Spoilers!!!! To those who are wondering whether or not Tomorrowland is worth their money and don't want any small spoilers, the short answer is a resounding yes. It's nowhere near perfect, but the performances are good, and it's one of the most fun visual experiences you will see. The first two acts are great and fun, but the third has the film tripping up a bit. To those who want to know more, read on. The first two acts of Tomorrowland are basically perfect in my eyes. I realize that I am usually overly lenient, but the fact is I was having too much fun in to notice whatever problems that the movie had in those first minutes. Brad Bird, who has made some of the greatest kids’ movies of all time, is still at the top of his game in terms of crafting some incredibly fun visual scenes. There's a jetpack moment that comes early in the film that I feel is on par with what Bird did in Ghost Protocol as far as pure exhilaration goes. That's impressive considering Ghost Protocol contained the now legendary Burj Khalifa scene. But that said, Tomorrowland's opening acts have some even more spectacular stunts that did not fail to amaze. We are also introduced to our main characters: Casey, a spirited young teenager; Athena, a little girl who knows a lot about Tomorrowland; and Frank, the only man who can get them back. I won't divulge how they all come together, but to say the least it's all in good fun--especially since the actors for this portion of the movie seem to be having a great time. Britt Robertson as Casey spends a lot of time screaming and looking dreamy eyed, but again it's all in good fun. Raffey Cassidy is delightful as Athena, and there is nothing more entertaining than watching a smoothly flowing fight scene where a 9 year old beats up two killer robots. George Clooney here is good as Frank and seems to be playing an idealized version of the old men that people used to see in their movies. There seems to be a history behind his performance that is almost exciting. There are a couple supporting actors, but none of them are used very often. Act 1 and 2 move by at a great and fun pace, and everything with them wraps up nicely. And then Act three comes in. It's by no means bad, but it seems like the writers (I'm gonna go ahead and blame David Lindelof for this) suddenly realized that they hadn't put any of the huge idea stuff into the movie by the time the second act happened. Then they scrambled to throw it all together in a way that disappointed me. They go full-on idea talk. The script focuses simply on this big idea that pops up, and the shift from fun, floaty sci-fi adventure to full on human philosophy is rough. It was even a little difficult to analyze it because there is a lot going on on that front too. There's a subtle line that is basically a middle finger to modern Hollywood, which is a nice touch, but seems to convolute the dialogue. It's all just not as fun as I thought it would be. That said the way that the film wraps up really nice, little, optimistic bow. I give Tomorrowland an 8 out of 10. Reviewed by Stephen Tronicek. Edited by Mia Rintoul.
0 Comments
Minor Spoilers
Mad Max: Fury Road is an action picture; there is no doubt about that; but it's also very much a smart sci-fi picture. It's a film with a richly conceived world that, while bizarre, is incredibly creative. This was all true in The Road Warrior, and it's all true here. So what's the difference? Well, the difference comes in the same way it comes in all Mad Max movies. Each one of the films is less about the story of Max, and more about how the people around him perceive him. This concept was interesting in the each different film, giving Max a different flavor in each, but it didn't actually have anything to say or deepen the film's context. That is not the case with Fury Road. Not at all. Fury Road opts to make the storytellers the women around Max, and the result is surprisingly flavorful. The story, or what I can tell you has Max falling in with a high ranking officer of a warlord, who has just stolen the wives of the warlord. Max is shown as more of a feral person, and so is the world around him. It's all being told in the eyes of the women, and all the crazy shit that happens in the movie is only escalated, because the way that they see it is all the men in the world are, well, "mad." But I fear I may have dug too deep into this. The reality is, on the surface of the entire thing is a huge chase, and while that whole reality is a little bit jarring as the characters all fall into place, the subsequent hour and a half after it is exhilarating. While its deeper ideas provide the heart that embodies action movies of old George Miller has brought the action that he was so good at making in the 1980's. But christ, at 70 the man can think up some crazy shit. The action is some of the most breakneck, crazy and exciting I have ever seen, and it's all part of the world building just as much as the slower moments are. Immortan Joe controls his minions through promising them "a place in Valhalla" leading them to go and do even crazier shit, and the way that he drags a rock band along with him to excite his troops is almost hilarious. The certain vehicles that factions use... again I may have dug too deep into it lead to half the fun of watching the great action being in the details of it and if you have a grasp on them Fury Road is utterly thrilling. But you need good camera work to make good action and that is also here. The cinematography of the film is beautiful, with the over saturated color scheme making everything pop. It's definitely one of the best looking films in a while. Also the camera work on the fights is great; moving smoothly, and allowing the audience to get a good idea of where everything is. That's made even better by the editing which instead of going for quick cuts and shaky cam just speeds up the speed of the action a little bit every time it wants to make the action quicker, and more jarring. It's violent stuff. Now with all that out of the way, I can talk about the characters quickly. They are actually a lot like the ones in the older Max films. They are really well drawn with actors displaying their characteristics, and a thin script fueling their motivations. Max is more feral, and Hardy is very soft spoken. I really wish he had more lines, but it's all fine. The really good stuff though comes in with the colorful cast of supporting characters. Theron's Furiosa is an exciting contribution to the series, and Nux (Nicholas Holt) is given a very interesting arch that adds sweeter love tone to the film. But even better are the wives. Each of them gets their moment, and Rosie Huntington-Whiteley (yeah from the shit-storm that was Transformers: Dark of the Moon) get's one of the film’s best moments. There are a couple of those throughout the movie that really boost your want for the characters to succeed. Mad Max: Fury Road is a blast. A crazy, energetic, and emotional piece of action movie, that in its bizarreness may scare off a few, but will reward those who take it in and enjoy it. I give Mad Max: Fury Road a 9.5 out of 10. Written by Stephen Tronicek, Edited by Mia Rintoul. Oh my gosh there is way to many story lines going on in this movie. There's a sweeping adventure/romance. There's a brutal (like "R" rated brutal) war story, and there's a subtle mystical element to it all. That's a lot to do in one movie, and The Water Diviner unfortunately comes nowhere near to sticking the landing. It does however accomplish the task of at least staying together long enough to be engaging throughout all of it's runtime. The reason for this becomes immediately apparent as the flaws in the films screenplay start to show early on. The whole thing seems to actually get more solid later on as you start to find out more about the characters, but jeez near the beginning it all just seems sloppy. The film would have lost me if not for one reason. That reason is Russell Crowe. No, not his performance (that's not bad it's just very... Russell Crowe you've seen him play this before), but his direction. The film has a very Ridley Scott feel to it, and I have a feeling that is because Scott and Crowe have worked together a lot. But it's really beautiful direction, and I can't wait to see what his next project will be like. Crowe's very good at creating an epic scale when he needs to, and the very good cinematography helps. It's really inspired, and exhilarating work. But again there's too much going on, and the entire thing is really sloppy. No matter how much prowess Crowe brings to both his part, and direction there's nothing you can do for a flawed screenplay. The Water Diviner has one hell of a flawed screenplay with tonal shifts galore. None of it is particularly bad, but when you go from a down to earth truly vicious war scene to a feel good romance scene in an exotic country there's some whiplash (How good was that movie!) there. There is a good call though to make the mystical element very subtle, and use it more to push the story along then make it something that you should pay full attention to. If they'd gone all out on it it probably would have crashed the more sentimental aspects of the film. But all that said the performances are really good. I mentioned Crowe earlier, and him and his costar Olga Kurylenko have some nice banter even as I've with most other elements of the film the screenplay chokes the hell out of it. There is a fun kid in it though, and Jai Courtney doesn't give a wooden performance so I'll take it. The Water Diviner is a greatly directed work even if the screenplay keeps it from really being what it could. I give The Water Diviner a 6.5 out of 10. Written by Stephen Tronicek. Avengers: Age of Ultron; Directed by Joss Whedon. Starring: Robert Downey Jr., and Chris Evans.5/2/2015 IT'S BIG. IT'S MESSY. IT'S A LITTLE OVERSTUFFED AT POINTS. BUT OVERALL, IT'S AWESOME! Avengers: Age of Ultron was never going to be the masterpiece that the first one was, but it's sure as hell fun. As far as a sequel goes, it more than satisfies, and will deserve every penny it gets. If most of what I talk about in this review seems negative, it's simply because I'm sure you know the positives. Anyone who's been on board with this huge franchise since Iron Man, or anything else, will know the positives. All of what is good has been said before. That said, let's get into it. For anyone who hasn't been hiding under a rock for the last few years, you know exactly what makes a movie like this good. Great action, entertaining characters, and an overall a fun movie. That's all here, and it's all great. The visuals are just as spectacular as usual, and the way everything wraps up is epic. Just like the first one, it throws in some hilarious winks into the audience sighting its ridiculousness. That said,this is not as good as the first one, and I think that could be attributed to the tone. Sure it's all still fun, and the winking meta-narrative that fueled what originally came before works just as well, but the tone of this movie is much more grounded, similar to Captain America: The Winter Soldier. What's happening is still big idea, crazy, Avengers stuff, but it all feels a little choked by the tone. It doesn't help that there's a lot going on in this movie. While the main story is quite simple, as always a lot of the subplots that pop up seem to cloud it's effect; leading to the evil plan appearing to pop up abruptly. That isn't to say that the subplots aren't well orchestrated or set up promise for anything new. There's a quick diversion in Africa that seems to go nowhere, only till you realize it's longterm effects in both this movie, and the ones to come. One including Black Widow, and the Hulk pays off triumphantly with a big emotional end. The quality of them is not the problem. The problem here really is overstuffing the story to the point of detracting from what's mainly going on, which combined with a less bombastic tone leaves the film feeling a little bit bloated at times. But that said, the actors go all in. The main cast is great as always, striking up a good chemistry (especially with an ongoing joke on Captain America that's hilarious), and even the newcomers bend in nicely with Quicksilver and Scarlett Witch, easily being two of the most creative characters to pop up in one of these movies yet. The villain in this is also not as straightforward. He's ultimately not as memorable as Loki, simply because he's a little too laissez fair about his world destruction. This is probably intentional though, since his character is more based on him being unknowing of the consequences of his actions, rather than fully comprehending what he's doing. James Spader, who voices him, does give him some viable personality, and the sarcastic way he goes about taunting both the Avengers, and drawn out dialogue sections (that may seem odd), really makes him worth watching, especially as the movie culminates into its large, showy, fireworks ending. That ending is awesome, by the way. Avengers: Age of Ultron is one of those rare sequels that truly lives up to the hype. Sure it's more flawed then the first one, but it works overall as a great fireworks show, and is a greatly entertaining popcorn fair. I give Avengers: Age of Ultron an 8.5 out of 10. Written by Stephen Tronicek, Edited by Mia Rintoul. The deciding factor of whether or not Ex Machina works as a movie comes down to the way that its screenplay is structured. It has a screenplay that, for the most part, proposes ideas, and leaves the actors to fill in the spaces. The complications of the characters, their personalities...how far they will go, is all left to the actors. That's quite a tightrope to walk. On one hand it could all pan out, and the actors and script easily blend into engaging sci-fi, or it could be a train wreck that digs itself into a hole it can't get out of. If you've read any reviews on this film you know it's the former. Ex Machina is about a simple programmer Caleb (Domhnall Gleeson), in a company who is being hired to spend a week with the companies creator, Nathan (Oscar Isaac), in a secret facility. Why it is a secret is soon revealed. Nathan has been hiding Ava (Alicia Vikander), an artificially intelligent being in the facility, and has been testing her. He needs Caleb to complete the final part of testing, which involves Caleb testing Ava through conversation. I will not give anything else away, but this all progresses in ways I didn't even expect, right down to a terrifying conclusion. Again, the screenplay is based much more on idea than anything else. Though, this doesn't mean that the conversations between Caleb and Ava are not interesting. The ideas at play here are amazing (again nothing I will spoil), but the film gets you thinking in the way that a classic sci-fi like Blade Runner or 2001 has you thinking. It also helps that each actor is really exploring their characters. Gleenson is incredible, and he creates a character almost out of thin air. Vikander also deserves some recognition because she strikes a great balance between being quite cold, and still empathetic. But overall, the best performance from the film that there is Oscar Isaac. Sure he is the most written in character in the movie, getting both hilarious, and serious lines to dish out. Isaac, as usual, is incredibly convincing, and you can slowly realize the reasons why an anti social insanity has hit him. It's engaging work. Also, I'd like to give a special mention to the technical work for the surprisingly effective lighting. I won't go into that too much, but when the lights turn red, you'll know what I'm talking about. Actually, I think the only place Ex Machina stumbles is in overall tone. That may seem like a big thing, but I don't mean that it's fluctuating or so. The film, I feel, is a little too subtle to fully allow the audience to feel the emotion they should at specific parts. It's all about the acting, and if you're not paying attention, you might miss some of the ways the ideas tie into everything else. Overall Ex Machina is an engaging, if not as accessible science fiction, that is a great directorial debut for Alex Garland. I give Ex Machina a 9.5 out of 10. Written by Stephen Tronicek, Edited by Mia Rintoul |
Archive
December 2017
CategoriesAuthorHello welcome to FilmAnalyst. My name is Stephen Tronicek, and I really like movies. This is a way to get my opinions out to people. Thank you for visiting. |