The Cinemasitter

Blog

Review: The Hunger Games (2012)

The Hunger Games is being trumpeted in some quarters as the new Twilight – an adaptation of a series of young adult fantasy novels which has acquired a rabid teenage fanbase. But while Twilight is firmly placed within the horror genre (though with obvious romantic inclinations), The Hunger Games deals with a dystopian sci-fi future where the United States has collapsed and subsequently re-formed as Panem under a feudal dictatorship. Each of Panem’s twelve districts are required to send two teenage “volunteers” to the Capitol every year to fight to the death until there is just one left standing – a reminder to the districts of who’s in charge, as well as suitably dramatic entertainment for the aristocratic ruling elite.

Sound familiar? Of course it does. But originality is the least of The Hunger Games‘ problems. Indeed, some of the best science-fiction films have been those that recycled ideas and plots from earlier stories. The problem comes when it fails to do anything of interest with them.

I would agree that the set up is ripe with potential. Series author Suzanne Collins has recycled ideas most obviously from Lord of the Flies and Rollerball, but you could also point to the likes of The Running Man and Battle Royale. Her stroke of marketing genius was to graft a teenage love triangle on to the side of her sci-fi mash-up and aim it at the young adult market, which the Twilight series ignited a few years earlier. Hey presto – instant cash machine. Ok, maybe it wasn’t that easy, but given the lack of inspiration onscreen I’m struggling to think of anything else that could account for the astounding success of both book and film.

Director Gary Ross spends a long time – basically the first hour – setting the story up, and boy does it FEEL like a long time. If this were an intricately detailed universe, I could understand spending the entire first half of the film on getting the two main characters – Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen and Josh Hutcherson’s Peeta Mellark – from their homes to the Capitol and kitting them out with natty new clothes (literally – this was all that happened). But this is a world that we’ve seen hundreds of times before: a future where the poor live in semi-medieval squalor and the rich live in swanky hi-tech apartment blocks and watch endless TV. The only difference here is that the rich dress like they are auditioning for an episode of Star Trek set in revolutionary France.

As if trying to compensate for this extended lack of action, Ross shoots the film in shaky-cam style dialled up to 11. I’ve never really had a problem with this hand-held style in the past; the last two Bourne entries didn’t irritate me in the way it did many others. But well done to Ross: he’s succeeded in putting the shooting style in the way of the story. It called attention to itself so much in the early stages it started to verge on parody.

When we finally get to the Hunger Games themselves, it inevitably disappoints. The action is competently done, despite being limited to a 12A classification. There’s very little blood on display after the distributor asked to be passed at that rating. The tame violence is not necessarily a problem; what is a problem is the near-total absence of suspense and excitement. The film threatens to get pulses moving in a couple of places, when Katniss and Peeta are running around the enclosure avoiding the other contestants and occasionally firing arrows. But just when you think something really interesting might be about to happen… it doesn’t. It lacks a single memorable set-piece, content instead to serve up scene after scene of running and hiding, and then some more running and hiding. And then some more again.

The actors do their best: Jennifer Lawrence at least confirms her rising star status, perfectly cast as the gutsy Katniss. Hutcherson, a bit stiff in Journey 2: The Mysterious Island a couple of months back, is also a bit stiff here as the seemingly dim baker’s boy Peeta, who mostly just waits around to be saved by Katniss and occasionally camouflages himself in icing. Donald Sutherland turns up for a few lines and takes the money. Best of all is Woody Harrelson as a former Games champion, looking both surly and silly in an unbecoming and extremely ill-advised wig.

And what of the film’s alleged satire of current television trends (so-called reality shows with contestants being voted off by a bloodthirsty public)? A character suggests at one point that if everyone stopped watching the Games, then the government would have no choice but to throw in the towel and cancel the whole thing. Quite possibly true, but that’s as sharp as the satire gets. It’s difficult to imagine legions of teenage Americans switching off America’s Got Talent as the result of having seen this film. Stanley Tucci as greasy chat show host Caesar Flickerman (yes, that really is his name) comes off as just another greasy chat show host, but in a blue wig. I assume he was supposed to be funny or critical, or possibly both, but in the event he is neither. In all honesty, The Running Man was far more savage and certainly more amusing (if not always intentionally).

By the end I had had quite enough of the film’s tepid action, tepid romance and tepid satire. It will satiate fans of the books, I’m sure – the overly long running time surely proof of its fidelity to the novel. But unless you’re a massive fan of wigs (in which case you really need to see this film), The Hunger Games amounts to little more than reheated leftovers from older, better sci-fi stories.

[xrr rating=2/5]

April 2, 2012
Take One review: Wild Bill (2012)

My review of Dexter Fletcher’s decent directorial debut:

Wild Bill review at Take One

April 2, 2012
Review: Mimic (1997)

Guillermo del Toro’s 1997 creature feature is the film from his CV that now tends to be forgotten – usually on purpose. Compromised almost from the word Go, the Mexican director disowned it for a long time until last year when he was invited to assemble a director’s cut, returning the film to a version which came as close as possible to his original vision. I’ve finally got around to watching this cut of the film, hence this somewhat tardy review.

Mimic wasn’t a great film in its original iteration, and to be honest it still isn’t. But it remains an extremely polished and very enjoyable melding of Hollywood B-movie clichés with del Toro’s trademark fantasy-horror preoccupations, and this version is something of a modest improvement.

The plot, based on a short story by Donald A. Wollheim, is par for the monster movie course. A group of scientists led by Mira Sorvino, in an attempt to halt the spread of a disease killing New York City’s children, create a mutant insect that wipes out cockroaches, the disease’s carrier. Three years later, random people are being picked off in and around the subway system. It turns out those mutant insects have done a lot more mutating that anyone expected, evolving to human size and enjoying the taste of their new prey: humans.

As an example of del Toro’s work, Mimic features many of the themes that the director would subsequently return to: Frankenstein science, fairy tales, the innocence of childhood, religion (specifically Catholicism), and of course horrors lurking beneath the surface of the ordinary world, both real and imagined. Almost all of these are more successfully explored in his finest achievement to date, Pan’s Labyrinth. Here he only skims the surface; clearly this was a stepping stone to greater things, though frequent interference by the film’s producer Bob Weinstein probably didn’t help much.

Yet the twin compensations of a strong cast and a beautifully shot production make Mimic an effective genre entry. Mira Sorvino as the inventor of the giant mutant cockroaches (of which there are far too few movies in my book) and Jeremy Northam as her colleague and husband are both much better than this sort of material, but they still treat it with an admirable seriousness. A stronger-than-expected supporting cast (Giancarlo Giannini, Charles S. Dutton, Josh Brolin, F. Murray Abraham) adds another level of class to the film, keeping it together even as the familiar plot refuses to deviate from its well-worn path.

Dan Laustsen’s cinematography delivers a pleasing glossiness to the sewer and underground sets, heightening the dank and slimy gloom in a way that favourably recalls Alien (clearly a strong influence throughout; Charles S. Dutton’s casting certainly feels like a nod to the franchise). The highlight is the sequence set within a subway car, as the key characters come under attack from a swarm of the oversized critters. It’s suspenseful, fun and offers up lashings of goo; indeed, much the same could be said of the film as a whole.

There’s nothing new or special here, but this cut of Mimic delivers the goods while offering tantalising glimpses of the director del Toro would go on to become.

[xrr rating=3/5]

March 25, 2012
Friday Favourites: 10 films that deserved a sequel

In these days of franchises dominating the box-office and films coming with sequel-friendly endings as standard, it’s interesting to look back at some that could or should have had follow-ups but, for whatever reason, didn’t. Sequels can be a good thing (no, seriously): they can provide an encore for popular characters, deepen or embellish the world from the original, or offer an opportunity to fix things that didn’t work first time around. Sometimes we’re left wanting more, and though we know in our heart of hearts a sequel is as likely to disappoint as not, that doesn’t stop us dreaming. So here are a few of my dream choices for the sequel treatment:

1. Flash Gordon (1980)

“The End?” The final scene’s tease in Mike Hodges’ adaptation of the classic comic strip promised a sequel that tragically never materialised. Yes, it’s as camp as hell, but who wouldn’t want to see a follow-up with more dodgy acting, crazy set designs and a rocking Queen soundtrack? Just think: more Brian Blessed as Prince Vultan! Could the world have survived it?

2. Young Sherlock Holmes (1985)

Of all the films produced by Steven Spielberg geared towards younger audiences, this is perhaps the most overlooked. The Goonies has the biggest online clamouring for a sequel, but this introduction to the master detective was an enjoyable (if rather unfaithful) adventure mixing Conan Doyle’s familiar ingredients with a strong dash of Spielbergian fantasy, a decent cast and a killer closing shot. A follow-up would likely have disappointed, but been welcome nonetheless.

3. The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959)

Another Sherlock Holmes adventure, this time with a man born to play the lead role: Peter Cushing. This was Hammer’s attempt to continue their run of successful literary horror adaptations following The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) and Dracula (1958), and retained the core team of Cushing, Christopher Lee and director Terence Fisher. It’s a gorgeously gothic take on the classic novel, and Cushing’s performance was terrific. Alas, no official follow-ups were made, despite the abundance of source material – though Cushing did get to reprise the character in a 1960s BBC TV series.

4. Galaxy Quest (1999)

This pitch-perfect satire of the Star Trek phenomenon was enjoyed by both fans and non-fans alike. The strong cast (Tim Allen, Sigourney Weaver, Alan Rickman) and clever story (about the has-been cast of a once-popular sci-fi TV show being forced to live through an episode for real) made it an ideal choice for sequelising (is that a word?). Unfortunately it didn’t sell as many tickets at the box-office as it should, and any thoughts of a Part Two were placed in hypersleep.

5. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (2005)

The curse of sci-fi comedy struck again with this adaptation of Douglas Adams’ ever popular series. With four published sequels from the author (and a fifth completed by Eoin Colfer), all the first film had to do was capture the audience’s imagination; the sequels would practically make themselves. The only problem: the film failed to find an audience in America. The Guide was quietly shelved.

6. Unbreakable (2000)

M. Night Shyamalan’s follow-up to The Sixth Sense was a slightly eccentric spin on the superhero genre, and arguably a few years ahead of its time. As the film ends the stage is set for an epic showdown between the hero (Bruce Willis) and the villain (Samuel L. Jackson). Probably one of those films that’s best left as a one-off, but the mind still lingers on what might have happened next.

7. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000)

Unusually, Ang Lee’s arthouse blockbuster is already a sequel: an adaptation of the fourth book in a five-book series. It took over $100m in the US alone and further adaptations of the series were promised, but never came to pass. A shame, as its epic mixture of mythical action and doomed romance would almost certainly have justified a second visit.

8. The Untouchables (1987)

There’s little suggestion of further stories to be told at the end of Brian De Palma’s take on the Al Capone story, but after the edge-of-the-seat climax I was actually rather keen to see where Eliot Ness (Kevin Costner) and the other surviving Untouchable, George Stone (Andy Garcia), went next. Who knows? They might have assembled a new team and taken on other crime syndicates… *enters the land of imagination* *forgets to finish article* (the same applies to Curtis Hanson’s L.A. Confidential (1997) with Russell Crowe and Guy Pearce)

9. Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (2003)

From a personal perspective, it’s simply criminal that a sequel to Peter Weir’s adaptation of Patrick O’Brien’s seafaring saga was never greenlit. Unquestionably the finest dramatisation of naval warfare during the Napoleonic Wars (a rather narrow genre, I grant you), the excitement, monotony and sheer terror of life aboard ship was superbly brought to life. Russell Crowe as Jack Aubrey and Paul Bettany as Stephen Maturin made a fantastic pairing. With at least another 18 novels left to adapt (this film merged two entries), and Crowe publicly stating his desire to reprise the role of Aubrey, one can only wistfully hope there is still time to pull a follow-up together.

10. The Italian Job (1969)

And finally, how can I not mention the film that will forever be engrained on the British public consciousness? THAT ending, as Michael Caine proclaims to have an idea as to how to retrieve his team’s stolen loot from the bus balancing on the edge of a cliff in the Alps, has come to define this country’s irresistible urge to support the underdog, the loveable rogue, the cheeky chappie – even if he is a common thief. We desperately want him to succeed, but we’ll never know if he did. It’s a terrific ending; a sequel showing what happened next would simply have robbed the film of a major part of its charm. Still, it did deserve a sequel, right?

March 23, 2012
Review: The Raven (2012)

With its nicely brooding atmosphere and a characteristically lively central performance from John Cusack, The Raven is something of a small gem. It’s clunkily directed by James McTeigue and the serial killer plot doesn’t really make any sense, but it goes about its ghoulish business with an admirable determination and persuasiveness.

The central conceit is based on a crumb of historical truth: that Edgar Allen Poe was found dying in Baltimore in October 1849, and that his whereabouts prior to his death remained a mystery. On to this has been grafted a gruesome kidnapping plot that feels like reheated leftovers from the 1990s serial killer fad spawned by The Silence of the Lambs and Seven. A murderer is on the loose in the city, recreating deaths from Poe’s literary works. When the author’s secret fiancée Emily Hamilton (Alice Eve) is abducted and buried alive inside a coffin, the mastermind insists that Poe prints his thoughts and private anguish in the local paper until she is found.

McTeigue is a workmanlike director who has a knack for picking interesting material (see V for Vendetta). He gives us the dank streets and foggy forests that are par for the course – the gaslit gloom of Baltimore provides plenty of shadows for something to lurk in – but he also delivers a satisfying amount of suspense, along with a side order of bloody shocks, on the way to an unsurprising ending. It feels faintly reminiscent of Tim Burton’s Sleepy Hollow, which for me is a good thing.

Cusack is always a welcome presence and his caustic interpretation of Poe feels just right for this tale. The strong supporting cast, including Luke Evans as a detective assisting Poe, Brendan Gleeson and Pam Ferris as Emily’s parents and Kevin McNally as Poe’s publisher, are equally good. If you’re in the mood for some gothic gloom and doom, this might well fit the bill.

[xrr rating=3/5]

March 16, 2012
Review: John Carter (2012)

John Carter is one of those films that you really, really want to like more than you actually do. For me, it should have been a slam dunk. It ticks so many of my boxes: Retro-flavoured sci-fi? Check. Classic pulp literature source? Check. Beautiful alien vistas? Check. Supporting cast made up of reliable British stalwarts? Check. So why doesn’t the film click in the way that it should?

The blame must lie squarely with the director. Andrew Stanton has three outstanding directorial credits to his name, and they are all Pixar animations: A Bug’s Life, Finding Nemo and WALL·E. As good as they are (and they are very very good), it is still an enormous leap from animation to live-action – doubly so when you’re working on a big budget Hollywood blockbuster. Funnily enough, one of Stanton’s colleagues made exactly the same leap last December: Brad Bird (the genius behind Ratatouille, The Incredibles and the joyous The Iron Giant) branched out with Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, and delivered the most entertaining entry in the franchise yet. So evidently it is possible to make the transition.

But Stanton fumbles the narrative right from the off. Instead of easing the audience in to a world full of strange names and warring factions, we are dropped practically head first in to a mid-air battle. It’s pretty difficult to get a handle on who’s who and why they are fighting, and it makes very little sense. Then we’re suddenly catapulted to 1880s New York, where a young Edgar Rice Burroughs (Daryl Sabara) has been summoned by his wealthy and eccentric uncle John Carter (Taylor Kitsch) – it’s there he learns of Carter’s Martian escapades, and how he came to travel to the red planet in the first place.

I can see why Stanton wanted to cut through mountains of exposition in order to tease the action, but it doesn’t quite work. It’s jarring and disorientating, and feels like a desperate ploy. From New York it’s back to Mars and those strange names and factions, although the scenes where Carter adjusts to a world where he is able to leap tall buildings are quite fun.

I don’t buy the argument going round critical circles that the source material has been plundered and ripped off so many times down the years that there’s nothing left of interest to today’s audiences. True, the original Burroughs stories date back to 1912, and have heavily influenced genre milestones like Flash Gordon, Star Wars and Avatar. Certain plot points and scenes heavily recall films like Stargate and last year’s Cowboys and Aliens. But with the right script, cast and direction, anything is possible. There is plenty of potential on display in John Carter to justify the decision to adapt the stories. The problem is the way they’ve been adapted.

The story has been pared down to a basic series of chases, from A to B to C, occasionally pausing for some action. There’s very little time spent on shading the characters, which obviously creates problems when you’re not sure who’s on who’s side and does nothing to win the audience over. Some humour would have helped, but there’s none to be found. The central romance between Carter and Martian princess Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins) feels a bit forced. A cute dog-type creature goes a little way to adding family appeal, but not much. In short, it falls in to the common blockbuster trap of all spectacle, no heart.

The second big problem is the casting of the lead character. For Carter they needed someone who had charisma, panache, a bit of swagger. They needed a Harrison Ford; they got a Mark Hamill. No offence to Kitsch, I’m sure he’s a lovely bloke, but he’s a plank of wood as Carter. He looks the part but fails to convince as a man able to inspire an uprising; he barely seems credible as a disillusioned Confederate soldier.

The film is not a complete loss; far from it. The entire production is a thing of beauty – the photography, sets, costumes and special effects all look terrific. Beyond Kitsch, the rest of the cast more than hold their own. It’s always fun to see a good supporting cast in a sci-fi yarn like this; they give depth to the spectacle and help anchor the story, and actors like Mark Strong and James Purefoy do just that (though Dominic West simply stays in Ham mode). And the copious action on display is fun, if never thrilling.

John Carter is no flop. It’s not as good as it might have been and it has problems, but it’s still an entertaining two hours. It’s just a shame that, with so much going for it, it only emerges as OK.

[xrr rating=3/5]

March 14, 2012
Friday Favourites: 5 Dodgy Taglines

I do love a good film poster. It seems to be something of a dying art, sadly; so many these days are just Photoshopped headshots of the cast looking serious/pensive/awestruck. They remind me of Joey’s acting class from Friends: in order to act like you’ve received some bad news, he tells his students, just try and divide 232 by 13 (cue prolonged quizzical expression). Where’s the excitement? Where’s the passion? Where’s the beautiful, swooning, scantily-clad woman being carried away by the monstrous creation?

Anyway, one of the best things about a poster is the tagline: a line of text that promises anything and everything in order to seduce us in to seeing whatever they are trying to sell. Some are memorable for good reasons (sci-fi and horror flicks tend to attract particularly enjoyable examples), others… not so much. Here are five slightly suspect attempts to sell a film:

5. Whoever Wins… We Lose.

Film: Alien vs Predator (2004)

Well, at least it was accurate – audiences were the ones who lost out if they handed over their hard-earned cash to see this disappointing intergalactic battle. Proof that honesty is not always the best policy.

4. Amazing!

Film: Forbidden Planet (1956)

To be honest, I’m rather fond of this one. Back in the 1950s it seems a single simple word was sufficient to dazzle punters (although there are plenty of examples of more hysterical efforts). Still, even by the standards of the time it’s a pretty lame effort to sell one of the best sci-fi films of its era. It’s got Robbie the Robot, for goodness’ sake!

3. EARTH – Take a good look. It could be your last.

Film: Independence Day (1996)

You can’t deny this didn’t work – it roped every man, woman and child in to cinemas in the summer of 1996. A bit later on we wondered what all the fuss was about. And then later still we realised it was all a big joke. One wonders if some advertising exec slipped this tagline in to a meeting for a laugh just to see if anyone bit. Of course, they did.

2. Collide With Destiny.

Film: Titanic (1997)

All in the best possible taste! Or not. Trivialising an infamous cruise ship disaster which cost hundreds of people their lives by carelessly throwing the word Collide around – could you be any less tasteful? Oh, wait – how about re-releasing the film in 3D to ~~profit from~~ commemorate the 100th anniversary of the sinking?

1. This Time It’s Personal.

Film: Jaws: The Revenge (1987)

Nothing can beat the third Jaws sequel for sheer outright silliness. Leaving aside the absurdity of the plot (just how does a shark make things personal…?) and the cheap production values, if that’s possible, this tagline must have had people laughing all the way to the fleapit box office in 1987. Still, it delivered exactly what it promised – even if nobody wanted it.

March 9, 2012
Superman (1978)

Look, let’s not beat around the bush: Superman is the king of all superhero films. It may be over 30 years old, the special effects may be looking a little long in the tooth, and there’s hardly any trendy angst on display; but it doesn’t put a single foot wrong during its epic two and a half hour running time. This is old-fashioned Hollywood movie-making at its best.

Richard Donner’s film delivers the requisite action and spectacle in spades, but it also has an irrepressible sense of fun which allows it to transcend the usual genre boundaries, enabling anyone to enjoy it – even if they’ve never picked up a comic book in their life. Pitched somewhere between reverent adaptation, epic blockbuster and tongue-slightly-in-cheek romp, Superman succeeds in having all of its cakes and eating them too.

Conventional wisdom stated that the Man of Steel was an anachronism in post-Vietnam, post-Watergate 1970s America; a relic from a bygone, more innocent era. Yet Donner capably demonstrated that, on the contrary, Superman was exactly what America needed. Working from an ambitious script (from several writers, among them Mario Puzo) which updated the story to the present day – shots of the open plan, brightly lit Daily Planet offices instantly recall those of All the President’s Men – Donner breathed new life in to the character, proving that the Superman myth could still work its magic on contemporary audiences while staying true to its heritage.

The opening sequence is a minor miracle in itself: theatrical curtains respectfully pull back to reveal a montage of images from the superhero’s past lives on the page and on screen, openly acknowledging that what you are about to see is nothing more than a childlike fantasy. Then the camera slowly moves in and BAM! – you’re sucked in, willingly strapping yourself in for the forthcoming ride. That journey through space, as the opening credits whoosh past your ears and John Williams’ incomparable score starts up, never fails to put a smile on the face. Somehow you instantly know you’re in safe hands.

It certainly has all the hallmarks of a mythical epic. Beginning on Superman’s homeworld, Krypton, we firstly meet his father Jor-El, who packs his infant son Kal-El off in a spaceship to avoid his planet’s imminent (and spectacular) demise. We then move to the American Midwest where Kal-El, Krypton’s only survivor, crash-lands and is brought up by an obliging farmer and his wife; it is here he discovers he has certain strengths and skills not of this world. After a brief layover in the Arctic where the now teenaged alien learns who he is and where he’s from, we finally arrive in Metropolis (looking suspiciously like New York) where he assumes the identity of Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter, in order to fit in with the rest of humanity and keep secret his real identity.

It’s at this point we get to the meaty superhero stuff. Memorable set-pieces abound: Superman’s first appearance as he saves Lois from a damaged helicopter atop the Daily Planet building; his subsequent tour of duty around the city catching criminals and rescuing cats; and of course his gargantuan efforts to stop Lex Luthor from destroying the west coast. Donner perfectly paces the story, hitting all the right emotional notes. Remember that the film is a love story too; the romance between Superman and Lois really works, to the extent that you feel his loss when he holds Lois’ body in his arms towards the end.

Technically the film is a marvel of its time – many effects sequences still look damn good today. But this is not why it continues to endure. Two words can describe one of the main reasons: Christopher Reeve. He was such a perfect fit for the role he was typecast almost from the start. He quite simply IS Superman. It’s a terrific performance, prone to being easily overlooked – especially by young audiences.

Returning to the film as an adult, I was struck by just how good Reeve was in the dual role of Supes and Clark. To the former he brought stature, muscle and sheer heft, tempered with authority, wisdom and compassion; to the latter he brought a hunched shyness and awkwardness, as well as an endearing clumsiness. People often wonder at Lois Lane’s inability to notice that Clark and Superman are one and the same; Reeve’s performance almost makes it credible, it’s that good.

The rest of the cast feel just as much at home. Besides Marlon Brando’s infamously well-paid cameo as Jor-El (something in the order of $14m for ten minutes of screen time), Margot Kidder brings a twinkle to her feisty, career-driven Lois Lane, Jackie Cooper is growly perfection as Daily Planet editor Perry White, and filling out the starry supporting cast are such reliable faces as Glenn Ford and Terence Stamp. The only uncertain notes are hit by the villains of the piece: Gene Hackman makes for a ruthless though not especially threatening Lex Luthor, and Ned Beatty’s sidekick Otis strays a little too far in to cartoonish buffoonery for my liking.

But this isn’t enough to derail what is a precision-made piece of escapist . I still haven’t really mentioned THAT soundtrack yet – perhaps John Williams’ finest hour (seriously, listen to the whole thing if you haven’t – it’s fantastic stuff). In terms of its cast, script, direction and overall entertainment value, Donner’s take on one of the world’s most iconic literary characters is still the one to beat. It is, quite simply, the finest superhero film ever made.

[xrr rating=5/5]

March 8, 2012
Digital Fix Review – Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2012)

My review of Ghost Rider 2 is now online:

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance | Cinema Review | Film @ The Digital Fix.

February 29, 2012
Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (2012)

Nominally a sequel to 2008’s underwhelming Journey to the Center of the Earth, this new spin on Jules Verne’s classic tale is in fact a very silly adventure with only a vague connection to its source material. Josh Hutcherson, as the teen “Vernian” adventurer Sean Anderson, is the only returning cast member; Brendan Fraser is MIA, so in steps Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson as Sean’s new stepfather Hank. Sean believes he’s located the island that Verne was writing about in his book, and that his grandfather (Michael Caine) is marooned on it. So Sean and Hank set off for the South Pacific to rescue him, enlisting en route a helicopter tour guide (Luis Guzmán) as comic relief and his daughter (Vanessa Hudgens) as eye candy.

Where Journey 1 (as it wasn’t called) tried and failed to be a tongue-in-cheek adventure yarn in the style of Fraser’s The Mummy, Journey 2 elects to sit firmly in the Camp camp. Big colourful special-effects sequences follow one after another so quickly there’s barely time to laugh at the daftness of it all. You want to complain at what they’ve done to the story and the paint-by-numbers script which makes very little sense at all (apparently Mysterious Island, Treasure Island, Lilliput from Gulliver’s Travels and Atlantis were all one and the same place), but when you’re having fun watching Michael Caine riding a giant bee, why bother?

It’s clear why Johnson signed on: credited as co-producer, it was filmed largely in his native Hawaii and the script gives him plenty of room to show off his sculpted torso, as well as his not-all-that-bad singing voice. Johnson’s always a likeable screen presence and has no problem with sending up his action hero image, which he certainly does here. If you’re a fan of The Rock’s nipples, then this is the film for you.

[xrr rating=2/5]

On a side note, Johnson seems to be the go-to man for propping up ailing franchises at the moment; he injected more muscles in to Fast and Furious 5 in 2011, and later this year will be seen in G.I. Joe 2, after the majority of the first film’s cast were given the boot following its mixed reception. I have no problem with this – any action blockbuster would stand to benefit with Johnson on its team, simply because he has more charisma than a thousand Paul Walkers.

February 24, 2012