Sleight of Film

Today’s quick review: Stardust. Tristan (Charlie Cox), a naive English country boy, ventures over the wall near his village into the magical kingdom of Stormhold in search of a fallen star to win the hand of Victoria (Sienna Miller), a girl from his village. But the star turns out to be a woman named Yvaine (Claire Danes) who is cross about falling to Earth. As Tristan hurries to get Yvaine home in time for Victoria’s birthday, he must stay ahead of Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer), a witch who wants the star’s heart to restore her youth, and Septimus (Mark Strong), a prince seeking to use the star to claim his father’s throne.

Stardust is a fantasy film directed by Matthew Vaughn and based on a story by Neil Gaiman. For a modern take on the fairy tale genre, Stardust has surprisingly solid fundamentals. Apart from a few mature themes that push it into PG-13, Stardust has all the optimism and wonder one could expect from the genre. The story is very well constructed, adroitly managing its plot threads and setting up its endgame quite nicely. Between crisp writing, thoughtful direction, and a subtly impressive soundtrack, Stardust remains an engaging watch throughout its two hours.

As for the characters, none are exceptional, but they fill their roles quite well. Tristan is a bit of a sap but blends his starry-eyed idealism with enough courage to make him a worthy hero. For her part, Yvaine receives little development at first but is fleshed out nicely over the course of the movie. Michelle Pfeiffer plays a satisfying witch in the classical mold, while Robert De Niro steals the show in his supporting role as Captain Shakespeare.

Watch Stardust if you are a fan of well-written, well-executed fairy tale fantasy. Stardust is a spiritual successor to The Princess Bride, but it distinguishes itself from its predecessor with heavier fantasy, a more cohesive plot, and more polish, albeit at the cost of some of The Princess Bride’s quotability and storybook charm. Those who dislike fantasy or find the fairy tale genre to be unsatisfying or naive will get little out of Stardust and should skip it.

7.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for craftsmanship and charm.

Today’s quick review: The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Adventurer Allan Quatermain (Sean Connery) returns from retirement at the request of the British government to prevent war from breaking out in Europe after a series of attacks perpetrated by a mysterious mastermind known as the Fantom. Quatermain joins Tom Sawyer (Shane West), a successor to the Invisible Man (Tony Curran), Captain Nemo (Naseerudin Shah), Dr. Jekyll (Jason Flemyng), and other unusual characters in a continent-spanning hunt for the Fantom.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is a science fiction movie based on the comic book series by Alan Moore. The film reinterprets some of the more notable characters from Victorian-era fiction as borderline superheroes and sends them on an adventure across Europe. The character reinterpretations justify some interesting moments throughout the film, but the unstable nature of many of the protagonists make them difficult to root for.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen does deliver a surprising amount of action for a movie nominally set in the 1890s. The characters’ unique abilities coupled with guns and explosives are enough to square away the film’s action component as good if not outstanding. The plot has a reasonable premise but suffers from a lack of focus, while an excess of twists makes it difficult to predict the film’s trajectory.

Watch The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen if you are in the mood for a schlocky, action-packed take on Victorian literature. An unfocused plot and unsympathetic characters keep The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen from being the fun romp it should be, but it still makes a decent popcorn watch for those interested in the premise. Skip it if the concept sounds silly to you, and watch Van Helsing instead if you are looking for a horror-genre counterpart that has a bit more fun.

5.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for clever use of public domain characters hindered by a lackluster plot and poor characterization.

Today’s quick review: Big Trouble in Little China. When Jack Burton (Kurt Russell), a loudmouthed trucker, visits his friend Wang Chi (Dennis Dun) in San Francisco’s Chinatown, he gets dragged into a magical conflict beyond his understanding. Wang’s fiance Miao Yin (Suzee Pai) is kidnapped by the evil sorcerer David Lo Pan (James Hong) for use in a ceremony that will free him from an ancient curse. With the help of a willful lawyer (Kim Cattrall) and an old tour bus driver with a few tricks up his sleeve (Victor Wong), Jack and Wang must infiltrate Lo Pan’s Chinatown stronghold, confront a variety of magical foes, and rescue Miao Yin before the ceremony is complete.

Big Trouble in Little China is a tongue-in-cheek 80s fantasy adventure film directed by John Carpenter. Kurt Russell leads as Jack Burton, a trucker who refers to himself in the third person and has a hard time backing up his bravado. His fresh-faced buddy Wang, played by Dennis Dun, is the more competent of the two but is prone to many of the same mistakes as Jack. Together they fight their way through a hectic series of challenges based loosely on Chinese mysticism to rescue Wang’s fiance from Lo Pan.

Big Trouble in Little China makes for a peculiar watch. Despite its simple premise, the plot quickly becomes confusing as new elements are introduced and discarded in rapid succession. What starts as an apparent gang war turns into a mystical adventure, and the main party fluctuates wildly as allies join or are captured. The explanations are enough to piece together what is going on, but barely, and the viewer is left to guess at events as they happen. The martial arts action is plentiful but not that impressive. The special effects are passable if dated.

For all that, Big Trouble in Little China is a fairly fun watch. The quality of the film depends on how tongue-in-cheek you think it is being. Taken at face value, it has all the hallmarks of an 80s movie with none of the finesse: a macho protagonist, cheesy dialogue, and a plot that seems to be made up as it goes along. Taken as a parody, it winks at all these conventions, from Jack’s frequent blunders to the thin explanations for the story’s magical elements. But the nature of the genre, plus the fact that parts of the film can and should be taken seriously, makes it difficult to tell where the joke ends and the movie begins.

Watch Big Trouble in Little China if you are in the mood for a self-deprecating 80s film with a distinctive flavor. How well you like the movie will depend on how much you like its blend of 80s camp and mock 80s camp. Those who are struck the right way will get a lot out of this movie, while others will wonder what it was they just watched.

7.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.0 for the movie it pretends to be and a 7.0 for the movie it actually is.

Today’s quick review: Quantum of Solace. James Bond (Daniel Craig) follows the trail of clues left in the wake of the events of Casino Royale in a mission that is as much personal as it is business. His investigation leads him to Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), a powerful man at the head of a secret organization known as Quantum. Together with Camille (Olga Kurylenko), a woman out for revenge, Bond races to uncover Quantum before its criminal ambitions for the country of Bolivia become a reality.

Quantum of Solace is a spy thriller and the second film in the rebooted James Bond franchise. Despite high production values and many of the elements that made Casino Royale a hit, Quantum of Solace suffers from subpar writing, an incoherent plot, and shaky camera work. The premise is a reasonable one: Bond is up against the secret criminal organization responsible for the events of the previous movie. But the execution disappoints, with tangled plot threads and action scenes that are overshadowed by their counterparts in Casino Royale.

For all its faults, Quantum of Solace is still a modern Bond film and therefore a reasonably entertaining piece of cinema. Though it lacks the spectacle and crisp execution of Casino Royale, it retains Daniel Craig’s steely resolve as Bond, Judi Dench’s seasoned expertise as M, and one of the better universes the spy genre has to offer. Watch it if you are in the mood for a spy movie and do not mind a dip in franchise quality or for completion’s sake. Skip it if you dislike the Bond reboots or if you have already seen Skyfall.

6.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it 7.0 to 7.5 for decent quality well below the Bond standard.

Today’s quick review: Thor. When his rash actions nearly trigger a war between the gods of Asgard and the Frost Giants of Jotunheim, Thor (Chris Hemsworth), the Norse god of thunder, is banished from Asgard by his father Odin (Anthony Hopkins) as a lesson in humility. Trapped on Earth and stripped of his powers, he is taken in by Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), an astronomer who has been studying a series of strange anomalies. But Thor’s exile is just the opportunity his treacherous brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) needs to betray their father and claim the Asgardian throne.

Thor is a science fantasy superhero movie and the third entry into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Thor takes on the ambitious task of selling the Norse pantheon in a science fiction setting and succeeds admirably. Asgard is portrayed as a hyper-advanced civilization located in space, whose advanced technology looks and behaves like magic. With the setting firmly in place, Thor then proceeds to tell a fantasy-esque story of deceit, inheritance, and the wisdom to rule.

The acting in the movie fits its semi-comedic tone. The film is serious enough on its own terms, but it is far enough removed from the historical Norse gods that it can embrace Marvel’s sense of fun. Chris Hemsworth makes for an entertaining Thor, honest and brave, but brash and unwise. Tom Hiddleston steals the show as Loki, his charming, deceitful brother. Natalie Portman rounds out the main cast as Jane Foster, Thor’s guide and love interest in the world of Midgard.

Beyond its setting and characters, Thor is an action movie in the superhero mold. Thor pulls off a few neat tricks in combat with his enchanted hammer Mjolnir, while his Asgardian allies have fighting styles of their own to give the combat a nice bit of variety. The special effects are gorgeous, from the gleaming spires of Asgard to the frosty wastes of Jotunheim. The plot delivers a nice blend of action, comedy, and drama that fits the tone of the Marvel Cinematic Universe quite well.

Watch Thor if you are in the mood for an entertaining superhero movie with elements of fantasy. While it lacks the scope of later Marvel movies, it remains an easy watch that stands well on its own. Skip it if you find the premise too far-fetched, if you prefer strict adherence to Norse mythology, or if you are looking for deep storytelling.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for action and enjoyability.

“Today we are canceling the apocalypse!” —Stacker Pentecost

Today’s quick review: Pacific Rim. When an interdimensional rift opens at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean, unleashing the enormous monsters known as Kaiju to ravage Earth’s cities, humanity responds by constructing Jaegers, towering mechanical suits of armor designed to fight the Kaiju hand-to-hand. Pilot Raleigh Becket (Charlie Hunnam) joins a multinational team of Jaeger pilots led by Marshall Stacker Pentecost (Idris Elba). Together with Pentecost’s adoptive daughter (Rinko Kikuchi), an Australian pilot and his ornery son (Max Martini and Robert Kazinsky), a pair of quirky Kaiju scientists (Charlie Day and Burn Gorman), and a black market Kaiju parts dealer (Ron Perlman), Becket embarks on a desperate mission to take the fight to the Kaiju.

Pacific Rim is an action sci-fi movie from director Guillermo del Toro that crosses a deep love for the mech genre with fantastic special effects and capable storytelling. Pacific Rim promises and delivers exactly one thing: mechs fighting monsters. Everything else about the movie is designed to make this simple premise as effecting as possible. The result is an exhilarating, action-packed film that plays its premise to the fullest.

The fighting in Pacific Rim is immensely satisfying. Titanic mechs brawl with monstrous behemoths in the shallows of the Pacific and the streets of Hong Kong. Each of the Jaegers has its own unique character, from the indomitable Russian rust bucket Cherno Alpha to the swift, top-of-the-line Striker Eureka. For their part, the Kaiju are horrendous amalgams of sea creatures with the sheer destructive power of hurricanes. The two collide in a spectacular blaze of digital effects, lumbering punches, and property destruction.

The universe of Pacific Rim is remarkable as well, filled to the brim with small touches that bring it to life. From the fleets of helicopters that carry the Jaegers to their fights to the Category system of Kaiju classification, Pacific Rim is a film that wholeheartedly embraces the mech genre and all it has to offer. None of the characters are all that deep, but they fit the world perfectly and are interesting enough to drive the human side of the plot. The whole thing is backed by an electric guitar soundtrack that amplifies every scene from its swaggering first notes to the thunder of its final bass hit.

Watch Pacific Rim if you enjoy big, spectacular fights. Those who are the slightest bit interested in the premise will get a lot out of the movie, while those who are not will get almost nothing. Enjoyment requires a healthy inner child and the willingness to sacrifice substance for spectacle. But for a viewer who is on board, Pacific Rim is a fantastic movie that delivers fun in spades.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.5 for craftmanship, intensity, and sheer fun.

Today’s quick review: Groundhog Day. Phil (Bill Murray) is an abrasive weather man with an inflated ego who is sent to cover the annual Groundhog Day celebration in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania. One miserable day turns into many when he finds himself trapped in a time loop, waking up each morning to relive Groundhog Day over and over again. With no way out of the loop, Phil occupies his time picking up new skills, exploring the town of Punxsutawney, and pursuing a one-sided romance with Rita (Andie MacDowell), his charming coworker.

Groundhog Day is a comedy movie with a surprising amount of heart. Phil is one of Bill Murray’s best characters, a misanthrope with just enough humanity to remain likable. His acid tongue earns him the enmity of those around him, but his bad attitude does him no good once he becomes trapped. Instead he must adjust to life in a small town with only one day’s events to live out however he chooses.

This freedom leads to great comedy and profound insights into the human condition. Phil’s ability to live out the day again lets him do just about anything he sets his mind to. At the same time, his imprisonment leads to boredom and suffering. Hedonism quickly loses its charm, and without the ability to end the loop, Phil must find other ways to fill his time and find meaning in his life.

The mixture of a flawed, funny protagonist and a philosophical, human story makes Groundhog Day a unique, impressive movie. Watch it if you are in the mood for an amusing comedy that also lives up to its considerable emotional potential. Skip it if you are looking for a more overt comedy without the emotional weight.

8.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.0 for an inventive premise, good comedy, and an insightful look at the human condition.

Today’s quick review: Princess Mononoke. Ashitaka, a warrior from a small forest village, strikes down a demon-possessed boar in defense of his village and receives a curse that threatens to consume him. Expelled from his village, he seeks a cure in Iron Town, a frontier town on the verge of a technological revolution. But the town’s hunger for natural resources has pitted it against the spirits and animals of the surrounding woods in an escalating conflict. The humans are led by the stern and pragmatic Lady Eboshi, while the forces of nature are led by Princess Monoke, a feral young woman who was raised by a wolf spirit. With no allegiance to either side, Ashitaka sets about resolving the conflict with as little bloodshed as possible before his own time runs out.

Princess Mononoke is an animated fantasy film from Hiyao Miyazaki and one of his best works. Sound writing, haunting fantasy, brutal conflict, and gorgeous animation combine to produce a film unlike any other. Unlike many of Miyazaki’s other works, Princess Mononoke is mature in its tone and writing. The film does not shy away from violence, using it to emphasize the severity of the conflict and the consequences for the losers. The otherworldly beauty Miyazaki is known for is masked by the brutality of the story, but it peeks through in select places, showing signs of a world beyond the war.

Princess Mononoke offers a surprisingly nuanced take on the question of Man versus Nature. Miyazaki achieves the difficult feat of portraying a conflict with no unambiguously correct side. The humans of Iron Town are greedy, short-sighted, and uncaring, yet they are loyal to each other and their efforts secure a better life for the innocents within their walls. For their part, the spirits of the forest are simple, stubborn, and hostile, possessing all the primal majesty of nature yet rightly fearful that the humans represent a threat to their existence. With both sides blinded by fear and hatred, only the outsider Ashitaka has any hope of ending the conflict with anything short of a bloodbath.

Watch Princess Mononoke if you are interested in an animated masterpiece with thematic storytelling, rich animation, and a mature take on questions of nature and industry. While recognizable as a Miyazaki work from its imagination, its animation style, and its themes, Princess Mononoke is distinct from his other work, tapping into a darker tone to show different sides of nature and humanity. Skip it if you are looking for a gentler story.

8.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 8.5 for outstanding quality.

Today’s quick review: Django Unchained. Django (Jamie Foxx) is a black slave in the 1850s South whose life takes a dramatic turn when he is freed by Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz), a bounty hunter who takes him on as an apprentice. Together they set out to reclaim Django’s wife (Kerry Washington) from a capricious slave owner (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his traitorous slave (Samuel L. Jackson). But their mission will take all of Django’s self-control if it is to succeed, and failure is sure to result in violence.

Django Unchained is a revenge film from director Quentin Tarantino that meanders between genres. While technically a drama, Django Unchained borrows Western elements and sprinkles in scenes of violent action at irregular intervals throughout the movie. Tarantino’s odd sensibilities give the film a slightly surreal quality as well, not enough to push it into the realm of comedy, but enough to temper the drama and give the film a deliberately cinematic film.

Django Unchained suffers from issues of pacing and tone. The plot’s trajectory is never all that clear, and the film spends enough time on setup that several of its key developments are not introduced until later on. Where Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds were pure fantasy, Django Unchained mixes in grim elements of reality: slavery, rape, and torture. The injection of real drama and suffering into what would otherwise be a violent romp tarnishes the film’s escapist qualities.

Watch Django Unchained if you are a Quentin Tarantino fan or if you are in the mood for a violent revenge fantasy that touches several different bases. For production quality, Django Unchained is as strong as any of Tarantino’s other films, and what it lacks in focus, it makes up for with a potent mix of elements. Your enjoyment of the film will depend on how much you like its dramatic elements; the style and action are pure Tarantino. Skip it if you are at all sensitive to gore or prefer lighter action films.

8.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for violence, style, and a perversely fascinating plot held back by pacing and a peculiar mix of realism and fantasy.

Today’s quick review: Die Hard 2. John McClane (Bruce Willis), a New York cop with a good heart and bad luck, finds himself at the center of another hostage situation when a gang of armed terrorists takes control of Dulles International Airport. They use the air traffic control tower to deceive the planes in the air, threatening to direct them into the ground if their demands are not met. Only McClane, at large in the controlled area, has any hope of foiling their scheme.

Die Hard 2 is an action thriller and the second movie in the Die Hard franchise. Bruce Willis returns as John McClane, an everyman cop with a knack for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. All the traits that made McClane such a good protagonist in the first film are present in the second: limited resources, overwhelming odds, justifiable cynicism, and the grit to persevere.

However, Die Hard 2 misses out on Hans Gruber, the stellar antagonist of the first film. The terrorists of Die Hard 2 have an interesting, multi-stage plan but lack the focused charisma of Alan Rickman. As a result, Die Hard 2 feels like more of a generic thriller than its predecessor. The plot lacks the polish and originality of the first.

For all its limitations, Die Hard 2 is still a satisfying watch. Watch Die Hard 2 if you are in the mood for a strong action thriller with a good plot, a great protagonist, and plenty of action. Skip it if you dislike the action genre or prefer infallible action protagonists.

7.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for being a solid thriller without the superlative quality of the original.