Today's News: catching up with lots of trailers

Not done just yet with the news of last week. Let's get that out of the way fast, since this week's news begs attention as well.

Titel eerste Star Wars solofilm bekend

I suppose this was last week's bit of 'breaking news' (insert exclamation mark or two). Even though the Star Wars spin-off films aren't nearly as hugely anticipated as the upcoming Episodes proper, they're still Star Wars movies. The title of the first solo feature, as directed by Monsters Man Gareth Edwards, is now revealed to be Rogue One. Still no plot synopsis, but if the name is any indication, it will undoubtedly involve the famous Rogue Squadron pilots, of which Luke Skywalker was once a member in the Rebel Alliance, before his status as a Jedi Knight took precedence. Rogue One is generally the call sign of the X-Wing Squadron's leader, so could it be about that? With Felicity Jones as the protagonist, will she play a tough female fighter pilot kicking some Imperial ass all over that galaxy far, far away? Sounds a bit like Starbuck on Battlestar Galactica, but hey, that show took a hint or two from Star Wars itself. Maybe the title is simply a huge misdirect and the movie will actually be about something entirely different. Could be, considering the persistence of those bounty hunter plot rumours. But maybe they keep on popping up because people want a bounty hunter movie, as nearly everyone had hoped this first solo feature to be a Boba Fett flick. Doesn't mean that project is off the table if Rogue One is really about Rogue's pilots, since this certainly won't be the last Star Wars spin-off. From the talented Edwards, I'll take any Force filled Fighter fest I can get, rather than facing the inevitable letdown that's gonna be Abrams' Episode VII...

Nieuwe trailer San Andreas

Speaking of letdowns and things resembling other things, this trailer just screams 2012. The plot looks very much like that of Earthquake, except with one main character rather than multiple. I just can't understand why this hugely expensive project was greenlit so soon after 2012's release. Do studio execs really think Dwayne Johnson's presence and lots of visual effects are enough to entice audiences to go see it in theaters? Though I like rampant destruction as much as the next man, to my mind there simply seems little appeal to this film. The devastation scenes are gonna be fun at best, but never original or inspired, while the rest of it just seems utterly dull. Maybe someone in Hollywood knows something the general audience doesn't at this point, and the long expected big bang is finally imminent on the American West-Coast. A big earthquake with lots of property damage and huge numbers of fatalities won't be fun, but would make the film a hot current event at least. But other than that, I can only see this movie being shattered and crushed by the success of others at the box office.

Nieuwe trailer Inside Out

In terms of originality and box office success, I have more hope for this film, Pixar's latest. First of all, it has the Pixar name going for it. It may have taken a dent or two lately because of the lack of inspired projects, but it's still strong enough to stand out amidst a crowd of animation competitors. Second of all, the plot seems much more thoughtful than in the case of most animated features of late, and finally hails another Pixar original rather than a dreaded sequel or spin-off. Lastly, considering the success of characters like the Smurfs and the Minions, clearly colour coded little entities with distinctly different personalities are sure to appeal to kids everywhere en masse, so positive box office results are more or less guaranteed. The only thing in that regard I would have done differently is push the release date back a few more weeks, to stay clear more of the Minions movie and avoid animation competition, but otherwise Inside Out will do just fine. Will it be on the same creative level as the Pixar greats of the previous decade? I dare not speculate. It sure has a unique premise it seems, but whether it will connect to audiences without degenerating into a mindfuck? Probably, but certainly not a given as of yet.

Eerste trailer Hotel Transylvania 2

And here's a less original animated feature for you. An unavoidable sequel from a lesser studio, it's hard to deny. Doesn't mean it will be bad, per se. After all, everybody loves monsters, animated or otherwise. The success of the first film clearly established that, otherwise this sequel would not exist. So far, Hotel Transylvania seems to stick to relatable events, family squabbles and such. No creatures secretly controlling our minds, evil characters hellbent on taking over the world, or other grandiose plot points in this franchise. The plethora of strange and spooky creatures ensures the visual impact needed, while the plot keeps it much more down to Earth. Dracula's daughter has married an outsider (an everyday human) and spawned a halfbreed kid, and now his family, including his overly oldfashioned and conservative father, must learn to cope with current events. Hardly an unrecognizable problem. Just with unusual characters, vampires and werewolves and stuff. I like that notion of turning things upside down. Hopefully Hotel Transylvania 2 will acknowledge the potential of this emotional plot and not let the monstrous take priority over the human aspect.

Meer character posters Avengers: Age of Ultron

Speaking of inhuman characters, here's two of them. Mutants really, though that term is taboo in Marvel Studios's canon. Obviously the new Avengers were the last ones to get their own character posters, since the studio considers the popular returning characters the big audience draw, while these two still have to prove themselves. Quicksilver already turned out a great character in X-Men: Days of Future Past, but that of course wasn't 'Marvel's' Quicksilver. It's gonna be a challenge starting from scratch with the same powers and adding a distinct separate personality on the same creatively enjoyable level. Hopefully the sibling relationship with Scarlet Witch is utilized to maximum effect to make this Quicksilver a decidedly different and original take on the same character. Considering the simultaneous release of these character posters, it seems to be what Marvel is aiming for. After all, they could have mixed things up and paired either one of these with the posters for other newbies like Ultron or Vision (the latter still unaccounted for), but they didn't. Of course, the big question then is, will Olsen and Taylor-Johnson show the necessary chemistry between them to make us like these siblings? I saw the new Godzilla again this week, in which these actors played husband and wife. Can't say they did a particularly compelling job in that role. Hopefully brother and sister suits them better...

Today's Mini-Review: Contagion

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

Starring: Matt Damon, Laurence Fishburne, Marion Cotillard

Directed by Steven Soderbergh

USA: Warner Bros., 2011

Steven Soderbergh's cautionary tale about the dangerous reality that is (and/or could be) a deadly global pandemic and its disastrous effects of human society and sense of morality proves an often harrowing but ultimately overly clinical film. Gwyneth Paltrow returns home from a business trip (which included some secret bedding out of wedlock) and is struck by seizures. Her husband Matt Damon rushes her to a hospital where she soon dies, much to everybody's shock and surprise. Her demise is only the beginning, as the disease that killed her – a fictional form (fortunately!) of meningoencephalitis – soon manifests itself all over the globe. The social order starts to break down everywhere as governments are unable to cope with the sudden onslaught that plagues their citizens. Experts from the CDC and WHO attempt to find a cure and to locate the origin of the outbreak but are hindered by problems as diverse as boundaries in their professional ethics, conspiracy bloggers inciting public revolt against the rule of law for their own profit, and the overall fear and hopelessness that drives people to extremes they would otherwise never consider, just to survive another day. The result is a carefully woven mosaic of various plot lines that never merge but end up making for an excellently rounded structure as a whole in terms of exploring the nature of the virus, its effects on global society and the race for ending its reign of terror. Though credit has to be given to Soderbergh and his team for keeping this narrative as close to reality as possible, both for chilling us to the bone and for the benefit of our education, it's hard to deny the film's occasional uneven pace and its constant need for overexplaining the more technical situations portrayed, even though it's tremendously helpful in understanding the motions of science in hazardous scenarios like these, and provides some always welcome intellectual uplifting of the audience in general. At times it feels a documentary would have better suited this topic (and no doubt some have). An all-star cast is brought on board to demonstrate how swiftly a lethal, worldwide viral outbreak makes an end to everyday life and in some instances, human values we claim to hold dear until circumstances prove us otherwise.

Though convincing performances are found throughout, in hindsight it would have been more apt to have these characters be played by less known talents to increase the level of realism Contagion aims for. Though the likes of Matt Damon, Marion Cotillard, Kate Winslet, Laurence Fishburne and Jude Law are undoubtedly just as susceptible to nasty diseases as the rest of us (unless fortune really is a cure for every illness), their struggle against the horrible infliction in question doesn't feel as grounded in reality as it ought to because of the high level of internationally familiar faces and the lack of “normal people” in major roles throughout the whole. The movie's overall style is rather cold and detached, a tone many spectators would expect a scientifically accurate story to convey, while the human element is relegated to the background a little too much. Soderbergh focuses on the microcosm of things, so scenes of mass panic and rampant lawlessness are absent though they are referred to abundantly, which doesn't make the concerns addressed in this film feel as immediate and as serious as we are meant to experience them. Contagion is a fine attempt at explaining in a scientifically correct sense what very well could (and most likely would) transpire if it came down to a global pandemic of this magnitude – the death toll at the end of the film reaches 26 million people – but its reliance on letting science determine the course of the film doesn't make for as compelling and intense a drama as it should have been.

Today's News: Dwayne Johnson versus earthquake

Another post of mine on MovieScene:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/150918/dwayne_johnson_gecast_in_rampenfilm_san_andreas

The user comment left behind by someone that read this newsflash isn't wholly incorrect: this does bear a fair bit of resemblance to 2012. Problem is, that film was basically the ultimate disaster movie, featuring everything from devastating earthquakes to giant volcanic eruptions and humongous tidal waves, so how could you hope to impress a post-2012 audience with "only" an earthquake? Simple. You add a star. As is the case in most disaster movies, the star of the film is the disaster itself, while the cast is only meant to guide you through it to add some human drama. That's why casts of disaster movies usually, with very few exceptions, don't feature big name moviestars but only 'moderately well known' actors instead, often with the addition of older actors that have slowly but surely fallen out of favor with the public's immediate interest (as was done all through the Seventies with classic actors of the Thirties, Fourties and Fifties). None of the actors in 2012 were genuine moviestars. But now Dwayne Johnson gets to stand up to an earthquake, and currently he's undeniably a hot star, with a fairly wide audience appeal. So people that don't care about Johnson get to enjoy the tremors (which probably won't bring The Rock down), while Johnson fans will care less about the actual catastrophe, but simply crave to see their hero back in action. You wonder why studios don't employ big names in this type of epic film more often. It may have something to do with the bad reputation of disaster movies (also thanks to the Seventies), that so far generally told stars they've reached their expiration date. Maybe Johnson can debunk that much maligned 'genre curse'.

In other ways San Andreas seems an overly standard disaster flick: epic shots of ruin and destruction coupled with standard family drama throughout (an estranged family too, that no doubt finds new strength due to their trials). I doubt Johnson can change much about that routine. Especially if it's brought to us by Brad Peyton, who delivered quite a similar story in Journey 2: The Mysterious Island, except against a fantasy backdrop. Even in 3-D though, I doubt San Andreas will outboast 2012 in terms of scope and awe.

Today's Film: The Day After Tomorrow

The Day After Tomorrow

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

Probably Roland Emmerich's most typical disaster movie, delivering grandiose spectacle as catastrophe strikes and actors attempt to survive the many pixels the visual FX departments throw at them accordingly. Joining on the doomsday bandwagon of both scientists and laymen alike, Emmerich depicts the coming of a new ice age due to mankind's arrogant tampering with the planet's environment. Caused by global warming, ocean currents change and a series of super storms evolve, hitting the northern hemisphere hard, resulting in giant tornadoes levelling Los Angeles and tsunamis engulfing New York City. Things get even worse when temperatures drop rapidly and the latter town freezes over completely, leaving a boy (Jake Gyllenhaal) and his friends trapped in the city library, with his father (Dennis Quaid) setting out on a desperate trek across the frozen wasteland to come and save him. Though the prospects of global warming (or global meltdown for that matter) aren't particularly attractive in real life either, Emmerich goes all-out without really bothering with the laws of nature for realism's sake. The movie is therefore much maligned amongst the scientific community for its preposterous display of dramatic natural effects supposedly caused by global warming, but the message stands that we had better try to avoid the Earth cooling down or warming up for our own health anyway. Like any disaster movie, the true star of the film is the disaster itself which makes for a highly entertaining watch, while the human drama in-between moments of thrilling calamities is less compelling, at times even obnoxious for getting into the way of the action. Most spectacular is the flooding of New York, despite the overly digital quality of the piece. After that, the big freeze and a wolf attack upon the protagonists provide some more thrills but the best bits have come and gone, though all too brief moments of satire, like Americans crossing their southern border to get into Mexico illegally, generate a good laugh occasionally. Emmerich would find even more stuff to demolish in his disaster flick to-end-all disaster flicks 2012, as the fate of whole mankind and indeed the entire world lies in the balance: after all, the southern hemisphere got off too lightly in this film.

Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Dennis Quaid, Emmy Rossum

Directed by Roland Emmerich

USA: 20^th Century-Fox, 2004

Cassandra Crossing, The

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

Slow paced disaster flick, released at the time the disaster movie cycle of the Seventies had already almost worn itself out, yet still featuring all the typical hallmarks of the genre. This isn't the worst of the bunch though, as it features a fairly intriguing disaster scenario. A terrorist releases a deadly disease on an international train traveling through Europe, after which governments conspire to let the train travel to its doom rather than see the disease spread (a plot exemplary of the overall grim atmosphere running rampant in movies of the Seventies). As the train heads towards the infamous Cassandra Crossing with its immense ravine and poorly constructed bridge, survivors on board, led by Richard Harris, try to find a way off before they arrive at their destiny of death. Being a disaster movie, it'll come as no surprise when we see the train crashing into the depths of the crossing in a way that was supposed to look epic but features a model train a bit too obviously. Still, decent try, and not as tiresomely long as the likes of Earthquake and The Towering Inferno.

Starring: Richard Harris, Sophia Loren, Martin Sheen

Directed by George P. Cosmatos

UK/Italy: Associated General Films, 1976

Armageddon

Rating: **/*****, or 4/10

Overly noisy and bombastic action spectacle featuring the imminent demise of our planet by a giant asteroid, so an unlikely group of oil drillers is send into space to drill a hole in this threat and plant a nuclear bomb into it so it can be blown up in space before it kills us all. Though the movie features a deliciously good cast and plenty of action, its at times completely asinine plot, cheesy jokes, focus on loud explosions and abundance of annoying moments of blatant American patriottism clearly betray this film to be yet another obnoxious Michael Bay product, dragging on for 150 minutes from one silly catastrophe to another until we simply cannot care about the characters' plight any more. Too bad, since the film starts out pretty good with a convincing and spectacular action scene of small meteorites hitting landmarks around the globe. After that, the movie only goes progressively downhill, despite the solid score and the many fine actors involved.

Starring: Bruce Willis, Ben Affleck, Steve Buscemi

Directed by Michael Bay

USA: Touchstone Pictures, 1998

2012

***/*****, or 7/10

De ondergang van de wereld volgens Roland Emmerich

Voor het betere grootschalige sloopwerk gaat Hollywood al sinds jaar en dag bij Roland Emmerich te rade. Als geen ander weet hij een fictieve ramp, het liefst met kleine satirische terzijdes, enerverend in beeld te brengen. Zo liet hij buitenaardse wezens talloze wereldsteden in de as leggen in Independence Day, mocht een reuzenreptiel New York platgooien in Godzilla, en teisterde hij de hele planeet met tornado's, vloedgolven en extreme vrieskou in The Day After Tomorrow. Altijd met een knipoog, want het moet immers niet te serieus worden. Met een dergelijke staat van dienst is het niet verwonderlijk dat juist Emmerich de man is die het naderende einde van de wereld in het jaar 2012 op het grote scherm mag brengen. En zoals we van hem gewend zijn maakt hij van deze ramp een groot spektakel dat zijn weerga in de filmgeschiedenis niet kent.

Met als uitgangspunt de jaartelling van de Maya's, die 21 december 2012 als het einde van de huidige tijd rekent, waagt Emmerich zich aan de hype rond de komende apocalyps. Uiteraard doet hij een poging om het geheel wetenschappelijk te verantwoorden, met een vlugge uitleg over gemuteerde neutrino's en hun effect op de aardkorst. Volslagen onzinnig, maar het precieze hoe-en-waarom is echter niet ter zake doende, de film draait hoofdzakelijk om een aaneenschakeling van verbluffende actiescènes waar een groepje mensen zich doorheen moet worstelen. Zoals altijd al gold in het genre van de rampenfilm is de ramp zelf de grootste attractie; de rest is opvulling, en dat laat 2012 iets te duidelijk merken.

De film voert John Cusack (High Fidelity, 1408) op als hoofd kanonnenvoer voor het spektakel. Hij speelt Jackson Curtis, een gescheiden vader van twee kinderen. Niemand neemt hem serieus, inclusief zijn kroost. Tijdens een uitstapje naar Yellowstone Park, bedoeld om de relatie met de kinderen te verbeteren, komt Curtis in contact met een schijnbaar geflipte radiopresentator (Woody Harrelson in topvorm) die de naderende rampspoed verkondigt, waarop ook bij hem langzaam de lichten aangaan en hij zijn best doet zijn kinderen, vrouw (Amanda Peet) en zelfs haar nieuwe minnaar (een irritante Tom McCarthy) het vege lijf te redden. Voorts mag ook een reeks andere personages, waaronder een Russische miljardair en zijn kinderen, een jonge wetenschapper en diens collegae, een Tibetaanse familie, de Amerikaanse president en zijn dochter en twee oude muzikanten op een cruiseschip een poging doen het Einde der Tijden te overleven. Het gerucht doet de ronde dat de regering de ondergang zag aankomen en ruimteschepen heeft gebouwd in China om tenminste een deel van de mensheid te behouden. Vanzelfsprekend reizen Jackson en zijn familie af naar China om de catastrofe te overleven, waarbij obstakels als de verzakking van Los Angeles, de uitbarsting van Yellowstone en een verbrand Hawaii hun pad kruisen.

Emmerich toont zich wederom een meester in het doeltreffend in beeld brengen van de opeenvolgende rampen, die de kijker meerdere keren op het puntje van de stoel doen zitten en waarvoor een Oscar-nominatie voor Visuele Effecten niet zou misstaan. Maar evenals in zijn voorgaande films blijkt hij minder bekwaam als het erop aankomt zijn personages van diepgang te voorzien. Tussen de rampen in is 2012 rijkelijk gevuld met melodramatische scènes die bedoeld zijn om enige sympathie voor de overlevenden bij de toeschouwer op te wekken, maar daar voor het overgrote deel niet in slagen, gezien het hoge gehalte van fletse, met clichés beladen dialogen. Ook de relativerende humor, die in Independence Day dikwijls een glimlach opleverde, helpt niet om de effecten van de ramp op het mensdom voelbaar te maken: slechts Emmerich's kenmerkende satire treft doel, bijvoorbeeld wanneer hij het Witte Huis laat verpletteren door het vliegdekschip John F. Kennedy. Helaas is deze satire minder aanwezig dan in zijn voorgaande werk. Met een lengte van meer dan tweeënhalf uur werkt het overschot aan plotlijntjes rond de vele personages de film als geheel sowieso tegen en doet het de kijker weinig als er weer een paar duizend mensen ten onder gaan.

Tussen de overdaad aan rondrennende acteurs is er slechts een handjevol dat te midden van alle aardbevingen en tsunami's het hoofd boven water houdt, althans qua acteerprestaties. Naast de al eerder genoemde Woody Harrelson (Natural Born Killers) die voor de (enige geslaagde) komische noot mag zorgen overtuigt Danny Glover (Lethal Weapon, Be Kind Rewind) als respectabele president van de VS en het morele kompas van wetenschapper Chiwetel Ejiofor (Serenity, Inside Man) die het reddingsplan van de mensheid moet opstellen. De toeschouwer zal het echter een worst wezen of de rest van het ten toneel gevoerde acteursensemble het overleeft.

Uiteraard meent Emmerich zijn visie van de ondergang van de wereld niet zonder boodschap op te dienen voeren. In 2012 stelt hij de vraag wie het recht heeft te bepalen wie mag overleven en wie ten onder zal gaan. Na het leger als incompetente sukkels in Godzilla en de Amerikaanse overheid als slaafje van het milieuverwoestende kapitalisme in The Day After Tomorrow te hebben opgevoerd, is het nu de beurt aan de samenwerking tussen regeringen onderling, met hun diepgewortelde bureaucratie en hun macht over de massa, om van kritische kanttekeningen te worden voorzien. Uiteraard zijn zij al tijdig op de hoogte van de naderende rampspoed en bouwen zij moderne Arken om de menselijke beschaving te redden: voor de financiering van dit project verkopen zij toegangskaartjes aan miljardairs en eenieder die de waarheid verkondigt laten zij heimelijk vermoorden. De eer is aan Ejiofor om Emmerich's boodschap van verdraagzaamheid en gelijke kansen voor iedereen uit te dragen en ervoor te zorgen dat zoveel mogelijk overlevenden de Arken mogen betreden, want niemand heeft het alleenrecht te overleven. Dit bericht is weinig subtiel, maar deze boodschap en het plot over de vernietiging van de planeet maken de geplande remake van de klassieker When Worlds Collide, die dezelfde uitgangspunten hanteert, gelukkig overbodig.

2012 haakt effectief (en bovendien op tijd!) in op de hype rond het naderende doemjaartal, en vormt qua special effects en sensatie een hoogtepunt in Emmerich's oeuvre. Echter, de moraliserende boodschap en de overdaad aan melodrama tussen de actie in maken het geheel maar half geslaagd. De regisseur had er goed aan gedaan het een en ander te schrappen om een betere balans tussen spanning en drama te vinden. Desondanks is 2012 een redelijk popcorn-spektakel geworden. Emmerich heeft al aangegeven dat dit zijn laatste rampenfilm zal worden, aangezien er niets meer is overgebleven om te slopen. Gelukkig maar, want zijn visie op de ondergang van het heelal had ongetwijfeld een te uitputtende zit opgeleverd...

Airport

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

Slow paced and melodramatic picture takes a look at the daily events around an American airport, complete with blizzard and plane hijack. Only the latter provides for some worthwhile scenes of disaster, since the rest is too often quite dull to watch. This feeling was reflected when this movie and The Poseidon Adventure were proclaimed responsible for starting the cycle of disaster movies of the Seventies, most of which also weren't great, including two Airport sequels that also focused mostly on the catastrophes.

Starring: Burt Lancaster, Dean Martin, Jean Seberg

Directed by George Seaton

USA: Universal Pictures, 1970