vain hope that some part of it can be salvaged….?

That’s how I felt watching this movie. I love the original Die Hard, it is a Christmas tradition in my home. Die Hard II, still excellent and often quoted. Die Hard 3, less so, but it has it’s moments. Die Hard IV….well that’s when the meal started to go bad. This….this is Rancid.

Every good Die Hard film has an “every man” that you can relate to in John McClane. He is a man who is placed into situations beyond his control and you root for him to survive. The odds are nigh impossible, yet to a certain Hollywood logic plausible. THe world is “ours” with just the slightest nudge into action fantasy. These situations pushed our every man to his limits and nearly broke his body and his will. We were with him all the way.

That’s where Die Hard 5 begins to fail. He delivers himself into the situation and stops being our every man. He becomes a typical action hero walking away from not one, but two accidents and an explosion with nary a scratch. Thats in the first twenty minutes. To be honest I nearly walked out then…but I had to see the train wreck through to the end.

It didn’t get better. Yes he does get injured, but this was a nightmare of his own making with a contrived plot that suffers under the weight of it’s own BS. The movie does surprise me at least once, but that was it.

The rest of it was an action movie with Bruce Willis. Had it not been called Die Hard anything I might have enjoyed it a bit more. This was actually a better Bourne film than the most recent one.

If you are a completest and have no choice but to see it. I am sorry for you. If you are a Bruce Willis fan and just don’t care that it’s titled Die Hard, you will get a Matinee’s moneys worth.

Otherwise…steer clear of this. Go see Warm Bodies or wait a few weeks for one of the major March releases. Tomorrow evening I plan to see Beautiful Creatures and hopefully am less disappointed in that then I was this …thing they called a Die Hard film.

Darke Reviews | Beautiful Creatures (2013)

Posted by

0

Movie review time folks!! This time it’s for a movie I liked!!

Beautiful Creatures, based on a book which I just ordered from Amazon, is one of those love stories that shows you can still write a love story and do something interesting with it. I am not just talking Warm Bodies, where you have Romeo and Juliet with zombies ((quick review on that one – if you like Zombies and/or Romeo and Juliet go see it, you won’t regret it).

What BC delivers is charm. Charm in abundance with its newcomer actor Alden Ehreneich as Ethan Wate. I spent some time in South Carolina as a little girl and yes that kinda southern guy still exists. Alice Englert, another one relatively new to the silver screen, delivers a wonderful performance as a teen age girl caught between two worlds and with no good way out.

While the movie hits many of the traditional teenage romance tropes, it stops short on some of the expected ones. I believed in this romance set in a world where magic can make a room spin, vines grow and shadows live. These two young actors did in two hours what Twilight failed to do in five movies; giving me a believable romance between two young people who have their own worlds doing everything in their power to separate them.

Jeremy Irons tones down his usual insanity, likely tempered by Viola Davis and handles himself well against Emma Thompson who delivers an excellent villain. Emmy Rossum is fun to watch but almost ends up comical at times, almost.

Movies like this do give me hope for the young adult book and film market. I hope, hope, hope that other directors in the process of adapting similar material (City of Bones, Vampire Academy etc…) learn from how it can be done right.

If you were the slightest bit interested in the movie. See it.
If you enjoyed Twilight, see it. (I will resist another dig here, but…yeah just see it)
If you like teen romance, magic, good vs evil. See it.

Just in general see it and see it with friends.

Darke Reviews | Les Miserables (2012)

Posted by

2

So, let’s talk Les Miserables.

I know my site partner didn’t like it. Not her thing, me however, cried about every third song thanks to the delivery and performances by the actors within.

Director Tom Hooper (The Kings Speech) took a lot of risks in his approach to this film. He cast mostly unknown to (hollywood) actors through the film that would have to deliver some of the most gut wrenching songs to hit broadway. He then made a very controversial decision to record the actors singing live, rather than ADR in a booth much later.

Typically when a musical is done for film, the actors will sing live as they are being filmed, then go into a booth weeks or months earlier to be recorded for the voice overlay in the movie. Not this time. What happens with this style is that you now have all the raw emotion that the actor is delivering in face and body language brought out in the voice as well.

Starting with Hugh Jackman as Jean valJean’s, no stranger to broadway, in Valjean’s Soliloquy, brought all the range of emotion from anger to remorse in a single song. It was near perfect for someone like me who had never seen Colm Wilkinson perform this live.

Anne Hathaway’s performance as Fantine. I don’t know where to begin? When Uma Thurman played her in the non musical version a few years back I was excited to see her fate. Now…I was moved to tears by the raw nerve level pain she expressed in I dreamed a dream. The trailer only conveys part of it folks. You truly feel for this woman and it’s all Hathaway.

As much as I would want to NOT talk about Sasha Baron Cohen or Helena Bonham Carter, they both turned in an above average and completely deplorable performance as the Thenardiers. They were everything that they needed to be and more. Well cast, well sung, well performed.

Samantha Barks, who also played Eponine in the West End production, nearly had me bawling with every word during On My Own, Heart Full of Love and her final song. She is possibly the most tragic character in the film next to Fantine.

The other performers such as Russel Crowe’s Javert who you actually feel sorry for by his final song, Eddie Redmayne (Marius), Aaron Tveit (Enjolras) and David Huttlestone (Gavroche), all perform as well but none of them quite drive the same level of emotion as Jackman, Hathaway and Barks.

The movie, as epic and moving as it is (half our theatre was in tears) is not without its flaws. Amanda Seyfried’s performance as Cosette didn’t move me at all, and in fact hurt a few times with her high notes. I would have preferred Emma Watson (who had also auditioned for the part). I do admit I am not a fan of the elder Cosette or her songs in the play to begin with so, your mileage may vary.

I was not as moved by Empty Chairs as I had hoped, but that may be my own expectations after the Jonas brother performance during the 25th anniversary concert. The desire to be “realistic” in the escape from the barricade was nauseating to say the least. Finally, the director and cinematographers desire to do close ups for most every solo was a bit overdone by the end of the film. I like Hugh Jackman, I didn’t need to know where every pore on his face was with 40 feet of face!

If you are a lover of the original novel, it’s musical adaptation or musicals in general, this is an absolutely must see film. You should have stopped reading this review and been in line already! If you enjoy a good tear-jerker, good drama and the story this tells go see it!

If you aren’t a fan of any of the above, steer clear. This film will likely not do it for you.

Darke Reviews | Lawless (2012)

Posted by

0

I spent a bit of time thinking how to give a reader a comprehensive review of Lawless. John Hillcoat (The Road) and Nick Cave (musician from Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds) have taken a story of three brothers in Appalachian Virginia during prohibition and made it a nearly heartless endeavor. I expected Untouchables from the trailers, I got instead the a watered down redneck version of Bonnie and Clyde.

Set in the heart of the Prohibition era we are introduced to the Bondurant brothers, Howard (Jason Clarke), Forrest (Tom Hardy), and the runt of the litter Jack (Shia LeBouf). The brothers decide to tell the ‘nancy’ city boy detective that they will not pay off anyone to continue to run their moonshine operation. The war ensues. I wish I could say the movie had more complexity than that, but at the end of the day it does not. There are subplots within the film that make you either smile or want to beat Shia into a pulp.

When I said the film is nearly heartless that is true, the only true heart of the film comes from the sublime performance brought by Tom Hardy. If you are a Tom Hardy completist, you need to see this film. In his role as Forrest, you see a man of many layers, few words and a pair of handy brass knuckles. When he is on screen you not only need to watch him for the subtlety he puts into the performance, but you want to watch him for all he brings. Even his relationship with city girl turned country girl Maggie (Jessica Chastain), brings levels of emotion to the film that just sort of is a paint by numbers affair.

I have read reviews where they praise Shia for his acting. I wonder what film they watched. I saw much of the usual Shia antics believing he knows better than everyone around him and everyone but him being forced to pay a high, and in one notable case the ultimate, price.

The final beats of the movie seem to take away from all the trial and tribulation enforced by the past two hours leaving me feeling wholly unsatisfied. I overall walked out of the film going “So that happened…” or..”Meh”

Give Lawless a pass, unless you have a love affair with any of the actors within.