dgefuller Reviews

Red State (2011)

Disappointing

[8 September 2011]

Kevin Smith's attempt to be known for anything other than his New Jersey comedies is admirable, if only for the fact he is striking out into such massively different territory.

First things first. 'Red State' is not a terrible film, but it's not a great film either. There are aspects of it that feel very much like traditional Kevin Smith- the penultimate scene in which Goodman's ATF field leader is assessed has some pretty broad statements about how authorities have handled religious fanaticism, homegrown terrorism etc and the drawn out sermon in act 1 also satirises Bible belt fundamentalism; and there are parts that feel like someone else is having a go behind the camera- the palpable tension and desperation of the teenage boys held hostage creates a fearful atmosphere reminiscent of 'Eden Lake', with lots of dead ends and revelations of human failure.

Ultiamtely, human failure is what it feels like 'Red State' is about. I expected a brutal assessment of Evangelical nut jobs like Waco, I didn't expect violence to played for laughs (I was anticipating a groundbreaking straight edged suspense horror- that's what I'd been lead to believe in the marketing, more fool me). What happens here is the three teenage boys who are lined up to be victims (and the closest things to protagonists in the movie) are on a mission to hook up with an older lady in a trailer so that all three of them can have sex with her by way of an online invitation. They don't sound like very nice boys. They hit the sheriff's car, but he doesn't do anything because he's receiving oral sex from a Mexican, despite being married. Not a very nice thing to do. The boys have been set up by evangelical mass murderers who kill homosexuals and call Mexicans 'wetbacks'. Not very nice at all. And the evangelical mass murderers kill anyone who gets close to finding out what they're up to, which further complicates their morality- are they really doing this for God, or are they just after an excuse? The minister comments on the saturation of sin from the media, but is it not he who has been over-exposed to misinterpretation of the scriptures by those who fear difference and change? Then you have the ATF, who are a bunch of incompetent, uncaring gun carriers- and the only one who seems to have conscience (Goodman) eventually folds to his unseen superior's commands to KILL EVERYONE and states that he'll need something in writing to stand behind. Not very noble.

Basically, everyone in this film is pretty damn low, with the exception of the children who don't have a clue what's going on.

The confusion into what type of film it is stems from, as I said, the 'Eden Lake' style dread, and the flat political satire of the ATF side of things. The horror literally runs into a foray of bullets from the satire, and from there things get a bit messy and unfocused.

It's hard to get a take on quality of performances either, as the characters are part of some rushed ensemble sketch show and are never really given room to develop. There are some great potential 'seeds' of characters, but nobody gets to grow.

It's not the religious exploitation piece you expected, it's certainly not the action thriller that some of the marketing suggests, and it's a bit of a disappointment that the terror of it all is glossed over so quickly. It could have been a wonderful essay on the inner-workings of religious extremism, but it ends up just being a half-baked shoot out shot with video cameras from Argos.

Like I said, it's not awful, but it could have been so much more- especially from a know-it-all like Smith. Just goes to show that a film fanatic isn't always the best choice for bringing a subject to the screen. But hey, it's a hell of a lot better than 'Cop Out'.

Scream 4 (2011)

Stab in the dark: more gash than slash...

[2/10 · 24 April 2011]

If anyone in horror deserves a stab at critiquing horror remakes, it must be Wes Craven (Elm Street, Hills Have Eyes, and Last House on the Left... all fairly recent)- and after the groundbreaking self-awareness of Scream, who is more qualified to attempt such a post mortem?

If this is a post-modern exploration of horror remakes, perhaps it's intentionally awful to reflect that remakes are usually sub-par. If, however, it's an attempt at creating a convincing horror sequel that lives up to the reputation of its predecessors then it's sorely lacking in quality.

Just to get to the point: this instalment is an insult to the original (like so many horror movies- perhaps this is intentional? After all, Elm Street just got a remake- which tarnished any memories of the original Freddy caper- is it really necessary for Krueger to be a paedophile for the audience to fear him? Is that frightening or just simply unpleasant?).

There are no surprises- in fact it's quite likely that the ideas you have while watching the film will be far superior to anything that unfolds on screen- and whereas I always believed Scream 3 was weaker than earlier instalments on purpose, it feels like this film has been crafted by a hack amateur.

For Wes Craven fans, this film isn't even better than Cursed. I don't think anyone will be disappointed, the general consensus when this franchise resurrection was announced was that it was a desperate move to squeeze more cash out of a story that was wrapped up 10 years ago, part of a self-aware post-modern teen pop movement that has been done to death and can't even be assessed ironically because that's what the whole thing was about. It's the same joke done in like David Arquette's head with a bedpan (spoiler?).

Ghostface has lost all its anonymous terror thanks to Scary Movie (a franchise that lives better in recent cultural memory to be honest- not for the better!), and frankly I got bored of people being stabbed. There's none of the tension, none of the ferocity and just a pale imitation of the humour of the original, seminal Craven masterpiece.

Alien: Resurrection (1997)

It's not Alien 4, it's a new beginning

[6/10 · 8 November 2010]

I've always been surprised as to how much negativity Alien Resurrection has generated. Like its direct predecessor, it is a much maligned piece of cinema. Unlike Alien3, however, Resurrection doesn't descend further into the harrowing nightmare that ended with Ripley's death; it completely shifts the paradigms of the series.

You could easily view this film as something apart from the previous three. It doesn't even have Ripley in it, not really- it's a clone (one of eight), and Sigourney Weaver doesn't play her like she's Ripley, either. Undeniably, they look similar these two protagonists, but that is pretty much the only link. Other than the blood-thirsty aliens stalking the corridors of a military space station- which itself finally delivers on the idea of what might happen should 'The Company' (or at least 'a company' since Weyland-Yutani are no more 250 years into the future) get hold of alien DNA and mess about with it. It raises some really interesting ideas about the nature of the creature itself (how, exactly, do you clone a parasite from the host's blood sample? That's a sci-fi concept waiting to be explored), not to mention their more 'human' aspects (problem solving intelligence, for one, an implied sexual interest in their genetic grandmother- Ripley 8) making for some pretty nasty monsters.

That's the bad point really though, because ever since James Cameron took a load of machine guns to a colony of xenomorphs in 1986, they've lost the menace the creature had in the 1979 original. They are just teeth and claws to be dispatched, and perhaps it's intentional with regard to these aliens being a little bit human, but they look far too organic (they even seemed to have developed goat legs, which doesn't make such sense, but perhaps it's for artistic flare, and the creatures do look very good, just not as good as they used to).

Alien Resurrection really isn't business as usual, but then every film in the series has been different, so why not have a European black comedy thrown in, too? Personally, I love Jeunet's touch; despite his language barriers at the time, he injects great humour into the proceedings, without ridiculing the hallowed science fiction saga, and that is thanks to Joss Wedon's script. He's been incredibly vocal about his disappointment with the project, but Jeunet's visual style lends itself incredibly well to science fiction, creating a grubby, dystopian future an age away from the clean white space station of Aliens and a darn sight more believable. If man as a species takes to the stars, the universe will be filthy, and that is on display here in abundance.

There are some fantastic set pieces(although the underwater sequence's CGI has dated in the last 13 years), and a brave attempt at taking the series in a new and frightening direction with the love it/hate it (mostly people seem to hate it) Newborn creature, born directly from the (sadly under-used) Queen's womb inherited from the genetic crossover (so when do we get to see Ripley laying eggs?).

Like Alien3 before it, it takes up the reigns from an ending nobody really knows how to develop the series from. Sure, it would have been nice that Hicks and Newt made it. And sure, it might have been nice if Ripley hadn't died- but this series has been taking risks since the beginning. Captain Dallas should have been the hero way back in 1979, but he buys it halfway in. Ridley Scott pulls a Psycho on us, and we love it. Every time anyone else tries anything against the grain in this franchise, it's been met with disdain. The most popular entry into the series (Aliens) is the least subversive, all guns and war and even a happy ending. It's a masterclass in scifi action, sure, but I think Alien Resurrection is probably the bravest film of the four. It sort of writes itself into a hole at the end, but we've been there before with this series. I'd like to know what could happen next.

Bizarre, grotesque, frightening and equal parts hilarious, beautiful and bold, Alien Resurrection is a film that has been brutalised by fans and critics alike; even by those who made it. It takes risks, and the result is a subversive and entertaining b-move schlock-fest with European sensibilities and an incredible visual flare (like Fincher, it doesn't matter how much a studio suppresses the choices of Jeunet, his style is too powerful to be completely oppressed).

Alien was horror. Aliens was action. Alien3 was foreboding drama. Alien Resurrection is outlandish, kinetic and occasionally insane science fiction. You should give it another chance. But I still don't know why the aliens are brown in this one.

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)

Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

[10/10 · 30 October 2010]

Scott Pilgrim has met the girl of his dreams, Romona Flowers. Now, he must face her seven evil exes if he is to keep dating her. Now imagine this love story is taking place inside a souped up Nintendo Entertainment System with some of the finest indie music the world has to offer, lovingly directed by the world's biggest geek and edited to perfection by joy pad wielding insaniacs intent on blowing up your eyes with colours.

This film is the pinnacle of everything an immersion in pop culture can be. From the parody of the typical 'love against adversity' journey of any typical film, 'Scott Pilgrim' takes the idea of the journey and turns into an epic QUEST. What's more, it's refreshing that the hero of the piece is fundamentally flawed: pursuing a girl while in a relationship with another, however tame that relationship might be, is a basic rule of social villainy- and yet Scott Pilgrim is that awkward hero; not following the laws of what is right, rather going for what he wants and ignoring the consequences. That the protagonist is imperfect, selfish and thoughtless makes him more identifiable as a genuine human being rather than a pastiche of unachievable ideals, and anchors the film's emotional core against the absolute insanity that unfolds.

Michael Cera is at his finest here. He is one of those comic actors who has an act and usually sticks with it- even reverting back to it in "Youth in Revolt"- but here, Cera is not the meek nice guy. He still looks and sounds like Cera, but he's not the smart, sensitive boy we've come to know. He's fatally flawed and does bad things to good people on impulse. Like real people tend to on occasion. Further grounding comes from Kieran Culkin, a revelation as the straight man (so to speak) of the piece and one of several excellent supporting roles peppered throughout this character-packed story (Brandon Routh and Chris Evans can battle for the title of the best evil ex, but Tom Jane showing up as a member of the vegan police for about 20 seconds just blew my mind). Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Romona Flowers is so inexplicably cool you go against your gut and start pushing Pilgrim to fight for her (she even manages to flex some acting muscles, too- ranging from hardened introvert to heart-on-sleeve vulnerability to giant Thor-hammer smashing aggression).

Everything about this film is effortlessly cool, from the fantasy fight scenes straight out of Tekken, one of many video game references that the film is saturated in (a dream sequence involves a flourishing arrangement of music from Zelda to great effect). The use of video games within the film could arguably be suggested a critique of our obsession with electronic influences on our lives, but I'm just guessing that the reason they used all of that stuff is because it just looks amazing- it sounds amazing too, probably one of the best contemporary soundtracks I've ever heard (thanks to contributions from Metric, Beck and uber-producer Nigel Godrich).

On a technical level, this is Edgar Wright's finest achievement, harking back to the the heady days of sitcom 'Spaced' but with a few million dollars to really push the limits- and I don't believe he wasted a single penny.

From the devastating reaction to sunlight (blissfully over the top comic-book framing) on an early morning, and the scuzzy bass that centres the film's soundtrack, you'll come out of this still not believing you just saw this movie. Your brain won't let you believe it's real. Well it's not, but it is a film. It has been made, with loving devotion to its source material- which as to why anyone would even try and commit that to the screen is beyond me, but Edgar Wright just did it. I think he can safely assume his place as one of the most unique and brilliant filmmakers in the industry right now, with this film as a portfolio promising what visions will come next.

This film is perfect. There is literally nothing wrong with any of it. As far as the genre of 'comic-book adaptations' goes (which itself is ridiculous, you would throw every film based on a book into the same section at HMV- Jaws and Pride and Prejudice aren't the same now, are they?) this is one of the finest, most standout pieces made. As a fantasy adventure it's even credible, remaining resolutely laid back and lo-fi despite it's impeccable visual style.

Just... outstanding.

Jonah Hex (2010)

Wild Wild West II

[2/10 · 29 October 2010]

A western revenge thriller starring Josh Brolin, John Malkovich and Michael Fassbender? Sounds amazing, right? With the exception of Hex's make-up and a horse with Gatling guns strapped to its sides, it's really not so great.

Brolin has all the charisma to carry this off, but talks through his teeth to the point of a Clint Eastwood parody (though with half his face missing I suppose his speech should be impeded somewhat) and Malkovich pretty much does Willem Dafoe in Speed 2: brilliant character actor, terrible character.

Fassbender? Well, he must've realised he was in a bad movie and thought it would be a good idea to chow down on the scenery. Way, way, WAY over the top- but in a cowboy movie where the hero talks to the dead (on occasion) things will go that way.

Potentially, this could have been Sergio Leone with a bit of horror thrown in, or at least the Neveldene and Taylor version that it started out as (what they wanted to do that was so awful that THIS is the replacement is beyond me- but hey, Warner Bros are familiar with inferior replacements- Exorcist prequels anyone?).

The opening sequence draws (badly- it looks awful) on the comic book origins, with a really obvious set up for a revenge hook- something that could have been better established (do we always have to start with an origin? can't we learn history later rather than at the expense of structure?) rather than treating the audience like a bunch of idiots who can't figure things out for themselves.

The action is explosive, yet somehow really dull and limp- the opening assault on a small town that double crossed Hex is just devoid of any threat or tension or anything, really, that could make it interesting- not even the Q type character with his guns (Smith), which all look clunky and ugly rather than ingenious.

Megan Fox does what Megan Fox does, and Will Arnett boggles the mind as to why he took a break from comedy to involve himself in what is effectively, for Warner Bros at least, Wild Wild West 2.

There's a couple of Neveldene & Taylor moments left in- Hex's recovery at the hands of the 'injuns' that rescued him originally is actually hilarious, and Fassbender's fate being an exploitation of Hex's 'special' abilities is quite smart. But that, based on their other movies, is solely down to them rather than the degenerate studio puppet that took over this poorly executed, badly edited and- for Brolin's career as a leading man- tragic farce.

The Singing Detective (2003)

Good, but not as subversive as it thinks it is...

[6/10 · 19 October 2010]

The film plays out like a Technicolour fever dream as reality meets fiction meets fantasy through the eyes of Robert Downey Jr's Dan Dark, a long-suffering author with an eye-watering painful looking skin condition.

Downey is on top form, and the gradual erosion of the boundaries between fantasy and reality is extremely effective as characters from the page walk into Dark's real world and vice versa.

His illness represents the decay apparent in his life since his difficult childhood, and all the clever metaphors therein are exploited beyond the obvious.

Downey is, as always, fantastic- the scenes with Mel Gibson a delight, and Robin Wright Penn exudes a vulnerable warmth in her role as his long suffering wife. Adrien Brody's presence is superfluous; still when he is on screen he's pretty darn good.

It's a film that's not as clever as it thinks it is, though- all that smart symbolism is explored beyond the plot of the story until it becomes an exercise in showing you how to be clever on film, though failing because it's so obvious.

Great performances, and all in all a wonderfully bold- yet fragile staging- of an a descent into illness and redemption, but flawed in it's brash attempt to overwhelm the audience with clever twists and turns and techniques which ultimately give the impression it's trying far too hard to be subversive.

Batman: Under the Red Hood (2010 Video)

Batman cartoons for grown ups!

[8/10 · 16 October 2010]

DC, Batman in particular, have quite a reputation when it comes to their animated endeavours. Take "Batman: The Animated Series", for example; a kids TV show full of action and adventure yes, but also one of the finest explorations of Batman and his Rogue's Gallery psychology- the borderline heartbreaking Two-Face and Clayface story arcs, and possibly the most frightening and unpredictable incarnation of the Joker... and that beautiful art deco style; not to mention the score- the opening titles lifted from Danny Elfman's rousing 1989 theme, or the soaring elegance of Shirley Walker's theme that replaced it. The series was such a triumph that it even garnered itself a cinematic outing- the simply breathtaking "Mask of the Phantasm"; a mystery thriller about a masked vigilante taking on Gotham's organised crime with some unsavoury methods and a sinister link with the Joker... hang on a minute.

That's also the premise of "Under the Red Hood"; a more modern, less stylised take on Batman. It's far removed from the 30's curves of that 90's series, and a leap from the standards-slipping Justice League era.

For anyone who is a Batman fan, you'll know the story of Jason Todd. And you'll be happy to know it's been done justice on the small screen in this dark thriller, taking its queues from Nolan's Batman (albeit with some slightly silly moments- Amazo, for example) with a principle villain in the Black Mask; a perfect fit for the Dark Knight's vision of a relentless storm of crime and fear engulfing a corrupted city.

I was expecting a kiddy-friendly breezy little film, but "Under The Red Hood" delivers to the older members of the audience too. In fact at times it feels more like it's aimed at them; the themes of drug dealing and the occasionally shocking violence (the opening scene depicting the death of the second Robin is especially brutal) is perhaps for some too much- but why can't we have an animated Batman for a more mature audience? That it's new territory for Batman is probably the issue, given that violence in animation is hardly a new concept (Manga, anyone?). But if anyone's followed the comics, you'll find that very little of it is really suitable for a pre-teen audience (Grant Morrison's recent run, for example- brilliant, yet relentlessly dark), so an animated Batman with blood and death shouldn't be too much of a surprise- though it really was to me. Not only that, but the maturity of the writing, the handling of the emotional complexities of Bruce and Jason's relationship- this is a Batman movie I would love to see in live action, it's really that good. Sure, it's not "The Dark Knight", but with a few tweaks it could have been a successor to that accolade somewhere down the line.

Dark, foreboding, well cast (although DiMaggio is no Hamill when it comes to voicing Joker and Greenwood's Batman is going to disappoint some Kevin Conry fans, even though it's still pretty good) and just beautifully executed- and treated like a real film, too, not a quick fix to plug up the hole between the cinematic outings (Marvel, I'm looking at you- your animated films are cheap and nasty).

I hadn't really considered watching any of these animated 'events' since "Batman/Mr Freeze: Sub-Zero" and the equally weak "Mystery of the Batwoman", but this film is just in a different league. It's actually quite fantastic, and if you're a Batman fan you won't be disappointed. Sure, the animation isn't the finest ever committed to disc, but it's fluid, graceful and expressive enough to carry what is essentially a tremendous effort from Warner Bros., worthy to sit alongside "Gotham Knight"; a film that only surpasses "Under The Red Hood" on looks.

All in all, really very good. Great, even. And it was a pleasure to finally see Black Mask animated, and Jason Todd's tragic story given some screen time. It's a super hero tragedy of Shakespearian magnitude and I'm surprised nobody thought of using it sooner. great stuff!!!

Resident Evil: Afterlife (2010)

"It's easily as good as 'Land of the Dead'!" This is going to go well then...

[5/10 · 15 October 2010]

If you're watching this film then you know the drill:

Act 1: There's no hope for humanity! Act 2: I've met some lovely people, perhaps there's hope after all! Act 3: Ah, no... no I was right, there's no hope left, just a terrible conspiracy from a greedy company

(repeat acts 2-3 as necessary).

It's a familiar recipe, and one that nobody here shies away from exploiting time and again. Still, 'Afterlife' is probably the best sequel to a film that was so poor it shouldn't have had one- let alone three. That being said, it only makes it as good as "Land of the Dead". How bad, I wonder, was Romero's screenplay for the original 'Resident Evil' that it was rejected in favour of this formulaic franchise?

Though, like some criminally insane lunatic with an obsessive compulsive disorder, I have inexplicably been drawn to watch all four of these films. Some say Resident Evil: Extinction was unwatchable; it- like the first- bared some resemblance to the first two games from which it is adapted, the events from said shoot 'em-ups happening as a backdrop. And why not? It is an adaptation after all, and it's nice to have surprises. Shame then that's the only one the series offers.

The action here is okay- but you could easily lose about 20 minutes of the running time by simply removing the slow motion bullets, kicks in the face and swinging/running away from things that are exploding. The director (Anderson, returning after a brief hiatus from the series to run 'Alien' and 'Predator' into the ground simultaneously and the shockingly watchable 'Death Race') loves looking at shiny guns, too- so we have to look a lot of shiny guns.

The 'infected' are a bit boring (compared to the pants-wettingly terrifying ones in '28 Days/Weeks Later') and they seem to have a great deal of difficulty eating anything because they have four very long tongues with teeth embedded in them (a bit like the dog out of John Carpenter's 'The Thing'- a bit too much like that, actually). Furthermore, they look completely unbelievable (as if these zombies are walking around with a bad special effect stuck to their faces) and it's a gimmick that gets exhausted pretty quickly (Del Toro did something similar in 'Blade 2' as well, except he's a genius and doesn't submit to overkill).

The villain wears sunglasses ALL THE TIME and has a big black trench coat. Frankly, that's so clichéd it's beyond funny now: it's actually a little bit embarrassing, like that guy at college who STILL dresses like Neo from the Matrix. Seriously, it's been eleven years. Can we stop ripping that film off please? If it's not fashion, then it's the slow mo and the half-baked bullet time effects. It wouldn't be so bad if they weren't so terribly executed.

The highlight of the film is the unexpected appearance of Neil from 'The Inbetweeners' sister. The plot's the same as always, there's nothing new on display here, there's not even any innovation in terms of death- everything gets bitten on the neck or gets shot several times- because guns ARE the solution.

It's the best of the four, but it's still a sub-standard action/horror flick which delivers on neither action or horror. It's been bested by other, smarter films. I wouldn't mind the film being so dumb, so mind numbingly stupid if only it wasn't asking the audience to take it so seriously and this misguided self-belief that it's the greatest action/horror franchise of all time. It's the best video game inspired franchise of all time, but then again I think it might be the only video-game inspired franchise that hasn't been helmed by Uwe Boll (most other adaptations don't get sequels for damn good reasons- I don't see how Resident Evil was any better than, say, 'Doom'- which will never get a follow up).

Also, the trailer gives away something that the film tries to keep as a surprise, given how the opening scene plays out... although it's pretty obvious to be fair.

I can't say I'm disappointed, I knew it was going to be poor. And I will probably watch the fifth one too. Like I said, it's an illness.

The Other Guys (2010)

Shift in tone for McKay, bring on The Boys!

[7/10 · 13 October 2010]

Adam McKay could make terrible films for the rest of his career if he so chose, because the man is responsible for 'Anchorman'- the defining comedy of a generation and one of the funniest films ever made (FACT). He made Will Ferrell an international superstar, and hasn't made a movie without him since.

Ferrell has a lot of stick, actually, and some of it's quite unfair. He gets a lot of criticism for "playing the same role" time and again. Well, that's simply not true. Ron Burgandy is almost a separate entity, and here he plays a dull, introverted detective who differs from all three previous McKay collaborations as much as they do from one another. It's an understated comic performance for the most part, allowing (oscar winning) Mark Whalberg an opportunity for some laughs- and the two surprisingly gel quite well on screen.

The action-comedy genre is populated with cop/buddy movies: Rush Hour, 48 Hours, The Man (urgh) and the recent Cop Out- but what's striking about McKay's effort is that it's tonally more similar to 48 Hours; both films having a streak of darkness running through them. The comedy is sometimes black (Ferrell attempting to stop a potential 'jumper' from plummeting to his death with words of encouragement- and failing), sometimes heroically juvenile (the departure of Jackson and Johnson's super-cops is so funny to look at I laugh simply when I remember it in my head) but pretty much always funny.

It has its pitfalls though- Ray Stevenson (so likable in 'Rome', so repugnant here) is criminally underused in this movie as one of a pantheon of potential threats, and Michael Keaton too (although a police captain who also works at Bed Bath and Beyond is a twist on his usual dual-personality roles) is always welcome to more screen time. Perhaps the romantic entanglements could have been sacrificed in exchange for more time with these characters and the wonderful Steve Coogan (Whalberg's love interest serves no purpose but to facilitate a mildly amusing recurring joke wherein Whalberg has learned ballet and the harp during his childhood in order to mock the 'fairies', and Eva Mendez is trying a bit too hard to be funny).

McKay has played down the "whacky" aspect of his comedy in order to produce a functional and entertaining action/comedy; a (slightly) more mature tone and some impressive skill with action and effects sequences. Some may have previously suggested his landing of "The Boys" adaptation was a mistake- after watching 'The Other Guys', you can see how it is a bridge between his previous films and what is to come. I think he'll handle it magnificently, and given that subject matter it will hopefully inspire him to a whole new world of possibilities within his own original material.

I was quietly impressed by this film; a well engineered action-comedy flick which surpasses most others in the genre (namely Cop Out). Except for 'Pineapple Express', but that's a personal choice.

Machete (2010)

Grindhouse: The Revenge

[8/10 · 13 October 2010]

Remember when Tarantino's 'Death Proof' and Rodriguez's 'Planet Terror' were going to be a double feature called 'Grindhouse'? If you were one of the lucky who actually got to see 'Grindhouse' in the cinema (all 4 butt-numbing hours of it), you may have seen the 'fake' trailers. If you picked up the 'Planet Terror' DVD (which, to be honest, you should have by now) then you will have seen the surviving mock trailer for a film that never was called 'Machete'. As you may or may not know (although you probably do if you're even remotely interested in this film), this film is the adaptation of that trailer. Yes, somewhere in the world of film someone has finally made a movie based on an advert (although in all fairness, this was an advert for something that didn't exist- I'd like to think of it as reverse engineering a film rather than scraping the barrel of ideas).

If you like straight-to-DVD action movies, or 70's revenge thrillers, then this piece of pulp entertainment is for you. If you enjoyed the self-aware schlockfest that was 'Planet Terror', you're probably who this movie is meant for. If, however, you are looking for a rich, thought-provoking conspiracy thriller, you might want to try 'Edge of Darkness' instead, because you'll get no reward here.

Like it's 'Grindhouse' counterparts, you can't really define 'Machete' as good or bad. If you look at other films in the same sort of vein (Ninja Squad, for example) it's head and shoulders above a lot of them. In fact, it's refreshingly cheap and simple. It's big, dumb, macho fun- full of guns, violence, girls and VENGEANCE!!! It's pure, b-movie entertainment and Danny Trejo seems to be having fun in a rare leading role (to be honest, he is a pretty fearsome looking chap and fits the part perfectly).

The fight scenes (for the most part death scenes, really) are hilariously over-the-top, and our titular hero makes great use of his environments (picking up tools in a hospital, Machete is advised "we use that to scrape the bones clean"... he also makes great use of some unguarded gardening equipment). And frankly, the way he escapes from the hospital is just inspired.

The supporting cast knows their place- Alba, Rodriguez, Segal (showing some rare humility with a bit of self-parody- I hope)... as well as some star turns from Jeff Fahey's hair all fit in nicely, although Cheech Marin's potentially excellent sidekick priest, Don Johnson's fascist boarder cop and De Niro's racist senator are sadly underused (yeah, that's right- not enough Don Johnson). Lindsay Lohan shows up to get naked, and that's pretty much all she's there for. But then considering the rest of the film, it makes perfect sense.

There's not really much to say about 'Machete'. What you see is what you get- booze, broads and bullets. It's pulp entertainment in the Grindhouse mold; lo-fi, brazen and balls-to-the-wall stupid fun. You could argue it's a post-modern homage to the low budget action thrillers of the 70's and 80's, or you could just relax and enjoy a film that isn't trying to test you or challenge you and failing, a film that isn't trying to be state-of-the-art tech, a film that isn't trying to insult your intelligence with stupid twists- a film that is just a hell of a lot of dumb fun. Look at the poster: that's the film you're going to see.

Splice (2009)

Potentially excellent drama ruined by insistence of horror

[5/10 · 10 October 2010]

There's something really quite fascinating about stories where people play God. The premise of 'Splice' is a truly terrifying one; as two arrogant scientists (Brody and Polley) go against all advice to advance their pioneering genetic work which quickly spirals beyond even their own wildest expectations.

It's rare you see a film these days that walks that line between social commentary, drama and horror- most settling for condescending moral lessons or brutal violence. Once in a while though, you get a film that at least tries to do more; and like Cronenberg's 'The Fly' before it, 'Splice' has a damn good go at it.

The themes are obvious from the outset; the moral and ethical implication of manipulating things that we don't understand- specifically human genetics and science we just don't fully comprehend yet and taking careless risks in exchange for quick progress (refreshingly, Clive and Elsa- our geneticists, are interested in the benefits of the science rather than the quick bucks, although of course their benefactors are not so inclined). The first act of the film is actually quite brilliant- the quick establishment of the genetic programme, the introduction of the minimal (and yet somehow underused) cast, and the lightning fast appearance of Dren. Who or what exactly is our protagonist is hard to clarify; we route for the maligned Dren, forced to live in the shadows, or for the scientists taking on maternal and (forced) paternal duties? No, not really any of them- Dren would be a hell of a lot more likable if she didn't make idiotic beeping noises like a lizard ALL THE TIME (this is a mistake, they just don't fit the character at all), and it becomes apparent that she is a subject of her science- an animal that adheres to all the frightening changes that have plagued the scientists in their experiments before.

Then, there's some nasty stuff that's just for the sake of it (Brody's completely reluctant to have any involvement with Dren- despite her drawing lovely pictures of him, and then all of a sudden he's becoming sexually obsessed with a sub-human chicken-legged mutant- a reversal of which happens to Polley once science does its thing), and a couple of characters who show up just to die- which would be fine, except they don't even have a remotely entertaining dispatching (it doesn't even happen on screen).

The message in the film is clear, the first act is great, but the film eventually descends into a standard last act horror movie (complete with a hook that could lead us kicking and screaming into Fly II territory), and is marred by those stupid and unnecessary animal noises, and the actions of characters that happens against their identities and bypassing any reasonable development.

To be honest, if they had just focused on making a sci-fi drama (like the eighties mini series 'First Born' which deals with similar themes) they would have been a lot better off, but someone had the idea of sticking horror in it. The ideas are horrifying enough without having to lower them to killing and interspecies relations (the emotional relationship that Polley strives for is heartbreaking enough without going any further- it that which just kills the film, and leaves you hoping nobody walks in when that scene is on screen if you're watching at home by yourself- you may have a job explaining it).

So all in all, the first half is brilliant, which makes the conclusion all the more disappointing. The leads are great, but in that second half they just change character as if a new production team took over, as much as Brody tries to resist the shift in his character and sticks with the exasperated introvert (like in Darjeeling Limited), when he should've become a twisted mess (like in The Jacket).

The Losers (I) (2010)

The Z-Team

[4/10 · 6 October 2010]

Having never read the comic book from which "The Losers" is adapted, I went into it with no preconception of what to expect- other than it had an eclectic cast who had previously given some entertaining turns (Chris Evans in "Fantastic Four", but also showing an ability to play reserved and affected in "Sunshine"), some revolutionary turns (Jeffrey Dean Morgan goes from "Grey's Anatomy" and "PS I Love You" to The Comedian in "Watchmen" and it couldn't have been played better) and the brilliant Idris Elba (the BBC's excellent crime drama, "Luther")- an actor with incredible screen presence.

From the opening scene, it's clear that this isn't about award-winning writing- it's an action movie and that's fine. So let's get some action- it's a little weak, to be honest; a bit like a straight-to-DVD version of the attack on the jungle camp in "Predator". The introduction of a villainous presence (later revealed to be, quite unthreateningly, Jason Patric) is rushed, and you can see a mile off what's going to happen to those kids when they get in that helicopter because far too much emphasis is put on Morgan's interest in their welfare, with his big "look at me, I'm a celebrity helping kids for charity" type expression. So, after several children are blown up instead of our illustrious titular 'losers', the scene is set: a crack-team of soldiers have been betrayed- forced to become fugitives (hang on a minute- that's the premise of "The A-Team"- the TV show as well as the abortion that was the film adaptation).

What follows afterwards isn't really given time to make sense, who or what Zoe Saldina is actually in this for isn't given enough background or emotional gravitas for us to care (perhaps if they cut out some slow motion they would have freed up about thirty minutes to develop that). Idris Elba looks like he wants to leave for the majority of the film, and the only person having any fun is Chris Evans, who is- as expected- the comic relief, which would be necessary only if Jason Patric wasn't swanning around trying to be menacing and ending up like a slightly dishevelled Jimmy Carr (nice suits though).

There's some other villain that the 'heroes' of the piece know, a relationship summed up in one sentence rather than given any room to develop into a grudge match that you would actually like to see played out (even "The Expendables" managed that much, whatever its naysayers claim), and a supporting cast of over-actors (is that guy even Indian? why is he pulling every racial stereotype if he is?!).

Ultimately, there are moments that are fun- but this film a series of clichés stitched together by a plot so thin the film keeps letting it slip through its fingers in exchange for what it perceives as style- an eight year old with his dad's camcorder, trying to emulate Joe Carnahan.

You get 4 stars for Elba being in it, but that's all you're getting. Even for a brainless action flick, this is a disappointment which leaves me still uncertain of Morgan's abilities (as the Comedian he was superb, but as special forces supposedly at the top of his game he doesn't cut it), but hasn't changed my opinions of Evans and Elba- both are still great at what they do. The less said about everyone else involved, the better (particularly the catastrophe that is 'Cougar').