47 Ronin (2013)

2014-01-07

"Lightsaber. Whoah." — “Lightsaber. Whoah.”

Twitter Plot Summary: After the death of their master, 47 samurai seek revenge on the man responsible. Keanu Reeves tags along.

Five Point Summary:

1. Bad CGI.
2. Evil is afoot.
3. Getting the band back together.
4. So… is this supposed to be set in the real world or not?
5. Finally, something interesting has… oh, it’s finished.

If you were expecting a faithful and entertaining romp through feudal Japan, filled to the brim with exciting ninja battles and a compelling story, then don’t see 47 Ronin. Whilst based on perhaps one of the best known stories to come out of that era, the tale of 47 samurai seeking honourable revenge for the death of their master, it’s never sure if it wants to be a full blown fantasy or a serious revenge drama, uncomfortably straddling the two styles like Vanessa Feltz on an exercise bike.

There’s little more to the tale than just described – a group of samurai go on a revenge quest after their master, Lord Asano, is killed by Lord Kira, who has plans to take command over the entire region. He takes Lord Asano’s daughter Mika away with him, with the intention of marrying her once her time of mourning has ended – in a year’s time. It is therefore up to our plucky band of 47 ronin (samurai without a master) to stop the wedding and gain the revenge they seek. Along for this ride comes Keanu Reeves, a halfbreed who is often shunned by the noble samurai as having no honour, no family history and so on. It will of course transpire that he proves himself to this group. To further complicate matters, he has a love interest with the kidnapped Mika, so he has a personal stake in events.

I’m glad I didn’t see it in 3D – the standard film is so dark that I imagine the 3D conversion would be horrendously dark and under-exposed. There are a few hints of nice set design, but most of it is hard to pick out due to the low light levels. On the plus side it’s always nice to see feudal Japan receive the big screen treatment, even if half the time they don’t quite get it right. On the negative slant (again), the CGI is mostly terrible, it’s as if the clock has been wound back 15 years to Flubber-era effects. In practice it’s not quite as bad as that sounds, instead it’s more on par with the effects in 2013’s equally derisive R.I.P.D. On that note, the fantasy element is badly set up and isn’t explained satisfactorily. Much like most of it, then.

There's clearly not 47 men there. They're short by 30. — There’s clearly not 47 men there. They’re short by 30.

Keanu Reeves provides a typically wooden performance, and actually serves no real importance to the plot. In fact it would have been improved immeasurably if he hadn’t been involved at all. The remaining cast of Japanese actors are reliable and solid, but are lost in the weak script. Furthermore is it too much to ask for the film to be in Japanese rather than mostly English? On several occasions it switches between the two, again confusing the film’s intentions. I know subtitles are considered a bad thing by the majority of Western audiences, but either have everything in English, or have everything in Japanese with subtitles – we don’t need both. Rinko Kikuchi looks like she’s having the most fun as the Witch, but much like the remainder of the film, the character has little of consequence worth contributing.

A couple of nice action set pieces also do little to sway opinion in the film’s favour – the final assault on Kira’s home as he prepares for his wedding has a nice build-up, but ultimately becomes a generic resolution in the final act. The story itself is a classic and has received many successful movie adaptations, but this interpretation certainly isn’t one of them.

Score: 2/5

Kill Keith (2011)

Simon Prior

2014-01-06

When they said Keith Chegwin was in this film... — When they said Keith Chegwin was in this film…

Twitter Plot Summary: A killer is bumping off minor celebrities and Keith Chegwin is on the list. Will he survive?

Five Point Summary:

1. The Crack of Dawn. Oh I see…
2. That’s not Tony Blackburn. Oh, it’s a gag. Right.
3. A flatulence gag. This amuses me.
4. Ooh, a twist.
5. Some days you just can’t get rid of a bomb!

It doesn’t bode well for this film from the very beginning. The title and the DVD artwork pay loving homage (in other words – completely rip off) the much bigger, more successful movie Kill Bill. Perhaps in a desperate marketing bid this was decided as a good idea, yet at no point in the film does Keith Chegwin wield a samurai sword and, in fairness, it’s not really a film about Mr Chegwin in the first place.

Danny is a tea-boy/runner on popular breakfast TV show The Crack of Dawn (yes, very funny) and current male host Cliff is on his way out, albeit somewhat reluctantly. Actually, scratch somewhat – he really doesn’t want to go. But there is trouble afoot – all the potential replacements for Cliff are being bumped off one by one by a murderer dubbed the Breakfast Cereal Killer. Meanwhile, Danny has a romantic interest in Dawn, one which slowly develops as the story progresses and the killer places her in his sights. There are a number of D-list celebrity cameos, including Tony Blackburn, Joe Pasquale and the titular Keith Chegwin, playing up to the idea that breakfast TV is throwaway stuff.

Surprisingly there are a lot of amusing moments, in particular the producer who is essentially a vampire, lurking in his office and floating across the floor like he’s in a surreal Reeves and Mortimer sketch. Other jokes are less successful – Tony Blackburn being played by a much younger man is a fun idea on paper, but in reality is handled badly. It would be better if the younger guy was entertaining, or even a little bit like Blackburn in any capacity, but Joe Tracini could be anybody. That’s probably the gag right there, but again an idea on paper is fine, but you need to back that up with genuinely funny interplay when it comes to putting it on screen. The only genuinely good joke he gets is when the real Tony Blackburn finally shows his face and those trademark pearly whites, and that just leaves you wishing the original Tony was in it all the way through.

He'd been made to watch Swap Shop on a 24 hour loop. — He’d been made to watch Swap Shop on a 24 hour loop.

Keith Chegwin is also surprisingly good as himself – it would be extremely disappointing if he couldn’t even portray himself convincingly, but he does a top job. There are several genuine laugh out loud moments, in particular his annoyance at not being recognised at the studio’s front desk. The remaining celeb cameos are kept short and to the point – this is a good thing.

At best it’s a low brow British comedy. Moderately amusing in places and thankfully doesn’t put more emphasis on the D-List celebrity cameos than is necessary. The celebs are a recurring theme throughout but aren’t the core focus. They add colour to what would otherwise be a quite generic slasher film, but for once there are genuine laughs which at least counterbalance the overriding smell of cheapness that runs through the rest of the production. It’s a 50/50 success rate in that respect, but it’s hard to be disappointed by the poor jokes if you’re expecting them in the first place. It might even – dare I say it? – warrant a repeat viewing somewhere down the line. Going in, I never would have expected that to be my reaction by the closing credits. Well done folks, you have completely subverted my expectations.

Score: 3/5

Doomsday (2008)

Simon Prior

2014-01-05

He didn't think she was taking their game of hide and seek seriously. — He didn’t think she was taking their game of hide and seek seriously.

Twitter Plot Summary: After a virus leaves Scotland quarantined, a special ops officer is sent in to find a cure after the virus spreads south.

Five Point Summary:

1. Quarantining Scotland? Typical English move.
2. Why is there a gimp sat in the corner? Actually, don’t answer that.
3. So long Sean Pertwee. As expected.
4. Poor Dr Bashir.
5. It’s all gone a bit Mad Max.

Neil Marshall’s films often pay extensive homage to other genre favourites, and Doomsday is no different, transferring Escape From New York to the equally beautiful locale of er, Glasgow. Thirty-odd years after a virus forces the English to seal off the border with Scotland (as if they really needed an excuse) at the site of the old Hadrian’s Wall – including Newcastle, sadly – those left behind the wall are trapped within a quarantine zone where Scotland operates as it did before – lawlessness, barbarism and random killings are the order of the day. I jest, of course – that’s just weekends in Glasgow. After the virus somehow makes its way south to London (completely missing the remaining north of England and the Midlands – mysterious!), Rhona Mitra is given command of a team of commandos and sent over the wall to try and find a cure. It’s not long before it all goes to pot and the gore starts to fly.

Meanwhile back in London Dr Bashir from Star Trek DS9 is the Prime Minister (who’d have seen that one coming?), who’s content to sit back and wait whilst Rhona Mitra’s team does all the work on the other side of the wall. He also has to contend with the “50 a day” throaty voice of David O’Hara’s Canaris, and his lofty political ambitions. He also has to contend with Bob Hoskins, who isn’t anywhere near his usual level of excellence and mostly sleepwalks through his performance. Rhona Mitra is an odd choice for the lead, given that the best gigs she had previously were “naked girl assaulted by Kevin Bacon in Hollow Man” and as a real life model portraying video game heroine Lara Croft. She does okay with the material, if nothing amazing. Sean Pertwee also turns up as a commando-type officer so you know he’ll probably die before we reach the final act. Has any of Sean Pertwee’s characters ever made it to the end of a film? I’m assuming not.

Whilst the plot is hardly original, the film does at least have Neil Marshall’s typical stylish flair and buckets of gore. As far as the visual style goes, it does at least look good in that usual “post apocalyptic” way, although the descent of the Scots into anarchy seems a little far fetched given that only 20 years has passed. In any case, it wouldn’t be much of a film if they were all sat behind the wall doing a bit of knitting and gently conversing over a glass of scotch. There’s a sense of fun to the script, but mostly it’s taken very seriously. Well, except for parts like the gladiatorial battle between Mitra and some guy in heavy armour – the presence of Malcolm McDowell in the scene does nothing but force events into cheesy territory. Otherwise, Doomsday is genre cinema at its finest; not to be taken too seriously and enjoyed despite any misgivings you might have as the story plays out. Ignore the blatant references to those better genre films and enjoy it for what it is – unashamed escapism entertainment.

Score: 3/5

Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs 2 (2013)

Simon Prior

2014-01-04

Flint had just seen his energy bill for the FLDSMDFR.

Twitter Plot Summary: Flint Lockwood returns to his home island to stop the FLDSMDFR, which is creating foodimals.

Five Point Summary:

1. Hmm, looks a bit Apple-esque.
2. Hah, King Kong reference.
3. Food puns galore!
4. The inevitable realisation that all is not well.
5. Monkey done good.

Despite its premise, the first Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs was an enjoyable film. It was inherently silly which spoke to the man-child that I am occasionally known to be. A sequel was inevitable, yet despite a similar level of silliness it lacks the same sort of killer punch that made the first film such a delight. That’s not to say that Meatballs 2, which will henceforth be its name (because otherwise most of this review’s word count will be me saying the full title), is a bad film. Certainly by comparison to the likes of Turbo it’s incredibly well scripted and features the right amount of daftness to pull in children and adults alike. If you’re attuned to that sort of thing, of course.

The story sees weird and wonderful inventor Flint Lockwood, intrepid reporter Sam Sparks, Brent, Earl and Steve (amongst others) return to their home island which has been turned into a food-based jungle by the FLDSMDFR. Given a job with by his idol Chester V, Flint has to go back and find his machine whilst being completely unaware that all is not right as far as his new employer is concerned. But… you kind of guessed that, right? Perhaps the best aspect is the sheer number of food related puns on offer – it’s a pun-filled extravaganza where foods are combined with animals to create shrimpanzees, tacodiles, hippotatoes, and more. It’s a delight, plain and simple.

It’s also the type of film where I find Anna Faris the least annoying. I can’t quite place where my dislike originates, but in pretty much everything else I’d rather just watch something where she isn’t present. The remainder of the cast are fine, Bill Hader in particular is always fun as Flint, and Neil Patrick Harris is both wasted and a genius as one-word monkey Steve. It’s a shame that Mr T didn’t return to voice Earl, but that’s the only notable exception amongst the voice actors, the rest of whom return from the first film. There’s also the usual array of references for eagle-eyed parents to watch out for, including a thinly veiled homage to King Kong. And obviously the jokes, which are as strong as the first film, stronger perhaps because of those food puns.

So why doesn’t it work as well as that first film? Well it’s perhaps a case of familiarity breeding contempt. The first Meatballs was unique in that it was amusingly surreal, didn’t try to play down to its intended audience and balanced out humour for both kids and adults alike. Meatballs 2 does this as well, albeit by relying on the food puns to cover its weak and overly linear story and also to hid the fact the characters don’t really develop. I realise that might be a big ask from a children’s animated film, but there should probably be more to it than what we received. Barb’s transition is nicely done, but for everybody else? Not much going on there. If there was a little more depth, akin to the first film, then Meatballs 2 would have potential to be the superior film. With that said, I’ll still gladly see a third film should it crop up.

Is there an Alan Rickman-style plummet?: Yes

Score: 3/5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw6dECrl-BE

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Simon Prior

2014-01-03

Bilbo had a hard time finding his ring in all this bling.

Twitter Plot Summary: More Middle Earth shenanigans, with 100% more dragon than Part 1 and 100% less singing.

Five Point Summary:

1. Dwarves!
2. Spiders!
3. Man flesh!
4. Fish!
5. Dragon!

Once more into Middle Earth, dear friends, once more. It’s the festive season which means another Hobbit movie is upon us. This time round we get giant spiders, a confusing forest, a man who turns into a bear (or vice versa), the return of Legolas, and at last a ruddy great big dragon. All of this is crammed into a 2 hr 40m running time, so as you may expect it starts at pace and never lets up.

Efforts have been made to counteract the “too many dwarfs” syndrome of the first film and more of them have a bit of personality this time round. It’s still not perfect and at least half the dwarf contingent are non-existent in terms of the narrative, but it’s a step in the right direction. We’re introduced to a younger Legolas, and rather than the assured warrior we saw in LOTR, at this stage he’s cocky and abrasive, liable to get himself killed as a result of his own smug superiority complex. His circumstances are further complicated by his interest in fellow Elf Tauriel (Lilly), however into this mix is thrown dwarf Kili (Turner). The love triangle between Legolas, Tauriel and Dwarf Kili feels forced and doesn’t sit well – it develops from nothing and unless Elves form relationships in under 5 minutes then it’s hard to believe. One further note of complaint is that some of the CGI actually looks quite bad (the group on the outskirts of the forest, the liquid gold in the mountain), however this is counterbalanced by Smaug, who looks fantastic, and is expertly voiced by Benedict Cumberbatch. On the “almost too obvious to mention” front, locations too are as gorgeous as ever to look at, which in its own way makes up for the occasionally iffy CGI.

Then there’s Smaug, who is introduced relatively late into the story but is entirely worth the build-up. Bilbo’s encounter with him is akin to a bigger scale version of Riddles in the Dark, although in this case Bilbo is lucky to get out alive. Smaug is devious, cunning, and absolutely massive. No easy route for escape however you look at it.

Meanwhile Gandalf is off investigating Dol Guldur and the mysterious Necromancer who resides there. Looking at Gandalf’s story separate to Bilbo’s, there isn’t much to it beyond him travelling from A to B and piecing together a few clues, in what almost feels like a desperate bid to link the two trilogies – in the darkness bind them, indeed. Still, much like the original trilogy, this second film has given me some of my favourite quotes so far – Gandalf’s silky delivery of “Good. You’ll need it.” is fantastic, and the orcs saying “Man flesh!” made me giggle in the cinema. I would expect part 3 to find it difficult to top these two brief moments, but we’ll see.

Barrels. I wonder what he could use those for... — Barrels. I wonder what he could use those for…

And therein lies the one big improvement over Part 1 – lots of story and lots of action. There’s loads of them crammed into this portion of the tale, the characters moving from one set piece to the other with reckless abandon. Performances remain solid and entertaining. Other than Ian McKellen being fantastic as always, Freeman and Armitage maintain strong characterisation as Bilbo and Thorin, and new characters such as Bard, Tauriel, Legolas (well, kind of new), and the Mayor of Laketown (an always impressive Stephen Fry) are all earnest in their approach. The only sticking point there is Ryan Gage’s Alfrid, who seems to be a cheap knock-off of Brad Dourif’s Grima Wormtongue.

All in all it’s a marked improvement over the first entry. There’s more action, more drama, and we’re a few steps closer to both the epic Battle of the Five Armies as well as making the final connections between The Hobbit and LOTR. The only sticking point is the rather sudden ending. If you needed any more proof that this was the middle part of a trilogy, you’ll definitely get that impression when the film reaches its end. Less satisfying than the ending to part 1, it does at least hint at the epic finale to come.

Score: 4/5

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

Simon Prior

2014-01-02

Bilbo didn't know what these men were doing in his home, but he didn't want to ask. Not while he was in his dressing gown. — Bilbo didn’t know what these men were doing in his home, but he didn’t want to ask. Not while he was in his dressing gown.

Twitter Plot Summary: Young Bilbo Baggins goes on an adventure with a group of Dwarfs who wish to reclaim their mountain home from a dragon.

Five Point Summary:

1. Hobbiton. It’s as if it never went away.
2. That’s a lot of dwarfs. And a lot of singing.
3. Some troll-related stuff. Feels like we’ve seen this before.
4. Riddles in the Dark. Awesome.
5. Bilbo’s accepted. About time, too.

It’s back to Middle Earth for Peter Jackson as the long-gestating project of The Hobbit finally made its way to our screens in 2012. After much back and forth over the film rights and discussions over who would take the director’s chair, it was Lord of the Rings (LOTR) helmer Peter Jackson who finally stepped back into the director’s chair after Guillermo del Toro dropped out due to scheduling issues. Set some years before Jackson’s epic trilogy, Bilbo joins a band of Dwarfs and Gandalf (a returning Ian McKellen) on a quest to reclaim their kingdom under the mountain which has since been controlled by the dragon Smaug. In a similar way to Frodo’s quest, they head south and have a number of adventures along the way. Meanwhile Gandalf and fellow wizard Radagast investigate the rise of an evil sort known only as The Necromancer, which as we all know will lead directly into the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

Martin Freeman steps into the younger shoes of Bilbo Baggins (previously played by Ian Holm in LOTR and who makes a cameo in the movie’s introduction), bringing an everyman quality to the character that is his staple. Despite the 2.5 hour plus running time, that is still not enough to give all of the dwarfs any real character. There were too many of them in the book and subsequently there are too many in the film. There’s also too much singing – if their quest is that urgent then stop warbling and get moving. The dwarfs may receive additional depth in the sequels, but for now at least they’re a hairy bunch of people we don’t know all too well. Gandalf is the same as he was previously, which is no bad thing. Radagast is played with an air of insanity by Sylvester McCoy, who we don’t see enough of in my opinion. His Radagast is linked directly to the natural world, to the point where he has birds living under his hat and their droppings run down his hair. Hardly what you’d usually expect from a wizard, but that’s how it is.

Gollum. Obsessed with the Precious, yet so easily loses it. Silly creature.

One of the key highlights is Riddles in the Dark between Gollum and Bilbo. Much like in the book, it’s the most powerful sequence and is given plenty of room to breathe within the individual arc of the movie. It’s great to see Andy Serkis back as Gollum and again acts as a marker for why Gollum hates Hobbits and the Baggins household so much by the time he meets Frodo, and again sets up later events. An addition to the book sees the party being chased by a group of Orcs. This gives events a greater sense of urgency, one that in my most humble of opinions was lacking in Tolkien’s original text.

Ahead of release there was much grumbling about the 48 frames per second version of the film, which perhaps fortunately was not available in the majority of my local cinemas. It’s likely a result of the higher frame rate, but the CGI looks a little bit iffy in places, which is a shame given the sterling work completed on the LOTR trilogy and that we’ve had nearly 10 years of advances in CGI in the interim. Many also complained about the fact that this first Hobbit movie was too similar to the Lord of the Rings, but it’s from the same director and creative team so I’m not sure what they were expecting to be different. There is a good argument against stretching the story out to three films when two would have been enough, but otherwise it works as the opening entry to a new trilogy and tells a complete story. The slightly whimsical tone fits with the one in the book, however putting focus on a hedgehog called Sebastian, however briefly, does take some wind out of the sails. Okay, so there is an overall feeling of Lord of the Rings-Lite to it, but given how well that trilogy was received, is that necessarily a bad thing?

Score: 3.5/5

Casper (1995)

Simon Prior

2014-01-01

Twitter Plot Summary: A shunned scientist and his moody daughter move into a haunted house where villainess Carrigan hopes to find treasure.

IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112642/?ref_=nv_sr_1

Five Point Summary:

1. Who you gonna call? Not the Ghostbusters, apparently.
2. Welcome, Bill Pullman and your floppy hairstyle.
3. Party time!
4. An axe will most definitely hurt…
5. Resolution!

CGI was a good thing for children’s movies, the 1990s being filled with inventive use of the technology to provide a number of films that would have otherwise been difficult to produce on a cheap budget. Whilst the 80s gave us a pinnacle in fantasy movies, the 90s gave us a step towards uniting cartoons with live action adaptations. Casper proves to be one of the better family films to use CGI in that decade, although that may have something to do with the cartoon-like appearance of the ghostly spirits – it might have been a different story had they attempted photo-realistic ghosts. Which clearly wouldn’t have worked because ghosts don’t exist… (or do they?!).

Three groups of characters combine to form the story. On the one hand we have evil villain Carrigan and her faithful henchman Dibbs, who inherit the old house following her father’s untimely and not at all suspicious demise, and who seek the riches that are hidden somewhere in the building; there’s Bill Pullman, his floppy 90s hairstyle and Christina Ricci as father, floppy 90s hairstyle and daughter. Once an eminent scientist, he switched to being a ghost therapist/paranormal expert after the death of his wife, whilst Kat ended up becoming a typical displaced teenager of no fixed abode; and finally there are the four ghosts who live in the mansion – Casper, Stinkie, Stretch and Fatso, the latter three being the mischievous uncles of Casper who just wants to make friends.

Welcome, Bill Pullman's lovely hair! Oh, and Bill Pullman. — Welcome, Bill Pullman’s lovely hair! Oh, and Bill Pullman.

As a kids film it covers all of the essentials: slapstick humour, decent special effects for the era, and jokes that work for both kids and adults – a number of very brief cameos in particular are a highlight. It also has a suitable moral by its close. Whilst Casper is the title character, the true focus is on the father/daughter relationship between Dr Harvey and Kat, providing them both with emotional resolution to the death of Harvey’s wife. The humour stems mainly from Dr Harvey and his interactions with the three ghosts, and then in Matroska doll style there are less laughs when Carrigan and Dibbs are involved, and then even less for Kat and Casper. There’s a very minor subplot of a jealous girl at school wanting to teach Kat a lesson, but compared to many other films this angle is not overplayed and is simply used as an excuse to have a party at the mansion.

Other than the impressive CGI, this looks just like every other family film of the era. It’s hard to describe it exactly, but the sets have a specific design to them that says “cheap but not that cheap.” Compared to many other family films of the time, Casper works because it has a consistent story with no loose threads, decent effects and genuinely amusing jokes. Whilst it’s not in a position to win any awards in most categories, it does at least tick the box for entertaining the family for 90 minutes. And that moral I mentioned? Death isn’t treated as something to be afraid of. Concentrate on living now because you can’t say for certain what will happen next. A wise notion to live by.

Score: 3.5/5

Up (2009)

Simon Prior

2013-12-31

That must have cost a small fortune... — That must have cost a small fortune…

Twitter Plot Summary: A grumpy old man attaches thousands of balloons to his house to visit South America.

IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1049413/?ref_=nv_sr_4

Five Point Summary:

1. Now that’s really sad…
2. …and that’s a lot of balloons.
3. SQUIRREL!
4. Surrogate family of outcasts VS an army of talking dogs. Fight!
5. That’s a long way down.

Up starts with such an emotional kick that you wonder if it will prove to be incapable of maintaining that level of emotional investment from start to finish. Rest assured, despite that melancholy opening Pixar retain your interest and your faith in them as producers of films for all ages. We begin with Carl, a young boy who has a keen sense of adventure. He meets Ellie, a slightly older girl with similar interests. Time passes and they marry, settling down and living out their lives together.

Moving forward, Carl Fredricksen is now a grumpy old man. Not only has he lost his wife, but because life got in the way for various reasons – home repairs, broken cars etc – they never saw through their plans to visit the world and, in particular, South America. After an epic amount of construction starts taking place around his home, Carl uses his previous career as a balloon salesman to attach thousands of balloons to his house in order to carry it to South America. Unfortunately for him he also has cub scout Russell in tow. What follows is an adventure for the pair of them as they encounter Dug the talking dog (he has a collar that projects his internal voice), a rare bird they call Kevin (despite being a female), and the long-lost adventurer Charles Muntz, who was a boyhood hero of Carl’s. That’s a pertinent point actually – Carl’s old anyway, so how old does that make Muntz?

Not something you expect to see out your front door every day.

The story has plenty going for it whether you’re old, young or somewhere in the middle. There’s exciting adventure elements, a truly heartwrenching story for Carl as he slowly comes to terms with the death of his wife Ellie, and some incredibly amusing moments primarily from the large pack of talking dogs. It’s also fun to see a story play out between two old men rather than the standard approach of using youngsters to make the story relatable. In that respect we at least have Russell, who helps Carl realise where he’s been going wrong all these years. Carl goes on both a literal and a figurative journey throughout the film, and that opening montage gives it the emotional heft to make the resolution all the more powerful. Rounding off the surrogate family he now finds himself surrounded by is Dug, the friendliest of the talking dogs, is funny, lovably dim-witted and loyal. Then there’s the rare bird Kevin, who is equally loyal but only communicates via squawks.

As Carl and Russell become embroiled in Muntz’s near patholical desire to capture Kevin, the story morphs fully into an adventure serial along the same lines as the Indiana Jones franchise. Replace Nazis with the talking dogs and the two could be interchangeable. The quality of the animation goes without saying – it’s excellent, enhancing the South American location and clearly defining the action without going all Michael Bay on us. The disparity between Carl and Muntz is another highlight – both men have spent years seeking that which can’t be found, and ultimately it’s the realisation of that fact that separates them. Well done Pixar.

Is there an Alan Rickman plummet?: Yes

Score: 5/5

Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues (2013)

Simon Prior

2013-12-30

Twitter Plot Summary: Ron’s back, but this time he has to rebuild from the ground up as he helps kick off the 24 hour news cycle.

IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1229340/?ref_=nv_sr_1

Five Point Summary:

1. Harrison Ford! More of him would’ve gone down a treat.
2. Ron gets the band back together.
3. Racism.
4. Ron takes a trip to the lighthouse. This all feels strained.
5. Ron’s fighting a shark. Odd place to end it.

Ron Burgundy and his news team are back at the dawn of th 24 hour news cycle. Having been turfed out of his native San Diego and replaced by his wife Veronica Corningstone, Ron has to reform the team of Champ Kind, Brian Fontana and Brick Tamland where they head to New York to start their careers anew. Despite many good moments the story falls flat, none more so than in a third act twist that sees Ron living in a lighthouse. It’s inconvenient plotting that doesn’t allow the characters to breathe and destroys the pace of the story. The script also rides on the coattails of the original film, borrowing ideas liberally and doing them again but slightly different. Rivalries between Burgundy and handsome newscaster Jack Lime, and Bergundy’s relationship with his black female boss Linda Jackson are amusing but don’t have any resolution.

There’s also less of Champ Kind and Brian Fontana than I’d have liked – Ron of course gets the majority of screen time as you would expect, but it’s Brick Tamland and his odd romance with Kristen Wiig’s equally dumb Chani. Their scenes are entertaining, but giving Brick the B story is a bit much – I know Champ and Brian are essentially 2D caricatures, but then so are Ron and Brick – more of Brian in particular would’ve balanced it out – at least Champ has his unrequited love for Ron to fall back on.

An obvious date location that many overlook.

That’s not to say the film isn’t funny, in fact it’s the most I’ve laughed in a cinema since Alan Partridge’s Alpha Papa earlier this year. It’s also delightfully silly, with many moments that are either totally surreal or just generally insane. It’s possible that the expectation of the film was far higher than it could achieve given how well liked the first movie is. There’s also the issue with the promotional clips ahead of release, showing scenes that were cut from the final film. Arguably those clips were funnier than what was retained, but I’ve no doubt that we’ll see them again either on the DVD/Blu-Ray release or as another Bergundy film in the same style as Wake Up Ron Bergundy.

It would also help if the film was about 20-40 minutes shorter. As a general rule of thumb, comedy works best when the running time is limited to 90-100 minutes at the most. Expecting to keep the audience laughing for a full 2 hours is a tall order and one where Anchorman 2 falls on its face. With a little more restraint in the editing suite a 90 minute Ron Burgundy film would be hilarious. As is typical of the Judd Apatow stable, a lack of restraint in cutting the film has led to the inclusion of many flabby sections that add little. Overall it has the same appeal as the first movie, only with its impact lessened by repetition of what worked before. If a third movie does make it to our screens let’s hope that the story is up to scratch and, whilst unlikely, has more of that cult appeal that made the first film such a pleasure.

Score: 3.5/5

The Rundown (2003)

Simon Prior

2013-12-29

"You were pretty good in American Pie. I could smell what you were cookin'." — “You were pretty good in American Pie. I could smell what you were cookin’.”

Twitter Plot Summary: A hard-hitting retrieval expert with plans to become a chef is made to go on one last job before retiring.

IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0327850/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Five Point Summary:

1. Arnie cameo. Nice and early.
2. Rock Bottom!
3. Bad guy with a whip. I see a showdown coming up later on…
4. Monkeys: The Revenge
5. Christopher Walken: the ultimate parody of himself.

Also known as The Rundown in the USA, Welcome To The Jungle is a surprisingly efficient modern action film. The script, despite being a typical cliche action movie setup, zings with snappy dialogue and a number of entertaining set pieces. Beck is a retrieval expert, tasked with completing one last job for his slightly sinister boss, Walker. The job should be simple – head to the Amazon basin and collect Walker’s son, Travis. Of course, this being an action film and Beck being played by none other than The Rock himself, things won’t go to plan and it will all go to pot.

Beck is an interesting character for the fact he’s not a fan of using guns. That’s his defining characteristic and one that he sticks to until he’s pushed too far and things really kick off. Until then he kicks seven shades of snot out of anybody who’s deserving of it, including Travis where appropriate. From start to finish Beck makes it perfectly clear that all he wants to do is retire and start a career as a chef, and his exasperation with the circumstances he finds himself in is captured perfectly.

The real delight is the interplay between Seann William Scott and Dwayne Johnson. It’s certainly no Riggs/Murtaugh from Lethal Weapon, and it’s not even John McClane/Zeus from Die Hard With A Vengeance, but it’s fun stuff all the same. Dwayne Johnson is a charisma machine in any case, so thankfully he and Stifler can bounce off each other nicely. Christopher Walken plays an exaggerated version of himself, although nowadays it’s hard to tell the difference. As the villain he’s largely underused, but has a couple of decent scenes to justify his presence. Topping up the central cast is Rosario Dawson to add a minor love triangle element to the story. There’s more to her character than meets the eye, which makes a pleasant change to the usual “damsel in distress” routine.

Christopher Walken and three generic bad guys. On a Wednesday.

The location shoot itself is fantastic to look at. Combined with a fun script and decent action, it all slots together with little to complain about. On that note, and rather understandably, as an action film there is little depth to the story or the characters than the action demands. There’s a lot of secondary characters – Ewan Bremner’s pilot the most notable – but there isn’t much for them to do. This I can understand as otherwise we’d not actually see anything being done – it would be two hours of in-depth character study set in a jungle. Suffice to say that the secondary characters are given a notable characteristic and it’s left at that.

It appeared at first that this would start a new action franchise with Beck as the lead – clearly 10 years later (at time of writing) this hasn’t come to pass, and it feels like an opportunity has been wasted. Still, at least we got to enjoy this one adventure with Beck and some rather excitable monkeys. Yeah, keep an eye out for them.

Score: 3.5/5

1...666768...90 Page 67 of 90

SIMONPRIOR.COM