It’s been over a decade since the horrible events of September 11th, and to tell you the truth, I am still not entirely comfortable with Hollywood utilizing that subject material, so when I first saw the trailer for Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, I thought of the film as nothing more than a shameless attempt to garner votes for awards season. The inclusion of A-list names like Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock was enough to catch the average moviegoer’s attention, but supporting cast members like Max von Sydow and Viola Davis seemed to guarantee a high-quality project. Still, there was one hurdle that I could not get over, and that was young Thomas Horn, who came off as so smug and persnickety in the promotional trailers that I didn’t think I could sit through a two hour drama featuring someone that irritating. Decidedly mixed critical reaction certainly didn’t help reduce my skepticism, nor did rumor that both Hanks and Bullock suffered from limited screen time, but that opinion was challenged when Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close scored an Oscar nomination for Best Picture. As someone who prides himself on seeing as many Best Picture nominees as possible, it was out of mild curiosity and sheer obligation that I decided to see and review Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.
In retrospect, I jumped to a snap judgment concerning Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, especially in regards to its young star, Thomas Horn, but that was largely due to a misrepresentation of the character and his motivations. With a newfound understanding, I can see the brilliance and emotion within this drama and its actor’s performances, and as such I now fully agree with the accolades that have thus far been awarded. Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock have minimal screen time, but both make the most of this apparent shortcoming, with Bullock especially dominating every second she is on camera. Make no mistake, this Oscar contender attacks the heart, exploiting sensitive material a little too strongly at times, but the overall message sent forth is so positive and life affirming that you will end up smiling through the tears. Exceeding every expectation in relation to acting and storytelling, I cannot emphasize enough how much you have to see Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Monday, January 30, 2012
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close: Full Review
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close - (December 25, 2011 – Limited; January 20, 2012 - Wide): PG-13
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
Opening Weekend Box Office: #4 with $10,045,332
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $20,941,702
Gross Revenue: $20,941,702
Production Budget: N/A
Director: Stephen Daldry
As news of a child-driven family drama set against the events of 9/11 was brought to the attention of Hollywood critics and analysts, there were a number of factors that helped set expectations for Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close insanely high. The first noteworthy element involved the inclusion of A-listers like Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock, both of whom were sure to deliver strong performances and draw support from their substantial fan-bases. Another strong indicator for how this emotionally-charged drama would perform during Awards Season was the direction of Stephen Daldry, who boasts the unique distinction of having all of his feature films earn nominations for either Best Picture or Best Director. In terms of appealing to a mass audience, trailers positioned the drama as a definitive tearjerker, but I couldn’t get past the abrasive and annoying personality of young Thomas Horn…plain and simple, I found him insanely irritating. Given mixed critical reaction, imagine my surprise when I learned that Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close nabbed a nomination for Best Picture; now I would have to see the movie!
Telling a story concerning how to recover and continue-on after unspeakable tragedy, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close introduces audiences to Oskar Schell (Thomas Horn), a young social outcast with Asperger’s Syndrome who shares a special relationship with his eccentric father, Thomas (Tom Hanks). Oskar’s world is turned upside down when Thomas is killed in the attacks of September 11th, and the young boy struggles to relate to his mother, Linda (Sandra Bullock), and hold on to the memory of his father. Nearly a year after the attacks, Oskar discovers a key hidden within an envelope inside his father’s closet, with no distinguishing marks aside from the name “Black” written on the envelope. Having played several scavenger activities with his father, Oscar becomes convinced that the key will unlock a secret message; as such he methodically seeks out each “Black” listed within the Five Boroughs, inquiring about his father and the lock that the key might fit. Along the way, Oskar meets several New Yorkers struggling to rebuild after the attacks, such as Abby Black (Viola Davis), who is suffering through a divorce. Oskar’s eccentricities and curiosity charms many, including The Renter (Max von Sydow), an elderly mute man who rents a room from Oskar’s grandmother and decides to aid the boy in his quest. As the search becomes more and more complicated, Oskar begins to despair that he may never unearth his father’s last message, but along the way he discovers several truths about both himself and his family related to bravery, mourning, and hope.
To call Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close emotionally jarring is a complete understatement, but the end message is so unbelievably stirring that you cannot help but walk out of the theater with a smile, and that is why this drama fully earned its Oscar nomination. In addition to pulling and tearing at the heartstrings, this Best Picture contender also showcases some brilliant acting, the most apparent being the shocking performance of young Thomas Horn. The trailers gave no indication that Horn’s character had a developmental disability, so without that knowledge, I could only assume he was just an irritating kid; now, in retrospect, in portraying the symptoms of Asperger’s so convincingly, the young actor is shockingly brilliant. As for the adult talent, buzz was created when Matt Lauer gave Sandra Bullock grief for only appearing in twenty-three minutes of the two-hour running time, but the celebrated actress owns every minute she is on camera and will undeniably melt your heart. Add these strong performances to the unique and chilling pacing of the story, and you will find yourself drawn-in and just as curious about the mysterious key that the engaging central character is seeking so desperately.
If I had to pick any true criticism of Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, I would question the film’s overt and sometimes exploitative use of the 9/11 tragedy framing, alongside under-use of a few key cast members. We all have strong memories of the 9/11 attacks, and the film certainly knows how to send that chill down your spine once again, but sometimes it just feels a little too strong…it’s almost like, “I’m still crying, lay off already!” In terms of supporting cast, Max von Sydow is surprisingly charming as Oskar’s elderly companion (no wonder he’s been nominated for Best Supporting Actor), but I would have liked to see more contribution from Viola Davis or John Goodman, the latter of whom plays an abrasive doorman. I am not trying to downplay their performances on any level, but I still think that the narrative should have made more room for these highly recognizable faces. Aside from these qualifications, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close remains a thoroughly uplifting and deep surprise for moviegoers that should simply not be missed.
From a box office perspective, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close generated impressive amounts of buzz after its extremely limited opening, and so I was a little surprised that audiences didn’t respond a little more strongly for the wide release. Still, you cannot fault the film for its performance against other mass appeal releases like Underworld: Awakening and Red Tails. Due to my inability to identify a legitimate production budget for the film, I cannot comment on Warner Bros. covering its costs, but maybe this drama will make more of a dent as Oscar’s Night approaches. At the very least, young Thomas Horn is a definitive talent to watch; he has undoubtedly made a shaking impression on Hollywood and his future career is very promising. If you are in any way on the fence concerning Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, I cannot emphasize enough how much you need to see this emotionally loaded and fully memorable drama.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
Opening Weekend Box Office: #4 with $10,045,332
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $20,941,702
Gross Revenue: $20,941,702
Production Budget: N/A
Director: Stephen Daldry
As news of a child-driven family drama set against the events of 9/11 was brought to the attention of Hollywood critics and analysts, there were a number of factors that helped set expectations for Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close insanely high. The first noteworthy element involved the inclusion of A-listers like Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock, both of whom were sure to deliver strong performances and draw support from their substantial fan-bases. Another strong indicator for how this emotionally-charged drama would perform during Awards Season was the direction of Stephen Daldry, who boasts the unique distinction of having all of his feature films earn nominations for either Best Picture or Best Director. In terms of appealing to a mass audience, trailers positioned the drama as a definitive tearjerker, but I couldn’t get past the abrasive and annoying personality of young Thomas Horn…plain and simple, I found him insanely irritating. Given mixed critical reaction, imagine my surprise when I learned that Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close nabbed a nomination for Best Picture; now I would have to see the movie!
Telling a story concerning how to recover and continue-on after unspeakable tragedy, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close introduces audiences to Oskar Schell (Thomas Horn), a young social outcast with Asperger’s Syndrome who shares a special relationship with his eccentric father, Thomas (Tom Hanks). Oskar’s world is turned upside down when Thomas is killed in the attacks of September 11th, and the young boy struggles to relate to his mother, Linda (Sandra Bullock), and hold on to the memory of his father. Nearly a year after the attacks, Oskar discovers a key hidden within an envelope inside his father’s closet, with no distinguishing marks aside from the name “Black” written on the envelope. Having played several scavenger activities with his father, Oscar becomes convinced that the key will unlock a secret message; as such he methodically seeks out each “Black” listed within the Five Boroughs, inquiring about his father and the lock that the key might fit. Along the way, Oskar meets several New Yorkers struggling to rebuild after the attacks, such as Abby Black (Viola Davis), who is suffering through a divorce. Oskar’s eccentricities and curiosity charms many, including The Renter (Max von Sydow), an elderly mute man who rents a room from Oskar’s grandmother and decides to aid the boy in his quest. As the search becomes more and more complicated, Oskar begins to despair that he may never unearth his father’s last message, but along the way he discovers several truths about both himself and his family related to bravery, mourning, and hope.
To call Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close emotionally jarring is a complete understatement, but the end message is so unbelievably stirring that you cannot help but walk out of the theater with a smile, and that is why this drama fully earned its Oscar nomination. In addition to pulling and tearing at the heartstrings, this Best Picture contender also showcases some brilliant acting, the most apparent being the shocking performance of young Thomas Horn. The trailers gave no indication that Horn’s character had a developmental disability, so without that knowledge, I could only assume he was just an irritating kid; now, in retrospect, in portraying the symptoms of Asperger’s so convincingly, the young actor is shockingly brilliant. As for the adult talent, buzz was created when Matt Lauer gave Sandra Bullock grief for only appearing in twenty-three minutes of the two-hour running time, but the celebrated actress owns every minute she is on camera and will undeniably melt your heart. Add these strong performances to the unique and chilling pacing of the story, and you will find yourself drawn-in and just as curious about the mysterious key that the engaging central character is seeking so desperately.
If I had to pick any true criticism of Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, I would question the film’s overt and sometimes exploitative use of the 9/11 tragedy framing, alongside under-use of a few key cast members. We all have strong memories of the 9/11 attacks, and the film certainly knows how to send that chill down your spine once again, but sometimes it just feels a little too strong…it’s almost like, “I’m still crying, lay off already!” In terms of supporting cast, Max von Sydow is surprisingly charming as Oskar’s elderly companion (no wonder he’s been nominated for Best Supporting Actor), but I would have liked to see more contribution from Viola Davis or John Goodman, the latter of whom plays an abrasive doorman. I am not trying to downplay their performances on any level, but I still think that the narrative should have made more room for these highly recognizable faces. Aside from these qualifications, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close remains a thoroughly uplifting and deep surprise for moviegoers that should simply not be missed.
From a box office perspective, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close generated impressive amounts of buzz after its extremely limited opening, and so I was a little surprised that audiences didn’t respond a little more strongly for the wide release. Still, you cannot fault the film for its performance against other mass appeal releases like Underworld: Awakening and Red Tails. Due to my inability to identify a legitimate production budget for the film, I cannot comment on Warner Bros. covering its costs, but maybe this drama will make more of a dent as Oscar’s Night approaches. At the very least, young Thomas Horn is a definitive talent to watch; he has undoubtedly made a shaking impression on Hollywood and his future career is very promising. If you are in any way on the fence concerning Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, I cannot emphasize enough how much you need to see this emotionally loaded and fully memorable drama.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Friday, January 27, 2012
Underworld: Awakening - Short and Sweet
I’ve spoken time and again of my fondness for vampire and werewolf mythology, despite Stephanie Meyers’ tendency to play fast-and-loose with established guidelines, so it is understandable as to why I am a big fan of the Underworld series. Ever since Kate Beckinsale first took up the mantle of the immortal Death Dealer Selene in 2003’s Underworld, audiences have established a devout fan-base to the successful franchise. Critical reaction has never been phenomenally high, but everyone can appreciate the effort that the films have exerted to detail a rich and complicated history for the Underworld cinematic universe. After a successful prequel in the form of 2009’s Rise of the Lycans, fans would undoubtedly be excited to see Beckinsale return to the big screen in the form of her most popular character. Promising significant action, 3D special effects, and extended shots of the most beautiful woman in Hollywood moving around in skin-tight leather, male mythology fans were sure to respond in droves for Underworld: Awakening.
As the fourth film in the franchise, filmmakers have already gone to considerable lengths to establish the diegetic world and character mythology of Underworld: Awakening, and as a result, audiences are granted complete and immediate immersion into off-the-wall action and violence. In terms of the plot holding this sequel together, the story told is simplistic and razor thin, but it is really hard to care when bullets and explosions are jumping out at you in almost every scene. Kate Beckinsale returns as Selene in full force, tearing through enemies with unforgiving brutality and intensity, in essence proving that she has more than earned her status as a female action star. Given my status as a fan of the supernatural, I loved the implications and fan-boy science behind this next chapter in the war between undead monsters, but if that type of fantasy doesn’t interest you or you have never seen an Underworld movie, then a lot of the enjoyment inherent in this sequel will inevitably be lost. Still, with the high-octane action offered by this newest entry in a successful franchise through a sexy leading lady, Underworld: Awakening remains a strong and adventurous horror film that sets the bar fairly high for other January releases.
Overall Recommendation: High
As the fourth film in the franchise, filmmakers have already gone to considerable lengths to establish the diegetic world and character mythology of Underworld: Awakening, and as a result, audiences are granted complete and immediate immersion into off-the-wall action and violence. In terms of the plot holding this sequel together, the story told is simplistic and razor thin, but it is really hard to care when bullets and explosions are jumping out at you in almost every scene. Kate Beckinsale returns as Selene in full force, tearing through enemies with unforgiving brutality and intensity, in essence proving that she has more than earned her status as a female action star. Given my status as a fan of the supernatural, I loved the implications and fan-boy science behind this next chapter in the war between undead monsters, but if that type of fantasy doesn’t interest you or you have never seen an Underworld movie, then a lot of the enjoyment inherent in this sequel will inevitably be lost. Still, with the high-octane action offered by this newest entry in a successful franchise through a sexy leading lady, Underworld: Awakening remains a strong and adventurous horror film that sets the bar fairly high for other January releases.
Overall Recommendation: High
Underworld: Awakening - Full Review
Underworld: Awakening - (January 20, 2012): R
Distributor: Screen Gems (Sony Pictures Entertainment)
Opening Weekend Box Office: #1 with $25,306,725
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $32,625,613
Gross Revenue: $46,025,613
Production Budget: $70 million
Directors: Mars Marlind and Bjorn Stein
Even though I enjoyed 2009’s Underworld: Rise of the Lycans, Kate Beckinsale’s absence was a definite shortcoming; so I, along with no doubt hundreds of fans, was thrilled when it was announced that the gorgeous actress would be returning to the series in this newest sequel. Having seen each Underworld film numerous times, I consider myself well-versed in the universe’s mythology, so I was not only curious to see how the story could develop further, but I was also eager to see vampires and werewolves (Lycans) again portrayed in the darker and grittier light that the Twilight series has been trampling on for years. And, given her spectacular miscasting as a damsel-in-distress in the utterly disappointing Contraband, I couldn’t wait for Beckinsale to pick up her weapons and start kicking ass again in the same way that helped make her famous. As the first true franchise entry of 2012, Screen Gems would undoubtedly benefit from audience familiarity, not to mention that 3D and IMAX offerings would sweeten the deal for any action and violence junkies looking for something entertaining at the theater. After being substantially disappointed by Haywire, I was praying that Underworld: Awakening would deliver so that Beckinsale could again demonstrate how a female star is supposed to lead an action thriller.
As the fourth installment in the Underworld films series, Awakening picks up six months after the events of 2006’s Evolution, where vampire Selene (Kate Beckinsale) is captured by humans during “The Purge,” a mass extermination of both immortal bloodlines; as a result, both vampires and Lycans are hunted with impunity. Placed in cryogenic suspension, Selene awakens twelve years later as a prisoner of a medical corporation, Antigen, which is actively experimenting to make a cure for both vampirism and lycanthropy. Selene is freed by a mysterious prisoner known only as “Subject 2,” and upon her escape, Selene discovers that “Subject 2” is none other than Eve (Sandrine Holt), the hybrid daughter that she shares with Michael Corvin (Scott Speedman), who has been reported dead for years. Finding both vampires and Lycans nearly extinct in this strange future, Selene struggles to cope with her daughter and escape pursuit by both the head scientist of Antigen, Dr. Jacob Lane (Stephen Rea), and an idealistic human police officer, Detective Sebastian (Michael Ealy). Seeking out a new vampire coven, Selene soon uncovers a sinister plot when a mutated form of Lycan emerges, thereby revealing hidden work at Antigen and threatening the safety of this former Death Dealer’s new family.
The trailers for Underworld: Awakening promised significant and mind-boggling action, and I am happy to report that this sequel more than delivered, with near non-stop violence and brutality that is only further enhanced in 3D. In an almost shameless attempt to appeal to a male audience’s baser instincts, Awakening showcases enough gun fights, explosions, and gory monster battles to keep the narrative’s level of energy through the roof for the entire run time, making this sequel the strongest action offering of the series. Kate Beckinsale is undeniably in her element as Selene, brutally dispatching every adversary that crosses her path while remaining unbelievably sexy, reminding audiences why they love the character in the first place. Speaking strictly to the horror and mythology elements of the narrative, the film delves deeper into the dark themes surrounding vampires and werewolves, and that fact is just downright cool and sure to entertain fans of the franchise. As nice as it was to sit back and enjoy familiar characters engaging in impressive action sequences, I cannot ignore the fact that Underworld: Awakening leaves quite a bit to be desired in terms of story.
In comparison to the other entries in the Underworld series, Awakening is by far the most razor-thin in terms of story, but that criticism has to be taken in consideration of the deep narratives that characterized the prequels. Over the course of the first three Underworld films, filmmakers went out of their way to set up the rules, guidelines, and history of a centuries-long battle between werewolves and vampires, so with all of that out of the way, the only thing left for Awakening to showcase was action and violence. It is almost as if audiences are being rewarded with the chance to turn off their brains and enjoy mythical creatures simply kicking the crap out of each other…as long as they had previously invested their time and energy in understanding the set-up and subtleties of the series. That being said, if you have never seen an Underworld film before, have no clue what a Death Dealer is, or have little interest in seeing Kate Beckinsale take on an army of immortals, then this sequel isn’t going to offer you much in the form of entertainment. Plain and simple, Underworld: Awakening was clearly made for the enjoyment of fans of the franchise, and they are the ones who will most appreciate the lean and exciting horror action film offered.
From a box office perspective, opening weekend numbers for Underworld: Awakening show that there are still plenty of people out there who believe that vampires are better suited to kill monstrous wolves rather than simply sparkle and complain about romance. In its first weekend, this newest Underworld sequel generated an impressive $25 million, outperforming significant competition in the form of Haywire, Red Tails, and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Hopefully positive word of mouth will continue to drive audience attendance and keep Beckinsale in her title of top action heroine for a few more weeks. The story leaves plenty open for another sequel, and barring some unforeseen tragedy, this newest horror thriller should generate more than enough revenue to justify green lighting a fifth entry. If you are in any way a fan of the Underworld films, the simple truth is that you cannot afford to miss Underworld: Awakening.
Overall Recommendation: High
Distributor: Screen Gems (Sony Pictures Entertainment)
Opening Weekend Box Office: #1 with $25,306,725
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $32,625,613
Gross Revenue: $46,025,613
Production Budget: $70 million
Directors: Mars Marlind and Bjorn Stein
Even though I enjoyed 2009’s Underworld: Rise of the Lycans, Kate Beckinsale’s absence was a definite shortcoming; so I, along with no doubt hundreds of fans, was thrilled when it was announced that the gorgeous actress would be returning to the series in this newest sequel. Having seen each Underworld film numerous times, I consider myself well-versed in the universe’s mythology, so I was not only curious to see how the story could develop further, but I was also eager to see vampires and werewolves (Lycans) again portrayed in the darker and grittier light that the Twilight series has been trampling on for years. And, given her spectacular miscasting as a damsel-in-distress in the utterly disappointing Contraband, I couldn’t wait for Beckinsale to pick up her weapons and start kicking ass again in the same way that helped make her famous. As the first true franchise entry of 2012, Screen Gems would undoubtedly benefit from audience familiarity, not to mention that 3D and IMAX offerings would sweeten the deal for any action and violence junkies looking for something entertaining at the theater. After being substantially disappointed by Haywire, I was praying that Underworld: Awakening would deliver so that Beckinsale could again demonstrate how a female star is supposed to lead an action thriller.
As the fourth installment in the Underworld films series, Awakening picks up six months after the events of 2006’s Evolution, where vampire Selene (Kate Beckinsale) is captured by humans during “The Purge,” a mass extermination of both immortal bloodlines; as a result, both vampires and Lycans are hunted with impunity. Placed in cryogenic suspension, Selene awakens twelve years later as a prisoner of a medical corporation, Antigen, which is actively experimenting to make a cure for both vampirism and lycanthropy. Selene is freed by a mysterious prisoner known only as “Subject 2,” and upon her escape, Selene discovers that “Subject 2” is none other than Eve (Sandrine Holt), the hybrid daughter that she shares with Michael Corvin (Scott Speedman), who has been reported dead for years. Finding both vampires and Lycans nearly extinct in this strange future, Selene struggles to cope with her daughter and escape pursuit by both the head scientist of Antigen, Dr. Jacob Lane (Stephen Rea), and an idealistic human police officer, Detective Sebastian (Michael Ealy). Seeking out a new vampire coven, Selene soon uncovers a sinister plot when a mutated form of Lycan emerges, thereby revealing hidden work at Antigen and threatening the safety of this former Death Dealer’s new family.
The trailers for Underworld: Awakening promised significant and mind-boggling action, and I am happy to report that this sequel more than delivered, with near non-stop violence and brutality that is only further enhanced in 3D. In an almost shameless attempt to appeal to a male audience’s baser instincts, Awakening showcases enough gun fights, explosions, and gory monster battles to keep the narrative’s level of energy through the roof for the entire run time, making this sequel the strongest action offering of the series. Kate Beckinsale is undeniably in her element as Selene, brutally dispatching every adversary that crosses her path while remaining unbelievably sexy, reminding audiences why they love the character in the first place. Speaking strictly to the horror and mythology elements of the narrative, the film delves deeper into the dark themes surrounding vampires and werewolves, and that fact is just downright cool and sure to entertain fans of the franchise. As nice as it was to sit back and enjoy familiar characters engaging in impressive action sequences, I cannot ignore the fact that Underworld: Awakening leaves quite a bit to be desired in terms of story.
In comparison to the other entries in the Underworld series, Awakening is by far the most razor-thin in terms of story, but that criticism has to be taken in consideration of the deep narratives that characterized the prequels. Over the course of the first three Underworld films, filmmakers went out of their way to set up the rules, guidelines, and history of a centuries-long battle between werewolves and vampires, so with all of that out of the way, the only thing left for Awakening to showcase was action and violence. It is almost as if audiences are being rewarded with the chance to turn off their brains and enjoy mythical creatures simply kicking the crap out of each other…as long as they had previously invested their time and energy in understanding the set-up and subtleties of the series. That being said, if you have never seen an Underworld film before, have no clue what a Death Dealer is, or have little interest in seeing Kate Beckinsale take on an army of immortals, then this sequel isn’t going to offer you much in the form of entertainment. Plain and simple, Underworld: Awakening was clearly made for the enjoyment of fans of the franchise, and they are the ones who will most appreciate the lean and exciting horror action film offered.
From a box office perspective, opening weekend numbers for Underworld: Awakening show that there are still plenty of people out there who believe that vampires are better suited to kill monstrous wolves rather than simply sparkle and complain about romance. In its first weekend, this newest Underworld sequel generated an impressive $25 million, outperforming significant competition in the form of Haywire, Red Tails, and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Hopefully positive word of mouth will continue to drive audience attendance and keep Beckinsale in her title of top action heroine for a few more weeks. The story leaves plenty open for another sequel, and barring some unforeseen tragedy, this newest horror thriller should generate more than enough revenue to justify green lighting a fifth entry. If you are in any way a fan of the Underworld films, the simple truth is that you cannot afford to miss Underworld: Awakening.
Overall Recommendation: High
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Haywire: Short and Sweet
There is nothing quite like starting off a year in movies with a definitive question mark, but Relativity Media seemed to have no problem with jumping into 2012 on a huge gamble. With a director of Steven Soderbergh’s caliber and a cast that included household names like Ewan McGregor, Antonio Banderas, and Michael Douglas, Haywire had all the makings of an early blockbuster, but the wildcard was undoubtedly Gina Carano. In the world of mixed martial arts, Carano is nothing short of an icon, holding a near-immaculate fighting record and having formerly been ranked the #3 female fighter in the world within her weight class …she certainly had the credentials to portray a female superspy who could give Jason Bourne a run for his money. Now, a strong fighting record was no guarantee that Carano could act, but certain personalities have made a successful transition from fighting ring to silver screen…case-in-point: Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. I wasn’t expecting Oscar-caliber acting, but Haywire still looked like a legitimate and entertaining action film, and RottenTomatoes reviews were through the roof, so I was still excited to see and review Relativity’s newest project.
Wow, I’m not sure I can ever trust RottenTomatoes again, because Haywire was a colossal disappointment, misfiring on almost every level and offering no clear redeeming values. The first and most apparent shortcoming is the extreme mismatch in directing, with Soderbergh applying the wrong tone to the film; to put it simply, scoring a “spy thriller” with the same music you used in the Ocean’s Eleven movies is distracting and a little insulting. Now, bad directing aside, Haywire could have had a coherent, engaging, and entertaining story, but (SPOILER ELERT) it didn’t…at all. As for our leading lady, Carano shows shockingly little acting talent, showing that filmmakers clearly lost their gamble with the MMA fighter. Add in painfully obvious fight choreography, and it is hard to fathom how any of the big names attached to this project (some of whom who had little more than an extended cameo) were persuaded to have their names associated with this train wreck. Don’t let the critics and post-release promotions fool you…Haywire is not worth your attention and is an easy and early contender for Worst Film of 2012.
Overall Recommendation: Very Low
Wow, I’m not sure I can ever trust RottenTomatoes again, because Haywire was a colossal disappointment, misfiring on almost every level and offering no clear redeeming values. The first and most apparent shortcoming is the extreme mismatch in directing, with Soderbergh applying the wrong tone to the film; to put it simply, scoring a “spy thriller” with the same music you used in the Ocean’s Eleven movies is distracting and a little insulting. Now, bad directing aside, Haywire could have had a coherent, engaging, and entertaining story, but (SPOILER ELERT) it didn’t…at all. As for our leading lady, Carano shows shockingly little acting talent, showing that filmmakers clearly lost their gamble with the MMA fighter. Add in painfully obvious fight choreography, and it is hard to fathom how any of the big names attached to this project (some of whom who had little more than an extended cameo) were persuaded to have their names associated with this train wreck. Don’t let the critics and post-release promotions fool you…Haywire is not worth your attention and is an easy and early contender for Worst Film of 2012.
Overall Recommendation: Very Low
Haywire: Full Review
Haywire - (January 20, 2012): R
Distributor: Relativity Media
Opening Weekend Box Office: #6 with $8,425,370
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $10,662,106
Gross Revenue: $10,662,106
Production Budget: $23 million
Director: Steven Soderbergh
When I first saw the trailer for Haywire, I was understandably intrigued by the notion of throwing a former MMA fighter into the crosshairs by having her headline an A-list cast in a Hollywood blockbuster, without any proven acting credentials. Now, to be fair, I am a fan of Gina Carano as a fighter, find her insanely attractive, and remember fondly her days as an American Gladiator, performing under the moniker “Crush,” so of course I was going to see her filmmaking debut. Steven Soderbergh’s name on the title-card was also a bit of a question mark, as he is better known for the crime-caper genre ( à la Ocean’s Eleven), but he hit the mark a few months ago with Contagion, so who’s to say that he couldn’t have success with yet another different type of film? Relativity Media has been skyrocketing in popularity lately, building a reputation with strong and engaging titles, and with so many bankable names attached to the project, it wouldn’t be difficult to sell Haywire to a diverse audience, whether that included the adolescent females who drool over Channing Tatum and Michael Fassbender or the cinematic savants who wanted to see Michael Douglas’ return to the big screen. Clearly positioned as the female Jason Bourne, Carano had plenty to prove to both her fans and curious moviegoers, and hopefully Haywire’s box office performance would follow the lead of the film’s already-impressive critical reception.
Telling a story of betrayal and cover-up using a non-linear narrative, Haywire first introduces audiences to covert operative Mallory Kane (Gina Carano) as she narrowly escapes detainment after an attack orchestrated by former associate, Aaron (Channing Tatum). Fleeing alongside an innocent patron, Scott (Michael Angarano), Mallory then recounts her story, where she recently worked alongside Aaron for a snatch-and-grab job in Barcelona. The contract was set up by her employer and ex-boyfriend, Kenneth (Ewan McGregor), and was in turn commissioned by government agents Coblenz (Michael Douglas) and Rodrigo (Antonio Banderas). Following the success of that mission, Mallory was then sent to Dublin as part of a reconnaissance mission alongside British agent Paul (Michael Fassbender); unfortunately, upon completion, Paul double-crosses and attacks Mallory, who narrowly prevails and soon finds herself pursued by local authorities. Things are further complicated when the narrative switches back to present-day and both Coblenz and Kenneth are branding Mallory a rogue agent and trying to convince her father, John Kane (Bill Paxton), that his daughter killed fellow agents in cold blood. Now racing to clear her name and punish those who betrayed her, Mallory must use all of her training to uncover the truth.
Based on that plot synopsis, you might be tempted to think that Haywire offers a thrilling and engaging spy adventure, but unfortunately, if you walk into the theater with those kinds of expectations, I guarantee that you will be bitterly disappointed. It is one thing to keep an audience in the dark and tie everything together in the final minutes; however it is quite another to bring in so many twist, turns, and unanswered questions, that the audience has no clue what the hell is going on for a majority of the film and is then disappointed by subpar resolutions. Tragically, Haywire is the type of film that you keep hoping will get better, but ultimately keeps dragging along until the end credits begin to roll…bummer. In terms of the “no-holds-barred” fighting that was promised in the trailers, Carano demonstrates why she is a champion, but the fights themselves are infrequent and overly-choreographed, offering little suspense or excitement. Now, you may think that I have altered my format and will now offer the positive accolades associated with Haywire, but the criticisms I just identified are simply the lesser of two evils, as this “thriller” makes some even graver mistakes.
In terms of directing, scoring, and acting, Haywire is easily an early contender for biggest failure in moviemaking of 2012. I have written over one hundred and twenty reviews for Pantages’ Theater, and I cannot think of one film that has a more blatant mismatch between director and subject material than Haywire, as Steven Soderbergh seemed determined to turn this spy action film into the next entry within the Ocean’s Eleven series. Mallory is supposed to be a no-nonsense operative dealing with the most dangerous individuals on the planet, but camera angles, pacing, and scoring keep everything too lighthearted…every single time someone jumps, runs, or gets shot, music kicks in that would have you believing that George Clooney is going to walk onscreen alongside Brad Pitt and start counting cards. And then there is the acting; as much as it pains me to say as a fan of the female lead and out of fear that Carano might actually read this review and retaliate, the reality is that the MMA star has zero charisma and delivers her lines with less personality than a robot…I’ve seen better acting on YouTube. No one can deny that Carano is nice to look at, but that is where the appeal of Haywire begins and ends; plain and simple, this is just an awful movie.
I cannot remember the last time that I was actually pissed that I paid money to see a film, but I felt slightly vindicated when Haywire underperformed in its first weekend. For all of the high-end names attached to the project, a 6th place opening has to be disappointing; my guess is that audiences just couldn’t get past the general unfamiliarity of Carano outside MMA circles. Thankfully, Relativity didn’t spend too much on this project, so there is a chance that financial loss will be at a minimum when weighed against a $23 million production budget. For the life of me, I cannot imagine how Haywire received an 80% on RottenTomatoes, I don’t think I can ever trust that review aggregator again. I don’t care how curious or forgiving you may be, DO NOT waste time or money on Haywire, you deserve far better.
Overall Recommendation: Very Low
Distributor: Relativity Media
Opening Weekend Box Office: #6 with $8,425,370
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $10,662,106
Gross Revenue: $10,662,106
Production Budget: $23 million
Director: Steven Soderbergh
When I first saw the trailer for Haywire, I was understandably intrigued by the notion of throwing a former MMA fighter into the crosshairs by having her headline an A-list cast in a Hollywood blockbuster, without any proven acting credentials. Now, to be fair, I am a fan of Gina Carano as a fighter, find her insanely attractive, and remember fondly her days as an American Gladiator, performing under the moniker “Crush,” so of course I was going to see her filmmaking debut. Steven Soderbergh’s name on the title-card was also a bit of a question mark, as he is better known for the crime-caper genre ( à la Ocean’s Eleven), but he hit the mark a few months ago with Contagion, so who’s to say that he couldn’t have success with yet another different type of film? Relativity Media has been skyrocketing in popularity lately, building a reputation with strong and engaging titles, and with so many bankable names attached to the project, it wouldn’t be difficult to sell Haywire to a diverse audience, whether that included the adolescent females who drool over Channing Tatum and Michael Fassbender or the cinematic savants who wanted to see Michael Douglas’ return to the big screen. Clearly positioned as the female Jason Bourne, Carano had plenty to prove to both her fans and curious moviegoers, and hopefully Haywire’s box office performance would follow the lead of the film’s already-impressive critical reception.
Telling a story of betrayal and cover-up using a non-linear narrative, Haywire first introduces audiences to covert operative Mallory Kane (Gina Carano) as she narrowly escapes detainment after an attack orchestrated by former associate, Aaron (Channing Tatum). Fleeing alongside an innocent patron, Scott (Michael Angarano), Mallory then recounts her story, where she recently worked alongside Aaron for a snatch-and-grab job in Barcelona. The contract was set up by her employer and ex-boyfriend, Kenneth (Ewan McGregor), and was in turn commissioned by government agents Coblenz (Michael Douglas) and Rodrigo (Antonio Banderas). Following the success of that mission, Mallory was then sent to Dublin as part of a reconnaissance mission alongside British agent Paul (Michael Fassbender); unfortunately, upon completion, Paul double-crosses and attacks Mallory, who narrowly prevails and soon finds herself pursued by local authorities. Things are further complicated when the narrative switches back to present-day and both Coblenz and Kenneth are branding Mallory a rogue agent and trying to convince her father, John Kane (Bill Paxton), that his daughter killed fellow agents in cold blood. Now racing to clear her name and punish those who betrayed her, Mallory must use all of her training to uncover the truth.
Based on that plot synopsis, you might be tempted to think that Haywire offers a thrilling and engaging spy adventure, but unfortunately, if you walk into the theater with those kinds of expectations, I guarantee that you will be bitterly disappointed. It is one thing to keep an audience in the dark and tie everything together in the final minutes; however it is quite another to bring in so many twist, turns, and unanswered questions, that the audience has no clue what the hell is going on for a majority of the film and is then disappointed by subpar resolutions. Tragically, Haywire is the type of film that you keep hoping will get better, but ultimately keeps dragging along until the end credits begin to roll…bummer. In terms of the “no-holds-barred” fighting that was promised in the trailers, Carano demonstrates why she is a champion, but the fights themselves are infrequent and overly-choreographed, offering little suspense or excitement. Now, you may think that I have altered my format and will now offer the positive accolades associated with Haywire, but the criticisms I just identified are simply the lesser of two evils, as this “thriller” makes some even graver mistakes.
In terms of directing, scoring, and acting, Haywire is easily an early contender for biggest failure in moviemaking of 2012. I have written over one hundred and twenty reviews for Pantages’ Theater, and I cannot think of one film that has a more blatant mismatch between director and subject material than Haywire, as Steven Soderbergh seemed determined to turn this spy action film into the next entry within the Ocean’s Eleven series. Mallory is supposed to be a no-nonsense operative dealing with the most dangerous individuals on the planet, but camera angles, pacing, and scoring keep everything too lighthearted…every single time someone jumps, runs, or gets shot, music kicks in that would have you believing that George Clooney is going to walk onscreen alongside Brad Pitt and start counting cards. And then there is the acting; as much as it pains me to say as a fan of the female lead and out of fear that Carano might actually read this review and retaliate, the reality is that the MMA star has zero charisma and delivers her lines with less personality than a robot…I’ve seen better acting on YouTube. No one can deny that Carano is nice to look at, but that is where the appeal of Haywire begins and ends; plain and simple, this is just an awful movie.
I cannot remember the last time that I was actually pissed that I paid money to see a film, but I felt slightly vindicated when Haywire underperformed in its first weekend. For all of the high-end names attached to the project, a 6th place opening has to be disappointing; my guess is that audiences just couldn’t get past the general unfamiliarity of Carano outside MMA circles. Thankfully, Relativity didn’t spend too much on this project, so there is a chance that financial loss will be at a minimum when weighed against a $23 million production budget. For the life of me, I cannot imagine how Haywire received an 80% on RottenTomatoes, I don’t think I can ever trust that review aggregator again. I don’t care how curious or forgiving you may be, DO NOT waste time or money on Haywire, you deserve far better.
Overall Recommendation: Very Low
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
The Iron Lady: Short and Sweet
If you were to ask me to identify the best actor in Hollywood, I would have to weigh and debate the work of a number of heavyweights, but if you inquired about the best actress, my answer would invariably be Meryl Streep. Throughout her distinguished career, Streep has received 16 Academy Award nominations and 26 Golden Globe nominations…needless to say, when she decides to make a movie, you had damned well better pay attention. As Oscar buzz was starting to build, critics and analysts started to turn their attention towards Streep when it was revealed that she would be portraying British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in a historical drama. When you consider the fact that another historical drama (The King’s Speech) won not only the Best Actor but also the highly-coveted Best Picture accolade last year, then it is understandable that expectations were insanely high for The Iron Lady. Early critical reaction was lukewarm concerning the film but white-hot concerning Streep’s performance, so when the film moved from limited to wide-release, I couldn’t wait to see the talented actress earn even more recognition.
After seeing The Iron Lady, I have no doubt that Meryl Streep has earned her next Oscar, as she delivers a flawless and mesmerizing performance as Margaret Thatcher, exuding a confidence and regal presence that you will not soon forget. In portraying the “Iron Lady” through the start, height, and decline, of her political career; along with her battle with dementia later in life, Streep disappears into her role and demonstrates a brilliant range of acting that will impress the hell out of anyone. As far as the film itself goes, I found it considerably more entertaining than what I was led to expect from early critical reaction, but that might be a function of my familiarity with the character’s historical background. If you are not well-versed in British history and Lady Thatcher’s political career, I can understand how The Iron Lady might be a little difficult to follow, but the unique narrative style should be enough to keep you interested. Plain and simple, Meryl Streep has already won a Golden Globe for her portrayal, and if you are at all interested in watching an Oscar-winning performance, then you need to see The Iron Lady.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
After seeing The Iron Lady, I have no doubt that Meryl Streep has earned her next Oscar, as she delivers a flawless and mesmerizing performance as Margaret Thatcher, exuding a confidence and regal presence that you will not soon forget. In portraying the “Iron Lady” through the start, height, and decline, of her political career; along with her battle with dementia later in life, Streep disappears into her role and demonstrates a brilliant range of acting that will impress the hell out of anyone. As far as the film itself goes, I found it considerably more entertaining than what I was led to expect from early critical reaction, but that might be a function of my familiarity with the character’s historical background. If you are not well-versed in British history and Lady Thatcher’s political career, I can understand how The Iron Lady might be a little difficult to follow, but the unique narrative style should be enough to keep you interested. Plain and simple, Meryl Streep has already won a Golden Globe for her portrayal, and if you are at all interested in watching an Oscar-winning performance, then you need to see The Iron Lady.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
The Iron Lady: Full Review
The Iron Lady - (December 30, 2011 – Limited; January 13, 2012 – Wide): PG-13
Distributor: The Weinstein Company
Opening Weekend Box Office (Wide): #11 with $5,419,000
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $7,062,000
Gross Revenue: $18,062,000
Production Budget: $13 million
Director: Phyllida Lloyd
When you consider her recent work like The Devil Wears Prada, Doubt, and Julie & Julia, Meryl Streep has been a consistently strong and high quality presence at theaters, so virtually any movie she works on is guaranteed Oscar attention. Last year, the Weinstein Company shocked moviegoers with a strong and powerfully-acted historical drama, The Kings’ Speech, which was no stranger to golden trophies; and this year, it looked like the same formula would strike gold again. Buzz was through the roof when it was announced that Meryl Streep would be portraying one of the most powerful women in history, as no one questioned the appropriateness of the best actress in Hollywood tackling the undeniably difficult role. Besides being a fan of the actress, I was also thrilled by the subject matter of The Iron Lady, as I had studied Lady Thatcher’s politics extensively during high school European History and was curious to see how they would translate on-screen. I was unable to find The Iron Lady during its limited release, and though critics loved Streep’s performance, some were critical of the film’s quality; so, I was understandably glad when the film was eventually moved to more theaters so that I could form my own opinion.
Taking place over 3 days in the life of Lady Margaret Thatcher, The Iron Lady tells the story of the Prime Minister’s life through a series of flashbacks. In present day, the elderly Thatcher (Meryl Streep) is struggling with dementia and having strong hallucinations of her recently deceased husband, Denis Thatcher (Harry Potter’s Jim Broadbent). As Margaret slowly starts packing up Denis’ possessions, she reflects on her childhood and her rise through the Conservative Party and the House of Commons. As Thatcher is eventually elected as the longest serving Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, the film examines several historical events during her tenure, such as Britain’s economic recession, the Falklands War, and her opposition to European Integration. Finding a way to deal with her grief properly, this once-powerful woman must now cope with her powerlessness relative to her impressive and historical legacy.
It should come as absolutely no surprise that easily the strongest part of The Iron Lady is Meryl Streep’s awe-inspiring performance, which is fueled by strong writing, clever direction, and cast chemistry. Whether it was using the trademarked dialect of Lady Thatcher or playing up the intensity of the dramatic cinematography, anytime Streep delivers a line, you feel the power and motivation of the titular historical figure. Streep also shows considerable range in portraying the professional Thatcher as distinct from the domestic Thatcher, which she achieves largely thanks to considerable chemistry with Jim Broadbent…the two make a very convincing elderly couple . Speaking of “elderly,” the makeup used to portray an aged Thatcher is phenomenal, and the two distinct life-phases portrayed in the film warrant a comparison with Leonardo DiCaprio’s J. Edgar; using this type of storytelling, The Iron Lady succeeded where J. Edgar failed. Now, other critics have agreed with my assessment of Streep’s performance, but where we disagree is the quality of the film aside from the phenomenal acting contained within.
The Iron Lady is perhaps one of the purest biographical films I have seen in some time, not because the facts presented are indisputable, but because there is no central hook to the film other than getting a history lesson on Margaret Thatcher. In The King’s Speech, audiences were drawn in while watching Colin Firth struggle with a stutter, but in this drama, there is no real conflict to be resolved…rather, you must just find interest in Lady Thatcher’s political career. Now, as I said earlier, I was relatively familiar with the title character given past studies, but I do believe that there are not many out there who would draw as much pleasure out of the story told, aside from history buffs. Still, you shouldn’t let this qualifier stop you from enjoying The Iron Lady, as Streep’s performance is so mesmerizing that I doubt most will be able to identify this supposed misstep. It may not warrant any Best Picture nominations, but with no blatant shortcomings, I think it is safe to assume that The Weinstein Company can add this newest historical drama to their list of successes.
From a box office standpoint, no one should have expected The Iron Lady to break the bank, given its time spent as a limited opener, but I am slightly surprised that more audiences didn’t respond to the praise surrounding Streep’s performance. Granted, Contraband, Joyful Noise, Beauty and the Beast (3D), and holiday holdovers were going to undeniably split the audience, but The Iron Lady deserved far better. Time has done its job though, as the historical drama has already covered its modest production budget; and since Streep has already nabbed a Golden Globe, I suspect audience attendance to experience a bit of a surge. Once Oscar nominations are announced in a few weeks, I will be astounded if Streep’s name is absent…hell, given the quality of her performance, I will be enraged if she doesn’t win. If you are a fan of Meryl Streep in any way, shape, or form, you cannot afford to miss The Iron Lady.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Distributor: The Weinstein Company
Opening Weekend Box Office (Wide): #11 with $5,419,000
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $7,062,000
Gross Revenue: $18,062,000
Production Budget: $13 million
Director: Phyllida Lloyd
When you consider her recent work like The Devil Wears Prada, Doubt, and Julie & Julia, Meryl Streep has been a consistently strong and high quality presence at theaters, so virtually any movie she works on is guaranteed Oscar attention. Last year, the Weinstein Company shocked moviegoers with a strong and powerfully-acted historical drama, The Kings’ Speech, which was no stranger to golden trophies; and this year, it looked like the same formula would strike gold again. Buzz was through the roof when it was announced that Meryl Streep would be portraying one of the most powerful women in history, as no one questioned the appropriateness of the best actress in Hollywood tackling the undeniably difficult role. Besides being a fan of the actress, I was also thrilled by the subject matter of The Iron Lady, as I had studied Lady Thatcher’s politics extensively during high school European History and was curious to see how they would translate on-screen. I was unable to find The Iron Lady during its limited release, and though critics loved Streep’s performance, some were critical of the film’s quality; so, I was understandably glad when the film was eventually moved to more theaters so that I could form my own opinion.
Taking place over 3 days in the life of Lady Margaret Thatcher, The Iron Lady tells the story of the Prime Minister’s life through a series of flashbacks. In present day, the elderly Thatcher (Meryl Streep) is struggling with dementia and having strong hallucinations of her recently deceased husband, Denis Thatcher (Harry Potter’s Jim Broadbent). As Margaret slowly starts packing up Denis’ possessions, she reflects on her childhood and her rise through the Conservative Party and the House of Commons. As Thatcher is eventually elected as the longest serving Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, the film examines several historical events during her tenure, such as Britain’s economic recession, the Falklands War, and her opposition to European Integration. Finding a way to deal with her grief properly, this once-powerful woman must now cope with her powerlessness relative to her impressive and historical legacy.
It should come as absolutely no surprise that easily the strongest part of The Iron Lady is Meryl Streep’s awe-inspiring performance, which is fueled by strong writing, clever direction, and cast chemistry. Whether it was using the trademarked dialect of Lady Thatcher or playing up the intensity of the dramatic cinematography, anytime Streep delivers a line, you feel the power and motivation of the titular historical figure. Streep also shows considerable range in portraying the professional Thatcher as distinct from the domestic Thatcher, which she achieves largely thanks to considerable chemistry with Jim Broadbent…the two make a very convincing elderly couple . Speaking of “elderly,” the makeup used to portray an aged Thatcher is phenomenal, and the two distinct life-phases portrayed in the film warrant a comparison with Leonardo DiCaprio’s J. Edgar; using this type of storytelling, The Iron Lady succeeded where J. Edgar failed. Now, other critics have agreed with my assessment of Streep’s performance, but where we disagree is the quality of the film aside from the phenomenal acting contained within.
The Iron Lady is perhaps one of the purest biographical films I have seen in some time, not because the facts presented are indisputable, but because there is no central hook to the film other than getting a history lesson on Margaret Thatcher. In The King’s Speech, audiences were drawn in while watching Colin Firth struggle with a stutter, but in this drama, there is no real conflict to be resolved…rather, you must just find interest in Lady Thatcher’s political career. Now, as I said earlier, I was relatively familiar with the title character given past studies, but I do believe that there are not many out there who would draw as much pleasure out of the story told, aside from history buffs. Still, you shouldn’t let this qualifier stop you from enjoying The Iron Lady, as Streep’s performance is so mesmerizing that I doubt most will be able to identify this supposed misstep. It may not warrant any Best Picture nominations, but with no blatant shortcomings, I think it is safe to assume that The Weinstein Company can add this newest historical drama to their list of successes.
From a box office standpoint, no one should have expected The Iron Lady to break the bank, given its time spent as a limited opener, but I am slightly surprised that more audiences didn’t respond to the praise surrounding Streep’s performance. Granted, Contraband, Joyful Noise, Beauty and the Beast (3D), and holiday holdovers were going to undeniably split the audience, but The Iron Lady deserved far better. Time has done its job though, as the historical drama has already covered its modest production budget; and since Streep has already nabbed a Golden Globe, I suspect audience attendance to experience a bit of a surge. Once Oscar nominations are announced in a few weeks, I will be astounded if Streep’s name is absent…hell, given the quality of her performance, I will be enraged if she doesn’t win. If you are a fan of Meryl Streep in any way, shape, or form, you cannot afford to miss The Iron Lady.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Monday, January 16, 2012
Contraband: Short and Sweet
There are few actors that I have blind-faith in, but after The Italian Job, The Departed, Shooter, and The Fighter, I will see anything that Mark Wahlberg decides to put in theaters. Needless to say, when I first caught wind of Contraband, I was thrilled that one of my favorite actors would be returning to one of his best genres, namely the gritty crime thriller. There was also a considerable amount of curiosity concerning the proposed subject-matter, as crime-centered narratives often showcase elaborate heists but rarely venture into the world of professional smuggling. Throw-in Kate Beckinsale, one of the most gorgeous women on the planet, and Giovanni Ribisi, a perpetually underrated yet consistently strong performer, and I had insanely high expectations for Contraband. Leading up to its release, promotions for the first true action thriller of 2012 were absolutely everywhere, and with early critical reviews praising the film, it looked like Wahlberg would strike cinematic gold…again.
Wow…as much as it pains me to say it, Contraband turned out to be a supreme disappointment, with this much-hyped film suffering from overacting, miscasting, poor direction, shoddy cinematography, and altogether confusing storytelling. The first and most easily identifiable shortcoming is the erratic direction and grainy cinematography, with blocked camera angles and blurry screen-shots trying to come-off as gritty, but only giving the film a low-budget and unrefined feel. Now, I could have probably forgiven the distracting look of Contraband had the story been thrilling or entertaining, as was promised; unfortunately, such was not the case. For the first hour, it is difficult to discern what exactly is unfolding onscreen, as the narrative does little to explain or identify some of the supposedly more elaborate points of the smugglers’ plans…heist films go through painful lengths to walk viewers through everything, so why wasn’t that tactic deemed necessary for a type of crime that few adequately understand? To be fair, Contraband does have a few entertaining moments, but in light of the aforementioned shortcomings, alongside other missteps like Wahlberg’s forced levity and Beckinsale’s poor casting, and this “thriller” is guaranteed to be an epic let-down for most moviegoers.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Wow…as much as it pains me to say it, Contraband turned out to be a supreme disappointment, with this much-hyped film suffering from overacting, miscasting, poor direction, shoddy cinematography, and altogether confusing storytelling. The first and most easily identifiable shortcoming is the erratic direction and grainy cinematography, with blocked camera angles and blurry screen-shots trying to come-off as gritty, but only giving the film a low-budget and unrefined feel. Now, I could have probably forgiven the distracting look of Contraband had the story been thrilling or entertaining, as was promised; unfortunately, such was not the case. For the first hour, it is difficult to discern what exactly is unfolding onscreen, as the narrative does little to explain or identify some of the supposedly more elaborate points of the smugglers’ plans…heist films go through painful lengths to walk viewers through everything, so why wasn’t that tactic deemed necessary for a type of crime that few adequately understand? To be fair, Contraband does have a few entertaining moments, but in light of the aforementioned shortcomings, alongside other missteps like Wahlberg’s forced levity and Beckinsale’s poor casting, and this “thriller” is guaranteed to be an epic let-down for most moviegoers.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Contraband: Full Review
Contraband - (January 13, 2012): R
Distributor: Universal Pictures
Opening Weekend Box Office: #1 with $24,500,000
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $28,800,000
Gross Revenue: $30,300,000
Production Budget: $25 million
Director: Baltasar Kormákur
Normally, after the crowded box office and the high-quality offerings of The Holiday Movie Season, moviegoers usually have to tolerate a string of decidedly mediocre titles as the New Year gains momentum, but by all appearances, it looked like Contraband would be primed to break that trend. A remake of a 2009 Icelandic film, this newest thriller seemed to promise everything that fans love about Hollywood everyman Mark Wahlberg, namely guns, violence, and unmatched criminal planning and precision. Based on Wahlberg’s reputation alone, Universal would have little trouble selling the film to audiences, but Contraband also boasted a surprisingly strong cast, especially since Kate Beckinsale’s legions of Underworld fans would jump at any opportunity to see her on the big screen. If there was one question mark, it was the inclusion of Icelandic director Baltasar Kormákur, who has no true proven success with American audiences and thus presented a bit of a gamble as the leader of a star-studded Hollywood blockbuster. Still, despite that one potential hiccup, I was enough of a fan of the talented cast and proposed subject-matter to be genuinely excited to see and review Contraband.
Taking viewers deep inside the world of professional smuggling, Contraband focuses on retired smuggler Chris Farraday (Mark Wahlberg), who has his peaceful life thrown into chaos when his inept brother-in-law, Andy (X-men: First Class’ Caleb Landry Jones), botches an important job. When Andy’s life is threatened by ruthless drug dealer Tim Briggs (Giovanni Ribisi), Chris assumes the debt and discovers that he has two weeks to come up with $700,000. Deciding that he has no other alternative but to return to a life of crime, Chris agrees to smuggle $10 million in counterfeit super-bills from Panama, leaving his best friend, Sebastian Abney (Ben Foster), to care for his family. However, an increasingly impatient Briggs assaults and threatens Chris’ wife, Kate (Kate Beckinsale), leaving Chris helpless to protect his loved ones while he tries to complete his operation. Dodging authorities, a corrupt ship captain (J.K. Simmons), and rival gangsters, Chris resolves to return home safely and punish those that have threatened to harm his family and have forced him back into a life of crime.
With such a loaded plot, Contraband had all the makings of a classic and thoroughly entertaining crime thriller, and there are points where the crime is genuinely exciting and some of the smuggling tricks are truly clever, but those moments are few and far in-between. As I said in the “Short and Sweet” review, viewers are fairly familiar with heist procedures, and yet heist films still take the time to carefully explain every trick…in the case of Contraband, viewers are thrown head-first into a complicated smuggling plot with little-to-no explanation. For easily the first hour of the film, it is downright difficult to understand what exactly is unfolding on-screen, and though most questions are answered by the time the end-credits roll, you are either left disappointed or have already lost interest. In terms of the plus-and-minus aspects of the cast, Wahlberg for the most part delivers the type of cinematic badass that we have come to expect over the years, but a portion of his performance feels forced, with his moments of “levity” being abrupt and downright corny. While the mix of positives and negatives that I just laid out may seem bad enough, the reality is that there are far worse offenses present within Contraband.
Easily the most abrupt and noticeable shortcoming of Contraband is its sloppy direction and cinematography, which would have you believe that you were watching a low-budget B-film as opposed to a Hollywood A-list action thriller. Cinematographer Barry Ackroyd tried to produce the same gritty and realistic feeling that he achieved in The Hurt Locker, but he completely missed the mark this time around, and together with director Baltasar Kormákur, the two produce enough blurred shots, erratic camerawork, and obscured angles to thoroughly piss-off the audiences that were led to believe that there would be some refinement to this film. Now, when I normally take the time to comment and criticize on the cast, it is usually to lay blame on poor acting, but this time around, I have to take a shot at a thoroughly questionable casting choice. Between Pearl Harbor, Van Helsing, and the Underworld series, Kate Beckinsale has made her career as a strong and thoroughly independent female powerhouse, but in Contraband, she is relegated to embodying a defenseless and rather dim-witted damsel-in-distress…talk about disappointing. Maybe my expectations for Mark Wahlberg’s work have been built-up a little too high, but I simply cannot overlook the considerably large amount of lazy and blatantly negative elements that were ultimately presented.
For as weak a project as Contraband ultimately is, audiences have yet to realize this horrible truth, so the inevitable effects of word-of-mouth will not be seen until the film’s second weekend. Wahlberg and Beckinsale proved that they still possess an undeniably strong draw, as this newest thriller smashed competition and took first place with nearly $25 million in its opening weekend. Thankfully, such a strong opening has already recovered the film’s modest production budget, so Universal cannot be that worried about sub-par critical reaction. Hopefully, January has gotten its misstep out of the way early and upcoming action entries like Underworld: Awakening, Haywire, and The Grey will be far more entertaining. Plain and simple, if you are a true Mark Wahlberg fan, you will be disappointed in Contraband, and if you feel absolutely compelled to still see the film, then you will be better off waiting for Netflix or Red Box.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Distributor: Universal Pictures
Opening Weekend Box Office: #1 with $24,500,000
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $28,800,000
Gross Revenue: $30,300,000
Production Budget: $25 million
Director: Baltasar Kormákur
Normally, after the crowded box office and the high-quality offerings of The Holiday Movie Season, moviegoers usually have to tolerate a string of decidedly mediocre titles as the New Year gains momentum, but by all appearances, it looked like Contraband would be primed to break that trend. A remake of a 2009 Icelandic film, this newest thriller seemed to promise everything that fans love about Hollywood everyman Mark Wahlberg, namely guns, violence, and unmatched criminal planning and precision. Based on Wahlberg’s reputation alone, Universal would have little trouble selling the film to audiences, but Contraband also boasted a surprisingly strong cast, especially since Kate Beckinsale’s legions of Underworld fans would jump at any opportunity to see her on the big screen. If there was one question mark, it was the inclusion of Icelandic director Baltasar Kormákur, who has no true proven success with American audiences and thus presented a bit of a gamble as the leader of a star-studded Hollywood blockbuster. Still, despite that one potential hiccup, I was enough of a fan of the talented cast and proposed subject-matter to be genuinely excited to see and review Contraband.
Taking viewers deep inside the world of professional smuggling, Contraband focuses on retired smuggler Chris Farraday (Mark Wahlberg), who has his peaceful life thrown into chaos when his inept brother-in-law, Andy (X-men: First Class’ Caleb Landry Jones), botches an important job. When Andy’s life is threatened by ruthless drug dealer Tim Briggs (Giovanni Ribisi), Chris assumes the debt and discovers that he has two weeks to come up with $700,000. Deciding that he has no other alternative but to return to a life of crime, Chris agrees to smuggle $10 million in counterfeit super-bills from Panama, leaving his best friend, Sebastian Abney (Ben Foster), to care for his family. However, an increasingly impatient Briggs assaults and threatens Chris’ wife, Kate (Kate Beckinsale), leaving Chris helpless to protect his loved ones while he tries to complete his operation. Dodging authorities, a corrupt ship captain (J.K. Simmons), and rival gangsters, Chris resolves to return home safely and punish those that have threatened to harm his family and have forced him back into a life of crime.
With such a loaded plot, Contraband had all the makings of a classic and thoroughly entertaining crime thriller, and there are points where the crime is genuinely exciting and some of the smuggling tricks are truly clever, but those moments are few and far in-between. As I said in the “Short and Sweet” review, viewers are fairly familiar with heist procedures, and yet heist films still take the time to carefully explain every trick…in the case of Contraband, viewers are thrown head-first into a complicated smuggling plot with little-to-no explanation. For easily the first hour of the film, it is downright difficult to understand what exactly is unfolding on-screen, and though most questions are answered by the time the end-credits roll, you are either left disappointed or have already lost interest. In terms of the plus-and-minus aspects of the cast, Wahlberg for the most part delivers the type of cinematic badass that we have come to expect over the years, but a portion of his performance feels forced, with his moments of “levity” being abrupt and downright corny. While the mix of positives and negatives that I just laid out may seem bad enough, the reality is that there are far worse offenses present within Contraband.
Easily the most abrupt and noticeable shortcoming of Contraband is its sloppy direction and cinematography, which would have you believe that you were watching a low-budget B-film as opposed to a Hollywood A-list action thriller. Cinematographer Barry Ackroyd tried to produce the same gritty and realistic feeling that he achieved in The Hurt Locker, but he completely missed the mark this time around, and together with director Baltasar Kormákur, the two produce enough blurred shots, erratic camerawork, and obscured angles to thoroughly piss-off the audiences that were led to believe that there would be some refinement to this film. Now, when I normally take the time to comment and criticize on the cast, it is usually to lay blame on poor acting, but this time around, I have to take a shot at a thoroughly questionable casting choice. Between Pearl Harbor, Van Helsing, and the Underworld series, Kate Beckinsale has made her career as a strong and thoroughly independent female powerhouse, but in Contraband, she is relegated to embodying a defenseless and rather dim-witted damsel-in-distress…talk about disappointing. Maybe my expectations for Mark Wahlberg’s work have been built-up a little too high, but I simply cannot overlook the considerably large amount of lazy and blatantly negative elements that were ultimately presented.
For as weak a project as Contraband ultimately is, audiences have yet to realize this horrible truth, so the inevitable effects of word-of-mouth will not be seen until the film’s second weekend. Wahlberg and Beckinsale proved that they still possess an undeniably strong draw, as this newest thriller smashed competition and took first place with nearly $25 million in its opening weekend. Thankfully, such a strong opening has already recovered the film’s modest production budget, so Universal cannot be that worried about sub-par critical reaction. Hopefully, January has gotten its misstep out of the way early and upcoming action entries like Underworld: Awakening, Haywire, and The Grey will be far more entertaining. Plain and simple, if you are a true Mark Wahlberg fan, you will be disappointed in Contraband, and if you feel absolutely compelled to still see the film, then you will be better off waiting for Netflix or Red Box.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Friday, January 6, 2012
War Horse: Short and Sweet
Back a few months ago, when buzz for early Oscar contenders was first starting to build, analysts were absolutely giddy concerning Steven Spielberg’s upcoming World War I epic, even though it would oddly enough focus on an equine. While Spielberg is normally associated with extra-terrestrial subject matter, no one can deny that the man is insanely talented anytime he tackles warfare or war-time periods…case-in-point: Saving Private Ryan and Schindler’s List. However, in spite of possessing all the early makings of an award-winner, I wasn’t entirely sold on War Horse, and the attached teaser trailers did little to assuage my skepticism. Not only was the main face associated with the film a no-name, but the only plot elements shown involved little more than an isolated horse running and dodging artillery on a war-torn battlefield; Spielberg is good, but promotions seemed to indicate that he had very little material with which to work his cinematic magic. In fact, the only thing compelling me to see and review War Horse involved the fact that critics were raving and labeling the film a new classic…clearly, I had to verify whether the film was actually good or critics were simply acting as “yes” men to the legendary director.
In its entirety, I did enjoy War Horse, and I can fully appreciate the impressive production design, the beautiful cinematography, and the experienced direction, but that does not change the fact that it takes nearly an hour for any of these accolades to appear. For easily the first half-hour to forty minutes, nothing definitive happens in War Horse, with the dialogue and score trying way too hard to build some semblance of emotional attachment with the audience…a horse pulls a plow, that’s about it. Thankfully, the film starts to live up to its title once it finally introduces the warfare framing devices and the titular horse begins integrating into distinct, yet interconnected narratives that highlight the human sacrifices of war. Each of the battle sequences are as gripping as they are sobering, and that fact combines with the mature script to only further detail why Spielberg has had unparalleled success. If you can make it through the lagging and extended introduction, then War Horse will reward you with a very engaging drama.
Overall Recommendation: High
In its entirety, I did enjoy War Horse, and I can fully appreciate the impressive production design, the beautiful cinematography, and the experienced direction, but that does not change the fact that it takes nearly an hour for any of these accolades to appear. For easily the first half-hour to forty minutes, nothing definitive happens in War Horse, with the dialogue and score trying way too hard to build some semblance of emotional attachment with the audience…a horse pulls a plow, that’s about it. Thankfully, the film starts to live up to its title once it finally introduces the warfare framing devices and the titular horse begins integrating into distinct, yet interconnected narratives that highlight the human sacrifices of war. Each of the battle sequences are as gripping as they are sobering, and that fact combines with the mature script to only further detail why Spielberg has had unparalleled success. If you can make it through the lagging and extended introduction, then War Horse will reward you with a very engaging drama.
Overall Recommendation: High
War Horse: Full Review
War Horse - (December 25, 2011): PG-13
Distributor: Touchstone Pictures
Opening Weekend Box Office: #7 with $14,527,972
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $48,225,212
Gross Revenue: $52,225,212
Production Budget: $66 million
Director: Steven Spielberg
Though I may not love every entry in his extensive filmography, I have long since learned to pay attention anytime Steven Spielberg gets behind the camera, and many were curious to see what he could do with War Horse, especially since the film was based on a children’s novel that had already received a stage adaptation. As more information about the film was released, it quickly became apparent that this war drama would be banking almost exclusively on its director’s reputation as opposed to a brand-name cast…the main character was largely an unknown, and some of the faces that I did recognize were anything but household names. I was glad to see Tom Hiddleston (Thor) and David Thewlis (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban), but I doubted that they would be enough to fill a theater; clearly DreamWorks and Touchstone would have their hands full is selling audiences. With the many action films and animated/family features built off of established franchises hitting during the Holiday Movie Season, a definitive hook would be needed to grab attention, and I wasn’t convinced that footage of a horse running through trenches would be enough. So, out of sheer curiosity dedicated to validating whether a war drama centered on an animal with no bankable actors deserved Oscar buzz, I knew that I would need to review War Horse.
Opening in England just prior to the beginning of World War I, War Horse introduces audiences to a young colt raised by young farmer, Albert Narracott (Jeremy Irvine); having trained the horse, now named “Joey,” Albert helps plow his father’s farm and build revenue to pay-off the unforgiving landlord, Lyons (David Thewlis). When a storm wipes out the crops, Albert’s father is forced to sell Joey to English forces that are mobilizing for the upcoming war with Germany; understandably devastated, Albert is comforted by the kindly Captain Nicholls (Tom Hiddleston) who promises to return Joey if he can at the conclusion of the war. After Captain Nicholls is killed in battle, Joey is utilized a number of different ways and interacts with several characters across the Western Front, whether that involves working as part of a German ambulance wagon and artillery convoy, or bonding with a young French girl and her kindly grandfather. Making a distinct impression on every person he meets, Joey induces several acts of unprecedented compassion during the war that has engulfed the lives of so many. As fate would have it, Albert eventually ends up serving in the English infantry, having never forgotten his beloved horse, setting up the unlikely possibility that these two friends may eventually reunite and return home safely.
Having the titular “War Horse” switch settings and interact with different characters in unique ways is a thoroughly refreshing way of telling a story that I have not seen in some time, a fact that combines with other beautiful filmmaking elements to make War Horse a thorough epic that one cannot help but enjoy. It does take some time, but you do eventually build a bond with Joey and become truly invested in his welfare, a testament to the strong storytelling abilities of Spielberg. And, in speaking about the famous director, Spielberg once again demonstrates where his true strength lies, as the battle sequences and war settings are given a deep and emotional reality that strongly resembles the profound work that was accomplished in Saving Private Ryan years ago. When it comes to environmental setting, cinematography, and score, War Horse is nothing short of brilliant, adding a certain weight to the film that keeps you engrossed for a majority of the extensive two-and-a-half hour running time. However, even though this war epic showcases some incredibly strong filmmaking that will undoubtedly be acknowledged by the Academy in a few months, the film does almost sink itself with a painfully weak beginning that simply tries too hard.
I did enjoy War Horse, but during the first forty minutes, I was struggling to find anything worthy of the strong critical praise that the film had thus far been receiving, as the film tries far too hard to induce its audience towards empathy. Albert’s first interactions with his beloved Joey are so over-the-top cheesy and sappy, with the mushy score playing every six seconds, that I guarantee you will be rolling your eyes…okay, the horse can pull a plow and save the family farm, but that is nothing that the entire village needs to come out in order to see and cheer. Add-in some of the difficult to understand and badly exaggerated English/Irish accents, and I was half-expecting hobbits like Frodo and Sam to come over the hill and start talking about how much they loved the Shire. From an acting perspective, young Jeremy Irvine clearly demonstrates his inexperience, and though he does seem to relax a bit and fall into a rhythm by the end of the film, I cannot help but question the decision to choose him as the front-man of an undeniable Oscar contender. But, as I said in the “Short and Sweet” review, if you can tolerate these shortcomings, they largely disappear as the film progresses and War Horse takes the opportunity to showcase its true brilliance.
As a true Christmas Day release, War Horse did have an apparent advantage in giving the other Holiday box office contenders some time to make money prior to a fresh, buzz-building entry opening during the notoriously busy movie-going day, but Spielberg appears to have lost some of his draw. Despite its strong quality, War Horse still fell victim to the split audiences that condemned We Bought a Zoo and The Adventures of TinTin to sub-par performances, only pulling in $14.5 million and a seventh place ranking. Luckily, the film seems to have legs that maintain a respectable audience, so execs have little to worry about as receipts continue to chip away at the surprisingly modest production budget, especially since this period drama was recently named one of Entertainment Weekly’s 25 films that have to be seen before Oscar Night. At the very least, if you are in any way a fan or war films or Steven Spielberg (and the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive), then you owe it to yourself to see War Horse. This drama proves that simple trailers can dramatically undersell a quality film, and if you in any way want to be prepared for Awards Season, then you need to make your way to the theater.
Overall Recommendation: High
Distributor: Touchstone Pictures
Opening Weekend Box Office: #7 with $14,527,972
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $48,225,212
Gross Revenue: $52,225,212
Production Budget: $66 million
Director: Steven Spielberg
Though I may not love every entry in his extensive filmography, I have long since learned to pay attention anytime Steven Spielberg gets behind the camera, and many were curious to see what he could do with War Horse, especially since the film was based on a children’s novel that had already received a stage adaptation. As more information about the film was released, it quickly became apparent that this war drama would be banking almost exclusively on its director’s reputation as opposed to a brand-name cast…the main character was largely an unknown, and some of the faces that I did recognize were anything but household names. I was glad to see Tom Hiddleston (Thor) and David Thewlis (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban), but I doubted that they would be enough to fill a theater; clearly DreamWorks and Touchstone would have their hands full is selling audiences. With the many action films and animated/family features built off of established franchises hitting during the Holiday Movie Season, a definitive hook would be needed to grab attention, and I wasn’t convinced that footage of a horse running through trenches would be enough. So, out of sheer curiosity dedicated to validating whether a war drama centered on an animal with no bankable actors deserved Oscar buzz, I knew that I would need to review War Horse.
Opening in England just prior to the beginning of World War I, War Horse introduces audiences to a young colt raised by young farmer, Albert Narracott (Jeremy Irvine); having trained the horse, now named “Joey,” Albert helps plow his father’s farm and build revenue to pay-off the unforgiving landlord, Lyons (David Thewlis). When a storm wipes out the crops, Albert’s father is forced to sell Joey to English forces that are mobilizing for the upcoming war with Germany; understandably devastated, Albert is comforted by the kindly Captain Nicholls (Tom Hiddleston) who promises to return Joey if he can at the conclusion of the war. After Captain Nicholls is killed in battle, Joey is utilized a number of different ways and interacts with several characters across the Western Front, whether that involves working as part of a German ambulance wagon and artillery convoy, or bonding with a young French girl and her kindly grandfather. Making a distinct impression on every person he meets, Joey induces several acts of unprecedented compassion during the war that has engulfed the lives of so many. As fate would have it, Albert eventually ends up serving in the English infantry, having never forgotten his beloved horse, setting up the unlikely possibility that these two friends may eventually reunite and return home safely.
Having the titular “War Horse” switch settings and interact with different characters in unique ways is a thoroughly refreshing way of telling a story that I have not seen in some time, a fact that combines with other beautiful filmmaking elements to make War Horse a thorough epic that one cannot help but enjoy. It does take some time, but you do eventually build a bond with Joey and become truly invested in his welfare, a testament to the strong storytelling abilities of Spielberg. And, in speaking about the famous director, Spielberg once again demonstrates where his true strength lies, as the battle sequences and war settings are given a deep and emotional reality that strongly resembles the profound work that was accomplished in Saving Private Ryan years ago. When it comes to environmental setting, cinematography, and score, War Horse is nothing short of brilliant, adding a certain weight to the film that keeps you engrossed for a majority of the extensive two-and-a-half hour running time. However, even though this war epic showcases some incredibly strong filmmaking that will undoubtedly be acknowledged by the Academy in a few months, the film does almost sink itself with a painfully weak beginning that simply tries too hard.
I did enjoy War Horse, but during the first forty minutes, I was struggling to find anything worthy of the strong critical praise that the film had thus far been receiving, as the film tries far too hard to induce its audience towards empathy. Albert’s first interactions with his beloved Joey are so over-the-top cheesy and sappy, with the mushy score playing every six seconds, that I guarantee you will be rolling your eyes…okay, the horse can pull a plow and save the family farm, but that is nothing that the entire village needs to come out in order to see and cheer. Add-in some of the difficult to understand and badly exaggerated English/Irish accents, and I was half-expecting hobbits like Frodo and Sam to come over the hill and start talking about how much they loved the Shire. From an acting perspective, young Jeremy Irvine clearly demonstrates his inexperience, and though he does seem to relax a bit and fall into a rhythm by the end of the film, I cannot help but question the decision to choose him as the front-man of an undeniable Oscar contender. But, as I said in the “Short and Sweet” review, if you can tolerate these shortcomings, they largely disappear as the film progresses and War Horse takes the opportunity to showcase its true brilliance.
As a true Christmas Day release, War Horse did have an apparent advantage in giving the other Holiday box office contenders some time to make money prior to a fresh, buzz-building entry opening during the notoriously busy movie-going day, but Spielberg appears to have lost some of his draw. Despite its strong quality, War Horse still fell victim to the split audiences that condemned We Bought a Zoo and The Adventures of TinTin to sub-par performances, only pulling in $14.5 million and a seventh place ranking. Luckily, the film seems to have legs that maintain a respectable audience, so execs have little to worry about as receipts continue to chip away at the surprisingly modest production budget, especially since this period drama was recently named one of Entertainment Weekly’s 25 films that have to be seen before Oscar Night. At the very least, if you are in any way a fan or war films or Steven Spielberg (and the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive), then you owe it to yourself to see War Horse. This drama proves that simple trailers can dramatically undersell a quality film, and if you in any way want to be prepared for Awards Season, then you need to make your way to the theater.
Overall Recommendation: High
Thursday, January 5, 2012
We Bought a Zoo: Short and Sweet
It is no secret that the Holiday Movie Season is absolutely saturated with animated entries, so the presence of a live-action family film is always understandably refreshing, and the exceptionally strong cast boasted by We Bought a Zoo was simply icing on the cake. Whether he’s beating the snot out of spies or plotting to take down a casino, Matt Damon is easily one of my favorite actors in Hollywood, and this newest comedy-drama seemed like the best kind of lighthearted upswing after Damon’s serious turn in Contagion. Add in the beauty of Scarlett Johansson and the cynicism of Thomas Haden Church, a premise involving exotic animals, and I was already completely sold on We Bought a Zoo. I was also considerably curious concerning the involvement of director/producer/writer Cameron Crowe, who is better known to audiences for more serious dramas like Jerry Maguire and Almost Famous. Needless to say, I had high expectations concerning We Bought a Zoo, but by all appearances it didn’t look like there was much that could disappoint.
Though not as refined as I would have ultimately preferred, We Bought a Zoo remains a well-made, feel good film that should have no problem warming your heart and putting a smile on your face. As always, Matt Damon shines with his everyman persona, playing an idealistic, if slightly haphazard, father struggling to keep his family together, all the while demonstrating that he possesses a truly good soul. The cast in its entirety displays a welcome amount of chemistry, with Thomas Haden Church and Scarlett Johansson making the most of their screen time, but the true standouts are present amongst the younger cast members. Elle Fanning once again demonstrates the maturity that stood out in Super 8, this time adding in more of a sunny, girl-next-door disposition, while Maggie Elizabeth Jones may be the most preciously adorable child actor to grace the silver screen in years. The story is slightly too predictable and lags are certain points, but the fact remains that We Bought a Zoo displays considerable amounts of heart and emotional depth that audiences will not soon forget.
Overall Recommendation: High
Though not as refined as I would have ultimately preferred, We Bought a Zoo remains a well-made, feel good film that should have no problem warming your heart and putting a smile on your face. As always, Matt Damon shines with his everyman persona, playing an idealistic, if slightly haphazard, father struggling to keep his family together, all the while demonstrating that he possesses a truly good soul. The cast in its entirety displays a welcome amount of chemistry, with Thomas Haden Church and Scarlett Johansson making the most of their screen time, but the true standouts are present amongst the younger cast members. Elle Fanning once again demonstrates the maturity that stood out in Super 8, this time adding in more of a sunny, girl-next-door disposition, while Maggie Elizabeth Jones may be the most preciously adorable child actor to grace the silver screen in years. The story is slightly too predictable and lags are certain points, but the fact remains that We Bought a Zoo displays considerable amounts of heart and emotional depth that audiences will not soon forget.
Overall Recommendation: High
We Bought a Zoo: Full Review
We Bought a Zoo - (December 23, 2011): PG
Distributor: 20th Century Fox
Opening Weekend Box Office: #6 with $9,360,434
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $47,108,169
Gross Revenue: $54,808,169
Production Budget: $50 million
Director: Cameron Crowe
Based on the memoir of zoo owner Benjamin Mee, We Bought a Zoo certainly seemed to target a very specific family demographic, and one cannot blame 20th Century Fox for banking on Hollywood crowd-pleaser Matt Damon to draw an audience. The marketing tactics were certainly aimed at catching attention, whether that involved the notoriously simple print advertisements and billboards that featured singular zoo animals wrapped in gift ribbon, or the teaser trailer that took no qualms in introducing the unconventional story…Curb Your Enthusiasm’s J.B. Smoove made it clear, Matt Damon was buying a zoo. When it comes to live-action family films, a strong cast is by no means a guarantee, so I was understandably pleased when I learned that Scarlett Johansson and Thomas Haden Church were included in the project, interviewing in sneak-peaks on premium cable and indicating that they loved the story that was ultimately told. And admit it, you were curious to see a Hollywood A-lister of Damon’s caliber interacting with bears and tigers and running from one supremely pissed-off porcupine. An undoubtedly welcome break from the numerous animated films offered during the Holiday Movie Season, I have no problem in admitting that I was excited for We Bought a Zoo.
Showcasing a thoroughly unique parenting method, We Bought a Zoo tells the story of recently widowed Benjamin Mee (Matt Damon), who is struggling to care for his children, the rebellious and still-mourning 14-year-old Dylan (Colin Ford), and the optimistic and endlessly curious 7-year-old Rosie (Maggie Elizabeth Jones). Benjamin’s older brother, Duncan (Thomas Haden Church), suggests that the family take measures to start over completely, and in searching for a new home, the Mee family discovers a large house with an attached zoo, the Rosemoor Animal Park. Charmed by the novelty of the zoo, Benjamin liquidates most of his savings and buys the property, meeting the quirky zoo staff that is lead by head zookeeper Kelly Foster (Scarlett Johansson), Kelly’s younger cousin Lily (Elle Fanning), and carpenter Peter MacCready (Angus MacFadyen). Given a deadline to get the zoo up to running standards, Benjamin works to learn the different operations of the zoo in order to meet the qualifications of the fickle inspector, Walter Ferris (John Michael Higgins). Learning new things about himself and his family, Benjamin struggles to operate under this new lifestyle, to cope with the death of his wife, and to learn the deeper meaning of the importance of displaying courage in everyday life.
A family-centered comedy, We Bought a Zoo hits its target dead-on, displaying considerable heart and emotion all while keeping the audience smiling throughout…if you don’t feel slightly better about humanity while walking out of the theater, you just might be dead inside. As one has come to expect from an actor with his talent, Matt Damon once again delivers an engaging performance as the endearingly naïve new zookeeper. Telling stories to his young daughter, fighting heatedly with his son, fondly remembering his deceased wife, and struggling with feelings for the attractive head zookeeper, Matt Damon demonstrates a considerably large range of emotion that will surprise you with its depth and complexity. In terms of the younger cast, Elle Fanning is a sunny and sweet improvement over her creepy and entitled older sister, while Maggie Elizabeth Jones steals nearly every scene she is in with her blatant honesty and adorable outlook on life…she could make the Disney Channel look pessimistic by comparison, and I mean that in the best possible way. All-in-all, We Bought a Zoo is fun, deep and positive, and these strong elements do help compensate for a number of the shortcomings present.
For as sunny a story as is told by We Bought a Zoo, I do have to admit that the sequence of events is a little too predictable and falls into place a little too easily. For instance, nobody bats an eye when a suburbanite quits his job, uproots his family, and sinks his life-savings into a zoo…no way in hell something like that should have worked in this economy. You will undoubtedly be happy when things start working out for the Mee family, but make no mistake; you will see everything coming from a mile away. And admittedly, there are more than a few points where the story drags considerably, so much so that you almost feel like Matt Damon engaged a sight-gag or Scarlett Johansson walked by just to hold your attention. Still, despite these shortcomings, the overwhelmingly positive story that is told with the help of an enjoyable and harmonious cast, not to mention smart and humorous writing, makes We Bought a Zoo an undeniably strong film.
In its opening weekend, We Bought a Zoo clearly fell victim to the overly-saturated box office, with so many offerings ultimately splitting Holiday audiences and relegating this family-drama to sixth place. Less than $10 million in the first weekend could have been cause for alarm for 20th Century Fox, but luckily the extensive carry-over of the Holiday Movie Season drove extra revenue. So, with less than two weeks in theaters, We Bought a Zoo has covered its modest production budget, even if it is unlikely that the film will gain the attention of Academy voters. At the very least, this film proved that Matt Damon can deliver in any genre, Scarlett Johansson can provide more than eye-candy, and young Maggie Elizabeth Jones deserves considerable attention from casting directors. Plain and simple, if you are looking for a warm-hearted, feel-good family comedy, than you cannot go wrong with We Bought a Zoo.
Overall Recommendation: High
Distributor: 20th Century Fox
Opening Weekend Box Office: #6 with $9,360,434
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $47,108,169
Gross Revenue: $54,808,169
Production Budget: $50 million
Director: Cameron Crowe
Based on the memoir of zoo owner Benjamin Mee, We Bought a Zoo certainly seemed to target a very specific family demographic, and one cannot blame 20th Century Fox for banking on Hollywood crowd-pleaser Matt Damon to draw an audience. The marketing tactics were certainly aimed at catching attention, whether that involved the notoriously simple print advertisements and billboards that featured singular zoo animals wrapped in gift ribbon, or the teaser trailer that took no qualms in introducing the unconventional story…Curb Your Enthusiasm’s J.B. Smoove made it clear, Matt Damon was buying a zoo. When it comes to live-action family films, a strong cast is by no means a guarantee, so I was understandably pleased when I learned that Scarlett Johansson and Thomas Haden Church were included in the project, interviewing in sneak-peaks on premium cable and indicating that they loved the story that was ultimately told. And admit it, you were curious to see a Hollywood A-lister of Damon’s caliber interacting with bears and tigers and running from one supremely pissed-off porcupine. An undoubtedly welcome break from the numerous animated films offered during the Holiday Movie Season, I have no problem in admitting that I was excited for We Bought a Zoo.
Showcasing a thoroughly unique parenting method, We Bought a Zoo tells the story of recently widowed Benjamin Mee (Matt Damon), who is struggling to care for his children, the rebellious and still-mourning 14-year-old Dylan (Colin Ford), and the optimistic and endlessly curious 7-year-old Rosie (Maggie Elizabeth Jones). Benjamin’s older brother, Duncan (Thomas Haden Church), suggests that the family take measures to start over completely, and in searching for a new home, the Mee family discovers a large house with an attached zoo, the Rosemoor Animal Park. Charmed by the novelty of the zoo, Benjamin liquidates most of his savings and buys the property, meeting the quirky zoo staff that is lead by head zookeeper Kelly Foster (Scarlett Johansson), Kelly’s younger cousin Lily (Elle Fanning), and carpenter Peter MacCready (Angus MacFadyen). Given a deadline to get the zoo up to running standards, Benjamin works to learn the different operations of the zoo in order to meet the qualifications of the fickle inspector, Walter Ferris (John Michael Higgins). Learning new things about himself and his family, Benjamin struggles to operate under this new lifestyle, to cope with the death of his wife, and to learn the deeper meaning of the importance of displaying courage in everyday life.
A family-centered comedy, We Bought a Zoo hits its target dead-on, displaying considerable heart and emotion all while keeping the audience smiling throughout…if you don’t feel slightly better about humanity while walking out of the theater, you just might be dead inside. As one has come to expect from an actor with his talent, Matt Damon once again delivers an engaging performance as the endearingly naïve new zookeeper. Telling stories to his young daughter, fighting heatedly with his son, fondly remembering his deceased wife, and struggling with feelings for the attractive head zookeeper, Matt Damon demonstrates a considerably large range of emotion that will surprise you with its depth and complexity. In terms of the younger cast, Elle Fanning is a sunny and sweet improvement over her creepy and entitled older sister, while Maggie Elizabeth Jones steals nearly every scene she is in with her blatant honesty and adorable outlook on life…she could make the Disney Channel look pessimistic by comparison, and I mean that in the best possible way. All-in-all, We Bought a Zoo is fun, deep and positive, and these strong elements do help compensate for a number of the shortcomings present.
For as sunny a story as is told by We Bought a Zoo, I do have to admit that the sequence of events is a little too predictable and falls into place a little too easily. For instance, nobody bats an eye when a suburbanite quits his job, uproots his family, and sinks his life-savings into a zoo…no way in hell something like that should have worked in this economy. You will undoubtedly be happy when things start working out for the Mee family, but make no mistake; you will see everything coming from a mile away. And admittedly, there are more than a few points where the story drags considerably, so much so that you almost feel like Matt Damon engaged a sight-gag or Scarlett Johansson walked by just to hold your attention. Still, despite these shortcomings, the overwhelmingly positive story that is told with the help of an enjoyable and harmonious cast, not to mention smart and humorous writing, makes We Bought a Zoo an undeniably strong film.
In its opening weekend, We Bought a Zoo clearly fell victim to the overly-saturated box office, with so many offerings ultimately splitting Holiday audiences and relegating this family-drama to sixth place. Less than $10 million in the first weekend could have been cause for alarm for 20th Century Fox, but luckily the extensive carry-over of the Holiday Movie Season drove extra revenue. So, with less than two weeks in theaters, We Bought a Zoo has covered its modest production budget, even if it is unlikely that the film will gain the attention of Academy voters. At the very least, this film proved that Matt Damon can deliver in any genre, Scarlett Johansson can provide more than eye-candy, and young Maggie Elizabeth Jones deserves considerable attention from casting directors. Plain and simple, if you are looking for a warm-hearted, feel-good family comedy, than you cannot go wrong with We Bought a Zoo.
Overall Recommendation: High
The Adventures of TinTin: Short and Sweet
Any of my regular readers know just how strongly my faith in Steven Spielberg was shaken after the thoroughly unoriginal summer “blockbuster,” Super 8, so while having his name attached to a project used to guarantee cinematic magic, I wasn’t necessarily convinced when I first caught wind of The Adventures of TinTin. Granted, having incredibly talented filmmakers like Spielberg and Peter Jackson work together should have been more than enough to sell even the most casual of film fans, but the subject matter was a little bit of a hurdle. Now, The Adventures of TinTin comic book series is insanely popular in Europe, thereby guaranteeing a strong international presence, but North American audiences would clearly have trouble distinguishing the red-headed detective from Rin Tin Tin, the famous German Shepherd. These hesitancies aside though, the film was going to be showcasing cutting-edge motion-capture technology, and critics were raving, so this Christmas release did seem to deserve a respectable crowd. Even though I myself was vaguely familiar with the Belgian comic book, I wasn’t exactly chomping at the bit to see The Adventures of TinTin, but in all honesty, I still had to see what Spielberg and Jackson could produce together.
Skeptical as I may have been beforehand, I can say gladly that I was immensely entertained by The Adventures of TinTin, a fun and pure adventure that echoes the best work of both of these talented filmmakers. I thought that certain critics were laying it on a little thick when they described the film as a perfect blend of Indiana Jones and Pirates of the Caribbean, but in retrospect, that is a very apt description, as mystery, action, humor, and wonder are all present and prevalent. As expected, the state-of-the-art animation is spectacular, but it is further enhanced by stellar voice-acting, the standout being motion-capture veteran Andy Serkis (as if that surprises anyone). If I had any criticism, narrative momentum does take a little time to build, as does a certain tolerance to the lead character’s distinct personality, but other than that, the film is incredibly strong. All-in-all, even though, in all probability, few audiences have any loyalty to the core material, filmgoers of all ages deserve to see and enjoy The Adventures of TinTin.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Skeptical as I may have been beforehand, I can say gladly that I was immensely entertained by The Adventures of TinTin, a fun and pure adventure that echoes the best work of both of these talented filmmakers. I thought that certain critics were laying it on a little thick when they described the film as a perfect blend of Indiana Jones and Pirates of the Caribbean, but in retrospect, that is a very apt description, as mystery, action, humor, and wonder are all present and prevalent. As expected, the state-of-the-art animation is spectacular, but it is further enhanced by stellar voice-acting, the standout being motion-capture veteran Andy Serkis (as if that surprises anyone). If I had any criticism, narrative momentum does take a little time to build, as does a certain tolerance to the lead character’s distinct personality, but other than that, the film is incredibly strong. All-in-all, even though, in all probability, few audiences have any loyalty to the core material, filmgoers of all ages deserve to see and enjoy The Adventures of TinTin.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
The Adventures of TinTin: Full Review
The Adventures of TinTin - (December 21, 2011): PG
Distributor: Paramount and Colombia Pictures
Opening Weekend Box Office: #5 with $9,720,993
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $54,254,328
Gross Revenue: $314,754,328
Production Budget: $135 million
Director: Steven Spielberg
Since the late 1920s, Belgian artist Herge’s classic comic, The Adventures of TinTin, has charmed European readers, making it one of the most popular European comics of the 20th Century, but to-date, no real blockbuster film adaptation had ever been attempted. Now, I was vaguely familiar with the character, given a short-lived cartoon series that ran in the early 90s, but I wasn’t anywhere-near convinced that mass audiences would respond to a performance capture 3D film. You do have to give credit to Paramount and Columbia Pictures, because if there was one way to pique the interest of North American audiences, it was leveraging the fact that this animated feature would be helmed by Steven Spielberg and include the input of another veteran cinematic powerhouse, none other than Peter Jackson. Marketing promotions were in no way subtle about trying to catch the attention of audiences, my personal favorite being the Purina Dog Chow cross promotion, but there was one significant element missing from this campaign. Andy Serkis is the undoubted king of motion capture, lending his talents to The Lord of the Rings trilogy, King Kong, and Rise of the Planet of the Apes, but there was little-to-no indication that he was again working alongside Jackson on this project…talk about missed opportunity. Needless to say, early critical praise was strong, but there was still a significant chance that The Adventures of TinTin would not resonate during the crowded and undeniably strong Holiday Movie Season.
The Adventures of TinTin opens as young journalist TinTin (Jamie Bell) and his loyal dog Snowy browse an outdoor market, where TinTin buys a model sailing ship, the Unicorn. TinTin is immediately accosted by Ivan Ivanovitch Sakharine (Daniel Craig), a sinister businessman who tries to buy the ship back, to no avail. Soon after returning home, TinTin discovers a hidden parchment in the ship that points to a hidden treasure, should the two other missing parts of the parchment (also contained in other model ships) be found…this revelation comes at a price, as TinTin is soon kidnapped by Sakharine’s men and imprisoned on a ship that Sakharine has commandeered. With the help of Snowy, TinTin escapes and meets the ship’s true captain, the drunkenly good-natured Haddock (Andy Serkis), and together, the two make a pact to reach the other model ships of the Unicorn, gather the three scrolls, and find the treasure before the villainous Sakharine. Embarking on a global adventure, TinTin, Snowy, and Haddock, with some help from bumbling detectives Thomson (Simon Pegg) and Thompson (Nick Frost), uncover the deep mystery surround the true Unicorn ship that has been buried for centuries.
The above plot synopsis may sound slightly predictable and formulaic for an adventure film, but few recent entries have been able to execute that formula correctly, and in this regard The Adventures of TinTin absolutely shines. The wonder and mystery that TinTin and Haddock face is peppered with just enough action to strongly echo both the fun and the chaos of the original Indiana Jones films, while the narrative subject matter more than plays off the swashbuckling lightheartedness of the first Pirates of the Caribbean…reminding moviegoers on any level of such strong past films is a testament to the storytelling prowess of Spielberg and Jackson. In terms of the voice and motion-capture talent, the clear standout, once again, is Andy Serkis, who brings the mischievous Haddock to life with memorable humor and a distinctly likable everyman personality; you cannot help but watch his every movement intently and in high anticipation. And of course, the other side of that equation involves the downright gorgeous animation…TinTin has got one hell of an animated upgrade, and watching the richly detailed environments or the close-ups of the character’s faces is more than enough to make anyone say: “wow.” With all of these elements combining for an energetic and enjoyable adventure, The Adventures of TinTin is near-perfect, and the criticisms I do have serve more as warnings to potential audiences as opposed to blatant shortcomings.
For perhaps the first twenty minutes of the film, I had feared that I made a mistake in choosing to see The Adventures of TinTin, as I found myself annoyed by the titular character and less-than-thrilled by the potential story. Thankfully, momentum eventually builds and TinTin finally tones-down once he meets Haddock…this quick save is welcome, but takes a little too long to present itself, meaning that some moviegoers may lose interest. Another slightly troubling development involves the character of Haddock himself, who, true to source material, is a stumbling, raving, black-out drunk; I’m not sure what the rules are concerning portraying drinking in animation, but some parents can’t be thrilled that a hopeless alcoholic is portrayed in a humorous way. Other than these quick qualifications, there is not much to criticize concerning The Adventures of TinTin, which represents a simple testament to classic adventures that you cannot help but enjoy. The ending leaves an opening for a sequel, and I can now say with confidence that I will have no problem purchasing my ticket…Spielberg definitely earned some redemption in my eyes, let’s just hope that this renewed focus keeps going strong.
From a box office perspective, you might be tempted to think that The Adventures of TinTin has underperformed considering its lukewarm opening, but as expected, the film has made its mark on the international market. This newest motion capture powerhouse opened in the United Kingdom in late October, and since then, the film has earned $260.5 million, nearly 83% of its total revenue, bringing the total worldwide haul to over $314 million. In light of a $135 million production budget, a $54 million domestic haul would be a nightmare, but studio decision makers cannot be too upset when international moviegoers are responding in droves. It is a little disappointing that American audiences have thus far failed to give The Adventures of TinTin a chance, and I can only hope that positive word of mouth does its job. Plain and simple, if you in any way enjoy adventure films, than this brainchild of Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson can simply not be missed.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Distributor: Paramount and Colombia Pictures
Opening Weekend Box Office: #5 with $9,720,993
Domestic Box Office Gross to-date: $54,254,328
Gross Revenue: $314,754,328
Production Budget: $135 million
Director: Steven Spielberg
Since the late 1920s, Belgian artist Herge’s classic comic, The Adventures of TinTin, has charmed European readers, making it one of the most popular European comics of the 20th Century, but to-date, no real blockbuster film adaptation had ever been attempted. Now, I was vaguely familiar with the character, given a short-lived cartoon series that ran in the early 90s, but I wasn’t anywhere-near convinced that mass audiences would respond to a performance capture 3D film. You do have to give credit to Paramount and Columbia Pictures, because if there was one way to pique the interest of North American audiences, it was leveraging the fact that this animated feature would be helmed by Steven Spielberg and include the input of another veteran cinematic powerhouse, none other than Peter Jackson. Marketing promotions were in no way subtle about trying to catch the attention of audiences, my personal favorite being the Purina Dog Chow cross promotion, but there was one significant element missing from this campaign. Andy Serkis is the undoubted king of motion capture, lending his talents to The Lord of the Rings trilogy, King Kong, and Rise of the Planet of the Apes, but there was little-to-no indication that he was again working alongside Jackson on this project…talk about missed opportunity. Needless to say, early critical praise was strong, but there was still a significant chance that The Adventures of TinTin would not resonate during the crowded and undeniably strong Holiday Movie Season.
The Adventures of TinTin opens as young journalist TinTin (Jamie Bell) and his loyal dog Snowy browse an outdoor market, where TinTin buys a model sailing ship, the Unicorn. TinTin is immediately accosted by Ivan Ivanovitch Sakharine (Daniel Craig), a sinister businessman who tries to buy the ship back, to no avail. Soon after returning home, TinTin discovers a hidden parchment in the ship that points to a hidden treasure, should the two other missing parts of the parchment (also contained in other model ships) be found…this revelation comes at a price, as TinTin is soon kidnapped by Sakharine’s men and imprisoned on a ship that Sakharine has commandeered. With the help of Snowy, TinTin escapes and meets the ship’s true captain, the drunkenly good-natured Haddock (Andy Serkis), and together, the two make a pact to reach the other model ships of the Unicorn, gather the three scrolls, and find the treasure before the villainous Sakharine. Embarking on a global adventure, TinTin, Snowy, and Haddock, with some help from bumbling detectives Thomson (Simon Pegg) and Thompson (Nick Frost), uncover the deep mystery surround the true Unicorn ship that has been buried for centuries.
The above plot synopsis may sound slightly predictable and formulaic for an adventure film, but few recent entries have been able to execute that formula correctly, and in this regard The Adventures of TinTin absolutely shines. The wonder and mystery that TinTin and Haddock face is peppered with just enough action to strongly echo both the fun and the chaos of the original Indiana Jones films, while the narrative subject matter more than plays off the swashbuckling lightheartedness of the first Pirates of the Caribbean…reminding moviegoers on any level of such strong past films is a testament to the storytelling prowess of Spielberg and Jackson. In terms of the voice and motion-capture talent, the clear standout, once again, is Andy Serkis, who brings the mischievous Haddock to life with memorable humor and a distinctly likable everyman personality; you cannot help but watch his every movement intently and in high anticipation. And of course, the other side of that equation involves the downright gorgeous animation…TinTin has got one hell of an animated upgrade, and watching the richly detailed environments or the close-ups of the character’s faces is more than enough to make anyone say: “wow.” With all of these elements combining for an energetic and enjoyable adventure, The Adventures of TinTin is near-perfect, and the criticisms I do have serve more as warnings to potential audiences as opposed to blatant shortcomings.
For perhaps the first twenty minutes of the film, I had feared that I made a mistake in choosing to see The Adventures of TinTin, as I found myself annoyed by the titular character and less-than-thrilled by the potential story. Thankfully, momentum eventually builds and TinTin finally tones-down once he meets Haddock…this quick save is welcome, but takes a little too long to present itself, meaning that some moviegoers may lose interest. Another slightly troubling development involves the character of Haddock himself, who, true to source material, is a stumbling, raving, black-out drunk; I’m not sure what the rules are concerning portraying drinking in animation, but some parents can’t be thrilled that a hopeless alcoholic is portrayed in a humorous way. Other than these quick qualifications, there is not much to criticize concerning The Adventures of TinTin, which represents a simple testament to classic adventures that you cannot help but enjoy. The ending leaves an opening for a sequel, and I can now say with confidence that I will have no problem purchasing my ticket…Spielberg definitely earned some redemption in my eyes, let’s just hope that this renewed focus keeps going strong.
From a box office perspective, you might be tempted to think that The Adventures of TinTin has underperformed considering its lukewarm opening, but as expected, the film has made its mark on the international market. This newest motion capture powerhouse opened in the United Kingdom in late October, and since then, the film has earned $260.5 million, nearly 83% of its total revenue, bringing the total worldwide haul to over $314 million. In light of a $135 million production budget, a $54 million domestic haul would be a nightmare, but studio decision makers cannot be too upset when international moviegoers are responding in droves. It is a little disappointing that American audiences have thus far failed to give The Adventures of TinTin a chance, and I can only hope that positive word of mouth does its job. Plain and simple, if you in any way enjoy adventure films, than this brainchild of Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson can simply not be missed.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)