Oldies:
9/10- My Most Anticipated Summer Films
Oscar Breach Awards: Best of the '80s My Most Anticipated Films for Spring
Winter 08,
Summer 08,
Winter 07,
Summer 07,
Winter 06,
Summer 06
Review: District 9
The surprise hit of the summer is quickly becoming a success because of its originality and even its simplicity.
As a sci-fi action movie I think District really delivers. The visuals and sounds are impressive, the action is exciting, though perhaps
a little too graphic at times and the ending was a little underwhelming. Sharlto Copley also puts in such a great performance of both comedy and
humility that it's hard to believe he's never acted before. And I could tell that the film is supposed to be a reflection of culture in some ways
regarding poverty, immigration and weapon power. I couldn't tell if this is meant to reflect any actual countries or events, but I wouldn't
believe it if they did because some characters do horrible things that I would have trouble believing people of the civilized world would do.
Yet what I think this film accomplishes more is being a successful experiment in filmmaking in many ways. It proves that a film set in a
foreign-location, with a lot of subtitles, with complete no-name actors and a no-name director with a small budget can still be one of the
summer's biggest hits. It proves that impressive and realistic visual effects are no longer limited to big-budget films. And it proved that,
like Cloverfield, hand-held filmmaking with alternative forms of storytelling (in this case, making it look like a documentary), can
be as successful as straight-forward linear storytelling.
Though it's mostly limited to audiences of sci-fi, action, and social drama, District 9 serves as an entertaining summer flick as well
as a meditation on what can be accomplished in modern filmmaking.
Stars: 3.5 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Original Screenplay, Editing, Makeup, Visual Effects, Sound Editing
Review: The Hurt Locker
What is considered the first best picture contender of the year could end up becoming just that due to its handling of brutal reality.
The greatest strength of the film is the intense suspense, Hitchcock-style, during each of the bomb defusing scenes, and never knowing if James,
a skilled but reckless character, will make it out alive. Bigelow directs these scenes brilliantly for creating situations where every move is a
balancing act and anybody within sight could be ready to kill you. Never has a fly crawling on somebodys face seemed so nerve-wrecking.
Additionally, the three main actors deserve credit for great work, as should the sound mixing team.
However, I believe the same problem plagues this film that plagued Spielbergs last seven films. It has a lot of great scenes, but its sort of
lacking in a big picture. When you get to the end of the film, youve seen a lot of thrilling stuff, but you wonder what its all been for. Since
there seems to be little if any development in the characters, and since the ending takes us right back to the beginning, it doesnt look like
its been for much.
I should also mention my political thoughts on this. I came into Hurt Locker fearing that this would be another anti-war movie like
Born on the Fourth of July or Lions for Lambs. Fortunately, I didnt get that impression. The soldiers for the most part are
portrayed as the smart, skilled, loyal, and morally just individuals that they really are, while the enemy is portrayed as the cruel, deceitful,
sadistic buggers that they are. War is hell, and thats how it is portrayed here, but a film would be unrealistic if it wasnt portrayed that way.
Despite showing the horrors of war, the film is not a protest because not once did it question the purpose of the war, nor did it second-guess
the intentions of the soldiers. So it certainly gets my political seal of approval.
The Hurt Locker is a thriller about a very real situation half a world away, and it portrays that world accurately and keeps the audience
focused at the same time. Though the big picture behind the film seems somewhat inconclusive, I see it as a lot of thrilling scenes and a
fascinating look at just what our men and women in uniform are going through to protect our freedoms. If youre interested it the subject,
you should see the film, then thank a veteran on your way home.
Stars: 3 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Picture, Director, Actor Jeremy Renner, Supporting Actor Anthony Mackie, Original Screenplay, Cinematography, Editing, Sound, Sound Editing
Review: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
The biggest box-office opener of the year has its flaws that everybody has been so enthusiastically pointing out, but still delivers the badassitude
that weve come to expect and love from director Michael Bay.
I set my expectations really high for this film, so its only natural that Id be a little underwhelmed by it. I think the first Transformers
is one of the best action films ever, and the sequel has a few flaws that the original didnt have. This time the plot is a little too complex for full
comprehension, likely a result of the rushed post-WGA-strike script writing. Action sequences were a little too quick and incomprehensible. Believe
it or not, I think the movie was too short, for they should have used that extra footage that I know they shot to flesh out the action sequences in
greater detail. Like the resurrection of Megatron all happened a little too fast for digestion. And after the first film, many fans asked director
Michael Bay to pull the camera back a little so that not every action shot was a vague close-up, advice he clearly didnt follow. And finally, there
are several new robot characters (27 by my count), few of whom really get properly introduced. I would have enjoyed seeing more lines and development
given to new Autobots Sideswipe, Jolt, and especially Arcee. At least the twins Skids and Mudflap got adequate and in my humble opinion inoffensive
character development.
With all that in mind, I still loved this film because of Michael Bay doing what he does best: action scenes pumped with testosterone and visuals to
drool over. Im highly impressed with the number of robot characters, their digital complexity, and how many shots of them were rendered in the films
brief post-production period. The visual and sound effects are once again Oscar-deserving, though Im sure will once again be snubbed. The main course
is Devastator, a gigantic gorilla-like bot built from the combination of seven construction vehicles. Action sequences with this bot and more dont get
much better in terms of excitement, fun and light humor.
Now I just want to address the other critics out there who have been hammering this film to death. Theyve been criticizing this film for its lack of
plot, underdeveloped characters, and Megan Foxs bad acting. Well heres a news flash for you critics: THE AUDICENCE DOESNT CARE!!! Have you ever
heard anybody say, You should see this Michael Bay film because its so thought-provoking, or You should see this Michael Bay film because it has
such great acting. No, you hear people say You should see this Michael Bay film because it has awesome giant robots ripping the gears out of each other!
Thats why people like me and the millions of people who saw it this weekend all over the world love Michael Bays films: because theres just a
hell of a lot of fun! When will critics lighten up and just let their inner child enjoy one of Bays films for once?
Though I admit its not quite the masterpiece that the first Transformers was, Revenge of the Fallen is still a fun ride for those
who have testosterone in their blood, and an inner child that theyre willing to let roam free. Michael Bay, my friend, you say that you dont
make movies for the critics but for the audience. I believe youve succeeded in doing just that.
Stars: 3 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Visual Effects, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, Song
Review: Up
I don't even know why I bother writing reviews for Pixar films anymore. You know they’re always spectacular, and Up is certainly no exception.
What’s made all previous Pixar films excellent is here as well. It's a film that can be enjoyed by all ages, without any childish jokes that adults roll eyes at, and without any reference jokes that only work for the time. It may not be as funny as Toy Story, or as action-packed as The Incredibles or as stylistic as Ratatouille. But Up is probably the most touching film ever to come out of Pixar, which says a lot since it's the studio that made Finding Nemo and Wall-E. It’s the Pixar film most likely to make you cry as you mourn the same losses of Carl’s life. This also might make it the most adult-enjoyable Pixar film, not just because of the drama, but also for being essentially the most real-world film. But fear not, for there is certainly a happy ending.
Trust me, this is close to getting four whole stars. The only thing that really bothered me was when the realism that the film more or less maintained throughout the film was abandoned near the end when too many crazy things started happening such as super-intelligent dogs flying their own bi-planes. Also the character Dug, a friendly dog who speaks through his electric collar, is certainly funny but I feel like there were a lot of missed joke opportunities for him.
I'd also like to point out that this is the first film I've seen in 3D as part of the recent digital 3D fad that started a year or two ago and is now sweeping the country. While the 3D effect is cool, it probably won’t make you enjoy the film anymore that in 2D. But if you’ve never tried a recent digital 3D film, it might be worth the extra three bucks just for once. But no matter how many dimensions you see Up in, you should just see it. I believe it’s the best Pixar film since Toy Story 2 ten years ago, and I’m sure will once again end up being recognized as the best animated film of the year. Who knows, maybe it can do what Wall-E barely missed doing and even score a best picture nomination.
Stars: 3.5 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Picture, Director, Original Screenplay, Sound, Sound Editing, Score, Animated Film
Review: Terminator Salvation
The new installment of the Terminator franchise isn't a bad movie if standing on its own, but is a disappointment when put in the context of the series.
There are several things that made the Terminator franchise great, and Salvation has some of them. They've been known for revolutionary advances in visual effects and makeup technology. This continues however I'm disappointed they've mostly abandoned Stan Winston's traditional special effects methods (despite giving him a loving memory tribute in the credits) and relied too heavily on CGI. The franchise has been known for excellent action sequences. This continues, but again they're relying too heavily on CGI for the action when we know it's more entertaining when real actors and vehicles are used the way James Cameron used to do it. Using the Children of Men style of long takes is a nice touch but not with a super-shaky cam that gives you headaches. So the action and effects are good, but not the best of the franchise.
Yet the biggest problem with Salvation is that it doesn't provide its necessary purpose in the Terminator franchise. How I expected this to happen was one movie taking place in 2004 where John Connor emerges from his underground bunker and the war gets started. Then there would be one last film taking place decades later near the close of the war where all the loose ends of the franchise get tied up. You see, this is as much a prequel as it is a sequel. Based on the previous films, we know several things that must happen in the future (Kyle Reese, the T-1000 and others get sent back in time, etc). The only plot points that need to happen that did happen in this film were Kyle Reese gets introduced to John Connor and the first T-800 comes off the assembly line. At this rate, it's going to take another four films to wrap up the series. I fear Terminator has gone the way of Shrek and started producing profitable sequels off an assembly line each with as little relevance to the series as episodes of a television show.
My point is that Salvation doesn't have a beginning nor an end. There should be a movie before it and after it, and this is merely a pointless chapter in the war against the machines that could have and should have been overlooked. My other complaints include a stale performance from Christian Bale, and the distracting use of big-name actors in two-minute roles (ie Jane Alexander and Helena Bonham-Carter).
Now I say that you might enjoy this film if you are unfamiliar with the Terminator franchise since there's little required setup. You might enjoy the effects, action and sci-fi world. But those who appreciate the franchise will be disappointed in this film serving no role to the Terminator series other than prolonging it. The best way to describe this film: unnecessary.
Stars: 2 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Art Direction, Cinematography, Makeup, Visual Effects, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing
Review: X-Men Origins: Wolverine
A prequel to one of my favorite film franchises in history makes a worthy addition to the franchise if not the best, and continues my tradition of seeing an X-Men film to celebrate my birthday.
Hugh Jackman is the first actor to play a superhero four times since Christopher Reeve ran the Superman series. Jackman once again does a great job digging under Wolverine's skin and finding the inner-animal. The film also largely served as an opportunity to see some fan-favorite mutants that were not included in the original trilogy such as Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds), the Blob (Kevin Durand), and most notably Gambit (Taylor Kitsch). There was also action a plenty since this film seemed to take a page from the Mortal Kombat franchise and have several sequences where any two characters fight one on one. This resulted in eight matches, five of which have Wolverine fighting a different opponent each, my favorite being the climactic battle against Mutant XI, a weaponized mutant with the combined powers of several others. Some of these action sequences are actually the best of the X-Men franchise.
Along with the strength of the action, the story is strong as well. I thought it would merely be the story of how Wolverine got his claws, but it managed to include some twists and subplots that kept my attention, yet unfortunately many of these were spoiled by the by the overly-revealing trailers and clips. Yet most impressive is that, like Star Wars: Episode III or (I presume) Star Trek, this prequel tied up all the loose ends so that it fits perfectly with the events of X-Men, Wolverine's induced amnesia helping clean things up.
Though it's great on action, and continues the X-Men tradition of impressive makeup and visual effects, the substance wasn't quite as engaging as previous films, most notably lacking the mutant prejudice that made the previous films a parallel to society. But you know what? I'm just happy to see an X-Men film that isn't ruined by Halle Berry. Overall, it's not nearly as good as the first two X-Men films, and it's about on par with the third film, even though that film was more polarazing with great moments and terrible moments. In the end, Wolverine is somewhat less thought-provoking and less plot heavy than its predecessors, but it's one of the best when it comes to superpower action, visual spectacle and the wonders of the mutated world.
Stars: 3 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Makeup, Visual Effects, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing
Review: Star Trek
My first intake of a crowded blockbuster summer is a respectable accomplishment and makes a decent summer opener.
The film stars Chris Pine as Captain Kirk, the rebel brawler who enlists in Starfleet, and Zachary Quinto as Spock, the human-Vulcan hybrid conflicted by his roots. The two cross paths on the Starship Enterprise right when it gets into a conflict with the Romulan leader Nero (Eric Bana). We also meet the younger versions of the rest of the crew and how they got onboard like McCoy (Karl Urban), Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Sulu (John Cho), Chekov (Anton Yelchin), and Scotty (Simon Pegg). Most of the story surrounds the relationship between Kirk and Spock in the midst of trying to stop the Romulans from destroying the universe.
Having no knowledge of the original Trek other than the formula and a couple of characters, I'm not the guy to tell you how it compares to the original, but I can tell you how it stands as a stand-alone film. I believe it inhabits everything an entertaining summer blockbuster should be, and makes for a good start to what will likely be a new film series. The story had a good amount of brains to it, especially since a plot that involves time travel and paradoxes is rough ground to tread. Action sequences were well-planned and the small tidbits of comedy were good. I also enjoyed the performances of Pine who embodies a rebel without a cause character like a young Han Solo, and Quinto who superbly suppresses all emotion and observes everything through eyes of logic.
On the other hand, I felt like Eric Bana made for a poor villain, not just because he seemed to be slipping in and out of accents, but because his persona was never nailed. Sometimes he seemed to be purely evil while other times it felt like some comedy was trying to be thrown into the performance, neither of which fits his background as a person who was wronged merely seeking revenge against one man. Also, I didn't like Karl Urban who was the only actor doing an impression of the original character instead of a performance. There were also several small tidbits in the film that make the audience chuckle, though I doubt they were supposed to, Chekov's accent for example. But what annoyed me more is that this is meant to be a breakaway from the series with little in common, yet they fill it up with unnecessary and distracting references. I really got sick of the iconic phrases over and over again, everything from Set phasers to stun to I'm giving her all she's got, Captain to Dammit, Jim. I'm a doctor!
So I think that Star Trek makes for two hours of imperfect but fun film that most anyone will enjoy. As the latest in a recent string of prequel-reboots, this series can now take the route Batman Begins did and make an excellent sequel that steps up the levels, or it can take the route Casino Royale did and make a bad sequel that resorts to old methods. I certainly hope it's the former.
Stars: 3 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Adapted Screenplay, Art Direction, Editing, Makeup, Visual Effects, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, Score
Note: The important thing about this summer is that it will finally reveal the consequences of last year's three-month writers strike. Every film of the summer was impacted differently. Some were written and filming before the strike began and were unaffected (Harry Potter). Some were filmed during the strike which means their scripts couldnt be edited (Star Trek). Some postponed filming until after the strike so there would be time to rewrite (Angels and Demons). And some quickly wrote the whole script after the strike was over (Transformers). And in some cases, recasting was made since actors became suddenly available when their other projects were postponed (so if it weren't for the strike, Johnny Depp wouldn't be in Public Enemies). So even though there doesn't seem to be a shortage of films this summer, there are many that may have been rushed to completion. Only time will tell if the strike hurt the quality of the films.
5. Up
Since Pixar films are now an annual tradition, and since they have yet to disappoint, the anticipation of them becomes a tradition itself. I don't think there is any other studio that can claim every one of their films to be a hit both financially and critically. Pixar has yet to disappoint, so I can't wait for their next film: Up.
This is a simple story of a grumpy old man named Carl Fredricksen (appropriately voiced by Ed Asner) who gets tired of his simple retirement life and sets out for an adventure by flying his house across the world by attaching it to thousands of balloons. A young boy scout is a stowaway and goes on the adventure too.
Every Pixar film was the best of something. Toy Story was the funniest, The Incredibles was the most action-packed, Ratatouille had the most style, and Wall-E was the most touching. This makes me wonder what's left for Up to do. Whatever it does, I'm sure Pixar will do it brilliantly.
Up hits theaters May 29. Watch the theatrical trailer here.
4. Public Enemies
I'm not a fan of all Michael Mann films, but I did love The Insider for its ability to take a true story, break it down to its gritty details and make them all an intense point of suspense. I'm hoping he can do the same with another true story based film: Public Enemies.
Johnny Depp plays the notorious gangster John Dillinger, who along with Pretty Boy Floyd and Baby Face Nelson robbed banks all over the country in the '30s. The trailer pretty much summed up the movie: he robs, gets caught, breaks out, and robs again. I hope there's still some story left to surprise. Christian Bale plays the man who caught Dillinger and Billy Crudup plays FBI's J. Edgar Hoover.
What I hope for this is to be a perfect blend of action, history and style, a well-reviewed summer film. Maybe it could be like The Untouchables meets The Dark Knight. If it's a success, it could give Michael Mann back the audience and following he had in the ‘90s, and become the first major Oscar contender of the year.
Public Enemies hits theaters July 1. Watch the theatrical trailer here.
3. Terminator Salvation
I never actually got into the Terminator films until just a couple of years ago. Now that I've seen all three, I love them, with T2 clearly being the best for its crazy action sequences and breakthrough effects. I'm hoping Terminator Salvation can do the same thing even though it's a very different film.
Salvation takes place after T3 (and I hope they don't mess with the continuity). Machines have taken over the planet and the few surviving humans are part of a resistance lead by John Connor (Christian Bale). This is the first film without Schwarzenegger (seems he has more important business), but instead we have an Australian actor named Sam Worthington playing a man who doesn't know he's a machine, another opportunity for that famous under the skin makeup effect.
I'll probably rent the first three Terminator films so that I can watch them as a marathon before seeing this. So when I experience this series I hope that it will all fit together perfectly, and that Salvation brings the same action and effects wonder that the previous films did.
Terminator Salvation hits theaters May 21. Watch the theatrical trailer here.
2. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
In 2000, X-Men became my favorite superhero film of all time, and I believe it still is. The sequel was great, and the threequel was good, but now we've got a prequel on our hands all about Wolverine. With Oscar-winning director Gavin Hood at the helm, we can finally explore where or what Wolverine came from.
The trailers are somewhat cryptic in their plot, which I think is all the better since it leaves it open to surprise. What we can see is that Wolverine has lived a long time, fought many wars, lost a woman, and now seeks revenge by joining the Weapon X program under Col. William Stryker (Danny Huston), which gives him his infamous claws. Some new mutants appear including a fan favorite and my long-awaited favorite: Gambit (Taylor Kitsch).
You know, Hugh Jackman has now played Wolverine for four films, a rarity for big actors, but it shows just how dedicated he is to the character, and I'm sure that will continue with his performance. The X-Men franchise is already one of if not my favorite franchises in movie history, and all that I ask is for Wolverine to be an appropriate prequel and addition to the brilliant superhero series.
X-Men Origins: Wolverine hits theaters May 1. Watch the theatrical trailer here.
1. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
I never thought an X-Men film would be number two on my list of most anticipated films, but I just can't say no to the explosive, robot-banging, metal-clanging, Michael Bay-ing sequel to the most badass film of 2007: Transformers. And I have every reason to believe that Revenge of the Fallen will double the action and kick it into overdrive.
Picking up a few years after the original, Sam (Shia Labeouf) and Mikaela (Megan Fox) are living seemingly normal lives, other than the fact that Sam has a robot Camero named Bumblebee living in his garage. Then it seems the Decepticons lead by Starscream return with reinforcements and out for revenge, and it is up to Optimus Prime and the Autobots to once again save humanity. Those are pretty much all the plot details I've got since Michael Bay is doing a better job keeping this one under wraps.
But then again, who needs a plot? We didn't need it for the first one, and it was still great. What audiences will come to this film for is to see cars, jets, insects, and a motorcycle named Arcee transform into blasting robots. But they'll also be treated to an epic confrontation between Megatron and his treacherous lieutenant Starscream, and most awesome of all: seeing six construction vehicles combine to form one monstrously bigass Decepticon named Devastator. After all, this is Michael Bay film, and audiences turn out by the millions to see mindless explosions and effects that stimulate the senses and relax the mind.
I've tried for years to suppress my nerdish impulses, but films like this just keep on bringing it out of me. I may sound like a geek for calling Transformers the second-best summer film of 2007, and for calling Revenge of the Fallen potentially the best summer film of 2009. But can you blame me? With all the dull drawn out Oscar films like La Vie En Rose and The Reader that I'm forced to see for my website, I take great pleasure in the occasional film that doesn't require a much of a mind, but if you have one it will get blown away. Go see Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen this summer and I'm sure you too will have a new appreciation for Michael Bay and his reckless crash-course filmmaking. I sure do.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen hits theaters June 24. Watch the teaser trailer here.
Likely to be disappointments:
Drag me to Hell, G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra, Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs, Land of the Lost
Undecided:
Angels and Demons, Bruno, Night at the Museum: Battle for the Smithsonian, Star Trek
Sorry for the lack of updates, but I've been working hard finishing up these awards awarding the best films and performances on the 1980's. You can see them at the link above or on the sidebar. You will see one film clearly dominating the race, but I made sure to spread some of the love around. Below are the nomination and win talleys.
Win Talley
E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial - 4
Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back - 3
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi - 2
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - 2
Raiders of the Lost Ark - 2
Back to the Future - 1
Who Framed Roger Rabbit - 1
My Left Foot - 1
The Accused - 1
A Fish Called Wanda - 1
Mississippi Burning - 1
Die Hard - 1
Amadeus - 1
The Abyss - 1
Ghost Busters - 1
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade - 1
Born on the Fourth of July - 1
Nomination Talley
E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial - 7
Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back - 5
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi - 5
Raiders of the Lost Ark - 5
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - 4
Die Hard - 4
The Untouchables - 4
Dead Poets Society - 4
Batman - 4
Aliens - 4
Driving Miss Daisy - 3
The Termiantor - 3
The Abyss - 3
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade - 3
Back to the Future - 3
Gallipoli - 2
My Left Foot - 2
A Fish Called Wanda - 2
Who Framed Roger Rabbit - 2
Born on the Fourth of July - 2
Henry V - 2
The Land Before Time - 2
Rain Man - 2
Amadeus - 2
The Last Emperor - 2
Raising Arizona - 2
Top Gun - 2
The Shining - 2
A Christmas Story, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, The Little Mermaid, Good Morning Vietnam, The Accused, Fatal Attraction, On Golden Pond, Terms of Endearment, Ordinary People, Glory, Mississippi Burning, Tootsie, Working Girl, Hannah and Her Sisters, Empire of the Sun, Raging Bull, Platoon, Gandhi, Beetle Juice, The Elephant Man, Return to Oz, Back to the Future Part 2, Chariots of Fire, Ghost Busters, An American Tail, Predator, Coal Miner's Daughter, Out of Africa, A Passage to India, Reds - 1
Review: Watchmen
What is certainly one of the most anticipated films of the year, and a long-awaited adaptation, turns out to be something of a heavily-flawed masterpiece with more divisive power than politics.
Now believe it or not, I just summed up about half of the movie. You see, what I think is the film's greatest flaw is that about two thirds of the running time is spent introducing the characters and giving flashbacks to provide their back stories. The film's real plot is about uncovering who killed the Comedian and why. But if the running time is almost three hours, I would have expected them to spend more than an hour on the actual plot.
Now I'm sure that every flaw with this film will have the counterargument, "But that's how it was in the book." Though I always admire directors who try to stay loyal to the source material, I think in this case it would have helped to diverge from it a little more. The back stories and character developments all waste too much time when we want to get into the plot, which ends up being a very simple plot in the end. And for every pointless detail they leave in, there is one that gets left out, like they never explain why Rorschach's mask moves the way it does.
Yet what I can appreciate about this film is the fact that there is nothing else like it. Recent graphic novel adaptations (Sin City, 300) haven't been afraid to step up the graphic violence factor, but few have been as bold as Watchmen to step up the graphic sex content, something that's missing from all other superhero films. And I enjoyed the alternate historic world scenario, as well as an examination of several "could have happened" scenarios. And once the plot got moving, it was a well-written one with a rather clever ending to it. And I really loved Jackie Earle Haley's performance, possibly even better than his Oscar-nominated work in Little Children. But what intrigues me the most is how these are the first superheroes that are nobody special. They're just people who dress up and have their own personal flaws. As an extreme example, it's revealed during an intimate scene that Nite Owl has some trouble getting the Owl-ship off the ground, if you know what I mean.
Though I must stress that this film is not for everybody, especially not those who avoid graphic sex and/or violence. Nor is it for those who prefer complicated plots over character development and philosophy, nor those who can stay seated for two hours and forty-five minutes. As for fans of the novel, not being among you I can't speak for you, but one novel fan I saw the film with came out of it with an overall sense of approval. But a select few types of audience members might enjoy the film for its visual style, its parallels to society and its pure originality.
Stars: 2.5 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Supporting Actor Jackie Earle Haley, Adapted Screenplay, Art Direction, Editing, Costumes, Visual Effects, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing
5. Friday the 13th
The last three or four years have shown a new method of successful filmmaking: reboot. Taking franchises that have declined in quality and dwindled away and restarting them with fresh actors, directors and concepts has worked for films like Batman Begins, Casino Royale, and maybe this year's Terminator Salvation. This reboot of the Friday the 13th franchise is the same idea.
The previews haven�t shown us much other than that Jason is back, and for once he actually moves quickly. That�s a big change. I haven�t actually seen any of the previous Friday the 13th installments other than the splatterific Freddy vs. Jason. But if this film is good, it might get me hooked. I�ll probably see it anyway just because I believe it will have the first trailer for Transformers 2.
Friday the 13th hits theaters February 14. Watch the trailer here.
4. Coraline
From the director of The Nightmare Before Christmas is this stop-motion animated tale of a girl in some weird world that I don't fully understand. I do understand that it was supposed to come out last December but was pushed to this February date. I hope that�s not a reflection of its quality.
Though I actually maintain skepticism since Tim Burton is not involved. What would The Nightmare Before Christmas be if it weren't written and produced by Tim Burton? Probably something like this and that can�t be good. But I�ll try to remain optimistic that it can work without Burton.
Coraline hits theaters February 6. Watch the trailer here.
3. Fanboys
Though I don't consider myself to be a "fanboy", I do share many of the same likings as them (but I would never in a million years go to Comic Con). And that�s why I�m interested in this independent film about a group of fanboys who in �99 embark on a journey to be the first ones to see Star Wars: Episode I at the Skywalker Ranch. Many sci-fi related dangers encounter them along the way.
Perhaps what�s most interesting is the ever changing release date of this film. I believe it was filmed three years ago, has been completed for two years, and has had its release date pushed later nearly a dozen times (typical of the Weinsteins). That�s why I�m hoping it will finally come out this February. And I�m sure it will be hilarious when it does.
Fanboys hits theaters February 6. Watch the trailer here.
2. The Soloist
Like Fanboys, here's a film that was pushed to this spring release date. As we all remember, The Soloist was supposed to be released last October. And just when the ads began running and the Oscar buzz began growing, the studio pushed it so that they could limit their number of releases in a given year.
So the film if you recall is about a journalist (Robert Downey Jr.) who meets a talented but schizophrenic musician (Jamie Foxx) and an unlikely friendship forms. Even though April is not a traditional month for Oscar films, it could still garner nominations for Downey Jr. and Foxx. And best of all, it would finally complete Robert Downey Jr.�s 2008 trifecta (action in Iron Man, comedy in Tropic Thunder and drama in Soloist). His comeback will be complete.
The Soloist hits theaters April 24. Watch the trailer here.
1. Watchmen
I bet this is the most anticipated film of almost anybody's spring, and for some maybe the whole year. Watchmen is based on what they�re calling the most acclaimed graphic novel ever, a novel of which I had never even heard of until this film. The story is about a group of nontraditional darker-side superheroes trying to save the country in 1985. Some of the more notable ones are Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley), a scratchy-voiced detective who wears a white mask with a moving inkblot pattern on it, and Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup), a shiny blue naked magic man and the only one with actual superpowers.
Zach Snyder, the director of 300 directs this in much the same way. He does it stylistically, remaking sequences and shots from the comic. And he also does his trademark method of speeding and slowing the action at just the right times. I�m sure this will bring the most action and style of the spring.
Ever since four years ago when Sin City started the graphic novel adaptation fad, there have been some hits like 300 and some misses like The Spirit. But I have a feeling that Watchmen might become the biggest and best hit of them all.
Watchmen hits theaters March 6. Watch the trailer here.
Likely to be disappointments:
Everything else. It is Spring after all.