Review: Pacific Rim

Year: 2013

Director: Guillermo del Toro 

Screenplay: Travis Beacham, Guillermo del Toro 

Starring: Charlie Hunnam, Idris Elba, Rinko Kikuchi, Charlie Day

Synopsis is here:

For me Pacific Rim works because its director,Guillermo del Toro, knows how to economise storytelling. The film rattles along at great speed, but we never lose sight of anything. We feel more to be done to fill in the gaps, and yet throughout, the dynamics between characters are solid, the set pieces never feel extraneous (in fact the detail is often gorgeous) and the absurd story still manages to stay intact. Tropes and iffy dialogue are a plenty, yet the execution of it all side-swipes such issues like an elbow rocket.

For a film that is effectively Robots (Jaegers) smashing the scales off Monsters (Kaiju) it sweats out reference out of every orifice. Anime fans may mention Evangelion, Sci-fi fans can spy Godzilla. Gamers could smile at the Shadow of the Colossus feel, while guys like me may very well find themselves transported back when they first watched (and fell in love with) Independence Day (aged 12). The wealth of pop culture that seeps through scene after scene I found astonishing.

But its how all these references are stitched together which I found so appealing. The template is telling. Yet the beauty of the visuals, the spunk and energy of the performances and the boisterous thuds and clunks of mecha on flesh held my interest. Del Toro’s strength here is in taking a platter of well known aspects and rearranging them to feel fun again. The action loses the hyper active editing; we can see what’s happening. The length of the film is much shorter than some of the more hyped movies released besides it. It simply says what it needs to and doesn’t push for time to give the pretence of “epic” storytelling. The film feels big on its own regard, because of the films eye meltingly gorgeous design.

But while I found the look of the film often breath-taking (it ranks with Avatar for me as some of the best CGI), the actors that helped me suck up some air and kept me fighting the good fight. Charlie Hunnam gives an earnest display as Relight Beckett. Idris Elba channels Richard Crenna in First Blood and chomps at scenery.  Rinko Kikuchi bypasses some of the issues that have kept some of the other female characters from being anything interesting (thank god for the screenplay giving a damn). Meanwhile Charlie Day’s performance is not only welcomed by the fact that I’ve been binging on It’s always Sunny in Philadelphia, but by giving a performance that strangely reminds me of Rick Morris in Ghostbusters. That can only be a pleasant thing.

But Pacific Rim is full of such pleasant things and I don’t need my blockbusters to reinvent wheels when released (say that three times). But I do want that sense of fun that can be found. Pacific Rim doesn’t feature the comic book anxieties and origin stories that have almost become a mainstay during the summer period. It also doesn’t rely on name brand nostalgia to make an appearance of being decent. There’s none of the grubby “humour” that litters the likes of Transformers and thank goodness. Del Toro’s ability to see his blockbuster ideas through the prism of a small kid is important here. Pacific Rim manages to capture some of that imaginative feeling before cynicism set in. All Transformers seemed willing to give you is Megan Fox giving you a blank stare and a humping Robot.

Review: Cloverfield

Year: 2008
Director: Matt Reeves
Screenplay: Drew Goddard
Starring: Michael Stahl-David, Jessica Lucas, Lizzy Caplan, T.J. Miller, Mike Vogel, Odette Yustman

CONTENDER FOR MY END OF THE YEAR TOP TEN!

Words can't describe how much I loved this film. I haven't left a cinema buzzing like this for a very long time. Cloverfield will have it's haters (heard of many a walk out) but for me this was a brilliant cinematic experince.

Cloverfield has been considered "godzilla for the youtube generation" and I can see why. Elements of video games like Half Life run rife throughout the film. When me, my girlfriend and some firend spoke about the movie afterwards we commented not on the destruction of New York City but the reaction of everyone on screen holding up camera phones. From the films pesudo-hand held feel, to the well documented hype, for a monster movie produced by the guy who "almost ruined Superman" Cloverfield is not only stylish but isn't dumb.

It's visuals envoke images of 9/11, not as a cheap showy trick but as a way to provoke the intensity of the situation. We don't get alot of character buliding but would you if you look at the context of the film. The monster is rearly seen for alot of the movie but it's lack on screen action only ups the ante. You could see this thing at any time, and the monster has a true feeling of unpredictablity that has been rearly seen in a movie like this in a while.

The story? Well we are shown a group of young people preparing for a party for their good friend who is leaving town to become a vice president of a company in Japan after a brief mingle and some of the guests dealing with their relationship issues...a temor is felt...then havoc breaks loose.

Havoc it is. After the first 15 minutes, Cloverfield has one thing on it's mind; keeping the tension going. The movie is filmed as if it were by a partygoer and the amatuer cameramans awakward reactions and movements keep pace and unease at boiling point. Once the monster is rife in Manhattan the suspense is constant. Don't worry about those questions that would be answered in real life. For me I didn't have time to dwell on them, for me they were irrelevent as the pace and the pure excitement of the film was (excuse the ghetto) OFF DA HOOK!

To help aid things the preformances of the unknown actors are quite strong. We don't get to find out much about them but their preformances manage for cover the characterization. This however is an asset to the film. The shock is there, but you need to keep moving, the characters preform it well and need the audience to follow suit (youtube generation et all).

The use of unknowns is a perfect for the film, with standouts being the film "lead" Michael Stahl-David and the comic relief T.J Miller playing the Cameraman who is named Hud (geddit?). Stahl-David has enough presence and talent to make his brief moments of emotion effecting while Miller has all the best lines. Most of the females in the movie however are not given time to show what they got in anything apart from tight bodies and small moments of distress but it doesn't matter as like I said imeditatcy is the key.

Director Matt Reeves and the much more famous producer J.J have taken a huge risk with this film and for me they have succeeded. The hype and mystery surrounding the film ape that of The Blair Witch Project along with it's modest budget and unknown actors. However while TBW left a lot of people short changed (not me, I love the films atmoshpere and preformances), Cloverfield delivers in many areas that others may not think that TBW does. The film has the ability to shock and excite. it's what it was made for and it's what it does...tenfold. It's been a while since I've been in a cinema in which the film left everyone in an errie hush after watching.
Cloverfield did it's job. I await the DVD.

Wandering in Cloverfield

If you haven't seen this site or seen either of these trailers I will wonder where you've been in the last view months (if your a film wanker like myself that is). Yes it finally has a name and we finally get a full trailer...and yet like another J.J Abrams project Lost, the more we see the more questions have to ask.

What about the monster?

Who are these non-stars?

Why don't we know more etc.

Well I don't know about you but I love how this project is being handled. It's nice to see a film being pushed with an air of mystery about it. The net news is few and far between and even the most sneaky of scoopers are finding trouble trying to get information.

I say good. I'm sick of trailers (especially trailers of the recent spate of remakes) that try and condense the whole films story into 3 minutes. I hate the fact that by the time you get to the cinema, you know whats going down with the film because your waiting for that money shot that hasn't happened just yet.

The less I know the more I'm interested. You want to know the story when you see the actual film not during the preview of another film.

The films wish to hide it's secrets are a blessing and a curse. The Blair Witch Project is one of the biggest independent films to date in in terms of money however the amount of people truly FUCKED OFF with the film is understandable (I love it).

Also releasing the film in January is either genius (release a good money spinner in a dumping ground for shite? mega bucks) or stupidly (release a naff product to shift it quickly and bring on the summer.)

But who cares right now? The outlook for me looks more positive than negative. I like the films modern, intense feel towards the monster movie. It makes an interesting comparison to Peter Jackson's more classic feel to his monster epic King Kong.

I have a lot of high hopes for this flick and hope it will do ok critically and financially.


NOTE: Those into a good little monster movie should do well to seek out the Korean ditty The Host. It's an interesting take on the sub genre.