The past can't remain hidden forever." I'm going to come out and say that I appreciated the ambition of this story. The premise demonstrated that it had a good foothold in history (whether accurate or not) and had far-reaching consequences - the film travels between Egypt, Iraq and England. The story behind Ahmanet and her sins were also exciting, albeit unoriginal, but even more so the connection to the Crusaders and how her power and weapons came to move through Europe and end up underneath London. It's simplistic as hell, but it's a great way to introduce the audience to the origins of this new mummy and her future motive.
From there though, the film struggles to find a cohesive bond. Scenes interact messily, characters change tone very quickly and the plot progresses rapidly without much consideration for the detail and emotion invested in the story. My biggest gripe, is that I believe Tom Cruise to be miscast. I really like him as an actor and consistently applaud him in his Mission Impossible films and he never fails to be engrossing and charismatic as an action hero. However, in the Mummy, his character is ill-portrayed - he's hesitating rather than attacking. It may not help that I thought his character to be unlikeable, but I do believe Cruise should not have been given the role. Elsewhere, the action looks stunning - I especially liked the plane and ambulance crash sequences; they were both very effective visually. But, most of it is needless violence that seems lost in a film more connected to the horror genre. Speaking of horror, this was a pretty scary film, and I can now fully understand its certificate - the visual effects definitely helped to conjure up the monsters in the movie, sometimes to the extent of leaving you gasping in fright. The walking mummified corpses gave the movie a proper sense of danger that you don't find in many horror films in the modern day. The pacing was a major problem in most places - considering that the first half of the film, where most the exposition was spoon-fed, rushed by in the blink of an eye. Consequently, it seemed the second half spent too long allowing characters to interact with each other rather than concentrate on tying up the story. The final confrontation between Nick and Ahmanet was heavily drawn out, meaning that the final payoff didn't have the same resonance as it should have. Also, the film tried desperately to be humorous throughout, most often between Nick and his friend Chris, which was for one thing incredibly distracting, but also felt way out of place. Some of the jokes were cringeworthy to say the least and equally Cruise struggled most of the time to deliver them honestly, I'm sorry to say. Regarding this "Dark Universe" motif, I'm intrigued to see how it will pan out, in this entirely new franchise and Universe. Russell Crowe as Dr. Henry Jekyll was an interesting revelation I was not expecting, and despite the fact his preemptively important character only appeared for a mere fifteen minutes, he provided a much-needed shake-up for the storyline, possibly hinting at something else in the future of the Universe. The transition between Jekyll and Hyde and his dialogue about a patient he once cured was a clever way to make the reveal too, and I commend that achievement. Sometimes dark and sometimes ridiculous, the Mummy is a mixed bag that really tries to be serious, on the basis that it'll try to scare the living daylights out of you by putting its characters in mortal danger, but also annoy you as its one-dimensional characters act idiotically, and the typical horror tropes repetitively reappear. Some scenes were effective - the original finding of the prison is almost Spielbergian, but the overall product is a convoluted mess that is just barely held up by the acting. One thing I will say - Sofia Boutella was excellent. 6/10
0 Comments
I used to want to save the world, this beautiful place. But the closer you get, the more you see the great darkness within. I learnt this the hard way, a long, long time ago." Wonder Woman is a movie of epic proportions, with spectacular visuals, an A-list cast and a world-building story. However, its is unfortunately let down by some poor depiction of its characters and reliance on traditional tropes that make it too predictable. With its potential, Wonder Woman could have exceeded my expectations, but in the end, it only met them. Which is not to say that I disliked it, more that I enjoyed the film, but was disappointed with its avoidable flaws.
The scale of the film must be applauded. In a mere two hours, we touch on a variety of themes across a number of eras. I'm not much of a superhero fan, but the world-building involved here helps to illuminate me on the scope of this world and its many cultures, and how it ties into the real world timeline. The Amazonian settlement especially intrigues me, considering the back story involving how they existed for the good of mankind and to help tempt them from greed and corruption. Their culture may seem unoriginal in the pantheon of fantasy tribes and species that have come before - I was reminded of the Avatar-like attributes of warfare - but director Patty Jenkins has some conjured them in a way that seems new and glittering. Also, I'd like to point out my appreciation for the fact, that despite their appearance and their clearly immense physical skill, the Amazonians are still vulnerable to bullets as is demonstrated in the German attack on their island. As we move away from Themyscira, the story intertwines with something that a lot of us are familiar with, the terrible Second World War. At first, it seems out of place to be depicting a superhero film in the midst of an historical event, but the story adapts well, even pointing out some of the stereotypical notions that were evident in that day and age to remind us of how much our own culture has transformed thanks to open-mindedness and equality. We don't get much content of the brutality of the war, but I did especially like Diana's scene in which she walks purposefully into No Man's Land and deflects thousands of bullets to help the British and allied forces cross the battlefield into German territory. The action scenes are beautifully shot, and much care has been taken to ensure that we get every view of the battle sequences. This film certainly shows off (as Doctor Strange did last year) the power that CGI has when used correctly. The story is where things start to deteriorate for me. In the beginning, there's great ambition for the writers as they tell us the full background of how Diana came to being and of her impending destiny. But, as we move into the actual progressive story, the movie falls into the trap of being predictable and becomes reliant on grand, awe-inspiring action to distract the audience from its half-hearted dialogue and character choices. The relationship between Diana and Steve is lovely, but from the moment they first meet you can easily tell where their story will go, and where it will inevitably finish. Their friends who join them in the battle on the front line all seem like wonderful, loveable characters, but we barely get a chance to get to know them before we're thrust into the battle and their development is thrown into the wind. Sameer and Chief are especially weakly-developed and we barely have a chance to understand their role in the story, despite the length of the film. The only saving grace towards the end is the twist involving Sir Patrick Morgan who ultimately turns out to be Diana's arch enemy, Ares. My feelings towards their final confrontation aside, I thought David Thewlis was magnificent as the big bad, and perhaps deserved more screen time and a better script. He was mostly hindered by the fact that he was wearing a helmet during most of the battle, so there wasn't much of a chance for him to spread his acting wings. Production-wise, I thought this was a massive triumph. To cap off the incredible visuals, there was some evocative music to accompany them. Patty Jenkins allows the aesthetic of the film to flow easily from scene to scene. Some of the best shots are ones such as Diana walking silently through thick smoke as she surveys the bodies of those who were recently gassed by the toxic bombs. As I said before, the CGI was used sparingly, especially for the opening half an hour as we saw Diana grow up and beautifully golden-crested island, isolated from the rest of the world. The battle sequence on the beach is possibly my favourite scene, simply because it doesn't rely on too many big visuals, but the shots are full of life and action that it looks more like a rich collage of artwork. The acting has to be commended. I'm very pleased to say that Gal Gadot was undeniably endearing as Wonder Woman, and performs fearlessly as the lead character with little effort. Chris Pine may have been lumbered with cheesy lines, but he did well with what he had, and portrayed his character as a respectful soldier who was simply fighting for what he believed in. It was also great to see Robin Wright portray General Antiope - a role I would've thought would be difficult for her, but she plays soundly and without reservation. Her character's death was genuinely emotional, even though it was still predictable. All in all, this was an astoundingly good superhero movie, with a heavy emphasis on the visual infusion, which makes it look all the more grand. It may be tied with some uninspired dialogue, but the actors do well to build on their characters and ensure that it is an enthralling experience. The final confrontation may be something we've seen so many times before with superhero films, but it does not completely ruin what is an entertaining night out at the cinema. 7.5/10 The dead have taken command of the sea. They're searching for a girl, a Pearl, and a Sparrow!" This expensive movie had a lot of great ideas - innovative in fact. But, in writing the script, the film delivered something nostalgic, but distinctly lacking in closure. If this was to be the last story of Captain Jack Sparrow, and all the characters that were involved in his pirate's life, then it's a poor show. Regardless of whether every character who was still alive got a chance to share the limelight, it's pointless when you can't do it meaningfully.
Let's start with the positives. Johnny Depp has been the unbreakable anchor in this franchise and created a household name for his character, with little short of bumbling behaviour and a distinctive accent. He is the true saviour of a messy film, that is lifted out of boredom by means of comical interplay. He steals every scene, even from the highly-esteemed Geoffrey Rush and Javier Bardem. There's no denying that without Depp, this series would be much poorer, and perhaps wouldn't have succeeded from the off-set. The music can also be commended, even if its completely lifted from the first three films and lazily adapted. I also enjoyed the flashbacks, giving us insight (albeit short) into the early life of Jack Sparrow and the origin of his antics and his iconic name. The fact that Salazar has been connected to Jack through the compass for all this time, was a nice twist - but it's also a gaping plot hole, considering Jack has given the compass away in the past. Nostalgia is a powerful thing, and it could work wonders for this film, as that final scene between Will and Elizabeth pretty much caps off their entire storyline, meaning that they don't need to be separated any longer. But there are some cons to this final development, that practically undermines previous plots. With the positives out the way, there's a lot left to discuss. First of all, I'm very fond of the original three films - the script, storyline and crazy visions have always been exemplary. The films are also timeless, with so much fun and entertainment that it's hard to stop watching them sometimes. But, Salazar's Revenge (or Dead Men Tell No Tales), lacks the impact of those three films simply because it tries so hard to be original while also relying equally as much on the previous films. Salazar's crew are effectively a mix of Barbossa's crew in the first film and the crew of the Dutchman. The execution scene was a convoluted rehash of the original execution scene in the first film that has ten times more class and style. Not to mention the fact that the growing affection between Henry and Carina is blatantly parallel to Will Turner's and Elizabeth Swan's (hell, Henry is even Will's son). The connections are endless and yet they do the film no justice, because it's all been seen before. Whilst the acting was predominantly top notch, I thought Brenton Thwaites and Kaya Scodelario were both severely lacking in talent and charisma. Perhaps relying too much on the preceding love story (Will and Elizabeth) as the basis for this new relationship, the characters just didn't express themselves enough to make me give them any empathy. The script did them no justice either, as I found myself cringing at some of the most outrageous lines I've heard in cinema, such as repetitively pointing and shouting out the name of people and vessels as they approach, even if the audience is fully aware of what's coming. Unfortunately, they both came across as dim-witted and emotionless. I also thought David Wenham was terribly wasted in his role - script-wise he was portrayed as the stereotypical military officer, who holds more grudges than brain cells. For the script itself, I have no love. It was amateurish, cringeworthy and uninventive. How Pirates of the Caribbean has gone from some of the savy-est sweet-talk in all cinema to this ridiculous nonsense is beyond me, but it becomes quickly apparent that the screenplay is more of a guide than a subsidiary of storytelling, and everyone sounds like they're reading instructions rather than actually living and breathing their characters. I hate to say it, but the directing didn't exactly help this situation. Where this franchise was once renowned for its mesmerising action sequences (I refer you to Calypso's whirlpool in At World's End), as a potential closing chapter, Salazar's Revenge was sloppy and uncreative. Most of the action could be over in a minute, and there'd be barely any blood spilt. As is evident, especially in the final sequence involving the Trident of Poseidon, there's an extreme lack of thought gone into how the action could portrayed believably. The main factor for this film's downfall, for me, was the lack of grit. As I keep mentioning, the first three films had a certain tone that showed a different angle to Disney. Whereas they were pandering for the benefit of kids, here were movies that enjoyed being scary, and had some truly threatening villains to support that terror. Seeing as Barbossa turned good and Davy Jones and Beckett were both killed by the third film, the franchise lost too much substance to be able to continue. Without it, even the sharks, that would normally be blood-curdling, there's no real demand to cover your eyes. I definitely thought On Stranger Tides was a let-down, but this was arguably worse. It's not a complete failure, because there are some genuinely great ideas (if you can find them amongst the nonsensical jargon, mind you), but without Gore Verbrinski, and Elliot & Rossio, it lacks the extra flare that a film this grand needs. For the better of the franchise and its future reputation, I think Disney should leave it there and be content with the fact that they've told three amazing stories, and two half-decent ones to quench everyone's thirst. There's no need for any more. 5.5/10 With its stunning visuals and ambitious story, Blame! promises to be a hardcore science-fiction with an important message about technological evolution. Unfortunately, weighed down by some crappy screenplay and a plot that falls foul of cliche, the film never truly gets going. Despite some gritty action scenes and a few meaningful exchanges, I was left feeling stale by the fact that these wonderful animations were being wasted by an ultimately unoriginal plot.
The main criticism I have is the characters - they are all way too similar, each sharing a cause and each sharing their intentions. There's no hostility, there's no disagreement - everything is just a little too perfect. This is in stark contrast with the antagonists of the film - these safeguards who have immense power, and as is atypical with these futuristic science-fictions, have a penchant for eliminating Humans. Genuinely, the exterminators are pretty terrifying, but once you understand their capabilities, there's nothing more to add. A potentially terrifying threat, sidetracked by the fact that they were developed enough. If you just want to see it for the visuals, then that's a big positive. Every shot is made with care - I adore the landscape shots and the vast, dystopian architecture that now appear dilapidated and rusty. They really captured the post-purge atmosphere of the story just through the grimy imagery, and the hostile nature of some of the locations. Whilst the factory looked advanced in technology, it didn't clash with the dirty and hollow depictions of the city outside. The music also gave it that extra factor, hinting at a world that was once prosperous, but is now so changed that it can no longer be considered a safe environment. Plot-wise, the film is lacking. The opening scenes show great potential, and are shot so well that you're deceived into believing that this might be an intelligent, political science-fiction about a futuristic community attempting to adapt to an environment where they're considered illegal. In truth, while we're under the impression that these surviving Humans have adapted, this is no different from a story of survivors who've found refuge from their enemies. On top of the fact that the characters are so under-developed, there's no empathy whatsoever with anyone. They are walking corpses with no personality. I did, however, like the way Cibo was portrayed - a long-forgotten scientist who understands the nature of the hostile safeguards. But, her story quickly deteriorated as we're brought back to the village and she attempts to locate this missing technology that enables Humans to control the machines. This could have been so much better, especially considering the content Netflix have dished out before, but inevitably there are a few that get through and have little too substance. This had class and the visual aesthetic, but very little nuance to pass as top notch sci-fi. Nevertheless, some of it is appealing, and there will be a number of people who enjoy the doom-laden tone of the film as it gradually progresses to a simple, yet dissatisfying, ending. 6/10 |
AuthorA very passionate Welsh nerd... Archives
October 2017
Categories
All
|