Today's Double News: ascending inside out

Time is often against me, and so it proved this second half of the week. This is all the news I could muster:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158313/nieuwe_trailer_inside_out

This is getting somewhere, conceptually. Though there's still a lot of questions to be answered. I had a tough time visualizing how this whole interplay between the voices and the characters they control would work. I guess I got my answer. It does seem a somewhat static concept though. Are these voices really gonna stay confined to being simple talking heads in a conference room playing off each other as they suggest the actions of their subject? That has a tendency to get boring. I assume it's gonna be more visually interesting that that, somehow. I like the little details, like each set of voices taking on the characteristics (moustache, glasses, hairstyle and the like) of their host. I do believe limiting the voices to a set of five does sell the human psyche a bit short, but at least it makes for coherent storytelling, not plagued by an abundance of different emotional characters. Would have made more sense if some other emotions popped up in the minds of other characters, as everybody has some more strongly developed emotions defining their personality. Maybe that will still be the case, but we just don't see it from this trailer (which is basically more a clip of the film than an actual trailer, it must be noted). For now, the concept still isn't worked out as much to get me really excited about this film, but at least it proves intriguing and - as far as I'm aware - inspired.These days, that's as much as you could hope for in a Pixar movie.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158314/nieuwe_posters_jupiter_ascending

Yay, character posters! No big budget Hollywood flick's promotional campaign would be complete without them. Typical set-up of archetypal characters here. You've got your lead, a female for a change; her love-interest; the villain; and the wiser, older gentleman whose services will mostly consist of providing expositionary dialogue, to help both the protagonist and the audience get acquainted with this new world. Interesting to see Sean Bean is by now considered old and wise enough to play the part of the latter. But hey, any excuse to get him (and an excruciating death scene on his part) in your film is well worth the effort. I still wish the leading couple would have seen different casting, as the acting of neither Kunis nor Tatum appeals to me. But hey, it's not about their acting (or about me, sadly), it's about their popularity with the audience, and both stars are undeniably hot at the moment in that regard. I won't deny that despite the dull leads, this movie has very much peaked my interest. Even though in many ways it seems like it's copying Dune a bit too much, the notion of humanity being just a resource of vastly superior extraterrestrial life to exploit at will is a nice change of pace. Though no doubt the plot will devolve into the typical 'chosen one' routine of old. The set-up may prove fascinating (and the visual effects, too, naturally), the execution likely less so. Oh well, we didn't expect the ingenuity of the original Matrix come again from the Wachowskis, now did we?

Today's many little bits of News

Here's a few scoops I posted on MS in recent days. They just keep piling up, don't they?:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155773/eerste_teaserposter_minions

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155772/nieuwe_poster_guardians_of_the_galaxy

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155749/trailer_monsters_dark_continent_online

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155708/channing_tatum_wordt_x-man_gambit

Channing Tatum as Gambit? I vehemently object to this, though I get the reasons why he might be considered suitable for the role. Gambit is girlbait, he's a rogue (get the pun there?), he's charming and sultry, and these are all qualities the female part of humanity generally agrees Tatum possesses. The argument Tatum 'understands Gambit because they're both from the American South' is baloney: there's a vast difference between Gambit's home state of Louisiana and Tatum's native Alabama, even though they lie next to each other. My major issue with Tatum's casting is they didn't ask my opinion beforehand.

No, that's not it.

It's what Tatum brings to the franchise in terms of starpower that vexes me. Tatum by now is a firmly established hot moviestar that mostly appeals to the female demographic (not X-Men's main audience for sure), more so for his looks than for his ability to act. X-Men by now is a firmly established hot movie franchise that mostly appeals to the male demographic (age 12-35 or thereabouts). Obviously adding Tatum to the mix is a tactic by the studio to attract new audiences, and given Tatum's status he's very likely gonna play a major role (he'll no doubt take a major salary too). So far, the franchise hasn't resorted to casting big Hollywood stars. Sure, Hugh Jackman is one now, but he wasn't when he first started playing Wolverine. Plus, Jackman cares about his character, which is why he keeps coming back to play him even though he has no contractual obligations or acting challenges in store for him to do so. That's character loyalty. Tatum has gone on record stating he's not all that much into X-Men, though he claims to like Gambit. Duh, otherwise he wouldn't have accepted the part. But this is likely just promotional bull. I doubt he read the comics or watched the cartoons just because Gambit occasionally appeared in it. I fear Tatum is gonna detract audience attention away from what really matters about X-Men. In Gambit's solofilm this is not that big an issue (though Wolverine's solofilms left a lot to be desired compared to the proper X-movies). But in X-Men: Apocalypse, you need a strong ensemble of characters performed by team players who don't mind taking a backseat if the plot demands it (Anna Paquin's Rogue being scrapped from Days of Future Past without the actress complaining because it's for the greater good is a good example of taking one for the team). That's not something I think Tatum easily accepts. Also, the movie is likely to be built around Tatum (and Jackman too, still) to accomodate his star status. Certainly for X-Men: Apocalypse, that doesn't bode well, as this story deals with a team of mutants more than ever instead of it centering around a single character (apart from Apocalypse himself in a way). It seems a wrong time to start calling special attention to one character, especially one that was seen before but played by another actor (Taylor Kitsch). I would much prefer it if Gambit was re-introduced in his own film first, then appeared in a group effort later. Kinda like The Avengers, from which every studio owning Marvel property takes a page these days. In this case, the wrong page I'd say.

Monsters was a small film shot on a low budget in a guerilla style of filmmaking. It seems the sequel Dark Continent takes a different route. I didn't even think this unusual creature feature got enough audience attention to warrant a successor, but on that small a budget, profit isn't hard to accomplish and so a sequel is a given by the rigid laws of Hollywood. Obviously on a bigger budget, considering the visual effects (and this is still only the trailer too). It seems that's where most of the money went, since the plot feels fairly generic and there's no big names attached (playing a bit part in Game of Thrones gets you noticed but doesn't make you an instant star, Joe Dempsie). I don't think a second film was needed or desired by those who saw the first film, and it seems the original director Gareth Edwards agreed with me, as he's hardly involved with the production of Part 2 at all. He's listed as 'executive producer', but that's saying nothing. Stan Lee is listed under the same credit for virtually every Marvel movie, only for coming up with the characters back in the days, but otherwise doesn't do a thing, other than appearing in his cameos for fun. Edwards of course traded a shot at directing the sequel to his baby in for doing the remake of Godzilla. Good thing too, since you'd need a monster enthusiast to get the King of Monsters right, which I hear he has done. It seems there was little more to add to Monsters though, and so far the trailer for Monsters: Dark Continent proves just that.

Now that's what I call a bitchin' poster! Okay, so it's in many ways identical to the previous posters for Marvel Studios' movies, save for the different setting and characters of course. For now, I like to think of that as studio consistency, which is something Marvel excels in as it's continuously expanding its Cinematic Universe. And it works on this poster better than ever. There's also more than a little resemblance to the way Star Wars posters were composed (especially the classics by Drew Struzan), and that's also not a bad thing to say about promotional material for an ambitious space opera like this. This poster is colourful, appealing and otherwise just plain badass. I hope the movie delivers on the goods promised here.

The first poster for Minions, that's a different thing entirely. All it shows are a few characters, a title and a date set against a plain white background, but nothing else is needed for a teaser poster. At the sight of the minions, kids will know enough. And their parents who will pay for seeing the film in theaters too, poor things. But is a film about the minions themselves a good thing? Don't they work better as supporting characters? I see a kind of Smurf motive here. Other than the fact these little creatures already feel similar to the Smurfs by their simple but easily recognizable colour coding and their own invented language, the Smurfs first appeared in a comic album in which they were not the main characters, but they soon came into their own and few people remember the names of the characters in whose story they co-starred (naturally, I do). Since then, they have taken popular culture by storm worldwide. I doubt the minions will witness a similar fate, but it's hard to deny they steal the show in these Despicable movies. It's up to the first Minions film to prove they can do without their evil master in the future. And if they fail, we still have the Smurfs.

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra

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

Twee uur lang fijn spelen met actiefiguurtjes

Na het grote – maar toch niet helemaal verdiende – succes van Transformers is het niet verrassend dat speelgoedfabrikant Hasbro op zoek ging naar een nieuwe franchise om het kunstje nog eens te herhalen en opnieuw bakken vol geld binnen te halen. G.I. Joe was de voor de hand liggende keuze, want Hasbro heeft al 45 jaar de rechten op deze merknaam die uiterst succesvol bleek in media als tekenfilms, strips en uiteraard de actiefiguren zelf, maar tot dusverre nog niet de logische volgende stap naar het witte doek maakte. Transformers mag dan een kassucces en grootschalig actiespektakel zijn geweest, een erg bevredigende film leverde regisseur Michael Bay er niet mee, en hetzelfde gold nog minder voor het deplorabele Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen die deze zomer de bioscoop teisterde (en desondanks opnieuw Hasbro's kas flink spekte). Een vertaling van speelgoed naar het grote scherm, kan dat überhaupt een goede film opleveren? G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra geeft nog geen definitief bevestigend antwoord op die vraag, maar pakt in ieder geval een stuk leuker uit dan beide Transformers-vehikels.

De regie ligt in handen van Stephen Sommers, die met onder andere twee delen The Mummy al aangaf een bekwaam actieregisseur te zijn. Sommers laat overduidelijk merken dat G.I. Joe het hoofdzakelijk moet hebben van een flinke hoeveelheid lol en weinig anders, wat Bay ook probeerde met Transformers maar daar vooral bij het tweede deel jammerlijk in faalde. De balans tussen actie, humor en karakterontwikkeling is in G.I. Joe gelukkig een stuk beter uitgewerkt. Serieus te nemen valt het geen moment, maar dat mag de pret niet drukken.

In de nabije toekomst ontwikkelt een gewetenloze wapenfabrikant (een enge Christopher Eccleston) het ultieme wapen: 'nanomites', microscopische robots die metaal opvreten en hele steden in de as kunnen leggen als ze in kernkoppen worden gebruikt. Soldaten Duke (stoere Channing Tatum) en Ripcord (Marlon Wayans als komische noot) krijgen opdracht de raketlading veilig te vervoeren, maar worden belaagd door de geheimzinnige terreurorganisatie Cobra. Een elite-team soldaten genaamd G.I. Joe helpt ze uit de brand, waarna het duo besluit zich bij deze topgeheime militaire eenheid aan te sluiten. Samen met een bont gezelschap nieuwe collegae, waaronder de zwijgzame ninja Snake Eyes (Ray Park) en de kittige roodharige dame Scarlett (Rachel Nichols), valt het team vervolgens van de ene verbazing in de andere, als blijkt dat er een grootschalige samenzwering gaande is die moet leiden tot Cobra's overname van de wereldmacht. Bovendien hebben sommige terroristen, zoals de felle Baroness (sexy Sienna Miller) en de dodelijke Storm Shadow (Koreaanse superster Byung-hun Lee) nog een persoonlijk appeltje te schillen met de 'Joes'. Het resultaat is een aaneenschakeling van groots opgezette, spectaculaire actiescènes, inclusief de nodige 'martial arts' demonstraties, vuurgevechten en enorme explosies.

Sommers serveert het geheel zonder gêne, zonder de pretentie dat G.I. Joe meer is dan twee uur fijn vermaak. Als ze actie willen, dan kunnen ze actie krijgen, lijkt zijn motto. Van begin tot eind dendert G.I. Joe voort met slechts af en toe een adempauze om de personages de noodzakelijke achtergrondinformatie te verschaffen. Het script heeft hen gelukkig van precies genoeg ontwikkeling voorzien om ons tussen al het lawaai in toch afdoende met hen mee te laten leven, en de persoonlijke kanten van hun situaties naar voldoening tot uiting te laten komen. De liefde tussen Duke en de Baroness bijvoorbeeld, die door de dood van haar broer onder Dukes bevel vervormde tot intense haat van haar kant, voelt zodoende niet potsierlijk aan, maar geeft de personages dat beetje noodzakelijke persoonlijke karakter, en krijgt extra emotionele lading als blijkt dat haar broer nog in leven is en zonder haar weten ook de partij van de schurken heeft gekozen. Tussen al het cartooneske geweld bevindt zich een degelijke hoeveelheid relativerende humor, en gelukkig geen overdaad aan slechte grappen, wat Transformers 2 qua geloofwaardigheid de das omdeed.

Ondanks de actie, karakterontwikkeling en humor moet G.I. Joe het voornamelijk hebben van de grote hoeveelheid fantastische gadgets, waarin we een geslaagde hommage aan de thematische verwante James Bond-films aantreffen. Naast de eerder genoemde minuscule robotjes (waar overigens daadwerkelijk wetenschappelijk onderzoek naar verricht wordt) mogen zowel de 'good guys' als de snoodaards rondrennen met een hoeveelheid amusante uitvindingen, variërend van sonische kanonnen tot onzichtbare uniforms. De film gaat echter nooit te ver in het tonen van technische hoogstandjes maar blijft volstrekt binnen de grenzen van de in de film gepresenteerde realiteit.

Het valt te begrijpen dat de schrijvers er voor gekozen hebben om van deze incarnatie van G.I. Joe een internationaal elite-team te maken, in plaats van de 'real American heroes' waar de eenheid tot dusverre uit bestond. Immers, buiten de Verenigde Staten zit niemand te wachten op nog meer patriottisch Amerikaans militarisme. Ook is het verfrissend om eindelijk weer eens een actiefilm te zien waarin de terroristen geen religieuze motieven hebben, maar zoals vanouds streven naar het overnemen van de hele wereld.

Hoewel G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra een zeer vermakelijk actiespektakel is geworden, is het overduidelijk nooit meer dan dat, en meent het zelf niet meer dan dat te moeten zijn. Na het volstrekt onleuke Transformers 2 is het een hele verademing te zien dat er op basis van een reeks actiefiguren en met een ervaren regisseur wel degelijk een geslaagde actiefilm gemaakt kan worden die ons weer het gevoel geeft kleine jongetjes (of meisjes) te zijn die de dolste capriolen met hun speelgoed uithalen. G.I. Joe zal ongetwijfeld niet heel lang blijven hangen, maar levert tenminste twee uur ongegeneerd plezier. Hasbro kan tevreden zijn.