Today's Review: Terminator Genisys

Told you I'd be back with another review?

Terminator Genisys - recensie

And Arnold's back, too. Again. Wish he wouldn't be, considering the disappointing result. Once again a franchise is mucked up by messing with its time line. The producers obviously tok a hint from the financial success (brief as it was) from the recent Star Trek reboot. I hated it, because it created a new time line that hardly acknowledges the old which was running for nigh 45 years, basically saying 'anything goes' from here on out. I would have preferred it if they had shown more loyalty to the existing time line and its fanbase. Surprisingly, that is the route taken for Terminator Genisys, with equally lackluster results. In this movie's case, the new time line does nothing but acknowledge the old, resulting in a total nostalgia fest that rehashes characters, events and particularly oneliners from the previous installments. It offers nothing new, and only shows you the limits of the Terminator franchise if there is a mandate in place to incorporate the ingredients of its past successes, which was put in place because the previous installment, Terminator Salvation, offered too much novelty for many. I appreciated that movie for it. There's no innovation or novelty in Genisys, whereas in Trek's case by comparison, there was a little too much for my taste, so much so that it just didn't feel like Trek anymore. This movie undeniably feels like a Terminator movie, but still leaves a lot to be desired.

Maybe it's a sign that starting new time lines to retcon existing franchises just is a bad idea in general. How about creating new franchises instead, rather than desperately clinging to nostalgia? That's probably too revolutionary an idea for Hollywood's taste...

Today's Double News: return of the bad 'bad guys'

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151096/ben_kingsley_werkt_aan_geheim_project_voor_marvel

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151098/stephen_lang_terug_voor_avatar_sequels

Two bits of news that don't really rock my boat. I didn't like Ben Kingsley's character (at the ultimate reveal of the exact situation in the movie at least) in Iron Man 3 and I wasn't fond of any characters from Avatar in general. Both movies were poorly written and delivered only mild entertainment. That said, I am intrigued by Sir Ben's further involvement in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. As is usual, he's not allowed to give anything away, so as to keep the fanbase guessing ad nauseam. For all we know he's playing the same prank on us the writers of Iron Man 3 did in terms of writing his character. I doubt Kingsley is referring to Captain America: The Winter Soldier or Guardians of the Galaxy. The former is deep in post-production by now, while the latter is well underway in terms of shooting so it seems a little late to add more actors. The Avengers: Age of Ultron or Ant-Man seem more logical choices, since they're still only prepping and haven't been fully cast yet. What Kingsley could play in either of them is anyone's guess at this point. Then of course there's the option of Sir Ben popping up in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. on telly: many would call it unlikely such a grand actor of the big screen would lend himself for something like that, but it's a fact by now quality television series are getting ever more prestigious for actors and similarly big names have done TV before. Heck, if Samuel L. Jackson can appear in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (he did!), Kingsley's eventual guest star occurrence isn't that improbable. Last but not least, there's the possibility Kingsley is referring to a project as yet unknown to the general audience. Let us not forget, Marvel is already preparing Phase 3, as well as four (!) more TV shows. Sir Ben could appear in any one of them. It simply remains to be seen which project, and what he's playing. After the huge letdown that was his "Mandarin" in IM3, I sincerely hope he's playing a new character instead. He's certainly capable enough to look different enough from a character we already know. Whatever we can gather from his few tiny crumbs of information, the truth is exactly as he said: we'll have to wait and see.

As for Lang: really? His character is dead, but Cameron nevertheless wants him for three more Avatar sequels? Lang is a good actor, but his character in Avatar, the greedy and predictably nefarious Colonel Quaritch, was quite two-dimensional and I was glad to see him disposed of at the end of the film. Apparently, Avatar being science fiction, as Cameron confirmed (as if we didn't realize that!), gives the director free range of resurrecting any old character instead of getting creative and come up with more interesting new villains. I'm sad to hear it. It doesn't bode well for the next few Avatar movies in terms of a well developed story, what is what I (and many others) had hoped for this time around. Sure, it all looked great, but if it isn't put to inspired use, what's the point? Cameron was basically regurgitating Dances with Wolves and Pocahontas. It seems that by reintroducing Quaritch he's now regurgitating Avatar itself. After all, by the time Avatar 2 finally sees a release, we're sure to have forgotten Avatar's so-called 'plot' entirely.

Aliens

Rating *****/*****, or 10/10

Superb sequel utilizes a completely different style from its dark and brooding predecessor, exchanging the slow suspense for high action, to great results. Could very well be considered superior to Alien. After spending 57 years drifting through space in hypersleep, Ripley (Sigourney Weaver again) returns to Earth, where she soon finds herself asked to join a team of overly bold and raunchy space marines to LV-426 to check out whether there's any connection between her wild stories of monsters and the loss of contact with a group of colonists on that planet. Naturally, the settlement is overrun by the xenomorphs who soon turn the marines into a bunch of wimps, at which point Ripley has to take charge to get the team out alive, along with the lone survivor of the colony, a little girl nicknamed Newt, for which Ripley soon develops maternal feelings. A carefully crafted exciting sequence of action scenes culminates in the film's brilliant climax, Ripley battling a huge Queen Alien (another triumph of special creature effects work) with a power loader suit. Also featured is a surprisingly trustworthy android called Bishop (the impeccable Lance Henriksen), Bill Paxton as an hilariously loud mouth marine who wets his pants at the first sign of any real trouble and Jenette Goldstein as a very manly latina private. James Cameron, fresh off The Terminator, established himself as one of Hollywood's leading specialists in the field of sci-fi action blockbusters with this movie, which still remains the best in his oeuvre.

Starring: Sigourney Weaver, Michael Biehn, Lance Henriksen

Directed by James Cameron

USA: 20^th Century Fox, 1986

The Abyss

Rating: ****/*****, or 8/10

Spooky, action-packed deep sea science fiction picture: a nuclear sub goes missing near an ocean trench and a party of underwater experts is dispatched to solve the mystery of its demise. It turns out there's an extra-terrestrial intelligence down below with unknown purposes. First theatrical motion picture to use genuine Computer Generated Imagery, courtesy of FX pioneer James Cameron (Aliens, Titanic, Avatar). 

Starring: Ed Harris, Mary Elizaberth Mastrantonio and Michael Biehn. 

Directed by James Cameron

USA: 20th Century Fox, 1989