Year: 2012
Director: Len Wiseman
Screenplay: Kurt Wimmer, Mark Bomback
Starring: Colin Farrell, Kate Beckinsale, Jessica Biel, Byran Cranston, Bill Nighy, Bokeem Woodbine, John Cho
Synopsis is here:
After finishing The Good, The Bad and The Multiplex by Mark Kermode (light and witty), one of the main points that stayed with me was the chapter about Mainstream movies being better. Kermode believes that due to the fact that films no longer truly flop and merely "under perform", and that the studios that finance said production don't actually risk that much as they don't really lose money, should we be getting better quality movies? Now of course "better" and "good" are of course to the eye of the beholder, but as always I feel that the bequiffed one has an interesting point.
Kermode's words ring particularly true when it comes to the likes of something like Total Recall; an unbelievably, unremarkable and not at all daring Total Recall remake. However I would trade the word better with "stranger" for this particular entry. Reason being; if you're going to remake a Paul Verhoven adaptation of a Philip K Dick short story, you should make it stand out. Unfortunately, safe bets the talking in Hollywood, and they do it louder than middle aged bass playing critics, or live T.V producers who blog about movies for a hobby. Hence why Total Recall is a completely average footnote of the cinematic book of 2012.
The main issue is Total Recall has the used stench of other films hanging off it like burnt offal although it will smell like sweet pork to someone who may not be too bothered about their sci-fi or never got the fuss of the big dumb Arnie original. This film shows the generational gap between film-makers more than you think. We are now plunged fully into the directors who plunder and pilfer from other films and video games for no other reason than they remember it and it looks cool. Wiseman nabs all the artificial elements he can find from the likes of the original film, Blade Runner, Minority Report, I-robot and whatever Xbox games he had in the house at the time but does little else to the film to make our time with the mish mash world he's created fulfilling. This remake thinks it's a decent idea to discard the ambiguity that made Verhoeven feature such a stand out. Arnie is a naff actor, but Verhoeven is a learned director, with his original, wanting the viewer to second guess the intentions of it's lead and situation. TR2012 cuts all this for the "simple" approach, as if the audience couldn't comprehend the identity crisis that featured in the original.
In fact, so much is hollowed out from the original film that the film becomes frustrating. For instance; Quaid's exotic relationship with Melina, the girl of his dreams/reality, was so different from his blonde haired, blue eyed wife it caused an entertaining dynamic. Melina 22 years ago wasn't just different in looks but in personality. A head strong rebellious latina, supported by a feisty performance from Rachel Ticotin. Fast forward to our remake and we get a bland portrayal by Jessica Biel whose only characteristic is to look slightly forlorn that Farrell's Quaid can't remember his own birthday. Such lazy reimagings crop up everywhere as Wiseman's film decides to take the road most travelled. Character actors such as Nighy and Cranston are wasted and the only person seeming to have any fun is Beckingsale's Lori. But then again that is the directors wife we're once again watching in tight clothing holding weaponry (see also Underworld) .
For all the arguments placed on Christopher Nolan's head for his two recent blockbusters (Inception and The Dark Knight Rises) and Ridleys Scott's hyped yet flawed return to sci-fi (Prometheous), Both directors can at least say that their far reaching influences allowed to bring more to proceeding than just the plain surface. Their films have brought months of argument and debate, but at least they have something in there to rouse such heated talk. They have the main source yet manage to bring more to the game.
Total Recall 2012 gives us nothing but gloss and sheen. Verhoeven knew the power of ultra violence and the general insanity of the whole thing. This retread however, is happy to contend with platform game pilfering and Blade Runner cloning. The film doesn't even seem to understand why it's taking certain aspects. Case in point, a three breasted cameo that find its way into the film early on. If you took away the original reason for said cameo to be there in the first place (Mars) why bother with the hark back? Nostalgia be damned, not even the slick action that takes place, can shift the annoyance.
Friday, 14 September 2012
Sunday, 9 September 2012
Cinematic Dramatic 4x11 - Total Recall 2012
Get your ass to...um...earth? Confused? We are too as The Dramatics see the remake of Total Recall and ask themselves the simple question of "Why?"
via GeekPlanetOnline: Cinematic Dramatic http://www.geekplanetonline.com/hosting/originals/dramatic/?p=episode&name=2012-09-09_cinematic_dramatic_4x11__total_recall_2012.mp3
via GeekPlanetOnline: Cinematic Dramatic http://www.geekplanetonline.com/hosting/originals/dramatic/?p=episode&name=2012-09-09_cinematic_dramatic_4x11__total_recall_2012.mp3
Friday, 24 August 2012
Cinematic Dramatic 4x10 - The Expendables 2
Lock and Load! The Dramatics are throwing themselves into fantasy with Brave, spy games with The Bourne Legacy and more explosions as Sly's Expendables are back for another adventure. Byron's thrilled.
via GeekPlanetOnline: Cinematic Dramatic http://www.geekplanetonline.com/hosting/originals/dramatic/?p=episode&name=2012-08-24_cinematic_dramatic_4x10__the_expendables_2.mp3
via GeekPlanetOnline: Cinematic Dramatic http://www.geekplanetonline.com/hosting/originals/dramatic/?p=episode&name=2012-08-24_cinematic_dramatic_4x10__the_expendables_2.mp3
Sunday, 19 August 2012
Review: The Bourne Legacy
Year: 2012
Director: Tony Gilroy
Screenplay: Tony Gilroy, Dan Gilroy
Starring: Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton
Synopsis is here
My problem with The Bourne Legacy is that it's so interested in it's lofty themes, it completely forgets about getting the basics down. There's a kernel of a decent film which is lost amid a pool of lacklustre motivation, uninteresting characters and bland story. All that isn't supposed to matter because GUNFIGHTS AND CHASES. Unfortunately; we've seen all that before, with the first three Bourne films. Those films also had the decency to give you something tangible to hold on to while you rode the roller-coaster.
As I said before there are a few points of interest within The Bourne Legacy. One of them is the idea of soldiers being created with less remorse, making them more efficient killers in the field while losing the compassion that compasses their humanity. The film references this twice. Firstly; when a our new Jason Bourne, Alex Cross (Renner) meets another agent at a remote outpost, sent there because he "fell in love". Secondly in a admittedly impressive motorcycle chase sequence, an enemy agent grunt who is "tradestone with none of the inconsistency, appears and goes Terminator on our heroes. The idea that the genetic science that may have created Jason Bourne is now being used to zone out emotional capacities is something I would find fascinating in a movie, particularly in one like this in which does show some promise with dialogue that doesn't feel like it's been processed for teenagers. Placing a pharmaceutical company the way the film does as the antagonist also gives the film a 70's thriller vibe and maturity that you may not get with your vampire hunters or even Avengers.
Problems arises however, when you realise that Alex Cross is just not Jason Bourne and the so called legacy looms large over the entire project. We are told every early on by an uninterested Edward Norton, to forget about Jason Bourne. But Bourne's search for his identity (as well as his humanity) give him a clear purpose. Here; we're given a bland goal of having to get "chems" or else. This wouldn't be a problem if Cross was a character worth following. The same goes for the antagonists chasing him down. There seems to be little at stake for everyone involved. Whatever stake that is negated, doesn't feel worth bothering about.
The film doesn't make good on its terms, starting very slowly, almost to the point of tedium, before wandering aimlessly (the middle being punctuated with well structured but ultimately meaningless action set pieces) and finishing abruptly, with the main narrative being nowhere as interesting as the subtext the film mentioned. Renner and Weisz sell their roles well but I found myself constantly arguing the point of the whole thing with myself. When you do that, your not enjoying the movie.
Director: Tony Gilroy
Screenplay: Tony Gilroy, Dan Gilroy
Starring: Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton
Synopsis is here
My problem with The Bourne Legacy is that it's so interested in it's lofty themes, it completely forgets about getting the basics down. There's a kernel of a decent film which is lost amid a pool of lacklustre motivation, uninteresting characters and bland story. All that isn't supposed to matter because GUNFIGHTS AND CHASES. Unfortunately; we've seen all that before, with the first three Bourne films. Those films also had the decency to give you something tangible to hold on to while you rode the roller-coaster.
As I said before there are a few points of interest within The Bourne Legacy. One of them is the idea of soldiers being created with less remorse, making them more efficient killers in the field while losing the compassion that compasses their humanity. The film references this twice. Firstly; when a our new Jason Bourne, Alex Cross (Renner) meets another agent at a remote outpost, sent there because he "fell in love". Secondly in a admittedly impressive motorcycle chase sequence, an enemy agent grunt who is "tradestone with none of the inconsistency, appears and goes Terminator on our heroes. The idea that the genetic science that may have created Jason Bourne is now being used to zone out emotional capacities is something I would find fascinating in a movie, particularly in one like this in which does show some promise with dialogue that doesn't feel like it's been processed for teenagers. Placing a pharmaceutical company the way the film does as the antagonist also gives the film a 70's thriller vibe and maturity that you may not get with your vampire hunters or even Avengers.
Problems arises however, when you realise that Alex Cross is just not Jason Bourne and the so called legacy looms large over the entire project. We are told every early on by an uninterested Edward Norton, to forget about Jason Bourne. But Bourne's search for his identity (as well as his humanity) give him a clear purpose. Here; we're given a bland goal of having to get "chems" or else. This wouldn't be a problem if Cross was a character worth following. The same goes for the antagonists chasing him down. There seems to be little at stake for everyone involved. Whatever stake that is negated, doesn't feel worth bothering about.
The film doesn't make good on its terms, starting very slowly, almost to the point of tedium, before wandering aimlessly (the middle being punctuated with well structured but ultimately meaningless action set pieces) and finishing abruptly, with the main narrative being nowhere as interesting as the subtext the film mentioned. Renner and Weisz sell their roles well but I found myself constantly arguing the point of the whole thing with myself. When you do that, your not enjoying the movie.
Friday, 17 August 2012
Review: The Expendables 2
Year: 2012
Director: Simon West
Screenplay: Richard Wenk and Sylvester Stallone
Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Chuck Norris, Randy Couture, Terry Crews, Liam Hemsworth, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Nan Yu
Synopsis is here
NOTE: I go into some spoiler territory here, but if you turn up to this for the plot, you surprise even me.
In a brave new post modern world; where action heroes are now more likely to be character actors (Bale, Damon, Downley Jr et all), The Expendables came across as a distressing plea for relevance at the hands of it's director and lead, Sylvester Stallone. Rambo himself may have jogged audience members memories to remember heap of near forgotten action stars. However, the misty eyed nostalgia of seeing these screen heroes was quickly obscured by the real reason for the films existence: ego fuel.
Sly's film was less about showing the young pretenders how it's done and more about exclaiming that he was till around. Drunk of the response of Rocky Balboa and Rambo, The Expendables' constant extreme close ups of an elderly Stallone mumbling naff gags was unfortunately more memorable than the hastily hacked action.
Empire writer Helen O'Hara rightfully lambasted the net nerds and lugheads on twitter by quoting the following:
That said, The Expendables 2 will probably quench the thirst of those who lust for the wrinkly muscle of it's meat headed cast. The film starts out with a set piece that could have easily been the climax of any other action movie. As oddly composited the sequence is (considering the film, and the money put in place, it doesn't look great) this sequel clearly wishes to expand on what came before. Bullets fire, bones crack and faceless soldiers of a far away country are set on fire. Director Simon West sorts out some of the geography of the on screen action although still it feels like characters drop in and out with no real sense of place or time.
It is good that a director like West has taken over directing duties from Stallone. The film is a little more assured of itself this time round. The film trundles along at a decent enough pace and hits it's action beats better than it's predecessor. Most of the dialogue and gags are still pretty awful, but Stallone and his band of writers at least feel a bit more accurate with the ironic aspect of the franchise. I've got to believe that the confusing and cliched monologue that Liam Hemsworth spouts is for the "lolz" because his character goes so far past tongue in cheek that it skips past sad and ends up right back where it came from. Honestly, the moment Hemsworth utters his first line of dialogue, his trajectory becomes more than a little predictable.
But then that's what films like this are about. Stating the obvious and things that go boom. Things don't have to make sense as long as a famous action start pops up from nowhere, makes a pop culture reference to themselves and shoots a gun. There is little to no reason for Chuck Norris within this movie, other than to mention a Chuck Norris joke from the internet and distract you from the fact that Jet Li was only in the first 10 mins of the the movie.
It's not completely tragic. I really enjoyed the casting of Jean Claude Van Damme, who milks his villainous character for as much as he can get, while there's no denying that there's a certain chemistry between Stallone and chums, although it still feels like him Bruce and Arnie didn't shoot their scenes together. The inclusion of Nan Yu as an intelligent (for this kind of movie) female character also means well. Unlike a Micheal Bay movie, Yu doesn't feel as sexualised as so many Hollywood startlets, and yet remains attractive in her own right.
For all it's obviousness, The Expendables 2 does at times strive for something earnest. One "dramatic" moment has Sly's Barney Ross lament at why some are chosen to die, while others do not. The scene is badly played out (almost laughable) and yet touches on something I wished both this and the original film leaned on more. However, it's not meant to be. The Expendabless 2 stayed in my memories longer than the first film, but still faded quicker than watery mist on a hot July day. That negative response may have more grown men weeping and raging, but at least they'll have the large arms of The Expendables to keep them safe.
Director: Simon West
Screenplay: Richard Wenk and Sylvester Stallone
Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Chuck Norris, Randy Couture, Terry Crews, Liam Hemsworth, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Nan Yu
Synopsis is here
NOTE: I go into some spoiler territory here, but if you turn up to this for the plot, you surprise even me.
In a brave new post modern world; where action heroes are now more likely to be character actors (Bale, Damon, Downley Jr et all), The Expendables came across as a distressing plea for relevance at the hands of it's director and lead, Sylvester Stallone. Rambo himself may have jogged audience members memories to remember heap of near forgotten action stars. However, the misty eyed nostalgia of seeing these screen heroes was quickly obscured by the real reason for the films existence: ego fuel.
Sly's film was less about showing the young pretenders how it's done and more about exclaiming that he was till around. Drunk of the response of Rocky Balboa and Rambo, The Expendables' constant extreme close ups of an elderly Stallone mumbling naff gags was unfortunately more memorable than the hastily hacked action.
Empire writer Helen O'Hara rightfully lambasted the net nerds and lugheads on twitter by quoting the following:
"It's ironic, a movie that wears masculinity like a badge has fans who read 1 bad review & cry like little girls"I couldn't agree more. The Expendables is less about delivering a decent action feature as opposed to stroking the egos of those who star in it. Stallone, Arnie and Willis have all make their mark in action films that were way more effective in story and set pieces. High pitched screeches of how "old school" it is, can ring from here to Albuquerque. The whining falls on deaf ears when the likes of films like The Raid are only a rental away. That film also has issues, but when it comes to action, the scenes put forth could be watched over and over.
That said, The Expendables 2 will probably quench the thirst of those who lust for the wrinkly muscle of it's meat headed cast. The film starts out with a set piece that could have easily been the climax of any other action movie. As oddly composited the sequence is (considering the film, and the money put in place, it doesn't look great) this sequel clearly wishes to expand on what came before. Bullets fire, bones crack and faceless soldiers of a far away country are set on fire. Director Simon West sorts out some of the geography of the on screen action although still it feels like characters drop in and out with no real sense of place or time.
It is good that a director like West has taken over directing duties from Stallone. The film is a little more assured of itself this time round. The film trundles along at a decent enough pace and hits it's action beats better than it's predecessor. Most of the dialogue and gags are still pretty awful, but Stallone and his band of writers at least feel a bit more accurate with the ironic aspect of the franchise. I've got to believe that the confusing and cliched monologue that Liam Hemsworth spouts is for the "lolz" because his character goes so far past tongue in cheek that it skips past sad and ends up right back where it came from. Honestly, the moment Hemsworth utters his first line of dialogue, his trajectory becomes more than a little predictable.
But then that's what films like this are about. Stating the obvious and things that go boom. Things don't have to make sense as long as a famous action start pops up from nowhere, makes a pop culture reference to themselves and shoots a gun. There is little to no reason for Chuck Norris within this movie, other than to mention a Chuck Norris joke from the internet and distract you from the fact that Jet Li was only in the first 10 mins of the the movie.
It's not completely tragic. I really enjoyed the casting of Jean Claude Van Damme, who milks his villainous character for as much as he can get, while there's no denying that there's a certain chemistry between Stallone and chums, although it still feels like him Bruce and Arnie didn't shoot their scenes together. The inclusion of Nan Yu as an intelligent (for this kind of movie) female character also means well. Unlike a Micheal Bay movie, Yu doesn't feel as sexualised as so many Hollywood startlets, and yet remains attractive in her own right.
For all it's obviousness, The Expendables 2 does at times strive for something earnest. One "dramatic" moment has Sly's Barney Ross lament at why some are chosen to die, while others do not. The scene is badly played out (almost laughable) and yet touches on something I wished both this and the original film leaned on more. However, it's not meant to be. The Expendabless 2 stayed in my memories longer than the first film, but still faded quicker than watery mist on a hot July day. That negative response may have more grown men weeping and raging, but at least they'll have the large arms of The Expendables to keep them safe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)