Today's Review: Amazonia 3D

Wrote another review for MovieScene a while back, it finally got published today:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/152048/amazonia_-_recensie

A mixed bag, this film. The storialized aspect shouldn't be the main draw, that would be the spectacular wildlife photography, as is usual for documentaries. This movie isn't 100% documentary stuff though, which is probably a mistake, since the natural imagery would have been enough to make it worthwhile (both regular and in 3D), yet now you have a plot of sorts getting in the way of that to appeal to a younger audience. That said, I'm glad this movie didn't try to evade the issue at hand, namely the destruction of the rain forest and the loss of all its beauty (and dangers) for human short term greed. It takes a while for that issue to be addressed and the focus on that topic is rather brief but thoroughly effective, as the grim look of a demolished jungle is shocking for all ages, and hopefully succeeds in convincing all ages of the necessity of ending deforestation. Good message, but not perfect execution.

Today's Mini-Review: Dial M for Murder 3D

Dial M for Murder 3D: ****/*****, or 8/10

If you think the contemporary 3D craze is a new phenomenon, think again. Though the current output of 3D movies far surpasses those of bygone eras, there have been two previous waves in cinema featuring the addition of a third dimension to draw audiences away from their television sets – first from the sets themselves, the second time from the choices offered by VCR technology: these days it's a combination of high quality television production, the relatively large size of the home cinema screen and the ease in digital technology for users to watch whatever they fancy that threatens audience attendance – the previous one during the Eighties, the very first one in the Fifties. Then, like today, some high profile directors, fascinated by the narrative and visual possibilities offered by the three-dimensional aspect, tinkered with the technology to see what it could accomplish and add to the overall viewing experience. During the short lived fad of the Fifties, the most notable director to explore the new dimension was Alfred Hitchcock, who used it only once, for his 1954 crime thriller Dial M for Murder. Though its 3D release was almost as brief as the interest in 3D technology itself in that decade, it cannot be denied the 3D version of this classic film still makes for a fascinating watch, both with regards to the use of the third dimension and the story itself. Thanks to the EYE Filmmuseum in Amsterdam, I got the opportunity to experience this film as Hitchcock shot it, in a beautifully restored print that utilizes the modern 3D techniques, which also benefits the vividly rich Fifties' colour palette that would have been absent in the original 3D print with its notorious red & green glasses.

It's clear upon watching the film Hitchcock made ample use of the added layers of depth 3D offered, as we get a clear sense of persons and objects in the foreground, the middle and the background of the frame, the depth perception shifting as another person or object moves into frame prominently on a closer layer. Considering most of this Kammerspiel type film takes place in a single room, 3D actually comes in quite handy to make the environment feel more alive and diverse than it otherwise would have felt. Especially notable is the scene where two characters are in mid-conversation and a vase enters the shot, basically right in our faces as we see the two men continue to talk behind it, though separated (both visually and in terms of their narrative interests) by the vase which is positioned in the middle of the shot composition. Of course, a few more typical in-your-face shots are also present, and these work far better than the ones we have grown used to, outstretched arms feeling almost tangible as they seem to hover right in front of us. Also charming to behold is the blue matte lines that appear around characters as they are in motion: the modern 'high frame rate' technology might have been of benefit to avoid such visual oddities, but in this case it makes the movie feel even more historically intriguing from a technological viewpoint. Nevertheless, after the first hour it seems Hitchcock was running out of ideas as no particularly noteworthy new use of 3D is witnessed and the novelty of its sensations wears off. Until that point, this film makes some of the finest use of 3D to this day. The incomparable Grace Kelly never looked more beautiful than she does in all three dimensions in this remastered 3D print.

In terms of story Dial M for Murder is simply a little outdated, through no fault of its own. The problem is it has been emulated, copied and parodied for almost sixty years. Though Hitchcock's famous mastery of suspense and the delivery and timing of his actors' dialogue is still of the highest order, it cannot help but make the movie feel like its dragging its feet just a little too long. The moment police inspector Hubbard (John Williams; not that one) enters the crime scene and displays just how brilliantly deductive the mind of a British inspector works as he spends the next 30 minutes explaining the details of the murder attempt for longer than we care to hear it (we got the point!), while occasionally touching his moustache in every conceivable clichéd manner, the movie drones on a little too much. Until that time though, the exciting plot offered by a man (Ray Milland) who means to murder his wife (Kelly) by blackmailing a former schoolmate who has fallen on hard times (Anthony Dawson), only to have the assassination gone horribly awry, makes for s striking crime drama of the highest order, good for many a scene of emotional tension like only Hitchcock managed to deliver. 1954 proved a good year for Hitchcock, as the celebrated director released his even more highly acclaimed (and superior) suspense masterpiece Rear Window – also starring Grace Kelly – only a few months later.

Today's Mini-Review: Gravity

Gravity: ****/*****, or 8/10

It is rare these days to encounter effects in movies that look so astounding that they pull the audience in completely and won't let go until the credits roll. After twenty-odd years of increasing overuse of CGI, it seemed positive that everything had been done, also owing to the plethora of home video releases containing behind-the-scenes footage that reveals in detail the tricks of the trade, thus enhancing the audience's expertise on what is real and what is not when watching a film. It has diminished the emotional impact of the contemporary blockbuster, which often tends to rely heavily on such big budget effects work, because we spectators think we've seen it all and know it all by now. But once in a while a movie comes along that does manage to sweep us off our feet entirely and immerses us completely into the world its director has envisioned for our viewing pleasure. In such uncommon cases, the often derogatory term 'effects film' turns out both wholly justified and incorrect: the effects it contains do not make a film, but instead engage us into a full fledged cinematic experience we cannot help but be captivated by so strongly that all we can do is undergo it until it releases its grip on us. And then we still sit back in awe for a while longer, with that most pertinent of questions firmly on our minds: how on Earth did they do that?! Alfonso Cuaron (Children of Men, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) has crafted just such a fantastic experience with Gravity, a superior science-fact feature that adheres to the laws of physics but constructs its own laws in terms of what you can accomplish cinematographically these days. From a narrative point of view it's simply the struggle of two astronauts (George Clooney and Sandra Bullock) to survive in our planet's orbit after their space shuttle has been devastated by space debris caused by the demolition of a Russian satellite. In every other regard, there is nothing simple about Gravity. 
 

It is most definitely one of the greatest accomplishments in the field of visual effects and 3-D technology in recent years and an incredible tour-de-force on the part of both actors whose capabilities are put to the most extreme test imaginable. In fact, you are pulled in so deeply you neither have the time nor the interest to agree the story is pretty bare and the few attempts at introducing deeper levels of character development – including Bullock's character still trying to cope with the death of her young daughter – don't add all that much to the protagonists' plight. We run with them because we cannot help but feel we are one of them, and we too must get out of this ordeal in one piece before time (and oxygen) runs out. Applying his signature use of the 'long take', Cuaron opens the movie on a quiet, peaceful note as we witness “our fellow astronauts” working on a telescope, a job that suddenly turns extremely hazardous as the debris field hits their workplace hard, cutting them loose, adrift into the endless black ocean of space: all in a single, apparently uninterrupted shot (though few will actually consider that fact as we are already engaged fully by this point). We're slowly introduced to their Zero-G environment, but soon must deal with intense camera movements as we float around the shuttle in fast motions at first, and soon almost unchecked as the mission is spiralling out of control. Their spacecraft lost, our fellow pair of astronauts must make its way to the ISS before it too gets hit by the rubble, and before they run out of breathable air, if they ever hope to get back down to Earth. Unfortunately physics don't make it easy on them and reaching their goal appears ever more hopeless. All to our benefit, as we are treated to some of the most spectacular visual imagery seen on the big screen in years. Gravity is a prime showcase of what 3-D can add to a film other than a higher admission price. Not only is the cinematography breathtaking, we feel part of a three-dimensional environment at all times, surrounded by pieces of space rubble on every side, or Bullock's sweat and tears when we are locked in an escape pod with her in very close quarters. The intricate shots of floating equipment and people going up, over and around each other adds a layer of depth that is not likely to be surpassed in film any time soon. Even though the lack of sound in space deprives us of an auditory experience the likes of Star Wars, the immersive visuals make us forget all about any lack where other sense are concerned. Credit is also due to the seasoned actors, Bullock in particular, that make the whole experience feel that much more convincing – though the effect the film has on our stomachs does half their work already – by delivering excellent performances few of their colleagues could have matched as they play off against each other and... yes, against what else, exactly? How much, if anything, of what we seen on screen was there to aid them? Even for a trained eye, it's nigh impossible to tell where the real setting ends and the fictional construct begins. Yet we never get the feeling we are watching visual effects, which is of course exactly the trick such effects aim to pull off: don't let the audience know you are only an effect. The result is a staggering, completely compelling cinematic experience, one best seen on the big screen as it is doubtful its full physical and emotional impact is done justice on a home cinema release, though hopefully the latter can tell us just how Cuaron and his team managed to accomplish this extraordinary feat. One thing is for sure, Gravity is gravitating towards well deserved Best Visual Effects and Best Cinematography Oscars.

Today's Review: Jurassic Park 3D, at last!

Fresh off MovieScene:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/146189/imagine_2013:_jurassic_park_3d_-_recensie

Needless to say this was the best moviegoing experience I had in twenty tears time. I have never felt both so old and so young at the same time. All the good experiences I had as a kid (and there have been many!) I relived, while simultaneously it dawned on me just what an impact this film has made on my life for two decades, most vigorously in the last eight years since I became a true die-hard JP collector. Despite having undergone a digital makeover, it is clear Jurassic Park has aged more gracefully than I could ever hope to do myself.

This anniversary celebration (though to be strict, for the Netherlands the exact mark would be September 30 of this year) also marks another milestone (possibly and quite probably) in my cinematic life, my first visit to EYE in Amsterdam. Much to anybody's surprise if they ask me what I think of the new Filmmuseum, I never actually went there until two nights ago. It took my all-time favourite film to persuade me the time was now, and I do not regret it. It's a wonderful building for sure. It works great as both a museum, which it strikingly appears to be in every conceivable facet - grotesque overly futuristic visual look, overuse of bare white walls, big dining facility, funky gift shop selling books, umbrellas and postcards (all overpriced), etc. - and as a genuine movie theater, housing several large theater rooms where one can sit in the dark and enjoy good cinema endlessly. It was kinda fun to see the actual theater looked in no way like the rest of the building on the inside, but more like any decent 'bioscope' theater. It was a pretty big theater at that, with a capacity of some 300 spectators I reckon. The show wasn't fully sold out (for shame!), but with at least 200 to 250 people still rather crowded. Thankfully all of them were pros when it came to watching films, so they behaved properly and sat quietly, undoubtedly as awestruck as I was myself. The 3D glasses were not my favorite model, being those pesky electronic, battery run devices, that are placed tightly around your head (cutting off some of the blood flow around the ears after a while) and are overly cumbersome in terms of weight: but they did their job adequately, and considering the nostalgia extravaganza I was undergoing I couldn't be bothered noticing them all that much, except of course where it concerned good use of 3D effects in the movie itself, which could be found surprisingly often. But for that I'll just let you read the review above. Here I'm just informing you of my first visit to EYE, which beyond the shadow of a doubt won't be limited to this single experience (though I doubt there will be any trips that can surpass or even equal it in quality).

The funniest thing about EYE I consider to be the restaurant, which completely lacks the feel of the rest of the building, except for that huge screen forever showing the movie that is the life and times of Amsterdam (I'm referring to the giant panoramic window over the IJ, for those of you who did not get the gist). Basically the restaurant is a separate entity inside EYE, a parasitic organism thriving on those audience members who feel the need to whet more than just their visual appetite. It's devoid of the stylistic touch of the rest of the building and has a menu to match, which one can use to order all kinds of stupendously fancy food, among them quails' egg pastries and other exotic dishes containing dead animals. The whole menu had an 'elite' feeling to it. Heck, even the butter for the free bread sidedish was some classy brand with a label that mentioned some ancient Duchess used its secret family recipe (now clearly open to all) only for royal occasions. Say what you will, it did have a sort of theatrical touch to it, as if you were in a movie yourself. Or maybe I just don't go out to restaurants enough. Sorry, I'm too busy going to the movies, and I did exactly that after finishing my plate of French Fries (they did have those too, but not on the menu, you had to ask for them specifically). After all, I came here to watch a film, my detour to the restaurant was only meant to satiate my appetite and to have a nice place to sit down and talk to my friend. I didn't go alone as you might have thought. Jurassic Park after all is far too good a film to watch alone, especially if you can watch it with someone else who thorougly appreciates its supreme quality. EYE sure delivered in that regard, as we both had the time of our lives. Again, after so many years.

It's ridiculous really: EYE's been open for over a year, yet I never bothered to cross the water and go there so far, despite the many classic movies they have exhibited there. Of course, none of those classics could ever be as classic for me on a personal level, but in hindsight I really should have made time for sweeping epics like Lawrence of Arabia or marvelous adventure flicks like Raiders of the Lost Ark. Oh well, JP 3D turned out such a great experience the ice has definitely been broken. Now if only they had more vacancies available so I might get the chance to get to know EYE on a truly professional level. And I don't mean serving quails' egg pastries...

Today's News: Old Star Wars must make way for the new

Just posted this on MovieScene:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/144110/3d-release_star_wars_ii_en_iii_uitgesteld

So the original planning to re-release both trilogies in 3D already was messy, quickly deviating from the one-film-a-year concept, but now because of J.J. 'Rape Trek' Abrams it's on hold indefinitely. In the case of Episodes II and III that's not a total disaster, though I was very curious as to just how much improvement Attack of the Clones showed over its lackluster 3D performance of its already poor predecessor. But it's a bitch to know the original trilogy won't hit the screens again for many years, in 3D or otherwise, in favor of Abrams' upcoming Episode VII. Granted, J.J. has been known to be an avid Star Wars fanboy (something he never claimed about Trek, which showed a little bit too obviously in 2009 for my taste), which showed in his abysmal Star Trek Episode I (it truly had everything its Star Wars counterpart featured, from an annoying alien sidekick meant for comic relief (and failing) to an overly digital 'there's always a bigger fish' scene taking chunks out of the FX budget over spending it on better writing). Big FX and grand spectacle are obviously what J.J. wants in his space operas, and Star Wars is historically the franchise that has done it best so the guy might be in the right place for once. If not, he'll destroy yet another much beloved Sci-Fi franchise and everyone will let him, standing by idly while I cry my eyes dry and beg for divine intervention (but I'm an atheist so such powers are not bestowed upon me). I had hoped his turn to the Dark Side would mean he'd leave Trek alone for now (or maybe even give it to somebody who actually cares!). Fat chance. He says he thinks he can manage both. Greedy bastard...




Oh well, no classic Star Wars in 3D. I'm sure it'll happen eventually down the road, but for now we'll have to make due with the home cinema and remember the 3D fail that was The Phantom Menace. At least that means Lucas won't secretly slip in some more pointless alterations to bug the legions of fanboys (it really was his only reason in the most recent case, blinking Ewoks and all).

Big Tits Zombie

Rating: */*****, or 1/10

Absolutely dismal attempt to make something resembling a horror comedy, like only the Japanese in their sick psycho minds could produce (any Japanese people that have seen this thing would undubitably concur with me in that last bigotry ridden statement). Easily one of the worst films I've ever seen, which unfortunately even ended up in my movie collection (I never knew my friends disliked me so much they would give me this monstrosity for my birthday... but at least I didn't pay for it, except for the ten years it took away from my life by giving me brain rot). Except for a few nice naked breasts sparsely displayed throughout, there's just nothing redeemable about this audiovisual piece of poo that by rights shouldn't even be allowed to be called a movie, since that would insult anyone who's ever worked on proper films. The plot, if there is such a thing here, revolves around a few exotic dancers (a bunch of girls with hardly any acting experience, which is clearly revealed) who find themselves under siege by completely unconvincing looking zombies (my cat's fleas could have provided better make-up effects!) after discovering some old book containing incantations capable of resurrecting the dead. Every supposed joke the brainless mutants called 'writers' make misses its mark completely, making this movie so painfully cringeworthy this flick is very hard to sit through, even though it's running for only 74 minutes. To make matters worse – yes, that is actually possible – the movie boasts 3D effects: every time an icon pops up in the corner of the screen, you can put on your 3D glasses, but what is seen when wearing these is not 3D, it's just jumbled, messed up imagery, inducing nasty headaches within seconds. Depth is obviously non-existent in every way here, it might as well be called a 0D movie. If there ever is such a thing as a public movie burning rally somewhere, this is the title you're most likely to see in agony on the bon fire; I'd be first in line to make sure no copies of this horrific pile of garbage survive the event. Original Japanese title: Kyonyȗ Doragon: Onsen zonbi vs sutorippȃ 5: if there's indeed a part 1 through 4 of this (I never bothered finding this out), watching the series in a marathon is nothing short of committing seppuku, the dishonourable version.

“Starring”: Sola Aoi, Risa Kasumi, Mari Sakurai

“Directed” by Takao Nakano

Japan: Big Tits Dragon Production Committee, 2010

Beowulf

Rating: ****/*****, or 7/10

Second foray of Robert Zemeckis into the realm of 'performance capture' (the first being The Polar Express (2004), allowing digital artists to record the motions of actors in blue suits on stage, especially their facial movements for maximum emotional impact, and filling in everything else via the computer afterwards. This time Zemeckis appropriated this technique for telling the epic tale of the medieval hero Beowulf (Ray Winstone), a valiant but arrogant warrior who comes to the aid of a king (Anthony Hopkins) who is plagued by the hideous monster Grendel (Crispin Glover). Beowulf fights the monster successfully, but must than deal with his seductive mother (Angelina Jolie) who promises him fame and riches in return for him giving her a new son. Beowulf accepts, but finds he made a deal with the devil: though he gets what was promised it makes him feel empty and alone. When his son returns as a dragon and lays waste to his kingdom, Beowulf gets one last chance to set things right and be a genuine hero again. Plenty of good action and amazing visuals, but the digital technique just didn't prove able to convincingly breathe life into the pixelized cast, making them feel eerily artificial and soulless. It did prove effective for getting Angelina Jolie stark naked though. Zemeckis, not one to give up on an evolving means of effects, applied performance capture a third time to his take on A Christmas Carol (2009). Beowulf was the first film I ever watched in (IMAX) 3D, and still one of the very few I feel made effective use of the 3D process (just before the 3D craze got a hold of Hollywood and most blockbusters used it to squeeze more bucks out of the audience without delivering the promised goods): the way those giant sea serpents alone came at you made the movie quite spectacular, despite its digital shortcomings. Overall, a good version of the old English poem, effectively combining the very old with the very new.

Starring: Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins, Angelina Jolie

Directed by Robert Zemeckis

USA: Paramount Pictures, 2007

The Return of the King!

Great news this week for fans of classic cinema and specifically for the Jurassic Park community, of which I am a very very avid member: come July 2013, the first Jurassic Park movie will finally return to theatres worldwide! Fully recognizing its 20^th anniversary (yes, it's really been that long ago and we've all gotten really old), Universal Pictures will re-release it in all its glory, bringing the rampaging dinosaurs back to the silver screen for older generations to fondly remember in an orgy of excessive nostalgia and for the younger generation, which has remaind blatantly ignorant of its awesome power in theatres, to finally re-discover in the way it looks best, on the big screen. It seems the small scale re-release in the UK (lucky bastards!) of late september was indeed, as many JP fans speculated it was, meant to test the waters for a potential full scale re-release around the globe. The waters apparently have been deemed favourable enough, considering JP drew in respectable numbers for a movie which only ran in a limited number of theatres and was withheld a basic advertising and marketing campaign of any kind, so the Brits only knew it was running in their local movie theatres if they stumbled upon it, or if they'd been perceptive enough online to know what cinematic gold they were bestowed upon by the studio executive powers that be. But now the whole world will have a chance to enjoy these animals again in all their glory of old...

...with one slight addition to the whole...

…as it will be a much dreaded 3-D re-release. People who know me will recall I'm not at all in favour of post-converting movies in 3-D, especially if these movies are decades old and were fully compelling to begin with and thus not in need of any extra dimensions. However, in the current movie market, re-releasing a classic without the added 3-D effect (and thus the additional admission ticket costs, which studios and theatres crave so much), is simply 'not done'. So we'll have to sit through JP watching it with an extra dimension, and hope they did a good enough job to make it look better, instead of worse. If we take the recent example of Star Wars Episode I 3-D, it will likely be the latter. That particular re-release was not improved by the 3-D effects at all. In fact, the 3-D was hardly noticeable and severely underwhelming considering all the ruckus with which Lucasfilm had previously announced it. In the Netherlands, it flopped big time, despite being Star Wars (because no matter how disappointing the 3-D turned out to be, seeing Star Wars on the silver screen again still was throughly enjoyable, even in the case of Episode I). Jurassic Park will undoubtedly receive a similar treatment, being a big franchise name which the studio will feel is appealing enough for the general audience, so it won't have to pull out all the stops to make the 3-D really worthwhile as spectators will flock to their theatres anyway, or so the studio hopes. Unless of course, studio executives got the message Star Wars Episode I 3-D delivered, namely re-releasing a big name franchise film with lousy 3-D just won't be enough these days. Even though I hate to compare JP to Episode I, it is the closest example.

Fortunately July 2013 is still a while away, so Universal has ample time left to decide on a potent strategy for making this re-release a success, and maybe even have their effects magicians come up with excellently added 3-D effects after all (though that seems less likely). Let's see how Titanic 3-D does first next month. Maybe the Star Wars Episode I 3-D incident will prove to have been just that, an incident, involving an already much maligned film adorned with less than stellar 3-D post-conversion.

For now, I'm thankful Jurassic Park gets re-released at all (and I sincerely hope it reaches Dutch theatres, since not all re-releases do). Even if the 3-D turns out to be utter trash, it will be very hard to ruin this film, considered by me as the grandest of all motion pictures, for me or my fellow JP fanatics. After all, I haven't seen it in theatres for nearly 20 years... but fortunately Ian Malcolm turned out to be right: life has, again, found a way!

Journey 2: underwhelming in all but the third dimension

Rating: ***/*****, or 5/10

A few days ago I criticized the disappointing use of 3-D in Star Wars Episode I, which was re-released solely to cash in on the 3-D hype currently controlling Hollywood studio executives' minds (and their bank accounts), and to a lesser degree the minds of audiences around the globe. Being converted in 3-D over a decade after its initial release, the 3-D effects in Episode I were unfortunately far from compelling or convincing, though seeing the movie itself back on the big screen was a bit of a blast (if you like Star Wars in general, and can swallow the prequel trilogy specifically). Viewers flocking to theatres expecting to find the new 3-D addition to The Phantom Menace a worthwhile event will be disappointed, since there just seems to be little room for 3-D were it was never intended to be, often making you forget the 3-D is there to begin with. The opposite is also possible, as Journey 2: The Mysterious Island, released in theatres this week, makes perfectly clear.

Journey 2 is, as the title obviously suggests, a sequel, though the first movie wasn't simply called Journey. It was called Journey to the Center of the Earth, and it was released in 2008. You probably missed it, if you are aware of this particular incarnation of Jules Verne's classic adventure novel at all. It was one of the earlier entries into the current 3-D craze and hit theatres at a time when there were still few theatres with 3-D projectors around (oh, the good ol' days!). I myself was very much aware of it though because it featured a bunch of dinosaurs, and movies with such contents make me lose all objectivity. And apparently common sense as well, since I bothered to travel all the way to Almere to see it in a theatre there that was a few years ahead of its time, like Almere often thinks it is (if you don't know about this wretched city, Google or Wiki it, but be sure to eat lunch or dinner afterwards). The movie theatre in question – I will not mention its name – has got to be the ugliest, most depressing movie building I've ever visited: it kinda felt like an image out of an Orwellian dystopian future. I actually paid to see the movie full price, something I hadn't done in a while then because of my 50% student discount powers, and which I have never done since, in payment for my loyal, unquestionable service to the sinister Pathé company. But despite these trials, my dubious perseverance was awarded with a delightful viewing experience: I saw massive caves, subterranean oceans, stunning blonde Anita Briem, flying piranhas, Trilobites and of course the much coveted dinosaurs, all in spectacular 3-D! For a short while, this movie made me a believer in 3-D. And then it got milked... and milked... with often such hugely dismaying results that I lost my interest in 3-D and the mere notion of a movie I anticipated being released in 3-D made me cringe and sigh out loud.

And on the topic of milking, we're back to Journey 2 3-D. Apparently, Journey 1 (I'm lazy enough to use this abbreviated title, even though I claimed above there is no movie with this nomenclature) made some money despite its limit release (limited since it was only released in 3-D instead of a regular 2-D version also being in circulation, as is usual now). And therefore, Hollywood Law states a sequel or some other follow-up must be produced by any means necessary. And now we have the result.

Guess what? Whatever shortcomings this sequel has (and there are many many many of those), in regards to 3-D effects, it's one of the best films I've seen in the last few years! Apparently the powers-that-be behind this franchise were aware of the 3-D history behind the first film, and honoured it by making sure the second film would surpass it on this front. So again we get a fast paced adventure flick filled to the brim with nifty, neat-o 3-D effects, ranging from the generic 'in-your-face' type to the excellent use of it in backgrounds and tracking shots, showcasing what you can do with 3-D and how few other movies make full use of its potential. Some of the most memorable set-ups include a zoom shot over the lost city of Atlantis, with the camera flying past a huge statue's trident, a giant electric moray eel swimming in a circle so closeby you feel like reaching out and touching it, a harpoon being thrown right into our eyes and The Rock getting berries thrown at his nipples, which bounce back in every direction (the berries, not the nipples). I had the good fortune of seeing this in an IMAX theatre, and I felt completely immersed into the movie, an effect 3-D hasn't had on me in a long time. This movie made 3-D feel like the event that audiences hope for it to be, instead of just a lame addition installed to justify higher admission prices. The 3-D alone makes this movie work, which is a rare happenstance, despite 3-D movies being so plentiful nowadays. It seems once again a 2-D version is nowhere to be found, which should be the case considering if you take away the 3-D, little of interest remains...

Despite the fantastic use of 3-D and a good overall sense of adventure, this movie just has nothing else going for it. The story is bare boned and predictable at every turn (not that there are many turns anyway): Josh Hutcherson (the only remaining element from Journey 1 aside from the Verne references) is being a spoiled brat who wants to go off and find some island because his grandfather sent him morse code messages on how to find it, and his stepfather (Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson, who replaces Brendan Fraser as the heroic lead) awards his misbehavior by taking him to said island in the hopes of creating a bond between them. In Palau they charter a rusty old helicopter and its pilot, Luiz Gusman in a stereotypical JarJarist comic relief role (i.e. supposed to be funny, but failing miserably) to fly them to their location, and as a bonus they get Vanessa Hudgens along for the ride as eye candy. Of course they quickly find the island, which Verne, plus various other authors randomly thrown in, alluded to in his novel Mysterious Island. As happened in the previous film, the works of Verne are used as guides to the protagonists in their quest to stay alive, as if the places Verne described actually existed (think Scientology's take on L. Ron Hubbard's books, except with a better author being used and less religious nonsense mixed in). Naturally the group ends up stranded there and has to run from one threat to the other to stay in one piece, a confrontation with a giant frilled lizard providing the most memorable action scene. The grandfather (Michael Caine, apparently once again in dire need of cash, otherwise he would have turned this sucker down) is found alive and well and takes them on a tour across a number of digital set pieces, including Atlantis, giant bees and a volcano spewing gold. The island of course is too good to be true, and turns out to be swiftly sinking, so our heroes have to get off by finding Captain Nemo's hidden submarine, which they do, after which they get home safely and all's well that ends well.

Worn out subplots concerning Josh Hutcherson's grandfather never really caring about him and The Rock wanting to be accepted as a father figure by his stepson provide the only real opportunities for the audience to bond with these characters as it sets out on this voyage with them, but ultimately viewers won't care less about them and just want to see them get into one fantastic situation after another, which is of course what they get. Say what you will about Journey 2, but at least it doesn't pretend to be anything other than the most basic adventure extravaganza with copious amounts of action and excitement.

Character development, plot twists and deep themes are of course lacking because they are not needed to thrill audiences for 90 minutes. Unfortunately the abundance of lousy jokes, many of them imvolving poop and assorted viscous, oozy materials, were apparently considered a necessity, but most of them (especially the ones provided by Gusman) are just not funny. In fact, given The Rock's known comedic talent (which he applies well in this film, the high point being the aforementioned berry throwing scene), Gusman's character might as well have been omitted entirely. Vanessa Hudgens looks gorgeous (again, good use of 3-D) but her relationship with Josh Hutcherson follows the cliche ridden path from nuisance to acceptance to romance, while chemistry between them is low. There's more chemistry between The Rock and the various creatures he has to fight in order to get his friends to survive the day, and of course, it's these creatures that stand out the most. Tiny elephants, giant birds, bees and lizards and a moray eel endowed with exceptionally high voltage give the cast a run for their money, but win the day in staying in our memories of this movie. In Verne's novel, such animals were of course absent, which means the producers were heavily inspired by Ray Harryhausen's take on this story, which ended up in his fabulous Mysterious Island in 1961, showcasing some of his brilliant stop motion photography that still awes audiences today. It's unlikely Journey 2's creatures will survive in cultural memory as well as their predecessors, but for now, they do their job.

Suffice to say, the carefully crafted but sensational use of 3-D is this movie's only truly redeeming feature while all else is quite forgetful. When the movie is over and the lights go on again, you've had the 3-D ride of your life, but the movie itself won't stay with you for more than a few days at best. Whereas Episode I results in audiences asking themselves 'Was I watching this movie in 3-D?'. Journey 2 will have them asking 'Was I watching this 3-D in a movie?'. However, given Journey 1's limited release and the fact a Journey 2 was made regardless, the wide release of the latter will undoubtedly spawn a Journey 3. The producers took this into account and made sure there's enough not quite so subtle hints as to Josh Hutcherson's next destination. And as long as the 3-D effects stay on their current level of excellence, we won't mind taking that trip to the moon with him in a few years...

Star Wars Episode I 3-D: underwhelming in yet another dimension

Rating: ***/*****, or 6/10

This week the first of the Star Wars films (if you count them numerically instead of in order of release) was re-released in 3-D. Episode I: The Phantom Menace has been much maligned ever since it first hit theatres and, unfortunately, with good reasons. George Lucas being George Lucas, he couldn't pass down yet another opportunity to re-release his space opera serial in a slightly enhanced format, the last version (on Blu-Ray, remember?) having been released almost six full months ago! However, a 3-D conversion has been something a lot of people have been clamouring for for a long time now, so we can't blame Lucas for just going with the 3-D hype like (almost) everyone else.

Sadly, the result is not as mind-boggingly spectacular as we had hoped for. In fact, it's all rather bland. Of course with conversions being done in post-production, or even years after like in this case, the results will never be as good as they would have been if they were actually shot in 3-D. But, Lucas and his various FX companies being pioneers of special and visual effects, something more sensational would have been expected. This is Star Wars after all! Alas, there's only very few moments of noteworthy 3-D effects, and the rest of the while the audience just sits there, most likely forgetting the movie is in 3-D at all. Not noticing the special effects in an effects heavy film has of course always been the aim of special effects in the first place, but not in the case of 3-D. Viewers expect some deliciously gratuitous 'in-your-face' 3-D shots with stuff coming right at them and the like. 3-D, unlike other effects, is much more the event shaping the sensation of the film instead of feeling like a simple added layer (which of course it is in post-conversion flicks). The audience seeks out the effects, wanting to be surprised by the extra dimension: it wants to feel the effects, undergo them, instead of just see them. It's true very few 3-D movies actually achieve this level of immersion and even fewer post-conversion movies are among them. Episode I also falls under the category of films released in 3-D where the third dimension didn't add much to the overall experience.

The official Episode I 3-D poster already hinted at what audiences wanted to see the most in 3-D: podracing and lightsaber duels (preferably involving Darth Maul, despite his very limited screen time). The best 3-D effects, unsurprisingly, are found in the podrace and the climactic lightsaber battle between Maul, Obi-Wan and Qui-Gonn. In most of these scenes the 3-D finally becomes more tangible and noticeably present. However, the downside is a lot of shots in these scenes pass so quickly you don't get enough time to really take in the 3-D effects. But at least you can see they're there. Also worth mentioning are the Galactic Senate and Naboo Core scenes, which also showcase some of the more successful 3-D shots in the film, though here the darkness level of the scene setting forms an extra barrier for the 3-D, which is notorious for being far less effective in movies or scenes involving poorly lit environments (recent cases in point, Thor and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II).

Apart from the 3-D addition, has Lucas changed anything else this time around? Digital Yoda, also pictured on the poster, isn't new by now, since he was already added for the Blu-Ray release. For the better actually, considering the puppet originally constructed for Episode I was never really convincing or appealing, and making Yoda digital increases the level of consistency in the new trilogy, since we also saw him pixelized for Episodes II and III. The only other difference I noticed was the line-up of the end credits. New credits had to be provided for all the people working on the 3-D conversion, and instead of lengthening the credits and thus also the accompanying score, Lucas opted for actually making the credits shorter by having two columns of names next to each other instead of the usual single column. John Williams' awesome score got a little abbreviated, but most people probably won't notice.

So, Episode I in 3-D, worth our while or wasting our time? Despite the disappointing 3-D conversion and the fact I was watching what's easily the worst of the Star Wars movies, I found I enjoyed myself quite a lot. Again. Sure, the story isn't exactly Shakespeare, the dialogue and acting are subpar for the most part and there's this obnoxious amphibian moron ruining it for everybody, it's still... Star Wars. I.e., epic space battles, grand lightsaber fights, a plethora of bizarre and intriguing creatures, an abundance of fascinating strange worlds and some of the finest musical scores ever on film. On the big screen. That alone made it worth it. Plus the knowledge I knew exactly what I was in for, and I didn't have high hopes for the 3-D process to begin with.

All things considering, Lucas could have saved himself a lot of trouble by just re-releasing the damn thing sans any expensive 3-D conversion, and it would still do as well. There's just some things in life that come around every decade or so and remain enjoyable each time, and Star Wars on the silver screen is one of them. Of course, the original trilogy would be much more enjoyable. But hopefully Lucas and his minions will spend the next few years finetuning the 3-D conversion process, so the upcoming movies will look continuously better in 3-D, and we'll have yet another dimension of enjoying Star Wars. For real, this time.

P.S. A pleasant surprise reared its head just before the movie itself began. Instead of seeing the usual predictable line-up of trailers, the audience was treated to a 6-minute preview of the upcoming space opera John Carter, consisting of a single scene plus an expanded trailer containing a lot of shots I hadn't seen before. Though the scene picked for this preview (wherein John finds himself confronted with Martian life forms for the very first time) wasn't the most exciting showcase in terms of both storytelling or (3-D) FX, as a whole the preview made me anxiously anticipate this movie even more than I already did. The expanded trailer was simply amazing, and used several 3-D shots more stunningly delivered than any to follow in the next 140 minutes. Hopefully the movie itself will be an equally jaw-dropping, awe-inspiring roller coaster of a Sci-Fi epic, reminiscent of the early days of Star Wars when such a wide vista of strange new worlds and creepy alien creatures was still new and impressive to audiences. It would be cool to have another big cycle of space opera movies coming, since as far as I'm concerned, they can't (and don't) make enough of those.