Movie Review: Cloud Atlas

Cloud Atlas

Directed by: Tom Tykwer & Andy Wachowski & Lana Wachowski.

Written by: Tom Tykwer & Andy Wachowski & Lana Wachowski based on the novel by David Mitchell.

Starring: Tom Hanks (Dr. Henry Goose / Hotel Manager / Isaac Sachs / Dermot Hoggins / Cavendish Look-a-Like Actor / Zachry), Halle Berry (Native Woman / Jocasta Ayrs / Luisa Rey / Indian Party Guest / Ovid / Meronym), Jim Broadbent (Captain Molyneux / Vyvyan Ayrs / Timothy Cavendish / Korean Musician / Prescient 2), Hugo Weaving (Haskell Moore / Tadeusz Kesselring / Bill Smoke / Nurse Noakes / Boardman Mephi / Old Georgie), Jim Sturgess (Adam Ewing / Poor Hotel Guest / Megan's Dad / Highlander / Hae-Joo Chang / Adam / Zachry Brother-in-Law), Doona Bae (Tilda / Megan's Mom / Mexican Woman / Sonmi-451 / Sonmi-351 / Sonmi Prostitute), Ben Whishaw (Cabin Boy / Robert Frobisher / Store Clerk / Georgette / Tribesman), Keith David (Kupaka / Joe Napier / An-kor Apis / Prescient), James D'Arcy (Young Rufus Sixsmith / Old Rufus Sixsmith / Nurse James / Archivist), Xun Zhou (Talbot / Hotel Manager / Yoona-939 / Rose), Susan Sarandon (Madame Horrox / Older Ursula / Yusouf Suleiman / Abbess), Hugh Grant (Rev. Giles Horrox / Hotel Heavy / Lloyd Hooks / Denholme Cavendish / Seer Rhee / Kona Chief).

No matter what you think of Cloud Atlas, you at least have to admit that this is one of the most daringly ambitious films of the year. I understand the people who think it’s a mess or bordering on incoherent (I’m not sure how I would have fared in piecing everything together had I not recently finished David Mitchell’s novel) or who simply think the film is overlong and flawed and fails to live up to what it sets out to do. I don’t necessarily agree with all of that – some of it, yes – but what I don’t understand is how some are outright mocking the film. The Wachowskis and Tom Tykwer decided to take an enormous risk in bringing this novel to the screen, and have crafted a huge, ambitious and daring film that is full of wonderful moments. Whether or not it all quite adds up (and for me, it mostly does) is almost beside the point – you have to at least admire their daring in even attempting to make Cloud Atlas. American film would be much better off if more filmmakers were as fearless as these three.

In the 1840s, Adam Ewing (Jim Sturgess) is travelling by boat from the South Pacific back to his native San Francisco – and tries to help a stowaway slave as well as fight off a parasitic worm making his way into his brain with the help of Dr. Goose (Tom Hanks). In 1936, a young British composer Robert Frobisher (Ben Whishaw) writes letters to his lover Rufus Sixsmith (James D’Arcy) from the home of Vyvyan Ayers (Jim Broadbent), an aging composer who needs Frobisher’s help if he’s ever going to write music again. In the 1970s, Luisa Rey (Halle Berry) meets an aging Sixsmith on an elevator, and he gives her the clues to help unlock a nuclear conspiracy. In 2012, a book publisher Timothy Cavendish (Broadbent) has to hide out from some thugs, and finds himself in a Kafka-esque nursing home being held against his will. In 2143 in Neo-Seoul, a Fabricant Somu-451 (Doona Bae) discovers the truth about herself and her position in life, and tells it to an archivist before she is to be executed. And 106 Winters After the Fall, Valleysman Zachary (Hanks) helps the strange, foreign woman Meronym (Berry) find the secrets of the past, which could save both of their people’s futures.

In Mitchell’s novel, these stories were told in ascending order – climaxing with Zachery, and then works their way back down to end with Adam Ewing. That structure worked remarkably well in the book, as Mitchell daringly mixed genres, and links the stories to each other, with a character in each story discovering the story previously told – and thinking it may well be fiction. The book also valued language, and through the course of the novel, we see it devolve, from the prim and proper sentences to Adam Ewing, to the barely coherent ramblings of Zachary, and then back again. As the novel progresses, you start to see how the stories mirror each other – all touching upon the same themes. The novel has many accomplishments, and is truly one of the most original works of fiction of the last decade.

The Wachowskis and Tykwer decide on an even more daring, and cinematic, way of telling these stories however by jumbling them up – jumping back and forth between them for the entire almost three hour running time – linking individual scenes that correspond with each other. Although Tykwer directed three of the segments himself – the Frobisher, Rey and Cavendish stories, and the Wachowskis the other three, Ewing, Sonmi and Zachary – they never feel like the work of different directors, as the come together as seamlessly as is possible given the structure of the movie. Casting the same actors to play roles in each segment was a stroke of genius, as it provides some dramatic continuity between the stories. It is certainly true that not all the roles that all the actors play come together seamlessly to create whole characters, for the most part it works. Particularly for Hanks, who is a man who struggles with doing the right thing throughout – there is a definite progression for his multiple characters. Hugo Weaving is the opposite – an evil, amoral character every time he shows up. The rest is more of a mixed bag – although the two best performances in the movie are by Ben Whishaw, who likely doesn’t leave much of an impression in his small roles, but makes Frobisher into a tragic, romantic, poetic hero and Doona Bae, who as the fabricant Sonmi has the most emotional journey of any one segment – which is saying something as this segment has also been pumped up by the Wachowskis to give the movie some action. Also impressive though was Jim Broadbent, who seems to be having a blast as Timothy Cavendish and Hugh Grant, who shows up as characters who seemingly have more power than they actually do. And Halle Berry does a fine job being a spunky heroine – especially in the 1970s segment.

The film is also an impressive visual achievement – with wonderful special effects, art direction and costume design that gives each segment their own distinct look and feel. I was impressed by the cinematography – by Frank Griebe for the Tykwer segments and John Toll for the Wachowskis, although the entire movie has the free flowing camera style that connects each segment. The editing by Alexander Berner is undeniably the most complex editing job of the year. I was also surprised to learn that the score, which often ties the whole movie together, was also a team effort by Tykwer along with Reinhold Heil & Johnny Klimek.

To put it bluntly, I was in awe when I watched the movie, marveled by the impressive way this was all put together, and how the directors got the cast of stars to buy into the roles, and dive headlong in which certainly ran the risk of making them look stupid. I was film with admiration for the movie for its entire running length – yes, it is almost three hours long, but for me the time flew by – I wasn’t bored for a second.

And yet, I also have to admit that Cloud Atlas has more than its share of flaws. Like I said, overall I think the casting of same actors in various roles was a stroke of genius – and I see how some of them connect to each other. But other time, I have to admit I’m at a loss. I know why Sturgess is playing both Ewing and Hae-Joo Chang, the “Union” man who Sonmi falls in love with, but I have no idea why he shows up as a Poor Hotel Guest or a Scottish thug in other segments. I get how Luisa Rey and Meronym connect to each other for Berry, but have no clue why she shows up as Jacosta Ayers or some of her other characters. And other than Frobisher, it seems like they’re making poor Whishaw play the most meaningless roles in the other segments for now reason. While I’m not offended, as some are, about actors playing different races – after all, if Koreans are offended because many white and black cast members show up as Koreans in Neo-Seoul, than I suppose whites, Mexicans, blacks and women should be offended as well, since different races play those characters as well. After all, part of the theme of the movie is what makes us who we are is much bigger than race. Having said that, while I admire much of the makeup work in the movie, some of the Korean makeup is a distraction.

And then we have to deal with what the movie is actually saying – and I have to admit that the message is jumbled and messy, and I don’t think ever quite comes together the way the Wachowskis and Tykwer were hoping it would. The film is filled with a lot of new age spiritual hokum, that I personally don’t believe in, but then again, I don’t prescribe to the religious beliefs on display in Terence Malick’s The Tree of Life either, and I still think that film is a masterpiece. The difference is that Malick’s message is confidently told, and comes through during the course of the film. While the message here is muddled.

Yet the pros of Cloud Atlas certainly outweigh its flaws. The film is a daring, original, technical marvel – one that takes huge chances, and mainly pulls it off. I don’t want to have a film culture where a movie like Cloud Atlas, which is so hugely ambitious, is mocked. Hate Cloud Atlas all you want – I understand the reasons – and yet I have to say that a film like this deserves respect. To me, it’s one of the must see films of the year for anyone who values ambitious films. You may hate Cloud Atlas, but I don’t think you can easily dismiss it.

Movie Review: Antiviral

Antiviral
Directed by: Brandon Cronenberg.
Written by: Brandon Cronenberg.
Starring: Caleb Landry Jones (Syd March), Sarah Gadon (Hannah Geist), Malcolm McDowell (Dr. Abendroth), Douglas Smith (Edward Porris), Joe Pingue (Arvid), Nicholas Campbell (Dorian), Salvatore Antonio (Topp), Elitsa Bako (Vera), Milton Barnes (Salesman), Katie Bergin (Candyce).

Having the last name Cronenberg is probably both a blessing and curse for Brandon Cronenberg. Being the son of David Cronenberg, the best director to ever come out of Canada, means that in Canada’s small film industry, doors will more readily open for you than they would for someone else. Yet, the name also carries with it baggage – and more importantly expectations. I don’t think that no matter how made Antiviral that it would a “good” film, but I do know that myself (and others) might not so readily compare it to the work of David Cronenberg had it not been made by his son. Yes, the plot of the movie sounds like something David would have made when he was younger, but the connection would have been more tenuous if someone else had made the film. The result is a movie where you admire the intention and effort much more than the execution. I want to see what Brandon Cronenberg does next, even if I have to ultimately conclude that Antiviral doesn’t achieve what it sets out. It’s a good try though.

The film takes place in the not too distant future, where our culture’s celebrity fixation has grown to an even more unhealthy level than it currently is. In this society, there are companies who can infect you with the same virus your favorite celebrity has – you can suffer from the same cold, the same flu, even the same herpes as the object of your obsession if you want to. In addition, there are places where you can go and buy cloned cell steaks – so you can essentially eat the muscle tissue of a celebrity if you want to. And all of this has come to be perceived as normal.

Syd March (Caleb Landry Jones) works as a salesman selling these viruses to the people who come into his sterile, bright, all white office. He is a quiet, awkward little man, not as easy with chitchat as the other people who work for this large, faceless corporation. But it’s possible it’s because he almost always finds himself sick. Knowing there is a black market for these viruses; Syd injects himself with the latest viruses, goes home, draws his own blood and on a stolen machine, recreates the virus. He cannot get the virus out any other way – and this pays well. All he has to do is be sick most of the time.

One of the company’s biggest “sellers” is Hannah Geist (Sarah Gadon). Whatever she is supposedly famous for is never mentioned – maybe an actress, a singer or someone famous for simply being famous. She has an “exclusive” contract with his company, selling her viruses just to them. Syd is sent to collect the latest of these from her, as she lies sick in her hotel room. He draws her blood, but before getting back to the office, he injects some it into himself – to save some time, and to ensure that he is the one who makes the money on the black market off this virus. The next day on the news he hears disturbing news – Hannah Geist is dead of some strange virus. And now, of course, he has it too, and has to find a way to cure himself – or die.

Depending on your tolerance for this type of story, the above plot description probably either sounds really interesting, or really stupid. To me, I found it interesting – at least reading the outline in the TIFF Program. The film’s obsession certainly falls in line with David Cronenberg’s obsession with body horror movies – where the threat to the protagonist does not come from some exterior threat, but something growing inside them (this is true of many of Cronenberg’s earlier movies from Shivers to Rabid to The Brood to Scanners to The Dead Zone to The Fly, and continues, in more subtle ways, throughout much of his work). I think our celebrity obsessed culture is ripe for mockery, and this type of film should be a fascinating exploration of the subject. Unfortunately, I don’t think Brandon Cronenberg ever truly thought this all out – he came up with an interesting idea, and then does very little with it. Based on his own short film, Broken Tulips, Antiviral feels like a short film stretched beyond all reason into a feature. So we get many repetitive scenes and scene after scene of exposition, since the plot is so needlessly complex the movie has to stop itself every few minutes to explain what the hell is happening. It certainly doesn’t help that in the lead role Caleb Landry Jones is pretty much a zombie – sleep walking through his role, seemingly trying to go for quiet intensity that instead comes across as silly. And the rest of the cast are given such thin roles that there is nothing that can be done with them – the best being Sarah Gadon, who at least is supposed to be a cipher in the film.

Still, Antiviral shows tremendous promise from Cronenberg – much more as a director than as a writer. The movie is full of striking images, that grow more and more disturbing as the movie goes along, culminating in a one of the more disturbing and sickening images of any film this year. I want to see what Brandon Cronenberg does next – where he goes from here. But I also think that he would be better served by taking on a movie that doesn’t bare quite so much resemblance to the movies that his father has already mastered.

Movie Review: Looper

Looper

Directed by: Rian Johnson.

Written by: Rian Johnson.

Starring: Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Joe), Bruce Willis (Old Joe), Emily Blunt (Sara), Paul Dano (Seth), Noah Segan (Kid Blue), Piper Perabo (Suzie), Jeff Daniels (Abe), Pierce Gagnon (Cid), Summer Qing (Old Joe's Wife), Tracie Thoms (Beatrix), Frank Brennan (Old Seth), Garret Dillahunt (Jesse).

There’s a scene in Looper where Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) sits down with his older self (Bruce Willis) in a diner and starts asking questions. Old Joe says “Let’s not start talking about time travel shit, or else we’ll end up diagraming everything out with straws”. That’s good advice, not just to Young Joe, but the audience watching Looper as well. I guarantee you that you won’t have to look very hard on the internet to find someone who will point out all the time travel contradictions in Looper – and to find others who disagree with them, and “prove” them wrong, only to have someone else correct them. This is true of pretty much every time travel movie ever made. But delving too deep into all that crap would, for me anyway, spoil the fun of Looper – which is a great time travel story. It sets up its own rules, and doesn’t really violate them in any way that became immediately apparent to me. Looper, like all time travel films, requires the audience to take a leap of faith for it to work at all. But if you take that leap, than Looper rewards you handsomely.

Joe is a Looper. What that means is that although it is 2044, he works for the mob from 2074. When they need someone killed, they send them back in time; Joe kills them and disposes of the body. Time travel is highly illegal in 2074, and hasn’t been invented yet in 2044, so eventually the mob will decide to end the contract with their loopers. The loopers have no idea when this will happen – they just know it will eventually. What happens when they end their contract is simple – they end up killing their future selves. Because everyone who gets sent back is bound and has a hood over their head, the loopers don’t know they’ve just killed their future selves until they go to the body to get their payment, which has been strapped to their victims – in place of the regular silver bars are gold ones. You’re now down being a looper, and know that in 30 years, you’ll be sent back in time and you’ll kill yourself. The profession, as Joe admits, doesn’t attract many forward thinkers. The consequences of NOT killing your future self are dire. But when Joe comes face to face with his future self – something is off. He isn’t bound, and has no hood on. Joe hesitates, and that’s all the time Old Joe needs to get away. I could explain more of the plot, but it would fruitless – and unfair to you, as one of the pleasures of the movie is the unexpected twists and turns it takes. Needless to say, Young Joe is being pursued by his employers as he pursues Old Joe – who is also pursued by Joe’s employers, and Joe himself. How Young Joe ends up on a farm, with Sara (Emily Blunt) and her young son, and what they mean, I’ll leave it for you to discover.

Looper is writer/director Rian Johnson’s third film – and his best to date. His debut Brick was an immensely entertaining high school noir, where all the characters talked like they were the stars of a 1940s classic noir. His follow-up with the caper comedy, The Brothers Bloom, in which Johnson seemed to be trying too hard to be Wes Anderson, instead of just being himself. Looper is his first film where he seems to be working on his own level – that isn’t as beholden to his influences as his previous films were. This is intelligent sci-fi, a movie that takes itself and its implications seriously. It is also a stylish action movie – with more violence, that at times is disturbingly realistic even when it seems outlandish. If his first two films showed promise, than Looper delivers on that promise.

The acting also helps a great deal. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who has been with Johnson since the beginning, delivers an excellent performance as Young Joe – even under all the makeup and special effects applied to his face to make him look more like Bruce Willis. He may start the movie as a soulless killer and drug addict, but he transforms throughout the movie – into someone willing to see the big picture. As Old Joe, Bruce Willis is perfectly cast. Johnson doesn’t spend anywhere near as much time with Old Joe, so having an actor like Willis – who we are used to seeing as a kick ass action star, does some of the work for him – and Willis does the rest. Often, Willis sleepwalks through roles, but not here. Emily Blunt is also terrific as the young, single mother – devoted to her child. The supporting cast – Paul Dano as Gordon-Levitt’s sniveling friend and Jeff Daniels as the mob boss in particular – are also terrific fun.

The real star here though is Johnson – especially his screenplay, which is one of the more original works of the year. This is an intelligent sci-fi action movie – that tackles some interesting issues, while still managing to be a superb, mainstream entertainment.

Movie Review: Total Recall

Total Recall
Directed by: Len Wiseman.
Written by: Kurt Wimmer and Mark Bomback and Ronald Shusett & Dan O'Bannon based on the short story by Philip K. Dick.
Starring: Colin Farrell (Douglas Quaid / Hauser), Kate Beckinsale (Lori Quaid), Jessica Biel (Melina), Bryan Cranston (Cohaagen), Bokeem Woodbine (Harry), Bill Nighy (Matthias), John Cho (McClane), Will Yun Lee (Marek).

I have never been one of those people who automatically dislike remakes. I actually kind of like seeing different directors takes on the same material, and different actors takes on the same characters. Yes, Hollywood relies too heavily on remakes, and the main reason they remake popular films is money – but that doesn’t necessarily mean all remakes are bad. When I heard they were remaking Total Recall, I was hopeful. I do really like Paul Verhoeven’s over the top, violent 1991 version with Arnold Schwartzenegger – that film went for broke, and was a supreme entertainment. And yet, I feel that Philip K. Dick’s short story, We Can Remember for You Wholesale, has a lot of ideas that Verhoeven’s film merely touches on, and doesn’t explore fully. I was hopeful for a more intelligent version of the story. Unfortunately, this Total Recall pays even less attention to the ideas in Dick’s short story. It is nothing but one action sequence after another. They are handled well enough, but the movie never really convinced me to care about its characters – they are even less defined than they were in Verhoeven’s movie.

Total Recall takes place in a dystopian, not-too-distant future, where only two countries – The British Federation and The Colony (Australia) still exist. The richer Brits take advantage of the Colony – who are tired of being exploited. There is a rebel fringe group, led by Matthias (Bill Nighy) who is trying to get equality for his people – but President Cohaagen (Bryan Cranston) is trying to quash it.

In this world, Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell) is a nobody – a factory drone who is having weird dreams, featuring himself as some sort of spy working with a beautiful woman, Melina (Jessica Biel). He has no idea where these dreams are coming from – and does not tell his wife Lori (Kate Beckinsale) everything about them. He just feels like there is something missing in his life. He has heard about a company called Rekall, which will implant memories into your head as if you lived them yourself. He decides to go – and that’s where all hell breaks loose. None of them memories he chooses to be implanted in his head can be real in his own life – or else it will cause him to snap and go crazy. He chooses the spy package – and that’s where things go wrong. The scan of his brain shows that he is in fact a spy – and that’s when the police show up and try to arrest him – and acting on instinct, Quaid takes them all done. Needless to say, this confuses Quaid to no end who tries to piece together who he actually is – and it gets even more confusing when it turns out that no one he knows turns out to be who he thinks they are either.

Directed by Len Wiseman, the film has the same problem that his other films – the first two Underworld movies and Live Free or Die Hard – had. All of his films have a good, if directive visual look to them and even an interesting premise to them. But all the movies are merely skin deep. It’s clear in Total Recall that Wiseman wanted to be away from the neon, colorful visual look of Verhoeven’s original – which was probably a good idea because no one does those quite like Verhoeven anyway. The problem is it seems like he has watched another Philip K. Dick adaptation one too many times – Blade Runner. The film wants so badly to recreate the world that Ridley Scott did so brilliantly in that 1982 film, and while the buildings and the cars look like they did in Scott’s film, they don’t have the same lived in feel of Scott’s film. In Blade Runner, the setting felt like a real place, and in Total Recall, it feels like a set.

I could complain about the performances in the movie – none of which are really good – but I don’t see much of a point, because I don’t think the actors really couldn’t have done anything more with the roles anyway. Farrell, who has made some great films in recent years, seems to have been cast more for his physicality than his acting abilities (the same could be said of his work in The New World and Miami Vice, but at least Malick and Mann knew how to use Farrell in this way – Wiseman doesn’t). Jessica Biel, as the “the good girl” and Kate Beckinsale as “the bad girl” really have nothing to do but look good – which they do. Bryan Cranston continues to show up in nearly every other movie coming out – but none of his film work can equal the brilliance he shows every week on Breaking Bad (the only one that has come close is his brilliant supporting turn in Drive). The film wants him to be a snarling villain – which he does – but nothing in the performance suggest an actual, human character underneath.

 
The bottom line on Total Recall is that it does justice to neither the great short story by Philip K. Dick nor the great action movie directed by Paul Verhoeven. Doing a remake is a double edged sword, because on one hand, you already have a pre-sold brand – a built in an audience for your movie – and on the other hand, there are expectations placed on the film to live up to the original. Total Recall doesn’t live up to anything – in fact, it makes you wish the theater you are in would just place the original.

Movie Review: Prometheus

Prometheus *** ½ 
Directed by: Ridley Scott.
Written by: Jon Spaihts & Damon Lindelof.
Starring: Noomi Rapace (Elizabeth Shaw), Michael Fassbender (David), Charlize Theron (Meredith Vickers), Idris Elba (Janek), Guy Pearce (Peter Weyland), Logan Marshall-Green (Charlie Holloway), Sean Harris (Fifield), Rafe Spall (Millburn), Emun Elliott (Chance), Benedict Wong (Ravel), Kate Dickie (Ford), Patrick Wilson (Shaw's Father), Lucy Hutchinson (Young Shaw).

Ridley Scott’s Prometheus is one of the best sci-fi movies in recent memory. Not only that, even though the film was billed as a prequel to Alien, it stands on its own as a great film – it is not reliant on nostalgia for its greatness like many long running series are. Scott didn’t like this being considered a prequel to Alien, but says it is more of a film that takes place in the same universe as Alien and its sequels, but may not really be a part of the same story. Yes, you walk in expecting another Alien movie – but the movie quickly subverts and exceeds those expectations. Even now, days after I saw the film, I cannot stop thinking about it.

When two scientists – Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green) discover cave painting from thousands of years ago which all have the same pattern. These societies had no interaction with each other, and yet they seem to be pointing in the same direction – out into deep space. They scientists, with generous help from the Weyland Corporation, figure out what planet these cave painting seem to be pointing to – and an expedition is mounted. Shaw and Holloway feel that they may have discovered humanity`s creators. The Weyland Corporation sees an opportunity to make money. The scientists, and a crew that includes the icy cold, mysterious Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron), and robot David (Michael Fassbender), who has modeled himself after Peter O`Toole in Lawrence of Arabia, head off to that distant planet – and as you can probably guess, things do not go as planned.

The original Alien was really a horror movie, with science fiction elements. The sequel, Aliens directed by James Cameron, was more of an action movie, with science fiction elements. The great thing, to me at least, is that Prometheus is real science fiction through and through. This is a film full of ideas about where humans come from and why we exist. Yes, there are horror elements – a couple of bloody scenes that are very tough to take (there is a self-inflicted surgical scene that is among the more disturbing scenes in recent memory), but at its most basic level, this is classic science fiction stuff – done with intelligence, which is rare in this day of age. Even the best of the recent sad stock of science fiction usually gives way to action at some point – but even when Prometheus becomes a series of violent episodes at the end; it retains that mystery of the unknown that drives great science fiction. We know this from the first scene, which gives us a very brief explanation of perhaps how life on earth began – and, depending on how you look at it, may just answer the bigger questions that the movie asks. Like many great science fiction stories, Prometheus asks more questions than it answers – but that is part of what makes Prometheus so interesting.

The performances in the movie are mostly very good. Charlize Theron is good as mysterious and cold Meredith Vickers – we know she has secrets, but she is good at hiding them – and making us look closely at her seemingly expressionless face to try and figure them out. Noomi Rapace, the original Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, is excellent in what is essentially the new Ripley character, as the tough as nails heroine, who is still sympathetic and human. The best performance though belongs to Michael Fassbender, who has the difficult task of playing the robot. Unlike previous Alien movies, there is no secret that Fassbender’s David is a robot – and I think that works well for the movie, as it allows a more philosophical debate about creation to be had involving David. Fassbender does an excellent job making his emotionless character the most fascinating one in the film.

But let’s be honest – it is the visuals that truly make Prometheus special. Ridley Scott has always been a gifted director in terms of his visual style – and blending special effects with everything else, so it becomes part of the movie, and does not overtake it. And this is one of his best visual achievements. The ship, and the planet, where most of the movie takes place are two distinctive visual environments. This movie is a visual triumph above all else – but the story and characters never take a back seat.

Prometheus may not be a movie like The Tree of Life, another movie that looks at humanity’s creation, but then Ridley Scott and Terrence Malick on working on different levels. What Prometheus is however is one of the most intelligent of all recent summer blockbusters. Yes, it has the action and the special effects to keep the masses happy – but there is something much more going on underneath the surface. You may not see a better blockbuster this summer.

Men in Black 3 (3D)

It's quite evident when movies are made simply to make money. Okay, most movies are made to make money, but sometimes it seems that a film is almost forced upon the audience. Men in Black 3 is one of those films.

The films brings together, once again, Will Smith's Agent J and Tommy Lee Jones' Agent K, and adds on the element of time travel to their book of adventures. As Will Smith travels back in time to save Tommy Lee Jones' character from getting killed in the present, thankfully the makers went ahead with casting Josh Brolin as a younger Agent K rather than using CGI. Besides the time travel element, the story takes on a more emotion and serious path, which is also the most obvious direction it could have taken, almost completing the "cycle of life" linking it back to the original Men in Black. It's a much stronger story, but one that proves to be disappointing due to the lack of originality in the execution of the film.

10 years too late, the film brings about absolutely nothing new to the previous two films. The humor is exactly the same that the audience has been seeing till now. The "normal personal" turning out to be an alien has been done to death in the films. Even worse, celebrities’ turning out to be aliens is a joke that no longer amuses or fascinates. There are no real additions to the gadgets or supporting characters. What is really unfortunate is that even thought the film travels back in time to the 1960s, it fails to make the most of the time period. It remains so caught up in the story and focused on the two main leads that nothing around them really matters. Although on the positive side, Josh Brolin shines as the younger Agent K and it seems that Will Smith miraculously hasn’t aged a tiny bit over the years.

All in all the film lacks the WOW factor that the first two films had. Now, it might prove to be interesting for the newer generation who were too small to remember the first two films, but then the story is such that it only makes sense if you have seen at least the first film, which came out in 1997.

I do hope that this is the last of the series. Unless, Will Smith is secretly preparing his children to take over the franchise and we will be seeing a reboot of the film in the future. Actually, in that case, I really hope this is the last we have heard of the Men in Black.

I was also a bit irritated since I had no choice but to view the film in 3D since the local cinema was not playing the 2D version (actually they were in the dubbed Hindi version), but once again 3D is nothing to talk about and is your average run-of-the-mill 3D that is becoming ever so common in mediocre films.

Rating 2/5 Stars

   

Movie Review: Womb

Womb **

Directed by: Benedek Fliegauf.

Written By: Benedek Fliegauf.

Starring: Eva Green (Rebecca), Matt Smith (Thomas), Lesley Manville (Judith), Peter Wight (Ralph), István Lénárt (Henry), Hannah Murray (Monica), Ruby O. Fee (Rebecca - 9 years), Tristan Christopher (Thomas - 10),  Jesse Hoffmann (Thomas - 5 years).

Note: I saw Womb nearly two years ago at TIFF – and this review was written a few days after seeing it. I see no indication that any changes in the movie have been made since then, but figured I should mention it anyway just in case the movie was re-edited from the very disappointing version I saw two years ago.

Womb is one of those movies whose concept is so good that you simply cannot believe that the end result doesn’t work. The film takes place in a small, beachfront town – although mainly in winter, where the place is even more desolate – and opens with a friendship between 9 year old Rebecca and 10 year old Tommy – a friendship that grew incredibly close until Rebecca and her family moved away. Now, more than a decade later, Rebecca returns, and finds Tommy still there – and the two are drawn back together almost immediately. The only sense we get that this is a sci-fi film, set in the near future, is Tommy mentioning something called “cyber-prostitution”, which involves clones. It is on their way to a protest against this, early in their renewed relationship, where Tommy is hit and killed by a car. And this is where the story really begins.

Rebecca (now played by Eva Green) has some of Tommy’s DNA, and decides that she wants to give birth to his clone, and raise him as her own son. But it’s clearly fairly early on that she has more than motherly feelings toward this new Tommy. Green does an excellent, and unsettlingly job, of staring at this child with a mixture of motherly and sexual feelings. On Tommy’s part, he doesn’t know the secret of his birth (which she hides for many reasons, including the fact that clones are viewed as second class citizens by everyone) – but he looks at Rebecca with that same mixture – something oddly sexual for child his age (and it gets truly creepy in one scene on the beach while the two are playing and Tommy essentially gets on top of his mother, and for lack of a better term dry humps her).

The movie raises disturbing questions about sexual ethics. Technically, although Green gave birth to this new Tommy, they are not actually related. But is she raising this child simply because she thinks the world will be a better place with this version of Tommy, or because she is trying to get her soul mate back. They movie ventures into truly disturbing territory in its final scenes – where new Tommy is now in his early 20s, and while Green must surely be in her mid-40s by then, she doesn’t look like she has aged that much. It is here where the mixed up feeling truly come out.

I realize now that I have made this movie sound a whole lot more interesting than it actually is (which is why I choose to see it at TIFF in the first place). The film is painfully slow, as director Benedek Fliegauf favors long unbroken shots of his characters in and around their abandoned beach house, essentially looking at each other. Yes, this looks carry a disturbing quality to them, but Fliegauf doesn’t seem to have much more on his mind for most of the running time then these looks, which he repeats far too often for them to be effective. He really seems to be treading water at times, waiting to get to his conclusion when he can really let loose. There are many places Fliegauf could have taken this film – and although he choose an interesting one in the sexual angle – there are other questions that are left unanswered – disturbing sequences like when Tommy 2.0 buries his surprising lifelike toy, even as it moves and makes sounds, suggests that Fliegauf may be making a case of nature vs. nurture – and that this new Tommy will be an entirely different person because of the way Rebecca raises him, compared to his original parents – a darker, more violent person perhaps. But there is no follow through on this, no follow through on Tommy’s original parents who are initially reluctant to agree then go away for 2 decades before showing up, and saying nothing.

There are striking images in the film, it raises such interesting questions and Green does a remarkable job of conveying her confused feelings toward her son/lover that I really wanted to like Womb. But the end result is a long, slow journey that takes for too long getting to where it’s going.

DVD Review: In Time

In Time ** ½
Directed by: Andrew Niccol.
Written by: Andrew Niccol.
Starring:  Justin Timberlake (Will Salas), Amanda Seyfried (Sylvia Weis), Cillian Murphy (Raymond Leon), Vincent Kartheiser (Philippe Weis), Olivia Wilde (Rachel Salas), Johnny Galecki (Borel), Alex Pettyfer (Fortis), Matt Bomer (Henry Hamilton).

I know I’m not the first person to say this, but I have always thought that if you’re remake a movie, you probably shouldn’t remake a classic, that was perfect to begin with, but rather a movie that had promise that for whatever reason just didn’t work the first time around. If studios would do that, I would suggest that someone remake In Time, because the idea behind the movie is brilliant, but the execution of that idea just isn’t up to the idea itself. The idea of currency literally being replaced by time – so that the rich can live forever, where the poor literally live day to day, under the constant threat of death. This near future, science fiction film could not possibly be timelier. And yet, In Time never quite figures out what to do with this premise – and instead of crafting an intelligent film, it devolves into action movie clichés. Too bad, because this movie had the potential to be great.

The film stars Justin Timberlake as Will Salas, a poor factory worker who has to go to work every day just to earn enough time to get back to work the next day. In this future, everyone has been genetically engineered to stop aging at the age of 25 – until then, you’re clock doesn’t wind down at all. When you hit 25, you get one year of time. The poor need to use this time to pay off their parents debts, so that shortly after they hit 25, they are living day to day. The rich can pass their time down to their kids, so that they can live forever. Everyone is split into certain districts, based on their time remaining – and it costs so much to move between zones, that no one ever does it. But one day Will meets a rich man in a bar – with over a century of time on his arm (which is where your countdown clock is located). Will saves him from some people who want to steal that time from him. To pay him back, the rich man gives Will all his time – killing himself. Will, angry at the system (which had just allowed his mother to die), decides to travel to the richest district to get revenge.

There are great ideas running through In Time – at least beneath the surface. Will quickly draws the attention of the timekeepers (led by Cillian Murphy`s Raymond Leon), who track him down quickly. But by then, Will has connected with Sylvia Weis (Amanda Seyfried), the daughter of the richest man in the world. Sylvia essentially becomes his Patty Hearst – first a hostage Will uses to get away from the timekeepers, but soon joins Will in trying to bring down the system.

 
Andrew Niccol is a talented writer and director. His Gattaca was one of the best science fiction films of the 1990s, and his Lord of War was a grossly under rated, very entertaining film about an amoral arms dealer, who wins. In Time is more like his Simone, which was also a film with a brilliant premise – a Hollywood director (Al Pacino) who creates a virtual actress so he doesn’t have to deal with the ego of other actresses, only to find the virtual star becomes a huge celebrity that overshadows him. That film aimed to mock our celebrity obsessed cultures, and although that target should be easy, Simone missed the mark. In Time is like that as well. In a year where the Occupy Wall Street Movement made headlines, and the chasm between the rich and the poor grew wider and wider, a movie like In Time should have easily tapped into that anger. But instead, In Time devolves into an action movie – with bank heists, shootouts and car chases galore, that takes center stage and pushes the ideas into the background. Too bad, because the idea at the heart off In Time deserves a better movie.

Movie Review: Chronicle

Chronicle ***
Directed by: Josh Trank.
Written by: Max Landis.
Starring: Dane DeHaan (Andrew Detmer), Alex Russell (Matt Garetty), Michael B. Jordan (Steve Montgomery), Michael Kelly (Richard Detmer), Ashley Hinshaw (Casey Letter), Bo Petersen (Karen Detmer), Anna Wood (Monica).

Chronicle is an inventive new addition to the found footage genre – films like The Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield or Paranormal Activity – which are films supposedly shot the characters themselves who feel the need to document their every move. I find that sometimes, in these movies, I cannot help but wonder why the person filming never stops – Cloverfield in particular had this problem, because if you’re under attack by giant monsters, why the hell would you want to hobble yourself with a camera? But in Chronicle, it makes sense. The movie centers on three teenagers of the You Tube generation, who always seem to be filming themselves anyway. And once they get their telekinetic powers, and can control the camera with their minds, well, why not film all the cool stuff you can do?

I guess I should mention that the three teenagers are Andrew (Dane DeHaan), an antisocial, friendless loser at high school, his cousin Matt (Alex Russell), who is perhaps too smart for his own good, and likes Andrew, but pities him as well, and Steve (Michael B. Jordan), a football star running for class President – so essentially the most popular kid at school. Matt convinces Andrew to go to a rave with him, and it is there that the three of them find a crater in the ground – and being overly confident teenagers, jump right in. There is something down there, something alien perhaps, and then the camera shuts down. When we next see them, they have realized that something happened down in that crater – they have special powers, and can move things with their minds.

I liked how, when the teens find out they have telekinetic powers that just keep getting more powerful the more they use them, they continue act just like teenagers would. They have fun with their powers – using a leaf blower to blow the cheerleaders skirts up, playing around in a toy store by making a shopping cart go out of control and screwing with kids by making a teddy bear float. When they figure out that they can use their powers to fly, they do just that, even though it’s incredibly stupid and foolish. But have you seen the stupid things teenagers post on You Tube every day?

But even in these light hearted scenes, there is darkness lurking. Even though he now has friends, Andrew still feels like the high school loser. His mother is dying a slow, painful death from cancer, and his father is a mean drunk. He goes too far early in the film, and even though he apologizes for it, you don’t really believe it. Just when it seems he may be getting over that seething resentment though, things go horribly wrong, and you know he’s going to lose it.

The movie gets darker as it goes along, and the last half hour is very dark. I probably would have preferred a lower key ending to the special effects extravaganza that ends Chronicle, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t work.  

 
Chronicle is inventive in its use of camera work – the camera literally floats above the action at times, observing everything. It is well written Max Landis, son of John, and he has created three believable characters, who behave and talk like teenagers. The three central performances, by actors I have never seen before (or at least, I don’t remember) are not forced, but natural. The anger in the movie comes from a real place. The problem with many found footage movies – and this goes even for good ones like Paranormal Activity – is that the characters never really feel real. They do here, and that’s why Chronicle works way better than I ever expected it would.

The Best Films I Have Never Seen Before: War of the Worlds (1953)

The War of the Worlds (1953) ****

Directed by: Byron Haskin.

Written by: Barré Lyndon based on the novel by H.G. Wells.

Starring: Gene Barry (Dr. Clayton Forrester), Ann Robinson (Sylvia Van Buren), Les Tremayne (Maj. Gen. Mann), Robert Cornthwaite (Dr. Pryor), Sandro Giglio (Dr. Bilderbeck), Lewis Martin (Pastor Dr. Matthew Collins), Houseley Stevenson Jr. (Gen. Mann's aide), Paul Frees (Second Radio Reporter / Opening Announcer), William Phipps (Wash Perry), Vernon Rich (Col. Ralph Heffner), Henry Brandon (Cop at Crash Site), Jack Kruschen (Salvatore), Cedric Hardwicke (Commentary).

The original The War of the Worlds from 1953 holds up remarkably well almost 60 years later. Yes, special effects have come a long way in that time – and are capable of doing things that were inconceivable in 1953 – but even the effects in this movie retain their creepiness and ability to scare. Modern audiences may find some of the movie cheesy, but if they give it a chance to work its magic on them, then they will find a truly wonderful sci-fi film.

The movie transplants the original H.G. Wells story from Victorian England, to 1950s America. It all starts with what looks like a meteor landing in a field outside of Los Angeles. The army is called out, and they also bring leading scientists, including Dr. Clayton Forrester (Gene Barry). Forrester is immediately struck by how little damage this supposed meteor has done. Something is not quite right here. He meets the beautiful Sylvia (Ann Robinson), who uncle is the local Pastor, and the two of them immediately bond. But then more and more of these “meteors” start landing across the country – and the world. And soon, they start moving. Once they do move, they lose contact with that area.

I enjoy 1950s science fiction movies, even the ones that can be a little cheesy. What surprised me about The War of the Worlds is how little cheese there is in the film. True, the character of Sylvia is hopelessly dated to the 1950s (she has an advanced degree in science, but spends the whole movie making tea and eggs for all the men), but other than that, the film holds up amazing well. There are several truly scary sequences – especially the long, slow moments as the Martians unscrew their exit hatch that becomes almost unbearably suspenseful. The scenes where the Martians make their ways across the landscape, laying waste to everything in their sight, are also wonderful.

Alien invasion movies have become common place in movies. I don’t even think you could say that The War of the Worlds was the first but it certainly did set the standard. Every alien invasion movie, from Invasion of the Body Snatcher to Independence Day to Spielberg’s War of the Worlds remake (which I know I am in the minority in thinking is actually a pretty great film, except for the terrible ending), has to be compared to this one. It establishes the clichés that every other film will play with in their own ways.

It must be said however, that the film doesn’t quite have the same impact it once did. Yes, it had groundbreaking special effects for its time. And yes, you can hardly call the movie clichéd since it establishes the clichés, not just mindlessly regurgitating them. For these reasons, The War of the Worlds will forever be placed, and rightfully so, right near the top of any list of the greatest alien invasion movies of all time. The only problem is, that once you see what this movie inspired – in dozens of other movies – it simply cannot have quite the same impact it once did. This is a wonderful movie – a must for sci-fi fans – and whatever faults we see in it now, really aren’t the film’s fault.

DVD Review: Attack the Block

Attack the Block ***

Directed by: Joe Cornish.

Written by: Joe Cornish.

Starring: Nick Frost (Ron), Jodie Whittaker (Sam), John Boyega (Moses), Luke Treadaway (Brewis), Alex Esmail (Pest), Paige Meade (Dimples), Leeon Jones (Jerome), Franz Drameh (Dennis), Jumayn Hunter (Hi-Hatz), Danielle Vitalis (Tia), Simon Howard (Biggz), Sammy Williams (Probs), Maggie McCarthy (Margaret), Michael Ajao (Mayhem), Selom Awadzi (Tonks).

If JJ Abrahms Super 8 was a throwback to the Steven Spielberg films like Close Encounters of the Third King and ET, then Attack the Block may well be a throwback to the Steven Spielberg of Jaws, which was less sentimental and slightly more hard edged. The Spielberg who would kill a beautiful young woman and teenage boy to keep the audience on its toes. Attack the Block is an alien invasion movie where the only line of defense is a group of inner city kids in London who live in the “Block”, an aging apartment complex, basically populated by poor minorities. Written and directed with style and skill by Joe Cornish, I assume Spielberg saw something of himself in this movie. After all, Cornish is one of the co-writers of Spielberg’s upcoming Tintin movie, itself said to be a throwback to more innocent times for Spielberg.

The movie opens quickly, wasting little time before getting right into the action. Sam (Jodie Whitaker) is a nurse who has just moved into the block. She’s on her way home from work, when she is attacked by the teenage residents of the block, led by Moses (John Boyega). They are still in the process of taking her wallet and her jewelry, when something crashes into a car right next to them. They chase it down, and it’s some strange creature that they beat to death with a baseball bat, and then parade it through the streets. It isn’t long before its joined by more strange creatures from outer space – these new ones not quite as easy to kill.

Attack the Block moves at pretty much breakneck speed from beginning to end. The film wastes no time in getting started, and from there movies quickly from one well executed action sequences to another. A bike chase is a stylish highlight, as is a creepy scene in a smoke filled hallway. As the movie moves along, you quickly realize that Cornish will do just about anything to surprise and shock the audience. There is a real sense of danger, and a feeling that even though these are kids, not everyone is going to make it out alive.

Attack the Block is clever and funny as times as well. Nick Frost, from Dawn of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and Paul, adds a nice, comedic performance as a drug dealer stoned out of his mind for most of the movie.  Because the movie moves so quickly, character development is shunted off to the background, but there are a few surprisingly effective scenes, that so how disenfranchised these kids already are with the system – and yet how they subject others to the same sort of prejudices. They apologize to Sam, saying that if they knew she was from the block, they wouldn’t have robbed her – as if that makes it okay. They judged her, because she is white and pretty and doesn’t look poor, much like everyone judges them, because they are black and from the block. The movie doesn’t push this social agenda down your throat, but it offers a nice little insight to go along with all the action.

Attack the Block is destined to become a cult hit – something it has already gathered to a certain extent. Dumped into a few North American theaters this summer, the film did pretty well for itself. Now that it’s on DVD, it should find a receptive audience. It is not quite as good as Super 8 – but then again it was made for a tiny fraction of that films budget. This should be the start of a promising career for Cornish.

Movie Review: Another Earth

Another Earth *** ½

Directed by: Mike Cahill.

Written by: Mike Cahill & Brit Marling.

Starring: Brit Marling (Rhoda Williams), William Mapother (John Burroughs), Matthew-Lee Erlbach (Alex), DJ Flava (Himself), Meggan Lennon (Maya Burroughs), AJ Diana (John's Son), Jordan Baker (Kim Williams), Flint Beverage (Robert Williams), Robin Taylor (Jeff Williams), Rupert Reid (Keith Harding), Diane Ciesla (Dr. Joan Tallis), Luis Vega (Federico).

Rhoda is a promising, intelligent teenager who has just been accepted to MIT. Like all teenagers, she decides to go out and party to celebrate her success, and has a few too many beers. Like far too many teenagers, she decides to drive even though she’s too drunk. On the radio, she hears about the discovery of a new planet – closer to earth than Mars, that has just become visible. Distracted by the news, and the alcohol running through her system, she runs a light she shouldn’t, and ends up crashing into another car – killing a young boy and his mother, and leaving the father, John, in a coma.

Four years go by, and Rhoda is let out of prison. She doesn’t want to rebuild the life she lost, and decides to take a menial job as a high school janitor. She hears that the father is out of his coma, and goes to his house to apologize and make amends. But she is too scared to go through with it. He doesn’t know who she is, and she lies and says she works for a house cleaning service offering a free trial period. In the years since awakening from his coma, he has become a recluse, living alone in an isolated house, and it could certainly use a good cleaning. He accepts her offer, and then invites her back the following week. At first cold and standoffish, eventually he starts to warm to Rhoda. He hungers for human contact, even though he never realized it, and soon they start to grow closer. Of course, sooner or later, we know that Rhoda will have to tell John the truth.

What is interesting about Another Earth is how it pairs a fairly standard human story, with its sci-fi elements. We have seen many movies about the aftermath of a car crash before – and countless movies where two characters become close while one of them is hiding a secret that could destroy their relationship. But this side of the story is handled well. Brit Marling, who also co-wrote the screenplay, does an excellent job of planning the emotionally shutdown Rhoda. And William Mapother does a great job playing the even more emotionally shutdown John. These two wounded characters help to heal each other, even if their relationship is based on a lie.

And yet, it’s the science fiction aspect that I think elevates the material. As more information becomes available about this new planet, they start calling it Earth 2, because it seems to be an exact replica of Earth. And when a scientist first makes radio contact with Earth 2, and ends up talking to herself – with the exact same memories – the implications become even more profound. The film, in its much simpler way, reminded me of Tarkovsky’s Solaris, which was also about a new planet that in some ways replicated earth. That film was about trying to resurrect someone out of your memories, and how the result will always be incomplete. This one looks at just how small and meaningless our lives are in the grander scheme of things. And if there’s another planet identical to ours, and another you, identical to yourself, what does that really mean? Are we not all special, unique individuals made in God’s image?

Another Earth has a few missteps along the way. The essay contest that Rhoda enters, that will allow the winner to be among the first people to travel to Earth 2 strains credibility to an absurd degree, but at least is necessary for the plot to function. More distracting was the sexual relationship that develops between Rhoda and John, which is simply not needed. These two share a deeper connection than sex. And the subplot involving the other janitor that Rhoda works with adds little.

But those are minor complaints to what is an uncommonly thoughtful indie movie. In the past few years, I have grown weary with the regular formula we see coming out of American Indies, that are basically all comedy/dramas about dysfunctional families who learn to cope with their problems. The formula has grown old. Another Earth is a step in the right direction – and proof that the best science fiction movies are not all about special effects, but about the ideas behind them.