Month: September 2017

Today’s quick review: Versus. An escaped prisoner (Tak Sakaguchi) saves a kidnapped woman (Chieko Misaka) from a gang of thugs, and they flee into the Forest of Resurrection, a haunted place where the dead come back to life. Pursued by the thugs, assailed by the undead, and at a loss to explain the events around them, they gradually uncover the truth: they have been brought to the Forest as part of an immortal’s (Hideo Sakaki) plan to gain ultimate power.

Versus is a Japanese action horror movie with a muddy plot and a low budget. One part zombie flick, one part rival fight, Versus takes a moderate premise for an action movie and stumbles on its execution. The budget shows in everything from the lone filming location to the mediocre gore and special effects. The characters are on the thin side, and the writing focuses more on building mystery than conveying the plot.

As an action movie, Versus has a few factors going for it. While the zombie scenes are bland, the hand-to-hand fights do pack a bit of punch. The protagonist upgrades his weapons and outfit as the movie goes on, a nice video game-esque touch. Outside of its dramatic and incomprehensible plot, the movie does not take itself too seriously, yielding a handful of funny moments that could have been hilarious with the right delivery.

Apart from these glimmers of charm, Versus suffers from bad decisions stacked upon poor fundamentals. The thugs are downright bizarre in their behavior, overshooting comic relief by a wide margin. The characters have a tendency to fight each other and let each other go for no reason other than to pad the number of action sequences. The pacing drags for the first half of the movie, with wave after wave of zombie filler delaying the main plot and its holes.

Some of these issues may be the result of watching the dubbed version of the film rather than the subtitled version. Dubbing clobbers everything from the delivery to the lines of dialogue themselves, truncated or altered to fit the characters’ mouths. A poor dub could be to blame for many of the flaws with the writing, downgrading it from passable to poor. But as it stands, Versus has problems that eclipse its potential.

Watch Versus only if you are looking for a deeply flawed action film with a couple of entertaining moments. The slow pacing and cryptic plot make it difficult to follow, even for viewer who wants to laugh at the film rather than with it. Adequate martial arts, one or two good ideas, and the odd joke give it marginal value, but most viewers are better off skipping Versus entirely.

6.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 4.5 for a decent premise wrapped in poor execution.

Today’s quick review: Ocean’s Thirteen. When real estate mogul Willy Bank (Al Pacino) cheats Reuben Tishkoff (Elliott Gould) out of his share of their new casino, his friends Danny Ocean (George Clooney), Rusty Ryan (Brad Pitt), and their crew reunite to rob the casino of as much money as possible on its opening night. But with $500 million to steal and a state-of-the-art security system to contend with, they have their work cut out for them.

Ocean’s Thirteen is a crime comedy with an ensemble cast and the third movie in the Ocean’s Eleven series. Nearly all of the original cast members return, with George Clooney, Brad Pitt, and Matt Damon headlining a cast that contains Bernie Mac, Don Cheadle, Andy Garcia, and newcomer Al Pacino as Willy Bank, an unsympathetic developer who prides himself on his luxury hotels. The only missing faces are Julia Roberts and Catherine Zeta-Jones.

Ocean’s Thirteen is a return to roots for the franchise. Once again Danny Ocean finds himself up against a casino owner against whom he has a personal grudge, and once again his crew must infiltrate and scheme their way through a casino’s impenetrable security. The humor comes from the banter between the colorful characters, while the excitement comes from their intricate plan to pull off the impossible.

Where Ocean’s Twelve was experimental to a fault, Ocean’s Thirteen plays it safe with a linear plot, conventional humor, and an obvious antagonist. The movie still keeps one or two tricks up its sleeves, but the twists are neither as elaborate as the ones in Ocean’s Twelve nor as satisfying as the ones in Ocean’s Eleven. The plan does have a nice progression to it, with a few clever schemes along the way, making the plot of the movie straightforward but entertaining.

The rest of the film follows a similar pattern: straightforward and lacking any glaring weaknesses. Willy Bank makes for a less nuanced villain than Terry Benedict, but his obnoxious attitude makes him a good target. Reuben’s suffering gives the film its emotional heart, a weaker subplot than Danny and Tess’s relationship in the first film, but a viable one nonetheless. The humor dials down the extremes of Ocean’s Twelve but still manages to amuse.

Watch Ocean’s Thirteen if you are in the mood for a light heist film with a decent plot, a good sense of humor, and a talented cast. While not the iconic film the original was, Ocean’s Thirteen makes for an entertaining watch without any major flaws. Skip it if you enjoyed the first film and would rather leave it on its pedestal.

6.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for being a tidy heist film with good dialogue and a great cast.

Today’s quick review: Ocean’s Twelve. Three years after Danny Ocean (George Clooney) and his crew robbed Terry Benedict’s (Andy Garcia) casinos of $160 million, Benedict tracks them down and makes an impossible demand: repay the money in two weeks, with interest. The thieves head to Europe in search of work, but their task is complicated by Interpol agent Isabel Lahiri (Catherine Zeta-Jones), Rusty’s (Brad Pitt) ex-girlfriend, and the Night Fox (Vincent Cassel), a master thief with a stake in their activities.

Ocean’s Twelve is a crime comedy with an ensemble cast, an elaborate plot, and a quirky sense of style. The sequel to Ocean’s Eleven, Ocean’s Twelve sees the return of an excellent cast that includes George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Julia Roberts, Bernie Mac, Don Cheadle, and Andy Garcia. The move to Europe is a nice change of pace for the series, keeping the sense of class while offering a bit of variety.

Ocean’s Twelve accomplishes the tricky task of finding roles for a dozen characters. Danny’s crew have been living the high life since their last heist, but the bubble bursts when Terry Benedict catches up with them. On a deadline and low on options, they pool their money, their talents, and their contacts to steal enough in antiques to pay off their debt. The crew has the same easy banter as before, and the heists they pull are impressive.

But where Ocean’s Eleven was a well-rounded film with a satisfying mix of humor, character, and intrigue, Ocean’s Twelve doubles down on a complicated plot and self-indulgent humor. The twists in the first film were picked carefully and presaged by clues hidden throughout the movie. The twists in the second film are layered on without forethought or consideration for their impact. The clues are present but much subtler, and the plot devolves into a guessing game.

Likewise, the humor in Ocean’s Twelve takes a turn for the bizarre. The sequel has the same casual, funny dialgoue as the first film, but without the sharp, well-paced plot to scaffold it. The jokes are much more obscure than before, both in terms of delivery and subject matter. These Easter eggs can be immensely satisfying for the knowledgable viewer, but anyone who does not pay close attention to the Hollywood references will be left in the cold.

What’s left is still an enjoyable heist film, but one hampered by a confusing plot, odd sensibilities, and a sense of disappointment after the quality of the first movie. Watch Ocean’s Twelve if you enjoyed Ocean’s Eleven and are willing to put up with a dip in quality to see the cast go at it again. More discerning viewers can skip the sequel without much loss.

6.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it the same for a great cast and decent comedy held back by serious flaws.

Today’s quick review: Gattaca. In the future, advanced genetic testing has cut off whole swaths of jobs for the genetically inferior. Born sickly, Vincent Freeman (Ethan Hawke) pursues his dream of space travel the only way he can: by posing as Jerome Morrow (Jude Law), a genetically superior man, at the space exploration company known as Gattaca. But when his supervisor is murdered, the ensuing investigation threatens to expose his deception.

Gattaca is a science fiction drama that extrapolates the societal effects of improved genetic testing and engineering. As genetic screening and designer pregnancies all but eliminate heritable disease, a new underclass arises for the genetically disadvantaged. To sneak into the most exclusive jobs, these outcasts must take on false identities to fool the frequent genetic tests, often striking a deal with a donor who has fallen on hard times.

Gattaca takes a simple, plausible premise and uses it to tell a well-written and interesting tale of perseverance. To maintain his lie, Vincent must diligently tend to the slightest traces of genetic material he might leave behind, replacing them instead with samples taken from Jerome. Vincent is a weak man by birth, and only his dedication to his goal gives him the strength to take the grueling steps necessary to compete with the more fortunate.

The tone of the movie blends thoughtful sci-fi speculation, a suspenseful plot, and personal drama for an experience that mingles sentiment and detachment. Uma Thurman plays Irene, a coworker of Vincent’s who helps out Detective Hugo (Alan Arkin) with the investigation. The development of their relation comes at a bad time: her investigation draws him close to his secrets, while Vincent’s promised space flight is less than a week away.

Watch Gattaca if you are a science fiction fan who appreciates well-written drama and clean, minimalistic plots. Gattaca lacks the grand scope or sweeping pronouncements about the future that other sci-fi movies tend to indulge in; instead it focuses on a simple premise and its very personal consequences. Steer clear if you are looking for action, spectacle, or humor.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for clean execution of an unusually credible sci-fi premise.

Today’s quick review: Blow. George Jung (Johnny Depp), an innovative drug dealer, opens up a brand new market by bringing cocaine to the United States for the first time. His success brings him mountains of cash, a beautiful wife (Penelope Cruz), and a young daughter, but law enforcement, family troubles, and fractures within his empire threaten to send it all tumbling down.

Blow is a crime drama about the drug trade. Based on a true story, Blow follows George Jung in his ascent to the top of the drug ladder and the twists and turns that await him there. The movie splits the difference between drama and biography, shifting quite naturally between George’s personal and professional lives. Much of the human element comes from his daughter, the one bit of normalcy in his abnormal life.

Blow does succeed in telling a good story. George’s progression from small-time pot dealer to cocaine kingpin is easy to follow, a tale of entrepreneurship run amok. The temptations he faces are laid out clearly, from slipping back into his old habits after an early arrest to deciding who to trust. The vicissitudes of fate are given a surprisingly plausible treatment for a genre that is prone to exaggeration, making the story as unpredictable as real life.

Where Blow finds itself on shakier ground is its personal drama. George lacks the passion or grandiosity of a movie drug kingpin; he is just an ordinary man in over his head. Viewed that way, George is a nuanced, realistic figure of a type not often seen in the crime genre. The problem is that George lacks character. He has all the regrets of a tragic figure without the charm to balance them, a neutral man who seems to drift through life.

Like other movies in the genre, Blow has the winding, unpredictable plot of a true story. Whether this is a strength or weakness is a question of taste, but it does have profound implications for the pacing and momentum of the movie. George’s life progresses in fits and starts, disrupting any sense of linear buildup. Several important elements of the story arrive late on the scene, sacrificing story structure for realism.

Watch Blow if you are looking for a decently executed crime drama with uncommon grounding in reality. George Jung separates himself from other movie drug dealers by never descending wholly into violence or madness; his failings are more personal in nature. At the same time, the movie’s realism keeps it from living up to its potential as fiction. For better entries into the rise-and-fall genre, check out Scarface, Casino, or The Wolf of Wall Street.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for a decent story, glimmers of character, and debatable tradeoffs.

“The fate of the free world’s in the hands of a bunch of hustlers and thieves.” —Darius Stone

Today’s quick review: xXx: State of the Union. After an attack on his life forces him into hiding, NSA agent Augustus Gibbons (Samuel L. Jackson) turns to Darius Stone (Ice Cube), a former Navy Seal now serving time in prison, to take on the mantle of xXx, the latest in a series of deep cover agents recruited from outside the Agency. Together they uncover a planned coup by Secretary of State George Deckert (Willem Dafoe), the man who had Darius imprisoned.

xXx: State of the Union is an action movie and a loose sequel to the original xXx. State of the Union takes the premise and supporting characters of the first film but swaps out Vin Diesel for Ice Cube. Without Xander Cage, the extreme sports motif gets dropped in favor of more attitude, broadly put. Darius Stone combines a criminal attitude with military training for a character that fits much more naturally into the action genre than an athlete turned spy.

The swap helps with the movie’s pacing as well. With the xXx program already established, State of the Union is free to drop right into the main plot. The military focus makes the action in State of the Union feel more cohesive, but at the cost of some of the original’s more inventive stunts. What is left are the bread-and-butter action scenes, with guns, cars, explosions, and close combat, delivered in sufficient quantity and spread evenly throughout the movie.

Though a more consistent movie than its predecessor, xXx: State of the Union shares some of its flaws. The plot has good pacing and the right progression but treads very familiar ground for action movies. The characters are passable but not especially memorable, and neither Samuel L. Jackson nor Willem Dafoe are at their best. Likewise, the dialogue passes muster, but the lines are not as sharp as other entries into the genre.

Watch xXx: State of the Union if you are in the mood for a popcorn action flick with no strings attached. While not a standout in the genre, xXx: State of the Union makes for a fun watch with few iconic moments but few glaring errors. Skip it if you want a deeper action movie or one that takes more chances.

4.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for enjoyable if conventional action.

“Our last moments on Earth, and this is what you have to say to me?” —Polly Perkins

Today’s quick review: Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. When a squadron of titanic robots attacks New York City, ace pilot Joe Sullivan (Jude Law), alias Sky Captain, takes to the air. Polly Perkins (Gwyneth Paltrow), a hardheaded reporter, has the clues he needs to figure out where they came from. Together they set off on a globe-spanning adventure to track down the robots’ master, the mysterious Doctor Totenkopf, before he can bring his plan to fruition.

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is a stylized adventure film set a fictionalized version of the early 20th century. Filled with robots, ray guns, dogfights, and all manner of adventure, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow recreates the pulp era of science fiction using modern filmmaking and special effects. The movie thrives on this nostalgia, tapping into the sense of freewheeling wonder that dominated early boys’ adventures.

Unfortunately, Sky Captain is only partially successful in this worthy endeavor. The visual style is faithful to a fault, replicating the look of the era using muted golden tones, art deco skylines, and soft camera lenses. The technology mixes post-World War I planes, airships, and electronics with science fictional extrapolations pulled from the pages of a comic book. The plot touches on a shocking number of pulp adventure moments given the time available.

These successes are offset by several debilitating failures. The film’s heavy stylization comes with enough visual clutter to make it difficult to watch. The limited color palette, hodgepodge of light sources, and constant use of greenscreen only add to the mess. The characters are deliberately shallow, the plot is linear, and the movie handicaps itself by avoiding many of the tricks modern action movies use to build excitement.

The result is an experimental film that gambles hard on its style. At its best, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow recaptures the sense of adventure that should always be at the heart of science fiction. At its worst, it borrows from a defunct genre without making the concessions necessary to adapt to a new medium. Where Sky Captain falls on this spectrum depends on your tastes and your mood.

Watch Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow for a stylized, daring adventure film that does not quite achieve its goals. Skip it if you are looking for a more conventional watch. See Captain America: The First Avenger or The Adventures of Tintin for more successful adaptations of early 20th-century science fiction and adventure, respectively.

6.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for an ambitious premise with flawed execution.

Today’s quick review: La La Land. Mia (Emma Stone), an aspiring actress in a slump, finds a kindred spirit in Sebastian (Ryan Gosling), a jazz pianist with dreams of opening a nightclub. As their antagonism gives way to romance, the couple must decide whether their dreams are worth following and what they are willing to sacrifice to make them come true.

La La Land is a romantic musical about a pair of artists in Los Angeles who are struggling to follow their dreams. La La Land is an ode to the musicals of yesteryear, with an upbeat jazz soundtrack, stylish costumes, and frequent bursts of tap dancing. The cinematography lends itself well to the energetic tone, with long, sweeping camera shots and subtle musical refrains to keep the scenes moving at a healthy clip.

Mia and Sebastian are the heart of the movie, and their relationship is interesting enough to drive the character-centric plot. Mia is a smart woman who followed her dreams to Hollywood, only to come up short in audition after audition. Sebastian is a pianist whose passion for jazz keeps him from holding down a steady job. What they have in common is their nostalgia for bygone eras: Mia for the Golden Age of Hollywood, and Sebastian for the jazz greats of old.

Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling make an effective lead couple. Emma Stone’s Mia strikes a delicate balance, coming off as witty but not acerbic, feminine but not moonstruck. Ryan Gosling’s Sebastian makes a rude first impression, but his bluntness gives way to sincerity as his passion for jazz shines through. Their scenes together run the gamut from funny to sweet to romantic, walking a tasteful line between affection and schmaltz.

The main draw of La La Land is its catchy swing soundtrack. The song list couples up-tempo dance numbers with a few slower, more wistful songs, giving the sound a nice emotional range while keeping the tone consistent. The quality of music remains high throughout, with one or two standouts backed by a solid stable of supporting songs. The songs shift naturally between the background and the foreground, subtly tying the ordinary scenes to the musical numbers.

La La Land backs its impressive soundtrack with equally impressive dancing. The dances vary from tap to ballroom and back, but even the most sentimental songs retain a sense of forward motion. Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling are talented dancers, and if they fail to upstage the Hollywood greats, they do manage to hold their own. The other dancers give the dances a sense of scale when needed, but fade gracefully into the background when the spotlight is on the stars.

At first the modern setting dates the film badly: Priuses, cell phones, and pop culture references form an odd dissonance with tap dancing and swing music. But soon the film establishes itself and the details of setting are swept away in favor of romance and song. Once it gets rolling, La La Land does an excellent job of balancing the style, energy, and optimism of classic musicals with modern pacing, characters, and production values.

Watch La La Land if you are in the mood for a pleasant musical that merges classical style with modern storytelling. While not yet a classic itself, La La Land revives some of the best aspects of the musical genre. Those who dislike musicals may still get something out of its strong writing and characters, but most viewers who dislike the genre are better off skipping it altogether.

8.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.0 for an excellent soundtrack, a worthwhile romance, and polished execution; your score will be higher or lower depending on your taste in musicals.

Today’s quick review: L.A. Confidential. Sergeant Ed Exley (Guy Pearce) is an up-and-coming police officer with a nose for politics. Officer Bud White (Russell Crowe) is a hotheaded but effective cop with a good heart. Sergeant Jack Vincennes (Kevin Spacey) is a minor celebrity more concerned with his reputation than his police career. The three men find themselves drawn into a sprawling web of crime and deception that will put their loyalties to the test.

L.A. Confidential is a crime drama set in 1950s Los Angeles. The movie weaves an intricate tale around its three protagonists. A coffee shop massacre kicks off a winding investigation that Ed and Bud approach in opposite ways. Meanwhile, Jack’s high-publicity drug busts turn up questions with no answers. As the three officers pursue their own goals, their paths intersect in unexpected ways, hinting at the existence of a larger mystery.

One of L.A. Confidential’s greatest strengths is its cast. Guy Pearce, Russell Crowe, and Kevin Spacey star as three police officers with very different approaches to their professions. Ed Exley, the son of a cop, wants to live up to his father’s legacy. His by-the-book approach to police work rubs his fellow officers the wrong way, but his ability to play politics ensures him a bright future on the force.

Bud White and Jack Vincennes do not share his idealism. Bud does whatever he has to, legal or not, to deliver justice, while Jack spends his time catering to the press. The movie is not afraid to play the three men off each other. Their conflicts give the movie its nuanced moral character: with three dissenting protagonists, the right course of action is never very clear, a theme echoed in their crisscrossing subplots.

The lead trio are backed by a capable supporting cast. James Cromwell plays Dudley Smith, a police who holds the key to Ed’s career. Kim Basinger plays Lynn Bracken, a prostitute caught up in Bud’s investigation. Danny DeVito plays Sid Hudgens, a tabloid writer who collaborates with Jack. With solid performances all around, the cast complements L.A. Confidential’s artful writing and sense of intrigue.

Watch L.A. Confidential if you are in the mood for a gritty, well-written, and well-acted mystery. Featuring a complicated plot that takes full advantage of its three separate protagonists, L.A. Confidential is one of the better crime dramas around. Skip it if you are looking for action or an easy plot to follow.

8.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.0 for high-quality acting and writing.

Today’s quick review: Astro Boy. When his son Toby (Freddie Highmore) is killed in a lab accident, Doctor Tenma (Nicolas Cage), Metro City’s most brilliant roboticist, creates a robotic double with the memories and personality of the boy. But Tenma finds that he cannot replace his son and rejects his creation. Taking the name Astro, the young robot ventures out into the ruined wastes in search of a place to call home.

Astro Boy is an animated family adventure film based on the classic manga and cartoon character. Astro Boy presents a world where humanity lives in a floating city, robots are ubiquitous, and ethical questions are brushed aside by luxury. The movie features a reasonable plot for a kids’ film, cartoonish CGI graphics, and several familiar voices, including Charlize Theron, Bill Nighy, and Nathan Lane.

The crux of Astro Boy is whether Astro is human. He has the heart and mind of Toby, but is made of metal and silicon. In a world where machines are cast aside on a daily basis, the distinction is an important one. While Astro Boy does not mine this concept as deeply as more mature science fiction, the question receives a satisfactory treatment and offers the movie a bit of heart.

Hand in hand with this theme comes the universe’s treatment of robots. For thinking, feeling, and fully voiced creations, robots are routinely dehumanized and discarded, an odd dissonance that the film never resolves. The paradox is deliberate and ties into Astro’s questionable humanity, but the movie tries to play it both ways, with robot destruction as comic relief and robot humanization as a core plot point. The resulting muddy tone would hamstring a more serious movie; for Astro Boy it is more of a peculiarity.

The film’s overall quality is moderate. The CGI has a soft, rounded look to it, with simple coloring and exaggerated designs reminiscent of a comic, not bad but quickly outclassed by advances in technology. The voice acting draws on an interesting cast but offers nothing too special in the way of performances. There are a couple of good jokes, but most of the humor is feeble. The high-flying action is plentiful but lacks impact.

Most viewers would not get much from Astro Boy. For a similar movie with better characters, humor, and animation quality, check out Big Hero Six. For those of less discerning taste, Astro Boy makes for a pleasant background watch or palate cleanser.

6.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for being a decent family film missing the spark needed to make it shine.