Cross of Iron (1977)

2014-05-07

Twitter Plot Summary: On the Russian front in 1943, a platoon of German soldiers have to contend with a captain seeking the Iron Cross.

Five Point Summary:

1. Blood spurts look best when seen in slow motion.
2. Never trust a Prussian officer, especially when played by Maximilian Schell.
3. Apparently if you keep Russian women prisoner, you don’t bother actually guarding them.
4. Hospital visits are always rife with hallucinations.
5. The very definition of friendly fire.

Sam Peckinpah’s only war film, Cross of Iron takes place on the Russian front in 1943. The German army is despondent and certain that Germany losing the war is now inevitable following their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet still they soldier on, no pun intended. Okay, maybe a little. This is emphasised by the opening credits, summing up the German war effort thus far – from initial Blitzkrieg victory to the tide slowly being turned – all set to the heartwarming tune of young German girls singing a folksy tune. On the front line we encounter James Mason, playing Oberst Brandt, who makes barely any attempt at a German accent, a dysentery-ridden Hauptmann Kiesel (David Warner) wishing for a respite from the war and his loose bowels, and Sgt Rolf Steiner, a grizzled James Coburn, who leads a ragtag group of loyal soldiers on a number of successful missions to kill Russians. Their war, both of the global and personal variety, is interrupted by the arrival of Maximilian Schell’s Captain Stransky, an opportunistic and slightly arrogant Prussian officer who requested a transfer to the front line in order to acquire the Iron Cross, despite having little in the ways of first hand experience of combat.

The German army will literally hire anybody... — The German army will literally hire anybody…

You’ll likely lose count of the amount of times a soldier is seen being blown up or shot in slow motion – it’s almost as if watching watching a proto-Zack Snyder at work. This is all fluff compared to the main story at play, however. That of Sergeant Steiner, the type of man who represents the last hope of the German army, all the while staring defeat in the face. There is instant dislike between Stransky and Steiner for the simple reason that they are from different aspects of the German social spectrum. Stransky on the whole is manipulative and deceitful, doing everything in his power to get what he wants. Steiner meanwhile is loyal to his men, and they are loyal to him. You’d be hard pressed to find anybody loyal to Stransky – they’re more likely to be blackmail victims rather than have any sense of loyalty to the man.

The futility of war is clear to anyone who watches Cross of Iron. Men scream in pain at regular intervals, soldiers are killed in gory slow motion, and the less said about the sequence involving the captive female Russians, the better. It’s just a shame that it feels so disjointed, which is likely due to Peckinpah’s own heavy drinking during the course of the film. In many respects we’re lucky it makes any sense at all when you take this into consideration. The sequence in the middle of the film involving a lengthy stay in a hospital and the numerous hallucinations that follow is perhaps the weakest section, but again it comes back to that futility of war motif and represents the mental effects war has on those involved in it. It might not be perfect, but Cross of Iron does at least get the feeling of desperation and the literal filthiness of war spot on, and the rivalry between Stransky and Steiner is reason enough to enjoy it.

Score: 3.5/5

Lawrence of Arabia (1962)

Simon Prior

2014-05-06

"Look, they even have a McDonald's out here now." — “Look, they even have a McDonald’s out here now.”

Twitter Plot Summary: The story of TE Lawrence, a British officer serving in the Middle East during World War 1.

Five Point Summary:

1. “The trick, William Potter, is not minding that it hurts.”
2. “Have you no fear, English?”
3. “It’s for him!”
4. “The best of them won’t come for money; they’ll come for me.”
5. “NO PRISONERS!”

Lawrence of Arabia is quite rightly considered a classic movie, one in which all the various elements of the production – acting, direction, cinematography, score, etc – unite to form a quintessential piece of cinema. So much so in fact that its almost four hour running time feels more like a standard two hour venture, such is its quality and story telling power. That story is of TE Lawrence, a soldier in the British army who finds himself torn between his allegiance to Britain and those he befriends in the Arabian desert during the first World War.

Split down the middle with a convenient intermission at just over the 2 hour mark, the first half sees Lawrence’s indoctrination into the desert world, its people and its customs and traditions. Here we see him demonstrate that he’s not the same as the other white folk who come swanning into the desert, and earns the respect of many of those he encounters. Good thing too, as he’s seen as somewhat of an odd one in the eyes of his superiors. The second half focuses more on the war effort and the various attacks orchestrated against the Turks, specifically those on Aqaba and Damascus, and the terrible effect the fighting is having on Lawrence. It never gets bogged down with military details, though – this is all about Lawrence, his efforts at uniting the desert tribes and his quirky mannerisms. The fact the plot remains relatively sparse despite the epic running length is never a cause for concern.

"The trick, William Potter, is not minding that it hur... OW!" — “The trick, William Potter, is not minding that it hur… OW!”

Lawrence of Arabia is yet another of those epic productions that Hollywood was so fond of during the 1950s and 1960s, every frame of the production dripping with style and attention to detail. The cinematography does many favours to the setting, with the desert landscape looking phenomenal at all times. The introduction of Sherif Ali (Omar Sharif) in particular is a highlight, the mirage-like effect of the desert being used to great effect. It’s a scene of great tension and is played out in full without need to speed things up – it takes a long time for Ali to be fully in focus, but you’re too focused on the appearance of this mysterious stranger to care – a sign of good film-making if there ever was one. It would be remiss not to mention Maurice Jarre’s score, which is equally as epic as the film itself. The film’s overture has become synonymous with the desert and this era of cinema – you can probably ask anybody to hum a theme that represents the desert and they will likely hum Jarre’s theme without even knowing where it’s from. It’s easily one of the best film scores ever written, a fitting companion to the production.

Peter O’Toole is a revelation as Lawrence, opening as a softly spoken Brit and slowly becoming akin to the guerrilla fighters he commands in the desert, bloodthirsty and with violent intent. The desert has a power to change a man, and that is entirely evident in Lawrence’s demeanour as the fighting ensues. Joined by Alec Guinness, Anthony Quinn and Omar Sharif, amongst others, it is a cast brimming with talent, although in modern society it would have been more appropriate to hire Arabian actors to portray Auda Abu Tayi and Prince Feisal rather than relying on white men, no matter how good at acting those men happen to be. This is a completely superfluous point in the grand scheme of things though, as Lawrence of Arabia works perfectly well despite this casting choice. It’s a film that everybody needs to have seen at some point, even if only once. In terms of imagery and thematic content, it will be a film you return to time and time again.

Score: 5/5

Hell Comes To Frogtown (1988)

Simon Prior

2014-05-05

Roddy Piper just realised he wasn't going to win any awards for this movie. — Roddy Piper just realised he wasn’t going to win any awards for this movie.

Twitter Plot Summary: Roddy Piper has women throw themselves at him, and he’s asked to impregnate them. There are also mutant frogs.

Five Point Summary:

1. Roddy Piper’s genitals are property of the government. Hah.
2. She’s too skinny, throw her back, Roddy.
3. Froooog people…
4. Chainsaw versus the groin of Roddy Piper.
5. Flares – a frog mutant’s natural enemy!

In a post apocalyptic future, war has killed off the vast majority of the population and Roddy Piper’s Sam Hell is one of the few remaining men who is capable of impregnating women. We meet him strapped to a chair and under the control of militant nurses who want to use his high sperm count to impregnate a few women and help save the human race. Complicating matters is that the stock of fertile women held by the militant nurses have been kidnapped and stolen away by some mutant frogs from Frogtown, and so they rope him into an adventure to reclaim the women and er, set him on his path. As it were.

It is of course a deliberately amusing premise and very much played for laughs. Perhaps not from the perspective of the director (Donald G Jackson is renowned for his trashy output), but the cast at least seem to be aware of what kind of movie they’re featured in and play it up for laughs. Exposition is spouted with reckless abandon, and the acting quality is only ever so slightly higher than the Troma routine, so very quickly you get a good feeling for how things will proceed. From the opening few minutes of daftness it just gets sillier and sillier, with the occasional foray into cheesy action territory for good measure. When Roddy Piper has to fight off the advances of a mutant frog woman, however, that’s when events take a turn for the entirely ridiculous and the threat of his genitals literally exploding rears its ugly head – and not for the first time.

Yes, that is a mutant frog wearing a fez. Fezzes are cool.

It’s hard to believe that Roddy Piper was a viable movie star during the 1980s, although it’s easy to see why he decided to take this script. Women of all shapes and varieties, and in various states of undress, fling themselves at him on a regular basis. Despite the somewhat suspect quality of the women involved in the production (including a woman who’s apparently supposed to be attractive but looks like she could do with a few hot dinners inside her), he probably still had an absolute blast. Fair play, that man.

The mutant frogs are very poorly designed, and every single one of their lines of dialogue is said with elaborate levels of gusto, to the point where they’re practically the best thing in the film. They’re only just slightly behind Roddy Piper and his strange ability to act as though he’s cutting a wrestling promo at every opportunity. Which to be fair, was his day job at the time, so we should be perhaps a little less harsh on him for that. The influences on the script and production are clear to see for anyone who has even a passing interest in the genre. Mad Max in particular is the most obvious, with a dash of Star Wars Tatooine and a blatant rip of that episode of original Star Trek where Kirk fights the Gorn.

To call Frogtown a good film would be absolutely untrue, but it’s entertaining and any film where Roddy Piper shouts “Eat lead, froggies!” can only be a good thing.

Score: 2.5/5

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_pBD-1P9c8

Double Impact (1991)

Simon Prior

2014-05-04

They could never work out who would pay the bill.

Twitter Plot Summary: Van Damme plays twin brothers who are embroiled in a criminal underworld plot

Five Point Summary:

1. Jean Claude Van Damme in spandex. There’s an image that I’m never going to forget…
2. Two Van Damme’s!
3. I was just waiting for the big explosion… there it is.
4. Brotherly strife.
5. Yes, let’s all take our shirts off for this fight to the death. Why not?

Van Damme made a seemingly endless amount of cheap and cheerful action films in the 80s and 90s, none more cheap, cheerful and inherently silly as Double Impact, where you get double the Van Damme for your money. After their parents are killed, baby twin brothers Alex and Chad are separated and raised in different countries. Now some years later, they’re reunited to seek revenge against those responsible for the death of their parents. So far, so cliche. Unfortunately it never rises above this as every trope in the martial acts action sub-genre is trotted out for all to see.

If there’s one thing it gets right is the personality split between the two brothers. Van Damme has never been an exceptional actor, but at least here he was able to clearly define both his characters, one decidedly cool and the quintessential action hero, the other not so much. In fact the second, less action-esque brother, Alex, has a penchant for displaying his package in tight spandex. To complicate matters there’s also a love triangle involving the two brothers and their affection for stereotypical blonde Danielle Wilde (Alonna Shaw) who has to pick between the two brothers. Because naturally this is something that we have to endure in a film that’s otherwise focused on big beefy men scrapping in dark warehouses or yet more dark warehouses.

Van Damme could kill a man just by posing. With a knife.

Whilst some of the action isn’t all that bad, the excessive use of slow motion does have the ability to annoy after a little while. In many cases it feels like padding that would have been better placed covering up Van Damme’s member. Van Damme at least is entirely capable of pulling off these sequences, although for the most part these sequences are played far too safely, and more often than not the camera is positioned too close to the fighting to fully appreciate the skills required to pull it off. It’s not as bad as Steven Seagal’s more recent films (whereby the camera is so close to the fight you’re practically inside Seagal’s colon) but it’s not far off.

It lapses further into generic territory when one of the twins has a fist fight with the obligatory scarred villain in the final act. The fact they also, seemingly without rhyme or reason, take off their tops just to show off their muscles and press against one another is somewhat concerning. Suddenly it becomes clear why Alonna Shaw’s character is in the film – men need to feel secure in the knowledge that there is a moderately attractive woman to look at in amongst all of this potentially homoerotic scuffling.

Double Impact does its job in entertaining the masses briefly before making a swift dash for the exit before its audience realises that they have just sat through two hours of generic action nonsense. Not just that but generic action nonsense that has nothing new to say. If seeing Jean-Claude Van Damme sport two different hairstyles is your thing then Double Impact is the film for you.

Score: 2/5

Batman: Year One (2011)

Simon Prior

2014-05-03

Twitter Plot Summary: Bruce Wayne returns to Gotham after 12 years away and sets off on the path to becoming the Batman.

Five Point Summary:

1. Baseball bat beating.
2. Payback.
3. Jim Gordon: action man.
4. Bats. Lots of bats.
5. A calling card.

The original graphic novel of Batman Year One, written by Frank Miller, is oft cited as one of the best story arcs from Batman’s long and chequered history, and with good reason. Going back to the very beginning (as if the title didn’t give that away), Year One sees Bruce Wayne return to Gotham after 12 years out of the city, time which he spent learning how to put his skills to good use – to fight crime, instil justice and so on. Meanwhile, new cop on the beat Jim Gordon has to deal with rampant corruption in the police force whilst also having to cope with this new bat-themed vigilante stalking Gotham’s criminal fraternity every night. For anybody who has seen Batman Begins, the story will feel familiar, although that script did ultimately go off in its own direction. There are a number of sequences that are common to both, which thankfully doesn’t spoil either of them if you’re clued up and know what to look out for.

Gravitas is provided by Bryan Cranston as Jim Gordon, adding weight and experience to the character despite the fact this is supposed to be a younger man than we’re used to seeing. In the grand scheme of things that’s a very minor gripe. Let’s face it – post-Breaking Bad, if Bryan Cranston says yes to a project, you use him regardless. Of course this isn’t the prim and proper Gordon we’re used to seeing – he’s human just like everybody else. This also very much applies to Bruce Wayne, here voiced by Benjamin McKenzie, who is yet to form that hard emotional shell that separates him from the rest of the world. Here is has concerns and worries that extend beyond his existence as the Bat.

Batman's hiding place was a little too obvious. — Batman’s hiding place was a little too obvious.

The animation follows the style of the source material, but adds in detail where appropriate, giving Gotham City a dirty look that is a perfect metaphor for the state it finds itself in when Bruce Wayne and Jim Gordon make their return. Gotham City, as is frequently the case, becomes a character in itself, as if years of criminal activity have reduced it to a literally grim appearance. Those living there are in an equal state of degradation, including a Selina Kyle who is working as a dominatrix in one of the even less reputable sections of the city.

It’s perhaps a little to slavish towards the source material, overdoing the voiceover narration and not doing enough to distinguish it from being anything more than a slightly advanced motion comic. With that said, Frank Miller’s graphic novel is so good that any adaptation of said graphic novel either needs to be slavish or a completely unique beast in its own right. It does the job but could perhaps do with being a little longer, as just over an hour isn’t nearly enough time to do this story justice. Otherwise, in many respects it’s just as good as the graphic novel and Bat-fans will be in their element.

Score: 3.5/5

Batman: Under The Red Hood (2010)

Simon Prior

2014-05-02

"WHERE IS SHE?!?!?!" — “WHERE IS SHE?!?!?!”

Twitter Plot Summary: Batman has to face up to the Red Hood, a new criminal vigilante in Gotham who has links to Batman’s past.

Five Point Summary:

1. Poor Jason Todd.
2. Hello Nightwing.
3. Lightsabers?
4. Never trust The Joker.
5. Batman fights dirty.

After the success of their animated films set in the Animated Series/Batman Beyond/Justice League universe, in more recent years DC’s animated movies line has moved away from the shared continuity established by Bruce Timm and Paul Dini and taken to adapting stories from the comic book source material. Under The Red Hood adapts two crucial and popular story arcs from the comics, namely 1988’s A Death In The Family and 2005’s Under The Hood.

The animation is crisp and sufficiently grim for a Batman tale, and certainly goes to darker places than would have been possible in the Animated Series, which in fairness went quite a way down the path of darkness during its run. Batman hasn’t always been about action – he’s a detective after all – however this story requires action set pieces by necessity. In this respect it’s an absolute winner, well choreographed fights that aren’t afraid to have a bit of fun. One sequence in particular sees the Bat climb through a car as it’s thrown towards him, which takes up only a couple of seconds of screen time but is a really interesting and entertaining use of a prop and a location to do something that wouldn’t look half as good if attempted with CGI.

Whilst Bruce Greenwood is ideal as Batman/Bruce Wayne, it seems that the spectre of Kevin Conroy is hanging over his every word. By comparison, John DiMaggio’s Joker is unique enough from Mark Hamill to stand on his own, although his occasional New York twang is all the more obvious when you know he also played Bender in Futurama. Adding Neil Patrick Harris and Jason Isaacs to the cast, as Nightwing and Ra’s al Ghul respectively, only improves things further.

Don't tase me, bro! — Don’t tase me, bro!

This is yet another story where Bruce Wayne has to face up to his past, the possible mistakes he has made and work out how to make amends as best he can. Yet again the Red Hood is another villain created as a direct result of Batman’s existence. Clearly if Bruce Wayne wasn’t mentally prepared for this sort of thing, you can imagine him having a breakdown years ago. It can’t be doing much good for his mental health having all of these weirdos crawling out of the woodwork, but then the man does dress up as a bat to fight crime, so he’s probably used to it. In this case the Red Hood is a vigilante who has fallen on the other side of the big crime fence, choosing to take down the bad guys using methods that Batman would never consider, nor would he approve.

Of course, once you work out who the Red Hood actually is – and to be fair if you’re a fan of the comics you probably knew already – then things start to make a bit more sense. In one respect you can see how easily it could have been for Bruce to do exactly what the Red Hood is doing had circumstances been slightly different, and that’s what makes this story so compelling. Apart from adding a new villain to Batman’s pantheon of bad guys, it also provides an opportunity to put a mirror up against Bruce Wayne’s/Batman’s reflection and ask some serious questions. And therein lies the appeal of the character – after all these years and despite many similar stories covering the same ground, there are still layers to be peeled back and explored, and Under The Red Hood adds yet another facet to the discussion.

Score: 4/5

Batman: Gotham Knight (2008)

Simon Prior

2014-05-01

Twitter Plot Summary: A Batman anthology featuring six tales about the Dark Knight.

Five Point Summary:

1. Batman as seen by kids.
2. Fire. Fire burn.
3. Killer Croc and Scarecrow arrive.
4. Batman in pain.
5. Deadshot strikes.

Ostensibly set between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight (although it has been acknowledged that the stories could fit into any Batman continuity), Gotham Knight features six stories featuring Batman. Each story has a unique animation style, very similar in tone to The Animatrix. Despite being an anthology there is an ongoing narrative, although this is mostly linked through minor story points rather than a central thread. The guy captured by the Bat in the first story shows up in the second, and so on. Beyond that, each of these stories could and does stand on its own.

Covering various aspects of Batman’s existence and the work he does to take down crime, Gotham Knight’s various animation styles go hand in hand with the tone of the individual stories being told. The real issue is that it never feels like a film in its own right, despite the connective tissue between each of the tales. yes it’s more violent and dark than previous DC animated releases (it has a 15 rating here in the UK), but on the whole this is a minor quibble.

The voice cast is a pleasing link to the past – Kevin Conroy returns as Batman in each of the six stories, but there are also appearances from the likes of Will Friedle (Batman Beyond), Corey Burton (Brainiac in the DC Animated Universe) and Kevin Michael Richardson (too many Batman credits to count) all add to the classic DC Animated feel. It would have perhaps helped to have the film cast step in and do voice work, but any excuse to use Kevin Conroy is a big bonus point. That and Batman doesn’t sound like he has a sore throat.

Testing of the fire retardant cape was a resounding success.

The beauty of the anthology format means that we get a bounty of animation styles in a very short space of time. Mix that in with some gorgeous shot choices and some interesting exploration into the methods and thoughts of Batman, the people of Gotham City and the criminal fraternity that have taken hold there, and you have a near-definitive view of the world in which Batman exists or, indeed, needs to exist. The story entitled Field Test is a particularly good example of Batman’s process – he uses a piece of technology that results in somebody accidentally being shot, and what he chooses to do as a result.

The most engaging story is Working Through Pain, which analyses Bruce’s methods for dealing with physical and emotional pain by showing us flashbacks to his time assisting a doctor in a war zone who has to complete surgery on a patient without anaesthetic, and a later time being taught by a woman in the Middle East to control his pain. It all builds up to an impressive character study of Bruce Wayne and how the death of his parents led him to this path. Perhaps there’s nothing new here for longtime Bat-fans, but for those who were new to the character following Nolan’s Batman Begins, there’s a lot of depth to be found here.

Score: 3.5/5

Batman: Mask of the Phantasm (1993)

Simon Prior

2014-04-30

The Phantasm realised much too late that the smoke bombs had gone off in his pocket. Again.

Twitter Plot Summary: Batman is wrongly accused of killing mob bosses when a new vigilante appears in Gotham.

Five Point Summary:

1. Literally Batman begins.
2. Bad move, Bruce – never hang out at the memorial in “the gear.”
3. Hello, Mark Hamill.
4. And they almost got him…
5. What a twist! Although it should really have been obvious.

Mask of the Phantasm marked the first in what has since become a long line of animated adventures set in the DC Universe. Suffice to say, Batman is always a popular choice and Warner Bros Animated division’s movies are invariably of a high quality. Phantasm fits into the animated continuity established by Batman The Animated Series, taking place somewhere within the run of the original animated series. Continuity-wise, you could probably place it wherever you like, but in many ways it works best as an exploration into Bruce Wayne’s decision to become Batman.

Mask of the Phantasm introduces a new vigilante to Gotham – the Phantasm of the title (although not specifically named as such within the film itself). He’s going round bumping off mob bosses and unfortunately for Batman he ends up implicated in their deaths and he has to both clear his name and discover who this Phantasm really is. All in a day’s work for the Dark Knight though. His detective skills get time to breathe, which is a nice change from the two Tim Burton films that movie goers had previously been treated to. It’s always a risk with Batman that his crime solving capability will be lost amongst the many incidents of smacking people upside the head, but that’s not so much the case here.

There are nice but not graphic amounts of violence, a bit more than you can get away with in a TV animated series but still clean enough so that kids can still watch it. There’s also a surprising amount of emotional depth to it, sufficient to entertain the youth market it’s primarily aimed at, yet remains perfectly entertaining for adults as well because of the themes explored. The art deco style of The Animated Series carries over, and looks as impressive as ever, separating animated Batman from all the other pretenders to the animated crown.

The story is intercut with flashbacks to Bruce’s past, seeing his early days as Batman and his budding relationship and later split from Andrea Beaumont, a girl who is perhaps a perfect match for Bruce, to the extent that both of them visit the graveyard to talk to their dead parents – bit creepy, I know. Expanding on areas that would have been difficult to cover in a 22 minute format, the feature length run time allows the story to run at its own pace, splitting evenly between the Phantasm storyline and Bruce’s flashbacks – all of which tie in together in ways that will soon become apparent.

It wouldn’t be Batman without some sort of influence from The Joker, so Mark Hamill steps up to the plate and reprises his role as the Clown King of Crime who is deeply involved in the matter and adds his own particular level of insanity to it. When taking a step back from the story it may seem obvious who the Phantasm is, but then that’s not really the point. More pertinent is the reasons behind Bruce putting on the mask, and the losses that led him in that direction. Powerful stuff ordinarily, but the fact it’s also coming from an animated movie makes it more so.

Score: 3.5/5

Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman (2003)

Simon Prior

2014-04-29

Is it just me, or are the dimensions of her costume unnecessarily suggestive?

Twitter Plot Summary: Batman has to discover the identity of the Batwoman, a new vigilante that is more ruthless than old Bats himself.

Five Point Summary:

1. Batwoman is in light grey – surely it should be black?
2. Lots of women all entering Bruce Wayne’s life at once.
3. Greatest Detective gets it wrong!
4. Oh right, so that’s who the Batwoman is.
5. Bane fight. Standard.

Batman The Animated Series had been off the air for almost 10 years by the time Mystery of the Batwoman had its release, although that same Batman was still alive and kicking in the Justice League TV series and had not much earlier been seen stalking the streets of Gotham in The New Batman Adventures. This standalone story seems an odd choice for release at that time, more so because it retreads similar ground to 1993’s superior Mask of the Phantasm.

Opening with an exciting chase sequence, we’re introduced to the Batwoman, a new vigilante who has no affiliation with Batman. Her outfit in fact is reminiscent of the design used for Batman Beyond, but that was probably a deliberate choice. Shortly thereafter, Bruce Wayne encounters three women, variably from his past or newly introduced as employees of Wayne Industries and so on. Clearly, because scripting convention demands it, one of these women is the unauthorised user of the “Bat” prefix, so of course it’s then up to Batman to work out who it is.

Whilst the final resolution will come as no surprise, it is at least cleverly scripted in order to leave you guessing right up until the appropriate time. It’s also a good story in terms of linking Batman’s quest to a more standard calibre of criminal – although with that said there is quite a substantial part for Bane and the Penguin to play in these proceedings. It wouldn’t be a Batman story without a hefty dose of emotional angst and family drama that are a staple of the character and the DC universe, once again acting as a mirror to Bruce’s own tragic circumstances. The storyline between Kathy and her criminal father Carlton has the most impact as both of them have the most to lose if they were to go their separate ways. There’s slightly less interest in the storylines for other female newcomers Rocky and Sonia, but given the relatively tight running time there are always going to be sacrifices, especially when introducing three new characters in quick succession.

Bane's actually pumped full of Mountain Dew. — Bane’s actually pumped full of Mountain Dew.

The animation is typical of the animated series, featuring lots of gothic art deco designs and layering Gotham in various levels of darkness, although as this is spun out from The New Batman Adventures, it’s ever so slightly less grim than the original Animated Series. By this point in their production cycle, to expect anything less than excellence from the DC animated stable would be a foolish thought. Typically, they deliver despite lacking the polish that would later be applied to the stories not directly related to the DC Animated Universe.

Whilst it might not do anything overtly unusual with its story or setting, Mystery of the Batwoman does at least provide an engaging story that fits in nicely with the previously established canon without making any substantive changes that would affect Batman Beyond or the Justice League storyline. It’s perhaps directly because of these limitations that it doesn’t do very much to progress either Batman or the DC animated universe, but in any case it’s a story that gets in and out before quickly vacating the building.

Is there an Alan Rickman plummet?: Yes

Score: 3/5

Bait (2013)

Simon Prior

2014-04-28

Twitter Plot Summary: A bunch of Australians and a random American are trapped in a flooded supermarket with a roaming shark.

Five Point Summary:

1. CGI sharks are always a bad thing.
2. Why have one shark when two will do a better job?
3. People seem to lack balance when perched on supermarket shelving.
4. Once a supermarket manager, always a supermarket manager.
5. Slow motion should always be used when attacking a shark.

There’s only one expectation to have when going into Bait – it’s going to be nothing but outrageously silly from start to finish. Its premise is simple – an array of personalities are trapped in a supermarket with a massive CGI shark after a tidal flood hits the place and throws the disparate bunch together. Just to add a bit of conflict, a bunch of robbers are holding the store up just before the freak wave hits, and of course they make up part of the surviving group that also includes a cop father and his daughter, a brace of couples who are experiencing the usual relationship woes that always crop up in these things.

After the first few attempts at avoiding being eaten, the remainder of the plot is equal parts people sitting around on top of shelving, or the scriptwriters trying to find inventive ways of throwing people into the water to act as shark bait. More entertaining than this is the array of Australian accents on display, ranging from classic soap opera to attempts at being the Aussie equivalent of Jason Statham. Of course there’s also the random appearance of Dr Doom himself, Julian McMahon as the apparent obligatory American – it actually plays no part in the plot and makes you wonder why he didn’t just play it as an Australian in the first place. He also happens to be one of the guys robbing the supermarket, so of course being the most recognisable face to an international audience, he’s going to have a little redemptive story arc all of his own.

I genuinely have no idea who's going to win this fight. — I genuinely have no idea who’s going to win this fight.

Mixed in with the obligatory falling into water moments are attempts at drama and a number of arguments designed to illustrate how precarious the situation is, but end up just being slightly irritating. In yet another instance of classic creature feature fare, there are a huge number of thinly drawn characters designed to leave you guessing who will survive and who will snuff it. Amongst this, those who deserve to die – or apparently deserve to die – obviously will, and the majority of those who are morally clean or who decide to make amends (or whatever) will survive.

It would have helped if the drama was a little less cliche, but then to expect much more from a film about a shark swimming around a supermarket would perhaps be stretching credulity further than is absolutely necessary. Apart from a couple of half decent ideas there’s nothing new or noteworthy about either the script or the presentation. This is a real pity, because the notion of a shark swimming around a flooded supermarket actually sounds half decent. Of course, it would help if the supermarket itself was large enough to accommodate a great white shark in the first instance. By the time we see a couple of decent action shots (in slow motion, of course) and it starts looking like it might become the “so bad it’s good” type of movie, you realise it’s the final 10 minutes of the film and all of the mostly dull story beforehand has been leading up to this. Even worse, you realise it’s not going to have opportunity to redeem itself or live up to that initial premise, and that’s perhaps the biggest problem of them all.

Score: 2/5

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSUUBiHea68

1...545556...90 Page 55 of 90

SIMONPRIOR.COM