Dan Harmon, the creator of "Community", has announced he will return to his post as show runner for the upcoming fifth season. Harmon left his position after creative differences between the executives at Sony and himself. Many fans are overjoyed at the news of his return, and see this as an opportunity for the show to once again be the critical cult hit it once was. Many fans considered the fourth, "Harmon-less" season a letdown, and the worst season so far.
I believe that while the fourth season was not up to par with the past three, it still had some quality episodes. When Season 4 was bad, it was bad (Changnesia, anyone?). When Season 4 was good, it was good.
With that being said, here are my Top Five Episodes from "Community"'s Fourth Season.
#5: Episode 4.7 "Economics of Marine Biology"
The side story of Abed's fictional fraternity ("Delta Cubes!") was classic "Community". Jim Rash was given some great lines as The Dean in this episode, and the return of Board Members Clark and Richie was a funny moment. The Jeff and Pierce storyline was classic and true to the characters, furthering their development and relationship. While I felt the season finale (and the episodes that follow this one), didn't properly conclude Pierce's story*, this episode acted as a nice little consolation for everyone's favorite Greendale grump.
*Chevy Chase, and presumably the character of Pierce, will not be returning for the fifth season.
#4 Episode 4.1 "History 101"
While not the greatest episode of the series, "History 101" was a solid start to the season. The Hunger Games parody was underdeveloped, and nothing more than a setting for the episode, but it provided some great laughs. Abed's "laugh-track sitcom" illusion of the study group was spot-on. It was meta, and classic "Community" humor. The Muppet Babies illusion, within the illusion, was just icing on the cake. Reading this all on paper make this episode sound like a mess, but in truth this is real fun episode to watch.
#3 Episode 4.8 "Herstory of Dance"
You could place this episode in the middle of a Season 1 DVD, and if you didn't tell me it was from Season 4, I probably wouldn't have noticed. The humor felt very traditional and true to the roots of the show. It displayed the characters and their relationships as the fans have known them the past three years, while moving their stories forward. It's an episode I think Dan Harmon himself would be proud of.
#2 Episode 4.11 "Basic Human Anatomy"
A brilliant episode written by Oscar Winner Jim Rash (Dean Pelton himself). It features some truly wonderful performances from Rash, Donald Glover (Troy), and Danny Pudi (Abed). Not only in this episodes does "Community" mock the body-switching film genre, it puts its unique twist on it, that serves the episode and the characters well
1. Episode 4.9 "Intro To Felt Surrogacy"
I'm a sucker for "Community"'s theme/concept episodes, and this is really one of the best. Maybe it's my fascination with The Muppets, but you can tell that the cast and crew treated this episode with care. From the attention to the detail in how the puppets move and interact, to the musical numbers. Like "Basic Human Anatomy", or "Abed's Uncontrollable Christmas", the concept/theme isn't there for the hell of it. It services the plot of the characters, in a fun and unique way. It may not have furthered the overall arc of the show, but it was an emotional and satisfying episode, that showed how the group has grown in four years. "Intro To Felt Surrogacy" will possibly become known as the highlight of Season 4.
So with that we close the books on an uneven, but still enjoyable season of "Community". Now, onto Season 5...
Runners-Up:
Episode 4.9 "Intro To Knots" (The season's Christmas episode)
Episode 4.5 "Cooperative Escapism In Familial Relations (Jeff reunites with his father for Thanksgiving)
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Film Review- "The Great Gatsby"
The Great Gastby
Directed By Baz Luhrman
Starring Tobey Maguire as Nick Caraway, Carey Mulligan as Daisy Buchanan, and
Leonardo DiCaprio as Jay Gatsby
It's not easy adapting a book into a feature film. The source material can only offer so much story, so sometimes you need to stretch it to get to that 120 page script, and sometimes that will backfire on you (Looking at you The Lorax, The Cat In The Hat,...probably Twilight).
"The Great Gatsby" by F.Scott Fitzgerald is only 130 pages. It's a simple story that is well known and loved by many readers. I doubt this film is going to reach that same level of praise.
During the 1920s, Nick Carraway (Maguire) moves to West Egg on Long Island, where he becomes neighbors with the famous, mysterious, and fabulously wealthy Jay Gatsby (DiCaprio). After receiving a personal invitation to one of Gatsby's parties, Nick learns Gatsby and his cousin Daisy (Mulligan) were once lovers, but the Great War separated them. Gatsby asks Nick to arrange to have Daisy over for tea, where they reunite. This little afternoon of tea leads to scandal, drama, and secrets being revealed.
That's all there is to the story. It's quite simple. But Baz Luhrman, in his typical directing fashion, attempts to suggest there's more, by tossing dozens of flashy visuals at the audience. Style overtakes substance and it shows here. The original Fitzgerald story isn't represented as properly as it should. The opening and closing narration of Nick (Twisted here by the filmmakers) feels like nothing more than a gimmick to try and get the audience go "Ohhhhh!' at the end of the film. (Avoiding spoilers here).
Gatsby's parties are made to look like college night clubs. The way 1920s New York looks, it's as if we're watching a movie based on a Frank Miller graphic novel. And the portrayal of the green light at the end of the Buchanan's dock, dare I say, is reduced to something of a Green Lantern cameo.
Do these visuals work? No not really. Are they nice to look at? Sure. I didn't see the film in 3-D, and I'm glad I didn't, because from what I could tell it was just a cheap gimmick.
I'd say the soundtrack is nice, if it wasn't the soundtrack for a movie based on "The Great Gastby". One minute you hear roaring twenties music, the next a rap song by Jay-Z and Will.I.Am. Jay-Z and Will.I.Am have no place in "The Great Gatsby" Yes the songs are catchy, but why are they here?
I will say this though, the acting in the movie is strong. Tobey Maguire is good as the fish-out-of-water Nick Caraway. Leo does a fine job as Gatsby, but by the thousandth time he says "old sport", he starts to come off as robotic. Carey Mulligan works well as Daisy. Joel Edgerton really stands out as Tom Buchanan, and relative newcomer as Elizabeth Debicki gives a solid performance as Jordan Baker. The cast is good, but sadly not good enough to save the movie.
The best way to describe The Great Gatsby, is Baz Luhrman trying to Moulin Rogue a classic F. Scott Fitzgerald story. It doesn't work. I didn't completely hate it, but I didn't throughly enjoy it. It's not something I'd watch multiple times. Save this one for a Redbox night, and read the book instead. The book is much better.
Directed By Baz Luhrman
Starring Tobey Maguire as Nick Caraway, Carey Mulligan as Daisy Buchanan, and
Leonardo DiCaprio as Jay Gatsby
It's not easy adapting a book into a feature film. The source material can only offer so much story, so sometimes you need to stretch it to get to that 120 page script, and sometimes that will backfire on you (Looking at you The Lorax, The Cat In The Hat,...probably Twilight).
"The Great Gatsby" by F.Scott Fitzgerald is only 130 pages. It's a simple story that is well known and loved by many readers. I doubt this film is going to reach that same level of praise.
During the 1920s, Nick Carraway (Maguire) moves to West Egg on Long Island, where he becomes neighbors with the famous, mysterious, and fabulously wealthy Jay Gatsby (DiCaprio). After receiving a personal invitation to one of Gatsby's parties, Nick learns Gatsby and his cousin Daisy (Mulligan) were once lovers, but the Great War separated them. Gatsby asks Nick to arrange to have Daisy over for tea, where they reunite. This little afternoon of tea leads to scandal, drama, and secrets being revealed.
That's all there is to the story. It's quite simple. But Baz Luhrman, in his typical directing fashion, attempts to suggest there's more, by tossing dozens of flashy visuals at the audience. Style overtakes substance and it shows here. The original Fitzgerald story isn't represented as properly as it should. The opening and closing narration of Nick (Twisted here by the filmmakers) feels like nothing more than a gimmick to try and get the audience go "Ohhhhh!' at the end of the film. (Avoiding spoilers here).
Gatsby's parties are made to look like college night clubs. The way 1920s New York looks, it's as if we're watching a movie based on a Frank Miller graphic novel. And the portrayal of the green light at the end of the Buchanan's dock, dare I say, is reduced to something of a Green Lantern cameo.
Do these visuals work? No not really. Are they nice to look at? Sure. I didn't see the film in 3-D, and I'm glad I didn't, because from what I could tell it was just a cheap gimmick.
I'd say the soundtrack is nice, if it wasn't the soundtrack for a movie based on "The Great Gastby". One minute you hear roaring twenties music, the next a rap song by Jay-Z and Will.I.Am. Jay-Z and Will.I.Am have no place in "The Great Gatsby" Yes the songs are catchy, but why are they here?
I will say this though, the acting in the movie is strong. Tobey Maguire is good as the fish-out-of-water Nick Caraway. Leo does a fine job as Gatsby, but by the thousandth time he says "old sport", he starts to come off as robotic. Carey Mulligan works well as Daisy. Joel Edgerton really stands out as Tom Buchanan, and relative newcomer as Elizabeth Debicki gives a solid performance as Jordan Baker. The cast is good, but sadly not good enough to save the movie.
The best way to describe The Great Gatsby, is Baz Luhrman trying to Moulin Rogue a classic F. Scott Fitzgerald story. It doesn't work. I didn't completely hate it, but I didn't throughly enjoy it. It's not something I'd watch multiple times. Save this one for a Redbox night, and read the book instead. The book is much better.
Film Review- "Iron Man 3"
Iron Man 3
Directed By Shane Black
Starring Robert Downey Jr as Tony Stark, Gwyneth Playtrow as Pepper Potts, Guy Pearce as Aldrich Killian, and Ben Kingsley as The Mandarin
Tony Stark returns in one of the stronger films in the Iron Man franchise, and possibly one of the best films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
After his run in with Gods and aliens in The Avengers, Tony Stark (Downey) is facing some anxiety issues. He can't sleep and he's spending way too much time in his workshop. Meanwhile, an old business associate of Pepper's, Aldrich Killian (Pearce), returns with a new technology called Extremis, and a terrorist named The Mandarin (Kingsley) emerges.
When Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) is injured in one of The Mandarin's attacks, Tony calls for vengeance, and a fierce conflict ensues. This puts Tony in a real tough position, forced to rely on his smarts alone to take down these villains and protect everything he loves.
The film is like a Marvel version of The Dark Knight Rises, as it leaves our hero isolated and battling his way out of the toughest challenge yet. It's a solid story that answers the question "Does the suit make the man, or does the man make the suit?" The action scenes are superb, from the terrorist attack at Tony's Malibu home, to the climax aboard an oil rig (Which is a fight scene that rivals the last fifteen minutes of The Avengers). But as well-written and action-heavy as the film is, it's really quite funny with a lot of laugh-out-loud moments.
Robert Downey Jr is again fantastic as Tony Stark. Gwyneth Playtrow is given more to do this time around. This is probably her best performance as Pepper in all the Marvel films. The returning supporting cast, Don Cheadle as Rhodey, Jon Favreau as Happy, and Paul Bettany as the voice of JARVIS (Who may just steal the show here), are all bringing their usual with A-Game.
In terms of the new cast members, Rebecca Hall is...average. She does a good job with what she's given, but she isn't given much. Guy Pearce gives a fine performance as Aldrich Killian, but nothing that really makes him memorable. Ben Kingsley is just fantastic as the film's Mandarin.
I'm writing this well after spoilers have hit the Internet, and everyone seems to either love or hate what they did with The Mandarin. I personally, was a little upset with how it was done, but I understand why it was done. When it comes to the Marvel films, the Iron Man films are the most grounded in reality, and what they did with The Mandarin character fits that mold. It's still a solid performance by Kingsley.
The ending will raise a lot of questions. Not to spoil, but I'm curious as to how much of the uncertainty in the renewal of Downey's Marvel contract factored into it, and I hope that what is done in The Avengers 2 doesn't just hit the "undo button" on the ending of this film.
In the end, Iron Man 3 is another solid film out of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and is absolutely worth seeing in theaters, maybe multiple times in theaters (I saw it twice).
Directed By Shane Black
Starring Robert Downey Jr as Tony Stark, Gwyneth Playtrow as Pepper Potts, Guy Pearce as Aldrich Killian, and Ben Kingsley as The Mandarin
Tony Stark returns in one of the stronger films in the Iron Man franchise, and possibly one of the best films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
After his run in with Gods and aliens in The Avengers, Tony Stark (Downey) is facing some anxiety issues. He can't sleep and he's spending way too much time in his workshop. Meanwhile, an old business associate of Pepper's, Aldrich Killian (Pearce), returns with a new technology called Extremis, and a terrorist named The Mandarin (Kingsley) emerges.
When Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) is injured in one of The Mandarin's attacks, Tony calls for vengeance, and a fierce conflict ensues. This puts Tony in a real tough position, forced to rely on his smarts alone to take down these villains and protect everything he loves.
The film is like a Marvel version of The Dark Knight Rises, as it leaves our hero isolated and battling his way out of the toughest challenge yet. It's a solid story that answers the question "Does the suit make the man, or does the man make the suit?" The action scenes are superb, from the terrorist attack at Tony's Malibu home, to the climax aboard an oil rig (Which is a fight scene that rivals the last fifteen minutes of The Avengers). But as well-written and action-heavy as the film is, it's really quite funny with a lot of laugh-out-loud moments.
Robert Downey Jr is again fantastic as Tony Stark. Gwyneth Playtrow is given more to do this time around. This is probably her best performance as Pepper in all the Marvel films. The returning supporting cast, Don Cheadle as Rhodey, Jon Favreau as Happy, and Paul Bettany as the voice of JARVIS (Who may just steal the show here), are all bringing their usual with A-Game.
In terms of the new cast members, Rebecca Hall is...average. She does a good job with what she's given, but she isn't given much. Guy Pearce gives a fine performance as Aldrich Killian, but nothing that really makes him memorable. Ben Kingsley is just fantastic as the film's Mandarin.
I'm writing this well after spoilers have hit the Internet, and everyone seems to either love or hate what they did with The Mandarin. I personally, was a little upset with how it was done, but I understand why it was done. When it comes to the Marvel films, the Iron Man films are the most grounded in reality, and what they did with The Mandarin character fits that mold. It's still a solid performance by Kingsley.
The ending will raise a lot of questions. Not to spoil, but I'm curious as to how much of the uncertainty in the renewal of Downey's Marvel contract factored into it, and I hope that what is done in The Avengers 2 doesn't just hit the "undo button" on the ending of this film.
In the end, Iron Man 3 is another solid film out of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and is absolutely worth seeing in theaters, maybe multiple times in theaters (I saw it twice).
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Film Review- "Oz The Great & Powerful"
Oz The Great & Powerful
Directed By Sam Rami
Starring James Franco as Oscar Diggs, Mila Kunis as Theodora, Rachel Weisz as Evanora, and Michelle Williams as Glinda
If you’re going to take a favorite, well-known story and do a new take on it, you’ve got to give it some fresh new edge. Once Upon A Time does it every Sunday night on ABC. Countless films like Alice In Wonderland, and the multiple adaptions of Snow White like Snow White & The Huntsman and Mirror Mirror, have tried and didn’t really succeed for one reason or another (Kirsten Stewart, aside). Disney’s Oz The Great & Powerful offers some of the familiar, in an appealing new packaging, making it a very enjoyable film.
Directed By Sam Rami
Starring James Franco as Oscar Diggs, Mila Kunis as Theodora, Rachel Weisz as Evanora, and Michelle Williams as Glinda
If you’re going to take a favorite, well-known story and do a new take on it, you’ve got to give it some fresh new edge. Once Upon A Time does it every Sunday night on ABC. Countless films like Alice In Wonderland, and the multiple adaptions of Snow White like Snow White & The Huntsman and Mirror Mirror, have tried and didn’t really succeed for one reason or another (Kirsten Stewart, aside). Disney’s Oz The Great & Powerful offers some of the familiar, in an appealing new packaging, making it a very enjoyable film.
Before
Dorothy’s time, Oscar “Oz” Diggs (James Franco) is a carnival magician in
Kansas, striving for more than what he is. Unfortunate circumstances and an all
too convenient tornado send him off to the Land of Oz. There he meets three
witches, Theodora (Mila Kunis), Evanora (Rachel Weisz), and Glinda (Michelle
Williams). The witches believe him to be the wizard prophesized to will bring
peace to their land after destroying the Wicked Witch. Seeing this as his
opportunity for a better life, Oz plays along and sets out on a journey that
will put him to the ultimate test as the fate of Oz (the land) rests on his
hands. But not everything in Oz is as it seems…
There’s
not much to the plot than that. There are some of the classic screenplay
clichés thrown in there, such as will the liar be exposed, and is the bad guy
really the bad guy. But they’re not the problems you expect them to be. You
really get invested in the story and this world. For one thing, it’s Oz, one of
the most successful and well-known cinematic universes of all time. Second, the
effects in this movie are awesome. It’s exactly how you’d expect Oz to look
like if the original were made today. Third, the performances in this movie are
terrific.
Michelle
Williams is spot-on as Glinda, and brings the same love and charm Billie Burke
did to the character in The Wizard of Oz,
but in a fresh, modern way. She may have been my favorite performance of the
film. Rachel Weisz is so convincing and alluring as the wicked Evanora, and
Mila Kunis gives a performance that I didn’t know she had in her. Seriously she
should show her more serious acting side more often. One question though,
wasn’t there four witches in the land of Oz (North, South, East, West), or am I
missing something?
James
Franco however as our lead…God bless him he’s doing his best. There are moments
when he really shines. But when he really has to show the suave, charismatic
side of this character, the cracks in his performance form. You just can’t help
but see that creepy, weird James Franco face behind it, trying to be
charismatic. Overall he did a fine job, but I wish Robert Downey Jr. didn’t
turn down the role. Meanwhile, Zac Braff may steal the show as the adorable
comic relief, Finley the Monkey.
Oz The Great & Powerful is a truly enjoyable film. It offers
something slightly new, yet slightly familiar, and I recommend it to any
filmgoer. And also keep an eye out for little references to The Wizard of Oz throughout the film.
Sunday, January 6, 2013
Film Review- "Les Miserables"
Les Miserables
Directed By Tom Hooper
Starring Hugh Jackman as Jean Valjean, Russell Crow as Inspector Javert, Anne Hathaway as Fantine
I had never seen the musical and I had never read the novel. All I knew is that almost everyone declared Les Miserables as "the best musical ever". Now I have seen the film, and I can see why people love it so much. You can officially add me in to the Les Miserables Fan Club. I can't stop singing the songs to myself or listening to the soundtrack on Youtube. So the only thing left to do is review the film.
Set in France during The Revolution, Jean Valjean (Jackman), is finally released from prison on parole after nineteen hard years. Marked as a convict by his papers and ostracized by society, Valjean turns to stealing priceless silver from a convent. When he is caught, The Bishop convinces the officers he gave him the silver as a gift, and then tells Valjean he has saved his soul for God. Touched by the Bishop's actions, Valjean breaks parole and assumes a new identity.
Years later he has become a wealthy mayor and factory owner. At said factory, a young woman Fantine (Hathaway) is fired after it is discovered she is sending money to her daughter Cosette. Fantine is forced to sell her hair and teeth, and become a prostitute. Feeling responsible, Valjean promises her on her deathbed he will care for Cosette as his own. Meanwhile, Javert discovers Valjean's true identity and seeks to return him to prison.
It's tough to explain the rest of the story without going into too much detail. The plot is not as straight forward in the second half as it is in the first, as we witness, in addition to all this, a love triangle and the perils of the French Revolution. Les Miserables is something of a character study, but a damn good one nonetheless. You fall in love with these characters and you understand their pain, from Valjean's quest to become a better man, to Fantine's futile struggle for a better life. I must admit I did get antsy when the focus of the film turned to the love story of Marius and Cosette and away from Valjean. It sort of slows the film down, and their romance seemed rushed and underdeveloped (They do fall in love rather quickly, like the leads in a Disney movie).
Hugh Jackman is on his A-Game, brining to life one of the greatest characters ever known, and he makes the role his own. Anne Hathaway will break your heart as Fantine. Both actors are serious contenders for this upcoming awards season, and should bring home some gold. Russell Crowe as Javert is great, and the chemistry he has with Jackman is perfect. The supporting cast is spectacular. Everyone hits their marks.
The singing is just as wonderful as the acting. Anne Hathaway's rendition of "I Dreamed A Dream" will move you to tears. Russell Crowe, who was the only one I was concerned about, surprised me. There are a few moments where he appears shaky, but he's giving it his all here. Director Tom Hooper's decision to have the cast sing live gives the film such raw power audiences have never seen in film musicals. When we see the actors sing, it's real vocals, and real emotions that makes the film itself more real and the audience heavily invested. Dare I say it, the genre of film musical has been redefined.
Many have had mixed emotions with Hooper's choice of cinematography. There are many long-takes of close ups on actors as they sing. I myself am torn over this aspect. On one hand it gives us a better glimpse into the performances were watching, while on the other it somewhat robs the film of its production value (There's only so much of Revolutionary France you can see in a close-up). I admire Hooper's decisions as a filmmaker, and I do find that for most of the film, they pay off.
Les Miserables is probably one of, if not the best musical-to-film adaptions ever done. A well-assembled cast and director make it so. There are aspects of the film that may not be for everyone, but it is definitely worth seeing, as it will be a force to be reckoned with come awards season.
Saturday, July 21, 2012
Film Review- "The Dark Knight Rises"
The Dark Knight Rises
Directed By Christopher Nolan
Starring Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman, Tom Hardy as Bane, Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle, Joseph Gordon Levitt as John Blake
How rare is it do we find a "threequel" that does justice to its predecessors, if not perform better than them? There are those rare films, like Toy Story 3, Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade, and now The Dark Knight Rises, which brings Christopher Nolan's Batman film series to a close, in a spectacular, dignified, and more than satisfying way.
Taking place eight years after The Dark Knight, we find Bruce Wayne a shut-in, having hung up his cape and mask, and Commissioner Gordon tired of carrying the guilt of what truly happened to Harvey Dent. When Bruce Wayne catches cat burglar Selina Kyle (you may know her better as Catwoman) stealing his fingerprints for the criminal mastermind Bane, he comes out of retirement to uncover and stop Bane's master plan, much to his faitful butler Alfred's dismay. Batman soon faces his greatest challenge, as Bane threatens to literally destory Gotham.
That's the basic storyline, but once again Christopher Nolan has brought to the screen a story filled with so much depth and emotion that concludes the legend that began with Batman Begins beautifully, as both Bruce Wayne and Batman are pushed to the very limit, as the character must confront the question Can he both Bruce Wayne and Batman? Will there ever be a time when Gotham no longer needs Batman, or when he no longer needs Batman? Can he find a life beyond the Batman? That is the emotional core of the film, and the stellar performances by Christian Bale, Michael Caine, and Joseph Gordon Levitt emphasize that. Bale and Caine are at their usual best. Ask for Levitt, I can say this is his finest performance, and I can't wait to see where his career goes after this film.
Tom Hardy as Bane is perfect. There are moments when it is difficult to understand him, but the moments are so minimal it can be overlooked (I'm sure if you really can't figure it out there'll be subtitles on the DVD). Bane's prescence, motivation, and drive, God forgive me, make him so much more intimidating The Joker. The stakes are so much higher with Bane.
Supporting players from the previous films like Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman are given less to do with Rises, as we spend more time with new additions to the Nolan/Batman universe like Levitt, Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle, and Marion Cotillard as Miranda Tate, a business woman looking to revitalize Bruce and Wayne Enterprises. These three give us some of their best work. If you ever had doubt that Hathaway could pull of Catwoman, you will be proven wrong. She is one of the highlights of the film. On a side note with Levitt and Cotillard, and I will put this next section in white to avoid spoilers: there was a great deal of speculation about the true identities of their characters, and there were alot of theories out there. Let me just say, somebody got it right.
One apsect of this film I really enjoyed was that it is very much an esemble film. Every actor, character plays a major part in the story. What's at stake in this film is the very exisistence of Gotham City, and it's not just Batman fighting to save it. He becomes very much a symbol for the other characters, and the citizens to rally behind. It's a war for the city, and it's an epic one with incredible players. This is one of the finest casts put together for a film I've ever seen.
I'll say this right now, if you're expecting an action-heavy film, you're not going to get it, at least right off the bat (no pun intended). Act 1 and 2 spend a great deal of time helping build up to an EXPLOSIVE, MAGNIFICENT Act 3, which, and again, to avoid spoilers: contains one of the best chase scenes I've ever seen in film. It works though, so don't let my words sway you away from this film. There is plenty in the first two-thirds of the film that will keep you on the edge of your seat regardless, as you wait for the $#!T to hit the fan in Act 3.
I don't want to say The Dark Knight Rises is better than The Dark Knight, because I feel it's like a sense of betrayl...but damn I think it really is. I don't know I'm probably going to have to see this one again to be absolutely sure. This is a spectacular trilogy that will go down in film history, and The Dark Knight Rises is the perfect way to end. To the person who has to reboot Batman for film I truly feel sorry for you, but I also wish you the best of luck. Lord knows you're going to need it...
Directed By Christopher Nolan
Starring Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman, Tom Hardy as Bane, Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle, Joseph Gordon Levitt as John Blake
How rare is it do we find a "threequel" that does justice to its predecessors, if not perform better than them? There are those rare films, like Toy Story 3, Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade, and now The Dark Knight Rises, which brings Christopher Nolan's Batman film series to a close, in a spectacular, dignified, and more than satisfying way.
Taking place eight years after The Dark Knight, we find Bruce Wayne a shut-in, having hung up his cape and mask, and Commissioner Gordon tired of carrying the guilt of what truly happened to Harvey Dent. When Bruce Wayne catches cat burglar Selina Kyle (you may know her better as Catwoman) stealing his fingerprints for the criminal mastermind Bane, he comes out of retirement to uncover and stop Bane's master plan, much to his faitful butler Alfred's dismay. Batman soon faces his greatest challenge, as Bane threatens to literally destory Gotham.
That's the basic storyline, but once again Christopher Nolan has brought to the screen a story filled with so much depth and emotion that concludes the legend that began with Batman Begins beautifully, as both Bruce Wayne and Batman are pushed to the very limit, as the character must confront the question Can he both Bruce Wayne and Batman? Will there ever be a time when Gotham no longer needs Batman, or when he no longer needs Batman? Can he find a life beyond the Batman? That is the emotional core of the film, and the stellar performances by Christian Bale, Michael Caine, and Joseph Gordon Levitt emphasize that. Bale and Caine are at their usual best. Ask for Levitt, I can say this is his finest performance, and I can't wait to see where his career goes after this film.
Tom Hardy as Bane is perfect. There are moments when it is difficult to understand him, but the moments are so minimal it can be overlooked (I'm sure if you really can't figure it out there'll be subtitles on the DVD). Bane's prescence, motivation, and drive, God forgive me, make him so much more intimidating The Joker. The stakes are so much higher with Bane.
Supporting players from the previous films like Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman are given less to do with Rises, as we spend more time with new additions to the Nolan/Batman universe like Levitt, Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle, and Marion Cotillard as Miranda Tate, a business woman looking to revitalize Bruce and Wayne Enterprises. These three give us some of their best work. If you ever had doubt that Hathaway could pull of Catwoman, you will be proven wrong. She is one of the highlights of the film. On a side note with Levitt and Cotillard, and I will put this next section in white to avoid spoilers: there was a great deal of speculation about the true identities of their characters, and there were alot of theories out there. Let me just say, somebody got it right.
One apsect of this film I really enjoyed was that it is very much an esemble film. Every actor, character plays a major part in the story. What's at stake in this film is the very exisistence of Gotham City, and it's not just Batman fighting to save it. He becomes very much a symbol for the other characters, and the citizens to rally behind. It's a war for the city, and it's an epic one with incredible players. This is one of the finest casts put together for a film I've ever seen.
I'll say this right now, if you're expecting an action-heavy film, you're not going to get it, at least right off the bat (no pun intended). Act 1 and 2 spend a great deal of time helping build up to an EXPLOSIVE, MAGNIFICENT Act 3, which, and again, to avoid spoilers: contains one of the best chase scenes I've ever seen in film. It works though, so don't let my words sway you away from this film. There is plenty in the first two-thirds of the film that will keep you on the edge of your seat regardless, as you wait for the $#!T to hit the fan in Act 3.
I don't want to say The Dark Knight Rises is better than The Dark Knight, because I feel it's like a sense of betrayl...but damn I think it really is. I don't know I'm probably going to have to see this one again to be absolutely sure. This is a spectacular trilogy that will go down in film history, and The Dark Knight Rises is the perfect way to end. To the person who has to reboot Batman for film I truly feel sorry for you, but I also wish you the best of luck. Lord knows you're going to need it...
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Film Review- "The Lorax"
Considering the critical success rate of films based on Dr. Seuss's classic works, where both the live-action How The Grinch Stole Christmas and The Cat in The Hat failed, and the animated Horton Hears A Who succeeded, I was willing to bet that this film would succeed. The odds seemed in its favor, with the only successful Suess movie before it also being animated. According to the mainstream critics of sites like Rotten Tomatoes, one could I say I bet on the wrong horse...or did I?
The Lorax
Directed By Chris Renaud and Kyle Balda
Starring Zac Efron as Ted, Ed Helms as The Once-ler, Taylor Swift as Audrey, and Danny DeVito as The Lorax
I understand that there's a certain difficulty in adapting something like a children's book into a 90 minute feature film. The original source material may not provide enough to meet the run-time, so you may have to "pad" the story or fill time. So in a way what The Lorax does can be justified, but it doesn't really do it all that well.
The nameless child from the book who asks The Once-ler what happened to the trees is given the name of Ted, and a drive in the film, and the voice of Zac Efron. He ventures out of his futuristic, plastic town to discover trees to impress this girl Audrey (Taylor Swift). Once out in the desolate wastelands of yesteryear he meets The Once-ler (Ed Helms) who tells him the story of his encounter with The Lorax (Danny DeVito) and how he eventually caused the destruction of the Trufula Trees.
While all this is happening, the head of town O'Hare (Rob Riggle), keeps a close eye on Ted, determined to make him fail in his mission, and ensure his business of bottled air will continue to thrive. Now if you remember from the book, The Once-ler wasn't exactly the nicest guy. In the film, he's a bit of a goof, and instead of doing things on his own, he's persuaded into chopping down more trees by his greedy family. The film makes him a more sympathetic character. The filmmakers might have been afraid to make him a bit unlikable, but they should have taken a page from the classic Disney films of old, where the villains can be just as well liked as the heroes.
There is a clear and real conflict between The Once-ler and The Lorax in the book, but in the film it's more of an unlikely brotherhood, and how The Once-ler betrays it, and because of this, and the dumming down of The Once-ler's character, is where O'Hare comes in as the film's main villain. The Once-ler could have still have served the purpose of the villain, if the filmmakers were brave enough. O'Hare is kind of there to help shove the whole environmental message down the viewer's throat, which also hurts the film. Had he not been in the film, perhaps the movie would have had a stronger impact, like say that of Wall-E.
Like most animated films, The Lorax relies on some musical numbers to get the story moving along. But unlike Disney musicals, they really just don't fit, well most of them, the final number is quite catchy. The songs The Once-ler sings are just too "modern" for this story. Just because Ed Helms can sing and rock out on a guitar doesn't mean he should. That and the song "How Bad Can I Be?", which depicts his transformation into a greedy miser, enjoyable as it is, hurts the film. It would have been so much better to see his turn into this character, rather than flash through it in a two minute musical sequence. Also kind of ironic that the only member of the voice cast known for her singing (Taylor Swift), doesn't sing...
When I watched the clips and trailers online, I thought that the celebrity voices they picked were just too celebrity. I could not distinguish the voices from the character. Thankfully, that problem did not transition into my viewing of the film itself...well, except maybe Betty White's character of Granny. Ed Helms does get very close to playing the typical type of character we expect him to play. I would have liked to see him play the actual version of The Once-ler from the book. Finally, it felt like they were trying too hard to make the fish, bears, and birds do what The Minions did in Despicable Me.
I understand the creative decisions behind the making of The Lorax, but I do not completely stand by them, when there were better options. Nevertheless, I'd rank it 3rd out of the 4 Dr. Seuss films, and definitely think it's viewing at least once.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)