Prior to the movie’s release, I had no awareness at all of Philip Pullman's fantasy trilogy “His Dark Materials” from which the movie “The Golden Compass” was based on the first book. After the wildly successful Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter adaptations, Hollywood seemed still to be looking for the next mega-franchise fantasy series to part the devoted fans of these books from their hard earned cash. Some like “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe” was half way decent to watch while others like “Eragon” made me think of the missed opportunities they could have done better. “The Golden Compass” which saw local release in the cinemas recently was the latest to be added to the list of movies to fill in the void left behind by the LOTR series.
In “The Golden Compass”, audiences enter a parallel world where humans walked around with physical representation of their souls in the form of an animal companion. The companion or “daemons” as they are known in this world could act autonomously and speak for or with it’s human owner. Part voice of conscious, part extension of the human, the daemons were so intricately tied to it’s human owner that any harm inflicted on it would cause pain to the human and vice versa. This parallel world also has talking armored polar bears that rule over the vast Artic snows capes near the north pole as well as fantastic flying machines powered buy an indeterminate power source. Last but not least, this world was also inhabited by witches who lived a much longer lifespan than normal humans.
The audiences’ guide into this fantastical world in “The Golden Compass” is Lyra (Dakota Blue Richards). Left to live and study at the world’s equivalent of our worlds Oxford university by her uncle, Lord Asriel (Daniel Craig), she grows up to be an inquisitive and headstrong young girl who unintentionally learned of more than she should know about the realities of the world that she lived it. The knowledge quickly became dangerous for her when she attracts the attention of the Magisterium, the organization who controlled everything in her world, who sent Mrs. Coulter (Nicole Kidman) to take her away from her home to eliminate the threat she and her uncle represented on the Magisterium continued grip on power.
Before going with Mrs. Coulter, Lyra received the last alethiometer, the titular golden compass with the ability to discern the truth for any question asked. A parting gift from the masters who looked over her safety before, the golden compass quickly showed Lyra that things were not as it seemed with Mr. Coulter. When she discovered that her best friend, Roger (Ben Walker), has been abducted by Gobblers under the command of Mrs. Coulter, she escapes with her daemon Pan (Freddie Highmore) to rescue him. Along the way, she finds help in the form of the seafaring Gyptians, a witch called Serafina (Eva Green), an aeronaut called Lee Scoresby (Sam Elliot) and an armored polar bear named Iorek Byrnison (voiced by Ian McKellen). This collection of character accompanied Lyra as she traveled north towards the frigid polar icescape to find the location where the Globbers took the children and free them.
Looking at the pace of the film and reading that the screenwriter (and director - Chris Weitz) had to compress 430 pages into a screenplay to fit 114 minutes, I feel that he has done a fairly good job with it. With the exception of some scenes to show audience that Daniel Craig was actually in the movie and not just a name they tacked on the posters, considering the limited screen time he had in this installment, the movie wisely focused on Lyra’s journey. Help comes rather conveniently at each point of the journey but unlike the more successful LOTR adaptation, there seemed to be a lack of urgency and desperation on those points in her journey for the character to merit outside help. More than a few times while watching the movie, I felt that Lyra was just lucky to find help before she got into trouble instead of when she actually desperate to get that help.
“The Golden Compass” was also a beautifully rendered film with a lot of visual spectacles to feast on. From iconic images of airships, multiple daemons on screen at the same time as well as vast sceneries, it was clear the amount of work put in from the CGI department. Unfortunately, audiences were distracted with so much exposition delivered in the scenes to really enjoy them before the plot moves to the next point of the story. There was also a sense of detachment especially in the final climatic scene where the decision of using more wide angle in these scenes meant that the audiences could not feel like they were in the middle of the battle. With the audience not really feeling involved in the climatic battle, we were left with little to cheer about when the movie reach it’s feel good ending (which by the way I heard more bloody and darker than the ending in the movie).
The actors assembled for this movie were all of exceptional caliber in their own right but a decidedly lack of firm direction reduced their opportuinity to shine. Ian McKellen, signing up for another trilogy, was sufficiently regal sounding for Iorek and Sam Elliot was delightfully refreshing as a Southern gentleman aeronaut with a sassy hare daemon named Hester (Kathy Bates). Daniel Craig’s Lord Asriel hardly made a presence in the movie having only a few screens in the beginning and end of the movie. However the best mention for the film has to go to Dakota Blue Richards and Nicole Kidman. Richard’s portrayal of Lyra combined equal amounts of petulant child and wiser than her age qualities that was delightful to watch. She would surely worth looking forward to in future installments of the series to see how she develops. Kidman’s portray of the icy Mrs. Coulter was the highlight of the movie for me. A perfect study on how to portray inner fury simmering behind a smiling façade, Kidman’s first turn as a villain was both equally seductive and chilling.
“The Golden Compass” could have used the kind of magic touch that Peter Jackson had in the LOTR series. Grand in scale and scope, the movie seemed to be a bit lost in terms of focus and direction. It was as if the director himself was feeling detached from the movie that he wrote. It was still serviceable as an opening/origin movie to the trilogy but with the possibility that the next installment may not be made (remember Eragon?) , the movie left audiences frustrated with the amount of loose thread left behind after the credit rolled. That in itself is a pity in my opinion as the world that Lyra and her companions inhabit sounds more interesting to see more of rather than Narnia’s world for example. If this is to be the first and the last installment of the series to see screen, then hopefully at lease it would spur more audience to pick up the original books to read where Lyra’s adventures take her next.
I have never read “Beowulf” before in my life. It was neither required reading during secondary school nor was it required in any of my classes during college. So fortunately (or unfortunately depending on how you see it), I do not know much of the old English epic poem. What little I did know was that it was about a hero how fought and defeated a monster called “Grendel” in a Norse mead hall. I knew that much from watching an old Star Trek: Voyager episode where the holographic doctor got stuck in the ship’s holodeck while it was running a “Beowulf” scenario. I never really knew that there was more than that part to the poem until I watched the recently released reinterpretation of the poem in a full length animated feature medium.
Directed by Robert Zemeckis who earlier pioneered the same animation technique used here in “The Polar Express”, “Beowulf” tells the story of the titular character’s exploits starting with his arrival to the lands ruled by the elderly King Hrothgar (Anthony Hopkins) and his queen Wealthow (Robin Wright Penn). The King’s land has been beset by a horrible monster, Grendel (Crispin Glover), who had slaughtered his people as they were reveling in his newly built mead hall. Beowulf (Ray Winstone) and his crew of Geatsman arrived on scene vowing to rid the king of his monster which he eventually did in a great battle.
Grendel’s death in the hands of Beowulf did not sit well with his mother who immediately set out to revenge her son’s death. She massacred all of Beowulf’s companion save for Wiglaf (Brendan Gleeson) who was sent to prepare their ship for their departure home. Beowulf was again dispatched to deal with the murderous monster in her lair only to find that it had taken the seductive form of a naked woman (Angelina Jolie) who tempted Beowulf with power and glory for exchange for him give her a replacement for her dead son and leave her to live in her lair.
Beowulf returned to the king with proof of Grendel’s death and not of the mother although he told everyone that the deed was done. Knowing what Beowulf had done, King Hrothgar proclaimed the returned hero the new king and promptly threw himself off the tower to leave him to rule his lands. The story fast forwards several decades where the older King Beowulf had to again face a monster menacing his lands but this time in the form of a giant fire breathing dragon. Unlike his battle with Grendel, the fight this time around was more personal to the king as his past sin had finally come to haunt him and all his deeds finally becomes undone.
From what I was able to read of the movie, several changes were made by fantasy novelist Neil Gaiman and co-scribe Roger Avary who wrote the screenplay to the film in order to create a cohesive connection between the different events detailed in the original material. Having not read the original poem, I could only guess what was added or taken out from the storyline but what was left was good enough to propel the movie forward. Beowulf’s character development from a boastful warrior to wizen kind was explained adequately through out the film. The story itself flowed smoothly throughout the movie although some of the quieter moment of the film as a bit of a chore to go through. I found myself almost nodding off while waiting for the next action sequence to start since nothing really substantial was provided to hold my attention.
“Beowulf” was a visual treat to watch with it’s many depictions of the open expanse of the snow covered landscape, blue flame strobe like effect during the Grendel’s fight scenes and the golden shimmering waters of the monster’s lair. All of these set pieces were meticulously rendered in wonderful detail which could better enjoyed when watching the IMAX 3D version of the film which I’m not sure will be shown in Malaysia. Nevertheless, the 2D version that I saw was still quite impressive to watch. Less impressive was the character rendering which although was quite advanced compared to the earlier attempt with the same technique in “The Polar Express”, still had a plastic mannequins quality to the real life actor reproductions. The technology has still a ways to go if it would be used to replace live action actors in a film production as it has not solved the problem of how to make the live actor representation look less creepy.
Voice acting from the stellar cast on “Beowulf” was particularly memorable for me as I tried not to be too distracted by the character representations. Ray Winstone’s voice gave Beowulf the commanding heft that the character required although the frequent pronouncement of “I am Beowulf” left me with flashback to a more superior Gerald Butler in “300”. John Malkovich as Beowulf’s jealous court rival, Unferth, was particularly enjoyable to listen to as he delivered his lines with such mastery of the character. The other actors also left their memorable marks in terms of voice acting which helped to make their on screen characters easier to relate to in an emotional sense even when visually they lack the emotional link.
The two main action sequence in the movie was also choreographed wonderfully to sustain audience attention. The fight scene between Grendel and Beowulf would be remembered for the hideously grotesque depiction of Grendel in his most murderous as well as the cutesy strategic blocking of Beowulf’s privates during the acrobatic battle given that he was stark naked when fighting the monster. Given that we see much more when Grendel’s mother appears on screen, the earlier cover up attempts seems to be a bit on the childish side. Thankfully, we also have an even more exciting climatic battle scene between Beowulf and the dragon. Visually rich, the aerial dogfight left me quite exhilarated by it and made for a really memorable way to end the movie. Special mention should also be made for the sea monster battle montage that came before the Grendel battle for being somewhat appropriately gory for a hero to boast of his success.
While it may not win any fans from those who might prefer the original material, “Beowulf” has some moments of brilliance to get people to come and watch it. Some may even try to guess if it would have made for a better movie had it was acted with live actors instead of representation of them generate with the performance capturing technique. It would definitely lost some of it’s visual richness had it been produced as a live action movie as the cost of having the same level of detail might be a bit too cost prohibitive. One could also wonder if it would not have been better to have the emotional gravitas that only live actors might provide instead of pale reproduction in digital animated form. Regardless of where one stand on the issue, “Beowulf” was still a visual treat to experience.
Just try not to fall asleep during the quieter moments.
A lot of recent movie releases especially in 2007 have had their humble beginnings in the sequential art form also know as the comic book medium. With a treasure trove of story, plotlines and characters stretching back for decades, the comic book medium seems to the current ‘in’ source for movies as evidenced by the number of releases and upcoming movies in production. While this is no doubt a boon for comic book readers like myself who long waited to see favorite comic book characters and storylines realized on the big screen, there is still that fear that the movies would not be able to meet the comic book fan expectations and forever ruining the character in non-comic book readers. We have the utterly dreadful “Catwoman” movie to blame for that fear.
The latest addition to the list of movie released based on sequential art material, “Stardust”, was thankfully handled with the amount respect that a critically acclaimed graphic novel should be approached with. Written by Neil Gaiman and illustrated for Charles Vess, “Stardust” – the comic book, was both remarkable in it’s lyrical content and imaginative setting. An instant fan favorite, “Stardust” chronicles the tale of Tristan (Charlie Cox) who was on a quest to find a falling star to give to his aloof paramour (Sienna Millers) in exchange for her promise that she would marry him instead of another suitor. To get to the falling star, Tristan had to cross the wall that separated his village (also known as the village of Wall) and the magical kingdom of Stormhold.
Unbeknownst to Tristan, the falling star had taken up a human form and called herself Yvaine after she was knocked out of the sky by the enchanted necklace tossed out by the dying king of Stormhold. The king’s surviving sons had to search for the necklace which was now worn by Yvaine if they wanted to become the next king of the land. The falling star also had another seeker in the form of the witch Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) who wanted her for her heart that she would feast on with her sister to gain an extension to their already unnatural lifespan. With a little magical assistance, Tristan was the first person to find Yvaine and while his original intent was to bring her back to his paramour, their journey became one filled with challenges to elude the other pursuers. Along the way, their love for each other begin to blossom and in the end, it was that same love that help them fulfill their destinies.
While at first glance “Stardust” seemed to be made for family viewing, much of the story and humor in both the original material and the movie was written with a much more adult sensibility. Distinctly dark in tone, this adult fairy tale is not one that has been sanitized for children’s viewing. Death, both of people and animals, were shown in graphic terms even though the dead end up being part of a hilarious chorus of ghosts who haunt the surviving prince looking for the enchanted necklace. A fair amount of deliciously witty entendre fathomable only by adults run through out the story culminating in scenes with the cross-dressing sky pirate no less. Nothing is actually overtly explicit that parents would not want to bring children to watch it but there was enough for adults to enjoy it in a whole different level altogether.
“Stardust” was also blessed with a multitude of brilliant actors who seemed to relish the opportunity to play against type. Both leads, Claire Danes and Charlie Cox, were serviceable enough in their roles but it was the non leads, Michelle Pfeiffer and Robert De Niro (playing the abovementioned cross-dressing sky pirate Captain Shakespeare) who stole the spotlight of the movie in my opinion. In the witch Lamia, Michelle Pfeiffer displayed wonderful comic timing a portrayal very seldom seen in her other films. Her well timed eye roll when things don’t go her way never failed to crack me up. Also playing against type, Robert De Niro’s portrayal Captain Shakespeare ranks as one of the more memorable scenes I’ve seen in a movie this year not because of the character he played but because of the actor himself willing to have fun outside of the usual gallery of characters he portrayed before.
The story elements of “Stardust” were greatly supported by tight editing and pacing, unlike the other comic book movie released at about the same time, that at no time during the 2 hour screening time does the movie fall into dead space in between set pieces. The action moved in an increasingly frenetic pace as the main character faced increasing odds against their survival. Although the ending was clearly apparent to those who picked up on the foreshadowing presented in the beginning of the film, the journey that audiences took on the movie to get to the ending was one worth the payoff. This film did the original material proud and would be ranked up there among the better comic book to film adaptation by fans of both genre. It would definitely get into my list of the highly recommended movies to watch for this year.
Can’t wait for the DVD to come out.
It is hard for me to articulate what scares me nowadays. I’m definitely squeamish when it comes to snakes, loud pushy drag queens intimidate me and clowns in full makeup makes my skin crawl but they don’t really make me shiver with fright. Gory horror movies have likewise lost some of their luster with me over the years as I guess I’ve become jaded by the sight of arterial spray coming from ripped throats. I think that the last time that I truly left the cinema feeling really creeped out of my skin was after watching the first “Blair Witch Project” film. Fortunately for me, the atmospherics in films from the Asian horror cinema genre still could be depended on to provide me with a dose of real chills down my spine but I fear even that might become jaded for me after a while.
“30 Days of Night” comes to our shores with the tagline that it would be the scariest film you see this year. Based on the critically acclaimed graphic novel written by Steve Niles and Ben Templesmith, the film is set in Barrow, the northern most town in Alaska, where the sun sets and never rises for 30 days in the middle of winter. During the enduring month long night, Barrow get overrun by a pack of vicious vampires led by Marlow (Danny Huston) who mercilessly start to butcher the population of this isolated town. Survivors, led by the Sheriff Eben Oleson (Josh Hartnett) and his estranged wife, Fire Marshall Stella Oleson (Melissa George), has to survive the 30 days of darkness that surround them and hope that the vampires don’t find them before they get to see the sun again.
Directed by David Slade (“Hard Candy”), “30 Days of Night” did for vampires what “28 Days Later” did for zombies by returning them to the mold of the vicious bloodthirsty monstrous last seen in “Nosferatu”. The vampires in this movie were not tortured by their bloodlust like their brethrens in Anne Rice novels or were they the stylish high kicking martial art masters as seen in the “Blade” or “Underworld” film franchises. With their high pitch screams (which did get more annoying than terrifying after the first few times) and reptilian like facial features, these vampires were truly the kind you don’t want to be standing behind you in any circumstances. They hardly speak which means audiences don’t get much of a backstory for them and when they do it would be in an dialect specifically created for this film. The would rather play around with their meal rather than trying to turn them into vampires to keep them company.
Unfortunately for me, this was the only interesting aspect of the film for me with the exception of the memorable CGI crane shot they did to show the vampires taking the population of Barrow from their homes to slaughter them. Most of the non-vampire characters were blandly developed with most supporting characters undistinguishable from each other. The few characters that did get a little more screen time from the others were not that interesting to watch either. A lot of them seemed to fall into general horror movies archetypes that one could be forgiven for knowing before hand which one of them would be killed by the vampires first.
Pacing of the film was another aspect of the film that I felt could have been done better. Unlike “The Thing”, another film set in the snowy expense with a monster running around killing people, the tension in the “30 Days of Night” annoyingly comes in fits and starts. At several points in the film, the action grounds to a halt as the survivors start talking among themselves without really adding to the overall feeling of desperation of their predicament. Character revelations comes without any particular rhyme or reason other than to flesh out a character just before he/she meets their gory end. The action in the film also skipped long time frames with the things happening only on the 7th, 18th and 27th days which makes viewers wonder what they did the rest of the days. I was not expecting to see what they did on every day of their 30 days confinement but it would made for a more enjoyable viewing if we see their increasing desperation as the days roll by. Instead, what we get to see is this motley crew repeating the same cycle out hiding out then going out to a new location only to get someone else in the group killed.
Gore fans might be placated by the amount of gore on screen but I guess one could say that it was a bit tame compared to some of the other more gory films that have came before. There were more than a few decapitation scenes since cutting their heads off was the only way to kill these vampires. Vampire feeding were shown in very quick and messy cut away shots that emphasized the vicious nature of their attacks. Tons of blood gets splattered all over the place as the vampires seemed to be very messy blood drinkers who don’t really mind wasting the blood even though the existing people in Barrow might not last them the whole 30 days of darkness. There were a few action set pieces in the film that involved inventive ways of dispatching the vampires but they came in very few and far in between to sustain gore fan’s attentions.
I was told that some viewers hated the ending because of what happened to the main lead. To me the predictable ending was the only way that the conflict would have ended and to see anything else would definitely invalidate the whole movie. I just wished that there was much more of a character struggle to come to the decision that the main lead had to take instead of appearing to be the most convenient thing to do. After watching “30 Days of Night”, I am sorely tempted to get the original graphic novel that the movie was based upon to get more satisfying story to sink my teeth in. Weak characterization and pacing did the most injustice to a fairly imaginative premise. The film would be something that you would watch on a free afternoon but don’t expect too much from it.
Book 5 of the Harry Potter series, “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix”, was not only the longest one in the series but seemed to me would be the most difficult to translate into film. Unlike the readily visualized action set pieces of the preceding installments, the fifth book was much more introspective focusing on the darkening impulses within Harry himself as he dealt with a new school term at Hogwarts. I remembered most distinctly how angry Harry was at everyone all through the book and how everything changed for him and the people around him by the end. The book represented a turning point in the series and set the tone of the books that followed it. Given the density of the material within the 800 plus pages that had to be condensed to fit within the frame work of a film, I had fully expected some details to be cut out from the screen translation. Fortunately, with even the omissions, the latest film adaptation of the Harry Potter franchise recently released still retained the essence of the tome and managed to satisfy the audience.
At the onset of “Harry Potter and the Order to the Phoenix”, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) finds himself having to defend himself against the charge of underage magic usage when he had to use his magic skills to fend off a Dementor attack on himself and his cousin. With the help of Prof Dumbledore (Michael Gambon), Harry was cleared of all charges and allowed back to Hogwarts for the new school term where he finds that most of the students think that he was a liar for claiming that the Dark Lord (Ralph Fiennes) had returned. A victim of a smear campaign by the Ministry of Magic and the subservient media, Harry’s life gets even more desperate with the arrival of Dolores Umbridge (Imelda Staunton) as the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher as well as the representative of the Ministry of Magic at Hogwarts.
Among the changes that Umbridge implemented was to ignore the student’s need to practice the magic spells they would need to defend themselves with. Umbridge’s interference at Hogwarts forced a resolute Harry to gather his friends including Ron (Rupert Grint), Hermione (Emma Watson), Neville (Matthew Lewis), Ginny (Bonnie Wright) and Luna Lovegood (Evanna Lynch) to form a club where they could practice their defensive magic in defiance of her. Their practice time would later come in handy when they have to face Lord Voldemort’s DeathEaters at the cavernous Ministry of Magic to save Harry’s godfather, Sirius Black (Gary Oldman), and to recover an item before the DeathEaters did for their master. While the students won the day with the help from the older members of the Order of the Phoenix, it was unfortunately a pyrrhic victory for Harry.
The screenplay as written by Michael Goldenberg did have the unenviable challenge of pruning away peripheral events from the book to fit into the film’s runtime. While this meant losing some of the memorable beats from the book, overall I felt they he did a good job retaining the feel of the book. Being more introspective than the previous book meant that story pacing would be a slight issue as the characters would often stop to reflect what they were feeling. For better or for worse, this was removed from the movie by editing it in a much faster pace than the original material. I wished, however, that they could have retained the sense of growing resentment that Harry had against Dumbledore as described in the book. That change in the character always felt as a major growing up point for the character and a major milestone in his life when Harry discovers that even Dumbledore was not infallible.
Given the nature of the storyline, the action focused more on the students rather than the teachers or the magical environment around them All of the returning main cast seemed to be more comfortable in every succeeding film of the franchise and their familiarity with the character shows in their performance. Daniel Radcliffe (filling out nicely) brings sufficient angst to the character albeit it being a lot more understated compared to his character in the book. I also sorely missed the heighten distrust that threatened to drive a wedge between the 3 main characters as we saw in the book. Without that conflict, the relationship between Hermione and Ron with Harry felt slightly underdone. Most of the existing teaching staff who returned for this installment also suffered from less exposure due to the original storyline being more focused on Harry and therefore had substantially less screen time than they did before.
New characters seen in this installment delightfully added more substance to the tapestry of the franchise. The utterly sweet but ultimately sadistic Dolores Umbridge was played brilliantly by Imelda Staunton left behind a very memorable performance. While not as physically repulsive as detailed in the book, her willingness to take very extreme measures to ensure the students cooperation was fully realized on screen. No less memorable was Evanna Lynch’s ability to realize the ethereal and not-all-there spaciness of Luna “Loony” Lovegood as detailed in the book. While most of the DeathEaters were kept in masks with limited screen time, Helena Bonham Carter stood out among them as quite memorable especially her being able to present both craziness and sexiness in the package of Bellatrix Lestrange which we should be seeing more of in the next installment.
For the most part, the production value for the film was quite high especially with the impressive new black tiled underground Ministry of Magic set where the climactic battle between Voldemort and Dumbledore took place. No less impressive was the final fight scene between the students and the DeathEaters in the prophecy room where we finally get to see dueling wizards at their fullest. Unfortunately the same could not be said for the Order Advance Guard flight over the Thames at the beginning of the film. A fellow blogger mentioned that it looked like something that came off from the old Superman movie and I whole heartedly agree with him on that point. The CGI effect here was not to the standard that we have seen before in the franchise and it really stood out especially with later CGI scenes.
Overall, “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix” was on par with the other entries of the franchise. It is definitely much darker than it’s predecessors but it reflected the turmoil inherent in soul of the titular character. Things would only get darker from this point on as audiences who have read the next book in the series would attest so bemoaning the departure from the much cheerier earlier films would be a moot point. This is now about Harry Potter growing up realizing that the magic skills that he learnt at Hogwarts was not all for play. They were all on the eve of a civil war between the Dark Lord’s forces and the forces of the Order of the Phoenix. This film chronicled that turning point admirably and a worthy addition to the series that long time fans would enjoy.
“Way cooler than Armageddon !”
Truer words have not been spoken of Michael Bay’s “Transformers” especially when stacked up to the other summer blockbuster movies we’ve seen this year. Based on the beloved cartoon franchise people of my age group remember fondly from our youth, “Transformers” is the type of film that make summer blockbusters something to look forward to. All the hype that surrounded this movie paid off handsomely on screen for a change not like the other movies I’ve seen this year. From the first action set piece till the final climatic battle, the movie was truly a thrill ride that you wouldn’t mind going through all over again the moment you step out of the cinema doors after the ending credits.
The movie mainly follows the story of Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) whose current goal is to get a car to impress his dream girl, Mikaela (Megan Fox), who also happened to be the hottest girl in his class. After getting the grades and the funds that he promised his father he would, he finally gets his wish in the form of a beat up old Camaro which at times seemed to have a mind of it’s own. Little does Sam realize that his car does have a secret life as gigantic robot which he inavertedly uncovers while chasing after his car when he thought it was being stolen. It turned out that the Camaro (codename Bumblebee) was part of an alien robotic team called the Autobots sent to Earth to find an ancient artifact known as the Allspark. The location of the artifact was lost for centuries but was eventually discovered to be on Earth by Sam’s ancestor. Bumblebee’s team of Autobots, consisting of Jazz (Pontiac Solstice), Ironhide (GMC Pickup truck), Ratchet (Hummer S&R H2) and their leader Optimus Prime (Peterbilt truck), had came to Earth to prevent the Allspark artifact from falling into the hands of their sworn enemies, the Decepticons.
The Decepticons, consisting of Starscream (F-22 Raptor), Barricade (Mustang police car), Frenzy (CD player), Bonecrusher (Buffalo H Mine Protected Vehicle), Blackout (MH-53 Pave Low helicopter), Scorponok (mechanical scorpion) and Devastator (M1 Abrams tank), was already on Earth looking for their lost leader Megatron who had crash landed on Earth centuries earlier on his search for the Allspark artifact. To get the information they needed, they attacked US military installations in the Middle East and on board Air Force One to gain access into the military computer system to find out the location of their leader. Their actions brought them in contact with a team of military specialist led by Capt. Lennox (Josh Duhamel) and Tech Sgt. Epps (Tyrese Gibson) whose encounter revealed their existence to the US government. Led by the secretary of Defense (Jon Voight), the assembled team raced to stop the Decepticons from retrieving the Allspark cube with help from the Autobots.
“Transformers” is the type of movie that Michael Bay was born to direct. Say what you will about this director, he does know how to do eye-popping spectacles very well as proven in his previous outings in “Armageddon” and “Pearl Harbor”. The rapid fire pace of the action sets were a joy to experience as long as the audience doesn’t dwell too much on the subtleties of the action on screen. There is the outright requirement for some suspension of disbelieve in all of his movies and “Transformers” is no different in that regard. Given the subject matter and the well executed action set pieces, I would doubt that most of the audience would lose any sleep about the missing subtleties. Being able to finally enjoy a good old summer blockbuster type of movie after the disappointing previous offerings would be good enough for some.
On the human side of the acting equation, “Transformers” would fall under the category of a mixed bag in terms of the quality of acting. As main leads with the most screen time for the human actors, Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox gave credible enough performances to retain the interest of audiences while the titular robots were not on screen. Josh Duhamel and Tyrese Gibson mostly tried to extend their limited range into the action hero genre with less than memorable success while Jon Voight mostly looked like he was just there to deliver exposition for a paycheck. Attractive computer specialist Maggie Madsen (Rachel Taylor) who worked with the US government to break the Decepticon’s transmission was mostly eye candy for male computer geeks who wished someone like that worked next to them in their cubicle. Other than eye candy, the character was quite pointless except for infuriating the audience who tried to figure out why she had an Australian accent.
The main draw of the movie would surely be the computer generated robots that thrill audiences every time they appear on screen. Using the best CGI that the Industrial Light & Magic special effects master had at their disposals, they were successfully able to impart life like qualities in all the CGI robots who looked very impressive on screen. The makers of the film decide to update the look of the robots by making them more complex looking compared to their original appearance from the early cartoon series. While this made them look hundredfold more impressive this time around, the almost whiplash pace of the action sequences involving the robots were far to fast for audiences to appreciate the levels of detail. The film makers also gave a nod to the cartoon fans by allowing the robots to speak which they initially did not plan to in earlier drafts of the film. Not only do the Autobots and Decepticons speak, they even had Peter Cullen who voice the original Optimum Prime in the cartoons reprise the same role in the movie. Hearing his voice behind the face of the new Optimus Prime was a fanboy’s pay-off for going to watch this movie.
The story frame as written by screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman served the film well even when the robots were not on screen. The comedic beats in the movie was delivered smoothly and at times fairly enjoyable to watch. Look out for the scene of Sam’s parents barging into his room as he frantically looks for the item that the Autobots were there for. Comedic moments aside, the screenwriters wisely focused the movie on gigantic robots beating the circuits out of each other. Watching the robots transformed from their vehicle to robot mode, while was quite repetitive and does require a stretch of the imagination to be believable, would never grow old especially when they are accompanied by the whirls and clicking transforming sound that we fondly remember. It was also amazing to see every cent of the production value on screen being destroyed by rampaging robots when they battle each other. One would not be faulted for wondering how they would top the action sequences from this movie when they do get around to making the sequel which based on the last frame from the closing credits is surely in the plans.
Unlike the line from the original theme song of the cartoon series, there is not much more than meets the eye in Michael Bay’s “Transformers”. What you see is what you get and what you get is an eye popping CGI spectacles that will thrill both those who grew up watching the “Transformers” cartoon and newbie’s alike. As long as the audience is willing to accept the tenuous logic that runs through the movie and not to dwell too long in the absurdities of how a small car can scale up to a 20ft robot then all will go well. So well that by the end of the movie, I would not be surprised if many would gladly pay to go through the experience again. A sure fire hit with the merchandizing aware crowd, this film is the film to watch out when it comes out on DVD and their toys would be the hot ticket on every kid’s (and those still kids at heart) shopping list. After the disappointing summer blockbuster fare in the past weeks, “Transformers” was a welcomed addition and definitely a must watch movie for this year.
After a somewhat lackluster start to the movie franchise, Marvel universe’s foremost superhero quartet returns on the big screen in “Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer”. At the beginning of this sequel, Reed Richards/Mr. Fantastic (Ioan Gruffudd) and Susan Storm/Invisible Woman (Jessica Alba) are trying to get married for the 4th time after previous ceremonies were disrupted by events that required their superpower assistance. With the help of fellow teammates Ben Grim/Thing (Michael Chilkis) and Johnny Storm/Human Torch (Chris Evans), they hope to actually make it through the whole ceremony this time around and finally be legally married to each other. Unfortunately for the couple, fate threw a monkey wrench into their plans in the form of the Silver Surfer (Doug Jones, voice by Laurence Fishburne) whose arrival causes apocalyptic upheavals all across the Earth.
Racing to discover the intent of this stranger from space, the fantastic quartet find themselves having to join forces with the military under the command of U.S. Army General Hager (Andre Braugher) and a newly resurrected Victor Von Doom (Julian McMahon). The tenuous partnership managed to eventually capture the Silver Surfer only to find out that he was only the advance scout to an even bigger threat in the form of Galactus who traveled the universe looking for planets with organic life to consume. A predictable betrayal from one of the allied parties puts the world into more danger as Galactus draws closer to the planet. In the end, the Fantastic Four managed to beat the odds but not without the help of the noble herald who decided that humanity was worth saving from his former master.
The latest movie storyline is loosely based on the classic comic book storyline which first introduced the Silver Surfer and Galactus to the Marvel Universe. Well beloved by comic fans, high expectations were placed on this movie adaptation almost immediately after production news hit the internet. Unfortunately for fans of the original storyline, most would find the movie a huge disappointment after all the hype. While it was exciting to finally see the Silver Surfer realized on the big screen, a lot of what made the original story so engaging and historic did not make it to the screen. Instead of a deeper investigation of humanity’s worth, “Fantastic Four: The Rise of the Silver Surfer” choose to remain in the lightweight tone of it’s predecessor and appeal more to the demographics who would be more interested in the merchandizing byproduct of this summer fare.
All four of the original actors from the first film returned to reprise their roles in this installment. While the faster pace of this movie is a welcomed change from the meandering pace of the first, the same cannot be said of the changes or lack of in the character development this time around. Both Mr. Fantastic and Invisible Woman continue to the one note characters that we saw in the first movie. Like the first movie, the lack of chemistry between Gruffudd and Alba requires audiences to suspend disbelieve so we can accept them as a couple about to get married. Chris Evans continue to be the eye candy of the bunch and while I have no complaints about that it was quite disappointing to see the Human Torch’s unrealized character arch potential in this installment. It was also disheartening to see the how the character of the Thing which was the best thing of the first movie reduced to being just comic relief in this sequel.
Things are not any better on the other side of the heroic line as well. Julian McMahon’s Dr. Doom continues to be a underwhelming character in the movie who pales in comparison to his more regal comic book counterpart. Fan can take solace however on the portrayal of the Silver Surfer who made his transitions to the big screen with his backstory and motivations essentially intact. I just wished that I am not reminded of a Zen master like Morpheus from the Matrix movies every time I hear the character speaks on screen. The Silver Surfer was visually exciting to see on screen but dialogue wise left me feeling that they could have done more. The greatest disservice of the storyline has to be how the decided to portray Galactus in the movie. I had heard rumors of how they say Galactus will look like in the film but never really believed it since it was such an iconic character that people would look out for. Unfortunately for me, what I heard was true. I don’t know which would be more laughable if I saw it on screen, a planet size purple armored humanoid space entity or the Galactus that they decided to go with in the movie. I have a feeling that I would prefer the former because at least they would have made a concession to the comic fans who was already disappointed on how their favorite storyline has been adapted.
While much better than the first Fantastic Four movie and not the worse comic book based film made, “Fantastic Four: The Rise of the Silver Surfer” is quite a disposable film that does not do much to raise the stakes for the film franchise. Clunky dialogue and unmemorable character arches does disservice to the original storyline that the fans were looking forward to. I have to admit that the CGI effects were serviceable enough to make it an enjoyable watch but other than the flashy action sequences, there was not enough substance in the 91 minute runtime to make this movie anything more than forgettable.
I guess that you can say that 2007’s Hollywood summer blockbuster season could not have opened with a bigger bang than the eagerly awaited “Spider-Man 3”. Fast becoming the biggest film opening week box-office collection ever, the film premiered in Malaysia on May 1st which was ahead of it’s US release date. I had initially given up hope to be able to watch it during last week’s Labor day holiday but as fate would have it, my brother rang me up late Monday night to say that he managed to score tickets from one of his friends. This person had reserved 12 tickets for another group to watch the film at Damansara Cathay Cineplex but had to cancel that group reservations at the last minute. It was for last screening of the opening day at 1:50am but since it was “Spider-Man 3” and it was at the Cathay Cineplex that I have never been before there was no way on earth I would turn down the offer.
At the start of “Spider-Man 3”, things are looking up for Spider-Man/Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire). After the events of the last movie, he doesn’t have to hide his secret identity from Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst) anymore and the public adores him for his alter-ego’s past heroic deeds. The only thing that he had to watch out for was Daily Bugle’s editor J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons) continuing tirade against him and the seething resentment still harbored by former best friend, Harry Osborn (James Franco) who still thinks that Spider-Man/Peter killed his father. Things start to unravel when Peter becomes more enamored by his own popularity/success much to the detriment of others around him. The discovery that the person who killed his uncle was still alive and had recently escaped from prison further adds conflict to the young hero. This same escaped convict, Flint Marko (Thomas Haden Church), would later become Sandman after he was genetically altered to be able to transform himself into living sand by a freak scientific accident.
To further complicate matters, Peter finds himself infected with an extraterrestrial parasite symbiote that enhanced his powers but at the same time amplified his darker emotional side. The symbiote even infects the costume that Spider-Man wears making it jet black to reflect Peter’s inner darkness as to the brighter red and blue costume. Eventually Peter realizes how much he has changed after a string of incidents that would have a major impact on his relationship with the people around him. It was then when he decides to rid himself of the parasitic intruder which would later find Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), a fellow photographer at the Daily Bugle with a grudge against Peter. The new combination of Brock and the symbiote, now know as Venom, knew all of Peter’s secrets and begins to plot revenge against Spider-Man/Peter Parker with the help of the Sandman. Spider-Man does come up on top in the climatic battle with these two villains but not without a high price for his victory.
Watching the movie at 1:50 am when I’m usually already asleep at home notwithstanding, I was honestly a bit disappointed by the storyline. It felt that it was really two movies crammed into one. Between the new Goblin, Sandman and Venom, I thought there was one too many villains to focus on. As a result, although I have to admit that the villains were given a fairly competent backstory, there was not as much in terms of character development or focus on them compared to the villains in the first 2 movies. The film was also quite dense in narration and multiple conflict that the mish mash of elements felt slightly overwhelming to appreciate in a single sitting. I did have a little problem with the pacing of the first half of the movie as it took too long to set up the characters when most in the audience would rather see Spider-Man in action.
As for the action scenes, the frenetic pace of the battle between Peter and the new Goblin was really appreciated in the first hour of the film as it helped lift it from it's own meandering pace. Unfortunately for Thomas Haden Church, his Sandman battles were done mostly with his character in fully dispersed sand form which kind of defeats the purpose of the actor buffing up for the role. The final climatic battle with the combined forces of Venom and Sandman, while executed in a fairly exciting way, pales in comparison to the final battles in the previous installments. Given that the inclusion of fan favorite villains in this film, it is understandable that audiences had much higher expectations for this film and unfortunately the end product fell a little short of what fans were expecting.
Tobey Maguire continues to stamp his mark on the definitive interpretation of the character. The switch from the light to the dark side of the character was believable to watch although the progression went a bit over long. Kirsten Dunst’s character, however, seemed more as a repeat of the previous 2 installments although I has to admit that her acting at the bridge breakup scene was beautifully nuanced. If I were to give anyone high praise for acting ability in this film, it would definitely be to James Franco whose character whiplashes between best friend/worst enemy from scene to scene depending on the level of amnesia the character was in.
Thomas Haden Church’s character was played very movingly that audiences can almost forgive the overly wrought backstory that introduces the character but surely not for the final fate of the character. Topher Grace’s Eddie Brock/Venom character should have been given a film to fight alone with Spider-man. This fan favorite character was underutilize as a separate identity outside of Peter/Spider-Man and seemed more like an after thought in this installment. His final fate in the movie does open up the possibility of seeing the character again in the future but for now, the character was done a great disservice by the treatment received in this film. Equally disserviced and even more pointless was the characters of Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard) and her father, Captain Stacy (James Cromwell). Seemingly added as a knowing nod to the comic fans, their involvement in the story was unsatisfactorily superficial and unremarkable.
While “Spider-Man 3” no doubt is a successful gate opener for the 2007 Hollywood summer blockbuster season, it could have been much better if it had only not overreach itself and tried to do too many things at one time. The movie would have been perfectly good focusing on Spider-Man and one of the 3 villains that they tried to unsuccessfully juggle in this installment. Much of the storyline here also seemed focused more on tying up loose ends from the much more entertaining previous installments. The running length of 2 hrs 20 minutes will need the patience of a saint to sit though especially by fans of the character from the original comic books who unfortunately have to see the shoddy way their favorite characters were handled. Still it is one of the must see movies of this summer so be warned that mileage may vary with this movie.
How does a director film something that by design is almost unfilmable?
Based on a book written by Patrick Suskind, “Perfume : The Story of A Murderer” tells the story of the elusive realm of scents described into words. The film of the same name recently in local cinemas extends the conceit to transformed the words into visual images on screen. The end result could have easily been a horrible mess considering how elusive descriptions of scents could be but surprisingly that was not the case in this adaptation. It actually turned out to be a really interesting way to spend 147 minutes on a Saturday afternoon with good company.
“Perfume: The Story of A Murderer”, directed by Tom Tykwer ("Run, Lola, Run"), revolved around the fictional life and times of Jean-Baptiste Grenouille (Ben Whishaw) who lived in 18th century France. From the moment of his remarkable birth amidst the offal of the Paris fish market, Grenouille possessed in him 2 astounding characteristic that set him aside from the human masses around him. The first was his almost supernatural sense of smell which gave him the ability to discern even the slightest scent and the second being the total absence of scent on his body. His first attribute would eventually introduced him to the world of perfumery in Paris of the time and his apprenticeship with the perfumer Baldini (Dustin Hoffman) who has passed his prime when Grenouille showed up on his doorstep.
It was with Baldini that Grenouille began to perfect his craft using his astounding sense of smell to duplicate rival perfumes and immensely improve on them with addition of his own. Being the cash cow that long eluded him, Baldini let Grenouille full access to his perfume laboratory and his own considerable experience at the art of making perfume. What Baldini was not aware was that Grenouille had his own reasons for wanting to learn the art of distilling scents into perfumes. Once he has learned all that he could from Baldini, Grenouille moved on to Grasse in Southern France to further perfect his art. It was in this hamlet surrounded by fields of vividly colored lavender that Grenouille ultimate goal was revealed to all. Craving human aromas that himself lacked, Grenouille went on to distil the fragrance from virgin females of the area which also resulted in the victims death. Grenouille would eventually be captured but not before he completed his collection of 13 fragrance notes that he needed to create his ultimate perfume. The perfume would be both his savior and curse in the end once he realized that what he wanted all along was the very thing that he destroyed in the service of his obsession.
“Perfume” was definitely not for everyone much less for those of the faith hearted type. I found it by chance showing at KLCC TGV while trying to decide which movie to watch with a fellow film enthusiast last Saturday afternoon. I had heard of the story from the net but didn’t really know what it was all about and who acted in it. Considering the other options that was showing at that cinema, it looked like the most intriguing of the bunch that we both could agree on. Little that we know that we would be visually assaulted by the rich imagery of the film right from the first frames. In some scenes, the sheer amount of visual layers happening around the actors was simply too impressive to ignore. The film’s high production value was clearly apparent in the meticulous visual details of background, props and period costumes shown on screen.
I was even more impressed by the way the director of photography managed to capture the visual representation of what was essentially the invisible realm of scents that the film’s protagonist explores his life in. Nary a cartoon like haze of fragrance visual cue in sight, “Perfume” quickly enveloped viewers in the world of scents whether they be the stink of a Parisian fish market, the undulating fields of lavender in Grasse or the waft of fragrance from the bare shoulders of a red haired virgin. I remembered sitting there in the dark cinema trying to discern which aromas that surrounded me were real and which were just a memory recall from seeing the scenes as they unfolded. It was as if the director was able to personify scent as a physical being and set her to work on the film. The sheer genius and imaginative camera work on this film made a story that would be nearly unfilmable into a visual feast the such that has not been seen for some time.
Ben Whishaw who played Grenouille in the film was another unexpected find while watching the film. While lacking the number of lines customary attributed to the main character of a film, Whishaw’s performance spoke volumes with his grim and brooding interpretation of the character. With a running narration provided by John Hurt, Whishaw masterfully showed how well he could act even without uttering a word. It was a wonderfully nuanced performance which left me feeling very impressed by this young actor in his film debut. Another surprise for me was Dustin Hoffman’s turn as Baldini whose memorable screen presence played well against the darkening personality that Whishaw’s character was becoming. While it may not be very long in terms of screen time, Hoffman was able to make the best impression with his portrayal of the aging perfumer desperate for a new victory even at the expense of letting a monster develop right under his nose.
From the first frames of “Perfume”, there was no doubt that the story that the film chronicled would be dark and at times fascinatingly morbid. However it was not all dark and gloomy as it had also it’s share of gallows humor. The running gag of what happens to people who gave Grenouille up throughout his life left me smirking and anticipating what would happen next. Audience would also be forewarned to expect a highly controversial sequence in near the end of the film as Grenouille faced the crowd at his public execution. I have to admit that the movement of the story into the realm of magic realism during that sequence totally caught me off guard as I was working under the premise that it was a film that was based on a real story up to that point. I guess that I would have expected it if I read the original novel that this movie was based but since I didn’t it came as a shock to the system which left me reeling at it’s impact. The audience around where I sat that day at KLCC TGV had even less than sympathetic responses to this sequence which they did not hesitate to verbalize them much to my annoyance when all I wanted was to try to make sense of what I was watching.
“Perfume: The Story of A Murderer” was definitely not everyone’s cup of tea. The film asks a lot of the viewers but delivers on the goods once the agreement between the two parties have been accepted. Is “Perfume” an example of how an unfilmable work should be translated into a film? It could be but that is not my place to argue so. While people may not be able to agree on the merits of this film, no one would be able to deny that it is a film that is out of the ordinary.
Based on a popular graphic novel written by Frank Miller, the numerically titled “300” was the other movie that opened this past week in KL which had audiences talking about it. As I stood in line to collect my reserved tickets for the show at Sunway Pyramid TGV today, the two most often overheard conversations was that they were in line to watch either “300” or “Mukhsin” which made me wonder if any of the other films playing this weekend got any audiences. Since I’ve already watch “Mukhsin” yesterday, “300” was the next choice for me to spend my afternoon.
“300” recounts the story of King Leonidas who lead 300 of his Spartan warriors to the battle of Thermopylae against the hordes of invaders from Asia under the command of the Persian god-king Xerxes. Cut off from his supply lines and reinforcement by internal squabbles back home, King Leonidas had only himself and his band of warriors to delay the invader’s advance into his homeland of Sparta. After decimating wave after wave of the Persian army, the brave band of 300 Spartan warriors were summarily dispatched when a Spartan traitor revealed a weakness in the Spartan group’s position to Xerxes. With no reinforcement forthcoming, King Leonidas and his men faced their final hour with great honor and valor. His story and sacrifice would later mobilize the Greek nations to assemble an army that would eventually break Xerxes horde and push them back to Asia.
I have not read the original graphic novel that this film is based on but it does bear the mark of Frank Miller’s style of writing. Much like the approach of fully duplicating the comic panels into film frame of “Sin City”, “300” took the route of filming live actors on digitally created backgrounds. Unlike the earlier released “Sin City”, the color palate of “300” was vividly on display here for all to be amazed. From the first frames of the film, audiences are captivated by the visual feast of CGI magickry and innovation. There were several scenes that looked a little flat but overall the blend of live action with the digital environment was seamless.
While there is a story to follow in “300”, the bulk of the movie centered around the hyper-violent battlefield of Thermopylae where the Spartan army literally hacked the invaders to pieces. The onscreen battle most often were shown in slow motion which gave it a look that was nothing short of a ballet of flying appendages and splashes of blood choreographed to the strangely modern sounding soundtrack. After seeing the first few dismembered limbs fly off on screen, I found myself strangely numb to the battle scenes that followed. It was strange to note that the local censor still snipped out scenes that involved female implied nudity but yet left out at least 2 decapitations on screen. I guess if they had to cut all the scenes that they would usually cut in previous films, “300” would not really make much sense.
Overwhelmed by the visual spectacle, I didn’t really noticed the performance quality of the main actors. I did remember that Gerard Butler as Leonidas gave a sufficiently fair gravitas to the character as did Lena Headey who played his wife Queen Gorgo. Rodrigo Santoro who played Xerxes was made to look like a 8 foot tall version of a drag queen with more jewelry that she knows what to do with. While King Leonidas does state his disdain to Athenian “philosopher and boy-lovers”, it was hard not to read the homoerotic subtext inherent in the dialogue between the Spartan warriors regardless. It did not help the cause as well since the Spartan army was fully buffed up and dressed in as little as the rating would allow it.
While there can be something to be said about the relevancy of this movie to the current political and economical atmosphere between the West and Asia, this movie does not demand to be scrutinized as such. In fact the less that audiences try to fit how the Spartan’s represented the West i.e. America and the invaders represented the mess out there in the Middle East, the more sense the film will be. This is not a film to be used to draw parallels of what is happening now. Audience only need to appreciate the numerous decapitations and ignore any form of social comment that others try to put on it.
In the end, “300” was a eye popping visual feast that made the afternoon go faster. It didn’t really break new ground in terms of technology but it does show off the potential of what the technology can do. The hyper-violent scenes did came across as a little excessive but it should go well with the crowd that could use this as an outlet of channeling their own inner violent urges. With enough testosterone oozing on screen to make a bald woman grow hair, “300” should go well with the audience demographics that it was intended for. For the rest of us, it could be a novel way of spending an afternoon counting the number of times a body part flies off a character on screen.
In Yasmin Ahmad’s latest film offering, “Mukhsin”, she gives her fans a poignant love letter in the form of a beautiful examination of the story of first love and lost. It is a story that would surely resonate across everyone who goes to see it regardless of age. Looking at the crowd in the cinema when I watched it, I’m fairly certain that the message that “Mukhsin” was trying to convey had touched many and will touch more as word of mouth about how good this movie is starts to spread.
Billed as a prequel to her earlier breakthrough film, “Sepet”, this latest masterpiece tells the story of a 10 year Orked (Sharifah Aryana) and her first encounter with love. Living in a village in Selangor, the tomboyish Orked feels ill at ease among girls her age and much prefer playing with the boys. When the village newcomer, 12 year old Mukhsin (Mohd Shafie Naswip), finally relents to include her into the boys games, the seeds of a close bond began to germinate between the two of them. As the school holiday progressed, their friendship deepen into pangs of first love that both had no idea how to react to. Confused and bewildered, a slight misunderstanding caused Orked to stop talking to Mukhsin until the very last day when he had to return back to his father’s house at the end of the school holidays. In the end, Orked was left with the memory of her first love that she had to learn to let go so she could move on with her life.
Compared to her previous film, “Gubra”, audiences would find “Mukhsin” much easier to follow as the main characters of the movie remained the focus of the movie for most of the time. Forays into the story subplots involving the supporting cast, while does help to enrich the story, at times felt a little too disruptive to the pacing of the story for me. There were times in the movie that I felt a bit restless and wanting them to get back to the story of Orked and Mukhsin. It was not that the actors did not give good performances in the subplot scenes but I felt myself more invested in the main story rather than the subplots. The subplots involving Orked’s bad mouth neighbor and Mukhsin’s brother were the weaker two that slowed the pacing of the move for me. While I can seen the need of the first as a counterpoint to Orked’s own kooky clan and the second giving the backstory to Mukhsin’s family life, I wished that both could have been tighter in scope and more in sync with the flow of the movie.
As for the main meat of the story, “Mukhsin” doesn’t really seem that much innovative on the surface compared to similar Western movies. However when viewed through the lens of local Malaysia productions, one need to acknowledge that “Mukhsin”, like all Yasmin’s offerings that came before it, continues to present audiences with an idealized vision of the Malaysia that could be if we wanted to. Having the main character be a Malay girl living in a kampong, studying in a Chinese language school and speaks fluent British English no less spoke volumes of Yasmin’s continued drive to break down stereotypes of what being Malay meant. Looking at the other local offerings of the recent past, this break from stereotype was nothing less than a breath of fresh air for me.
It was fairly comforting to note that Yasmin’s signature off-screen conversation scenes were firmly included in “Mukhsin”. After getting used to this particular cinematic quirk of hers, I found myself looking forward for them and particularly in “Mukhsin”, these scenes were wonderful to watch. It this outing, this particular style benefited more from the outstanding performances of Sharifah Aryana and Mohd Shafie Naswip who both gave their all when the static camera stayed on their faces during these off-screen conversations. The tighter shots into their faces helped made these signature scenes more memorable compare to the long shots that was used in the previous films.
One would sorely be remiss not to make a note of the outstanding performance given by the two main leads. It was nothing short of spectacular seeing the chemistry between such young actors. Coming for equally famous siblings, Sharifah Aryana was a joy to watch especially when she managed to capture the mannerisms that her sister used when acting as the older version of her Orked character. It was easy to believe that this young girl would later grow up to be the teen that we saw in “Sepet” and the woman we saw in “Gubra”. However, I personally feel that the best performances in “Mukhsin” belonged to Mohd Shafie Naswip. With equal measure of quiet shyness and eye pleasing looks, this newly discovered gem shouldered the weight of the movie in his performance and delivered it in spades. His scene where he said his goodbyes to Orked before he left the village was nothing short of a tour de force from this young actor. His heartwrenching and earnest delivery of the lines still haunted me long after I’ve seen it. This young actor is definitely one to look out for as he matures into his craft.
“Mukhsin” was not without it’s share of slight disappointments for me. One that I have already mentioned earlier was the disruption of film pacing when the main story veered into some of the subplots. The other one that I had an issue with was the inclusion of the older Orked and Jason from “Sepet” in a scene with the younger Orked and Mukhsin. While clearly meant to be taken as an unofficial “dream sequence”, this particular scene played more for those who wanted Jason to be alive at the end of “Sepet”. For those of us, if there are more people than just only me, who accepted Jason’s death that the end of “Sepet” the scene felt a bit extraneous and confusing. The murmurs of confusion from the audience that I was with watching that scene told me that I was not the only one feeling so.
I have to be honest and confess that I was expecting “Mukhsin” to be a rite of passage story. Watching the movie, I realized that it was not exactly what I expected. While the film does deal with Orked’s first love, we don’t really see how much Orked was changed by it in this movie. We don’t see how Mukhsin was changed by the experience as well since we don’t really see him at the end of the movie as the taxi he was in drove off from Orked’s sights. I would have liked to have a stronger emotional dénouement at the end of the story especially having invested so much of my emotions into their relationship. The emotional buildup was already there for the taking but it felt as if the momentum faltered towards the end when audiences were expecting a release of their pent up emotions. Like “Gubra” that came before it, “Mukhsin” left me with the emotional equivalent of blue balls.
I don’t really know why but I have a nagging feeling that there are missing scenes from the final cut of this film that was shown in cinema. There were more than a few consecutive scenes that seem to demand that the audience make a calculated leap of faith to follow the action as it unfolds in the movie. In particular, the progression of Mukhsin’s realization that he might be falling in love with his best friend seemed a little emotionally sparse in content. I think I distinctly remembered a scene that was discussed on Yasmin’s blog site of a conversation that Mukhsin had with his aunt about the nature of love. I was looking forward for that scene and was surprised that it was not in the final cut. I now wonder if I had just imagined it all.
A lot of actors from the previous 3 Yasmin Ahmad’s films made cameo appearances in “Mukhsin”. Add to that the pre credit scene involving Yasmin’s real life parents and the film crew singing “Hujan” from the movie’s soundtrack, there seemed to me a sense of finality that this is the last film of the series involving this set of characters and their lives. If this is so, one could not ask for a better curtain call than “Mukhsin”. The simple but memorable story acted out by nothing less than the best young actors to be discovered in recent years was simply a joy to watch. This heartwarming tale is definitely one of the must see local productions of the year.
Being a big comic book reader/collector, I have always been wary every time one of my beloved comic book characters gets translated from the four color pages into the big screen medium. Comic book characters have never been the easiest material to work into the 100 plus minute film format as each characters usually have years of story continuity and history that made up what fans love about them. In the wrong hands, it could very easily degenerate into a unwatchable mess as proven before by “Catwoman” which was arguable the worst comic book film known to man. However with the success of the Spiderman, X-Men and Blade franchises, it seems that everyone wanted a piece of the action and license other bankable characters to be turned into a movie in hopes that they would be met with similar success. The latest of the comic book characters to make the transition from printed page to film is “Ghost Rider”.
In the recently released film, directed by Mark Steven Johnson who also directed the less then stellar “Daredevil”, a young stunt cyclist Johnny Blaze (Matt Long) discovered that his stunt partner father was dying from cancer. It was at that moment when a stranger came to the carnival where he was performing to offer a cure for his father’s cancer in exchange for young Blaze’s soul. After inavertedly signing the deal, Johnny found his father miraculously cured of his cancer only to be killed shortly after in a stunt seemingly orchestrated by the stranger. Feeling the guilt that his deal sealed his father’s fate, Johnny left the carnival and his teenage lady love to hit the road and find redemption for himself.
Fast forward a couple of years, an much older Johnny Blaze (Nicolas Cage) was more of a stunt cyclist than his father ever was. Famous and adored for his death defying motorcycle stuns, Johnny seemed to be living a charmed life until the stranger from his past reappear to claim his soul. It turned out that the stranger was actually Mephistopheles (Peter Fonda), who might be the Devil or an aspect of the fallen angel, and he was there to recruit Johnny to become his demonic bounty hunter known as “Ghost Rider”. The Ghost Rider was needed to prevent his wayward son, Blackheart (Wes Bentley), from obtaining an object of power that would allow him to usurp his father’s position of power.
Also reappearing in Johnny’s life at that particular time was Roxanne Simpson (Eva Mendes), his teenage sweetheart that he left behind after his father died, who was now a television reporter doing a feature about him. Thorn between his reignited attraction to her and his nocturnal activities as the “Ghost Rider”, Johnny soon finds himself in dire predicaments. With the help of a mysterious Caretaker (Sam Elliott), Johnny tries to harness the power of Ghost Rider to defeat Blackheart before he became a bigger threat to humanity than his father.
In the original comic book universe, there were actually 3 people who used the name “Ghost Rider”. Johnny Blaze was actually the 2nd person who used it, being preceded by Carter Slade and subsequently followed by Danny Ketch. I am more familiar with the 3rd Ghost Rider comics as I collected them when they first came out. The Johnny Blaze “Ghost Rider” comics were before my time and for most of the issue that I managed to read, it felt a little more campy than what I am used to relative to the darker 3rd iteration of the character.
After saying that, the “Ghost Rider” in this film came off as an amalgamation of the 2nd and 3rd version of the comic book character. They even put in the 1st “Ghost Rider” in as a character for good measure but unfortunately it helps little to make the film representation of the character any more engaging. Although I have to admit that to see the character on screen was fairly exciting, it felt a little empty as viewers would have seen most of what this CGI character could do in the film from the previously released trailers. Viewers do get to see the result of money that they poured in to the CGI effects for Ghost Rider which accidentally was also the reason why this film’s released date was pushed back from the earlier date planned in 2006. Unfortunately, the payoff for waiting to see this character on screen was diluted by having too little that was not already shown previously.
Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze was just simply the wrong person and much too old to be cast for the role. Being a comic collector himself, I expected him to have some level of reverence for the character and awareness of the fans expectations of how character was being portrayed. His choice to play the character as a quirky and campy caricature of the original comic book character was highly disappointing to me. Every time the film character was shown kicking back by listening to the Carpenters and downing M&M cocktails (since alcohol gave him nightmares), the knife twisted a bit more inside me as they desecrated a perfectly good comic book character. The absence of the quest for redemption that made the original character intriguing was sorely missed in the storyline of this film.
To add salt to the wound, there was hardly any chemistry between Cage and Eva Mendes who played the love interest soon to be in peril. Mendes’s character was very superficially developed and would have be utterly forgettable had it not be for her own “superpower” of fitting into a number of cleavage highlighting outfits designed to distract viewers from the awful wreck of a movie that they were watching. It was not a good sign for the character when viewers couldn’t care less what happens to her when she inevitable got captured by the villain and needed to be saved by the hero.
The other characters in the film unfortunately fared no better that Mendes’s character. Wes Bentley’s turn as the film villain was so clunky that one would expect him to have a pencil thin mustache to twirl as he made his endless proclamations and innate dialogue reading. His three henchmen, fallen angels who had power over the elements of earth, wind and water, were unimaginatively written and ineffectually portrayed to be a foil to the Ghost Rider. Even the two more illustrious actors in this movie, Peter Fonda and Sam Elliot, can be faulted for seemingly phoning in their performances with their bland portrayal of Mephistopheles and Caretaker respectively.
“Ghost Rider” felt like a movie that doesn’t know what to make of itself. On one hand, it wanted to be campy and funny with Cage pulling his quirky mannerism and endless Elvis poses. On the other hand, it wanted to be taken seriously as an entrant into the list of comic book inspired movie. The resulting mess was not as bad as “Catwoman” but it came close to languishing in the “Batman and Robin” level of inane mediocrity. Based on the crowd I saw at the cinema when I watched this movie, I would think that this film would get a fairly reasonable opening week collection at least until word of mouth got passed around to tell people how unnecessary this film was. Fans of the comic book character should be forewarned before they watch this movie lest they experience the same anger and disappointment that I left the cinema with after watching how much unrealized potential in the character that this movie ignored. Other cinema goers would be well advised to save their money and watch “Dreamgirls” instead when it comes to our local cinemas next week.
(poster courtesy of http://www.heedtheomen.com/)
I nearly got to watch this film on the 6th of June. I was near KLCC on an off-site meeting which ended early that day and thought of catching the movie since I have to go there anyway to catch the LRT back home. The thought of watching “The Omen” on 6/6/06 was quite novel and I found out that a lot of people think the same as well. The show that I wanted to watch that day was fully booked and I wasn’t keen on waiting for the next showing with my heavy laptop bag and whatnot. I decided then to go for an early dinner at KLCC instead and watch the movie on the weekend at my usual cinema where I’m almost certain able to get the seats that I like. In foresight, it would have been a little more exciting if I was able to watch this film on that particular date so I at least have something original from the film to talk about.
“The Omen” directed by John Moore is the second remake (the first being the waterlogged “Poseidon”) to come out of Hollywood this summer blockbuster season. With the exception of several minor additions and music score changes, this film is in essence a slavish replication of the original 1976 movie of the same name directed by Richard Donner. This film even reuses the original screenplay written by David Seltzer with uncredited revisions by Dan McDermot to less than effective impact compared to the original. While not as pointless as Gus Van Sant’s 1998 shot-for-shot recreation of “Psycho”, the film does still begs the question why it should be remade other than to capitalize on the calendar coincidence. There were too many times in the film that audiences who have seen the original will be left wondering why they paid money to watch something that they have seen done much better before.
As in the original film, “The Omen” begins when a high ranking US ambassador Robert Thorn (Liev Schreiber) cannot bear to tell his wife Kate (Julia Stiles) that her baby was stillborn so he accepts an offer made by a priest at the Italian hospital to secretly adopt an orphaned infant and pass him off as his true son. This seemingly benign act would later bring misfortune to all as the child, now called Damien (Seamus Davey-Fitzpatrick), seem to have a knack of causing those around him to die horrible deaths as he grows older. When their attentive nanny and a priest who tried to warn him about Damien’s true parentage dies in spectacular fashions, the father begin to realize that all is not as it seems with Damien. With the help of a doomed photo journalist, Robert races across Europe to find out the truth behind the deaths and the ominous happenings that surrounded his family. All his efforts would end up in vain when he discovers who Damien real father was and what they have planned for him. Unfortunately their plans would be fatally inconvenient for the Thorns now that they know who they were dealing with.
As mentioned before, “The Omen” is a remake of the original using the same script that was written for that 1976 movie. As such, almost all of the scenes and dialogues followed closely to what we have seen before. I can’t be sure if they used the same sets or locations from the original but I do have the sense that they may have used a close approximation of it. Unlike the earlier “Poseidon” remake, this film is true to the point of slavish in their recreation of the original film. There were a few new scenes added in this new remake in an attempt to differentiate itself from the original but they neither added anything new or exciting to what was already a warmed-over fare. The new opening scenes set in the Vatican actually undercut the story’s plot build up now that we know that the Anti-Christ was scheduled to be born in the first 5 minutes of the movie . The new dream sequence unimaginatively added used cheap scares and loud noises in hopes that it would jolt the fast becoming bored audience from their seats but added nothing more. The new additions, in short, were pointless and easily dispensed of without taking anything away from the experience.
Taking the reins from Gregory Peck and Lee Remick, both Schreiber and Stiles portrayal of the doomed parents pales in comparison. While he is a great actor in his own right, Schreiber’s constantly dark and brooding expression made his Robert Thorn too morally ambiguous. Audience of the original could easily understand Peck’s, an icon of the all-American fatherhood from his earlier movies, anguish when he found out that he had to kill his son to save the world but in this remake it was hard not to believe that Schreiber’s Robert would have the same difficulties in driving a knife into his son’s heart the moment he found out the truth about Damien. It also didn’t helped that Julia Stiles’ Katherine played out more like a helpless victim from the start instead of a mother gradually realizing that there was something horribly wrong with her son.
Fortunately, the supporting actors fared a little better than the main leads. Both Pete Postlethwaite and David Thewlis in their roles of the mad Father Brennan and the doomed photo journalist Keith Jennings managed to make the most of their limited screen time. I was quite a surprised to find their characters more memorable to me than the leads in this movie. Mia Farrow’s Mrs. Baylock, the replacement nanny from hell, came across as sickeningly sweet and patronizing which is a departure from the much more reserved and controlling approach that her predecessor used for her character. While it may not work in some of the scenes, the choice to depart from the original was a welcomed breath of fresh air in the whole déjà vu – ish experience.
One glaringly obvious item that made the original work better for me than this remake was how the character Damien was portrayed. Richard Donner was able to keep the audience hooked into his version of the movie by letting us come to the realization organically that not all is right with Damien. The audience are taken in by Harvey Stephens’ innocence and charm that it was hard to not to be horrified when we watch his gradual transformation from angelic to demonic. In contrast, Seamus Davey-Fitzpatrick’s Damien in this remake practically telegraphs diabolical evil by constantly scowling and glowering at everything he sees from start to finish. Unless this child actor was born pissed and had his features frozen in a perpetual scowl, there was no excuse for the director not to give this actor better directions on how the character should act.
There were more than a few occasions when I caught myself thinking about how bored I was while watching this movie. The movie came across too much like a pale imitation of the original and had too little to add to the experience. Having the film undercut it’s own plot build up with the new opening scene and the unrelenting creepy kid scowl at the audience did not helped to lessen the disappointment I got from having to pay to watch the film. It is very rare that I leave the cinema feeling like I just wasted nearly 2 hours of my life but that was exactly what I felt after watching this warm-over presentation.
(picture curtesy of www.x-menthelaststand.com)
After months of speculations and anticipation, I finally get to see the movie that I have been most looking forward to this summer blockbuster season. When I wrote about watching the trailers back in December and March, I also listed down a few spoiler-ish observations that was able to glean from the two trailers. Coming into the theater to watch this film, I was both excited and apprehensive to see how much I have speculated back then would actually come up on screen. While a lot of the things that I speculated did come up in the finished product, I was pleasantly surprised by the many other story twists that I would have never thought of unfolding as I watched the movie.
“X3: The Last Stand” is allegedly the last installment in the X-Men movie franchise. In this last installment of the mutant trilogy, our merry mutants have moved away from the mutant vs. mutant and human vs. mutant struggles we saw in the first 2 movies. Mutants seemed to be more visible after the end of the last movie and the US government even has a blue-furred mutant Dr. Hank McCoy/The Beast (Kelsey Grammer) on the Cabinet. Just as the world was beginning to look more like what Professor Xavier (Patrick Stewart) envisioned for his charges, the news of a cure that seemingly neutralizes the mutant gene in mutants is made public by a pharmaceutical company owned by Warren Worthington II (Michael Murphy). Worthington Sr. had invested his sizable fortune to find the cure after finding out that his only son, Warren Worthington III/Angel (Ben Foster), was a mutant with the ability to fly with his 16 feet long angelic-looking wings.
While the mutant cure is being promoted as a purely voluntary option for all mutants, Eric Lehnsherr/Magneto (Ian McKellen) sees it as just steps away from being something that is forced onto the mutant population by the fearful baseline humans. His fears would be later confirmed when they realized that the US army had been outfitted with cure-guns specially designed to administer the cure forcible to any mutant. In response, Magneto swiftly gathers like-minded mutants into an army opposed to the cure. At the core of his army is the new Brotherhood of Mutants consisting of Raven Darkholme/Mystique (Rebecca Romijn), John Allerdyce/Pyro (Aaron Stanford), Cain Marko/Juggernaut (Vinnie Jones), Callisto (Dania Ramirez), Jamie Madrox/Multiple Man (Eric Dane), Archlight (Omyhra Mota) and Quill (Ken Leung). Commanding legions of disfranchised mutants, the Brotherhood of Mutants seeks to destroy the cure at its source at any cost.
On the flip-side of the argument, the X-Men favors opening a dialogue with the authorities about the cure despite their own misgiving about their intentions. Ororo Munroe/Storm (Halle Berry) finds the mere idea that there was something to be cured in mutants morally reprehensible while Logan/Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) feels that it is up to the individual mutant to choose what is best for them. Marie/Rogue (Anna Paquin) sees the cure as a way for her to be able to finally physically touch her boyfriend Bobby Drake/Iceman (Shawn Ashmore) who seems to be getting closer to fellow teammate Kitty Pryde/Shadowcat (Ellen Page). When The Beast resigns from his position in the cabinet over differences with the administration on the issue of the cure, he rejoins the X-Men and adds his considerable skills alongside the strongman Peter Rasputin/Colossus (Daniel Cudmore). The team will have to rise to the occasion when they have to try to stop Magneto and his army when they come to destroy the cure at the source.
While both side of the conflict begin to assemble their forces, Jean Grey/Phoenix (Famke Janssen) returns seemingly from her death at Alkali Lake as shown at the end of the last installment. Her return bodes ill fortune for her grieving boyfriend Scott Summers/Cyclops (James Marsden) who gave up leadership of the X-Men after her death. Resurrected with vastly greater levels of telekinetic and telepathic powers, Phoenix becomes Magneto’s most powerful ally when he decides to raid Alcatraz Island where Worthington Pharmaceuticals is developing the mutant cure from the genetic material they harvested from an imprisoned young mutant Jimmy/Leech (Cameron Bright) who has the ability to temporarily suppress any mutant power within a certain radius. The final climatic battle would leave a lasting impact to all involved and would irreversibly change the X-Men forever when they have to face the ultimate sacrifice that they have to undertake.
If all of this seems a lot to be happening in a movie, it is because it is. Story threads from the previous 2 installment make their appearance here to be tied up by the end of the 105 minutes. Add to that, the new storylines that appear here, the combination of these plotlines at times seemed too rushed and unsatisfying. Unlike the previous two films, the newly introduced mutants have little exposure time to allow the viewer to really know them. This was true for the new mutants on both sides of the conflict. Angel was hardly an X-Men in any sense compared to Nightcrawler at the end of the last film and if you’ve seen Archlight’s display of power in the trailers then you’ve already watched everything that she does in this movie. I would have liked to see more character beats in the film for them to shine and be memorable. I guess that part of the problem is that there were too many mutants running around in this movie for director, Brett Ratner and the screenplay writers team of Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn, to keep track. In this regards, Bryan Singer’s skill at juggling multiple character development as seen in the last 2 installment was sorely missed.
As a fan and long-time reader of the X-Men comics, the movie has it’s high and low points. I have to say that I was absolutely thrilled at seeing the Danger Room session and the famous “Fastball Special” maneuver which incidentally looks more like a hammer throw rather than a fastball pitch. Seeing it on screen is akin to hearing Human Torch shouting “Flame On!” in the Fantastic Four film for a fanboy. I was even more excited at the prospect of see the Sentinel on screen but alas they only gave us a severed Sentinel head instead. After being disappointed by the lack of the mutant-hunting robot, I was further disappointed by the lack of Phoenix-effect that we say at the end of the last movie when Jean Grey was resurrected. Most of the time the Dark Phoenix seemed to be channeling either Carrie or Gollum when she used her powers. Fortunately for the character, I have no problems with their explanations on how Jean Grey turned to the Dark Phoenix. That particular character development arch felt very organic and in line with the more “real world” feel of the movies compared to the comics.
Acting-wise, I have to say that this latest installment of the X-Men franchise is a mix bag. I was fairly concerned about how Beast would come off but after watching the movie, aside from the hit and miss makeup job, Kelsey Grammer did an acceptable job with the character. Standouts from the movie would be the usually suspects from the previous installments with special mention for Famke Janssen chilling portrayal of the Dark Phoenix. As I mentioned before, the newly introduced mutants this time around got the short stick in this deal. We hardly get to see Colossus in action when a scene where he goes toe to toe with the Juggernaut would have been very much welcomed. Ben Foster’s character, Angel, had all the build up but in the end was let down by disappointing pay-off. Most of the mutants on the Brotherhood side fare no better when their combine powers could be more dramatic in the hands of people who know the characters better.
If this movie was to be the last of the franchise, I have to admit to being sad as it closes the trilogy with a whimper instead of the bang that I expected. After the momentum of the first 2 films, especially the much superior X2 : X-Men United, it was slightly disheartening to see it falter at the finish line. I sincerely hope that I am wrong in this regards and that a future expanded and restored version will be released in DVD form to correct this oversight. I do believe that there is an extended version out there as the film felt too short and rushed through the editing process. Despite all indications based on what the audiences saw in the closing credits, I am not putting too much hope that they will revive the franchise with these group of characters. It would be a bonus if they did but if the don’t then I will be looking forward to the characters spin-offs rumored to be in development. I wouldn’t mind watching a film about the young students at X-Academy dealing with the mutant powers for the first time.
X3 : The Last Stand was not all bad. It fulfilled all the requirements of a summer action movie admirably and it had a fairly thought-provoking storyline. The movie also boast the highest casualty body count in the franchise including several major characters which I admit took me by surprised. The action scenes were sufficiently grand in scope and execution to sustain interest although I would have liked to see more heart in the movie based on a comic that has always been known for angst. If one was willing to over look several glaring plot holes when the characters choose to ignore the more logical approach in favor for the more “showy” action then this film then this can be an exciting movie to spend the afternoon at. Long time comic fans may continue to debate about how successful the movie was but personally I felt that much more could have been done to make this last installment better. There was so much potential here that ended up unrealized at the end.
