Monthly Archives: June 2014

‘Snowpiercer’: An independent blockbuster NOT for the faint of heart

Unlike most blockbusters this summer, ‘Snowpiercer’ leaves the tension with its audiences throughout the movie and even after the end credits role. Given the wonderful blend of both a character- and a plot-driven script, Director/Screenwriter Joon-ho Bong gives us an independent action film set in a dystopian world in which the lower class literally fight their way to the top (front).

Curtis (Chris Evans), a 30-something man whose analytical thinking and strategic planning make him the leader of a revolution to gain a better life than the ones given to those in the back of a never-ending train after a failed global warming experiment left survivors trapped on a circumventing train divided by social class.

Screenwriters Joon-ho Bong and Kelly Masterson, while keeping us entertained, also manage to include character development with our main anti-hero Curtis. As the reluctant leader of the lowest class on their world, every new challenge within each car on the train brings his character a step closer to his own redemption. Evans, in a role very different from Captain America, excels in his performance as the conflicted lead having to constantly choose between saving his fellow revolutionaries and fending for himself while still maintaining a sound mind under the most dangerous circumstances as he progresses. In a rather emotional scene toward the end, Curtis finally admits his past vices and reveals just how far he’s come and what made him the way he was. Evans handles this beautifully in not only making us believe that his character has made a complete change, but also proving to us his great talent as an actor to invoke deep and heartfelt emotions within an instant despite the previous scenes consisting mostly intense action.

‘Snowpiercer’ has its share of interesting characters other than its lead (which only adds to our vulnerability as an audience). A technician hooked on industrial waste, Namgoong Minsoo (Kang-hoo Song) is someone whose familiarity with the train’s technology can access each car on the train and, ironically, stands as Curtis’s voice of reason/bodyguard. Minsoo’s daughter, Yona (Ah-Sung Ko), also hooked on this dystopian drug, offers her talents as a clairvoyant. Together, all three provide much of the emotional and intellectual moments of the film. Although not specifically made to be an intellectual film, ‘Snowpiercer’ has moments of pure genius. Discussions about global warming and the preservation of water and melting ice over water give us a sense of the kind of ecosystem and structure under which the citizens of this “eternal” train runs. Little details also pop up about characters in the beginning that come up again towards the end that makes this movie strangely distinctive and a touch more metaphorical. ‘Snowpiercer’, as a film that has a tight grip on your anxiety for the duration, also offers characters in whom we can relax (in a way) for a little with the comedic relief that both Edgar (Jamie Bell) and Mason (Tilda Swinton) bring to this dark and hopeless society. As second-in-command to Curtis and Wilton, the owner of the train, respectively, these two bring something different. Bell, being on the side of the oppressed offers a jovial approach as opposed to Mason, whose firm and harsh way of speaking diminishes once armed men and women are standing between her and “the tail” of the train. Like Curtis, however, she ultimately surrenders to our group of rebels only to save herself unless acting otherwise puts the status quo in her favor.

‘Snowpiercer’ carries with it a few of the typical traits attached to blockbusters like violent and intense scenes, wonderful cinematography and some unique camera shots especially concerning combat sequences (i.e., night vision scene, party train, etc). While the latter factor may actually set ‘Snowpiercer’ apart from its predecessors, if you’re unwilling to let go of some of the logic behind a continuously running train covered in ice and snow, then ‘Snowpiercer’ might not be as enjoyable.

Nevertheless, it is highly recommended that scientific logic be put aside to enjoy what is a good film. Dark themes about sacrifice and economic status placed in this film are what make ‘Snowpiercer’ a dystopian classic. It’s definitely worth your time and money spent at an independent theater.

Jim’s Rating: 8/10

Rise. Fight. Fall. Repeat.

Leave a reply

‘All You Need is Kill’, the title of the novel by Hiroshi Sakurazake off of which this film is based, might have been a better title only for the multiple times that—well, you’ll have to see the movie to truly cherish and appreciate the title. Still, it’s a must-see due to its originality, character development, and a platform for why Emily Blunt is a killer heroine (no pun intended). After an accident involving aliens attacking London, Cage (Tom Cruise), a recruiter-turned-soldier, gets their blood mixed into his system that allows him to relive the same day repeatedly helping him attempt to save the city from being overrun.

The most difficulty that screenwriters and directors face in developing a storyline is with stories involving time travel and/or covering the same day repeatedly without making their audiences extremely bored. Over the duration of this film, we are shown the same day several times and yet there’s something different covered in each sequence. With each accident or screw-up made by Cage, we enter the same day again, but in different scenarios as Cage’s attempts to find out how to defeat these aliens progresses. Editor James Herbert did a masterful job with this as he spliced together sequences from different situations within the same day and cutting from one single shot to the next (paired perfectly with music by Christophe Beck) to signify that our main character has gone through this part of the day already. Screenwriters Christopher McQuarrie and Jez and John-Henry Butterworth have formed a tight script with how the characters interact with each other through repeats of the same day also edited in the same style as the action sequences. Not a detail is left unpolished as our two main characters draw closer to each other amidst having to fight and defeat time-bending aliens.

‘Edge of Tomorrow’ has a lot of layers. We are seeing a science-fiction action film unfold in which our protagonists have to work together, both having very different, but strong personalities, one of which has to reacquaint himself with the same woman for whom he’s developing feelings and the other of who has no recollection of the guy falling for her from day-to-day. Rita (Blunt) isn’t just someone who knows what he’s going through, but someone who’s harboring some dark secrets of her own. While this makes her an ideal and highly respected soldier, it also serves as a character flaw. Both of our characters have to be willing to make sacrifices mentally and emotionally and these dire circumstances provide the best conditions for their individual transformations.

‘Edge of Tomorrow’ is a very character driven film and it’s executed beautifully, which makes it stand out as one of this year’s best blockbusters. Although a little foggy logically, ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ is quite the thrill ride and refreshingly original.

Jim’s Rating: 8.5/10

All is not what it seems in ‘God’s Pocket’

As critics continue to shred John Slattery’s (‘Mad Men’) directorial debut to pieces, this film critic must respectfully disagree. Although there are script issues and subplots that seemingly go nowhere, at its heart,’God’s Pocket’ is a decent feature.

Mickey Scarpato (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) lives in God’s Pocket with his wife, Jeanie (Christina Hendricks), and his stepson Leon (Caleb Landry Jones), whose behavior is a little unhinged. After a misfortune befalls him at work, they prepare to make arrangements for his funeral. Jeanie, a native of God’s Pocket and, therefore, all too familiar with its citizen’s disregard for the law, senses foul play and prods Mickey to investigate. In the midst of trying to secure funeral arrangements and look into Leon’s death, all things that could go wrong with his progress do and, thus, release a chain of unfortunate events.

As audiences would expect from the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman, his acting is superb in this film. While the situation worsens with the funeral date drawing near, Hoffman remains intense in his performance as his demeanor goes from calm to ticking bomb. It feels like a very true portrayal of an outsider as he’s not a native of this small town (a trait that the citizens of God’s pocket constantly remind him). His reactions are our reactions and, in his acting, he’s an excellent judge of our character.

Screenwriters John Slattery and Alex Metcalf write ‘God’s Pocket’ as a dark, comedy drama. Most scenes, while they do contain more than a touch of sorrow, Slattery and Metcalf sprinkle in dialogue that suggests otherwise. As a story that centers around a man who can’t find the money for a proper funeral–at least, in the eyes of his grieving wife–there are some moments in the film where one cannot help but laugh (i.e., a scene where Mickey is trying to trade in a meat truck to a dealership).

‘God’s Pocket’, with its main story, is one that’s a bit reminiscent of a Coen Brother’s film with how it makes light–through humor–of a dark situation. The subplots, however, don’t add anything to the story and are more of a distraction from the main story line. These smaller stories, although they involve our main characters are almost separate films, especially regarding Jeanie. In her grief, her connection with her husband begins to drift as he becomes increasingly distracted with ways in which to provide her son with a nice funeral. While an interesting concept–a marriage crumbling after a child’s death–it takes an interesting turn and one that involves an older, lonely journalist in Richard Shelburn (Richard Jenkins). The narrative also goes on to explain more about Shelburn’s background and his depressive state. Without the focus being on Mickey and Jeanie, opportunities to explore the state of their relationship, parental issues that might have been an instrumental part in their son’s demise, and the unwritten politics that write themselves in God’s Pocket, the film may not have been so uneven.

Still, the main story in ‘God’s Pocket’ is fairly enjoyable in all of its quirky and humorous glory. Phillip Seymour Hoffman gives a lovely performance and, as a whole, this film is a decent start to John Slattery’s career as a director.

Jim’s Rating: 6.75/10

Bryan Singer makes X-Men cool again in ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’

Leave a reply

As sequels always suffer being under intense pressure to be better than its predecessor, ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ proves three things: 1) sequels can be good, 2) ‘The Avengers’ isn’t the only superhero film that can pull of having lots of characters in one movie and 3) Director Bryan Singer’s still got it.

Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) must go back in time to stop Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from killing a scientist whose death would inevitably trigger a war between mutants and sentinels, genetically engineered robots designed to eliminate mutants.

The biggest conflict that audiences might predict would be the downfall for ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ proved to be a challenge and, in this task, Singer and screenwriter Simon Kinberg undoubtedly succeed. The story centers around a few characters–all of whom are given their fair share of screen time that also suits the story’s purpose. Although the initial plot suggests that this film is mainly about Wolverine and Mystique, it’s also about Magneto and Professor Xavier. Wolverine is merely a tool to explore the differences between Professor X and Magneto of the past and these same characters of the future.

In doing so, ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ brings out many themes. As this is a time travel movie, familiar themes like facing one’s fear of the future and the consequences of changing one’s past are touched upon, but Kinberg also brings out themes regarding sacrificing one to save many, putting aside excuses not to use our gifts to help others, and hopelessness. These themes are translated beautifully through James McAvoy, Patrick Stewart, and Michael Fassbender.

In the part of the film that takes place in the ’70s, Magneto continues his crusade in trying to get rid of one–regardless of whether he or she is human or mutant–in order to ensure the safety of the rest of his mutant “brothers and sisters”. After not having seen him in a while due to his betrayal in “X-Men: First Class”, Xavier struggles with his own sense of loss and dealing with this pair in a way that he deems fit. While Fassbender does a fine job posing Magneto as this cold and calculative man with an astute purpose, it’s McAvoy that steals the show. He’s lost just about everything and, in this loss, he seeks comfort in some things that push him far away from the “professor” persona. His character has gone through the most transformation and McAvoy executes this fantastically in his delivery and physicality.

Of the ‘X-Men’ films that we’ve seen in the past, ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ seemingly focuses less on including action and fight scenes and more about the story. While it’s been a while since we’ve seen these well-respected actors don their infamous mutant characters in theaters, their presence serves as a means to catapult the story into one told of their past and ways to change it to prevent their present hardships. Still, with including these veteran X-Men, Kinberg tries to weave in details from the past X-Men films in order to try to mesh the original film and the reboots together. Although a bold move, this decision only makes things a bit more confusing for fans of the previous versions of X-Men (Bryan Singer’s X-Men films, Brett Ratner’s ‘X-Men: The Last Stand’, and Matthew Vaughn’s ‘X-Men: First Class).

Despite this, ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’ is thoroughly satisfying, well-acted, humorous, and character-driven. It’s one of this summer’s best (with Captain America: The Winter Soldier being the very first) and certainly a recommendation. Welcome back, X-Men. You’ve been sincerely missed.

Jim’s Rating: 8/10

‘Only Lovers Left Alive’: A cool, original vampire film

Leave a reply

Being a vampire purist (in the way that zombie purists refuse to watch ‘World War Z’) is a very difficult kind of fan to be today. In recent years, television and film have brought us many stories under that genre. Some good, others atrocious, but like the zombie genre, seems to be overdone and incredibly dull given its many iterations. ‘Only Lovers Left Alive’, however, shouldn’t be a disappointment, but rather a refreshing and original take on the genre so loved by many.

Adam (Tom Hiddleston) and Eve (Tilda Swinton), both vampires, reunite to spend time together, reminisce about a time when humans—or zombies, as they call them—cared more about the world, scientific discovery and breakthroughs in art and music. When Eve’s sister, Ava (Mia Wasikowska), comes to visit them, her unpredictability and her incessant need to go against their standards of living as vampires unravel their world.

With vampire love being a very popular thing to tackle in movies presently, ‘Only Lovers Left Alive’ takes a turn for the more subtle. Our cool and mellow, but rather bloodthirsty couple has different means as to how they get their spoils as opposed to the traditional. Instead of living out their lives as radical and fierce beings, they spend their days either contemplating their lives outside of their careers (i.e., Adam) or living freely without worry (i.e., Eve). In keeping with tradition, but adding to the very “hip” vibes that these two give off, the visual effects team does give us a small glimpse as to how their physicality—quick reflexes and pale form—come into play. ‘Only Lovers Left Alive’ isn’t your standard vampire film, but rather a portrait of the lives of two intellectual lovers who happen to be immortal.

In passing the time in their world, Adam and Eve discuss many things—most of which are philosophical. Like humans, they share varied opinions about how humans (or “zombies”) treat their environment, their bodies, each other, and what past humans have created for them to cherish and use.

The tone of ‘Only Lovers Left Alive’ is slow and a bit lengthy, especially in the beginning. The audience is introduced to both of them separately and quite a bit of time is used up in examining the two of them in their own separate lives before finally reuniting about a third into the film. Although this pacing isn’t ideal for everyone, those willing to patiently wait for more to come will be satisfied with what comes next after the possibility of her sister’s arrival comes up in conversation and then again when Ava finally arrives.

The confidence that both Hiddleston and Swinton have in their characters works with their alluring chemistry and in keeping the audience entertained. With Adam suffering from a depression due to popularity from his music, Eve—as one would expect of a spouse—is the free-spirited, undisturbed balance for him, which is something that he has obviously forgotten despite his visits from a dedicated human lackey, Ian (Anton Yelchin).

While we only see her briefly, Ava disrupts the mood of ‘Only Lovers Left Alive’ altogether in a performance that’s both amusing and a little haunting in regards to her selfishness and disregard for those around her. Her personality is in constant clashes with Adam and is fun to see onscreen. It’s moments like these in the film that one gets a sense of how much fun the cast is having with the script and each other, which makes the movie all the more entertaining.

In ‘Only Lovers Left Alive’, there are some surprises in the story that take a turn for the interesting and, while it may not win everyone’s hearts, ‘Only Lovers Let Alive’ is worthwhile for the acting, the original storyline, and the script.

Jim’s Rating: 7.2/10

‘Godzilla’: Where the Monsters are more interesting than the Humans fighting them

Leave a reply

Gareth Edwards shows us different sides to the infamous monster, but not without making us humans look dull, incapable, and unintelligent. If you’re willing to let go of all logic, however, you might enjoy this monster reboot.

‘Godzilla’ is a story about scientists and military personnel who try to prevent underground monsters—whose electromagnetic energy and huge physicality threaten human life—from destroying cities around the world.

The scientific concept concerning Godzilla and his enemy—as seen in the second trailer—is quite magnificent. What keeps these creatures animated is the same energy that gives us our technology. In the digital era, this is a very scary thought as there’s almost nothing that we use that doesn’t depend entirely on electromagnetic waves (i.e., no Netflix, no Internet, and no cell phones…scared yet?). Not only are these creatures huge and very capable of destroying whole cities, but they also take away our tools that make life a bit easier (when they’re working, of course).

Bryan Cranston, while giving us just a taste of the amount of melodrama in this film during the trailer, is the only character who has every right to be over-the-top as events that have transpired have made him a tad desperate, paranoid, and obsessed. Although the level of dramatization might just tip the scale of being hilarious, Cranston does a nice job with balancing between crazed scientist and a somewhat normal family man.

In ‘Godzilla’, most of our time, however, is spent with his son, Ford (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), his daughter-in-law, Ella (Elizabeth Olsen), Vivienne Graham (Sally Hawkins), and Dr. Ishiro Serizawa (Ken Watanabe). While each of them are fine actors—given how well they portray these characters relative to how they’re written—audiences will start to care more about the monsters rather than the humans and their individual stories. The humans remain flat characters even though there are plenty of opportunities throughout the film to explore their development amidst the catastrophe. As a result, the scenes in which our main characters display human emotion does not have any affect.

Furthermore, while it’s understood that a disaster film of this nature is designed to entertain people rather than draw intellectual insight, tightening the script, especially when involving the military might have made ‘Godzilla’ a little less ridiculous. At no time are the citizens in this world told to take measures—measures that would make sense in a place where giant beasts are crushing everything in their path. ‘Godzilla’ also makes a mockery, whether or not it is intentional, of the military as decision after decision drives them deeper into despair. In fairness, however, this may have been an attempt to make Dr. Serizawa’s quote about man’s efforts in controlling nature stick as there are several ways in which soldiers try to rid us of these creatures.

Although you’ll have to wait a while for them to start fighting, Godzilla and his enemies are the highlight of the film and the slight saving grace to the first hour and a half of boredom.

JIM’s Rating: 5.75/10