Sunday, 24 February 2013
A Good Day to Die Hard
In 1988 the silver screen was introduced to the world’s most reluctant hero, John McClane. A New York police officer who finds himself stuck in a Los Angles skyscraper on Christmas Eve, fending off a dozen or so German terrorists and generally saving the day with the help a desk sergeant, a limo driver and a substandard Rolex watch.
Bruce Willis, hot off the success of Moonlighting, the television series that launched his career was given the role of McClane. The rest as they say is history. However things could have been entirely different if the role hadn’t first been turned down by the likes of Nick Nolte, Richard Gere and Robert De Niro.
The original is not only the best of the Die Hard films but is also regarded as one of the best action films ever made. It has become a legend and was for a long time the yard stick that all other action films were measured against. John McTiernan the director was in the form of his life, having just helmed Predator and went on to make The Hunt for Red October after Die Hard. The film also marked the big screen debut for Alan “shoot the glass” Rickman. A role that put him on the Hollywood map and played a large part in him being cast as the Sheriff of Nottingham in Robin Hood. However Die Hard has always been more than the sum of its parts. Based on a Novel by Roderick Thorp, it was at the time a unique story that didn’t open to much hype or fanfare. By today’s standards didn’t set the box office on fire. Its worldwide gross was less than one hundred million. Where it really started to gain traction via word of mouth was when it hit the video rental and retail stores…..
Twenty five years later and we find ourselves on the fifth film in the franchise. Twentieth Century Fox, knowing when they’re on to a good thing seem to keep throwing money at screenwriters and directors until they either relent and realise that “everybody has a price”. This also seems to be true of Mr Willis. After the third film Bruce went on the record as saying that he didn’t feel he could do anything else with the character. I wish he had stick to his principles as the forth and now fifth film are basically shadows of what came before.
You do get the feeling that Mr Willis is acting on autopilot in this film and is it’s being treated as an exercise in how to earn as much as possible with as little effort as possible.
The majority of this most recent Die Hard film, which, in my humble opinion should have been called “Five Hard” takes places in Russia. McClane travels there to try and reconnect with his rebellious son, played by the Australian actor Jai Courtney, who as it turns out happens to work for the CIA and is trying to stop a nuclear weapons heist. And as plots go that’s about it. There are a few twists and turns along the way, including some signposted double crosses but this really does fall into the “leave your brain at the door” film category.
The Irish born director John Moore has been let loose with Hollywood films before with such grand and majestic titles like Behind Enemy Lines, Flight of the Phoenix and Max Payne but they’ve never really set the critical or box office world alight.
I think because of this and the fact Fox came along and said “would you like a crack at the fifth Die Hard film?” Mr Moore decided that he’d just take the script Skip Woods had provided (another Hollywood devotee that probably had could do better written on his high school report card) and use the Spinal Tap methodology and just turn up everything up to 11.
There are two major action set pieces in the film. The first is a car chase through the streets of Moscow that takes place in the first act of the film. The second is in the film’s third act climax and looks like it could have been storyboarded by a five year, who’d just been given a toy helicopter and truck for Christmas. Both set pieces seem to want to try and distract you from the fact the story is weak and the screenplay is so frail it could best be described as suffering from an asthma attack.
The other problem with the film is the McClane character. In the first three films at least, he was very much doing what he’s doing because he has to. In the last two films you really get the feeling that he’s doing this because he wants to. The reluctant hero has either started to believe his own press or he has taken out a life insurance policy that only pays out if he happens to be shot by an Ak47 or taken he’s taken out by an explosion involving Semtex. The problem is I keep having to come back to is the plot and the fact that there isn’t one in his movie. The forth film was about digital terrorism and trying to reconnect with his daughter. The fifth and current film centres on nuclear terrorists and trying to reconnect with his son. Not much of a leap when it comes to being creative as you can see.
I’m certain that there will, in the not too distant future, be a sixth Die Hard film and I can only hope that instead of just asking anyone to come up with a screenplay the executives at fox actually realise that you can’t just throw money at a problem to fix it. It doesn’t matter how big your bangs are or how many rounds of ammunition the production gets through, you have to have a story that works. However I do feel that the next film will take the path of least resistance and the plot will be written with the mantra “if it aint broke, don’t try to fix it” in mind. If I were a betting man I’d take myself off to my nearest bookmakers and have a five pound bet that John McClane has a twin brother that will turn out to be the villain of the piece and Bruce will end up playing both parts.
Sometimes the old adage of less is more can actually work. As I said at the start the First Die Hard film is regarded as an action classic and it doesn’t have that many big set pieces in it. In my opinion films will only work if you can hold the audiences interest and A Good Day To Die Hard didn’t hold mine at all. There was just too much going on without anything happening at all.
Twitter Review:
Trilogies are much better when they don’t have five parts. Overblown with a plot and script that are MIA.
#SayNoToSix
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1606378/?ref_=sr_1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVkzZD92cMQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61UqRmDjwgc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qxBXm7ZUTM (How it should be done!)
Thursday, 24 January 2013
Les Miserables
Musical Production Pitch:
Writer: I've got this great idea for a show.
Producer: Go on, I'm listening.
Writer: Well I'd like to make a musical from a novel by the French author Victor Hugo.
Producer: What's the plot.
Writer: Oh, it's amazing. It has French Revolution as its backdrop, it has a thief who becomes a mayor, the police, illegitimate daughters, heartbreak & unrequited love, suicide, loads of other deaths, suffering and a smattering of prostitution...
Producer: Mothership overcrowded was it?
Writer: No honestly, it'll be nothing short of spectacular!
Producer: If you ever go to see a mind reader, make sure you only pay half price.
Writer: But I haven't even told you the best part yet.
Producer: You don't say.
Writer: It'll be a shade under three hours long, we can charge about £100 a ticket and I want to call it The Miserables.
Producer: ....... Why have you come to my planet?
As a premise Les Miserables shouldn’t work. If someone came up to you and tried to get you to spend three hours wasting away your evening on the above proposal you’d either want to go hammered first or seriously contemplate becoming best friends with your new chemical pal Prozac before you even walked out of your own front door. With the possible exception of “Fiddler on the roof” I can’t think of another musical that comes even close to reaching the levels of pain and suffering we see witnessed here. And yes before anybody says anything, I am fully aware of Stomp!
The problem is that it does work and for the life of me I can’t put my finger on why. All though that said I think the main contributory reason for it being so popular is that it does have the “love conquers all” message plastered all over the last fifteen minutes. I also believe that romance sells, yes I’m sure I read that somewhere and if you throw in the odd good tune it would seem that you’ve pretty much got your own licence to print money. I amazed more people haven’t tried it themselves. The West-end should be packed to the rafters every evening with stories of woe wrapped around a good old Andrew Lloyd Webber tune. (Note to self, work on a musical based around banking at Canary Wharf, which includes liquidations, bankruptcy and the odd overpriced pint. Get Gary Barlow to right the songs and pitch the idea to Simon Cowell. Working title could be “The Isle of Dogs depression” or “Shares, Sex and Suffering”).
Anyway back to the film. Hugh Jackman plays the long suffering hero of the piece, Jean Valjean. At the beginning of the film we discover that he’s currently spending eighteen years in prison for stealing a loaf of broad. Let this be a lesson to everyone, Tesco’s will ALWAYS prosecute shoplifters. Whilst in prison Valjean is only referred to by number, which I shan’t repeat here just in case he becomes the victim of identity theft. He manages to get paroled and promptly breaks the conditions attached to this so he can start a new life and before you can say “hey, aren’t you really Wolverine?” he has become the owner of a factory and the mayor of a local town. The man responsible for releasing Jean Valjean on parole is a Javert, played by Russell Crowe. Now as it turns out little old Javert isn’t overly happy about Valjean disappearing and is more than a little determined to track him down. This determination does border on the obsessive at times and you do wonder if his time could be best used in other endeavours.
It is in the aforementioned factory that we find our next Hollywood A-lister Anne Hathaway. She plays Fantine, a hard working seamstress who tries to keep herself to herself but once word gets out that she is a mother things just go from bad to worse for her and Fantine loses her job. In doing so also loses her ability to send money to the people looking after her daughter. This lack of money and the love for her daughter forces her to make some very hard decisions, which ultimately lead her towards prostitution. Now for those of you who have haven’t seen the film or are unaware of the plot I won’t ruin the story of Fantine for you but I will say this. Anne Hathaway is a as close to guaranteed as you can get for picking up this year’s best supporting actress.
Now the more eagle eyed readers will have spotted that in that last paragraph I did promise that I wouldn’t reveal what happens to Fantine but having thought about it I have realised that there isn’t any way I can continue with the plot of the film unless I do, so here goes. She dies, pops her clogs, is bereft of life, goes belly up, starts to check out the grass from underneath, finally kicks the oxygen habit or if you want the pc version she becomes living-challenged.
On Fantines deathbed Valjean promises to look after her daughter Cosette as he feels he is partly responsible for her losing her job in the first place. Cosette is being looked after by two very unscrupulous characters Thenardier and his wife. They are both run an Inn together and aren’t interested in anybody’s wellbeing other than their own. The only exception to this would be for their own daughter Eponine. After some serious haggling and negotiating they agree to sell Cosette to Valjean and after another run in with Javert they leave for Paris to try and start a new life together.
Whilst living in Paris Cosette, played by Amanda Seyfried, happens to fall in love with a very charming young man Marius. Now please pay attention as there may be a test at the end. Marius is very keen on change and with his friends they plan to lead an uprising against the oppressive government. Now Eponine, who just happens to also now be in Paris is head over heels in love Marius but Marius having just met Eponine, is very much in love with her. The uprising that has been a long time in the making doesn’t exactly go to plan. Javert infiltrates their ranks and nearly stops the revolt but before you can say “hey, you’re only seven, how can you tell I’m an imposter?” he gets found out by a seven year old who accuses him of being an imposter and the crowd turn on him. Valjean offers to execute him but once they’re alone he sets Javert free. Now this really messes with Javert’s mind as he’s spent all of this life tracking Valjean down and can’t understand how he could do this. Long story short, Javert kills himself by doing the worst Tom Daley impression you have ever seen off a nearby bridge. All ends well and eventually after a few more plot twists and turn Cosette and Marius get married and live happily ever after.
Now a lot has been made of the singing and the songs in this film and all I will say is this, Hugh Jackman can sing, Anne Hathaway can carry a tune and Russell Crowe was great in the Gladiator. That should tell you everything you need to know about Les Miserables musically.
Oh bugger I’ve just remembered another musical that is a tad heavy when it comes to tugging on the heart strings, Blood Brothers. However unless someone decides to turn the Killing Fields into a musical Les Miserables is and always will be the big boy on the block when it comes to sorrow, grief and misery.
Twitter Review:
Songs, singing and suffering. If mental anguish is what you want on the silver screen then Les Miserables is for you.
#TissueMovie
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1707386/?ref_=sr_1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvzgxKHYFIc
http://lesmiserables-movie.co.uk/
Writer: I've got this great idea for a show.
Producer: Go on, I'm listening.
Writer: Well I'd like to make a musical from a novel by the French author Victor Hugo.
Producer: What's the plot.
Writer: Oh, it's amazing. It has French Revolution as its backdrop, it has a thief who becomes a mayor, the police, illegitimate daughters, heartbreak & unrequited love, suicide, loads of other deaths, suffering and a smattering of prostitution...
Producer: Mothership overcrowded was it?
Writer: No honestly, it'll be nothing short of spectacular!
Producer: If you ever go to see a mind reader, make sure you only pay half price.
Writer: But I haven't even told you the best part yet.
Producer: You don't say.
Writer: It'll be a shade under three hours long, we can charge about £100 a ticket and I want to call it The Miserables.
Producer: ....... Why have you come to my planet?
As a premise Les Miserables shouldn’t work. If someone came up to you and tried to get you to spend three hours wasting away your evening on the above proposal you’d either want to go hammered first or seriously contemplate becoming best friends with your new chemical pal Prozac before you even walked out of your own front door. With the possible exception of “Fiddler on the roof” I can’t think of another musical that comes even close to reaching the levels of pain and suffering we see witnessed here. And yes before anybody says anything, I am fully aware of Stomp!
The problem is that it does work and for the life of me I can’t put my finger on why. All though that said I think the main contributory reason for it being so popular is that it does have the “love conquers all” message plastered all over the last fifteen minutes. I also believe that romance sells, yes I’m sure I read that somewhere and if you throw in the odd good tune it would seem that you’ve pretty much got your own licence to print money. I amazed more people haven’t tried it themselves. The West-end should be packed to the rafters every evening with stories of woe wrapped around a good old Andrew Lloyd Webber tune. (Note to self, work on a musical based around banking at Canary Wharf, which includes liquidations, bankruptcy and the odd overpriced pint. Get Gary Barlow to right the songs and pitch the idea to Simon Cowell. Working title could be “The Isle of Dogs depression” or “Shares, Sex and Suffering”).
Anyway back to the film. Hugh Jackman plays the long suffering hero of the piece, Jean Valjean. At the beginning of the film we discover that he’s currently spending eighteen years in prison for stealing a loaf of broad. Let this be a lesson to everyone, Tesco’s will ALWAYS prosecute shoplifters. Whilst in prison Valjean is only referred to by number, which I shan’t repeat here just in case he becomes the victim of identity theft. He manages to get paroled and promptly breaks the conditions attached to this so he can start a new life and before you can say “hey, aren’t you really Wolverine?” he has become the owner of a factory and the mayor of a local town. The man responsible for releasing Jean Valjean on parole is a Javert, played by Russell Crowe. Now as it turns out little old Javert isn’t overly happy about Valjean disappearing and is more than a little determined to track him down. This determination does border on the obsessive at times and you do wonder if his time could be best used in other endeavours.
It is in the aforementioned factory that we find our next Hollywood A-lister Anne Hathaway. She plays Fantine, a hard working seamstress who tries to keep herself to herself but once word gets out that she is a mother things just go from bad to worse for her and Fantine loses her job. In doing so also loses her ability to send money to the people looking after her daughter. This lack of money and the love for her daughter forces her to make some very hard decisions, which ultimately lead her towards prostitution. Now for those of you who have haven’t seen the film or are unaware of the plot I won’t ruin the story of Fantine for you but I will say this. Anne Hathaway is a as close to guaranteed as you can get for picking up this year’s best supporting actress.
Now the more eagle eyed readers will have spotted that in that last paragraph I did promise that I wouldn’t reveal what happens to Fantine but having thought about it I have realised that there isn’t any way I can continue with the plot of the film unless I do, so here goes. She dies, pops her clogs, is bereft of life, goes belly up, starts to check out the grass from underneath, finally kicks the oxygen habit or if you want the pc version she becomes living-challenged.
On Fantines deathbed Valjean promises to look after her daughter Cosette as he feels he is partly responsible for her losing her job in the first place. Cosette is being looked after by two very unscrupulous characters Thenardier and his wife. They are both run an Inn together and aren’t interested in anybody’s wellbeing other than their own. The only exception to this would be for their own daughter Eponine. After some serious haggling and negotiating they agree to sell Cosette to Valjean and after another run in with Javert they leave for Paris to try and start a new life together.
Whilst living in Paris Cosette, played by Amanda Seyfried, happens to fall in love with a very charming young man Marius. Now please pay attention as there may be a test at the end. Marius is very keen on change and with his friends they plan to lead an uprising against the oppressive government. Now Eponine, who just happens to also now be in Paris is head over heels in love Marius but Marius having just met Eponine, is very much in love with her. The uprising that has been a long time in the making doesn’t exactly go to plan. Javert infiltrates their ranks and nearly stops the revolt but before you can say “hey, you’re only seven, how can you tell I’m an imposter?” he gets found out by a seven year old who accuses him of being an imposter and the crowd turn on him. Valjean offers to execute him but once they’re alone he sets Javert free. Now this really messes with Javert’s mind as he’s spent all of this life tracking Valjean down and can’t understand how he could do this. Long story short, Javert kills himself by doing the worst Tom Daley impression you have ever seen off a nearby bridge. All ends well and eventually after a few more plot twists and turn Cosette and Marius get married and live happily ever after.
Now a lot has been made of the singing and the songs in this film and all I will say is this, Hugh Jackman can sing, Anne Hathaway can carry a tune and Russell Crowe was great in the Gladiator. That should tell you everything you need to know about Les Miserables musically.
Oh bugger I’ve just remembered another musical that is a tad heavy when it comes to tugging on the heart strings, Blood Brothers. However unless someone decides to turn the Killing Fields into a musical Les Miserables is and always will be the big boy on the block when it comes to sorrow, grief and misery.
Twitter Review:
Songs, singing and suffering. If mental anguish is what you want on the silver screen then Les Miserables is for you.
#TissueMovie
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1707386/?ref_=sr_1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvzgxKHYFIc
http://lesmiserables-movie.co.uk/
Friday, 18 January 2013
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
How to make a film about Hobbits.
For best results please try and stick to the correct elements listed below.
Ingredients:
1x old wizard played by Magneto (Sir Ian Mckellen)
1x Hobbit played by Dr Watson and or Arthur Dent (Martin Freeman)
12x Dwarves including 1 who married the Vicar of Dibley (Richard Armitage), 1 who played Jekyll & Hyde (James Nesbitt), 1 who’s been in everything from Red Dwarf, Casualty and The Bill (Graham McTavish)and 1 who’s made his name playing a Vampire (Aidan Turner)
2x Hobbits we’ve seen before so you can use them to help set up the telling of the story you’re about to see (Sir Ian Holm and Elijah Wood)
1x Elf played by Mr Smith from the Matrix Films (Hugo Weaving)
1x Elf played by Queen Elizabeth (Cate Blanchett)
1x Wizard played by the man with the golden gun with Dracula tendencies (Christopher Lee)
1x Wizard played by an ex Doctor Who (Sylvester McCoy)
1x Gollum, keeper of the precious (Andy Serkis)
Method:
Find a Director who has previous experience in bringing Tolkien to the masses. New Zealanders tend to be the best if you can find one. Sign up a local company that can handle the odd effect or two. Please check first that they don’t specialise in claymation or stop motion effects. Most of what’s seen on screen will need to be digital. Also without wishing to sound to clichéd when it comes to scouting for places to shoot your grand and epic tale, it will come down to three simple words “Location, Location, Location”. You can assemble the greatest actors, write the best screenplay seen in these parts for over a decade but if you’re going to convince the world that you are actually on location in Middle Earth you can’t do it with concrete cows or electricity pylons in the background.
Once you have these components put together take the above ingredients and mix them altogether. Give yourself a solid twelve months or so to cook it perfectly and then wait for critical acclaim.
This Hobbit movie isn’t actually that bad. The problems that it has are mostly inherited from what came before. The previous lord of the rings trilogy blew audiences way, raised the bar and made a lot of money, approximately 2.9 billion dollars. It also proved that there isn’t that much that can be considered these days to be “unfilmable”.
So with very high expectations filming of the Hobbit was announced with Peter Jackson once again taking on the big chair duties again. Originally the plan was to make two films but even this raised a few eyebrows within the film world. All three books from the rings trilogy clock in at around one thousand pages, whereas the hobbit is nearer three hundred and fifty. Some of the Hollywood naysayers were adamant that there simple wasn’t enough source material for it to be stretched over two films so I can only imagine that shares in Prozac must have gone up quite considerable when Warner’s announced in the early summer of last year that at Jacksons request the story would now take place over three films, not two.
This is a four star film, not five and the reason I say this is a simple on. At the heart of this story it’s basically a tale about reclaiming a home and the treasure horded within, even if it is guarded by a dragon. There’s never any real sense of peril or that the world will end should they fail in their quest. Even when Sauron isn’t on the screen in the original films you have the ring to remind you that something very bad is happening and that all is not well. You just the sensation that if the Dwarves don’t finish their journey not a lot will change. This is a shame really but guess the Hobbit was written as a children’s story, the lord of the rings wasn’t .
I’ll finish by saying this, the Hobbit was a long time in the making and had a few hiccups before it made it to the screen. The most prominent being a change of director. Guillermo del Toro had always been Peter Jackson first choice for directing these films but after the films production getting stuck in financial wrangles he left to pursue other interests. The next two films “The Desolation of Smaug”, due in December of this year and “There and Back Again” due to hit the screens in the summer of 2014 are still very much “must see movies” and I’m sure they will be received well and be hailed as landmark films, in much the same way the first trilogy were. I just hope they are more character driven and not too reliant on visual distractions as the first one seemed to be.
Twitter review:
If you don’t like this film you don’t know what you’re Tolkien about
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0903624/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOGsB9dORBg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IYMgqWXH8Y
For best results please try and stick to the correct elements listed below.
Ingredients:
1x old wizard played by Magneto (Sir Ian Mckellen)
1x Hobbit played by Dr Watson and or Arthur Dent (Martin Freeman)
12x Dwarves including 1 who married the Vicar of Dibley (Richard Armitage), 1 who played Jekyll & Hyde (James Nesbitt), 1 who’s been in everything from Red Dwarf, Casualty and The Bill (Graham McTavish)and 1 who’s made his name playing a Vampire (Aidan Turner)
2x Hobbits we’ve seen before so you can use them to help set up the telling of the story you’re about to see (Sir Ian Holm and Elijah Wood)
1x Elf played by Mr Smith from the Matrix Films (Hugo Weaving)
1x Elf played by Queen Elizabeth (Cate Blanchett)
1x Wizard played by the man with the golden gun with Dracula tendencies (Christopher Lee)
1x Wizard played by an ex Doctor Who (Sylvester McCoy)
1x Gollum, keeper of the precious (Andy Serkis)
Method:
Find a Director who has previous experience in bringing Tolkien to the masses. New Zealanders tend to be the best if you can find one. Sign up a local company that can handle the odd effect or two. Please check first that they don’t specialise in claymation or stop motion effects. Most of what’s seen on screen will need to be digital. Also without wishing to sound to clichéd when it comes to scouting for places to shoot your grand and epic tale, it will come down to three simple words “Location, Location, Location”. You can assemble the greatest actors, write the best screenplay seen in these parts for over a decade but if you’re going to convince the world that you are actually on location in Middle Earth you can’t do it with concrete cows or electricity pylons in the background.
Once you have these components put together take the above ingredients and mix them altogether. Give yourself a solid twelve months or so to cook it perfectly and then wait for critical acclaim.
This Hobbit movie isn’t actually that bad. The problems that it has are mostly inherited from what came before. The previous lord of the rings trilogy blew audiences way, raised the bar and made a lot of money, approximately 2.9 billion dollars. It also proved that there isn’t that much that can be considered these days to be “unfilmable”.
So with very high expectations filming of the Hobbit was announced with Peter Jackson once again taking on the big chair duties again. Originally the plan was to make two films but even this raised a few eyebrows within the film world. All three books from the rings trilogy clock in at around one thousand pages, whereas the hobbit is nearer three hundred and fifty. Some of the Hollywood naysayers were adamant that there simple wasn’t enough source material for it to be stretched over two films so I can only imagine that shares in Prozac must have gone up quite considerable when Warner’s announced in the early summer of last year that at Jacksons request the story would now take place over three films, not two.
This is a four star film, not five and the reason I say this is a simple on. At the heart of this story it’s basically a tale about reclaiming a home and the treasure horded within, even if it is guarded by a dragon. There’s never any real sense of peril or that the world will end should they fail in their quest. Even when Sauron isn’t on the screen in the original films you have the ring to remind you that something very bad is happening and that all is not well. You just the sensation that if the Dwarves don’t finish their journey not a lot will change. This is a shame really but guess the Hobbit was written as a children’s story, the lord of the rings wasn’t .
I’ll finish by saying this, the Hobbit was a long time in the making and had a few hiccups before it made it to the screen. The most prominent being a change of director. Guillermo del Toro had always been Peter Jackson first choice for directing these films but after the films production getting stuck in financial wrangles he left to pursue other interests. The next two films “The Desolation of Smaug”, due in December of this year and “There and Back Again” due to hit the screens in the summer of 2014 are still very much “must see movies” and I’m sure they will be received well and be hailed as landmark films, in much the same way the first trilogy were. I just hope they are more character driven and not too reliant on visual distractions as the first one seemed to be.
Twitter review:
If you don’t like this film you don’t know what you’re Tolkien about
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0903624/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOGsB9dORBg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IYMgqWXH8Y
Saturday, 15 December 2012
Dredd 3D, Skyfall, Frankenweenie, Gambit
There now follows an official press release from Bavs Celluloid Musings.
Dear reader first let me apologise for the lack of posts over the last two months. I’d like to say that the lack of activity was down to some exotic reason, such as having drafted into the Avengers to fight crime on my forklift or being kidnapped by the head of Disney to work on the new Star Wars script for Episode VII but the truth of the matter is far more boring and mundane.
Flat hunting, moving and then it taking a while to get the internet back up and running.
I know, I Should have gone with the Disney excuse shouldn’t I?
So with the apologies out of the way I’d like to give a quick review each of the films I’ve missed over the last eight weeks or so starting with Dredd 3D.
So where to start? Well firstly let me issue a word of warning….. It’s very violent. However that doesn’t really even begin to tell the story. Saying its violent is like saying Spartacus is a long film, it just doesn’t even come close to describing what has been committed to film here. This is in a different league when it comes to comic book adaptations. Nothing has ever come close to being this visceral and in your face. If ultra-slow motion bullet injuries are your bag or the sight of people being skinned “just for jollies” then this maybe the film you have been waiting for. It also goes without saying that film is not for kids.
Karl Urban has seen his stock rise over the last decade with roles in The Lord Of The Rings, The Bourne Supremacy and the rebooted Star Trek franchise but this is the first time he’s been asked to carry a Hollywood film as the lead. A job he does with ease, spending the entire film basically only acting with his chin (for those not in the know Dredd never and I do mean NEVER takes his helmet off). Lena Headey plays the big bad meanie of the piece, Ma-Ma. She has her own ideas about Neighbourhood watch and the chemicals she likes to use around the house you wouldn’t find any personal grooming products. Ma-Ma also has a few anger management problems. If she worked in a library I think it would be safe to say that you’d never return a book late. There have been better comic book films this year but this is definitely worth a watch when it gets released on dvd.
Twitter Review:
I am the gore!
#GunsGuts&GoodGrief!
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1343727/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqqgrUna28w
Skyfall comes next on my omissions list. Now seeing that the world and most of its relations have seen this by now there are two ways I can handle this. The professional approach that you’ll read in most places that’s informative, enlightening comes with a plethora of astute observations, or there’s the route I’m going to take that will include a trip to cheese city. So without further ado I’d just like to say that the new Q and M are a new “dench mark!” (See what I did there). And whilst I’m on the subject of M, Dame Judi actually drops the F-bomb in this film, which I believe is a first for Bond.
If you take Skyfall at face value it doesn’t work. Before the credits have even rolled he gets shot and loses the hard drive he’s looking for. He goes AWOL, fails to save the girl, loses Silva (played brilliantly by Javier Bardem) and M still dies in the end. Now even by the lowest standards set by any secret service agency, that’s P45 time in anyone’s book.
Daniel Craig has signed on the dotted line to play Bond for at least two more outings and by the time the he hits the screens again in late 2014 as the world’s most famous secret agent he’ll be as old as Roger Moore was when he started playing 007. As long as DC keeps his eyebrows under control I can see no problems with him being offered more chances to kill for Queen and Country.
Twitter Review:
The best Bond of a generation. Ignore the plot and enjoy the action.
#MI6UnderAttack,
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kw1UVovByw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StJLvbPIvTw
Next is Frankenweenie, which does exactly what it says on the tin and even throws in an invisible fish for good measure. All you need to know is that it’s a Tim Burton film and if you happen to like his particular bag of tricks, you’ll love this too.
Twitter Review:
Science experiments, monsters, gothic overtones and fantastic animation. Tim Buton remakes his own film into a B-movie classic.
#Black&WhiteGold
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1142977/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2luLW-9ySw
The last film I need to play catch up with is Gambit. A charming film with Colin Firth, Alan “shoot the glass” Rickman and Cameron Diaz. The story revolves around an art curator, played by firth, who’s fed up with having to work for his insufferable, rude and abusive boss, Rickman, and so sets about conning him into buying a fake Monet with the help of an eccentric Texan rodeo rider.
The film which is written by the Coen brothers is part farce and part poor man’s Oceans 11. It never really gets its right with the script and although it does have some great comedy set pieces, it just feels a little flat and underwhelming at times.
Twitter Review:
This could have been a great film but the script needs work.
#Monet’sTiggers&RodeoRiders.
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0404978/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq8LwPHBwtY
Dear reader first let me apologise for the lack of posts over the last two months. I’d like to say that the lack of activity was down to some exotic reason, such as having drafted into the Avengers to fight crime on my forklift or being kidnapped by the head of Disney to work on the new Star Wars script for Episode VII but the truth of the matter is far more boring and mundane.
Flat hunting, moving and then it taking a while to get the internet back up and running.
I know, I Should have gone with the Disney excuse shouldn’t I?
So with the apologies out of the way I’d like to give a quick review each of the films I’ve missed over the last eight weeks or so starting with Dredd 3D.
So where to start? Well firstly let me issue a word of warning….. It’s very violent. However that doesn’t really even begin to tell the story. Saying its violent is like saying Spartacus is a long film, it just doesn’t even come close to describing what has been committed to film here. This is in a different league when it comes to comic book adaptations. Nothing has ever come close to being this visceral and in your face. If ultra-slow motion bullet injuries are your bag or the sight of people being skinned “just for jollies” then this maybe the film you have been waiting for. It also goes without saying that film is not for kids.
Karl Urban has seen his stock rise over the last decade with roles in The Lord Of The Rings, The Bourne Supremacy and the rebooted Star Trek franchise but this is the first time he’s been asked to carry a Hollywood film as the lead. A job he does with ease, spending the entire film basically only acting with his chin (for those not in the know Dredd never and I do mean NEVER takes his helmet off). Lena Headey plays the big bad meanie of the piece, Ma-Ma. She has her own ideas about Neighbourhood watch and the chemicals she likes to use around the house you wouldn’t find any personal grooming products. Ma-Ma also has a few anger management problems. If she worked in a library I think it would be safe to say that you’d never return a book late. There have been better comic book films this year but this is definitely worth a watch when it gets released on dvd.
Twitter Review:
I am the gore!
#GunsGuts&GoodGrief!
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1343727/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqqgrUna28w
Skyfall comes next on my omissions list. Now seeing that the world and most of its relations have seen this by now there are two ways I can handle this. The professional approach that you’ll read in most places that’s informative, enlightening comes with a plethora of astute observations, or there’s the route I’m going to take that will include a trip to cheese city. So without further ado I’d just like to say that the new Q and M are a new “dench mark!” (See what I did there). And whilst I’m on the subject of M, Dame Judi actually drops the F-bomb in this film, which I believe is a first for Bond.
If you take Skyfall at face value it doesn’t work. Before the credits have even rolled he gets shot and loses the hard drive he’s looking for. He goes AWOL, fails to save the girl, loses Silva (played brilliantly by Javier Bardem) and M still dies in the end. Now even by the lowest standards set by any secret service agency, that’s P45 time in anyone’s book.
Daniel Craig has signed on the dotted line to play Bond for at least two more outings and by the time the he hits the screens again in late 2014 as the world’s most famous secret agent he’ll be as old as Roger Moore was when he started playing 007. As long as DC keeps his eyebrows under control I can see no problems with him being offered more chances to kill for Queen and Country.
Twitter Review:
The best Bond of a generation. Ignore the plot and enjoy the action.
#MI6UnderAttack,
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kw1UVovByw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StJLvbPIvTw
Next is Frankenweenie, which does exactly what it says on the tin and even throws in an invisible fish for good measure. All you need to know is that it’s a Tim Burton film and if you happen to like his particular bag of tricks, you’ll love this too.
Twitter Review:
Science experiments, monsters, gothic overtones and fantastic animation. Tim Buton remakes his own film into a B-movie classic.
#Black&WhiteGold
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1142977/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2luLW-9ySw
The last film I need to play catch up with is Gambit. A charming film with Colin Firth, Alan “shoot the glass” Rickman and Cameron Diaz. The story revolves around an art curator, played by firth, who’s fed up with having to work for his insufferable, rude and abusive boss, Rickman, and so sets about conning him into buying a fake Monet with the help of an eccentric Texan rodeo rider.
The film which is written by the Coen brothers is part farce and part poor man’s Oceans 11. It never really gets its right with the script and although it does have some great comedy set pieces, it just feels a little flat and underwhelming at times.
Twitter Review:
This could have been a great film but the script needs work.
#Monet’sTiggers&RodeoRiders.
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0404978/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq8LwPHBwtY
Wednesday, 5 September 2012
The Expendables 2
Let me set the scene. Its 2009 and its dawning on Sylvester Stallone that his days of making money from Rambo and Rocky franchises that he has spearheaded for the last thirty years maybe behind him. So what to do next? The answer to that question was a simple one. Put together a cast of action film icons and go make the best “leave your brain at the door” film possible.
So with that as its premise and starting point Stallone went away and put together a film that he also ended up directing, which included Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lungren, Randy Couture, Steve Austin, Terry Crews, Bruce Willis, Mickey Rourke and the terminator himself Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The film became The Expendables and basically it did exactly what it said on the tin. Lots of bang for your buck, an extremely high body count and enough blood on screen to fill about three Olympic size swimming pools.
The film, although never regarded as a classic in the grand scheme of things, made enough money for the studio behind it to start asking questions that went along the lines of “do you fancy making another one?” and “oh go on, pretty please”. Stallone, having recently checked his new and plumped up bank balance, didn’t have any issues putting the band back together and with the exception of Rourke everyone agreed to come back.
Having broken his neck in the first film Stallone and by his own admission, had taken too much on. So he decided to hand the megaphone duties over to the more than capable Simon West.
This freed Stallone up to come up with a screenplay that needed to be bigger and louder than the first. To say that he didn’t disappoint would be something of an understatement but more of that later.
With Rouke bailing on the sequel Stallone needed some new blood to join the party. Firstly he got Liam Hemsworth, who’s the younger brother of Thor for those of you not in the know. Just don’t expect to see him in the third film as and when that gets made (and it will). Then he persuaded the muscles from Brussels to sign on the dotted line. Jean-Claude Van Dam plays against type as the villain of the piece and what a job he does. Happily sending himself up at every available opportunity. The real trump card for this sequel though has to be the inclusion of Chuck Norris, who seemingly never looks like he ages at all. Norris has for a long time had a “legend” tag that he seems to follow him around and is something he appears more than happy to live up too. If you have five minutes to spare I urge you to head over to chucknorrisfacts.com . It’ll keep you amused for hours!
So let’s get back to that to that screenplay that Mr Stallone put together. The premise of the film is that JCVD is about to get his hands on six tonnes of old Russian cold war Plutonium and the CIA can't let that happen! Put simply this screenplay is appalling! It’s so far past bad it’s ridiculous. It doesn’t hold together in any way shape or form and I think the plot may have been asked to go away politely for a while whilst filming was under way. As for the filming itself, it’s preposterous. So full of continuity errors that I stopped counting after twenty minutes and it makes about as much sense as cheese socks.
That said, I LOVED IT!!! Every gloriously ham acted scene, every absurd and over the top death and illogical decision being made. I sat in the cinema for the entire duration of the film with the largest smile on my face. This may well be the first fan fiction film that has ever been green light and could also be the world’s first one star “must see” action film and although they do get far more screen time for this film it seems the only reason Bruce and Arnold were asked to come back was to commit each other’s trade mark catchphrases to celluloid with their tongue’s both fully inserted into their respective cheeks.
Given the fact that this film seems to have come up trumps and at the box office I can only imagine it’s a matter of time before Stallone receives another phone call begging for him to sit down and write another screenplay that pushes the boundaries of thought, perception and human understanding. But the problem he’ll have is this. How do you trump what’s already come before it? How do you make it bigger and better without actually turning up to the White House and saying “would you mind if we actually invaded Canada”?
And then of course there’s the other issue of who can you ask you be in it that hasn’t already been included. Other than Jackie Chan and Steven Segal there’s no other way to top the action cast list that’s already been put together. I would however suggest that if they do have a meeting where they try to come up with which actors to include, they should think outside the box a little just to keep the ideas fresh and original. An action flick that included the likes of Woody Allen, Ronnie Corbett or even Pingu is a film I’d pay to see!
Twitter Review:
Expendables 2 is a crime against film. No plot, no continuity, no point & for those exact reasons you have to go & see it!
#AMustSeeFilm
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1764651/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQf3YP8p85I
So with that as its premise and starting point Stallone went away and put together a film that he also ended up directing, which included Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lungren, Randy Couture, Steve Austin, Terry Crews, Bruce Willis, Mickey Rourke and the terminator himself Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The film became The Expendables and basically it did exactly what it said on the tin. Lots of bang for your buck, an extremely high body count and enough blood on screen to fill about three Olympic size swimming pools.
The film, although never regarded as a classic in the grand scheme of things, made enough money for the studio behind it to start asking questions that went along the lines of “do you fancy making another one?” and “oh go on, pretty please”. Stallone, having recently checked his new and plumped up bank balance, didn’t have any issues putting the band back together and with the exception of Rourke everyone agreed to come back.
Having broken his neck in the first film Stallone and by his own admission, had taken too much on. So he decided to hand the megaphone duties over to the more than capable Simon West.
This freed Stallone up to come up with a screenplay that needed to be bigger and louder than the first. To say that he didn’t disappoint would be something of an understatement but more of that later.
With Rouke bailing on the sequel Stallone needed some new blood to join the party. Firstly he got Liam Hemsworth, who’s the younger brother of Thor for those of you not in the know. Just don’t expect to see him in the third film as and when that gets made (and it will). Then he persuaded the muscles from Brussels to sign on the dotted line. Jean-Claude Van Dam plays against type as the villain of the piece and what a job he does. Happily sending himself up at every available opportunity. The real trump card for this sequel though has to be the inclusion of Chuck Norris, who seemingly never looks like he ages at all. Norris has for a long time had a “legend” tag that he seems to follow him around and is something he appears more than happy to live up too. If you have five minutes to spare I urge you to head over to chucknorrisfacts.com . It’ll keep you amused for hours!
So let’s get back to that to that screenplay that Mr Stallone put together. The premise of the film is that JCVD is about to get his hands on six tonnes of old Russian cold war Plutonium and the CIA can't let that happen! Put simply this screenplay is appalling! It’s so far past bad it’s ridiculous. It doesn’t hold together in any way shape or form and I think the plot may have been asked to go away politely for a while whilst filming was under way. As for the filming itself, it’s preposterous. So full of continuity errors that I stopped counting after twenty minutes and it makes about as much sense as cheese socks.
That said, I LOVED IT!!! Every gloriously ham acted scene, every absurd and over the top death and illogical decision being made. I sat in the cinema for the entire duration of the film with the largest smile on my face. This may well be the first fan fiction film that has ever been green light and could also be the world’s first one star “must see” action film and although they do get far more screen time for this film it seems the only reason Bruce and Arnold were asked to come back was to commit each other’s trade mark catchphrases to celluloid with their tongue’s both fully inserted into their respective cheeks.
Given the fact that this film seems to have come up trumps and at the box office I can only imagine it’s a matter of time before Stallone receives another phone call begging for him to sit down and write another screenplay that pushes the boundaries of thought, perception and human understanding. But the problem he’ll have is this. How do you trump what’s already come before it? How do you make it bigger and better without actually turning up to the White House and saying “would you mind if we actually invaded Canada”?
And then of course there’s the other issue of who can you ask you be in it that hasn’t already been included. Other than Jackie Chan and Steven Segal there’s no other way to top the action cast list that’s already been put together. I would however suggest that if they do have a meeting where they try to come up with which actors to include, they should think outside the box a little just to keep the ideas fresh and original. An action flick that included the likes of Woody Allen, Ronnie Corbett or even Pingu is a film I’d pay to see!
Twitter Review:
Expendables 2 is a crime against film. No plot, no continuity, no point & for those exact reasons you have to go & see it!
#AMustSeeFilm
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1764651/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQf3YP8p85I
Monday, 3 September 2012
Ted
Ted, Ted, Ted. Where do you start about a film that’s the brain child of Seth MacFarlane. The Man that brought us Family Guy, American Dad! And The Cleveland Show. Well first of all I’ll start by saying that Ted is very much a “Marmite” kind of film. You’re either going to love it or hate it. You’ll find the comedy therein spectacularly funny or you’ll just sit there looking around trying to work out why everyone else is laughing.
The Plot of the film centres around a young boy who gets given a teddy bear for Christmas when he’s eight. The boy in question has no friends and no matter how hard he tries to make new ones his alienation just gets even worse. Then one night he wishes that his Teddy could be alive so he could have someone to talk to and wouldn’t you know it, before Hollywood can say “sign here Mr MacFarlane” and add the appropriate “nights sky shooting star” effect, the bear comes to life.
Shooting forward some twenty seven years we find the boy John Bennett has grown up into a lazy and unmotivated thirty five year old. Played by the greatest living wooden actor since Pinocchio, Mark Wahlberg. The bear, which is voiced by MacFarlane, has in those twenty seven years gone from being the sweet new best buddy, wouldn’t hurt a fly, play time pal, to a foul mouthed, drug taking, beer drinking partner in crime for John. This is something that Johns girlfriend of four years Lori Collins, who is played by one of the Family Guy inner circle Mila Kunis, is starting to get rather annoyed with. Lori is fed up with lack of commitment being shown and after a series of “Ted” related incidents, which include a home full of hookers and some very bad personal hygiene an ultimatum is given.
“It’s me or the Bear!”
Ted does have some great set pieces dotted throughout the film. If you’re a child of the eighties then I think you’ll really enjoy this film. It has some great cameos from Norah Jones and Tom Skerritt. Airplane gets a mention and a doffing of its cap however if you’re a fan of the film Flash Gordon then I can’t recommend you seeing Ted enough. It’s worth the price of admission alone and may go down in history as one of the greatest homages in cinematic history. Another gem to take away from this film is a little ditty entitled “The Thunder Buddy Song”. It’s short on lyrics but high on standing up and facing your fears with regards to extreme weather. Just a quick word of warning though, it’s not really what the pc brigade would call child friendly so I wouldn’t recommend using to subdue anyone below the age of twelve the next time you’re babysitting and the heavens open. Another little added gem that’s been thrown into the mix is Patrick Stewart Narrating at the start and at the end. Very educational and he even mentions Apache Gunships. Now you don’t get that sort of information in Disney films these days.
So where does that leave us. Ted is basically Hollywood falling back and relying on the age old story of “Boy meets ted, ted comes alive, boy and ted grow up together, ted becomes semi famous, boy and ted live together, ted and boy drink too much and get stoned every time there’s a day that ends with a y, boy meets girl, boy and girl fall in love, girl tries to get boy to change his ways, ted has to move out, ted gets a job as a supermarket cashier to pay bills, ted has sex using a parsnip, boy and girl split up, ted is kidnapped by Giovanni Ribisi for his son, hijinks and chases ensue, (spoiler alert) boy wins girl back, (another spoiler alert) boy, girl and ted live happily ever after.
Yes I know what you’re thinking and yes we have seen that done million times before by the Hollywood film industry….. But never with Flash Gordon thrown into the mix!
In closing I’ll go back to the start and say this. Ted is really going to polarise opinions when it comes to its viewers. The only real advice I can offer is this.
If you like the film, then go and see it. If you don’t, then stay at home. Hope that helps…..
Twitter Review:
Talking Teddy Bears, Flash Gordon, The Thunder Buddy Song, Seth MacFarlane & Parsnip Sex. What's not to like!
#NotEveryonesCupOfTea
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1637725/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fbo_pQvU7M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9PnNW56bp0
The Plot of the film centres around a young boy who gets given a teddy bear for Christmas when he’s eight. The boy in question has no friends and no matter how hard he tries to make new ones his alienation just gets even worse. Then one night he wishes that his Teddy could be alive so he could have someone to talk to and wouldn’t you know it, before Hollywood can say “sign here Mr MacFarlane” and add the appropriate “nights sky shooting star” effect, the bear comes to life.
Shooting forward some twenty seven years we find the boy John Bennett has grown up into a lazy and unmotivated thirty five year old. Played by the greatest living wooden actor since Pinocchio, Mark Wahlberg. The bear, which is voiced by MacFarlane, has in those twenty seven years gone from being the sweet new best buddy, wouldn’t hurt a fly, play time pal, to a foul mouthed, drug taking, beer drinking partner in crime for John. This is something that Johns girlfriend of four years Lori Collins, who is played by one of the Family Guy inner circle Mila Kunis, is starting to get rather annoyed with. Lori is fed up with lack of commitment being shown and after a series of “Ted” related incidents, which include a home full of hookers and some very bad personal hygiene an ultimatum is given.
“It’s me or the Bear!”
Ted does have some great set pieces dotted throughout the film. If you’re a child of the eighties then I think you’ll really enjoy this film. It has some great cameos from Norah Jones and Tom Skerritt. Airplane gets a mention and a doffing of its cap however if you’re a fan of the film Flash Gordon then I can’t recommend you seeing Ted enough. It’s worth the price of admission alone and may go down in history as one of the greatest homages in cinematic history. Another gem to take away from this film is a little ditty entitled “The Thunder Buddy Song”. It’s short on lyrics but high on standing up and facing your fears with regards to extreme weather. Just a quick word of warning though, it’s not really what the pc brigade would call child friendly so I wouldn’t recommend using to subdue anyone below the age of twelve the next time you’re babysitting and the heavens open. Another little added gem that’s been thrown into the mix is Patrick Stewart Narrating at the start and at the end. Very educational and he even mentions Apache Gunships. Now you don’t get that sort of information in Disney films these days.
So where does that leave us. Ted is basically Hollywood falling back and relying on the age old story of “Boy meets ted, ted comes alive, boy and ted grow up together, ted becomes semi famous, boy and ted live together, ted and boy drink too much and get stoned every time there’s a day that ends with a y, boy meets girl, boy and girl fall in love, girl tries to get boy to change his ways, ted has to move out, ted gets a job as a supermarket cashier to pay bills, ted has sex using a parsnip, boy and girl split up, ted is kidnapped by Giovanni Ribisi for his son, hijinks and chases ensue, (spoiler alert) boy wins girl back, (another spoiler alert) boy, girl and ted live happily ever after.
Yes I know what you’re thinking and yes we have seen that done million times before by the Hollywood film industry….. But never with Flash Gordon thrown into the mix!
In closing I’ll go back to the start and say this. Ted is really going to polarise opinions when it comes to its viewers. The only real advice I can offer is this.
If you like the film, then go and see it. If you don’t, then stay at home. Hope that helps…..
Twitter Review:
Talking Teddy Bears, Flash Gordon, The Thunder Buddy Song, Seth MacFarlane & Parsnip Sex. What's not to like!
#NotEveryonesCupOfTea
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1637725/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fbo_pQvU7M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9PnNW56bp0
Wednesday, 22 August 2012
The Bourne Legacy
“One pill makes you larger, one pill makes you small and the ones that mother gives you don’t do anything at all”. That, ladies and gentlemen, pretty much encapsulates the entire plot of the Bourne Legacy. However dear reader, as usual, I suspect that you may want more from your film blogs and analysis so I’ll “flesh it out” a bit.
Can’t have you going elsewhere for your film reviews now can I?
After the first three Bourne Films, “Identity, Supremacy and Ultimatum” Universal must have had quite a few meetings that went along the lines of “wow, didn’t we do well” and “I wonder what other dead authors books we can bring to the big screen”. The reason for this glad handing and self-congratulatory patting of backs basically came down to the fact that through either dumb luck or intelligent design they’d come up with an intelligent story arc that not only held up for three films but reinvented the entire genre as well. The other piece of fate that seemed to be smiling on them was that they’d taken an actor in Matt Damon who’d won an Oscar for his screenwriting talents and turned him into not only an action star but a totally believable action star.
The spanner in the works turned up when both Damon and the director of Supremacy and Ultimatum, Paul Greengrass, said they were happy with their lot and didn’t want to make any more. Cue mildly concerned faces at Universal HQ.
The answer to the question of whether to leave well enough alone and move on was answered when Tony Gilroy asked if he could have a crack at the director’s chair if they made another film. Gilroy had earned his stripes with the Bourne franchise whilst writing the screenplays for the three previous films but had never had a Hollywood studio let him loose with the megaphone before. So, when the film was given the green light with Gilroy at the helm in the summer of 2011, it did raise a few eyebrows.
First things first, how best to describe The Bourne Legacy? Is it a sequel, a prequel or a candlestick maker? Well after much deliberation I think the tag that best fits this film would be a “Sidequel” (and if that word catches on remember where you heard it first!) The plot centres around a new hero, Aaron Cross played by Jeremy Renner who through no fault of his own, has just been put on the endangered species list due in no small part to the events that have transpired over the previous trilogy.
The Bourne Identity starts and The Bourne Ultimatum finishes with the hero of the piece in the water and that’s where we also start with Legacy. Having been sent to Alaska for what basically turns out to be a slap across the knuckles, Aaron Cross is on what could only be described as an extreme orienteering jaunt with some survival skills practice thrown in for good measure. Having reached his destination at the back end of beyond, Cross finds himself sharing a cabin with another who’s had “could do better” written on his super secret agent report card.
We are then given a rather complicated back story which goes into some detail about how these characters have become the best of the best. Training will only get you so far it seems and every asset out in the field is required to take blue and green pills to keep them at the top of their game. These pills and their taking them become the plot device for the rest of the film, which I think is a shame. In much the same way that George Lucas decided to make the “Force” a quantifiable and measurable item the last three Star Wars films I think having the main character reliant on pills and chemicals somehow removes some of the wow factor from it. You always want to know how the magician does the trick and pulls off the impossible but once you’ve been shown how it’s done it’s never quite the same.
Back at the cabin things then take a turn for the worse when those pesky CIA types, led by Edward Norton’s Eric Byer send an unmanned drone to blow it up. Realising that something is “amiss” Cross then heads off to find more pills and some answers from his employers. Whilst this is happening we, the viewer, are shown other secret agent getting their comeuppance. It seems that Jason Bourne really knows how to spoil a party!
The other main protagonist of the films is played by another Oscar winner Rachel Weisz (the current Mrs James Bond) but her acting talents are largely wasted here. She spends most of the movie playing a generic “Damsel in distress” and even though she’s given brains and intelligence she’s very rarely allowed to let them out of the box. The other issue here is that Renner and Wise don’t share any screen time together until we’re about an hour into the film. I also got the feeling that it was only going to be a matter of time before Cross uttered the immortal Schwarzenegger line “come with me if you want to live”.
Weisz character is Dr Marta Shearing, who just happens to be responsible for creating the blue and green pills but as luck would have it the closest available source for these “Happy Haribo’s” just happens to be a short plane ride away in the Philippines. Cue some very dodgy disguises and home made passports that wouldn’t look out of place in an amateur dramatics production of Cluedo.
Once they’ve arrived on the other side of the Pacific there are a couple of good action set pieces but they do really leave you wanting more.
I think the main problem with this film is that in order for it to work it needs to be treated on its own merits and values but given the three films that came before it that is never going to happen. The bar was raised to a very high level by its predecessors and no amount of new cast and new direction is ever going to change that. We spend the first fifty minutes of The Bourne Legacy being reminded of Jason Bourne and his films and even though you’ve seen those already you find yourself wanting to watch those instead and not wanting to spend the emotional investment on Legacy. Rachel Weisz’s character has the last line of the film where she says “I was hoping we were lost”. Well I can safely say that I think the viewing audience may well be missing in action.
Twitter Review:
Legacy doesn't raise the bar or offer anything we haven't seen before. Characters come don't develop or snap into focus.
#BourneYourTimeIsUp
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1194173/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSzy9qQ3mDE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdtUdEoE-Q4&feature=relmfu
Can’t have you going elsewhere for your film reviews now can I?
After the first three Bourne Films, “Identity, Supremacy and Ultimatum” Universal must have had quite a few meetings that went along the lines of “wow, didn’t we do well” and “I wonder what other dead authors books we can bring to the big screen”. The reason for this glad handing and self-congratulatory patting of backs basically came down to the fact that through either dumb luck or intelligent design they’d come up with an intelligent story arc that not only held up for three films but reinvented the entire genre as well. The other piece of fate that seemed to be smiling on them was that they’d taken an actor in Matt Damon who’d won an Oscar for his screenwriting talents and turned him into not only an action star but a totally believable action star.
The spanner in the works turned up when both Damon and the director of Supremacy and Ultimatum, Paul Greengrass, said they were happy with their lot and didn’t want to make any more. Cue mildly concerned faces at Universal HQ.
The answer to the question of whether to leave well enough alone and move on was answered when Tony Gilroy asked if he could have a crack at the director’s chair if they made another film. Gilroy had earned his stripes with the Bourne franchise whilst writing the screenplays for the three previous films but had never had a Hollywood studio let him loose with the megaphone before. So, when the film was given the green light with Gilroy at the helm in the summer of 2011, it did raise a few eyebrows.
First things first, how best to describe The Bourne Legacy? Is it a sequel, a prequel or a candlestick maker? Well after much deliberation I think the tag that best fits this film would be a “Sidequel” (and if that word catches on remember where you heard it first!) The plot centres around a new hero, Aaron Cross played by Jeremy Renner who through no fault of his own, has just been put on the endangered species list due in no small part to the events that have transpired over the previous trilogy.
The Bourne Identity starts and The Bourne Ultimatum finishes with the hero of the piece in the water and that’s where we also start with Legacy. Having been sent to Alaska for what basically turns out to be a slap across the knuckles, Aaron Cross is on what could only be described as an extreme orienteering jaunt with some survival skills practice thrown in for good measure. Having reached his destination at the back end of beyond, Cross finds himself sharing a cabin with another who’s had “could do better” written on his super secret agent report card.
We are then given a rather complicated back story which goes into some detail about how these characters have become the best of the best. Training will only get you so far it seems and every asset out in the field is required to take blue and green pills to keep them at the top of their game. These pills and their taking them become the plot device for the rest of the film, which I think is a shame. In much the same way that George Lucas decided to make the “Force” a quantifiable and measurable item the last three Star Wars films I think having the main character reliant on pills and chemicals somehow removes some of the wow factor from it. You always want to know how the magician does the trick and pulls off the impossible but once you’ve been shown how it’s done it’s never quite the same.
Back at the cabin things then take a turn for the worse when those pesky CIA types, led by Edward Norton’s Eric Byer send an unmanned drone to blow it up. Realising that something is “amiss” Cross then heads off to find more pills and some answers from his employers. Whilst this is happening we, the viewer, are shown other secret agent getting their comeuppance. It seems that Jason Bourne really knows how to spoil a party!
The other main protagonist of the films is played by another Oscar winner Rachel Weisz (the current Mrs James Bond) but her acting talents are largely wasted here. She spends most of the movie playing a generic “Damsel in distress” and even though she’s given brains and intelligence she’s very rarely allowed to let them out of the box. The other issue here is that Renner and Wise don’t share any screen time together until we’re about an hour into the film. I also got the feeling that it was only going to be a matter of time before Cross uttered the immortal Schwarzenegger line “come with me if you want to live”.
Weisz character is Dr Marta Shearing, who just happens to be responsible for creating the blue and green pills but as luck would have it the closest available source for these “Happy Haribo’s” just happens to be a short plane ride away in the Philippines. Cue some very dodgy disguises and home made passports that wouldn’t look out of place in an amateur dramatics production of Cluedo.
Once they’ve arrived on the other side of the Pacific there are a couple of good action set pieces but they do really leave you wanting more.
I think the main problem with this film is that in order for it to work it needs to be treated on its own merits and values but given the three films that came before it that is never going to happen. The bar was raised to a very high level by its predecessors and no amount of new cast and new direction is ever going to change that. We spend the first fifty minutes of The Bourne Legacy being reminded of Jason Bourne and his films and even though you’ve seen those already you find yourself wanting to watch those instead and not wanting to spend the emotional investment on Legacy. Rachel Weisz’s character has the last line of the film where she says “I was hoping we were lost”. Well I can safely say that I think the viewing audience may well be missing in action.
Twitter Review:
Legacy doesn't raise the bar or offer anything we haven't seen before. Characters come don't develop or snap into focus.
#BourneYourTimeIsUp
Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1194173/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSzy9qQ3mDE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdtUdEoE-Q4&feature=relmfu
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)