PROMETHEUS (2012)

June 9, 2012

 Greetings again from the darkness. Director Ridley Scott bounds back into the sci-fi genre 30 plus years after his two classics: Alien (1979) and Blade Runner (1982). Since then, he has avoided sci-fi and had some ups (Gladiator, American Gangster) and some downs (too many to list). Of course, in the film world, one need only create a single masterpiece to be forever worshiped … and the Alien lovers have always held out hope their master would return. Despite the sly marketing approach, Mr. Scott has delivered a prequel that should keep the geeks happy, while also having the “wow” factor to generate multiple viewings.

In the year 2089 we witness an archaeologist played by Noomi Rapace (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) discover an ancient cave gallactic map. With remarkable efficiency found only in the private sector, four years later, the Prometheus space ship is landing on the moon depicted in the drawings. It’s lofty mission is to discover the origin of life. The crew make-up is almost identical to the crew in Alien, only this time we get an ice queen corporate director, played by Charlize Theron, to emphasize corporate greed and lust for power, and the lack of love for science.

Once the ship lands, we pretty much know what the search crew will find. That doesn’t ruin the impact of the images. The strength of the movie comes from the visuals and effects. We never doubt that we are in a far away galaxy or that the aliens are real. This is one of the RARE times that the 3D version is recommended. Despite the dulled images caused by the glasses, this one was actually filmed in 3D and some of the effects really pop.

There will be much debate over this film because it looks effectively creepy and fascinating … downright phenomenal. However, it has too many of what I call “stupid movie character moments”. You know, those times when a character does or says something that just makes no sense – other than to create an opportunity for the filmmaker? There are plenty of those present here. The script is co-written by Jon Spaihts and “Lost” guru Damon Lindelof. The overall idea is brilliant and worth pursuing, however, the details and gaps are quite disappointing. We know there will be minor characters sacrificed in the name of creating fear in the survivors, but couldn’t we have more than one strong character? The Noomi Rapace character has much in common with Sigourney Weaver‘s Ripley, but the others here are pretty generic.

 Idris Elba plays the ship’s captain, Guy Pearce plays Peter Weyland, the old man funding the mission and seeking immortality, and Logan Marshall-Green plays Rapace’s partner and lover. The only other character of interest is Michael Fassbender‘s android David. He models himself after Peter O’Toole in Lawrence of Arabia, right down to the golden locks. Android technology has come a long way since Alien and David can be quite a wry smart-ass.

In the end, the sci-fi geeks will decide if this one deserves to live on, but for me, despite the breath-taking technological effects, it’s not worthy of the “classic” label. It was kind of humorous to hear a score that bears an uncanny resemblance at times to the iconic score of Inception. It seems that film’s impact is nothing short of never-ending.

SEE THIS MOVIE IF: you are a fan of Alien OR you are fan of sci-fi and special effects

SKIP THIS MOVIE IF: you prefer a coherent story line and strong characters

watch the trailer:

 

Leave a Comment » | Sci-Fi | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Ferguson

HAYWIRE

January 17, 2012

 Greetings again from the darkness. Caught an early screening of this one and my quick description is that it’s a mash-up of The Bourne Identity, Salt, and the original “Mod Squad” (it has a kind of retro feel). In other words, it’s a fun ride featuring stunning fight scenes filmed with an artistry that only director Steven Soderbergh can achieve.

Newcomer Gina Carano stars as Mallory Kane, an independent contractor … the type who handles dirty work for governments and the powerful people who must keep their hands somewhat clean. She gets double-crossed on a Barcelona job and becomes the target herself while in Dublin. So this lethal weapon goes on a globe-trotting mission of revenge and messes up people and hotel rooms in the process. If you think a woman can’t carry action scenes, then you don’t realize Ms. Carano is an MMA fighter. She is the real deal. Her physical skills are on full display and leave little doubt as to her deadly talent.

 Since this is a Soderbergh film, you know the cast is well-stocked. We get Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas and Ewan McGregor all at their smarmy best. Additionally we see Michael Fassbender, Channing Tatum and Bill Paxton (as Mallory’s father). Trust me when I say not all of these character fare so well in their showdowns with Mallory. Though the script from Lem Dobbs is pretty basic, Soderbergh’s way of telling the story is compelling enough to keep us interested between Carano’s fights.

The color palette alternates between the brown/gold Soderbergh used for Traffic, and the blue/gray from his “Ocean’s” franchise. The jazzy score from David Holmes is a wonderful compliment to the wide variety of scenes and locations, and the tongue-in-cheek humor is expert enough to keep you smiling through the all too serious business chats. A perfect example of the wry humor is that the movie begins and ends with the same one syllable word (begins with an “S”).

Soderbergh is one of the few directors who refuses to get pigeon-holed into making a certain type of movie. Never short on style or visual flair, he touches many genres and here proves he can twist the action-thriller in a new, fun to watch direction. If you kick back and go for the ride, Haywire will show you a great time.

a note of trivia: Gina Carano is the daughter of former Dallas Cowboys quarterback Glenn Carano

SEE THIS MOVIE IF: you are a fan of Salt and the “Bourne” movies OR you want to see a woman totally capable of kicking ass

SKIP THIS MOVIE IF: you are going to take it too seriously and expect a dose of heavy-handed Soderbergh filmmaking (he seems to actually have fun with this one)

watch the trailer:

Leave a Comment » | Action, Thriller | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Ferguson

A DANGEROUS METHOD

December 26, 2011

 Greetings again from the darkness. This film and story is yet more confirmation for my life-long belief that, in general, psychiatrists and psychologists tend to be the most unstable and consistently loony people in society. Whether in the medical profession, business world or scientific realm, over-blown ego affects judgment and clarity; and sometimes leads to the mis-guided notion that proving one’s theory is more vital than finding real truth.

Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen) and Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender) are considered the founding fathers of what we accept today as psychoanalysis. In this film, we see how the two men came to know each other and the subsequent prideful battle of egos that drove them apart. Just as importantly, we see how Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley) evolved from clinical hysteria sufferer in 1904 (as the film opens), to Jung’s patient, to Jung’s lover, and finally to the level of respected colleague of Freud and Jung within the field. Her growth and change as a patient provided clinical proof to “the talking cure” method, which took the place of electro-shock therapy (except in extreme cases).

 The film is directed by David Cronenberg, although you might not believe it if you didn’t know it to be so. Mr. Cronenberg is known for such work as The Fly, Eastern Promises and A History of Violence. This is easiest his most dialogue-intensive work to date. Of course, that makes sense given that it’s based on Christopher Hampton‘s play “The Talking Cure” and John Kerr‘s book “A Most Dangerous Method”. The two main subjects love to hear their own words, though here Freud spends much of his screen time puffing a cigar and tossing in a few well-timed grunts. This goes to his belief that silence often leads others to conclude that his theories are so solid, debate becomes unnecessary.

 It is very interesting to see the personality differences between the subdued Freud and the more open-minded Jung. When mystical and supernatural subjects are brought up by Jung, Freud quickly dismisses them as hooey. Freud was almost a master marketer is his attempts to get psychoanalysis accepted into mainstream. He fought Jung’s more exploratory ideas. At the heart of the film is the evolution of Sabina and it’s impact on the three leads. There is also a bit of Otto Gross (Vincent Cassel) thrown in to show just how open and vulnerable Jung could be.

Learning about these pioneers is crucial to understanding the topic of today’s psychiatry and psychology. There is no question that the foundation of their work led to the salvation of many suffering people over the years. Of course, it’s clear that many patients have also suffered at the hands of those in the field who are less scrupulous.

The look of the film is beautiful, as are the costumes and sets. An added bonus is the terrific score from Howard Shore. It’s difficult to see this one attracting a wide audience, but the performances and subject matter should please those who are drawn to it.

SEE THIS MOVIE IF: you fancy yourself an amateur psychiatist OR you would like a primer in the beginnings of psychoanalysis

SKIP THIS MOVIE IF: you aren’t up for frequent tie-ins to sex … after all, it is Freud!

watch the trailer:

Leave a Comment » | Drama | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Ferguson

SHAME

December 11, 2011

 Greetings again from the darkness. Can a film be a beautifully crafted work of art AND also a movie that very few will enjoy, or even have an interest in seeing? Clearly, I am in the minority here as critics are raving about the insight and genius of writer/director Steve McQueen (Hunger). McQueen is an art school graduate and has a terrific eye for color, tone, texture and visual acumen. Those talents (and plenty more) are all on display in Shame.

For me, there are two separate aspects to discuss: the look of the film, and the effectiveness of the story. The first deserves recognition and kudos, while the second has resulted in a total lack of interest and ambivalence. Evidently the goal was to detail and humanize the diagnosis of sex addiction, detailing the lack of emotional connection that follows this most personal of activities. The film is rate NC-17 for good reason. Not only are the two stars uninhibited, but much of the supporting cast joins in … too many to count.

I will not itemize the number of ways in which Brandon (Michael Fassbender) tends to his addiction. On the surface, he is a normal looking guy with a normal job in a generic Manhattan office building. We quickly learn that he is always alone and in angst … regardless if he is in a group at hour hour, hooking up with one of his endless stream of partners, or handling his own business. This guy is unable to find joy in anything that life offers.

His isolated world is one day invaded by his sister Sissy (Carey Mulligan). We learn that their up-bringing has much to do with his always dour mood, and her desperate need for attention and care. They are both a mess … just in different ways. She has a line via voice mail that says “We aren’t bad people. We’re just from a bad place.”. That is meant to explain the rotting foundation without exposing us to another story of poor parenting skills. 

 The clearest indication that Brandon’s emotional issues are well beyond frayed, occurs when he actually starts to see a glimmer of relationship hope with a co-worker (Nicole Beharie), only to have that end in performance failure. He quickly fixes the problem by resorting to what he does best … with no meaning attached.  The best sequence in the film occurs while Brandon eye flirts with a subway passenger, whom he loses in the crowd after the ride. She re-emerges late in the film clearly open to his attention.

Carey Mulligan is building a strong film career and her performance here is wonderful. Michael Fassbender has had a remarkable year with the latest X-Men, Jane Eyre, A Dangerous Method, and Haywire. That is a dream year for an actor. The film is beautiful to look at and has stunning performances. All that for a movie that is not really very interesting and certainly lacks substantive entertainment value for the normal movie-goer.

SEE THIS MOVIE IF: you can ignore the beat down of the story and focus on the artistic film qualities OR you just like to see movie stars naked.

SKIP THIS MOVIE IF: watching characters in the midst of life-long emotional abyss is less than appealing to you, not matter the high level of art direction

watch the trailer:

Leave a Comment » | Drama | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Ferguson

JANE EYRE (2011)

March 21, 2011

 Greetings again from the darkness. For a film to rate highly with me, mass appeal is not necessary. The requirements are an interesting story that is well cast, well acted and well directed. Though it is often required reading in high school, the novel by Charlotte Bronte is a timeless classic and among the most popular of all time. The key roles in this latest film version are played well by Dame Judi Dench (Mrs. Fairfax), Michael Fassbender (Rochester) and Mia Wasikowska (Jane). Cary Fukunaga directs. He was also responsible for the powerful 2009 film Sin Nombre (highly recommended).

There have been numerous film and TV versions of this classic over the years, with the 1943 version being the most famous. Orson Welles starred as Rochester and Joan Fontaine was Jane. While that version still works, this year’s model is the first that I believe surpasses that one in quality. The two keys are the performance of Mia Wasikowska and the direction of Mr. Fukunaga.

 The film surprises a bit with it’s flashback approach, but it works well in linking the older Jane with her early struggles. This version really rests heavy on Wasikowska’s shoulders and she does not disappoint. You will recognize her from her recent turns in Alice in Wonderland, and The Kids Are All Right. She quickly jumps to the head of the Jane Eyre class. Very impressive.

Fukunaga’s direction relies on art direction and spectacular lighting. He draws in the viewer to this dark and mysterious world where much goes unstated, yet so much is communicated. The good girl/bad boy battle is always fun and moreso when the good girl is a remarkably independent and brassy girl, while the bad boy is very dark and dangerous. Of course, this is Hollywood so the novel’s unattractive Rochester is played by the strapping Fassbender (Inglourious Basterds).  I even thought the “reveal” was well-handled and the fall-out simple enough to follow.

 What always attracted me to this story was the strength and perseverance of Jane herself. To find a girl with such fortitude and moral stamina despite her upbringing and longings means the central character is both fascinating and easy to pull for. She is what we would wish of our own daughters … self confident, full of character and observant of what is fair and just.

If you aren’t the literary type, don’t expect to enjoy this film. Watching it is truly like the visualization that occurs when reading a top novel. I was completely drawn into life at Thornfield Hall and the life of Jane Eyre.

SEE THIS MOVIE IF: you read the classic novel OR enjoy strong female characters OR appreciate an atmospheric approach to literary subject 

SKIP THIS MOVIE IF: the nuanced courtship of two polar opposite characters does not provide enough action, gun play or explosions for your taste

Leave a Comment » | Drama | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by David Ferguson

Next Entries »