Search
JT (287 KP) rated Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Of all the absurd film titles this has to be right up there. Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is a film that you can tune into and lose yourself with – nothing more than that.
Directed by Timur Bekmambetov (Wanted) the film initially focuses on the early life of one Abraham Lincoln (Benjamin Walker) whose mother is killed at the hands of a vampire.
Fueled by revenge he goes out and tries to avenge her death, unsuccessfully at first. He is then taken under the wing of Henry Sturges (Dominic Cooper) who shows him the proper ways to fight back, in a training montage that makes Rocky’s wood chopping skills look pathetic.
Sturges leaves Lincoln to go off on his own but sends him the names of undead that he has to go out and kill on a regular basis, while trying to hide his nocturnal hobby from those closest to him. First thing to note with this film is many of the techniques that made Wanted a unique action flick are used considerably throughout, a bit too much for me.
CGI in film should be used sparingly as far as I’m concerned, but when faced with a scene where there is no feasible way you could shoot for real then it’s a perfect solution. When Lincoln is giving chase to Jack Barts (Marton Csokas) across a stampede of wild horses it provides a great action sequence for which CGI comes into its own.
In-fact pretty much all the action sequences use this, and with the climactic train sequence proving a highlight to the end of the film it’s not anywhere near enough to make it a standout, you can only hide behind special effects for so long before you’re going to get found out.
There is a pause in proceedings, a chance to catch breath from all that over the top action, as Lincoln puts down his silver coated axe and follows a career in politics looking to abolish slavery as well as vampires. His lifelong friend Will Johnson (Anthony Mackie) also joins him on this quest as his personal Presidential aide.
Of course it turns out that vampires are unable to kill their own as we see from a brief flash back where Dominic Cooper is mindlessly attacked and his beloved taken from him, so he clearly has a motive as well.
It’s all harmless fun, and while the late Abe Lincoln provides some small resemblance to Liam Neeson with a beard (was it only me that thought that) it’s a far fetched and totally ludicrous story that you cannot take too seriously for a minute.
Directed by Timur Bekmambetov (Wanted) the film initially focuses on the early life of one Abraham Lincoln (Benjamin Walker) whose mother is killed at the hands of a vampire.
Fueled by revenge he goes out and tries to avenge her death, unsuccessfully at first. He is then taken under the wing of Henry Sturges (Dominic Cooper) who shows him the proper ways to fight back, in a training montage that makes Rocky’s wood chopping skills look pathetic.
Sturges leaves Lincoln to go off on his own but sends him the names of undead that he has to go out and kill on a regular basis, while trying to hide his nocturnal hobby from those closest to him. First thing to note with this film is many of the techniques that made Wanted a unique action flick are used considerably throughout, a bit too much for me.
CGI in film should be used sparingly as far as I’m concerned, but when faced with a scene where there is no feasible way you could shoot for real then it’s a perfect solution. When Lincoln is giving chase to Jack Barts (Marton Csokas) across a stampede of wild horses it provides a great action sequence for which CGI comes into its own.
In-fact pretty much all the action sequences use this, and with the climactic train sequence proving a highlight to the end of the film it’s not anywhere near enough to make it a standout, you can only hide behind special effects for so long before you’re going to get found out.
There is a pause in proceedings, a chance to catch breath from all that over the top action, as Lincoln puts down his silver coated axe and follows a career in politics looking to abolish slavery as well as vampires. His lifelong friend Will Johnson (Anthony Mackie) also joins him on this quest as his personal Presidential aide.
Of course it turns out that vampires are unable to kill their own as we see from a brief flash back where Dominic Cooper is mindlessly attacked and his beloved taken from him, so he clearly has a motive as well.
It’s all harmless fun, and while the late Abe Lincoln provides some small resemblance to Liam Neeson with a beard (was it only me that thought that) it’s a far fetched and totally ludicrous story that you cannot take too seriously for a minute.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Breaking In (2018) (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Get In.
Into every life a little rain must fall. Some fairly pervasive advertising drove me into the cinema to see this one… often a sign that the distributors think it has legs. And from its quirky opening titles (with a COMPLETELY expected shock denouement!) I started to think it did have something. The beginning is in fact VERY similar to the introductory scene of “Get Out” in its randomness, and for one brief moment I wondered if the film was trying to parody that indie classic from last year… with only some studio lawyers getting in the way of them really calling it “Get In”. (“No, no, no… ‘Get’ is copyrighted… you’ll have to use some other word!”).
But no. It turns out that this is a pretty below-average B-movie after all,
The plot is pretty derivative of the “family in dire peril” variety made famous by the “Taken” series. Not being able to persuade Liam Neeson to wear a dress in this “Times Up” era, the Neeson-actioner writer Ryan Engle (“The Commuter“, “Non-Stop“) switches the action to focus on stressed mother Shaun Russell (Gabrielle Union).
Shaun has come to deepest Wisconsin with her two kids, Jasmine (Ajiona Alexus) and Glover (Seth Carr) to arrange the sale of her deceased father’s luxury home: a house absolutely brimming to the elegant rafters with security features. But unknown to them, there are already intruders in the house searching for something of value, and with Shaun locked outside the secure fortress home she will stop at nothing to break in and bring her children safely home.
The sad thing about this one is that the fairly unknown cast actually do a pretty good job. The chief villain Eddie, played by Billy Burke, channels an effectively ‘evil-quiet-Gary-Oldman” turn to good effect. His accomplices, the more sensitive Sam (Levi Meaden), luckless Peter (Mark Furze) and (particularly) the psychopathic Duncan (Richard Cabral) (can a psychopath really be called Duncan?) are broad caricatures, but never too broad to be totally awful.
Gabrielle Union kicks-ass effectively with her particular set of skills (see below), but particularly good is 22-year old Ajiona Alexus who has a great screen presence and deserves to be in much better films than this.
Where the film stumbles and goes crashing through its carbonite shutters is in the story and the screenplay’s dialogue.
The former is just bat-shit crazy, with so many ridiculous plot-holes and “yeah-but” moments that you lose count. For example, at one point the daughter is looking for her mobile phone WHICH IS IN THE ROOM and which would wrap the plot up in 10 minutes flat…. but then something else happens and they stop looking for it, never to be thought of again!
And what of those ‘particular set of skills’ that Shaun has? Oh, I forgot to say… she has none!! Or at least you assume not, since Shaun seems to have no back-story whatsoever, other than the fact that her daddy is very very rich and being investigated by the D/A. For what? Embezzlement? Tax evasion? Smartie-smuggling? Gun running? Perhaps he was a mafia overlord and Shaun was brought up with martial arts, gun and knife training to spy-school level? Perhaps none of the above, and she was just an obsessive watcher of Engle-scripted flicks? We will never know.
In addition, Shaun gets the proverbial crap kicked out of her on so many occasions, but there is no trip to casualty required. (Yes, I know Neeson and most other action heroes have the same implausible in-vulnerabilities, but it just seems so much less realistic when she is a not-particularly sporty or athletic woman).
And that dialogue… it’s just plain laughable in places. If Eddie doesn’t do his “Mamma hen will come back to save her chicks” speech once, he does it five times….
“Hey, James”… (James McTeigue, director, “V for Vendetta”)… says Burke, “Haven’t I said this line four times already”. “Sure”, says McTeigue, “I’m not sure where exactly I want to put it in the final cut yet, but only one of them will stay in. Don’t worry… I won’t make you look stupid to the cinema-going audience!!”
Every last thriller cliché is mined as the story grinds to an unmemorable and very flat conclusion.
Before wrapping up, I’d point out Another crime being committed in the music department. Australian composer Johnny Klimek’s action thriller score is actually quiet good, full of nice electronic riffs. But he really doesn’t know when to shut up. I remember an interview by John Williams on scoring the score to Hitchcock’s “Family Plot” where he recounted that Hitchcock taught him the value of a sudden absence of music at key moments. This film is too recent to learn the many lessons of “A Quiet Place“: but there are so many moments in this film where silence should have been golden. At one point the (what should be) heart-stopping sound effect of a creaking beam can barely be heard over Klimek’s pounding electronics.
So in summary, although it’s the award of ‘good acting attempt’ badges to sew onto the cast’s scout uniforms, my message to you dear reader re this one is “Get Out” of the cinema and enjoy the nice summer evenings instead!
But no. It turns out that this is a pretty below-average B-movie after all,
The plot is pretty derivative of the “family in dire peril” variety made famous by the “Taken” series. Not being able to persuade Liam Neeson to wear a dress in this “Times Up” era, the Neeson-actioner writer Ryan Engle (“The Commuter“, “Non-Stop“) switches the action to focus on stressed mother Shaun Russell (Gabrielle Union).
Shaun has come to deepest Wisconsin with her two kids, Jasmine (Ajiona Alexus) and Glover (Seth Carr) to arrange the sale of her deceased father’s luxury home: a house absolutely brimming to the elegant rafters with security features. But unknown to them, there are already intruders in the house searching for something of value, and with Shaun locked outside the secure fortress home she will stop at nothing to break in and bring her children safely home.
The sad thing about this one is that the fairly unknown cast actually do a pretty good job. The chief villain Eddie, played by Billy Burke, channels an effectively ‘evil-quiet-Gary-Oldman” turn to good effect. His accomplices, the more sensitive Sam (Levi Meaden), luckless Peter (Mark Furze) and (particularly) the psychopathic Duncan (Richard Cabral) (can a psychopath really be called Duncan?) are broad caricatures, but never too broad to be totally awful.
Gabrielle Union kicks-ass effectively with her particular set of skills (see below), but particularly good is 22-year old Ajiona Alexus who has a great screen presence and deserves to be in much better films than this.
Where the film stumbles and goes crashing through its carbonite shutters is in the story and the screenplay’s dialogue.
The former is just bat-shit crazy, with so many ridiculous plot-holes and “yeah-but” moments that you lose count. For example, at one point the daughter is looking for her mobile phone WHICH IS IN THE ROOM and which would wrap the plot up in 10 minutes flat…. but then something else happens and they stop looking for it, never to be thought of again!
And what of those ‘particular set of skills’ that Shaun has? Oh, I forgot to say… she has none!! Or at least you assume not, since Shaun seems to have no back-story whatsoever, other than the fact that her daddy is very very rich and being investigated by the D/A. For what? Embezzlement? Tax evasion? Smartie-smuggling? Gun running? Perhaps he was a mafia overlord and Shaun was brought up with martial arts, gun and knife training to spy-school level? Perhaps none of the above, and she was just an obsessive watcher of Engle-scripted flicks? We will never know.
In addition, Shaun gets the proverbial crap kicked out of her on so many occasions, but there is no trip to casualty required. (Yes, I know Neeson and most other action heroes have the same implausible in-vulnerabilities, but it just seems so much less realistic when she is a not-particularly sporty or athletic woman).
And that dialogue… it’s just plain laughable in places. If Eddie doesn’t do his “Mamma hen will come back to save her chicks” speech once, he does it five times….
“Hey, James”… (James McTeigue, director, “V for Vendetta”)… says Burke, “Haven’t I said this line four times already”. “Sure”, says McTeigue, “I’m not sure where exactly I want to put it in the final cut yet, but only one of them will stay in. Don’t worry… I won’t make you look stupid to the cinema-going audience!!”
Every last thriller cliché is mined as the story grinds to an unmemorable and very flat conclusion.
Before wrapping up, I’d point out Another crime being committed in the music department. Australian composer Johnny Klimek’s action thriller score is actually quiet good, full of nice electronic riffs. But he really doesn’t know when to shut up. I remember an interview by John Williams on scoring the score to Hitchcock’s “Family Plot” where he recounted that Hitchcock taught him the value of a sudden absence of music at key moments. This film is too recent to learn the many lessons of “A Quiet Place“: but there are so many moments in this film where silence should have been golden. At one point the (what should be) heart-stopping sound effect of a creaking beam can barely be heard over Klimek’s pounding electronics.
So in summary, although it’s the award of ‘good acting attempt’ badges to sew onto the cast’s scout uniforms, my message to you dear reader re this one is “Get Out” of the cinema and enjoy the nice summer evenings instead!
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Men in Black International (2019) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
As a young girl Molly (Tessa Thompson) comes into contact with an alien in her back yard. When mysterious men show up and erase her parents memory of the incident it sparks a twenty year quest to find out the truth and find the Men in Black. She is smart and persistent and she becomes the first person to infiltrate the clandestine agency. After convincing Agent O (Emma Thompson) that she is worth taking a chance on, she becomes a probationary agent and sent to London. There she is tasked with helping Agent H (Chris Hemsworth) on a mission to stop some mysterious alien twins (Laurent Bourgeois and Larry Bourgeois) from getting their hands on a world destroying weapon. But they have no idea that a mole within the Men in Black could be their biggest obstacle in protecting the Earth from a destruction.
The Men in Black franchise returns with an international spin with very few familiar faces, Emma Thompson being on of very few, and a lot of new faces. F. Gary Gary (Straight Outta Compton, The Fate of the Furious) helms the fourth installment of the series as director. Tessa Thompson and Hemsworth reunite on screen after the successful Thor: Ragnarok, to head a large cast, including Kumail Nanjiani, Liam Neeson, Rebecca Ferguson and more.
If you are a fan of the previous three MiB films you are going to get the gun battles, cool new aliens and plenty of lasers. Also there are some really funny lines, most of them delivered by Nanjiani. The characters are really interesting and you get all of the action that you expect from a summer “blockbuster.” I really liked some of the CGI especially the stuff that had to do with the Alien Twins. The story really is predictable. From the start you can really tell how the entire movie will play out, for the most part. The previous films also had plenty of cheesy moments but it seems like they really ramped it up for this installment. I thought that Will Smith had really taken the Men in Black series about as far as he could and was excited for the new blood, but left feeling let down but this film. The promise of the characters washed away with the predictability and choppiness of the story.
I think this film will appeal to a younger audience and would be a good matinee watch for a family. Enough funny lines to keep the adults engaged and it moves at a fast enough pace to keep kids engaged. If you have never seen the other Men in Black films this might be a good introduction and get you to watch the first three movies. But I think fans of the previous three films may feel let down, as I did.
The Men in Black franchise returns with an international spin with very few familiar faces, Emma Thompson being on of very few, and a lot of new faces. F. Gary Gary (Straight Outta Compton, The Fate of the Furious) helms the fourth installment of the series as director. Tessa Thompson and Hemsworth reunite on screen after the successful Thor: Ragnarok, to head a large cast, including Kumail Nanjiani, Liam Neeson, Rebecca Ferguson and more.
If you are a fan of the previous three MiB films you are going to get the gun battles, cool new aliens and plenty of lasers. Also there are some really funny lines, most of them delivered by Nanjiani. The characters are really interesting and you get all of the action that you expect from a summer “blockbuster.” I really liked some of the CGI especially the stuff that had to do with the Alien Twins. The story really is predictable. From the start you can really tell how the entire movie will play out, for the most part. The previous films also had plenty of cheesy moments but it seems like they really ramped it up for this installment. I thought that Will Smith had really taken the Men in Black series about as far as he could and was excited for the new blood, but left feeling let down but this film. The promise of the characters washed away with the predictability and choppiness of the story.
I think this film will appeal to a younger audience and would be a good matinee watch for a family. Enough funny lines to keep the adults engaged and it moves at a fast enough pace to keep kids engaged. If you have never seen the other Men in Black films this might be a good introduction and get you to watch the first three movies. But I think fans of the previous three films may feel let down, as I did.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
As average as you can get
The lacklustre box-office performance of Jack Reacher in 2012 seemed to scupper plans for the film to become the first in a new Tom Cruise-led action franchise to rival the likes of Mission Impossible and its mixed critical response only added to its woes.
Fast forward four years and we’ve got the sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is Jack Reacher: Never Go Back the improvement that was so sorely needed and could it act as a catalyst to turn this popular novel series into a proper film franchise?
Investigator Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise) springs into action after the arrest of Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders), an Army major accused of treason. Suspecting foul play, Jack embarks on a mission to prove that the head of his old unit is innocent. After crossing paths with the law, Reacher must now go on the lam to uncover the truth behind a major government conspiracy that involves the death of U.S. soldiers.
Director Edward Zwick (Blood Diamond, The Last Samurai) shoots the action realistically but even a commanding turn from Tom Cruise can’t save a bland script, so-so special effects and a plot so unoriginal, it would be easy to swap out Cruise for Liam Neeson and call it Taken 4. Or Matt Damon and label it Bourne 6? You get where I’m going with this, right?
It’s all been done so many times before and there are no twists and turns or anything remotely unusual to give the film a USP. Instead, the scriptwriters, of which there are three here, force our two central characters into a game of cat and mouse so lazy, the bad guys show up literally minutes after our heroes, with no explanation whatsoever of how they came to be in the vicinity.
Surely it wouldn’t have been difficult to add some extra exposition into the script. Cyborg baddies with GPS tracking systems implanted into their brains perhaps? I’ll save that idea for another day.
Nevertheless, the action is confidently choreographed with a Halloween parade finale being utilised rather well and Cruise plays the titular role well, despite being 54 this year. However, the supporting cast are drowned out by some horrendous dialogue and a story that doesn’t really know what to do with anyone apart from Jack Reacher himself.
And that really is about it. Jack Reacher: Never Go Back is the most satisfactory film of the year by some margin. It’s not terrible by any means and it certainly isn’t fantastic, but it makes for a passable trip to the cinema, though one that you’ll probably have forgotten about by the time you get to your front door. It’s just that middle of the road.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/10/21/as-average-as-you-can-get-jack-reacher-never-go-back-review/
Fast forward four years and we’ve got the sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is Jack Reacher: Never Go Back the improvement that was so sorely needed and could it act as a catalyst to turn this popular novel series into a proper film franchise?
Investigator Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise) springs into action after the arrest of Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders), an Army major accused of treason. Suspecting foul play, Jack embarks on a mission to prove that the head of his old unit is innocent. After crossing paths with the law, Reacher must now go on the lam to uncover the truth behind a major government conspiracy that involves the death of U.S. soldiers.
Director Edward Zwick (Blood Diamond, The Last Samurai) shoots the action realistically but even a commanding turn from Tom Cruise can’t save a bland script, so-so special effects and a plot so unoriginal, it would be easy to swap out Cruise for Liam Neeson and call it Taken 4. Or Matt Damon and label it Bourne 6? You get where I’m going with this, right?
It’s all been done so many times before and there are no twists and turns or anything remotely unusual to give the film a USP. Instead, the scriptwriters, of which there are three here, force our two central characters into a game of cat and mouse so lazy, the bad guys show up literally minutes after our heroes, with no explanation whatsoever of how they came to be in the vicinity.
Surely it wouldn’t have been difficult to add some extra exposition into the script. Cyborg baddies with GPS tracking systems implanted into their brains perhaps? I’ll save that idea for another day.
Nevertheless, the action is confidently choreographed with a Halloween parade finale being utilised rather well and Cruise plays the titular role well, despite being 54 this year. However, the supporting cast are drowned out by some horrendous dialogue and a story that doesn’t really know what to do with anyone apart from Jack Reacher himself.
And that really is about it. Jack Reacher: Never Go Back is the most satisfactory film of the year by some margin. It’s not terrible by any means and it certainly isn’t fantastic, but it makes for a passable trip to the cinema, though one that you’ll probably have forgotten about by the time you get to your front door. It’s just that middle of the road.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/10/21/as-average-as-you-can-get-jack-reacher-never-go-back-review/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Widows (2018) in Movies
Jan 31, 2019
Loved it
A film with Viola Davis and Liam Neeson? Yep, count me in! Solid drama about a crew of women planning to finish the heist that their deceased husbands started.
Acting: 10
Viola Davis. Viola Davis. Viola Davis. The power behind her acting is so evident, so purposeful. She plays the role of Veronica, a hard-ass who is also trying to mask her vulnerability. Her words are few, but her impact carries the film. She isn’t alone in her strong performance as Elizabeth Debicki and Cynthia Erivo also held their own. I appreciated the way Debicki showed her character’s growth from the beginning of the film to the end. Once passive and weak, she emerges as one that’s willing to do what she needs to survive.
I didn’t mention Michelle Rodriguez for a reason. I wasn’t impressed with her role this time around. Kind of a lame duck. Sorry, Michelle.
Beginning: 10
Widows gets off to a really hot start as it moves back and forth between the daily life of the main character Veronica and the heist that went wrong. It sets the tone that the film will be conflict-driven and entertaining. Watching the first ten minutes had me really excited to see the rest.
Characters: 9
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
There’s nothing that really stood out for me and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Widows was shot plainly and in forgettable fashion. Fortunately the story and the conflict that moves the story are both extremely strong. At the end of the day, if you tell a good story the right way, you don’t have to go overboard with cinematic flare.
Conflict: 8
Solid action here. The movie benefits by having strong antagonists that actually make you fear for the lives of the main characters. You can’t really predict what is going to happen from one scene to the next. The intensity picks up even more when the characters arrive at the main heist. Very strong scene that will have you on the edge of your seat as you anticipate things going horribly wrong.
Genre: 8
I give credit to stories that are told in unique fashion. There aren’t enough heist films starring women so I’m hoping this is the beginning of what could be a very popular trend. From a dramatic standpoint, Widows absolutely holds its own.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 9
Plot: 10
Again, much credit is given to originality. The story moves quickly and is believable, only really slowing down in one spot. I also appreciate the twists that add some flare to the story without overdoing it. Sometimes twists can cause a hug eyeroll. Not this time.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 87
My expectations were minimal, but I must say that I was thoroughly impressed with how Widows turned out. It’s a fun ride from beginning to end. You won’t be disappointed.
Acting: 10
Viola Davis. Viola Davis. Viola Davis. The power behind her acting is so evident, so purposeful. She plays the role of Veronica, a hard-ass who is also trying to mask her vulnerability. Her words are few, but her impact carries the film. She isn’t alone in her strong performance as Elizabeth Debicki and Cynthia Erivo also held their own. I appreciated the way Debicki showed her character’s growth from the beginning of the film to the end. Once passive and weak, she emerges as one that’s willing to do what she needs to survive.
I didn’t mention Michelle Rodriguez for a reason. I wasn’t impressed with her role this time around. Kind of a lame duck. Sorry, Michelle.
Beginning: 10
Widows gets off to a really hot start as it moves back and forth between the daily life of the main character Veronica and the heist that went wrong. It sets the tone that the film will be conflict-driven and entertaining. Watching the first ten minutes had me really excited to see the rest.
Characters: 9
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
There’s nothing that really stood out for me and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Widows was shot plainly and in forgettable fashion. Fortunately the story and the conflict that moves the story are both extremely strong. At the end of the day, if you tell a good story the right way, you don’t have to go overboard with cinematic flare.
Conflict: 8
Solid action here. The movie benefits by having strong antagonists that actually make you fear for the lives of the main characters. You can’t really predict what is going to happen from one scene to the next. The intensity picks up even more when the characters arrive at the main heist. Very strong scene that will have you on the edge of your seat as you anticipate things going horribly wrong.
Genre: 8
I give credit to stories that are told in unique fashion. There aren’t enough heist films starring women so I’m hoping this is the beginning of what could be a very popular trend. From a dramatic standpoint, Widows absolutely holds its own.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 9
Plot: 10
Again, much credit is given to originality. The story moves quickly and is believable, only really slowing down in one spot. I also appreciate the twists that add some flare to the story without overdoing it. Sometimes twists can cause a hug eyeroll. Not this time.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 87
My expectations were minimal, but I must say that I was thoroughly impressed with how Widows turned out. It’s a fun ride from beginning to end. You won’t be disappointed.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Clash of the Titans (2010) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Jun 23, 2019)
Clash of the Titans tells the story of men turning their backs on the gods. The gods grow weaker as men refuse to pay worship to them and neither side will budge. That's where Perseus (Sam Worthington) comes in. Perseus is a demigod, half man and half god. Zeus (Liam Neeson) is his father, but Perseus was raised as a fisherman. As the gods grow desperate, they turn to Zeus' brother who was banished to the underworld, Hades (Ralph Fiennes) to hopefully scare them into realizing "the order of things." When Hades onslaught kills Perseus' family, Perseus vows revenge against him and will do everything within his power to destroy the god of the underworld. Perseus' journey will not be easy as several ungodly beasts stand in the way of him reaching his goal as he struggles with accepting sanctuary as a god or continuing on this journey as a man.
Clash of the Titans was highly anticipated on my end for quite some time. The trailers were pretty fantastic and everything seemed to point to the film being epic. Directed by Louis Leterrier (Unleashed, The Incredible Hulk) and starring Sam Worthington (Avatar, Terminator: Salvation), Liam Neeson (Taken, Batman Begins), and Ralph Fiennes (In Bruges, The Hurt Locker), this film had a solid cast and a director with some pretty great films under his belt. It had all the elements to make a fantastic film and yet it somehow managed to fail.
The film felt like a watered down version of what a film based on the God of War video game could potentially be. All the same gods are there, the Medusa character is in there, there's a character battling against the gods, the similarities are pretty obvious. The only thing that is different is that the main character is named Perseus instead of Kratos. On one hand, it may not be a bad thing comparing the film to God of War. If they do decide to make a God of War film down the road though, it seems like it'll be way too similar to this film unless they go full-blown, balls out rated R with it. That's the route they should go anyway, but Clash of the Titans basically feels like a censored version of God of War.
Certain other things about the film really bugged me. The main one being that the two main female characters Io (Gemma Arterton) and Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) cried at EVERYTHING. Every time they spoke it was like they started getting teary eyed. "Oh Perseus, I can't follow you into Medusa's lair since I'm not a big strong man like you are. *sob*" Just made me want to slap them and go, "GET A GRIP, LADY! SHEESH!" The biggest pet peeve of mine lies in the finale of the film. Everything regarding Hades and the kraken are dealt with so quickly. The film makes a huge deal about both of them only to have everything wrapped up in less than five minutes when the time finally comes. It just wound up feeling very rushed and anticlimactic. Also, what was the deal with the prophecy the witches gave Perseus? Was the explanation of getting around that because Perseus was half god? That's pretty weak. Instead, we're going to go with this ending that's completely open-ended and leaves massive room for a potential sequel. Lame.
Despite all of the things I found wrong with the film, there were some high points. The CG seemed very all or nothing to me. At times, the effects were fantastic. The giant scorpions scene and the kraken being the best examples. Pegasus is also a great example. The winged horses looked fairly genuine, but they looked kind of odd when they flew. Other times though, it seemed way too obvious that the characters were standing in front of a green screen and fighting with creatures that weren't actually there. There's a scene near the beginning where we first see Perseus as an adult where his father is talking to him and a thunderstorm is beginning to brew. The sky was obviously CG. There were just several moments like that that brought me out of the film.
Ralph Fiennes as Hades was easily the high point for me as far as acting goes. Fiennes was most impressive in David Cronenberg's Spider and has been on my radar for actors to keep an eye on ever since. He doesn't disappoint here. His smarminess as Hades spoke volumes. The ferry scene is also pretty amazing, at least until Perseus and Io begin their Medusa training. Ugh.
A few humorous points, the South Park fan in me chimed in when Io told Perseus "You're more than half man half god." I thought she was going to follow up with, "You're actually half man, half bear, half pig. Or maybe you're actually half bear half man-pig." Still laughing about that one. The scene where Perseus emerges from Medusa's lair and Io is waiting for him, she's wearing this really weird outfit. I heard the guy next to me say, "What the...is she wearing a mop?!" and it made me laugh out loud. Best part of the whole film though, at the end, when everything had been resolved somebody yelled at the top of their lungs, "I AM A GOD!!!!!!" After a brief silence, everyone in the theater started laughing. Kinda sad that the most entertaining part of the film wasn't actually a part of the film itself.
Clash of the Titans was one of the most anticipated blockbusters of the year, but fell short and wound up being one of the most disappointing. With mediocre special effects, a sloppy finale, and female characters that will get on your last nerve, the action film fails to live up to expectations. At the end of the day, Clash of the Titans is basically just a glorified Xena: Warrior Princess.
Clash of the Titans was highly anticipated on my end for quite some time. The trailers were pretty fantastic and everything seemed to point to the film being epic. Directed by Louis Leterrier (Unleashed, The Incredible Hulk) and starring Sam Worthington (Avatar, Terminator: Salvation), Liam Neeson (Taken, Batman Begins), and Ralph Fiennes (In Bruges, The Hurt Locker), this film had a solid cast and a director with some pretty great films under his belt. It had all the elements to make a fantastic film and yet it somehow managed to fail.
The film felt like a watered down version of what a film based on the God of War video game could potentially be. All the same gods are there, the Medusa character is in there, there's a character battling against the gods, the similarities are pretty obvious. The only thing that is different is that the main character is named Perseus instead of Kratos. On one hand, it may not be a bad thing comparing the film to God of War. If they do decide to make a God of War film down the road though, it seems like it'll be way too similar to this film unless they go full-blown, balls out rated R with it. That's the route they should go anyway, but Clash of the Titans basically feels like a censored version of God of War.
Certain other things about the film really bugged me. The main one being that the two main female characters Io (Gemma Arterton) and Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) cried at EVERYTHING. Every time they spoke it was like they started getting teary eyed. "Oh Perseus, I can't follow you into Medusa's lair since I'm not a big strong man like you are. *sob*" Just made me want to slap them and go, "GET A GRIP, LADY! SHEESH!" The biggest pet peeve of mine lies in the finale of the film. Everything regarding Hades and the kraken are dealt with so quickly. The film makes a huge deal about both of them only to have everything wrapped up in less than five minutes when the time finally comes. It just wound up feeling very rushed and anticlimactic. Also, what was the deal with the prophecy the witches gave Perseus? Was the explanation of getting around that because Perseus was half god? That's pretty weak. Instead, we're going to go with this ending that's completely open-ended and leaves massive room for a potential sequel. Lame.
Despite all of the things I found wrong with the film, there were some high points. The CG seemed very all or nothing to me. At times, the effects were fantastic. The giant scorpions scene and the kraken being the best examples. Pegasus is also a great example. The winged horses looked fairly genuine, but they looked kind of odd when they flew. Other times though, it seemed way too obvious that the characters were standing in front of a green screen and fighting with creatures that weren't actually there. There's a scene near the beginning where we first see Perseus as an adult where his father is talking to him and a thunderstorm is beginning to brew. The sky was obviously CG. There were just several moments like that that brought me out of the film.
Ralph Fiennes as Hades was easily the high point for me as far as acting goes. Fiennes was most impressive in David Cronenberg's Spider and has been on my radar for actors to keep an eye on ever since. He doesn't disappoint here. His smarminess as Hades spoke volumes. The ferry scene is also pretty amazing, at least until Perseus and Io begin their Medusa training. Ugh.
A few humorous points, the South Park fan in me chimed in when Io told Perseus "You're more than half man half god." I thought she was going to follow up with, "You're actually half man, half bear, half pig. Or maybe you're actually half bear half man-pig." Still laughing about that one. The scene where Perseus emerges from Medusa's lair and Io is waiting for him, she's wearing this really weird outfit. I heard the guy next to me say, "What the...is she wearing a mop?!" and it made me laugh out loud. Best part of the whole film though, at the end, when everything had been resolved somebody yelled at the top of their lungs, "I AM A GOD!!!!!!" After a brief silence, everyone in the theater started laughing. Kinda sad that the most entertaining part of the film wasn't actually a part of the film itself.
Clash of the Titans was one of the most anticipated blockbusters of the year, but fell short and wound up being one of the most disappointing. With mediocre special effects, a sloppy finale, and female characters that will get on your last nerve, the action film fails to live up to expectations. At the end of the day, Clash of the Titans is basically just a glorified Xena: Warrior Princess.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Widows (2018) in Movies
Nov 17, 2018
Well crafted, well acted, well directed heist flick
If you are looking for a smart, intelligent, well-made, well-crafted, well-acted action-heist flick to see with the family over the Thanksgiving weekend, then look no further than WIDOWS.
Yes, it's that good.
Based on a 1983 British TV mini-series, Directed by Steve McQueen (12 YEARS A SLAVE) and with a Screenplay by McQueen and Gillian Flynn (GONE GIRL), WIDOWS tells the story of 4...yes...Widows who's husbands were mobsters that were killed while stealing money from other mobsters. When the rival mob comes to the Widows to get their money back, these women must band together to complete a job to get the money to save their lives.
Leading this disparate group of women is Oscar winner (for FENCES) Viola Davis. She brings a strength and vulnerability to her role and makes a surprisingly complex and charismatic center to this film. Joining her is the always tough and gritty Michelle Rodriguez and the eminently watchable Carrie Coon. The surprise performance of this group of widows is Elizabeth Debicki (the golden Ayesha in GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY 2). Her widow, Alice, is more than just the "good-looking" trophy wife and has a depth and gravitas that upon first glance is not something that seems to be there. These 4 are joined by Cynthia Erivo and their group could probably kick the crap out of the Ocean's 8 crew.
McQueen has assembled a diverse and interesting cast to support these 5 - each "smaller" role filled with someone who brings something to the table that makes their character interesting. Liam Neeson, Robert Duvall, Collin Farrell, the always watchable Garrett Dillahunt and Jackie Weaver fill the film with "screen presence", power and strong characterizations that service the story. Special notice should be made for Daniel Kaluuya (Oscar nominated for GET OUT). His menacing "bad guy" ranks right up there on the list of "dudes you don't want to mess with". He was fascinating to watch - especially when he was doing "nothing" - you could see the animal swimming within him in the most still of moments.
All of these actors are directed with the Orchestral efficiency of McQueen - a director who knows what he's doing. He keeps the focus of his cameras where he needs to, sometimes eschewing the most obvious action to focus our attention elsewhere. The downside to McQueen is that he sometimes gets enamored with his beautiful pictures and atmosphere, so the film gets bogged down at times - especially in the first half - but all of this is in service to the larger story - a story that demands our attention.
The screenplay by McQueen and Flynn is full of plot twists and turns, of course, keeping you guessing throughout and concludes in a most satisfactory manner.
All in all a very fine time at the Cineplex. In this week of a myriad of items competing for your movie-going dollars, I would strongly recommend that you pick WIDOWS out of the pile and settle in for a good time..
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Yes, it's that good.
Based on a 1983 British TV mini-series, Directed by Steve McQueen (12 YEARS A SLAVE) and with a Screenplay by McQueen and Gillian Flynn (GONE GIRL), WIDOWS tells the story of 4...yes...Widows who's husbands were mobsters that were killed while stealing money from other mobsters. When the rival mob comes to the Widows to get their money back, these women must band together to complete a job to get the money to save their lives.
Leading this disparate group of women is Oscar winner (for FENCES) Viola Davis. She brings a strength and vulnerability to her role and makes a surprisingly complex and charismatic center to this film. Joining her is the always tough and gritty Michelle Rodriguez and the eminently watchable Carrie Coon. The surprise performance of this group of widows is Elizabeth Debicki (the golden Ayesha in GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY 2). Her widow, Alice, is more than just the "good-looking" trophy wife and has a depth and gravitas that upon first glance is not something that seems to be there. These 4 are joined by Cynthia Erivo and their group could probably kick the crap out of the Ocean's 8 crew.
McQueen has assembled a diverse and interesting cast to support these 5 - each "smaller" role filled with someone who brings something to the table that makes their character interesting. Liam Neeson, Robert Duvall, Collin Farrell, the always watchable Garrett Dillahunt and Jackie Weaver fill the film with "screen presence", power and strong characterizations that service the story. Special notice should be made for Daniel Kaluuya (Oscar nominated for GET OUT). His menacing "bad guy" ranks right up there on the list of "dudes you don't want to mess with". He was fascinating to watch - especially when he was doing "nothing" - you could see the animal swimming within him in the most still of moments.
All of these actors are directed with the Orchestral efficiency of McQueen - a director who knows what he's doing. He keeps the focus of his cameras where he needs to, sometimes eschewing the most obvious action to focus our attention elsewhere. The downside to McQueen is that he sometimes gets enamored with his beautiful pictures and atmosphere, so the film gets bogged down at times - especially in the first half - but all of this is in service to the larger story - a story that demands our attention.
The screenplay by McQueen and Flynn is full of plot twists and turns, of course, keeping you guessing throughout and concludes in a most satisfactory manner.
All in all a very fine time at the Cineplex. In this week of a myriad of items competing for your movie-going dollars, I would strongly recommend that you pick WIDOWS out of the pile and settle in for a good time..
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Darren (1599 KP) rated I Am Wrath (2016) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Story: I Am Wrath starts as we learn the war on crime was getting out of hand, but the Governor has started winning against the gangs. Stanley (Travolta) returns home after a business trip meeting his wife Vivian (De Mornay) where the two are attack with Vivian murdered.
With the police not getting the suspects, Stanley turns to a previous life working his former partner Dennis (Meloni) as a black-ops soldier that will stop at nothing to extract revenge on the people who murdered his wife.
Thoughts on I Am Wrath
Characters – Stanley is a mile-mannered businessman working in the car industry. When is wife is murdered in a senseless crime, he returns to a former life on a warpath with the gang involved as the cold-hearted killer. Dennis is the former partner of Stanley’s that still has the connections in the underworld, he helps Stanley in his revenge mission, he supplies the weapons and details of who were responsible. Abbie is the daughter of Stanley that tries to be there for her father while continue on her adult life. Detective Gibson is the lead on the case, he is forced to let the suspect go believing he will get himself killed soon enough.
Performances – John Travolta is solid enough in this leading role, we do get to see a large number of 50+ year old actors going into this action films, he isn’t the best, but he isn’t the worst. Christopher Meloni plays the best character in the film and is easily the one you want to see more of in this film. Amanda Schull is fine in her role, we need a figure that isn’t involved in the action and she offers it. The rest of the cast bring us the targets for the most part and give us generic bad guy performances.
Story – The story follows one man that goes to war on the gangs of his city to learn who killed his wife and get revenge. When it comes to the story this isn’t the most original, it is extremely watchable for a time killing hour and half, it doesn’t test the audience and doesn’t have any twists along the way. This is one of those stories that is mostly forgettable over bad and checks all the boxes needed to make the audience watch.
Action/Crime – The action is filled with old man action style that Liam Neeson made famous, it works for the film with Meloni getting the best sequence. The crime throws us into the world where gangs are controlling the streets with drug sales going through the roof and one man doing anything to get revenge.
Settings – The film takes us to a city overrun by crime and shows us how people can be forced into actions to get revenge for the lost loved one.
Scene of the Movie – Dennis versus the thugs in the shop.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We have seen this before.
Final Thoughts – This is a basic action film that will keep you entertained through the whole film without being anything overly original.
Overall: Easy to watch action film.
With the police not getting the suspects, Stanley turns to a previous life working his former partner Dennis (Meloni) as a black-ops soldier that will stop at nothing to extract revenge on the people who murdered his wife.
Thoughts on I Am Wrath
Characters – Stanley is a mile-mannered businessman working in the car industry. When is wife is murdered in a senseless crime, he returns to a former life on a warpath with the gang involved as the cold-hearted killer. Dennis is the former partner of Stanley’s that still has the connections in the underworld, he helps Stanley in his revenge mission, he supplies the weapons and details of who were responsible. Abbie is the daughter of Stanley that tries to be there for her father while continue on her adult life. Detective Gibson is the lead on the case, he is forced to let the suspect go believing he will get himself killed soon enough.
Performances – John Travolta is solid enough in this leading role, we do get to see a large number of 50+ year old actors going into this action films, he isn’t the best, but he isn’t the worst. Christopher Meloni plays the best character in the film and is easily the one you want to see more of in this film. Amanda Schull is fine in her role, we need a figure that isn’t involved in the action and she offers it. The rest of the cast bring us the targets for the most part and give us generic bad guy performances.
Story – The story follows one man that goes to war on the gangs of his city to learn who killed his wife and get revenge. When it comes to the story this isn’t the most original, it is extremely watchable for a time killing hour and half, it doesn’t test the audience and doesn’t have any twists along the way. This is one of those stories that is mostly forgettable over bad and checks all the boxes needed to make the audience watch.
Action/Crime – The action is filled with old man action style that Liam Neeson made famous, it works for the film with Meloni getting the best sequence. The crime throws us into the world where gangs are controlling the streets with drug sales going through the roof and one man doing anything to get revenge.
Settings – The film takes us to a city overrun by crime and shows us how people can be forced into actions to get revenge for the lost loved one.
Scene of the Movie – Dennis versus the thugs in the shop.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We have seen this before.
Final Thoughts – This is a basic action film that will keep you entertained through the whole film without being anything overly original.
Overall: Easy to watch action film.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Jungle Cruise (2021) in Movies
Jul 30, 2021
A Ton of Fun - Reminiscent of the first PIRATES film
Are you looking for a family friendly action/adventure/comedy that will be good entertainment for the entire family? Then look no further than the Disney Live Action film JUNGLE BOOK.
Yes…Disney has made another movie based on one of it’s them park rides and this one is more like the first PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN film than most of the other attempts.
Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra (several Liam Neeson action flicks like NON-STOP), JUNGLE CRUISE is part PIRATES, part INDIANA JONES and part AFRICAN QUEEN (look it up, kids) as we follow an adventurous young lady in the 1910’s. She heads to the Amazon and hires a ne’er do well Jungle Cruise skipper to take her up river.
Pretty standard set-up, right? We’ve seen this “mis-matched” frenemies premise before but in the hands of Emily Blunt and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, it is a very entertaining (albeit familiar) ride with 2 tremendously charismatic performers working off each other very well and they look like they are having as good a time in this film as we are.
They are joined by a bevy of assorted characters that help fill out this journey. Edgar Ramirez and Veronica Falcon are enjoyable enough as a couple of characters along the way, while Jack Whitehall surprised the heck out of me as the wimpy brother to Blunt’s character who becomes more and more three dimensional as the film progressed - something I didn’t think this film would even think about doing.
A pair of wiley veterans - Jesse Plemons and good ol’ Paul Giamatti - are also on board and each add some (but not a lot) to this film. Plemons is the main villain and he just wasn’t villainous enough for my tastes while I wanted much, much more of Giamatti’s character than was in this film (and it is a rare film, indeed, that you are left wanting more with a Giamatti character).
But make no mistake, this is a Rock and Blunt flick and these two professionals hold the center of this film together very, very well.
Director Collet-Serra keeps the action (and comedy) moving along at about the right pace, never dwelling too long on any of the plot points (for if you were to think too much about any of it, it would fall apart) and (for the most part) keeps the action sequences fun and coherent and avoiding over-directing, over-CGI-ing and over-loading these sequences.
Speaking of CGI, the main issue with this film is the special effects work - it is not the best (probably a budget issue) and, at times, you really need to suspend disbelief in watching the CGI and convincing yourself that it is a Live Action film you are watching and not a cartoon.
But, since the intended audience for this film are families, the less-than-perfect CGI (at times) is forgivable as JUNGLE CRUISE provides plenty of PG-Rated action and fun that the entire family will enjoy.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Yes…Disney has made another movie based on one of it’s them park rides and this one is more like the first PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN film than most of the other attempts.
Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra (several Liam Neeson action flicks like NON-STOP), JUNGLE CRUISE is part PIRATES, part INDIANA JONES and part AFRICAN QUEEN (look it up, kids) as we follow an adventurous young lady in the 1910’s. She heads to the Amazon and hires a ne’er do well Jungle Cruise skipper to take her up river.
Pretty standard set-up, right? We’ve seen this “mis-matched” frenemies premise before but in the hands of Emily Blunt and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, it is a very entertaining (albeit familiar) ride with 2 tremendously charismatic performers working off each other very well and they look like they are having as good a time in this film as we are.
They are joined by a bevy of assorted characters that help fill out this journey. Edgar Ramirez and Veronica Falcon are enjoyable enough as a couple of characters along the way, while Jack Whitehall surprised the heck out of me as the wimpy brother to Blunt’s character who becomes more and more three dimensional as the film progressed - something I didn’t think this film would even think about doing.
A pair of wiley veterans - Jesse Plemons and good ol’ Paul Giamatti - are also on board and each add some (but not a lot) to this film. Plemons is the main villain and he just wasn’t villainous enough for my tastes while I wanted much, much more of Giamatti’s character than was in this film (and it is a rare film, indeed, that you are left wanting more with a Giamatti character).
But make no mistake, this is a Rock and Blunt flick and these two professionals hold the center of this film together very, very well.
Director Collet-Serra keeps the action (and comedy) moving along at about the right pace, never dwelling too long on any of the plot points (for if you were to think too much about any of it, it would fall apart) and (for the most part) keeps the action sequences fun and coherent and avoiding over-directing, over-CGI-ing and over-loading these sequences.
Speaking of CGI, the main issue with this film is the special effects work - it is not the best (probably a budget issue) and, at times, you really need to suspend disbelief in watching the CGI and convincing yourself that it is a Live Action film you are watching and not a cartoon.
But, since the intended audience for this film are families, the less-than-perfect CGI (at times) is forgivable as JUNGLE CRUISE provides plenty of PG-Rated action and fun that the entire family will enjoy.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Batman Begins (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In the dark of night, a young man’s life is about to be forever changed. Young Bruce Wayne, son of wealthy industrialist Dr. Thomas Wayne (Linus Roache), is about to be orphaned in a random act of street violence.
The act will forever scar the younger Wayne, and will install and fuel a dark fire to stop crime and corruption wherever they may be. Fast forward years later and Bruce (Christian Bale), is interned in and Asian prison as a result of his desire to stop crime and an unfortunate series of events that made him flee Gotham City to find himself. Hope arrives one day in the form of a visitor named Henri Ducard (Liam Neeson), who arranges not only to free Bruce, but to train him for his destiny.
High atop a rocky, snow-covered peak, Bruce undergoes rigorous physical and mental training to hone his body and mind into the ultimate tool to combat crime. As time passes, Bruce eventually is ready to go out into the world. That is until an unexpected situation arises that forces him to decide which path he wishes to select.
The aftermath of this decision has Bruce returning home to Gotham City, where he is again under the care of the trusted family servant Alfred (Michael Caine), who informs him that crime and corruption is rampant in Gotham because the crime leader Carmine Falcone (Tom Wilkinson), has many members of the police force and judicial system under his influence.
While touring his father’s company, Bruce meets Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), who makes all manners of high-end experimental military weaponry and armor available to Bruce. Inspired, Bruce begins to craft his alter ego Batman, and takes to the nights to disrupt Falcone and the criminal activities in Gotham.
Unknown to Bruce/Batman, an evil villain known as the Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy), is plotting to destroy Gotham, and with Batman being wanted by the police as a vigilante his attempts to cleanse the city are hindered as Bruce/Batman must fight a war on different fronts.
For most films this would be more than enough plot to carry a summer action film, but for Batman Begins, it is only the setup as the depth of the story is surpassed only by the depth of the intensity and emotion of the film as this is not Tim Burton or Joel Schumacher’s campy takes on the tale of the Dark Knight.
Director Christopher Nolan takes the gloves off and shows that his triumphant work in “Memento” was not a fluke. He has crafted a complex, dark, and emotional film that is more of a drama than a comic book caper. Bale does a masterful job portraying the angst and anger of his character without ever being hammy or over the top. He portrays Wayne as a very normal, yet disturbed soul, who clearly has a method to his madness and is not a shallow once dimensional character. When Bruce is not out fighting crime, he is not above cracking jokes, squiring the ladies about town, and spending time with long time friend (and the one who got away) Rachael Dawes (Katie Holmes).
The film takes many twists and never gets sappy as far too many comic based films do. In fact, the intensity of the film keeps going up until the town literally explodes into frenzy of violence and chaos. Parents should note that this Batman is a very intense film filled with dark images and as such may be too intense for younger viewers as this is a film that is aimed towards a more mature audience.
As I sat through the films nearly two and a half hour running time, I was captivated as the film holds your attention throughout, and is filled with great performances and action. The chase scene with the new Batmobile is one of the best car chase sequences in recent memory and the action scenes move with a crisp and steady pacing. Bale, as I mentioned, does great work, but so do Neeson, Caine and Gary Oldman in a supporting role as Police Officer Gordon. They take supporting characters and infuse them with a touch of humanity that enables them to come across as real people rather than the thin constructs that are far too often passed on as characters in films of this type.
The only real quibble I had with the film, and it is very minor, would be that Holmes was not given a chance to show more to her character other than the duality of the damsel in distress and the passionate Assistant D.A. Her scenes with Bale seem to lack the spark and chemistry of someone who is supposed to have been a close friend of Bruce since they were children.
That being said, the mature nature and gripping and deep storyline, as well as the standout performances and action, make this film a true classic and rivals “Spider-Man” as the best and most faithful adaptation of a comic book.
The act will forever scar the younger Wayne, and will install and fuel a dark fire to stop crime and corruption wherever they may be. Fast forward years later and Bruce (Christian Bale), is interned in and Asian prison as a result of his desire to stop crime and an unfortunate series of events that made him flee Gotham City to find himself. Hope arrives one day in the form of a visitor named Henri Ducard (Liam Neeson), who arranges not only to free Bruce, but to train him for his destiny.
High atop a rocky, snow-covered peak, Bruce undergoes rigorous physical and mental training to hone his body and mind into the ultimate tool to combat crime. As time passes, Bruce eventually is ready to go out into the world. That is until an unexpected situation arises that forces him to decide which path he wishes to select.
The aftermath of this decision has Bruce returning home to Gotham City, where he is again under the care of the trusted family servant Alfred (Michael Caine), who informs him that crime and corruption is rampant in Gotham because the crime leader Carmine Falcone (Tom Wilkinson), has many members of the police force and judicial system under his influence.
While touring his father’s company, Bruce meets Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), who makes all manners of high-end experimental military weaponry and armor available to Bruce. Inspired, Bruce begins to craft his alter ego Batman, and takes to the nights to disrupt Falcone and the criminal activities in Gotham.
Unknown to Bruce/Batman, an evil villain known as the Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy), is plotting to destroy Gotham, and with Batman being wanted by the police as a vigilante his attempts to cleanse the city are hindered as Bruce/Batman must fight a war on different fronts.
For most films this would be more than enough plot to carry a summer action film, but for Batman Begins, it is only the setup as the depth of the story is surpassed only by the depth of the intensity and emotion of the film as this is not Tim Burton or Joel Schumacher’s campy takes on the tale of the Dark Knight.
Director Christopher Nolan takes the gloves off and shows that his triumphant work in “Memento” was not a fluke. He has crafted a complex, dark, and emotional film that is more of a drama than a comic book caper. Bale does a masterful job portraying the angst and anger of his character without ever being hammy or over the top. He portrays Wayne as a very normal, yet disturbed soul, who clearly has a method to his madness and is not a shallow once dimensional character. When Bruce is not out fighting crime, he is not above cracking jokes, squiring the ladies about town, and spending time with long time friend (and the one who got away) Rachael Dawes (Katie Holmes).
The film takes many twists and never gets sappy as far too many comic based films do. In fact, the intensity of the film keeps going up until the town literally explodes into frenzy of violence and chaos. Parents should note that this Batman is a very intense film filled with dark images and as such may be too intense for younger viewers as this is a film that is aimed towards a more mature audience.
As I sat through the films nearly two and a half hour running time, I was captivated as the film holds your attention throughout, and is filled with great performances and action. The chase scene with the new Batmobile is one of the best car chase sequences in recent memory and the action scenes move with a crisp and steady pacing. Bale, as I mentioned, does great work, but so do Neeson, Caine and Gary Oldman in a supporting role as Police Officer Gordon. They take supporting characters and infuse them with a touch of humanity that enables them to come across as real people rather than the thin constructs that are far too often passed on as characters in films of this type.
The only real quibble I had with the film, and it is very minor, would be that Holmes was not given a chance to show more to her character other than the duality of the damsel in distress and the passionate Assistant D.A. Her scenes with Bale seem to lack the spark and chemistry of someone who is supposed to have been a close friend of Bruce since they were children.
That being said, the mature nature and gripping and deep storyline, as well as the standout performances and action, make this film a true classic and rivals “Spider-Man” as the best and most faithful adaptation of a comic book.