Month: February 2019

Today’s quick review: Perfect Blue. Pop singer Mima Kirigoe leaves her idol group behind to pursue a career as a dramatic actress. Her new success comes at the cost of questionable jobs that tax her psyche and tarnish her public image. To make matters worse, a fanatical stalker objects to her career shift and takes out his frustrations on those close to her. With the pressure increasing from all sides, Mima begins to lose her grip on reality.

Perfect Blue is a Japanese animated psychological thriller from director Satoshi Kon. Perfect Blue follows Mima Kirigoe as her sanity begins to fray and she loses her sense of self. The movie features clever plot dynamics, inventive direction, and a rich animation style. Tight writing ties even the tiniest details to Perfect Blue’s main themes, and the film’s many fake-outs and competing interpretations of its events are disturbingly effective.

Perfect Blue’s greatest strength is its cinematography. Satoshi Kon cuts abruptly between events to capture Mima’s growing disorientation. The cuts are subtle at first, but as Mima spirals further away from reality, the dissonance of the cuts increases. Key segments of the movie are fevered blurs of fact and fiction. Yet Perfect Blue never loses its way; its chaos is deliberate, and each shift in perspective contributes to the greater whole.

Perfect Blue also makes measured use of horror. There are no proper jump scares, and the film’s bursts of violence are not much worse than a mature crime drama’s. The tension builds slowly as Mima tries to settle into her new life. Mima’s stalker, the specter of murder, and the unraveling of her conscious mind all contribute to an unsettling atmosphere, but the payoff of the film is its psychological themes, not its shock value.

Perfect Blue is a polished and engaging story that delves into the mind of a troubled individual. Psychological thriller fans will appreciate Perfect Blue as a fresh, dynamic take on the genre. Those unable to stomach tension or ambiguity should give the movie a pass. For a surreal fantasy done in the same style, check out Satoshi Kon’s Paprika. For an even darker psychological thriller that toys with reality, check out The Machinist.

7.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for an impressive blurring of delusion and reality.

Today’s quick review: Office Space. Peter (Ron Livingston) feels trapped in his white collar job at Initech. His days are spent filing meaningless paperwork and catering to the whims of his obnoxious boss Lumbergh (Gary Cole). But after a vicious round of layoffs, Peter and his friends Michael (David Herman) and Samir (Ajay Naidu) reach their limit. Together they hatch a plan to get their revenge on the company and get rich doing so.

Office Space is a comedy that lampoons the banality of corporate America. Office Space features observant humor, memorable dialogue, and bitingly effective characters. The film perfectly captures the petty frustrations of office life, from the annoying behavior of coworkers to the passive-aggressive tactics of management. Everything is tied together by Peter’s own, relatable struggles and his dream of doing nothing at all.

Office Space’s humor walks the line between dry observation and overt comedy. The gags are lively enough to actually be funny and not just clever, but the movie never abandons its straight presentation and sense of the mundane. Much of the movie’s strength comes from its characters, well-drawn caricatures of the white collar world. Its broad supporting cast captures a familiar range of personalities, each with just enough of a twist to feel original.

Office Space is an impressive comedy and well worth a watch for anyone in the right mood. Office Space delivers exactly what it promises: a bleak yet entertaining look at the American workplace. For a similar employee-boss relationship with a criminal twist, check out Swimming with Sharks. For a movie that channels office frustrations into violence, check out Wanted.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for keen humor and iconic dialogue.

Today’s quick review: Titan A.E.. Fifteen years after the destruction of Earth by the alien Drej, Cale (Matt Damon), one of the last surviving humans, leads a mundane life as a scrapper. But the monotony is interrupted when Captain Korso (Bill Pullman) recruits him to help find the Titan, a hidden ship that could offer humanity new hope. Following a map Cale’s father left him, Korso and his crew set out in search of the Titan with the Drej on their heels.

Titan A.E. is an animated science fiction adventure movie. Titan A.E. offers a glimpse at a future where humanity is on the verge of extinction and the few survivors are adrift in a galaxy full of aliens. The movie gets the basics of its plot right, and its detailed animation, celebrity cast, and well-developed universe are enough to give it some appeal. However, weak writing and a peculiar aesthetic keep Titan A.E. from reaching its full potential.

Titan A.E.’s flaws are minor but pervasive. The art style combines realistic character designs and exaggerated motions with mixed results. The use of CGI is ambitious but clumsy. The soundtrack is an out-of-place playlist of rock songs. The tone walks an awkward line between kid-friendly adventure and serious space drama. None of these issues are significant on their own, but taken together they push the movie in the wrong direction.

Titan A.E. does have a few points in its favor. The plot resembles a number of other sci-fi films, but its skeleton is perfectly viable. The dialogue never sparkles, but it gets the job done. The supporting cast includes Drew Barrymore, John Leguizamo, Nathan Lane, and Janeane Garofalo. The camerawork indulges in rotating shots that would be difficult to pull off without the use of CGI. Finally, the movie does have a few good action sequences.

Ultimately, Titan A.E. aims at the right place but falls short of the mark. It’s a fine watch for a sci-fi fan looking for something light and a little tacky, but most viewers would be better off watching one of the many similar sci-fi films instead, such as Captain Harlock, Treasure Planet, and Guardians of the Galaxy. For animated sci-fi of a similar caliber, check out Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within or Atlantis: The Lost Empire.

6.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for modest quality offset by various mistakes.

Today’s quick review: Lara Croft: Tomb Raider. Lara Croft (Angelina Jolie) spends her time retrieving treasures from ruins around the globe. On the eve of a rare planetary alignment, Lara finds a clock left by her father (Jon Voight) that holds the key to unlocking a powerful artifact. But the clock draws the attention of Manfred Powell (Iain Glen), a man who will stop at nothing to obtain the clock and the artifact it protects.

Lara Croft: Tomb Raider is an action adventure movie based on the Tomb Raider video game series. Tomb Raider takes the familiar concept of an adventurer-archaeologist and dials up the action and the fantasy. Angelina Jolie leads as Lara Croft, an unflappable adventurer who’s handy with pistols. She’s joined by John Voight as her missing father Richard, Iain Glen as her new nemesis, and Daniel Craig as rival treasure hunter Alex West.

Lara Croft: Tomb Raider is an unabashed action movie with few pretentions. The action scenes are crude but effective. There are few impressive stunts, but the action’s variety and creativity make up for what it lacks in mastery. Bullets fly, statues come to life, and Lara sails through it all with implausible, enjoyable poise. The presentation style is typical for the early 2000s: flashy and conspicuously aware of what moments are meant to be cool.

The rest of the film is a mixed bag. Lara and her supporting cast are shallow cutouts, colorful enough to be interesting but not real enough to be moving. Tomb Raider does manage to set up its story well, with a plot that’s the right length and clear relationships between its characters. The logic of the plot is loose, and there are only snatches of drama or comedy, but the whole package makes a pleasing enough popcorn watch.

Give Lara Croft: Tomb Raider a try if you’re an action fan who doesn’t mind a few rough edges. Tomb Raider is not a groundbreaking movie, and anyone who goes in expecting to be impressed will be disappointed. But those willing to forgive its quicks will find it to be a light, entertaining watch. For more credible adventure, check out the Indiana Jones series.

5.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for simple, enjoyable action.

Today’s quick review: The Giver. In a perfectly ordered society that has erased all trace of its past, Jonas (Brenton Thwaites) is chosen to become the new Receiver of Memory. Under the tutelage of the Giver (Jeff Bridges), the previous Receiver of Memory, Jonas inherits humanity’s collective memory, along with forbidden knowledge of emotion. But his attempts to share his knowledge earn him the enmity of the Chief Elder (Meryl Streep).

The Giver is a dystopian science fiction movie based on the book by Lois Lowry. The Giver examines the perfectibility of mankind by positing a sterile society where all difference and all strife have been eliminated. The movie offers a competent but rather static take on its premise. Its script and presentation are up to the challenge of exploring its themes of conformity and emotion, but its plot crescendoes too gradually to have much impact.

The Giver’s greatest strength is the construction of its world. The Giver takes place in a futuristic community where life is regimented, dissension is forbidden, and all memory of humanity’s past has been expunged. The details of the setting go a long way towards selling the film, from its stilted language to its well-meaning but misguided characters. Though similiar to other sci-fi settings, The Giver’s world gives it a solid foundation to build on.

The Giver runs into trouble when it tries to move beyond set-dressing. Brenton Thwaites leads a young supporing cast with just enough talent to keep the movie interesting but not enough to make it compelling. Jeff Bridges as a few good moments as the Giver, the sole individualist in a world of conformity, but the role lacks much-needed personality. For her part, Meryl Streep gives a token performance as the Chief Elder, more authority figure than character.

The plot has similar issues. The steps of Jonas’s awakening are all sensible enough, but the story tarries in this state for too long. Nearly the entire movie is spent inching Jonas along from one minor revelation to the next, with almost no external action to put them to use. By the time Jonas actually takes action, there is little left to do. Most of The Giver’s value is in the world it sets up rather than what it accomplishes with it.

The Giver is worth a watch when you’re in the mood for introspective, teen-friendly dystopian sci-fi. Skip it if you’re looking for something with a more gripping plot. For a science fiction drama with similar themes and thoughtful writing, check out Gattaca. For an action-oriented sci-fi movie with a similar premise, check out Equilibrium. For a classic take on a similar premise, check out Logan’s Run.

6.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it the same for a well-constructed world and good presentation held back by a static plot and mediocre characters.

Today’s quick review: The Three Musketeers. Three aspiring musketeers, Mickey, Donald, and Goofy, get their chance to prove themselves when Princess Minnie is kidnapped. But little do they realize that the culprit is their very own Captain Pete, who plans to get rid of the princess so he can become King of France. To save Minnie, the three heroes must overcome their fears and shortcomings to become true musketeers.

The Three Musketeers is an animated comedy adventure from Disney. The movie is very loosely adapted from the classic novel by Alexandre Dumas, retaining only the basic setting and hardly any plot. The Three Musketeers has all the fun and energy of a Mickey Mouse short, but it lacks the depth of Disney’s other feature-length offerings. A few sly jokes and musical allusions give it some legs, but its plot and characters are geared towards younger audiences.

The Three Musketeers is mainly an excuse for slapstick in the classic Disney mold. Mickey, Donald, and Goofy bumble their way through a series of encounters as they try to keep the princess safe. The story has almost nothing in common with the plot of the novel, but there are enough steps along the way to fill out an entertaining hour or so. The musical numbers are short and forgettable, and none of its scenes are iconic.

Still, The Three Musketeers makes for a fine watch when you’re in the mood for something quick and upbeat. Its fun characters and vibrant slapstick are enough to keep the movie going from moment to moment. Just don’t expect the rich worlds or nuance of Mulan or The Lion King. For a swashbuckling comedy with a similar tone and more sophisticated humor, check out The Pirates of Penzance.

6.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for energy and charm without the full craftsmanship of big-budget Disney productions.

Today’s quick review: Infinity Chamber. In a future America ruled by an oppressive government known as the ISN, Frank (Christopher Soren Kelly) wakes up inside a high-tech prison with no knowledge of how he got there. His only company is his jailer Howard (Jesse D. Arrow), a computer program with limited capabilities. Recalling the details of his last day of freedom, Frank must figure out why he was captured and how can escape.

Infinity Chamber is a budget science fiction mystery with decent ideas and mixed execution. Infinity Chamber is one part mystery, one part jailbreak, and one part musing on the nature of AI. Its script toys with a couple of interesting concepts, but it lacks the skill needed to make the most of them. Likewise, Christopher Soren Kelly’s performance is competent enough to hold the movie together but not enough to make it shine.

Infinity Chamber is a mystery without enough clues. The world inside Frank’s cell offers few answers, while the world outside is never explored in any real detail. The result is a story that’s difficult to invest in, with no clear plot trajectory and unclear rules. To its credit, Infinity Chamber does do a good job of managing its individual scenes, if not always in stitching them together. The forward momentum is jerky, but it’s there.

Infinity Chamber is worth a watch if you’re a sci-fi fan with flexible tastes. There are too many similar science fiction movies with better execution for Infinity Chamber to stand out, but the quality of its central puzzle, writing, and acting are high enough to at least make it viable sci-fi fodder. Other sci-fi movies that toy with similar themes include OtherLife, Moon, and Ex Machina. For an action-genre take on a prisonbreak, check out Escape Plan.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for a thoughtful plot that doesn’t live up to its full potential.

Today’s quick review: The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Out of work and out of money, Dobbs (Humphrey Bogart) and Curtin (Tim Holt), a pair of Americans living in Mexico, team up with Howard (Walter Huston), a down-on-his-luck prospector, to seek their fortune in the wilderness. After a long and harrowing journey, the men strike gold. But their newfound wealth soon drives a wedge between them, and paranoia takes root among the once-trusting trio.

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is a classic adventure drama that follows three men on a perilous quest for gold. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre features an impressive script and capable acting. Its plot hangs together nicely, with sensible pacing and engaging twists. The tone of the movie skews a little dark, but its tasteful presentation and nuanced characters make even its most dramatic moments feel justified.

Humphrey Bogart ties the film together as Dobbs, an ordinary man driven to desperate measures by the gold he finds. His motivations are laudable at first, hoping for just enough gold to keep him out of poverty. But as the dig goes on, his paranoia grows and his actions become irrational. Bogart captures both sides of the character with equal skill, portraying Dobbs as a flawed man even at his best and a sympathetic one even at his most unhinged.

Tim Holt and Walter Huston are nearly his equal. TIm Holt takes on the role of Curtin, a fellow American in just as dire straits as Dobbs. An acquaintance at first, he soon becomes Dobbs’ partner and voice of reason. Walter Huston rounds out the trio as Howard, a several-time prospector who understands the magnitude of the task before them. Though outwardly unstable, Howard proves to have a keen mind and a loyal heart.

The cracks between the three men come from their inability to trust one another. Dobbs gets the worst of it, but all three are pushed to the limit by the prospect of betrayal. The plot of the film plays into this dynamic masterfully. The challenges the men face are not just dangerous but uncertain. It’s never clear what the right course of action is, and the men’s differences in temperament make their choices all the more fraught with consequence.

Give The Treasure of the Sierra Madre a shot if you’re a fan of well-written drama. Its serious tone and classic sensibilities may not appeal to everyone, but those who give it a chance will appreciate it for its high all-around quality. Skip it if you’re looking for a more optimistic adventure. For a high-caliber movie with a similar story and a Western twist, check out The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

8.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for nuanced characters and excellent writing.

Today’s quick review: Tracers. Bumping into Nikki (Marie Avgeropoulos) introduces Cam (Taylor Lautner), a New York City bike courier, to the world of parkour. Cam begins to practice on his own, and his skills soon earn him a spot in Nikki’s crew, who practice parkour not only as a hobby but as a way to commit crimes. With $15,000 in debt to pay off, Cam embraces his new, criminal lifestyle but grows suspicious of the crew’s leader, Miller (Adam Rayner).

Tracers is an action movie with an emphasis on parkour. Tracers follows amateur parkour practicioner Cam as he goes deeper into a parkour-based gang of thieves. The movie offers fairly good action, but its weak cast and predictable plot keep it from doing anything more. Tracers does manage to avoid any glaring blunders; it simply lacks the interesting characters or plot twists that would take it to the next level.

Tracers’ distinguishing feature is its action. Cam, Nikki, and the rest of Miller’s crew fling themselves across rooftops, cars, and all kinds of obstacles in their attempts to move as quickly as possible. Parkour gives the chase scenes a nice sense of momentum, and the stunts are impressive yet plausible. However, the action is essentially limited to parkour, with only a little gunplay thrown in for variety.

Give Tracers a shot if you’re willing to trade some quality for a different kind of action. Tracers is far from a standout movie, and most viewers would be better off looking elsewhere in the action genre. But for parkour-fueled chase scenes and a competent if basic plot, Tracers has some merit. For another niche action movie with a bike courier lead, check out Premium Rush.

5.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 for decent action but little else.

Today’s quick review: The Men Who Stare at Goats. Journalist Bob Wilton (Ewan McGregor) heads to Iraq in search of a story and finds Lyn Cassady (George Clooney), an eccentric ex-soldier with alleged psychic powers. Lyn was a veteran of the New Earth Army, a military research project led by Bill Django (Jeff Bridges) to unlock the mind’s true potential. As the two men roam around Iraq, Bob must decide whether Lyn’s story is ridiculous or profound.

The Men Who Stare at Goats is a political satire that mashes up the War on Terror and New Age mysticism. The movie delves into the past of the New Earth Army through a series of flashbacks, chronicling its conception, its early experiments, and its ultimate fate. The New Earth Army embodies a quixotic dream of spiritual, non-lethal warfare that makes a stark contrast with the mission and ethos of the military.

The Men Who Stare at Goats is a comedy that runs on low-grade irony. Everything in the film is dysfunctional at some level: Lyn’s dubious psychic abilities, Bob’s aimless journalistic ambitions, or the ineptitude shown by the US military and its contractors. The humor never quite rises to the level of overt jokes, instead walking a fine line between the absurd and the uncomfortably plausible.

The attempted comedy shows potential but never quite hits its mark. The jokes are never absurd or biting enough to make a lasting impression. The emotional spine of the film is Bob’s fluctuating belief and disbelief in Lyn, but it lacks the conviction needed to cut through the layers of irony and give the audience something to cling to. The plot itself is meandering, uneventful, and ultimately pointless.

The movie does assemble an impressive cast, including Ewan McGregor, George Clooney, Jeff Bridges, and Kevin Spacey. Clooney and McGregor do fine with their characters, but the only standout performance is Jeff Bridges as Bill Django, the tranquil hippy behind the New Earth Army. The other roles suffer from the same issues as the rest of the film: amusing, half-baked ideas without a reliable center to tie them together.

The Men Who Stare at Goats offers some value as a sideways look at war and as a vessel for four talented actors, but it lacks something essential at its core: a sense of purpose. Most viewers would do better to give it a miss. For a movie that nails the blend of humor, idealism, and irony attempted here, check out The Grand Budapest Hotel. Those interested in a slightly more serious satire about the War on Terror may want to check out Three Kings.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for a few novel ideas that amount to little.