Today's Review: Baby Driver

Hoewel zijn vorige Amerikaanse avontuur niet afliep zoals de Brit Edgar Wright zich had voorgesteld, weerhield dat hem er niet van het nogmaals te proberen in Hollywood. De regie over Ant-Man mocht hij verloren hebben, die over zijn eigen carrière allerminst. Waar Marvel hem teveel in haar eigen hokje probeerde op te sluiten, gaf studio Sony hem de vrije hand. Voor Baby Driver sloot hij geen compromissen qua stijlvoering, waardoor de film voor liefhebbers van zijn werk vertrouwd, maar naar Amerikaanse maatstaven juist onorthodox aanvoelt. Deze tegendraadse 'heist movie' is een heerlijke mix van spetterende muziek, kleurrijke personages en wervelende actie, waarin we snel de handtekening van Wright herkennen, maar die niet als een herhalingsoefening voelt.

De chauffeur uit de titel luistert inderdaad naar de schuilnaam Baby en vormt de spil in een gewiekste bende overvallers. Dankzij diens briljante stuurmanskunsten komen de criminelen telkens weg met hun buit. Toch houdt Baby zich op de achtergrond, want hij moet niets hebben van het geweld waarvan zijn collegae zich bedienen. Hij probeert slechts zijn schuld aan bendeleider Doc af te betalen. Bovendien geldt hij als excentriekeling tussen de rovers, allen toch al niet echt normaal. Baby is een apart joch, met zijn koptelefoon steevast op, elke move die hij maakt zorgvuldig georkestreerd door de song die hij op dat moment afspeelt. Noem het auditief autisme, voortvloeiend uit een pijnlijk verleden. De bende tolereert zijn karaktertrekjes, maar staat minder verdraagzaam tegenover zijn zelfverklaarde vertrek uit de criminaliteit als zijn schuld afbetaald is. Vervolgens moet Baby racen als nooit tevoren om aan de misdaad te ontsnappen en met zijn kersverse vriendin, serveerster Debora, een nieuw leven te beginnen.

Een film als Baby Driver staat of valt met het optreden van haar hoofdpersoon en gelukkig is Wrights nieuwste verzekerd van het benodigde jonge talent. Ansel Elgort kruipt met verve in de huid van de titelpersoon, aanvankelijk een ogenschijnlijk arrogante knul die met zijn eigenaardige gevoel voor ritme een beetje op de zenuwen werkt. Al snel verdwijnen zulke twijfels als regen op heet asfalt als we hem beter leren kennen. Het is simpelweg een sympathieke jongen in een slechte situatie, met het nodige trauma achter de rug om te verklaren hoe hij in dit misdadige milieu is beland. Het helpt ook dat Elgort uitstekende chemie kent met Debora's wonderschone Lily James. Of eigenlijk met iedereen, want Wright strikte opnieuw een wereldcast. Met Kevin Spacey als de vileine maar charmante Doc, Jamie Foxx als de sociopathische Bats en Jon Hamm als de arrogante Buddy is het makkelijk om ook voor de schurken te pleiten, zelfs als de kogels om de oren fluiten. Geen Simon Pegg of Nick Frost dit keer, maar zo'n fijn ensemble maakt dat gemis zelfs voor de verstokte Wright fans helemaal goed.

Diezelfde liefhebbers kunnen zich verheugen over het feit dat Wrights belangrijkste vaste personage wel ruimschoots aanwezig is in Baby Driver: de montage. Wright heeft zich altijd een waar virtuoos getoond waar het 't knippen en plakken van shots betreft, maar voor deze film neemt hij dat stempel heel letterlijk. Dit keer laat hij zich leiden door een bonte tracklist aan songs, bekend en minder bekend, waarop hij hele scènes heeft gebaseerd. Neem bijvoorbeeld het haast eindeloze shot waarmee de film opent, weergaloos gevormd door het op Baby's headset spelende Bellbottoms. Dat is nog maar het begin van een film die grotendeels haar soundtrack volgt, maar onder Wrights montage-meesterschap tot een grandioos geheel van muziek en enerverende auto-actie gesmeed wordt. De muzikaal begaafde Elgort danst vol overgave mee als door gehoorbeschadiging geplaagde crimi-coureur die zich evenzeer laat leiden door zijn muziek als de film die zijn naam draagt. Wright schiep met Baby Driver een enorme uitdaging voor zichzelf en zijn cast, maar het is te merken dat iedereen het ritme volledig aanvoelde.

Wright had voor zichzelf blijkbaar iets goed te maken na door Marvel bijna ingekapseld te zijn in andermans manier van werken. Wat dat betreft is Baby een puike metafoor voor Wright zelf. Wright swingt achter de camera zoals Baby achter het stuur. Toch voelt Baby Driver op sommige fronten als een breuk met 's mans eerdere werk. Het is geen volbloed-komedie, zoals praktisch al zijn vorige films. Hoewel er genoeg te lachen valt, zorgen de trubbels rond de getroebleerde hoofdpersoon toch voor zwaardere thematiek. Ook is de film bruter dan we van Wright gewend zijn: was de regisseur nooit vies van een beetje bloed, de kogelregens die deze film afsluiten zijn van een minder zorgeloos kaliber en geven de film toch een zeker 'Amerikaans karakter'. Toch gaat het te ver om te zeggen dat de koppige Brit zich heeft geconformeerd naar Amerika, want Baby Driver is onmiskenbaar een product van zijn eigen creatieve geest, een hoogst originele film zoals die in Hollywood te weinig gemaakt worden.

Today's Review: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

Hollywood wordt verweten te teren op de nostalgische onderbuik van haar publiek. Populaire franchises worden teruggebracht naar hun basis met zoveel mogelijk knipogen naar vroeger. Uiteraard mag Star Wars, de moeder aller fanfranchises, niet aan het herkauwlijstje ontbreken, terwijl de reeks tegelijkertijd klaargestoomd wordt voor de toekomstige generatie. Disney lost die tegenstrijdigheid op door zich in de eigenlijke 'Episodes', ondanks de aanwezigheid van oudgedienden, vooral te richten op wat komen gaat, terwijl in de 'Anthology' serie juist de oudere fan zijn hart kan ophalen bij nieuwe verhalen over oude situaties. Rogue One geeft geslaagd de aftrap met één grote nostalgietrip naar het allereerste uur van de ruimtesage, het getouwtrek om die wapenplannen.
 
De afloop is bekend, maar dat mag de pret niet drukken. Hoe het de Death Star uiteindelijk verging is niet van belang, wel hoe het onding tot stand kwam en hoeveel moeite de Rebellen moesten doen om de bouwplannen te bemachtigen. Spil in dit relaas is de getroebleerde Jyn Erso, die door het verzet wordt geronseld in een speurtocht naar haar vader. Zoals ook voor Luke gold, kampt Jyn met flinke 'daddy issues'. Papa Erso werd destijds met geweld van haar ontrukt door kwade Keizerlijke genius Krennic, die zijn technologisch vernuft benutte voor de verwezenlijking van zijn droom des doods. Geplaagd door zijn geweten probeert de ongelukkige echter de opstandelingen van vitale kennis te voorzien. Reden genoeg voor de norse rebellenkapitein Andor om samen met Jyn de waarheid achter de Death Star te achterhalen. Tegen haar zin in, want ze zit niet te wachten op een hernieuwde kennismaking met zowel het verzet als haar vaderlief.

Gareth Edwards blijkt de juiste keuze voor de regiestoel van Rogue One, nadat hij hiervoor met succes Godzilla heruitvond op een wijze die recht deed aan diens verleden, maar fris genoeg was voor het heden. Hij overgoot het reuzenreptiel met een intrigerend duister sausje en doet nu hetzelfde met Star Wars, want de helden in Rogue One zijn lang zo heldhaftig niet. De kersverse Rebellenalliantie moet haar draai als vrijheidsstrijders nog vinden, vooral de methodes die haar afzetten tegen de onderdrukker die zij bestrijdt. Andor is bijvoorbeeld niet te beroerd om pardoes een paniekerige informant uit de weg te ruimen. Dat zijn eigenlijke missie hem kaarsrecht tegenover zijn beschermeling Jyn plaatst, is al gauw duidelijk en zorgt voor het nodige vuurwerk tussen de onvrijwillige bondgenoten. Op hun eerste trip kruisen zij het pad van een fanatieke rebellenleider wiens werkwijze te grof was voor de Alliantie. De manier waarop zijn gesluierde aanhangers in een drukke woestijnstad achteloos hun tegenstanders te lijf gaan, zal onder Edwards geen toevallige parallel met de brandhaarden in het Midden-Oosten vormen. Het is aan Jyn om de rebellie op diens eerste grote missie om te vormen tot een coherent geheel van goeieriken, zoals we die kennen uit de originele trilogie.

Het siert Edwards dat Rogue One voorzien is van volwassen morele diepgang en bovengemiddelde karakteruitdieping in wat feitelijk een onvervalste oorlogsfilm is, maar nooit verliest hij de pure lol uit het oog die Star Wars zo kenmerkt. Dankzij het bonte samenraapsel aan personages - waaronder een Keizerlijke overloper, een blinde Force-adept, een lekker cynische droid - en hun overtuigende onderlinge chemie, vormt de film een weergaloos avontuur vol exotische locaties en humoristische terzijdes. Het plezier dat de cast, van de stoere heldin tot de vilein schmierende schurk, beleeft, spat zichtbaar van het scherm. Kleine misstappen, zoals het gemakzuchtig snel heen en weer schakelen tussen diverse locaties in het begin van de film, zijn daardoor makkelijk te vergeven. En hoewel Jyns aanhoudend pleidooi voor de kracht van hoop wat geforceerd overkomt, stoort het nergens. Het hinten naar 'nieuwe hoop' is immers slechts één van vele verwijzingen naar de originele trilogie die het nostalgische gevoel van Rogue One zo aanstekelijk maken.

Want hoewel voor iedereen onderhoudend, is Rogue One een feest van herkenning voor de fans. Het respect dat Edwards en zijn kompanen voor vooral Episode IV koesteren, is in elk shot voelbaar. Herkenbare sets, muziek, dialoog en cameo's van allerhande oude personages worden een dikke twee uur lang over ons uitgestort, waarbij een gevoel van nodeloze uitpersing der klassieken zich nimmer opdringt. We vergeven zelfs het gemis van de iconische openingstitels. Rogue One is overduidelijk een product van liefde. En natuurlijk een visueel genot. X-Wings en Star Destroyers, maar ook nieuwe voertuigen, vliegen ons om de oren en de Death Star zelf zag er nog nooit zo glorieus uit. Het spektakel was gegarandeerd, maar voelt met de puike cast en dito regie haast meeslepender dan ooit. Bovendien hoeft de film geen frustrerende overkoepelende mysteries voor latere delen op te bouwen, waartoe The Force Awakens was veroordeeld. Rogue One is geen schaamteloze uitmelking van onze nostalgie, maar Edwards' liefdesbrief aan de fans, waartoe hij klaarblijkelijk ook zichzelf rekent.

Today's Review: Skiptrace

Eindelijk weer eens een review op mijn blog. Tekort aan tijd, je kent het wel. Dit keer gewoon rechtstreeks gekopieerd van de bron, want om nou elke keer mijn mening nog eens dunnetjes over te doen in het Engels vergt te veel extra inspanning. En alleen een link staat ook zo knullig.

Voor het eerst in lange tijd zijn Jackie Chans behendigheidskunsten weer te bewonderen in de Nederlandse bioscoop. Uiteraard was de Chinese legende in de tussentijd op eigen bodem in een hoop soortgelijke actiefilms te zien, maar de bioscoopreleases bleven beperkt tot de Aziatische en Amerikaanse markt. Skiptrace betekent bij ons dus een comeback voor de onderhand tweeënzestigjarige actiester, maar dat zal Chan zelf niet als zodanig ervaren. Voor hem is er in de tussentijd weinig veranderd. Ook zijn nieuwste film geeft aan dat de zaken zo veel mogelijk hetzelfde gebleven zijn. De fans weten wat dat inhoudt: doldwaze martial-artsactie in een flinterdun plot dat er vooral toe dient Chans malle fratsen met veel knipogende humor te etaleren. Dat is het publiek overal ter wereld van hem gewend, dus waarom die formule aanpassen? Skiptrace geeft echter aan dat Chan toch eens verandering moet opzoeken, want de beperkingen van die formule dringen zich op in dit actievehikel dat niet bepaald een hoogvlieger blijkt in 's mans oeuvre.

Skiptrace is een 'buddy movie' van het zuiverste soort, het type waaruit het merendeel van Chans filmografie bestaat. Chan speelt Bennie, een oude rot in het politievak, die zich al jarenlang stukbijt op een zaak rond een schimmige Chinese drugsbaron, maar daarin weinig steun krijgt van zijn superieuren. Als hij echter het pad kruist van de charmante Amerikaanse oplichter Connor komt de zaak in een stroomversnelling. De dief heeft te veel gezien en is tot doelwit verworden van de misdaadbende die Bennie op het spoor was. Als diezelfde criminelen vervolgens Bennies peetdochter ontvoeren om hem te dwingen Connor in te rekenen, is dat het begin van een avontuurlijke trektocht over het Aziatische continent, waarbij ook de Russische maffia zich laat gelden. Het soms wat verwarrende plot is daarbij uiteraard van minder belang, ondergeschikt aan de bonte aaneenschakeling van kleurrijke figuren en spectaculaire actiescènes op exotische locaties. Althans, zo hoopten de producenten.

Onder die makers bevindt zich ook regisseur Renny Harlin, coryfee van een lange reeks hersenloze actiefilms. De Finse cineast verschilt qua stijl niet veel van Chan, want ook hij serveert het liefst vette actie met even overdadige grapdichtheid. Chan en Harlin lijken voor elkaar gemaakt, een conclusie die het duo aan het begin van het millennium al trok toen ze de samenwerking aangingen voor Nosebleed. Die productie liep om diverse redenen, waaronder 9/11, helaas voortijdig stuk, maar met Skiptrace krijgt hun verbond nu een tweede kans. Het resultaat kan echter geen hoogtepunt genoemd worden op het conto van beide heren. Skiptrace is een lollig niemendalletje dat je al vergeten bent voordat je de bioscoop verlaten hebt.

Een 'buddy movie' is slechts zo goed als de chemie tussen de hoofdrolspelers en die laat bij Skiptrace helaas te wensen over. Chan doet het prima als de getormenteerde, eerzame smeris, maar tegenspeler Johnny Knoxville wekt vooral irritatie op met zijn tomeloos voorspelbare liegen en bedriegen maar zijn oh zo kleine hartje. Ook de overige rollen zijn goeddeels keurig binnen de lijntjes ingekleurd en spreken weinig tot de verbeelding. Van de jonkvrouw in nood tot de fletse Chinese gangsters. Hun Russische tegenhangers krijgen de lachers nog het meest op hun hand, maar zijn ook niet bepaald vernieuwend. Zowel voor Chan als voor Harlin is het feitelijk niets nieuws onder de zon, maar hoogstens een samenvatting van hun eerdere werk. Gelukkig dragen de locaties nog enigszins bij aan dat beoogde exotische gevoel, van de weidse Mongoolse steppen tot de duizelingwekkende Chinese bergrivieren. De fans van Chan zal het echter allemaal om het even zijn, want voor hen luidt de hamvraag hoe hun held zich staande houdt tussen alle vuistslagen en rondfluitende kogels.

De laatste Hollywoodfilm waarin we Chan zagen was de remake van The Karate Kid, waarin de ster op leeftijd de rol van leermeester aannam. Dit keer is hij terug in een meer vertrouwde rol, maar dat de leeftijd hem parten speelt, valt moeilijk te ontkennen. In Skiptrace levert hij niet bepaald zijn meest wervelende moves af. Hoewel hij nog steeds wild om zich heen slaat en schopt, doet hij dat niet zo energiek als voorheen. Echt indrukwekkende stunts blijven uit. Voor de liefhebbers teleurstellend, maar voor de leek mag het de pret niet drukken, want Chans meer-geluk-dan-wijsheidcapriolen worden nog immer aanstekelijk prettig gestoord gebracht. Ondanks de vele tekortkomingen in Skiptrace blijft Chan toch goed voor een kleine twee uur absurdistische actielol. Met pensioen gaan is er nog niet bij, zoals ook zijn personage dat pertinent weigert. Maar goed ook, want hoewel Skiptrace aangeeft dat er nog enige levensvatbaarheid in Chans werk zit, laat de film evenzeer zien hoe beperkt zijn routine onderhand is. Het zou jammer zijn als Skiptrace diens laatste aria is geweest.

Skiptrace: 5/10

Today's Review: X-Men: Apocalypse

Still behind on all the stuff I wrote, but slowly gaining.

X-Men: Apocalypse - Recensie

'Third one is always the worst' says Jean Grey when leaving the theater after watching Return of the Jedi back in '83. She was right about that one, and conscious or unconscious (I doubt the writer intended for this movie to be the weakest in the second X-trilogy), she's also correct about X-Men: Apocalypse. However, also like Return of the Jedi, Apocalypse still is a whole lot of mutant fun for those who didn't expect the franchise to reach new heights anyway.

Granted, it's not the story that provides the mirth, since it's the stuff of repetition, variations on themes and lack of narrative evolution. Basically, another all-powerful mutant rears his head and threatens to destroy the world for mankind so that its stronger successors can take over. And once again, the X-Men, fighting for peace between man and mutant, must get together to stop this megalomaniacal scheme from becoming reality. This time, it's not Magneto who has hatched the diabolical plan, but rather a 5,000 year old ideological predecessor, an ancient Egyptian once worshiped as a god, with the modern moniker Apocalypse. Magneto, once more masterfully performed by Michael Fassbender, merely provides some muscle to help Oscar Isaac's semi-god with his evil shenanigans. Isaac does a decent job playing an age old villain, but he's no Fassbender and his Apocalypse is nowhere near as intimidating or intriguing as the much more relatable Magneto.

Still, the villain suffices for the cause of bringing together two generations of X-Men, the First Class lot and the new batch of young recruits, including novel takes on classic X-characters Cyclops, Jean Grey and Nightcrawler. Their performances and their chemistry make us hopeful for the future of the franchise, should the studio feel like using them for the next installment Apocalypse seems to be building up to. For although it's meant as a conclusion to a trilogy, the ground work is amply laid for more to come and these young stars succeed in making us curious about what lies ahead. The new additions to the cast are aided by snappy dialogue and light humour, making the shortcomings in the plot not nearly as blatant as they would have been in lesser hands. Nevertheless, it's clear director Bryan Singer, who has made his fourth X-movie with this title, has run out of ideas for the X-universe. Though we appreciate his work on both trilogies, new blood would be equally welcome in the creative room as it proved in the cast.

Today's Review: American Ultra

Time for another review. Long overdue in fact.

American Ultra - recensie

You'd think the shady but historically true Project MK-Ultra would make for a smashing political thriller, with its detestable CIA experiments of mind control via drugs and careful conditioning on the unsuspecting American population. Instead, Hollywood loosely appropriated it for a stoner comedy. And sadly, not the funniest imaginable. American Ultra fires more bullets than jokes.

At least the lead casting is a shot in the right direction. Jesse Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart have worked together before and it shows, as they have the right amount of chemistry to make a likeable couple of losers. From Eisenberg, we've come to expect a certain level of quality, especially when it concerns this type of character. Stewart's performance thus leaves more of an impression, since we still needed some convincing of her talents as a true actress. With her much praised serious role in Camp X-Ray recently behind her, we can safely say 2015 is the year she finally came into her own and left her Twilight stigma behind her. Still, it takes more than two good leads to make for a solid movie. A decent plot and the right balance between action and comedy, for instance. American Ultra doesn't have either.

Where the fun is concerned, the movie starts at least promising, and a few good laughs are to be had in the first act. However, the film increasingly opts for action over comedy, which makes for a rather dull and unfunny finale, where both the jokes and the necessary emotional investment in the main characters is lost in all the gun fights, knife fights, and fist fights. There's simply too much fighting as the movie progresses and most of it is excessively violent, but not in any ironic or tongue-in-cheek manner. It's just a bloody mess, as is the story, which also involves rival CIA agents fighting it out in a manner totally devoid of the intelligence the I in their agency is supposed to stand for. There's also room made for a few stereotype drug dealers and deranged super assassins, but none of it works on the levels the writers probably intended. Director Nima Nourizadeh, fresh off the allegedly culturally notable teen flick Project X, shows a little too clearly he has more affinity with destroying things and blowing stuff up than in making us care about it all.

Fortunately we still have RED to show us how a fun time can be had with CIA assassins being hunted by their own employer. However, a definitive movie about Project MK-Ultra is still very much lacking. If Hollywood does tackle the touchy subject again, I hope they make a more serious movie  out of it. Mind control simply isn't funny, as American Ultra shows.

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 Review: Jurassic World

Told you another review was up soon. I assume you didn't need to guess for which movie?

Jurassic World - Recensie

A life changing experience after an anxious 14 year wait? That's saying a little too much. A worthy successor to the first trilogy? Sure was. Not on par with the original Jurassic Park film of course, but whoever expected that knew they were deceiving themself. It was obvious from the get-go they would never rival the magic of that game changing film that revolutionized digital effects. In fact, there's plenty of those throughout the movie, but they are never as awe inspiring or jaw dropping as they were 22 years ago. To be honest, I would actually have preferred a more extensive use of animatronics, since a lot of people tend to forget JP proved to master their use to great effect specifically in combination with the digital aspect, both of them completing the other in bringing that dinomite magic about rather than fixing it on their own accord. JW opted for a 95 percent digital FX rate and it was a little too clear at times, but not so much it took you out of the movie. It's still a major Hollywood blockbuster with a huge budget after all.

And it sure felt as one of those. In both a positive and a negative way. It didn't leave much room for narrative surprises, and the third act was largely an exercise in predictable storytelling, but it still handled it in such an epic way you could not help but roll with it despite your hesitations. There's a few instances in which the audience cheered and so did I, as if we were eight year old kids again (the increasingly strict Dutch rating system unfortunately won't allow kids of that age to experience the new Jurassic dawn, as JW has sadly been issued a '12' rating, despite not being more frightful than that first movie). Kids who had seen most of this stuff before in different guises though, but youthful exuberance abounded nonetheless. A contemporary blockbuster needs a star, and Chris Pratt is it for this film. Combining Alan Grant's common sense with Ian Malcolm's wit and wisecracking, the human hero of the piece certainly felt more heroic that any previous main human character in a JP movie. I don't mind for once, but I do hope the studio isn't gonna craft the next installments, unavoidable considering box office records are again being stamped on, around Pratt's persona and status, since few will deny the true stars are still the dinosaurs, as they should be.

Those stars sure got a chance to shine, as JW provided the most amount of dinosaur time of any of the movies yet. The number of species portrayed easily rivals that of its predecessors, even giving the occasional formerly neglected species (like Ankylosaurus) their due. The most attention as always is directed at the carnivores, with JW dividing most of their screen time between a trained foursome of vicious but communicable Velociraptors and a genetic hybrid named Indominus Rex. Both the notion of taming Raptors and of creating mix-up dinosaurs is handled by director Colin Trevorrow with enough narrative and real world sense not to distance the legions of JP fanatics, as it easily could have done. Ample time is cleared to discuss the ramifications of both with more depth than is usual for a blockbuster film, before diving deeply into the dino fighting. That said, there's two prehistoric characters that are not featured as strongly as we would have hoped for, one being the iconic T-Rex which is intentionally kept out of most of the loop before making a most welcome resurgence. The other is the heavily advertized aquatic Mosasaurus, which unfortunately is allotted only a few more seconds of screen time than already seen in the promotional material, and thus ending up an underwhelming animal we would liked to have seen a lot more of, but which we are sadly denied.

Executive producer Spielberg made the right choice hiring a fairly inexperienced director like Trevorrow for the Jurassic job. Trevorrow proves not only respective of the material and the franchise legacy, but he's clearly a JP fan himself. He shows it off in many scenes, both in composition of shots, score and sounds, but also in many references big and small to that most beloved movie from 22 years past. Potentially polarizing plot pitfalls are handled with the utmost care to make them plausible and relatable, thus adding his own signature to the thankfully enduring Jurassic Park legacy. Though there's still a few things to hold against the movie, both in terms of plot (one-dimensional human bad guy, vague corporate shenanigans) as in execution (too little animatronics, too much reliance on digital creations), Jurassic World succeeds in taking us back to when dinosaurs ruled the Earth, and sparing no expense in guaranteeing they will continue to do so for another generation at least.

Today's News: thus, 2014 is concluded

The last bits of news for 2014 are in. Expect the flow of news to pick up once 2015 has entered our lives.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158447/nieuwe_trailer_michiel_de_ruyter

Looks like it aspires to be quite the cinematic spectacle. But will it be? I have severe doubts. The theatrically forced acting that has ever plagued the Dutch school of actors sure doesn't lend itself to this sort of film. The dialogue just feels as wooden as the ships the main characters are sailing on. Also, the FX are not on par with their British and American counterparts. They just don't seem real, but have an awkward level of artificiality to them. At the same time they recall a sense of stylized unreality, reminiscent of the paintings of the Dutch Golden Age, but I think that's just a result of the limitations of the budget rather than a conscious choice on the director's part. And speaking of director Roel Reiné, at least his acquantaince with helming action movies on a limited budget (though not with the finer entries of the genre, considering titles as Death Race 2 and 3 and The Scorpion King 3)) seems suited for the big battles taking place in the film. So far the same can't be said for his directing actors, which is not a good thing considering the stellar cast of this epic. At least they got Tywin Lannister Charles Dance in there, who can act his way out of any scrape. Hopefully the Dutch actors will take a note or two from him. I hope there is a national audience for this picture, even though there certainly didn't seem to be for a very similarly themed movie like Kenau, which flopped only last year. Like Michiel de Ruyter, it was released off-season, which makes me question why this expensive historical epic underwent the same fate. January just isn't a good time to release big productions like this one. I want to be enthusiastic about this movie, as I love historical drama and this particular period hasn't been covered as thoroughly as it should have, but so far my scepticism rules supreme.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158450/eerste_teaser_penny_dreadful_seizoen_2

I'm much more excited about this one though. The Brits get better production values and acting on the small screen out of a lower budget (per minute, that is) than the Dutch do in theaters. The first season of Penny Dreadful proved a delightfully eerie and subversive portrayal of the rich Victorian age and a fabulous new conceptualization of famous literary characters. Even though the pairing of the likes of Frankenstein, Dracula and Dorian Gray at first sounded like a poor repetition of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, this series proved a far superior narrative. So far at least, as the story is far from finished yet and they can still muck it up in many ways. Whether that will be the case is not something you can determine from this teaser, which shows far too little of the upcoming plot progression (dammit!). In fact, it hardly shows anything we didn't know already. Of course, that's the usual stuff of teasers, creating awareness with showing as little footage as possible, to make people hungry for the trailer, which in itself makes them want to watch the series itself. Considering I was already aching for more when the credits of Season 1's final episode rolled, the teaser's job was already done.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158479/nieuwe_trailer_everly_

This trailer, however, fails to get me excited for the final product. It feels like I have seen the whole film already. Of course, this fault is a result of the limitations of the movie's plot, as it doesn't seem to have much of that at all. Mobster boss' ex gets locked in her apartment and must fight off numerous assassins to stay alive, that's basically all she wrote. Unless there's some major plot twists at play that are not revealed in this trailer, this is one of those films you watch only for the action. It takes a pretty accomplished action director to get the most out of a small set like this though, and if the trailer is any indication, Everly's director may not be up to the task. I don't see any particularly innovative cinematography or editing here, just bland shots of people taking bullets. Nor are the characters colourful enough to keep the attention fixed. This film feels like a far cry from a similar vehicle like The Raid, though clearly inspired by that recent superior action film. Hopefully the trailer proves a misdirect and the final film has more to offer than suggested here, otherwise Everly might soon end up in the same bargain bin as Death Race 3 or The Scorpion King 3.

Today's Review: The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1

It's been (quite!) a while, but I finally got around to visit another press screening for MS and post the result here:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158000/the_hunger_games_mockingjay_-_part_1_-_recensie

This film series doesn't seem to get any worse, despite all the young adult franchise trademarks trying to put a dent in its reputation. Splitting a book into two movies was obviously a financial move on the studio's part, and undoubtedly will pay off big time. However, that doesn't hinder the movie from being a solid piece of work, despite not being a whole story. It's best compared to the first installment of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, which underwent a similar theatrical treatment and enjoys equally similar themes in its story of teenagers on the run for a ruthless government. Plus, it's on the same level of quality. Character development is at an all-time high in Mockingjay - Part 1, thanks to a plot that doesn't leave much room, or need, for big bombastic action scenes or endless droning about which bland boy Katniss likes to kiss most, though there's still a few of those interspersed here and there. Politics and intrigue are thriving, as Katniss finds herself in the company of new allies who are not all that different from the Capitol regime she just escaped, in their unrelenting zealousness to bring the dictatorship down. Thanks to the talented cast - mainly, Jennifer Lawrence and all the experienced veterans featured in way too small parts: the rest of the younger cast leaves less of an impression, as before - and a director who once again shows he knows what he's doing, the movie forms a compelling continuation of Catching Fire as well as a great set-up for the finale. It comes complete with a cliffhanger that makes you want to check out the ending at the earliest opportunity. Which unfortunately you won't get for another year's time. Job well done, then.

And boy, did I have fun this last week mocking people for having seen this much anticipated film a week earlier than everybody else. One of the most appealing aspects of press screenings but not one of the most laudable character traits of those who visit them, I'll freely admit.

Today's Triple News: horrible witch terminators

More news posted at MovieScene this here few days:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157120/eerste_foto_vin_diesel_in_the_last_witch_hunter

As has been proven before on several occasions, Vin Diesel likes using social media to reach out to his fanbase (and movie news hungry editors like myself) about his current projects. It's good to see a Hollywood star keeping in touch with his followers himself rather than letting the Hollywood propaganda machine do that for him, though of course, we should not tell ourselves that anything Diesel posts isn't done with permission by the studios' promotional think tanks. This is the first we've seen of The Last Witch Hunter (not surprising, as it's still only half way through production). Doesn't show us much, but assures the Diesel fanatics their hero will play yet another gruff, masculine man of action, this time (partially) in a medieval setting. Whether the movie will be any good is hard to tell from just this single teaser image. The story doesn't seem all that inspired, combining ingredients from recent flicks like The Sorcerer's Apprentice (fantasy warfare in present day New York City) and Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters (witch hunters teaming up with good female witches to stop evil covens: plus the title of the film) without adding much novelty and seemingly swapping the element of humour for a more serious Gothic tone. The supporting cast seems decent enough, with the likes of Elijah Wood, Michael Caine and Rose Leslie. Especially the latter has her work cut out for her, as this is her first major Hollywood role. She had time for it apparently, now that her character didn't survive the last season of Game of Thrones.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157121/nieuwe_trailer_en_poster_horrible_bosses_2

I'm still not convinced of the need for a sequel to Horrible Bosses by watching this trailer. There isn't any really, other than the fact the predecessor made ample money to tell the studio a sequel might do the same. And so we basically get more of the same story, just with situations added and rearranged to some extent to let the audience know they're not looking at exactly the same picture. Again we have the trio of incompetent protagonists screwed over by their employer and plotting a revenge. This time it involves kidnapping rather than murder. Enter Chris Pine as the victim. And re-enter Jennifer Aniston and Kevin Spacey as two of the titular bosses from the original who are somehow woven into the new plot, even though their story lines seemed to have been over and done with at the climax of the first film. How ingenious the ways of Hollywood story telling, just to ensure enough characters return to repeat jokes and make the movie seem repetitive. At least we'll have one new boss, played by Christoph Waltz. There's something new for you, though not enough to make you feel the need to go to theaters to see this film. Seems more like the stuff of illegally downloading on a rainy Sunday afternoon.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157130/terminator_sequels_aangekondigd

Another example of a studio getting way ahead of itself by planning multiple sequels based on the hopes the first film, which is what this will be somewhat as it's clear by now we're dealing with a rebooted franchise, will do well with audiences. Reboot or not, it still stars Arnold Schwarzenegger, even though the guy seems way too old to do the stuff he used to do on the first trilogy by now. Rumour has it he will not be a killer cyborg this time though. But as always, it would make much more sense to work off guaranteed success rather than spending millions of dollars pre-producing two sequels that may get scrapped if the box office results of their predecessor disappoint. And isn't this exactly what happened on the last Terminator film, Salvation? That movie, too, was meant to take the franchise into new directions 9without the Austrian Oak, mostly) and spawn a new trilogy, but disappointing financial grossing put a stop to such plans beyond this single project. Down the drain went that second trilogy, leaving a poor standalone film in its wake. It wasn't a total financial failure, but scored last in the list of released Terminator films thus far. The studio (that is, a different one, as the previous owner went bankrupt) appears to feel adamant that by bringing Schwarzenegger back in a prominent role, whatever it may be, that critical element that guaranteed box office success (which it did, in the Eighties) will do so again. It didn't work on The Expendables 3 though, so they ought not get their hopes up too much. But apparently, they do. Hollywood will never learn it seems.

Today's Triple News: dark equalizer games

It took a while for worthy news to appear online, but after a week of not posting any, I got back in shape:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157083/nieuwe_trailer_monsters_dark_continent_

Wow, the scope of this franchise certainly got a lot bigger. In fact, we can finally speak of a franchise now. Not that these are positive developments per se. It's happened countless times before that a cheaply produced movie that connected with an audience got one or more unwanted sequels that failed to do so again. Even though Monsters made its money back (it was hard not to, considering its shoestring budget) and its director, Gareth Edwards, has since gone on to dabble in big budget, heavy FX films like Godzilla and now Star Wars, I doubt many people will be familiar with the original movie when the sequel hits theaters. In fact, I kinda suspect this will be released straight to VOD and the home video market in the Netherlands. It hasn't got much going for it to warrant a theatrical release here. There's no big names in the cast, it's not released by a major studio and the Monsters franchise won't ring a bell to so many people. Apart from the home cinema market, this is really the stuff of film festivals and such (bet we'll be seeing this on Imagine 2015!). Considering Monsters: Dark Continent, too, is done on not that large a budget (though still considerably more than the peanuts its predecessor cost), that doesn't necessarily mean the movie is doomed in tersm of boxoffice. Wouldn't surprise me if this too made enough dough to excuse a third installment. Again without Edwards, who will be slaving away on Godzilla 2 in Hollywood by that time.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157093/nieuwe_trailer_en_poster_the_equalizer

Though there's some good people in the cast, this movie doesn't excite me in the least. Man with a shady past and a talent of getting things done the violent way turns vigilante and fights the mob on his own. Nothing new here. Except maybe it's the Russian mob ingredient, as muscle flexing Russians are kind of a thing in the media right now. Denzel Washington seems very capable in the lead role. Also not a surprise, as this character bears similarities to his persona in Training Day, which, under the guidance of the same director, won him an Oscar over a decade ago. Seems like actor and director figured they might find similar success again doing a similar thing. At least Marton Csokas looks positively creepy as the Russian mob boss (which I know perfectly well he's capable of, as he's an underestimated character actor in my mind) and Chloë Grace Moretz sheds her Hit Girl image a bit by playing the victim for once. She makes a cute underage prostitute, enough for any middle-aged man to get sentimental over when she's taking punches in public. Of course, this movie will do well enough because people keep falling for runaway vigilantes effectively fighting a one-man war against crime. That's what we all wished we could do when it came down to it, eh? I bet Washington will succeed in his noble quest in The Equalizer, as there don't seem to be many surprises here otherwise. He'll probably die in the process though, or something like that. Unless they want to keep an opening for a second film. Remind me again, why did this typical action flick take precedence in IMAX over the visually much more intriguing The Maze Runner?

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157114/eerste_poster_katniss_voor_hunger_games_mockingjay

It took a while, but there's finally a Mockingjay teaser poster for Katniss Everdeen too. Virtually the entire supporting cast had preceded her until now, either in Capitol prisoner gard or full-on revolutionary soldier gear. Now that the main character has been added to the teaser campaign, it's high time the visually more enticing one-sheets were rolled out. If Catching Fire's poster campaign is any indication, it seems like Mockingjay will easily outdo it. Recurring theme of course being the Mockingjay itself, which already made its presence known on virtually all of the earlier ad artwork. It's done more subtly on this latest teaser poster though, but the message is pretty clear as it leaves little to the imagination that once again the nature of Katniss as a symbol for rebellion against tyranny (whether she likes it or not) is emphasized. And Jannifer Lawrence's backside looks good too, as always.

Today's News: lots o' trailers mostly

The latest crop of news of the past few days consists of mostly trailer material:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156970/nieuwe_trailer_serie_gotham

Seems somebody was inspired by Nolan's seminal Dark Knight trilogy. The whole look of this show, based on the trailers so far, screams Nolan in its display of realistic psychopaths and criminals and dark steel and glass canyons. No trace of the more outlandish, fantastic elements of Batman lore. Considering it's an origin show that can still come of course. You've got to show the everyday people behind these heroes and demons before going overboard with any otherwordly shenanigans they might offer. So for the time being, the villains to be set up will dabble in the more commonplace criminal enterprises instead of revealing their odd personality quirks out loud. I doubt we'll be seeing Poison Ivy controlling plant life with pheromones anytime soon, which is probably for the better. It seems that at the heart of the story remains young Bruce Wayne's loss of his parents and honest cop Inspector Gordon's subsequent quest to apprehend their killer, which forms a personal bond between the two of them based around their need for justice. That's as Batman as they come without introducing the alter ego of the Caped Crusader. It's also a basic element of the Batman make-up that the Dark Knight movies kinda raced through, which does make the show stand out more on its own. Question is, will Gordon catch the murderer, or will he fail at that, which makes the urgency for young Bruce feel all the more pressing? And how do all these token Batman villains, like Catwoman, Penguin and Riddler fit into the grand scheme of things? Despite the copycat style, still a lot to look forward to.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156979/eerste_trailer_outcast

Another medieval Sword & Sorcery flick starring Nicolas Cage as a wethered ex-crusader? Been there, done that, didn't work out so great before. It seems Outcast's plot just trades in the creepy witches and demons from Season of the Witch for angry Chinese overlords and royal family squabbles. And instead of Ron 'Hellboy' Perlman for a sidekick, we get Hayden 'whiny Anakin' Christensen. Also not much of an improvement. Cage's fondness of silly wigs remains, so at least there's some consistency to his career. The entire thing seems like a B-movie with a minute plot based around a string of action scenes, which is to be expected from a movie directed by a first-time director who usually deals with coordinating stunts only; though he has an impressive resumé in that department, no doubt there. Chances are that means the action scenes will be executed rather adequately, which seems like the least we should hope for in this film's case.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156980/eerste_teaser_woman_in_black_2_

The popular trend of giving succesful horror films a sequel of sorts that doesn't feature any of the characters from the previous installment continues, whether we like it or not. The Woman in Black was a very effective chiller, but its ending seemed fairly definitive, even though it was established that exorcising the vengeful spirit from the title didn't work. That's enough for any studio hungry to cash in on decent box office results (can't imagine they were stellar or anything), so the murderous ghost will soon be at it again. Hammer Studios has a history of fondly remembered horror movies and their many follow-ups, and in a way it's reassuring to know the recently revamped horror specialist studio isn't afraid to use its tactics of old. Do we want a second Woman in Black? Not particularly, but I'm all for period movies with Gothic looks. Hammer has always had a knack for those and the 21st Century seems no different for them in that regard. The premise isn't so bad either. Snotty kids evacuated from WW II London are relocated to a creepy countryside mansion, and instead of finding a delightful fantasy world in the cupboard they encounter a sinister spirit hellbent on enticing them to suicide there. Basically sounds like an evil Narnia, so what's not to like?

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156982/weaver_niet_in_expendabelles

This is quite a setback for the ExpendaBelles project. If you consider old grunts like Sly Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose primary decade of fame and fortune was the Eighties, as the prime action movie stars of their day, Sigourney Waver was their definite female counterpart, thanks to the first two Alien movies - groundbreaking pictures in that regard - and Ghostbusters. There's not that many well remembered powerful older action gals around that remain as active as she is. Terminator's Linda Hamilton maybe? What has she been up to since then? For any other similar femme fatales, you'd have to look for more recent fare. Weaver would have been the project's greatest asset in iterms of casting, so who could fill her shoes now? Sure, there's plenty of grand dames of the cinema who could, but not that many with a memorable action movie background that would warrant their presence. It just goes to show how rare such roles were for females back then. Which made this female equivalent of The Expendables a risky venture to begin with, as there was always a realistic chance those few girl power women of old would turn down a part. Considering The Expendables 3 is not doing so well at the boxoffice - to say the least! - maybe it's a clear signal there's no particular public demand for this type of film at present. However, it's the female bits (no pun intended) that would have made the difference here, and I was quite intrigued as to how that would play out. It would have been great to see theatres hosting a Ladies' Night that doesn't feature a typical romantic comedy for a change. Guess that's gonna take a while longer to transpire, if it doesn't fall through at all.

Today's Triple News: zombies, terminators and mockingjays

A short summary of recent news by my hand follows. As usual.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156816/pride_and_prejudice_and_zombies_leeft_weer

Glad to see this offbeat project in the land of the living (dead) once more. We could use more weird movies like these. The premise is overly simple: take a classic piece of literature and spice things up with a rather unusual element few people would commonly associate with it, and you got yourself a movie with an intriguing title that begs a visit in theaters to see what exactly must be made of this. Worked well enough with Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, by the same author, which proved a rollercoaster thrill ride of an action flick that actually connected the history with the horror in a fashion that made sense from a narrative viewpoint - i.e., vampires controlling the Southern slave trade to guarantee an unlimited amount of human blood while keeping the human economy rolling - but didn't pretend to be anything but utter fiction. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies seems determined to repeat that notion in very much the same way, perhaps carrying the risk of feeling repetitive. Nor does the title alliterate as delightfully as its own follow-up Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters. However, I say go for it, and so does the creative team behind it, including producer Natalie Portman, who wouldn't give up on it. So far the casting seems to be doing well, especially if they do manage to acquire Jack Huston for a part. With his particular character from Boardwalk Empire on his repertoire, a deteriorated undead look is right up his alley.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156838/schwarzenegger_onthult_titel_nieuwe_terminator

Strange title. I assume the deliberate misspelling refers to a plot point which has yet to be revealed, so I won't bitch and moan about that until I can either confirm or disprove that assumption for myself, even though I am a bit of a grammar nazi. It's not a title funky enough to get me geared up for this film though. The cast does a better job at that. I can't get over the irony that Sarah and John Connor are being played by Emilia and Jason Clarke respectively, while there is no direct relationship between them. I also appreciate the trick of fate that Emilia is now playing Sarah Connor, while her Game of Thrones co-star Lena Headey assumed that mantle before on the unfortunately short lived TV show Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. I'm quite pleased with this assembled cast overall, except for Schwarzenegger. Personally I felt Terminator Salvation was a breath of fresh air because it shied away from using him, making it feel different and less predictable than its predecessors, which started to feel repetitive. Same goes for the aforementioned TV show, which also established convincing Terminators can be played by a diverse range of actors of various shapes, sizes, races, ages and creeds. Schwarzenegger in my mind is the cliché the franchise would do well to avoid. However, considering the series' cancellation and Salvation's lackluster worldwide box office takes, public opinion might be against me in this matter. I guess most people just want to see the Austrian Oak kick ass in their Terminator films, despite the much wider story possibilities available.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156834/nieuwe_posters_the_hunger_games_mockingjay

Mockingjay's marketing strategy seems to follow Catching Fire's closely. The routine of a logo poster first, character posters second, is strictly sustained for this second sequel to The Hunger Games. No doubt a 'Katniss on fire in logo' poster will follow soon. This time, there's more than a trio of character posters though. So far, six different one-sheets have been unearthed in the viral marketing campaign, and more are likely to follow. I guess there's just much more characters, and much more fine actors portraying them, to go around this time. I reckon the studio wants to capitalize on the loss of Philip Seymour Hoffman by attributing a poster of his own to his character: dead actors mean public interest in their final movies after all, like it or not. Simultaneously, if you hooked a great and well respected actress for a part you want to convey that in your promotional campaign too, and so Julianne Moore also gets her own poster, which makes for the debut of her character in the public mind. Interestingly enough, so far all of these character posters seem to revolve around supporting characters, while the movie's main trio - the subject of Catching Fire's comparable character one-sheets - is nowhere in sight as of yet. Considering how much the teenage demographic loves - or how much the studio execs think it loves - the love triangle that is going on between Katniss, Peeta and Gale, I bet their place in the spotlight is simply reserved for later. So these character posters showcasing much of the fine supporting cast are basically a treat to people who love movies and good acting, while the franchise's fanbase with its various Team Gales and Team Peetas will no doubt soon get to drool over posters depicting their young heroes. By which I don't mean to imply Jennifer Lawrence can't act. I meant to imply Josh Hutcherson's and especially Liam Hemsworth's acting capabilities leave a lot to be desired. So now I might need to prepare myself from vicious attacks by Hunger Games fangirls. Thankfully I happen to know few of those read this blog of mine.

Today's News times five

Anyone care for a bit of news? Even though some of it is days old by now...

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156322/teaser_hunger_games_mockingjay_online

I like this sort of teaser. The kind that could easily have been an actual part of the movie proper - maybe it still will be - and expends on the story as a whole, though it can as easily be missed (in defiance of the contemporary tendency of viral marketing campaigns to divulge certain plot information that would have been better served appearing in the film itself where the addressed matter is irritatingly left open (I'm looking at you, X-Men: Days of Future Past!)). Of course it works only for those who have seen the previous two installments of the saga, as those who have not can only wonder what all this is about, nor do I think this theaser convincing enough to tempt them into seeing the first two films pronto. Like all teasers, it serves to forewarn the imminent arrival of the film in question into theaters, while this one also hints up front at the fate of poor Peeta Mellark now that the sinister President Snow has his hands on him. The video shows us what we already knew (if we indeed witnessed the previous films), that the Capitol of Panem will not take kindly to rebellion. There's been enough Games, now it's time for war, as this intimidating speech makes perfectly clear. Unless those insubordinate districts get in line before their insolence rains destruction down upon them. Fat chance.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156323/predator_krijgt_reboot

This news has already seen an update since I posted it, in which Shane Black stated the new Predator movie would not actually be a reboot, but more of a soft sequel. In many ways, it doesn't really matter much, considering the differences between both terms are negligible. As the sequels Predator 2 and Predators, as well as the occurrences of the violent trophy collectors from outer space in the duo of Alien vs Predator spin-offs, already showed, there's only so much you can do story wise with extraterrestrials hunting humans for sport. Since it would have been unlikely this new movie would follow the events of the first movie directly, a reboot seemed the better choice, reintroducing the Predators as they go about their usual gory business, but not hunting the same people twice (though considering Arnold Schwarzenegger's interest in repeating past successes, he might very well be up for anouther round). It's pretty much a given a 'soft sequel' will manage the same type of story. In this day and age of post-postmodern hyperintertextuality, no doubt both ways would have contained their fair share of references to past installments (and probably dragged the Xenomorphs into this mess for a gag or two as well). Whatever you call it, it's the same thing. I do like the irresistable irony that the guy who, as an actor, was the first to get mauled on-screen (though not as explicitly as some of the victims that followed in his footsteps) by one of the murderous creatures in the very first movie from 1987, now is chosen as the director to breath new life into the franchise. I do hope that goes to show his heart is in it and he means to make this a kick-ass horror/action gorefest of a thrill hunt, like the franchise started out to be. So far his track record as a director isn't enough to convince me of his capabilities in that department. I for one thought Iron Man 3 was the most disappointing Marvel Studios' flick thus far. But I'm not ready to hang him high in a jungle three just for daring to tackle Predator for that. Unlike the evil alien did himself back in '87.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156317/eerste_trailer_oorlogsfilm_fury

A rather standard trailer for what appears to be a rather commonplace WW II movie. After all the initial fuss about this movie and Brad Pitt's lead role in it, I was expecting something more than this fairly basic war drama. All the usual ingredients are there: an isolated group of men on a dangerous, seemingly hopeless mission, a battle hardened, gruff commander who cares first and foremost about the troops under his command, a rookie soldier's first time into battle and the emotional distress that comes with this initiation into manhood, tension amongst the camaraderie when faced with increasingly insurmountable odds, etc. I don't see any stand-out elements convincing me of the need to go see this movie. Brad Pitt alone doesn't cut it for me. I already saw him fighting WW II the American way in Inglourious Basterds: another thing entirely of course, which was also what made it so memorable compared to more typical movies like this one. Of course, it's only a trailer, and trailers can be deceptive to say the least (like the trailer for, again, Inglourious Basterds, which made the movie look like something it ended up not being for the better part). There's no particular appealing names in the rest of the cast, while Shia LaBeouf's presence serves more as a deterrent from watching this film for me. Fury doesn't look bad per se, it just doesn't look furiously good.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156374/eerste_trailer_dracula_untold

Another trailer which doesn't look as good as it ought to be is this debut preview of Dracula Untold. A fairly good cast and a somewhat intriguing, though hardly novel, plot notwithstanding, this trailer screams 'B-movie' all over. The cheap Gothic imagery and the poorly executed effects work doesn't bode well for the Prince of Darkness' origin story as told by total newcomer Gary Shore. Coupled with the fact this movie will open, in IMAX nonetheless, in a month plagued by the absence of attractive features (IMAX or otherwise) in theaters, its themes cannot help but remind me of the dismal action adventure flick I, Frankenstein earlier this year. It's regrettable IMAX feels the need to turn to visually unimpressive substandard budget fare that is not suited to the excessively big screen experience it boasts, to ensure there's always some title available in the format, even in slow seasons. The moody posters gave me hopes for this movie, but the trailer takes some away. As said before, trailers are no fair indication of the completed movie viewing experience, especially when heavy FX work is involved. Undoubtedly some of the shots seen in this preview remain to be polished before the film's release, even though it's not produced on the most stellar of budgets. But aside from the visuals, there's still a thing or two to be said against this film based on what this trailer show us. Or is that indeed Charles Dance playing the demonic character? That would sure help pull me in a bit more!

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156372/releasedatum_pacific_rim_2_bekend

If Guillermo del Toro says he wants to make a movie, it gets made. Even though it's a sequel to a not all that profitable predecessor. It happened on Hellboy - thankfully, as Hellboy II was a heck of a lot more awesome than the already not so bad first installment - and it seems history is repeating itself on Pacific Rim. The fact overseas box office turned out far more lucrative than the disappointing domestic sums the movie garnered sure helped the studio suits to greenlight a sequel. I don't mind, as I like Del Toro - a nerd turned director is always something that agrees with me - and I generally like his movies, some more than others obviously, but so far he hasn't made a single one that I consider to be bad. Pacific Rim sure sat well with me as the ultimate hommage to the Japanese Kaiju genre, which outdid nigh all of the entries the Japanese themselves made into that phenomenon. Monsters are my forte, giant or otherwise, so another round between titanic creatures and ditto robots sounds neat enough. Can't say it's particularly inspired, but an hommage doesn't have to be. Though I would welcome something new in a second film, but I'm sure Del Toro can come up with something before the 2017 deadline that suits my desires for giant monster/robot mash-ups.

How to build a bitchin' Transformers standee, Quicksilver style

I thought I'd post something else for a change. Something wickedly cool, naturally (though admittedly, the video quality when posted on my blog leaves a lot to be desired). Me and my partner in promotional crime recently built this giant standee for the upcoming movie Transformers: Age of Extinction. It took us just over three hours to complete this daunting task, though you would not guess so from this little 11-second video. This footage gives a decent impression of the activities I usually engage in on Thursday afternoons on the job. Of course, most standees aren't nearly as big or complex as this particular specimen (which is why they don't get spiffy timelapse videos like this one). I can safely say that building this standee was much more fun than watching the actual movie. Considering its running time of 165 minutes, it would take up an equal amount of time too. I doubt many people would have the privilege of building this one though, as it sets the distributor back a whopping 2,500 euros, so not many have been produced. Which is why there's only two of these in the Netherlands, though you can spot its small sized counterpart (only about half as big) in most other commercial theaters. As the climax of the video flashes by in mere milliseconds, below you'll find a picture of the final product so you can experience its splendid detail and admire the craftsmanship that goes into building these huge standees.

It's gonna be a damn shame to tear this one down when the times comes. But hey, it's too big to take home with me by train...

Today's News: Turtle power!

Here's a recent news flash I posted online just yesterday:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156312/nieuwe_trailer_ninja_turtles

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156308/character_posters_ninja_turtles_online

These are not my turtles. What else can I say? They don't look like the turtles I grew up with, they don't sound like the turtles I grew up with. However, upon rewatching last year, the turtles I grew up with didn't seem that great as I remembered them. It was a painful tete-a-tete with my cherished childhood memories that suddenly left sort of a sour aftertaste. The early Nineties' cartoon was definitely targeted at kids, and just didn't seem so awesome as once it did as an adult. (At least the action figures still do, but that's a different thing.) As for these new Turtles, the phrase 'the more things change, the more they stay the same' immediately comes to (my) mind. If the trailer is any indication, this movies offers everything the cartoon used to offer in a (half) nutshell. All the core ingredients are there, including the hokey humour telling us we should not take any of these ludicrous situations involving mutated animal/human hybrids at all seriously. Like we were going to. The characters are largely identical, except Shredder doesn't seem Japanese (or at least the actor who portrays him, William Fichtner, doesn't). The quartet of reptiles and their rodent sensei, as well as dashing star reporter April O'Neil (Megan Fox, take it or leave it) seem pretty much unchanged in nature.

More so in look, obviously. I can't deny giving the four titular protagonists more divergent styles of clothing instead of having them all dress the same except for their colours (and their signature choice of weaponry) isn't such a bad idea as it gives the characters more distinct personalities. Too bad these characters seem written around such overly archetypal lines. They always were of course, but you never noticed it that much because they all looked so similar, making one team of characters seem more dynamic than it actually was. I'll admit to the kids in the street these Ninja Turtles might very well seem like the next cool thing, as the studio and its partner-in-profits Hasbro get ready to groom them for buying movie tie-ins they don't really need, just like the cartoon made me do back in the days. I won't go in the typical cynical, whiney state of complaining Michael Bay (the producer, if you didn't know yet) raped my childhood, since voluntarily revisiting my childhood heroes, or at least their audiovisual equivalents, caused some emotional trauma in itself by my own hand. I do regret the choice of director in this case though, as Jonathan Liebesman has so far mostly made very bad movies driven by expensive but bland visual effects coupled with an abundance of American patriottism. It's likely this movie will therefore prove to have been just his cup of tea, then.

No evil transdimensional disembodied brain in this one? I guess they're saving that for the sequel.

Today's News: scary posters and explosive trailers galore

Get ready for a nerdy newsflash:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156193/eerste_poster_dracula_untold

Looks atmospheric enough, particularly the international one (see above). That doesn't guarantee quality though, as plenty of B-movies know how to convey a Gothic mood without ensuring narrative fullfillment or an awarding viewing experience. Naturally this will never be even close to Universal's original horror classics of the Thirties and Fourties, but any movie at least paying hommage to those scores points with me. There's some good actors attached, while Luke 'Bard the Bowman' Evans surely isn't the worst choice for playing the notorious Vlad the Impaler. As for the 'Untold' aspect, it's basically an overt excuse to retell this tale that has been told countless times in countless shapes before. Doesn't matter really. There's certain ever fascinating fictional characters that are so firmly embedded in the human psyche they keep reappearing throughout time in hugely divergent guises to satiate the public's continuing love for them and spawn a meaningful reinterpretation that befits the current zeitgeist. Dracula is very much among those (while the likes of Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes and Godzilla are other noteworthy examples). I doubt there's very much truly novel material Dracula Untold will add to the overall history of the most beloved bloodsucker of them all. But that doesn't stop it from delivering a thrilling rollercoaster of a period horror film per se, if executed properly. And if it isn't, there's bound to be another incarnation that is in the long run, or we can revisit the classic takes on the character instead. No need to yell bloody murder if this one fails to serve us what its title implies.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156211/eerste_trailer_the_expendables_3

Now that's more like it. The teasers were positively teasing and hardly showed any of the signature action and witty oneliners we were hoping for. This trailer certainly remedies that previous omittance. This is one hardcore romperstomper of a preview that acknowledges the fact this will be the final Expendables flick (though when lots of cash is involved, you never know) and suggests we may at last be getting that 100 million dollar explosion or excessively epic gunfight-to-end-all-gunfights the previous two installments just didn't provide. A few more expert tough guy actors have been added to make sure stuff gets blown up even bigger and more grandiose than before. The more the merrier, but it's still the duo of Stallone & Statham we love the most, as they also insert something reminiscent of a plot line and emotional attachment into the film (honestly!). And even if that element proves forgetful, there's still plenty of action heroes, throwing knifes and blazing bullets to look forward to.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156212/eerste_trailer_penguins_of_madagascar

What is it with the tendency of sidekicks to be awarded their own features? Sure, they're cute and lovable, but they were always intended as characters to play off other, major characters. Plus, they tend to be overused for often cringeworthy purposes of comic relief. Occasionally they do work better by themselves - ultimate case in point: the Smurfs - but more often than not, their spin-offs prove bland fare that never stands up to the material they derived from. Who remembers the Ewoks features compared to Return of the Jedi? Nevertheless, now that most computer animation series have run their course and people start to get bored by them, studios hope to milk these properties by exploring glorified background characters. Puss in Boots is already moving on to his sequel, while next year will witness a Minions movie. And during the winter Holiday season, we'll have the Penguins of Madagascar to look forward too. I didn't think these paramilitary penguins particularly entertaining to begin with, but I was clearly in the minority there. I'm still not convinced after seeing this trailer, sorry. Maybe it also has to do with the fact I'm just fed up with animated talking animals entirely. And I've always found penguins to be overrated. They've been featured in films over the last decade so often now, they're becoming dull. Why not do a movie about Kiwis, or Cassuaries for a change? Now those are some weird birds deserving of animated acknowledgment!

Today's Review: Edge of Tomorrow

Edge of Tomorrow: ***/*****, or 6/10

Remember Oblivion? Odd question, considering the meaning of the word, but chances are good you don't. It was a rather poor Sci-Fi blockbuster released last year, in which mankind has left the planet after a devastating war with an alien force, and now Tom Cruise is harvesting the last few natural resources. Or so he thinks, as things are not what they appear to be. Apart from Cruise, the movie co-starred Tom Cruise as several clones of the protagonist. That didn't save the movie from becoming overly convoluted. A cynic might be inclined to think Edge of Tomorrow repeats Oblivion's many mistakes, and he or she would not be fully wrong. Edge of Tomorrow, too, has a rather messy plot involving aliens in which Tom Cruise dies multiple times, at which point Tom Cruise takes over. However, Edge of Tomorrow utilizes a more tongue-in-cheek approach to its overall plot to, hopefully consciously, underscore the absurdity of the situation. Good thing too, as it is indeed all quite laughable and too serious a tone would not have worked in its favour. Too bad such a tone does creep in eventually, to the film's detriment.

Edge of Tomorrow is set in the not too distant future where a strange extraterrestrial enemy has rapidly conquered all of Europe and threatens to do likewise to the rest of the globe. Earth's human nations have banded together in an attempt to fight off the adversary together. All their battles have been lost, save for one, where metal armoured female soldier Rita Vrataski (Emily Blunt) made the difference in defeating the aliens. By applying similar combat harnesses to every soldier available and sending them en masse to invade France, humanity hopes to retake the continent and annihilate the enemy for good. Of course, things are not as simple as they seem, and the aliens have a few tricks up their sleeve yet. For one thing, time loops.

Enter the much dreaded Tom Cruise, who does a most unusual thing here: he plays against character. In this film, Cruise is not starring as the monotonously brave action hero as is his wont, but instead as a cowardly marketing agent for the military, who suddenly finds himself accused of desertion when he makes it clear he doesn't feel like covering the invasion to a stern and gruff general's face (Brendan Gleeson). Thrown in with a bunch of ragtag recruits – a merry band of comic relief characters, angry loudmouths and assorted personas that wouldn't fit in any regular regiments – Cruise is dragged off to battle and there left to fend for himself. Of course, he quickly kicks the bucket in a close quarter skirmish with one of the vicious alien monsters. And then he wakes up back at base, and everything starts over again, much to his dismay as he doesn't do better the second time. Or the third. Try convincing your commanding officer – a distinctly over-the-top Bill Paxton, now given command of a similar batch of marines he once belonged to himself in Aliens – of being stuck in a time loop ad infinitum. Needless to say he doesn't, so Cruise must find a way to discover what has happened to him and how to use it to his advantage, instead of continue dying without end.

So far so good, as the notion of time looping, a trite but true concept few audiences will be unfamiliar with thanks to movies as diverse as Groundhog Day and Source Code, is handled with enough confidence and fun not to feel repetitive (no pun intended). In fact, repetition is cleverly avoided after the first few loops, as Cruise's character remembers events and tries to alter them in differently enough ways so as not to get boring. This approach too causes problems in the long run, as Cruise dies so many times (hundreds, if not thousands, it is suggested) that the plot soon trots along and seemingly ignores the whole concept, just to further the ever more intricate story. The reason behind the time loops and the method of fighting the sinister aliens that caused it soon start to become so convoluted and ridiculous that the ingredient of fun which at first characterized it is ever more lost. What's worse, Cruise resorts to playing a more typical heroic role as the film progresses, while it's the sleaze bag aspect to his part that initially made him interesting to watch. At least his chemistry with the tough but emotionally unapproachable Rita, who faced a similar ability in the previous battle but lost her looping powers, is watchable enough as long as the Hollywood romance looming in the background is kept at bay. In terms of acting, Paxton's cocky performance suits the tone of the film best, which makes it all the more regrettable that the moment he's out of the picture, Edge of Tomorrow schizophrenically feels the need to get serious. Naturally it includes an all too predictable 'what the F!' type ending that suggests you need to think things over to see if it all fits, but unfortunately doesn't make you care enough to do so.

Until that time there's enough to make the viewing experience passable at best. Aside from Paxton, Blunt too does her bit with plenty of pizzazz as the strong spirited yet haunted and not too morally correct power girl, rife with entertainingly flamboyant demeanour. Nevertheless, it's the grandiose battle scenes that demand the most attention, as Edge of Tomorrow makes it progressively clear it intends to be an action movie more than the self aware comedy it could at first be accused of being, until the comic elements are just thrown out the window entirely. The notion of a futuristic landing on the beach of Normandy – not coincidentally reminiscent of the actual D-Day Allied landing in World War II – where men in battle armour fight weird alien creatures, proves hard to resist, but its execution leaves a few things to be desired. In many cases it's not easy to make out what exactly is transpiring, mostly due to the extreme detail and chaotic camera work, which do make the mass fights seem more realistic. The design of the aliens also doesn't help, as they keep violently moving about which makes it hard to see them as something other than a shapeless bunch of tentacles rolling around. It enhances the sense of battle immersion, but makes it difficult to appreciate the digital craftsmanship that went into designing what otherwise might have been epic scenes of war.

Edge of Tomorrow is a definite step up from the thoroughly forgetful Oblivion, but still a far cry from, say, Minority Report, Tom Cruise's earlier venture into the realm of science fiction. The movie sadly switches tones halfway through, without successfully having secured the audience's allegiance to accept such change. Worse, the more the plot progresses, the harder it is for the audience to remain focused, as things have to be taken with too big a grain of salt eventually, while the good humoured use of time loops ultimately gets lost in the mess of an incoherent plot. Cruise, always hard to take seriously as an actor due to his larger than life star status, pleasantly surprises the spectator in the beginning, before reverting to his standard performance. In this regard, you could state his career is caught in a similar loop; minor variations do occur occasionally, but he always reverts to his established routine.