It's the End of the World as We Knew It

Disaster films are pretty sketchy when it comes to quality. They usually have bad B-movie acting, over the top special effects, and impossible plotlines. Usually they are reserved for the summer blockbuster season as well, a time when every kid on the continent shuts off his or her brain. Last week, the master, if you can even call him that, of disaster, Roland Emmerich (the man behind “Independence Day” and “The Day After Tomorrow”) unleashed his ultimate destruction that is “2012.”

Whereas Emmerich has established himself as the man that destroys beloved landmarks (i.e. Statue of Liberty and the White House) he always was reserved when it came to the annihilation of mankind. The alien ship gets destroyed before the race is wiped out, and we now know there is escape from the cooling effects of global warming.

Finally he has thrown any inhibition aside and actually has taken all hope from the majority humanity. The film is brutal in its display of this, but hope exists for the select few. Finally we have a somewhat fearless filmmaker not afraid to kill everyone.

Ok, sarcasm aside, “2012” is simply a journey movie, spurred on by the onset of the apocalypse. John Cusack plays Jackson Curtis, a failed author and father, as a man simply trying to stay connected to the last bit of his family life he has. His wife (played by Amanda Peet) has divorced and remarried a doctor. His kids distance themselves from him to a point, with his son basically disowning him. So much for a happy setup. Anyhow, apparently the world is ending, due to a heating up of the core. It’s been happening for a few years, but on the year that the Mayan’s predicted the earth to end, lets just say, *stuff* will hit the fan. The rest of the movie is Cusack running away from one disaster after another.

I never said that Emmerich builds films upon substance. The whole 2012 apocalypse myth is built upon the Mayan calendar, which ends on Dec. 21 of that year. Last time I checked they met their apocalypse quite a bit sooner (a little dark comedy never hurt anyone). The plot here is also utterly inconceivable and completely improbably. Cusack runs from every single catastrophe that hits America during the apocalypse. Coincidence? I vote for the poor screenwriting tactic of piling one climax on top of another until the film becomes two and a half hours long. Yes that’s right; this is an epic scale movie in every sense of the term (except for the whole poetry part). I probably should stop bashing the film, because I’m beginning to like it less and less the more I continue.

I enjoyed myself watching “2012.” It is a good escape movie for some gorgeous special effects and explosions. It even beats “Transformers 2” in that category. Some of the camera work here is top notch as well, even without the aid of computer graphics. Beyond that, the special effects look impressive. When the earth blows up, I believe that the earth is blowing up.

To the acting, I have to say it isn’t terrible. The person I came to my breaking point watching was the new husband of Peet’s character and Oliver Plath. Plath should never be allowed to be unlikeable, and here he was beyond unlikeable. I guess he fulfilled the role to that point because he is supposed to be the emotionless logical leader. The supporting roles all deserve a bravo as well. Danny Glover plays the President. I can’t even back that up because that is awesome enough.

The man who stole the show for me was Woody Harrelson. His trip through “Zombieland” last month was a hoot, and here he plays a conspiracy freak radio broadcaster, preaching the apocalyptic cover-up. Hilarious. The acting does seem terrible at times because of the sham of an edit that was cut during action scenes. One shot will feature incredible CG destruction spliced with a screaming reaction close up of a character. Copy + Paste for the duration of the scene, and you get a very laughable final edit of the epic scenes.

Overall, “2012” is a pure popcorn cinema piece. Don’t expect to suddenly become enlightened with a way to accept the apocalypse, but simply enjoy yourself. Why else go to the theaters if you can’t sit back and enjoy the experience?

Grade: B-

The Heart of the Game

Football season naturally is the perfect time to release football films. There have been good ones (“Remember the Titans” and “Friday Night Lights,”) but for every good there are several bad ones (“Longest Yard” and “The Replacements” to start). Every so often there is a so called football film that ignores the sport and focuses on relationships and life. The last great one like this was “Jerry Maguire” but last week “The Blind Side” opened in theaters. Does it transcend the jock genre or remain cliché without ingenuity?

“The Blind Side” finds a middle ground between the possible extremes. It does transcend the genre by focusing on human relations rather than the brutally exciting sport. The film focuses on the orphaned Michael Oher played by Quinton Aaron, and the relationship that develops between him and a mother who takes him in, Leigh Anne Touhy (Sandra Bullock). The bond between these two becomes believably loving and strong.

Touhy takes Michael into her family after seeing him walk alone along a deserted road in the freezing cold; what an empowered, or incredibly stupid, woman. Michael is a 6’8” or more, monster of an African American teenager, who has the opportunity to attend a local catholic high school in Memphis, TN. Touhy helps to turn Michael’s life around through mentoring and just giving him a loving envirionment.

Eventually he is able to play football, and evolves into an incredible left offensive tackle. For those who don’t know the game, that is a lineman who blocks the blind side of the quarterback. He is so good, that powerhouse college football programs begin recruiting him, and thus the fight begins to sign Michael. It is fun to see several college coaches from the southern schools make cameos in the film. After everything settles down, the NCAA begins investigating Michael and the Toughy family for unethical recruiting practices to get him to go to their alma mater. This investigation causes the viewer to question what the whole moral of the film is. It is a very risky conflict to toss into the movie as it seems to be nearing its end, but doing soul searching you realize what the truth of the theme is.

The acting from Bullock to Aaron to the country singer Tim McGraw is all around very good. I was surprised at the talent that Bullock exhibits. Usually she doesn’t have strong roles, but she fills the role of a strong willed and emotionally powerful woman very well. Think a white Oprah with a southern drawl. Tim McGraw as the husband is a well cast support to Bullock, although he seems to only provide the money for the family. She really wears the pants in the relationship. I want to know where the casting director found Quinton Aaron. As a giant teddy bear, he is spectacular at emoting through his eyes rather than in any other action. It is hard not to find a soft spot for the man in your heart.

Beyond the story and the acting, this is a very by the numbers populous, feel-good film. The camera work is average at best. Not one shot stands out as epic or ingenious. Along with that, the opening set up scene really is not well written or imaginative. It feels stale to me and doesn’t set up what the focus of the film is. That said, the film is based on the Michael Lewis book by the same title, so it could be that it stayed close to the source material. I cannot be sure on this because I haven’t read the book.

The human element here makes this a much better film than it would have been if the focus was elsewhere. The film gives a great slice of life look at the importance of football to the southern American Culture, even showing how much it overtakes Thanksgiving dinner. The characters breathe and feel realistic and even when the football games do play out, they remain grounded, with little focus on the game itself. It always is about the evolution of Michael as a player. That focus makes this a very inspiring film to check out someday.

Grade: B

Is This Really It?

As seen on Movieset.com

If there is a single genre of films I have not viewed enough of, it would definitely be documentary. I have seen enough to know which are good and which are bad, and it helps to have a film class with a music documentary filmmaker this semester.

All of the back story aside, I viewed “Michael Jackson’s This is It” this past weekend, and was blown away.

In the past I brought up themes of nostalgia, especially with the re-releases of “Toy Story” and “Toy Story 2,” but the Michael Jackson concert/ rehearsal/ documentary film brings back the glory of his greatest hits. I was thrown into the past, remember the time I first saw the music video to “Thriller” or singing “Heal the World” as a preschooler. The film delivers both these hits, and many more, only leaving out very few chart toppers.

Essentially “This is It” is a glorified concert film, but it expands much further into the development, the grit, and the endurance necessary to put a production on stage. The feature charts the entire planning and production of the concert up until Jackson’s death. The beauty of the film is that never does it glorify his death. That fact seems to be a side note for viewers to already know while watching it. The film jumps right into Jackson’s announcement for a 50-performance engagement at London’s O2 Arena, and immediately charts several rehearsals to put together the tour’s catalogue. It is very intriguing to show the progression of each song, with some regular practices and other cuts of dress rehearsals full of special effects. Spliced between songs are snippets of special features content, ranging from green screen filming to dance try-outs to costume design. I found these to be the more interesting parts of the film, with the massive scale of the production and all of the elements being created.

Certain things wowed me with the film, starting with some amazing editing and shooting through the opening sequences. The press conference announcement segment is cut rapidly and has the same pacing that “District 9” had earlier this year. The frantic chaos set the pace for how high energy the performances to come would be. As a performer, Jackson definitely still has all the talent of old. His dancing was clean and articulate, with some new style thrown in. His voice sounded crisp, and not feeble, as his appearance sometimes would project. The man, no matter personal affairs and such, still had the charisma and power to sell out arenas and bring crowds to their feet.

Other intriguing parts are certain behind the scenes looks. The best for me was an innovative feature. Behind the stage there was a giant screen, which would have 3D projections. The concert creators, and the director Kenny Ortega, filmed in front of monstrous green screens, to create new footage for “Thriller,” “Smooth Criminal,” and “Beat It.” I loved the “Smooth Criminal” content, not only because it’s my favorite tune of his, but also because of the brilliant film noir short film that Ortega made to play on the screen. All of the footage was shot with 3D cameras for the audience to experience in 3D. Now watching a movie with 3D glasses is somewhat annoying, so maybe it wouldn’t have transferred to a concert very well, but it shows how much Jackson still pushed the boundaries.

The film allows you to get completely lost in the music and the concert experience. Even pulling away from the performance feels natural and enlightening. There is never a dull beat throughout the film, and I even found myself grooving along to the songs. The film opens with some of his lesser-known hits, but just wait till the film hits stride and the mega-hits start rolling. I believe that this concert could have rivaled U2 for production value, and it just reminds me even more that I will never be able to see new material from the King of Pop. Take the chance to experience the last material of Jackson’s career, and once again get lost in the music that defined cool.

Grade: A

Halloween Horror Survival Guide

As seen on Movieset.com

This Halloween we have a new scary movie in theaters and another installment from a gorefest series.

Going back there are scores of great, and forgettable, horror films to put you in the holiday spirit. Before you go out this Halloween, ready yourself, for if you happen to find yourself stuck in a horror film, there are ways to survive. It is a longshot, but these helpful tips will help you avoid being the cliché first act death.

10) Don’t be a jerk. Countless on screen deaths are characters that are plain rude and hated. All films have the character that every character and audience member hates, so be genial and don’t get on anyone’s bad side, because you never know if they are the killer. “Saw” films fit this category best.

9) Avoid Stereotypes. Going along with the jerk model, avoid being a stereotype as well. Usually the ditsy blond, any airhead jock, cheerleader or beauty queens are the targets eliminated throughout the film. See “I Know What you Did Last Summer.”

8) Get Outta High School. High school pretty much is torture, so get out of high school as fast as possible. Not just the building as in “Scream” but also through the adolescent years. Most popular teen horrors aim here and many classics play to the demographic. “Nightmare on Elm Street,” “Scream” or even flaky things like “Prom Night.”

7) Don’t Split Up. Your strength is in numbers. Don’t split up and go searching places alone when you know there is a killer. This cliché is always used to kill off several characters in any slasher. “Friday the 13th” series style.

6) Don’t lose your virginity. It happens someday, but don’t pick a time when serial killers are on the loose, or when it’s the weeks near Halloween. Notable kills here include the opening to “Nightmare on Elm Street.”

5) Stay Away from Empty. Don’t go through scary empty places searching for help. Time and time again dark dank sheds, gas stations, barns, and warehouses are lairs for villains. Pick a horror and it probably is in it.

4) Double Kill. No don’t go on a Halo murdering spree, but kill the villain twice to make sure they are dead. I kind of am stealing this from “Zombieland,” but that shows how brilliant that film has the formula down. Also see “Scream” for rule enforcement.

3) Run. Everywhere. Train to be a cross-country star. “Zombieland” cashed in on the rule, so start up that treadmill. You never know when it will be the apocalypse. The only exception here would be if you find yourself at a lake resort, and Jason attacks. If you run, you’re dead anyway, because he can just walk to catch you.

2) Take action and kill back. Most of the time the girl just screams or watches her killer come at her. Why not fight back? Courts will back you up with a self-defense ruling, so go ahead and murder the killer if they are coming at you with some weapon of choice. Only problem may be if you fight a ghost, a zombie that never dies, or even Freddy Krueger who exists in dreams. See “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” here because anyone can hear a chainsaw coming at you.

1) Turn the lights on. It must take a genius to figure out that if you leave the lights on, killers don’t come after you because then you can see them. Invest in flood lights, lots of lamps, and maybe some police flashlights. If there is a daytime murder, it probably is found in a drama, and not a horror. Nickelodeon had it right by calling a show “Are you Afraid of the Dark” (which still haunts me to this day) I’m going to stretch this one out a little and say watch “Alien” and that should teach you to use lights.

Astro Boy not so Stellar

As appeared on Movieset.com

Kids movies are no longer just for kids, or so it seems. This year a trio of ‘kid’s’ movies have all carried heavy themes that are dark by adult standards even. There was the deathly ominous “Up” this summer, and the abandonment of “Where the Wild Things Are” just last week. This past weekend “Astro Boy” blasted into theaters with light children’s fun, on top of some pretty weighty topics.

“Astro Boy” is much like “Pinocchio” with a man who builds a robot replica of his dead son, Toby, to replace him. (Check the ethics of cloning, defying God, and coping with death off of the dark themes list) The robot has all the memories and look of Toby, but he still isn’t exactly the same, so he throws him away per se. (Fill in abandonment on your Bingo cards) Astro adventures away from his home of Metro City and visits the surface. (Metro City floats in the sky) While there he meets a ragtag troop of kids, very similar to the Lost Boys in “Peter Pan.” The funniest characters also make their appearance, the RRF (Robot Revolution Front – 3 members strong). Astro deals with various things on the surface (reanimation, being enslaved, and one of the movies villains) until he returns to Metro City to fight a boss battle with the “Peacekeeper.”

Where to begin deconstructing? Astro (or Toby) is a nice character that really never undergoes drastic character change. He always is nice to people, as a boy and a robot. He does accept his role in society by the end, but that’s implied in the trailer and in the premise of a boy robot with super powers. The voice talent works here for me. As a child full of awe and wonder for the world, he has the perfect high-pitched voice to fit.

Now his father, voiced by Nicolas Cage, is a different deconstruction. I don’t ever side with how he feels. He is fickle toward what he wants for a son each scene. He abandons Astro to a harsh world, only to suddenly want him back in the middle of a later scene? Then the character Ham Egg becomes a father figure for Astro while on the surface, but he turns against Astro without a moment’s notice going against everything he had been saying through previous scenes. I thought this was a kid’s movie? I guess not with these types of adults, harkening to some of the darker characters in old Disney films.

I mentioned how Astro had some good voice talent, thanks to Freddie Highmore. Even supporting characters have good voicing, including Kristen Bell, Charlize Theron, Bill Nighy, Nathan Lane, and Donald Sutherland, but one character irks me. Nicolas Cage (Toby/Astro’s father) is truly forgettable, and ruins every scene he’s in. His voice never strikes a resonant chord, and he simply is bad at voicing anyway. I will cut him slack because he has done a few brilliant roles in his life, none of which are animated. If those aren’t enough big names, I’ll just throw in Samuel L. Jackson and Eugene Levy for good measure.

The animation of the film is interesting. I can’t say it always worked for me, but there were times that I was pondering how far computer animation has come since “Toy Story.” “Astro Boy” is very cartoonish in style. The characters have exaggerated features, and plastic looking skin. Their clothing also helps enforce certain campiness. The environment often looks much better than the characters set in it. Some of the camera movements helped to bring everything more to life, but all in all, the style never reaches revolutionary heights.

“Astro Boy” remains subpar and fits into the forgettable category of kiddie films. It’s too bad that these dark themes couldn’t be buried into the story deeper, making way for a better developed story arc to bring the characters too life. Pass up on it, unless you want to take your kid’s to a film this weekend, because those options are pretty thin.

Grade: C (2 out of 4)

Bring out the Adventure in All of Us

This weekend, set your iPod to repeat one song over and over: “Wake Up” by Arcade Fire. It became the anthem for the film “Where the Wild Things Are” when the trailer premiered earlier this year, with lyrics that resonate a touching story, and images that play like a music video. It fits right into the tradition of songs that become recognizable through a film. “Eternal Sunshine for the Spotless Mind” had “Mr. Blue Sky” by ELO, and “Watchmen” had Smashing Pumpkin’s “The Beginning is the End is the Beginning.” I know I will be playing the song over an over to get in the spirit to see one of my most anticipated films of the year.

Based on the popular children’s book by Maurice Sendak “Where the Wild Things Are” is extended way beyond the 48 illustrated pages. Director and co-writer Spike Jonze adapted the work with the help of Dave Egger’s. This will only be Jonze’s third feature film, but if there is any indication from his others (“Adaptation” and “Being John Malkovich”) this film could be up for awards come next year. His style as seen through the trailer, perfectly captures the perspective of a ten-year old, using low angles and a feel of innocent wonder.

If the camera doesn’t capture that mood, then I can assure you that the soundtrack does. The complete album is available for streaming on Myspace, so I decided to listen to it while doing homework one night. It features children singing indie music with light tempos yet sometimes darker tones.

The darker tones will not be constrained to the soundtrack. The film has been in limbo for quite a while because of its tone. Originally scheduled to release in May of 2008, Warner Brothers pushed the release to October 2008 and then to this weekend. The main reason for delay: the studio thought the film was way too dark and not family friendly enough. They wanted the whole thing re-shot, but Jonze managed to recut it and please the studio. Point is, don’t expect the most light-hearted of stories.

The shining aspect in the film seems to be Max Records, the actor who plays the child Max. Earlier this year he was in “The Brothers Bloom” as the young Mark Ruffalo, and in his 10 minutes in the film, he shined. He has the charisma to carry a film, yet the innocence to be completely believable as an every-child. This is his first starring role, but he seems to be one of those kids who can last a long time without fading into oblivion.

If you have never read the book, which is a shame, it is about Max being sent to his room without dinner and envisioning himself into his own kingdom, full of monsters, adventure, and danger. As for the film, Jonze inserted backstory into the parent-child relationship, and also more plotline with the wild things.

The wild things are wondrous creatures to look at. Because Jonze opted to use actual actors in suits, rather than animated characters, everything seems much more realistic. The suits are enhanced digitally, but the Jim Henson Company designed some stellar looking monsters. They were so thoroughly designed that the heads weighed too much for actors, so they had to strip out moving eyes and other expressive mechanics, to cut weight down. Actor’s still toughed it out and wore the suits, although they got many more breaks than stuntmen who wore the suits. That’s dedication to craft.

Finally I have to mention the supporting cast and monsters themselves. This is one all-star lineup; to name a few: Chris Cooper, James Gandolfini, Paul Dano, Mark Ruffalo, Catherine Keener, and Forest Whitaker. They have numerous awards and nominations between them, and hopefully they can garner more from this film.

Return to the nostalgia of childhood, much in a way the “Toy Story” did a few weeks ago, this time with a completely fresh retelling. “Where the Wild Things Are” looks to be one of the best films of the year and an inspiring and moving tale for the child within all of us.

Beyond Infinity

As seen on movieset.com

Seeing films on the big screen is always a special event. Popcorn, a dark theater, and surround sound make the experience something not easily replicated. That’s why when Disney announced a rerelease of “Toy Story” and “Toy Story 2” as a double feature, I was ready to buy my ticket. The films are part of the nostalgia of my childhood and enjoying seeing these great films with my whole family. That magic doesn’t exist by sitting on

the couch watching the DVDs of these; it is about a full visceral experience. The opportunity to return to that memory and feeling is one in a million.

What Disney did for this re-release is a step into the past of cinema, while opening the gate for revisiting old films. Before home video and on demand television, cinemas would replay old movies as rereleases but the VHS killed that tradition. By bringing these films back to the screen, Disney can captivate a new generation of viewers, while giving the old faithfuls a nostalgic revisiting.

There is a great new twist on the films as well. Pixar upconverted the films to 3D, giving the added dimension to these groundbreaking features. Now Woody, Buzz, Rex and all your favorites have the added depth that they were designed to have. Pixar created this world in a virtual 3D space, so presenting it in that aspect is logical and eye popping. The only drawback is the glasses needed to see the film. The 3D glasses cut down on the vivid colors of these plastic toys, with dimmer and less vibrant environments. I flipped the glasses on and off at times to see what I was missing. Now if you’re a cinephile, does the 3D outweigh the color loss? I can’t answer that because I wish I could have both due to the crispness and atmosphere of an added dimension.

This is the same beloved story, with all of the heart and soul that were there years ago. I’m glad that neither Pixar nor Disney decided to recut either of the films because they are perfect unto themselves. They remain stunning by today’s standards and absolutely charming. Is it really considered nostalgia if revisiting something is as good, if not better, than it was when you first experienced it?

This was only going to be a two-week engagement, which would have been absolutely disheartening for anyone who couldn’t make it. Disney announced on Monday though that it’s running will be extended at least another week, so thus this review will not be too late. The double feature also has grossed more than $20 million in the two weeks it’s been playing. Not bad for films from last decade. They even have been in the top five in the weekend box office both weekends.

The best perk to seeing the double feature is viewing the “Toy Story 3” trailer in 3D as well. The trailer was finally released online on Monday, but it premiered on the big screen. Man, does this look like a great flick. The premise for it is that Andy is going off to college, so the whole gang of toys gets sent to a daycare. While it could be the most depressing animated feature ever and a simple extension of the montage in Toy Story 2, the trailer packs jokes and a plotline that looks pretty darn funny. The depressing part is that I have to wait all the way till next summer to return to my favorite toys.

If you never have experience the magic of “Toy Story” and the sequel, collect about $15 go to the theater the first chance you get, and witness the films that are so heartwarming. The 3D experience is brilliant due to the extension of the environments rather than cheap gimmicks. The extra dimension truly adds to the film. Many other films are using this technique for 3D now, which is how the studios should approach 3D. I can admit that one montage in “Toy Story 2” still packs a punch to make me a little dusty. The themes ring true to this day and into the future.

Grade: A+