Today's bunch of minireviews: young people, old people and sex

Spring Breakers: ****/*****, or 7/10

Harmony Korine's provocative take on the death of the American Dream – or the exact opposite, its ultimate realization – follows a quartet of young college girls (including Harmony's wife Rachel) who will stop at nothing to celebrate Spring Break in Florida just to engage in endless mindless, decadent sex and drug use. Being penniless proves a bit of an obstacle at first, but their solution is as shocking as it is effective: just rob a restaurant, get in a car and don't look back. It's only the beginning of a nightmarish thrill ride into the mind of America's hedonistic youngsters who, despite beind educated and full of opportunity, prefer to opt for the easy way out in order to live a careless/carefree life, even if only for a short while. Just when they're living their fantasy to the fullest, the police intervene and haul their asses to jail for abuse of illicit substances. Fortunately, a rapper/gangster/parasite called Alien (James Franco being quite the chameleon, to say the least!) bails them out and introduces them to his world of everything. Thanks to his wild and violent life style leeching off the American way of life, he has loads of guns, loads of dope and loads of sex to offer, which the girls accept all too eagerly. Except for the devout Christian of course, who decides to return home: quite the hypocrit, considering her religious values ought to have kept her from coming along for this ride in the first place, knowing full well what she got herself into but opting to look the other way for her own pleasure. The other girls have the time of their life for a while, until the situation turns dark when a rival mobster threatens Alien's turf. Soon however, it appears Alien got more than he bargained for when the remaining teens prove quite resilient in helping him deal with the aggressor in a surprisingly violent manner. 

Casting several former Disney Channel stars like Selena Gomez (Wizards of Waverly Place) and Vanessa Hudgens (High School Musical) was a brave and perfect choice, both underscoring the point Korine tries to make and allowing these girls to break completely with their 'sweet & innocent' stigma. People who expect lots of booze and boobs in an overly simplistic story get exactly what they expected, just handed in a different way than they would probably have liked, since Spring Breakers is not a simple exploitation flick, but a mesmerizing descent into madness rife with wildly divergent visual gimmicks and hallucinatory effects, making the audience less of a viewer and more of a participant. Korine's rebellious denial to uphold to cinematic conventions made distributors rather uneasy, since the expectations of mainstream teen drama mixed with evocative artsy display caused them, in their limited money driven line of thinking, to be unable to successfully classify this film. As a result, Spring Breakers witnessed a release in both multiplexes and arthouse theaters, but failed to fully win over both audiences due to its rough, offbeat style and confronting thematic contents. Mission accomplished, Korine!

Thérèse Desqueyroux: **/*****, or 5/10

Dull French period drama, set in the 1920s, about the daughter of a wealthy land owner who is forced to marry an older man just so her family can improve its social status by getting its hands on his lands as well and thus becoming a major player in the pinery business. Thérèse (played by Audrey Tautou) soon finds that her loveless marriage revolves all around her child her husband sired with her, while she herself matters little anymore. She's as much a commodity as the pine trees her family trades in, and she receives as little affection. Yet she is expected to help convince a female relative, who's deeply in love with a boy of low status, to also marry for money. The continuing lack of care and interest in what she wants soon drive Thérèse to take outrageous, increasingly dark measures to get noticed again, including setting fires in the plantation and poisoning her husband. When her disturbing deeds come to light, her family threatens to take her child from her and gives her house arrest to avoid the scandal from becoming public knowledge. Though Tautou gives a convincing performance of a cold and calculating woman who sees her freedom and personal space deteriorate more and more, it's hard to feel much for her, since she and those around here are all despicable people who base their lives on increasing the family fortune and their social status instead of aiming to live a happy family life. Interesting parallels can be drawn between this French film and the TV-show Game of Thrones, which have much in common from a plot perspective. However, the latter does succeed much more in squeezing compelling drama out of nasty people out to strengthen their family and riches by marriage and procreation. Thérèse Desqueyroux has to make do with annoying people dancing around each other for two hours. At least the period setting of provincial France in the Twenties offers some diversion from the otherwise tedious story progression of this film.

Song for Marion: ***/*****, or 6/10

Cheerful feel-good movie that is bound to make anyone smile. Grumpy old Arthur (Terence Stamp) is married to the ever optimistic Marion (Vanessa Redgrave), whose favorite passtime is singing in a local choir with other old folks under the tutelage of the beautiful younger woman Elizabeth (Gemma Arterton, a joy to behold as always). Arthur thinks little of her hobby, thinking she'll make a fool of herself, but when she passes away from cancer he feels he must honour her passion and join up with the choir which has entered a singing contest. Arthur does so despite suffering from stage fright and general lack of interest in basically everything, including his estranged son (Who? Christopher Eccleston!) and his granddaughter. The utterly sympathetic and optimistic old performers in Elizabeth's choir, quite a colorful band of singers with their various funny idiosyncrasies, prove to be the most charming and uplifting element of the film (especially when they cheekily start singing about sex), but the emotional core revolves around Arthur and Marion. Though it is rather puzzling to find a spirited woman like her marrying a cynical old fart like him, their devotion towards one another is pulled off convincingly enough to make you believe Arthur would bother with putting up with her hobby, going so far as to save the day in the choir competition where Elizabeth's merry band of singing enthusiasts is as out of place between all the professional top choirs as Arthur is in Marion's choir itself. Of course father and son also become closer to one another due to all the merriment the songs deliver. This movie is utterly devoid of narrative surprises but proves just as pleasing all the same for all ages. An overly simplistic and predictable story does not stand in the way of strong, touching performances throughout and an overall 'don't worry be happy' attitude that nobody can resist. The song may be for Marion, but the movie is for everybody who expects nothing but 90 minutes of cheerful delight.

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...