Oct 042005
 
two reels

Agent Augustus Gibbons (Samuel L. Jackson) and half of his old military unit have been targeted by unknown assailants. To discover who is responsible, Gibbon’s breaks Darius Stone (Ice Cube) out of prison, making him the new xXx. Working outside of the system, xXx must uncover a secret plot that is somehow connected to their old general, George Deckert (Willem Dafoe), who is now secretary of state.

The original xXx was advertised as a replacement for James Bond films.  Bond is a 1950s-style film spy who has crawled along behind the times.  xXx is the new kind of film spy.  He’s now!  He’s wow!  He has a blaring modern soundtrack!

When Vin Diesel decided to skip the sequel, the powers-that-be decided some black stereotypes would sucker in an urban audience, and so we have xXx: State of the Union, an embarrassing, but sometimes exciting shoot’em-up.

The sequel is far more of a standard adventure film than its predecessor.  Gone are the extreme sports, social anarchy, and counterculture attitude.  Darius has a “bad attitude,” but that just means he’s grouchy all the time (demonstrated by a near omnipresent scowl).  All his spy skills come from training by “The Man.”  How is that more edgy than Bond?  He’s your average ex-special-ops spy. Apparently, making the lead black was as counterculture as Revolution Studios was willing to go.

The plot is easy enough to understand and just as difficult to believe. The problems start in the first scene, where ninja-clad bad guys break into a secret, high security government installation to kidnap Gibbons. If I was an evil megalomaniac whose scheme requires I nab a guy who lives in a nice house in the suburbs, I’d plan from the start to go after him when he’s home having dinner, where breaking and entering wouldn’t require science-fiction floating cameras and special explosives.  The story doesn’t make any more sense as it progresses and requires everyone to pause before doing anything to make little speeches or to utter glib one-liners.  The villain only loses (I don’t consider it a spoiler to tell you that in a pop-spy-action picture, the villain loses) because he insists on chatting when he should just pull the trigger.  To win the day, xXx enlists the aid of “the brothers,” who are all criminals.  If black, then criminal.  Even wealthy African American still steal on the side.  I’m searching for the social statement this is making, but it is hurting by brain, so I’ll move on.

The dialog makes the plot look brilliant.  No real people speak like these characters, which would be all right if they said something even slightly interesting or entertaining.  They don’t.  The worst lines are in the only character development scene in the film, where xXx tells his underwritten, but busty, love interest that he remembers how they used to do a lot of damage in the backseat of a car.  xXx: State of the Union is not a place to look for wit.  Luckily, most of the dialog is quickly deadened by explosions.

Ice Cube isn’t horrible as xXx, but his one-tone, one-expression style makes him better suited for a supporting role.  Cleverly, he’s kept away from Samuel L. Jackson for a majority of the picture as the comparison isn’t kind to him.  Jackson, who even at his worst (that would be…here) is better than a majority of actors, shows up for his paycheck, reads his lines, and is gone.  Willem Dafoe plays his standard villain.  Was this the height of clever casting?  Dafoe is the villain.  No kidding.  Why not make him the helpful, but sinister-looking NSA agent and Scott Speedman the evil, but freshly handsome, mastermind?  Just for a change of pace?

But this is an action flick, so the focus isn’t on the poor casting, painful dialog, non-existent character development, clichés, ludicrous plot, or the strange political landscape where a stand-in for President George W. Bush has shifted from far right to the middle.  What is important is the adrenaline pumping action, and here, xXx: State of the Union does pretty well.  It isn’t spectacular, but the pace is good, the stunts are wild, and plenty of things blow up.  Those ninjas dropping in at the beginning didn’t make any sense, but they get a reasonable “cool” rating.  And I give the film points for finding a new, violent, and amusing use for the launch catapult on an aircraft carrier.  The camera is too close in many of the hand-to-hand combat scenes, but no worse than in the average Hollywood fight of recent years.  If all you require are explosions to a pounding beat, xXx: State of the Union will fulfill your needs.  If you want more, go elsewhere.

James Bond is safe for another year.

Oct 042005
 
2.5 reels

Dick and Jane Harper (Jim Carrey, Téa Leoni) are living the upper-middle class American dream.  When Dick gets promoted to VP, the future looks secure and Jane quits her job.  But Dick’s boss (Alec Baldwin) is a Ken Lay-style crook and the company folds like Enron.  As their lives crumble, Dick and Jane must find a new way to make money.  What they find is armed robbery.

Some of you may be unfamiliar with Atlanta traffic.  If so, your life is better than those around you who are not in such blissful ignorance.  Bask in it.  Me?  I know it well.  And with such knowledge, I set out at 6 pm for a nearby theater to catch the prescreening of Fun With Dick and Jane, the remake of the Jane Fonda/George Segal never-too-pointed satire of ’70s life.  An hour later, I was still closer to home than to the theater.  Luckily, I had planed to get there early.  Instead, after spending an hour and a half on a trip that should take twenty minutes, I arrived just as the lights dimmed, and grabbed my close-enough-to-see-their-nostril-hairs seat.  I was not a happy man.

Why am I mentioning this?  Because I was in exactly the wrong mood to enjoy and objectively judge a movie, and I came out feeling pretty good.  Fun With Dick and Jane isn’t brilliant, deep, or memorable, but it isn’t bad entertainment.  If it can overcome the effects of driving on Atlanta’s roads, it’s got something.

The film is in three acts.  The first is a satire of corporate America and attempting to live the American dream, and this is where the movie works the best.  Dick and Jane are mindless consumers.  Dick is enthusiastic about a job where he rattles off meaningless slogans and questionable tech answers.  The company is essentially Enron and as it falls, you see the kind of desperation that so many workers have felt in recent years as their savings and security were ripped away.  Of course, there’s no other job to go to, and Dick and Jane fall apart as their pretty, but artificial world vanishes.

The situation is so familiar to those of us who lived the corporate life and then saw it all fall apart after Bush was elected.  Company after company went bankrupt or downsized (with very few CEOs feeling the pinch).  The film is uncomfortably close to reality.  I saw the long lines of out-of-work, middle-aged men in their nice suits, trying to find any job.  And, like in the movie, there’s no other job out there.  It sounds sad, and it is.  It also doesn’t sound funny, but it can be.  The truth of the situation is ripe with comic potential, particularly as there have been relatively few cinematic comments on the economic collapse of the last five years (standup comics don’t count as cinematic).

When Dick reaches his breaking point, the film takes a sharp turn and becomes a slapstick, holdup picture.  The script has problems with what should have been the easiest scenes as the robberies are comedy low.  You get Carrey doing some of his same old shtick, getting his gun caught in his coat (and jerking wildly to get it out for far too long), and flailing about with fake kung fu moves (which isn’t funny when your kid brother or nephew does it, and it isn’t funny here).  However, there are a few good moments as they gain back their old lifestyle, now enhanced with the excitement of being criminals.

The final segment switches gears again, becoming a big-caper movie.  Dick and Jane just need to pull off one last heist.  It connects with the corporate immorality from the beginning of the film, but outside of pointing out what the rich do to avoid taxes, it doesn’t bring back the satire.  There are good moments, but on a sitcom level.

Carrey is reasonable as a yuppie with a heart but not enough brain, showing he has the looks and ability to play a leading man.  He keeps his overacting and extreme antics to a minimum, though his occasional over-the-top expression and unnecessary thrashing does mar the middle of the film.  A bit of editing would have done wonders.  Téa Leoni is pleasant, funny, and sexy.  She and Carrey make a likable team.

Fun With Dick and Jane would have been better if it had shown some teeth.  It takes aim, and then lets its victim get away.  A TV screen shows President Bush talking about how prosperity is here, but this obviously false statement is never followed-up.  The CEO telling the news crew to watch him as he turns from their questions to go hunting is reminiscent of Bush ignoring reporters’ questions and instead telling them to watch his golf swing, but again, nothing more is made of this.  The best punch the picture gets in is in the credits, were it thanks some truly special people and institutions (sorry, but you’ll have to read it yourself).  But the heart to attack the American corporate facade isn’t there in a film that paints the boss as a villain, with his four houses, but seems to accept that Dick and Jane really need a swimming pool and a huge house with a servant.

Oct 042005
 
two reels

In the near future, when American super-aircraft fly into any country in the world and blow things up on a regular basis, three TOPGUNs, Lt. Ben Gannon (Josh Lucas),  Lt. Kara Wade (Jessica Biel), and Lt. Henry Purcell (Jamie Foxx) are joined by a cutting-edge, computerized, drone plane.  On the way back from blowing up some terrorists in the middle of Burma, lightening strikes the A.I. craft, causing it to think, and therefore, go rogue.  This makes it a death match between machine and humans (in machines).  That is until the script goes as nuts as the plane, causing conspiracies to appear, the officer in charge of the A.I. (Sam Shepard) to behave as if he’s in a spy thriller, a strange scientist (Richard Roxburgh) to enter and exit the movie with little explanation, and Wade to fight North Koreans on the ground.

Losing close to a hundred million dollars, Stealth was one of the biggest flops of all time.  It didn’t deserve to be.  It didn’t deserve to be a big hit either.  It’s an odd movie and I’m not sure what to think of it.  The PR people at Columbia Pictures had the same problem.  They sold it as a gung-ho, Rambo-style, pro-military, sci-fi pic where star Jamie Fox takes on an evil computer and makes the world safe for democracy.  But it isn’t any of those things.  Fox isn’t the star (fifth banana, after Lucas, the special effects, Biel, and Shepard), the computer isn’t exactly a bad guy, there’s no science, and the flick shows distinct signs of psychosis with its views on the military.

On the plus side, the air combat is as exciting as Columbia claimed it would be.  If you like cool planes, missiles, and big explosions, you’ll be very happy.  The ignition of a huge ring of fuel at high altitude and a crazed parachute drop with flaming wreckage all around should bring a smile to even the most jaded action fan.  And there’s some charming actors, with their charm dialed to eleven, accompanying all those pretty effects.  I’m not calling what they do here great acting; perhaps great “movie starmanship” is a better term (hey, I think I’ll copyright that phrase).  Lucas carries the film effortlessly, and everyone else is fun to watch.

Additionally, this isn’t a retread of Colossus: The Forbin Project or Top Gun.  There are lots of surprises.  But that’s not clearly a good thing.  You won’t know what’s coming next because the filmmakers didn’t know what kind of film they were making.  It starts as a pro-individualism, testosterone-laced shoot’em up, but that doesn’t last.  The early plot (humans fighting computer) is wrapped up halfway through the movie, spawning multiple threads, only some of which go anywhere.  Important characters (a politician, a scientist, a technician, and a Korean soldier) are underwritten, and in several cases, forgotten.  It all ties together in a general way, but there are enormous plot holes, insane coincidences, and a random feeling about the last half.

Call Stealth the first Red-State/Blue State movie intended to appeal to everyone.  Now that would normally mean that the film acknowledges the different views held by people in the U.S., and attempts to find common ground.  Not here.  It completely ignores the middle and goes for both ends.  It’s an anti-war film, where it’s a good thing that America polices the world (I couldn’t get Team America: World Police out of my mind.)  It objects strongly to the killing of innocent townspeople, but than revels in the deaths of Russian pilots who are in the right.  It suggests that anyone outside of the America can’t be trusted and there are terrorists everywhere, but also that our government and military are filled with evil men and paramilitary companies (read: Haliburton) are destroying our liberties.  It’s as if four scripts were independently written, two by liberals and two by conservatives, and the shooting script was made by randomly choosing pages from the others.

For all its flaws, Stealth is an enjoyable romp.  Silly, inconsistent, and politically confused, but enjoyable.

 Reviews, Robots Tagged with:
Oct 032005
 
four reels

With The Doctor (David Tennant) in a coma after a difficult regeneration, Rose (Billie Piper) returns to Earth in the TARDIS at Christmastime.  Unfortunately, the alien Sycorax have also arrived, with plans to conquer the planet.  With The Doctor sidelined, and lesser aliens after his body, Rose is helpless and afraid, and the new Prime Minister, Harriet Jones (Penelope Wilton), is left to deal with the invaders.

Some Christmas episodes of television series can be enjoyed by anyone without previous knowledge of the show.  This isn’t one of those.  Far too much information is needed.  Who is The Doctor and what’s this regeneration thing about?  Who is Rose and why is she upset?  Who is Harriet Jones and how does she know The Doctor?  These are all questions that the viewer needs to know the answers to in order to enjoy The Christmas Invasion.

So, is this for Doctor Who fans only?  Yes and no.  Yes because you’ll need to be a fan, and no, because you don’t need to be one already; just pick up the previous season of the show, and then you will be a fan.

For anyone not familiar with this long-running British series, it started in 1963 and followed the adventures of an elderly time traveler.  When the star stepped down, the appearance of the new actor was explained by making The Doctor capable of regeneration (into an entirely new person) when needed.  Hey, he’s an alien “Time Lord,” so why not?  The Doctor ended up regenerating six times before the show was cancelled in 1989.  In 1996, The Doctor returned with his seventh face in a U.S./Brit co-produced TV movie.  This eventually spawned a new series that began in 2005 with yet another actor in the lead.  And that brings us to the Christmas special that bridges seasons one and two of the new show and gives us yet another Doctor.  It isn’t necessary to go back to the ’63 episodes to get caught up.  The new series is relatively self-contained.

The original series was always a mixed bag.  Some of the Doctors (his character and the actors who played him) were superb while others were merely competent.  The supporting cast and guests varied as well, but tended to be weaker.  The scripts could be witty and thoughtful, but more often were thin and filled with holes.  The production values were poor, with primitive sets (walls would sway) and aliens that were either a guy in a bad mask or a cheap wad of Styrofoam.  It always had the feeling of a kid’s puppet show.  The reborn show vanquished almost all of the old problems.  It is a slick science fiction show with effects that features could be proud of and cross-the-board quality acting.  The scripts are even better.

The Christmas Invasion continues the first season’s quality (first season of the new series that is), effortlessly mixing comedy and drama.  Billie Piper, the U.K. beauty and ex-pop singer is a delight and always believable.  Tennant makes a wide-eyed and wild Doctor, mixing the best of the past with a level of hip intensity.  As for the Christmas elements, there are Santas with flamethrowers, some rather creepy snow, and a mysteriously mobile Christmas tree that creates a scene that is both fall-over-funny and likely to please the genre crowd looking for some cool effects.

It does get a bit slow in the middle.  The life of the show is in The Doctor, and with him unconscious for three quarters of the running time, the energy lags.  Sure, it builds tension with the world in peril as he naps, but I’d have been satisfied with a bit less anxiety and a bit more of The Doctor.  However, there’s plenty here to make it a merry sci-fi Christmas.

Oct 032005
 
2.5 reels

The Grim Reaper (voice: Greg Eagles) takes Billy (voice: Richard Steven Horvitz) and Mandy (voice: Grey DeLisle) to the North Pole to prove that Santa Claus exists.  But once there, they find that Santa (voice: Gilbert Gottfried) has become a vampire.  Leaving Billy with Mrs. Claus (voice: Carol Kane), Grim and Mandy journey to the castle of the strangely fastidious Baron Von Ghoulish (Malcolm McDowell) in an attempt to save Santa.

The animated series The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy began with mentally deficient Billy and overbearing Mandy winning a bet with The Grim Reaper, thus forcing him to be their companion forever.  There is potential in the idea, and the Jamaican-sounding Grim has many good moments.  Mandy, who is strong willed and hates just about everything, is a one note character, but it’s a good note.  Billy, on the other hand, with his nose-picking and similar antics, is strictly entertainment for the pre-teen set.  The pattern is the same for each episode, with Billy getting into some kind of trouble, Mandy unenthusiastically saving him with the aid of Grim, and The Reaper finding legitimate things to complain about.  It’s fun, but repetitious.  A few episodes should be enough for anyone.

The extended Christmas episode would be a good choice for that short list of episodes to catch.  Santa as a vampire allows for some good gags.  It seems the man in the red suite sleeps in a Gingerbread coffin.  What else would he do?  Mrs. Claus fearfully relates how Santa-vamp attacked and tried to drink the blood of “that poor elf who wanted to be a dentist.”  That puts the end of Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer in a new perspective.  Billy and Mandy Save Christmas is filled with pseudo-dark humor that should appeal to most anyone.  And it is worth turning on just to hear the line “You’re lucky that Death was here to save you.”

Oct 022005
 
two reels

Against the advice of her father, Nigel Bigelow (Michael Caine), Isabel (Nicole Kidman) decides to give up witchcraft and live as a human. At the same time, obnoxious, failing, film actor Jack Wyatt (Will Ferrell) agrees to take the part of Darrin in the TV remake of Bewitched, demanding that an unknown be cast as his witch wife, Samantha, so that he won’t be upstaged. He happens upon Isabel, and gives her the part, unaware of how well she actually fits it.

I could go on for paragraphs about the lack of originality displayed in basing yet another film on a “classic” TV show, but every other critic already has. They are right, but I hate to repeat what others have said in a diatribe about originality. So, onto the film, as if there never was a series about a cute-as-a-bug witch trying to live with a mortal.

Bewitched is two films. One is a light, if somewhat vacuous feature in which charming actors create a warm, pleasant piece of fluff that’s fitting for a cold night, a warm fire, and some caramel corn.  The other is a loud, post-modern-wink-at-the-audience, slapstick routine. Neither are particularly funny. It shouldn’t be a surprise that Kidman and Caine are in the charming one, and Ferrell…isn’t.

Kidman is an actress, along with being a beauty, and has enough charisma to overcome the mediocre material. When the focus is on her, the film sails along, and if I didn’t laugh, that was OK as I had a great desire to invite her over for tea. Caine, another person acquainted with the art of acting (do you gather I’m implying not everyone in the movie is?), is nearly as captivating, and if the jokes he’s given aren’t hilarious, at least they are delivered with grace.

But then there is funnyman Ferrell. He isn’t playing Jack Wyatt. He’s playing Will Ferrell, doing his regular shtick.  That’s fine when it’s funny, but he’s given no help by writers Nora and Delia Ephron, so he ends up leaping about like a frantic, yappy, little dog. He delivers every line like he’s still on Saturday Night Live, and maybe if he’s a little more raucous, the studio audience will laugh out of embarrassment.

Worse still, this isn’t supposed to be a wacky, joke-a-second comedy like Stripes or Ghostbusters. This is structured as another Nora Ephron, syrupy-sweet, romantic comedy (You’ve Got Mail, Sleepless in Seattle), with the accent on the romance.  With Ferrell in the lead, it’s like watching Jerry Lewis playing a Cary Grant part.

For any romance story to work, the viewer should want the two leads to get together, but Jack touching Isabel isn’t enchantment, its defilement. When he puts a hand on her, I want her to rush home quickly and bathe. Ah, now there would be a much better movie.

Sep 302005
 

Jasper Morello (voice: Joel Edgerton, Owen Lars in Episodes II & III of Star Wars and Gawain in King Arthur) lives in a future filled with steam-powered radios and iron airships.  A navigator who made a tragic mistake, he is given another chance onboard a hulking metal craft that is searching for a cure to the plague that ravages the land.  Leaving his wife behind, Morello sets off with imposing Captain Griswald (voice: Thomas Dysart), acclaimed scientist, Doctor Claude Belgon (voice: Helmut Bakaitis, The Architect in The Matrix Reload and The Matrix Revolutions), and a small crew into uncharted air.  Directed by: Anthony Lucas, Written by: Mark Shirrefs, Produced by: Julia Lucas.  26 min

For a short film, The Mysterious Geographic Explorations of Jasper Morello is a very long title.  It is nearly impossible to fit nicely above a review, and tends to drop to a second line in a film festival program book.  But then this is a short film which is long on character, plot, theme, and twisted beauty.  Besides, it isn’t a needlessly drawn-out title.  I can’t think of a better one to announce this twenty-six minute epic.  It says, “Here is an old-style adventure yarn, though perhaps with an unexpected direction.  There will be travel to secret, faraway lands filled with terrible and wonderful things.”  And it says that our hero—whose names signifies accountancy, not mercenary warfare or bullwhip archaeology—may not be up to the challenge.

I don’t see a lot of good steampunk, so Jasper Morello is a real treat.  It may be the best example of this sub-genre committed to film, and certainly does more for its reputation than the big-budget League of Extraordinary Gentleman, the most famous recent entry.

(For anyone who doesn’t normally worry about science-fiction expressions, “steampunk” is a literary term, referring to what was originally an offshoot of Cyberpunk.  It loosely covers scientific romantic adventures set in a world that expands, but does not fundamentally alter Victorian technology, merged with dystopian horrors.  Think of it as what you’d get if you resurrected Jules Verne and H.P. Lovecraft, kept them ignorant of any changes in the world since their deaths, and forced them to collaborate on a futuristic novel.)

By the nature of steampunk, there is going to be a mixing of the traditional and modern.  Jasper Morello does this with a story that harkens back to the radio plays of the early 1940s, but adds a touch of 2000s horror film savagery (there are some pretty nasty beasts with some very bad habits).  The narration/dialog is so well constructed and expertly delivered that you could close your eyes and enjoy the tale, letting the words paint pictures in your mind—strange in a movie with such remarkable visuals.

Of course it is those visuals that make the entire work so extraordinary.  They are part shadow puppets, part object animation, and part CG.  The 2-D silhouette characters move about in a gothic 3-D rendered world that reeks of malevolence.  It is the perfect interpretation of the multiple genres that make up steampunk, combining the old with the new.  But forget all the meaning and the way the style matches the story; it is simply a pleasure to look at the imagery.  Director Anthony Lucas has created a hybrid that is nothing like its parents.  You’ve never seen anything like The Mysterious Geographic Explorations of Jasper Morello.

And it looks like we’re not through with the “Aeronaut of the 3rd Royal Cartographers” as Lucas has plans for three voyages.  Apparently he’s going to pull a Star Wars and re-title the first film, using its current name as a wraparound for the trilogy.  The three will be:

  • The First Voyage – Jasper Morello and the Lost Airship
  • The Second Voyage – Jasper Morello and the Secret of Alto Meas
  • The Third Voyage – Jasper Morello and the Ebenezer of Gothia.

If the sequels are anywhere near as successful as the first has been (winning numerous awards, including at the Dragon*Con Independent Short Film Festival which I not-so-coincidently run, and earning BAFTA and Academy Award nominations), then we may be seeing a feature.  I sympathize with the desire to make a longer version since you can’t pay the bills with the profits from a short film.  But I’m happy with the shorter installments; the first “voyage” is thoroughly enjoyable, innovative, thought-provoking, and fast-paced.  Whatever the length, as long as Lucas, producer Julia Lucas, and screenwriter Mark Shirrefs create them, I’ll be happy to join Jasper for the ride.

Sep 302005
 

A badger just wants to sleep in his den in a Scottish hill, but he is disturbed, first by cawing crows, and then by the military placing missiles below his home.  Written & Directed by: Sharon Colman, Produced by: Jamie Wolpert.  7 min

In a time of mega-corporate, 3-D spectaculars and low-rent, Internet flash pieces, Sharon Colman has taken the middle road.  Her traditionally animated short, Badgered, is simple, yet elegant, with water-colored skies, and an amazingly expressive badger.  It can be seen as a comical examination of troubling environmental and nuclear issues, or just a charming character study of a furry animal who wants nothing more than a nap.  Either way, it’s bound to amuse.

The idea for the tale of a much put-upon beastie came to Colman when thinking about the paradox of nuclear weapons in the apparently natural country side.

“Near my hometown in Scotland there’s a nuclear base where they store weapons under the hills. You know I’ve watched nuclear convoys drive past my home, and I’m a real country person. so the idea came from what would the animals under the ground think about sharing their home with a nuclear weapon. So I approached it with humour, and left a little environmental message underneath for anybody that wants it.”

While a supporter of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Colman keeps the politics to a minimum.  What stands out is how the badger can say so much by doing so little.  A blink here, a scratch there, and you know exactly what is going through his head.  There is no frantic motion or cluttered frames, just gentle movements that emphasizes his innocence.  This is a delightful, easy to digest short that may not break new ground, but still manages to be something special.

Created for £5000 as part of her Masters project at Britain’s National Film and Television school, Colman was shocked to find her film a 2005 Oscar nominee.  But this isn’t a first.  Nick Park’s Wallace and Gromit short, A Grand Day Out, was his project for NFTS and was nominated in 1991 (it lost to another of his films, Creature Comforts).  Badgered has stiff competition in the Best Animated Short Film category, and the smart money isn’t on it to win.  Win or lose, it’s an entertaining seven minutes.

Sep 302005
 

Ben Willis (Sean Biggerstaff, Oliver Wood in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets), a student attending art school, works the nightshift at a twenty-four hour supermarket.  Each employee finds a way to make the time pass.  Ben’s approach is counterintuitive as he stops time, and then draws all of the women, at least in his imagination.  Written & Directed by: Sean Ellis.  Produced by: Lene Bausager.  20 min

A deftly constructed voyage inside the mind of an artist stuck in a meaningless job, Cashback is part satire of modern life, part worshipful tribute to the beauty of the female form.  With a nearly hypnotic performance by Sean Biggerstaff, witty dialog, and a style born of conviction, both parts work far better than they have any right to.

Ben, who narrates in a self-induced trance, introduces us to the motley crew of the eight-hour nightshift.  They all share the goal of making it to another day.  Their tricks for enduring the boredom include scooter races, tricking women into buying sexually suggestive shampoo bottles, and dreaming.  It’s presented in a lightly humorous manner, but the metaphor is clear.  The supermarket is our day-to-day, drab, pointless lives, and each person’s trick for getting through the night represents a way of “getting by” in the real world without going mad.  Generally, these methods get little out of life, but sometimes surviving is the best you can do.

Things change when Ben explains how he gets by.  He removes the clothing of all the extraordinarily gorgeous women who come to the store, and sketches them.  While there is humor in his co-workers’ actions, Ben’s devotion to the perfection of the naked female body is presented without subtext.  It is pure and heartfelt (though if from Ben or from director Sean Ellis is unclear), and Ben’s adoration is catchy, pulling the viewer in to join the exaltation.  Well, I was already pretty much there with Ben, so he didn’t need to do much for me to become part of the celebration.  But I’m betting that a majority, of males at least, will be ready to sign on.

Ellis, primarily known for his edgy fashion photography in Britain, makes good use of his day-job skills in this, his second short (his first, Left Turn, was an atmospheric horror piece).  He certainly knows how to photograph women.  More than that, he is able to present them as beyond human, as divine, though also as cold and distant as gods would likely be.  Ben is much like a photographer, or like a fan of photography.  He sees something of real value, but he can’t interact with it.

For a film with very little activity, the twenty minutes fly by (unlike the night at the supermarket).  Ben is such a sympathetic character, and his colleagues are so amusing, that there is always something to grab you.  Entertaining while you watch, the theme (or perhaps the nude women, depending on your state of mind) will stick with you.

Ellis is planning to develop Cashback into a feature.  I’m curious to see what he comes up with since he seems to cover the material in the short.

Nominated for an Academy Award for Best Live-Action Short Film.

Sep 292005
 
three reels

Don Alejandro de la Vega’s (Antonio Banderas) unwillingness to retire from being Zorro strains his marriage to Elena (Catherine Zeta-Jones) and his relationship with his son, Joaquin (Adrian Alonso).  After receiving divorce papers, things get even worse, as a group of gunmen pressure locals to sell their land, a huge explosion rocks the woods, and Elena has started seeing a French Count (Rufus Sewell).  Somehow, these things all tie together, and if Zorro can sober up, he’s the man to find out how.

With Catherine Zeta-Jones in a corset, Antonio Banderas jumping from rooftop to rooftop, and first-class swordplay, it would be impossible to make a bad film. Banderas and Zeta-Jones have enough charm to carry a film about chartered public accountancy. These are movie stars, in the old sense of the word: Personalities that are immediately likable, captivating, and light up the screen.  Humor appears second nature to them, and passion…oh yes!  Zeta-Jones may be the finest screen-kisser in Hollywood history. Banderas might do OK there too, but honestly, I wasn’t paying much attention to him at the time.

And as the stars, they do carry this film, carry it like an enormous weight, slowing them down. Given all of the huge advantages, including good acting from the entire cast, decent (if obviously fake in places) special effects, sweeping sets, and the before mentioned swordplay and stars, this is startling weak film. The flaws are in directing, writing, and editing.

Some things are simple.  If you are making a swashbuckler, don’t stick a kid in it. It really is that simple. Luckily, Adrian Alonso does a fine job, and the scenes where the boy is jumping about, particularly battling with his schoolmaster, work surprisingly well.  The problem is when he isn’t active, as all the fast-moving fights and witty dialog (i.e. the heart of any swashbuckler) slow to a crawl; everyone discusses the child, argues about the child, wonders about the child, feels guilty about the child, rides to rescue the child, checks on the child, and generally dwells on child-rearing instead of swashing and buckling.

But of course, The Legend of Zorro is built around the kid, as this is a “family film,” and insufficiently trained writers don’t understand that children like movies even when they don’t star a child.  The family-friendly focus also guts one of the basic features of a swashbuckler.  As is explained in the The Mask of Zorro by the Zorro-in-Training to the Old-Zorro, when asked if he knows how to use a sword: “Yes. The pointy end goes into the other man.”  But not in this movie.  No one gets the pointy end. People fence for a bit, and then someone gets hit on the head by a sword hilt or punched or kicked.  And, like in superhero films, massive impact damage does no real harm. Two men get repeatedly hit with shovels (accompanied by 5.1 booming “wack!”), but it hardly bothers them.  Sure, the filmmakers were going for a PG rating, but the G-rated Adventures of Robin Hood had no trouble running a few people through (though in these more conservative times, that staple of my childhood would probably get a PG-13; sigh).

The plot concerns statehood for California and stealing land and building a railroad track and a secret society and an invention, and I didn’t care about any of it.  Zorro’s a good guy.  So is Elena. I just wanted to know who the bad guys were and that’s that.  Instead, half the movie plays out like a rather slow espionage thriller. Stranger still, it has a few spaghetti western moments, which are far too serious for the lighter scenes and gags that fill most of the film.

Martin Campbell directs as if he’s had eight cups of coffee. Even when the characters are calmly standing in one place, the camera frenetically dances about.  With such excellent stunts, I’d like to give Campbell a few downers, pull the camera back so that I can see what’s going on, and keep it in one general location for more than a few seconds.

With the exception of the non-fatal sword fights, most of the flaws could have been (and could still be) corrected in editing.  Chopping twenty or thirty minutes of unnecessary exposition, child-rearing guilt, and yawn-inducing subplots, and then choosing a few wide shots over close-ups, would create an engaging film.  Well, I guess I can hope for a Special Edition, Non-Director’s Cut DVD in 2006.

Back to Swashbucklers

Sep 282005
 
two reels

Warrior-turned-politician Berek (Mark Dymond) and low level mage Melora (Clemency Burton-Hill) discover that the evil undead Damadar (Bruce Payne) has returned to the land of the living by freeing an ancient orb of power that held a dragon god in check. Berek, with four other adventures, an elven wizard, a berserker girl, a thief, and a cleric, set off to retrieve the orb before the dragon and Damadar can destroy the land.

Ah, finally, a sequel to Dungeons & Dragons, because there was so much more to tell!

Based on the role-playing game of the same name, the original film was a witless mess, trying for cute anachronisms while sucking talent out of several normally skilled performers. It did have a few nice looking dragons.

The sequel dumps the pretext of having gifted actors, since it didn’t work the first time, and gets some no-names that do better than the first batch. It also attempts to be much truer to the game. The film plays out like a long night around the table with a few friends and some dice. As I watched, I could almost hear the Game Master describing what the characters were seeing. Like in the game, a party of adventurers made up of different classes and races (well, make that a bunch of Caucasians and one elf) go from underground labyrinthine dungeon to outdoor battles and then back into another dungeon. Anyone with a few of the D&D instruction manuals handy could look up what spells and skills the characters were using along the way. The most amusing scene, for a gamer, has the party entering a goblin shaman’s quarters and then one by one going through the game’s routine. The mage casts a “see magic” spell. The thief searches for, and finds several secret doors. When one is concealing a chest, he checks for traps, finds one, and then uses his rogue skills to overcome it before melting away the lock on the chest.  This should sound terribly familiar to gamers. And right there is what is good and bad about this film. All the fights and lock-picking and magic spells are fun, but more fun to do than watch. This isn’t a bad time, but why watch it when you could just call up a few friends, get out the drinks and chips, and play D&D for eight or nine hours? Not interested in D&D? Then you’re not going to be interested in this movie.

The characters are nothing special, but only the thief is annoying, and I got to know them a bit better than I expected for a low budget sword and sorcery flick. The cinematography is competent, and the scenery is pleasant. The map paintings/computer effects are good enough on the city to create a believable fantasy setting. Some of the creature effects are less satisfying, but passable. Combat varied, with one segment being unintentionally humorous: as the berserker girl holds off an army, poor camera angles show extras running past her with no apparent goal; twenty people or more must have passed her by before scooting out of the frame.

While generally entertaining at a low level, things fall apart at the end when it turns out that most of the actions in the film accomplished nothing and the terrifying enemy turns into a wimp with no explanation (hey, he could fight in the first film).

The best use I can imagine for this movie is as background for your pre-D&D gaming session pizza party, just to get everyone in the right mood.

Back to Fantasy

Sep 042005
 
three reels

Continuing the story of the spaceship Serenity, previously told in the short lived TV show Firefly, roguish Captain Mal Reynolds (Nathan Fillion), first mate Zoe (Gina Torres), her husband-pilot Wash (Alan Tudyk), insane psychic River (Summer Glau), her doctor-brother Simon (Sean Maher), plucky engineer Kaylee (Jewel Staite), and violent Jayne (Adam Baldwin), all return as outlaws trying to survive in the outer planets.  But the Alliance Government is frightened of River and sends The Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor) to capture her.  It is up to the crew of the Serenity, and old friends Shepard Book (Ron Glass) and the courtesan, Inara (Morena Baccarin), to keep River out of government hands, and finally discover why they want her so badly.

Thanks to the good folks at Escape Pod (actually, I believe “folk” is more accurate), I took my seat at the June 23rd pre-screening of Serenity.  Popcorn in hand, for this is most assuredly a popcorn kind of flick, I watched the screen light up, but not with opening credits.  Instead, I was greeted by the Charlie Brown-like face of writer-director-vunderkin Joss Whedon, who delivered a funny and moving monologue on why the film was made and the importance of the fanaticism of Firefly’s fans.  Much of what is good in Serenity could be seen in his little chat.  The creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and writer of Toy Story is a master at mixing humor with emotion and is probably the finest dialog composer working.  I assume this opening will be missing in September when Serenity has its wide release.  The strangely round head vanished and the film began.

This was a rough cut of the movie, but how rough I couldn’t tell.  The end credits were missing, and occasionally, the editing was uneven and color correction was flawed, but those last two may be a chosen technique to produce a gritty feel.  Might there still be changes to the story?  I hope so, as this is a good film that should have been great.

Whedon put a lot of effort into making the movie stand on its own, and in some ways he is successful.  In two opening scenes, a flashback of River being experimented upon, and a brilliant, dialog-heavy introduction to the Serenity’s crew in comical crisis, the universe and characters are economically spelled out.  I doubt if anyone who missed the TV show will have difficulty understanding what is happening.  However, Whedon does not establish the emotional connection to these people that he needs to.  When he does horrible things  to them—and he does—fans of Firefly will gasp, but newcomers will shrug.  Only Mal and River engage the audience’s sympathy purely from this film. The movie, like the show, is not interesting because of its plot or theme, but because of its characters, so, while Whedon and Universal Pictures may claim this is a film that anyone can enjoy, it really only works for the fans of Firefly.

So, for you fans, will you like it?  Yes.  There’s some prime humor, excellent fights, and a bit more spectacle than you are used to from the show.  But with so many characters, some are left aside.  The plot belongs to River and the character development is all Mal’s.  Jayne gets the best lines, but if you are primarily a fan of Kaylee, Zoe, Wash, or Inara, you’ll be disappointed.  No episode of the show forgot so many characters so completely.  And Book is hardly in the film.  Replacing a few of the close-ups of Mal displaying his unhappiness with a bit of interaction between the rest of the crew would bring some needed balance to the movie.

The story is interesting and twisted, answering questions about the world and River, but it doesn’t make a lick of sense.  For Mal’s late-in-the-film plan to work, space has to be a lot smaller than it is (massively smaller).  We also have to accept a computer nerd with a hacking complex the size of a small planet and that Reevers, who lack the intelligence to speak and the emotional control to avoid attacking anything in sight with a spear, somehow maintain a fleet with impressive firepower.  But plot is minor in a Joss Whedon production, and these flaws don’t detract a great deal from the film.

What does detract is several poorly executed attempts at building tension and making the events in the film appear important.  Whedon worked out early in Buffy the Vampire Slayer that he could ratchet up the intensity by killing someone.  Unfortunately, he apparently missed that there is more to it than just having someone drop over.  In Serenity, he bumps off people with no fanfare, and no drama.  Instead of highly charged, stirring moments, the deaths only show the desperation of the author trying to shove in something so that the film will seem bigger than the TV series.  He ends up making major changes to the Firefly universe that pull much of the fun out of it without supplying any meaning or emotion other than irritation.

Even with the flaws, this is still an extension of Firefly, so it can’t help but be worth watching.  It has a group of excellent actors delivering first class lines.  But I expect more from a feature than I do from an episode of a TV show, and I didn’t get it.  Serenity isn’t at the bottom if I were to compare it against each of the weekly shows, nor is it at the top. “Out of Gas” (where Serenity breaks down and a dying Mal must fix it) and “Objects in Space” (where River is hunted by an eccentric bounty hunter) both have more emotion, more development, and more humor than Serenity.  Plus, the feature borrows too heavily from  “Objects in Space.”

Yes, you should plop down your quarters to see this picture, but not before you pick up the DVD of Firefly.  And if you can’t do both, buy the series.

 Reviews, Space Opera Tagged with: