Today's Review: The 9th Life of Louis Drax

Met The 9th Life of Louis Drax lijkt Alexandre Aja een waardige opvolger voor zijn zonderlinge Horns voor ogen gehad te hebben. In die bizarre film trok hij alles uit de kast in een gitzwarte, gothic komedie die de regels van de fantasy en horror aan zijn laars lapte. Goed nieuws voor de genrefans die er wel om konden lachen, want Aja tracht dus nu hetzelfde te bewerkstelligen. Het probleem is echter dat aan de basis van The 9th Life of Louis Drax een bloedserieus en beladen thema staat, dat zich maar moeilijk leent voor alle fantastische opsmuk waarmee Aja het serveert. Wat begint als een licht en komisch jongensavontuur, ontspoort hoe langer hoe meer in een duister relaas over slechte ouders, psychisch trauma en een dodelijke drang naar aandacht, waarbij Aja's mentaliteit van 'kijk-deze-malligheid-eens' volkomen misplaatst voelt.

De Louis Drax uit de titel is een negenjarig jochie dat de pech had in coma te raken na een val van een klif. Dat klinkt onfortuinlijk, maar is voor Louis slechts het zoveelste ongeluk in zijn korte bestaan. Die pech begon naar eigen zeggen al bij zijn geboorte en heeft zich sindsdien geuit in een reeks voorvallen die elk ander kind niet overleefd zou hebben. Nu lijkt ook voor Louis de grens bereikt, want het lukt hem niet om uit zijn coma te stappen. Dat geeft hem echter de gelegenheid om te observeren hoe zijn omgeving reageert op zijn toestand. Na het voorval is een onderzoek in gang gezet om te beoordelen of er opzet bij zijn ongeluk in het spel was. Alle sporen wijzen naar zijn sindsdien verdwenen vader. Ondertussen grient zijn beeldschone moeder aan zijn zijde, wat de aandacht trekt van de onwaarschijnlijk aantrekkelijke arts die Louis' curieuze geval bestudeert. Want dat er met het joch en zijn ouders veel meer aan de hand is dan een jammerlijk afgelopen picknick, laat zich snel raden.

Zo beschouwd schijnt The 9th Life of Louis Drax allereerst een doorsnee 'whodunit', maar dan had Aja zeker voor de eer bedankt. Voor een regisseur met uitsluitend horrortitels in zijn zak geen gedweep met standaard misdaadonderzoek. Nee, daar moeten bovennatuurlijke elementen, zoals engelen en zeemonsters, aan te pas komen wil het interessant worden. Dat leent zich prima voor de sfeer van jeugdig avontuur die de film aanvankelijk uitstraalt en een jonge doelgroep doet vermoeden. Al snel blijkt echter dat het hoe en waarom achter Louis' leed minder fantastisch, maar vooral duisterder en schokkender is dan verwacht. Het exotische element van The 9th Life of Louis Drax pakt daarbij misleidend uit en slaat dood. Wie met een kinderfilm van doen dacht te hebben, vergist zich behoorlijk. De film ontaardt in een thriller waarin optimistische fantasie plaatsmaakt voor zwaar drama over menselijke pijn en gestoorde ouder-kindrelaties. Op zich geen onaardige wending, ware het niet dat serieus drama aan Aja verspild is.

Uiteraard baseert Aja dit drama slechts op het bronmateriaal van schrijfster Liz Jensen. Maar gezien zijn staat van dienst is het niet verwonderlijk dat hij visueel flink uitpakt wanneer het script hem dat toestaat. Aja leeft zich veelvuldig uit met licht/donkercontrasten en stemmingmakende halo's, waardoor de film absoluut sfeerrijk is. De overdreven spookachtige soundtrack had wel een tikkeltje minder gemogen. De stijlmiddelen houden het verloop van de eerste helft enigszins intrigerend, ondanks de menselijke tekortkomingen naast al het mysterie. Want tegenover de vraagtekens rond het lot van Louis wordt een potsierlijke plotlijn geplaatst over een verhouding tussen moeder en dokter, beiden met het uiterlijk van een supermodel. Het tenenkrommende subplot mag dan uiteindelijk in dienst van Aja's grote misleiding staan, dat het lachwekkende trekjes aanneemt zal hopelijk toch onbedoeld zijn.

Eveneens niet bevorderlijk voor onze band met de hoofdpersonen is het feit dat de titelfiguur eigenlijk niet zo'n aardig kereltje is. Tijdens het voortdurende onderzoek levert hij commentaar op zijn situatie en zijn verleden, à la het inhoudelijk soortgelijke (en ook al niet beklijvende) The Lovely Bones, maar erg sympathiek is hij niet. Hij stookt tussen zijn ouders en doodt zijn hamsters. Vloeit dit alles voort uit een onverwerkt trauma rond zijn bekvechtende opvoeders? Met de achterliggende redenen heeft Aja schijnbaar minder affiniteit dan met de bovennatuurlijke kanten die hij doet vermoeden. Hij verliest zich in Louis' fantastiewereldje en sleurt ons daarin mee, terwijl dat uiteindelijk als bijzaak, en Louis als bijfiguur in het leven van zijn ouders, bestempeld wordt. Dat Aja ons hardhandig uit die fantasie haalt voor een naargeestige climax vol kommer en kwel die niets meer wegheeft van de vrolijk gestemde opening, is ronduit bezwaarlijk. Aja jongleert losjes met allerhande genres, maar balans wordt node gemist in het uiteindelijk allerminst luchtige geval Louis Drax.

Today's Review: Warcraft

Up to date again.

Warcraft - Recensie

Judging from the on-again, off-again subtitle The Beginning, it's clear Universal Studios hopes for this first entry into the Warcraft film franchise not to be the last. A ton of money has been thrown at the screen on a project that has been in development for nigh a decade to entice both fans and ignorant audiences alike, but the best intentions regardless, it's unlikely the film will sit well with the latter demographic, while it remains to be seen whether it'll be to the liking of the former. After all, the gamers are simple spectators on a quest played by Duncan Jones and his team, rather than their own. General viewers meanwhile get treated to a grand and supposedly rich fantasy universe for which they have a tough time developing a feeling, considering Warcraft only forms the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

The World of Warcraft is vast and extensive, yet a film franchise has to start somewhere explaining it all. The Beginning addresses the origin of the wars between Orcs and Men, so it is said in the opening narration. Which also proves a major spoiler to the movie's own plot, considering the outcome of it all has already been determined. While much of the movie follows a minority of Orcs attempting to establish a truce with the world of Men they just invaded, with that opening statement in mind, there's few narrative surprises in store for us. Which doesn't mean we don't feel for this peaceful, noble Orc warriors, who find themselves a pawn of a sinister force's greater schemes to suck this world dry of life like it did their own home before. Brought to life by the latest motion capture innovations, the movie follows the new path of creating convincing digital characters based on intense acting performances, in the same style as the recent Planet of the Apes movie so successfully. It works, as these are some of the finest Orcs we've seen on the big screen thus far.

Alas, the same cannot be said for their human counterparts. The noble knights and conniving warlocks of Azeroth aren't nearly as interesting to behold as their fresh enemies, a victim of both dull, generic fantasy writing and uninspired performances. Though there's definitely a pool of talent assembled here, none of these actors truly seemed to have affinity with the exotic subject matter. All the silly spells and swashbuckling sword moves can't change that, and there's plenty of both to go around. In fact, Warcraft fanatics will recognize plenty of everything from their beloved games much to their enjoyment and to the detriment of ours, the casual viewers not acquainted with this realm. Especially in the first thirty minutes of the movie, the plot travels from one outlandish location to the next without allowing us much room to absorb it all, get to know its rules or develop a sense of geography for the whole. While names like Ironforge and Stormwind are no doubt iconic nomenclature to the fans, they never rise above the sound of generic fantasy to inexperienced ears. Same can be said for the other inhabitants of Azeroth: Dwarves, Elves and the like are briefly seen here and there but otherwise play no part.

Undoubtedly there's more to the World of Warcraft than what's shown here, but for the general audience, what realms are served never really click. It all looks fabulous but none of it makes us truly care on the same level as the Lord of the Rings movies did. Whether the fans will absorb this take on their beloved franchise as much as they did their interactive equivalent remains to be seen, but the studio better hope they do. Other audiences at best get a decent two hours of generic fantasy entertainment out of it, but nobody will be converted to the Warcraft cause. Which, considering the cost of this hugely expensive movie, might easily suggest The Beginning will also prove the end for the Warcraft film franchise.

Today's Review: Inside Out

Look at little me turning Pixar's Inside Out inside out! Or as much as you can in a general review of under a thousands words in length.

Inside Out - recensie

This may be a turning point for Pixar. The naysayers who wrote off the studio ever since Disney took over often seemed right in their sweeping generalizations that Pixar's truly creative days of imaginary wonder where done. Sequels, that's what was in store for the audience ad nauseam. It worked well on Toy Story 3, few will deny. Not so much on Cars 2 though, or even Monsters University. So a new original project was definitely desperately needed to show Pixar has lost none of its dreaming potency, and this is it. Inside Out is as emotional and beautiful, not to mention innovative and soulful an animated movie as they come, and especially as they used to come in this company's own case.

It's not as perfect as the likes of Wall-E or Toy Story 3, I'll have you know, since it has some little flaws. Like Monsters, Inc. and Up, that makes it a classic Peter Docter movie. Those films, too, featured the occasional emotional highs that went coupled with some whimsical additions that had a bit of a trouble fitting in the whole. It was especially vexing in the case of Up, where the movie just never got as powerful as it proved to be in its first act. Inside Out equally knows a few moments where the magic diminishes, most notably when it concerns the elaborate logistics of the brain (though personally I found the forgotten imaginary friend rather an obnoxious sort as well, though I appreciated the notion). Docter has learned something from Up's experience though, saving the emotional climax for the end of the film. And it packs quite a punch, as Docter delivers his message that it's okay to be sad. Quite a rebellious act, since the movie still flies the banner of the Mouse House which usually tells us the exact opposite. While still an undeniably happy end, it's unlikely anybody will restrain their tears. As Docter says they shouldn't.

So is this a definite comeback for Pixar? The list of upcoming projects still consists mostly of sequels, with the only original tale for the foreseeable future presented by The Good Dinosaur. I'm more than a bit skeptical about that one, judging from the first teaser and its overly retro dinosaurs parading through near photo-real landscapes. I doubt an Inside Out 2 is out of the question, considering the film is doing fine at the boxoffice. Still, I like to think the naysayers remain in the wrong, and there's still a few tears of joy to be spilled over Pixar's films in the next few years.

And otherwise we'll still have the shorts preceding the main events. Hopefully they'll be as delightful as Inside Out's Lava, which also gets those eyes wet and thus perfectly warms us up for the main course to follow.

Today's Column: We Know Nothing, Jon Snow

This month's column skips the dreaded sequel for last month's (not much to columnize about me liking Jurassic World, other than summing up lots of hyperboles and superlatives, which makes for a dull read) and instead targets another very predictable topic, that jolly show called Game of Thrones, which had yet again drawn to a season close.

Column: We Know Nothing, Jon Snow

We've arrived at that time in the series we knew would come sooner rather than later. Book readers no longer can say with certainty what's to come for the majority of story lines. The series has caught up with the various narratives in the novels in most cases and has even well progressed beyond them in some. Not to mention many of them have also been changed to such an extent they little resemble their literary counterparts. Only a few of the characters' stories are still behind, and a bunch of them involve people we haven't even met yet, and may not ever meet on the show. So what does that mean for the relationship between those who have read all the novels, and those who solely stick to the series? For one thing, the latter party doesn't need to worry so strongly about dodging spoilers, which also means the former can once more open their mouths in public without fear of someone socking a fist in them. It makes for a better balance between both types of fans, now that they all know who, when and what we're talking about and nobody knows for a certainty what's going to happen next (except for Mr. Martin, I should hope). The interchange of theories will now evolve along more equal lines, since both parties know as much, or more aptly speaking, as little.

Of course, book readers still know about the other possibilities certain characters could have had, as they had them in the book, and may take a hint or two from those, though there are no longer any guarantees. The only spoiler threat left for avid viewers/non readers now involves the new characters, like the already announced Randyll Tarly, Septon Meribald and Euron Greyjoy. However, of these characters the only one whose story line from the novel is left mostly intact is that last name. The other two in the books already appeared much earlier in situations the show can't duplicate anymore, because the narrative of the characters they supported has moved well beyond their original point, requiring novel settings for their appearance, which means there's little tangible left to spoil about them. So even though book readers may know their Randyll Tarly, Septon Meribald and Euron Greyjoy from the book, they won't know the new incarnations of these characters and as such anything they think they can spoil about them needs to be taken with a grain of salt (or in Greyjoy's case, salt wives).

Book readers and viewers no long need to be at odds, nor do they need to avoid one another socially. Instead, they can embrace in the shared knowledge that nobody knows what's coming any more on their beloved show. So let's go out and celebrate that new equality which formerly could be called adversity. Anyone feel like hosting a lavish feast in some great Lord's hall with lots of wine and song? If not, you've certainly learned your lessons from watching this show.

Today's Column: True Blood has died the True Death

Overdue by a few days (by no fault of mine, I upheld my deadline as always), but here's my latest online column:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157062/column_de_ware_dood_van_true_blood

Boy, am I glad that is over and done with. And not because it was so dismally bad as some would have you believe, though the finale did leave a lot to be desired. But so did the rest of the season, so at least there is some inner consistency. There's a lot to be said against this last season in terms of story, but there were still several plot lines and especially characters I continued to enjoy and appreciate. And in that case, True Blood at least can boast a genuine ending, unlike most other shows that suffer increasing deteriorating ratings and heavy fan critique. The greatest thing about this finale is that it does indeed feel quite final and the show was permitted a decent send-off in that regard, rather than face cancellation and leave us all in the dark as happened to so many shows (and a lot of them deserved better). We can now all close the Sookie Stackhouse chapter of our lives peacefully, as to my mind any show should be ended. Of course, there were a few story threads that didn't feel wholly resolved and more of those that I felt should have been handled entirely different, but there's few shows that even get to this point without screwing a thing or two up. Only two recent examples of shows that were granted a final farewell sprung to mind, Breaking Bad and Spartacus. Admittedly, both of those ended on a superior note, but they were much more coherent in their quality throughout their run, while True Blood from the get-go tended to meander between well executed plot threads and those less so, featuring both wonderfully charismatic characters and their barely watchable counterparts. We'll have to make do without both, from now on. No more Maenad orgies, conniving witch covens and endless droning about who Sookie will jump into bed with this time, but also no more shrewd vampire politics, stupendously supernatural situations and Eric Northman. Not every blood type variety of Tru-Blood proved as delectable, but I still regret having to return to strictly human beverages again after seven years.

Today's News: devils and beasts get some, lose some

More news from everybody's favorite movie website (for those who have heard of it, that is):

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155901/deknight_vervangt_goddard_voor_daredevil

Apparently Marvel and Netflix traded talent for talent here. Both writers/producers have had their fair share of hits, and both stem from Joss Whedon's pool of creative talents. Both Goddard and DeKnight worked on Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel. Similar backgrounds must yield similar results, the powers-that-be at Marvel probably thought. They're probably right. Personally I lamented the loss of the ingenious mind that came up with The Cabin in the Woods - if you haven't seen that hilariously inventive movie, that's something you ought to remedy - but I can surely live with the showrunner of Starz' delightful Spartacus series tackling a Marvel project. I would wager coin it won't be as vulgar as those raunchy Romans, but with DeKnight's evident capability to write intriguing character and plot twists, Daredevil doesn't necessarily take a turn for the worse. Also, DeKnight didn't burn his fingers on that one show called Lost, which might otherwise have left a sour taste in his career. And of course Goddard won't be gone entirely, as his scripts for the first two episodes will remain in use, plus he'll stay on as a 'consulting producer', whatever the hell that's supposed to be. So there's definitely gonna be a touch of Goddard to be felt at first. For now, I see more gain than loss here. And either way it's more likely to give the Daredevil his due than Ben Affleck's less than daring flick back from 2003.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155926/alfonso_cuaron_wijst_fantastic_beasts_af

Too bad, but I kinda saw it coming. Cuaron has spend the last five years working on Gravity, after all. To great effect to be sure, but I'm positive he's in definite need of a creative break from all that digital blue-screen material. Cuaron cares about characters and drama far more than about effects, as his quote makes abundantly clear. I'll say Gravity is the odd-one-out on his resumé in that regard: even though it was basically about two people trapped in space, the technical element to that film far outweighed the acting component. It was the effects that made the experience, not the story. So it's about time he changed back to his former routine, where the opposite held true. Even though not much is revealed about the specific plot contents of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, its very title suggests it's all about the fancy creatures and the exotic locales they inhabit, which are heavily dependant on visual effects to make them come alive on screen. Characters clearly seem to come second here. So that really doesn't sound so appealing to a director who has spent half a decade exploring the digital realm. Cuaron is better off returning to his roots and doing something small for a change, or indeed spending time with his actual biological kids rather than his silver screen babies (I've heard from parents that you have to make time for children for their own sake). And even though Cuaron is out for the first installment of this upcoming fantastic franchise, there's nothing that stops him from expressing his interests for one of the already announced sequels somewhere in later years. In the realm of Potter - which still is where we are in this otherwise Potterless project - anything is known to be possible by now.

Today's Column: Spoiler is Coming

Wrote another column for MovieScene, read it here:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155411/column_spoiler_is_coming

I struggled for a while coming up with a decent topic (as those who are in the business of writing columns are prone to do), but when I had it, it quickly proved to be easy writing. Of course, I made situations appear more poignant and heartwrenching than they actually are in real life, for dramatic effect and poetic license, reflecting the plight of the many unfortunates who are forced into social silence just for knowing more than others. You might read my column as me saying people who cannot take spoilers are a danger to freedom of speech, but that would maybe be reading a little too much into things (then again... perhaps they are!). I don't have as many friends so highly suspectible to spoilers as you would be inclined to believe from this piece, just one or two who make my case for me. And even though I would love to just let it go and throw the truth all out right at them - these characters are all gonna die, yo! - I know better than to jeopardize friendships like that. Just as people who, unlike myself, are not spoiler proof have to learn to live with their disabilities by accepting that in these digital times they are often unavoidable, the rest of us has to learn to accomodate their shortcomings into our everyday lives and simply take such blatant personality flaws for granted. Pity them for their wilful lack of ignorance, I say.

A funny thing concerns the last paragraph of this column, in which I state that I might stumble unto wholly new plot lines not as yet addressed in Martin's novels at some point in the next season. Boy, did the writers of the show prove me wrong! Mere days after penning this column they already seriously digressed from the source material in wholly unpredictable ways which very likely will leave their marks on the act of reading the upcoming novel(s). Not only did the fourth episode of the fourth season change quite a few things on already existing plot lines, the show's ending was either completely made up by the episode's writer, or contained potentially massive book spoilers. Apparently the showrunners deduced that after the shocking events of last season, the majority of the show's fans would have taken to the books already by now, because they could not take 'not knowing' anymore when a written alternative was within their grasp, so they decided to start surprising that, probably fairly considerable, chunk of the audience sooner than anticipated by adding some true 'terra incognita' to the show. Personally I hope they won't continue that process too often over the course of this season: after all, even if only 10% of the next book is covered this way, I still prefer not to know what's coming my way in the pages of Martin's writing, even though I proved less concerned by such thoughts in the case of the TV show. I guess I'm not as spoiler proof as I initially considered myself to be. It's just the question to what medium these spoilers refer to. Televison spoilers? Whatever. Book spoilers? Shut the fuck up and get out of here!

Today's Double News: Flashy new Hobbit name

Here's a double bit of recent movie news for y'all:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155362/derde_hobbit_krijgt_nieuwe_naam

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155325/fox_produceert_remake_flash_gordon

You can't keep a legendary Sci-Fi franchise down forever. Interest in it waxes and wanes, and always it comes back, though it may take a few decades. Flash Gordon is about as classic a name in the genre as they come, currently celebrating his 80th birthday no less. Still, most members of the contemporary audience will probably recognize the name only from being (lovingly) made fun of in Seth MacFarlane's recent comedy Ted. Admittedly, I have never seen or read any of the various incarnations myself (for shame!). I guess I should at least check out the 1980 movie, which is arguably the most well remembered version on the character's tale around. From what I know about the adventures of Flash, the most important aspect of a potentially successful remake is not to make it feel corny and kitsch. Though it cannot be denied that the character has had a great impact on popular culture and the Sci-Fi genre in particular - Star Wars owes more than a few of its narrative make-up to the 1930s' space hero - its familiarity also caused the genre to be looked at with disdain for decades. It was just hard to take this space opera seriously - can you blame it with silly names like 'Planet Mongo' and 'Ming the Merciless'? - and it wasn't until the Fifties that science fiction pictures based around intelligent premises instead of the attractive exoticness of special effects and alien locales started to make their mark on (the cinematic front of) the genre. Ever since then, Flash has had a tough time truly connecting with an audience other than avid fanboys. The 1980 movie failed to built a continuing franchise of movies around the concept, and even the 2007 TV-series proved shortlived. Maybe the wondrous sense of adventure of the space opera is just too outdated and old-fashioned by now, as spectators demand more intelligence form their science fiction these days. After all, John Carter is a very similar sort of space hero, and look how poorly he did at the box office only two years ago. Will Flash Gordon do any better? It may take a few new Star Wars movies to get the public interested in space operas again, but it's safe to say Gordon will return in one form or another even if this new project fails to find an audience. He always has. Hopefully the same will ring true for John Carter...

Now fantasy, that still works. In fact, if you say it's more popular a genre than ever, you may not be wrong. It keeps scoring with the audience, as Game of Thrones reaches new heights in terms of audience ratings (and download ratings too). And at the same time, The Hobbit trilogy carries on, slowly but surely nearing its end as Peter Jackson is in the process of finishing that third and final movie. Which just got a new name, like it or not. There and Back Again it is called no more, as it has received the novel subtitle The Battle of the Five Armies. Can't say I'm a big fan of that one. Granted, it covers the movie's contents well enough, as this is what most of the film will deal with. I'd say it's too blunt a title. The Lord of the Rings movies may already have had their subtitles picked out for them by the source material, but The Hobbit is not so fortunate. Can you imagine the second LotR movie being named The Battle of Helm's Deep? Surely not, as The Two Towers has a more ominous and poetic, less direct quality to it. So I thought it was with There and Back Again, as the book did not provide a catchy enough subtitle itself (The Clouds Burst? Nay!). PJ argues it would have fit a two movie adaptation, but not a three part series, as Bilbo was already 'there' in The Desolation of Smaug. True. But he's still 'there', and he is destined to go 'back again'. So in my mind, it's not a relevant argument. The Battle of the Five Armies is simply too direct, though not without merit of mystery for a lay audience. Whose forces make up these five armies? And how does the dragon, which at one point seemed to be what this series was all about, fit in exactly? Predictable questions that would not arise with There and Back Again, but will not entice the audience any more than the last movie already would have. Truth is: The Battle of the Five Armies sounds like a cheap video game title. I would have preferred something with a little more literary charm to it. Even the other suggested new name, Into the Fire, sounded more intriguing. But hey, I'm not making these movies, I'm only paying to watch them (well, not really) so why should I care about the titles as long as the movie proves as entertaining (or more so) than its predecessors? It's not like fanboys revelled in the second movie's name either. Or even the first. I guess it takes an actual fantasy writer slash linguist to come up with something really iconic. It surely would have helped if Tolkien had split up the original novel in three parts himself.

Today's Review: Noah

Noah: ***/*****, or 6/10

You have to applaud his boldness, as Darren Aronofsky isn't afraid to seek out controversy with his first blockbuster movie. After sticking to the experimental and independent corners of contemporary American cinema for decades and continuously teasing the industry with his alleged plans to direct a big budget film for a major studio on more than one occasion (RoboCop for example), Aronofsky finally did just that. He hasn't made it easy on himself, opting for a Biblical epic that needs to appease both the religious spectators and the general international audience that does not care much for Old-Testament overtones, in a time where the divide between the tastes of both has parted as wide as Moses did the Red Sea. With Noah, Aronofksy makes a brave attempt to keep everybody emotionally invested in the story of the man chosen by God to preserve His creation, but it proves an undertaking as monumental as saving the whole of the animal kingdom on a single boat.

Noah's main problem is it must be faithful enough to the source material without being so religious as to scare away non-believers, as the studio can't afford to choose one part of the film's potential audience over the other to recuperate from its 125 million dollar budget. Concessions to both parties had to be made, and the result is an obvious, uncomfortable attempt at making a Biblical epic feel less Biblical but no less epic. If the studio ever thought they could have made a final cut of this movie that wouldn't be prone to harsh judgment from Christian groups, screentesting three different rough cuts – none of them in line with Aronofsky's own vision – to strong criticism from a religious audience made them aware of the impossibility of that endeavour. And so Aronofksy's cut is the one shown in theaters, bound to undergo the inevitable public scrutiny.

Noah follows Russell Crowe as the titular character. A descendant from the line of Seth, he and his family live a life of vegetarian righteousness and solitude, away from the rest of mankind, the offspring of the murderer Cain, which has deteriorated into a semi-industrial yet barbaric state and devoured the natural world. Avoiding contact with other people, Noah and his wife (Jennifer Connelly) have kept their three sons sheltered, teaching them to respect creation above al else. Naturally, the boys prove curious as to the way of life from their violent brethren, the rebellious middle son, Ham (Logan Lerman) most of all. Plagued by disturbing visions of humanity suffering under a great flood and inexplicable signs of the Creator – a being adressed only as such throughout the piece, as the term 'God' appears taboo – Noah seeks out his grandfather Methuselah (Anthony Hopkins) to learn what It has in store for him. The strange and somewhat childish hermit informs him that the Creator is planning on cleansing His world by water, washing away all the wickedness of man, while Noah is destined to save the innocent, the animals, from extinction. And thus Noah sets out to built a vessel to do just that.

Even a man as tough as Crowe cannot hope to perform such a Herculean task by himself, but thankfully Aronofksy has added some stone giants to aid him in his divine labour. Fallen angels that were abandoned by God because they desired to help the sons of Cain in their growth, they exist as supernatural beings of light trapped in volcanic rock bodies, deformed and in agony over the fact men returned their kindness with mayhem and war. Of course, a man as obnoxiously righteous and noble as Noah wins them over easily. These so-called Watchers now do more than observe, helping Noah to complete his task and protect the Ark they construct together over eight years time. The stone giants form a welcome addition to the rather dreary Noah and his one-note family, dull to watch thus far. It's also clear that much of the budget for visual effects went into designing them, at least more so than the budget allocated to rendering the animals that come pouring into the Ark when it is completed. Their design, which bears to mind both utterly fantastic and prehistoric creatures, compels the audience to consider Noah even more of a fantasy picture: unless Aronofsky means to take some sort of evolutionary process into account, envisioning these animals as almost their contemporary counterparts, but not just quite there yet.

Naturally, it's the human element that proves key in making us care about Noah's plight. The selfless man must confront the vicious king Tubal-Cain (Ray Winstone) and his legion of followers as the rains start to fall and the monarch gets wind of the Creator's purpose for his people. Winstone as always makes for an alarming villain, but there is an uneasy truth in the king's philosophical rhetoric as well: God made man in his image, so does that not also include his capacity for destruction? After all, how much difference is there between a God who feels like destroying mankind to save His creation and a king who kills to feed his people? Though the resulting thunderstorm battle between Noah and the Watchers and Tubal-Cain's vast forces proves a fairly thrilling battle – a comparison to the Helm's Deep battle from The Two Towers does not feel inappropriate – it's such exploration of the nature of man and his relation to the Creator's purpose that make for Noah's most interesting aspect, as could be expected from Aronofsky. Unfortunately, once the battle is over and the waters swallow the world, the film has reached its narrative climax, but Aronofsky spends another 45 minutes examining the emotional climax, as Noah's family finally gets to evolve into more than cardboards characters. A little late to the game, as an overdrawn ending forces itself upon the spectator.

It's in this third act of the film that Noah emerges as a true religious fanatic, claiming to alone understand his Creator's purpose as His chosen one. The protagonist feels that God intended for humanity to die out entirely, including him and his family, for the greater good of the innocent animals. Fortunately the only woman in his company eligible for breeding, a young girl once rescued on the road (Emma Watson, with an overly strong off-putting English accent), was barren, but proves no more thanks to Methuselah's convenient magic. As his oldest son gets her pregnant, Noah makes no secret from his intention to murder her child if it's a girl. And so the noble hero quickly degenerates into a violent misogynist terrorizing his family for months on end. Suffice to say, the audience quickly loses all sympathy for him. Maybe this new side of Noah is what ticked off the religious audience in the first place, as it wanted to make clear that not all true believers condone such homicidal, fanatically zealous behavior. To make matters worse, the king managed to slip aboard the Ark unseen and lick his wounds in the lower levels aided by the rebellious teenager Ham, who is angry with his father for not allowing him to find a girl to share his life with before the Apocalypse. It takes nine months for the waters to recede and Noah's crisis of faith to reach its crescendo, while the king is eating his way through the animal kingdom in the lower decks and Noah doesn't even notice species dying out rapidly on his watch. Of course Noah predictably chooses love over blind faith in the end and kills the king: and so generic Hollywood conventions triumph over Aronofksy's fascinating but at times disturbing notions on the human condition in relation to its supreme being.

For those that feared Aronofsky's signature style is lost adhering to the rules of Hollywood, they can rest assured to some extent as it is only tempered. Aronofsky still gets to revel in fast cutting montages and creepy dream sequences as often before, applying the former into a neat but contextually awkward sequence of life's evolution. The director also makes wonderful use of the fabulous landscapes provided by the Iceland locations to give the viewer a sense of awe throughout the picture. And as in his earlier work, he's not afraid to occasionally outright shock the audience, illustrated by a nightmarish sequence in which Noah visits Tubal-Cain's encampment in secret and witnesses animals being torn apart alive by hungry mobs, who have also taken to cannibalism. The disturbing imagery effectively evokes dark and moody paintings of hell and Judgment Day by the likes of Bosch and convinces us that whatever truth there is in the king's words, Tubal-Cain is not a good guy. So we are left with picking the side of a man who makes his family cry as he threatens to kill newborns on behalf of a God who destroys the world to start over, in the hopes of getting it right this time. It's ironic the studio tried to do a similar thing in the editing room to get that final cut of Noah that appeases everybody, despite the misgivings of the director who had to do all the hard work. Man failed God (again) as was bound to happen, and though there's solid action galore and a decent time allotted for thoughtfully debating the relationship between man and his creator, Aronofksy similarly could never have succeeded in making Noah work for everybody.

Today's Double News: less than yesterday

Let's resume posting news in the usual frequency, shall we?

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154917/marvels_dreadstar_wordt_bioscoopfilm

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154916/nieuwe_uitgebreide_trailer_godzilla

I had only vaguely heard of Jim Starlin's Dreadstar, which is not surprising as it didn't get a Dutch translation, unlike many other Marvel comics. It's not a part of the regular Marvel Universe, instead being featured on the pages of Epic Illustrated, a semi-independent Marvel imprint where creative talent could show off their own ideas and keep more of their royalties accordingly. Now that Marvel is a really, really hot brand, it's a no-brainer studios, big and small, are looking for as yet unexploited Marvel properties, even in more obscure corners. It's good to see lesser known franchises are also eligible for cinematic adaptations, though in Dreadstar's case, it's hard to sell to a financier since the story is so unlike the existing Marvel movies, not to mention wholly outlandish and definitely expensive to produce. Audience expectations of super heroism when hearing the name Marvel might also work against the project, as this is totally different conceptually from the Marvel style people have come to know and love from the movies. Don't expect crossovers with already established characters, even the cosmic ones like Thor or the upcoming Guardians of the Galaxy. Dreadstar is a whole different animal. Which is what makes it exciting as a movie project, but a tough sell for the small studios that now own the rights. Whether Dreadstar will truly make it to the big screen only time will tell. I'm hoping there's room for unusual Marvel off-shoots like these though. There's more to Marvel than superheroes, you know? I can live without an adaptation of Millie the Model though.

I could also live without another American remake of Godzilla, but Hollywood is presenting us with one of those regardless, and I gotta say, it doesn't look so bad. Considering how few of the original Japanese movies can actually be called 'good', that's not so hard to pull off. This new 'extended look' isn't as extended as you might at first be inclined to think, and basically serves as yet another trailer, with about half of its material shown before and the other half new stuff to keep us interested. And since Breaking Bad, I'm always interested in Bryan Cranston, even is he is playing second fiddle to a giant digital reptile. It seems the trailer is telling us that the human element to the story is not neglected - good thing to, if you have an actor of Cranston's stature on your payroll - though of course the creature is still of greatest interest and therefore, not shown as much as you would like, confined to shapes and silhouettes. It keeps the audience in suspense as to what this latest incarnation of the King of Monsters will look like. Though those who really want to find out need only take a look at the movie's merchandise, which has already been released. Wanna see what the new Godzilla looks like? Click this link. That's right, he's fat. And his spikes are rather small. And there's a million other things fans might hold against this design, but hey, at least he doesn't look like his silly Sixties' Japanese counterpart seen here, which could be seen merrily cavorting in kids' movies, dancing around and such. You wonder how this beastie could have grown so iconic despite doing a bunch of these terrible kiddie pictures.

Today's News: Lupita going to the Dark Side?

Here's a newsflash for you, this one more recent than most of late:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154439/lupita_nyongo_mogelijk_in_star_wars_episode_vii

The term 'rising star' - in this scenario, a blatantly predictable pun which even I could not refrain from using - has fallen more than a few times over the last few weeks in Nyong'o's case, and rightfully so it would appear. This actress is still at the start of her career, but has already won an Oscar and is now up for a role in what is probably the most major, highly anticipated blockbuster event of the next couple of years. Other than a recurring character in a TV show and a side role in a fairly standard action thriller, her on-screen resumé is a notable blank. It's likely we'll be hearing a lot more of her in the future, though she may also be one of those cases that witnessed a quick burst to stardom and an equally swift demise back into obscurity. Wouldn't be a first, even for an Academy Award winner. But let's not assume a worst-case scenario just yet.

Let's see whether she gets the Star Wars part first, which seems likely. After all, thanks to the Oscar there's a lot of sudden hype around her name, and that's what attracts studios these days. Her talks with J.J. Abrams took place prior to the Oscar ceremony, but now that she has won it's safe to say interest in her participation on the next chapter of the Star Wars saga is at a high and the studio is willing to go the extra length to ensure she bites. But like everything Episode VII, the question remains just what she's sinking her teeth in. Rumours abound of course. The strongest indicate she's a villain, and a Sith no less. That means she'll probably be working closely with Adam Driver, who recently was cast as a bad guy too. If there's any truth to these rumours, so far we have baddies aplenty, though the word on the heroes is still spread thin, particularly how they connect with existing characters we've come to love that are apparently up for an old age reprise, like Luke, Leia and Han. It's likely we'll be introduced to a new generation of Jedi learning the ways of the Force from Master Luke, that find themselves at odds with the usual 'anti-Jedi' Sith Lords and the remnant of the Galactic Empire. How these characters relate to each other is still in the clear, and it may not be as much of a family affair as before (face it: Episodes I through VI were all about the Skywalkers, the good and the bad, especially if you subscribe to the theory that Palpatine Force-fathered Anakin). Odds are strong we'll be treated to the offspring of the original heroes, but the villainy will likely originate from elsewhere. I doubt Nyong'o will portray a character related to the Skywalkers (though that thought may spring from the racist inside me). Heck, Nyong'o might not even play a bad girl at all. Such rumours have a tendency to start their own life online and are often revealed to have no basis in reality. Until we hear more concrete details about Episode VII's plot and characters, it's probably better for our sanity to regard every bit of news about this project - and there will undoubtedly be lots of those! - with an appropriately dispassionate grain of salt. 'Lupita Nyong'o might be up for a part in Star Wars', you say? Get back to me when the deal at least is closed, please.

Todays Double News: Game of Thrones, secrets and revelations

Two bits of news today, both concerning everybody's favorite sexy, bloody, epic HBO fantasy series called Game of Thrones:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154367/game_of_thrones_stopt_na_7_of_8_seizoenen

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154335/derde_trailer_games_of_thrones_seizoen_4

All good things must come to an end, even Game of Thrones, like it or not. Setting a limit is probably for the best, considering milking it out indefinitely can only lead to a downfall in terms of quality. That said, with no more than four seasons remaining, there's still quite a lot of ground to cover. As the latest trailer reveals, the next season will already deal with a fair amount of chapters from the fourth book (and therefore also the fifth book, as those two coincide storywise). This sadly means a lot of material from the books will be excised for reasons of time, and that's a damn shame considering the many wonderful minor plot lines A Song of Ice and Fire that make up the rich realms of the Seven Kingdoms. Now that the show is rapidly catching up with the books, this also means that for a change the series might soon actually start to spoil the books by omitting story that ultimately proves omittable, even though we haven't yet come to believe that from reading the novels. That seems inescapable. Even though Martin insists he won't let the series overtake his work, fact is with a maximum of eight seasons the date is set: we can expect the ending four years from now. However, Martin still needs to finish two books, and from his track record we can assume he will need quite a while longer to complete those. Unless we're closer to the ending than anticipiated and the last two novels will turn out a fair bit thinner than their predecessors, which I'm hoping is not the case. I would prefer already knowing the end of the books from the show, but still staying able to get a rewarding reading experience thanks to everything the series doesn't tackle. If Benioff and Weiss get their way, at least it will safeguard the series from unneccessary milking and most likely the ever dreaded cancellation too. I was kinda hoping the show would have to resort to a break somewhere down the line because the story had yet to be finished, at which point a spin-off/prequel series of sorts would temporarily takes its place. There's plenty of material to cover after all: Robert's Rebellion, the Targaryen conquest, Dunk and Egg, etc. It seems that won't happen now, thanks to the showrunners' creative integrity. You don't see that every day in TV. Who knows, HBO execs might still overrule them. I doubt they care much about the notion of milking a show this successful out for every cent they can get out of it. And otherwise they can still do a spin-off later on. Wouldn't be the only contemporary hit series to do so, just look at Breaking Bad and The Walking Dead.

In the meantime, the new trailer continues to whet our appettite for Season 4 even more. The battle for Meereen and the unexpected shot of Braavos - I thought the latter would be kept for the Fifth Season - let us know we can expect quite some exotic new locales, while the intrigue between the many characters remains as strong and compelling as ever. And if this isn't enough marketing material, there's the Vanity Fair photoshoot, which is... something else entirely. All the actors dressed as their characters looking uncomfortably cheerful while standing at a beautiful rocky coastline: why do these fashion photoshoots always utilize such an odd look that seems woefully out of touch with the series or films they cover? Judging from the semi-hilarious behind-the-scenes video, the cast proves a bit uneasy over the photoshoot themselves. As long as the characters refrain from engaging in overly concordial behavior in the series, I don't mind. After all, we want to see them stabbing each other in the back and screwing everybody over, not happily holding hands!

Valar Morghulis: all series must die. But not today.

Hodor!

Today's Double News: can't hate this behind the scenes video

Two more bits of news I posted on MS yesterday:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/153580/tarantino_maakt_mogelijk_alsnog_hateful_eight

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/153579/nieuwe_blik_achter_de_schermen_game_of_thrones

So Game of Thrones has a new production designer. Considering the stunning design of the sets of the first three seasons, that's a tough act to follow. From the looks of it, Debbie Riley seems up to the task, as the new sets (as well as new versions of several locations used prior, including the Eyrie) look equally grand as those that came before. At least, so it appears from this short puff piece video. Of course, the grandeur and beauty of the sets not withstanding, it's the actors which make them come alive, and what we want to see most is which of our beloved characters - the ones that yet live, that is - will return next season. Apart from that, first glimpses of new characters are also most welcome. The preview this little behind-the-scenes clip offers introduces another new character, namely Tycho Nestoris of the Iron Bank of Braavos, played by Mark Gatiss. That's one more down. No other new faces here, but fan favourites including Daenerys, Brienne, the Hound, Arya and Cersei Lannister still appear very much alive. For a moment longer at least, you know how this show works... characters come and go, but at least we'll always have fabulous production design.

And surprise, surprise: Tarantino may be reconsidering dropping The Hateful Eight. I was sorta expecting him to. You don't shelve a project that fast just because someone leaked a script. Scripts get leaked all the time. You do some damage control, but you don't throw out the project completely. How many members in the audience actually bother to read scripts? Even if some people know the story and post it online, the vast majority will still be surprised by the finished movie. Better yet, you can slip in some sneaky rewrites to catch those who spoiled themselves off-guard. Folks in the industry will know better than to leak Tarantino again now, since even though The Hateful Eight might still end up on the big screen despite what we first heard, I bet the lawsuits (all-American style sueing!) this hateful Tarantino is preparing will not be abandoned so easily. Let that be a lesson for those who spoil things for others!

Today's not-so-mini-review: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug: ****/*****, or 8/10

The middle part of a trilogy is always said to be the hardest part to finish successfully to everybody's approval and acclaim, since it it cursed with the absence of both beginning and end, while it must feel like a coherent piece on its own. In the case of Peter Jackson's Hobbit trilogy, this adage is once again proven fact. Whereas The Two Towers established itself as a perfect bridge between both other Lord of the Rings movies while remaining equally convincing and enjoyable on its own merits, the same cannot wholly be said of The Desolation of Smaug. Though a thrill ride of a movie, in many ways it feels simply too much like a set-up for a conclusion, ending in a frustratingly grave cliffhanger which leaves every story line unresolved. At the same time, its tone and style are much darker and more serious than its predecessor's, the wonderfully lighter themed An Unexpected Journey. And I'm positive the Tolkien fanatics amongst the audience have a thing or two to comment about the loose manner in which Jackson and his co-writers have adapted both the Hobbit novel proper and material from Tolkiens' various other works for their own narrative advantage, since, especially in the second half of this film, many creative licenses have been permitted, some of them dubious to say the least. The first half of The Desolation of Smaug however follows the novel more closely, admittingly racing through the original source material with more speed than feels appropriate or desirable.

Picking up where the previous movie left us, we find 'the Hobbit' Bilbo (Martin Freeman) and Thorin Oakenshield's (a brooding, increasingly torn Richard Armitage) company of Dwarves still on the run from Azog the Defiler's murderous band of Orcs-on-Wargs. Fortunately, shelter is found at the house of Beorn, an enigmatic, hairy giant of a man, who is said to be a skinchanger specializing in bears. Little is done with both this notion and this persona as he insists the band moves on swiftly, allowing the intriguing character only a mere few minutes of screen time (undoubtedly more to follow in the third installment). Soon after the sickly forest of Mirkwood is crossed, giant spiders (creepy ones too!) are combatted and angry Elves are confronted, the latter scene re-introducing another LotR character not present in the novel but added for the sake of convenience and pleasing the (female) audience, in this case Orlando Bloom's Legolas. Still an angry Elf skilled with a bow and looking gorgeous, Bloom's look and traits remain the same as his lack of notable acting skills when first we met his character. Nevertheless, his personality is fleshed out in regards to his forest home (another impressive design feat) and his fellow Elves, including his stern father Thranduil (Lee Pace overacting a bit) and his socially adventurous female captain-of-guard Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly), a character as completely made up for this film as her soon developing romantic interspecies relation with Kili (Aidan Turner), echoing the Arwen/Aragorn affair of the former trilogy, no doubt convincing certain demographics to stay tuned to see where this is going exactly. Not very hospitable, Bilbo is forced to save his friends from the Elves' jail, unleashing a memorable escape scene via barrel and river, with foes on all sides as the Orcs return to plague both Elf and Dwarf, effectively giving Bombur a chance to prove you shouldn't mock comic relief centered around fat people, which also provides us with one of the few grand moments of comedy (Jackson style) this film features, as it is a grittier movie as a whole. Said chase leads to the company meeting Bard the Bowman (Luke Evans) of Laketown, a reluctant smuggler and rebel against his city's corrupt regime under the command of the ragged Master (Stephen Fry!). Now also getting mixed up in the politics of Men – and already intertwined in the affairs of several clans of Elves, Orcs, Goblins, Eagles, skinchangers, Wizards and other Dwarves, for those keeping track – matters are complicated even further for Thorin and his companions, making the story both more substantial and increasingly convoluted. Basically it comes down to this: everyone wants dragon gold, but all fear dragon fire. Someone has to start the ball rolling, and of course that sorry job falls to the titular Hobbit. 

 

And where is Gandalf (the great Sir Ian McKellen), you may wonder? He leaves Bilbo and the Dwarves at the start of the movie, setting on his own adventure in search of the identity of the rumoured Necromancer. As was the case with The Two Towers, The Desolation of Smaug incorporates multiple story lines that won't come full circle until the final film. Gandalf and Radagast travel to the ruined fortress of Dol Guldur in search of much needed answers, a quest which feels like getting in the way of the main plot more than is comfortable, but which still follows the novel, except this time also showing Gandalf's voyage, which was only briefly mentioned in the literate version of the story. Gandalf's journey proves a narrative element which will greatly enhance the feeling of cohesion between both Tolkien trilogies, but forms an uncomfortable plot obstacle in this movie, only enlarging the bleakness of the overall film and adding more characters and plot to the piece, which was already bursting in that regard.

Simply said, a lot is going on in The Desolation of Smaug, as many characters and their various motivations are introduced into the story, while those of others from An Unexpected Journey are pushed to the back a little (no White Council politics in this one, but undoubtedly more to follow in the third installment). Naturally, not everything is given equal opportunity to shine and we would liked to have seen more of many elements, getting to know these characters a little better, which we will next year. Until that time we have to make do with the set-up for said scenes to follow, while an extended cut of this second part is indubitably also to be expected (and definitely called for!), considering we are treated to the bare necessities of all these characters without delving too deeply in their motivations and aspirations, often making us wonder whether additional material was cut to keep up with the fast pace of this film, which still runs a whopping 161 minutes. However, desolation is far from our mind when we finally encounter the big lizard himself, the dragon mentioned on countless occasions so far, even in Jackson's previous trilogy. It cannot be denied Smaug is an astonishing creation, an erudite, intelligent and charming, but naturally ruthless and temperamental dragon of fabulous size and strength, everything we expected him to be if not more so. Credit has to be given to both Benedict Cumberbatch's vocal and mo-cap performance and the Weta design team reponsible for bringing the mighty beast to life so utterly compellingly, resulting in one of the most fantastic and impressive computer generated characters in the history of film. A good thing too, since the reliance on computers over more traditional FX methods is overtly evident in this film's case, giving many scenes a bit too much of a green-screen vibe. Like his golden hoard similarly is the focal point of the entire story, the dragon is the big pay-off for the audience, and Jackson and co. triumph in this department, also succeeding in forging a cliffhanger that is sure to vex spectators to such extent they will return next year in even more record-breaking numbers. In the dragon's case, this may give cause to disappointment though, as those who have read the book will soon come to realize as they remember Smaug's ultimate fate. Fortunately that portion of the audience still has the conclusion of the Kili/Tauriel relationship to look forward to and guess over all year long. Yes, that is a bit of sarcasm there.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is a flawed middle part of what may still end up to be another masterpiece trilogy. While there's many a plot element that leaves much to be desired, in terms of good fun, spectacular vistas, grandiose action scenes and fabulous dragons it still proves a great blockbuster movie which leaves us craving more. Unfortunately not holding up on its own so solidly as An Unexpected Journey, it may prove to be a fine piece of work when the trilogy is completed as a whole and everything that is set up in this film is resolved to our satisfaction in the upcoming There and Back Again. One cannot help but keep wondering whether splitting up The Hobbit in three pieces as opposed to two was a good idea. Forging the last two films into one may have resulted in a more agreeable second movie, albeit a very, very long one.

Today's Mini(?)-Review: Frozen

Frozen: ****/*****, or 8/10

Say what you will about conservative Disney, there is some form of modernization in progress in that studio. You might even label it a feminist wave of sorts. Frozen marks Disney's first feature length animated film (co-)directed by a woman and only the second whose screenplay was written by such a creature. Not counting Pixar, since then it would have to contend with Brave, a movie where the girl power backfired, as did the quality of the piece as a whole. And while Frozen largely stays within the trite-and-true boundaries we've come to expect from Disney's fairy tale movies, including princesses, charming princes, faraway lands, comedic (animal) sidekicks and plenty of catchy songs, enough of such regularly exploited material is directionally changed to make the film feel as fresh and cool as the imagery the title inspires. Jennifer Lee's directorial debut introduces not one, but two beautiful young princesses, Elsa (voiced by Idina Menzel) and her younger sister Anna (Kristen Bell), heirs to the kingdom of Arendelle. Both are kind, independent and energetic spirits, but the older girl carries a terrible secret: she's basically a mutant with the power to control ice and snow, except she doesn't control it at all, since her fear to wield it controls her instead. She has cause to be afraid of her powers, as she nearly killed Anna at play as a child. Her parents tried to keep her out of harm's way by largely keeping her confined to her chambers, much to the dismay of her sister, who had her injury and memory of the incident erased by a nice wizard troll (this is a work of fantasy, need I say more?). After the death of their parents and the coming-of-age of the elder sister, a coronation takes place where Elsa is crowned queen and where Anna – hilariously – meets her apparent groom-to-be, the latter event uterly disrupting the former as Elsa unwittingly gets pushed so far she sparks an endless winter that covers the entire kingdom in frost. Fleeing the palace to built her own on a high mountain precipice where she finally starts to accept her powers in her moments of isolation, Anna is determined to bring back her sister and get her to undo her unintentional damage to the realm, which leaves her land vulnerable to the shady ambition of certain visiting foreign dignitaries. Accompanied by a simple but reliable young backwoods man named Kristoff, his carrot obsessed reindeer Sven and a wacky living snowman named Olaf, Anna sets out on a tough voyage to reunite with her wayward sister and bring summer back to Arendelle. And, in typical Disney fashion, to discover True Love in the process. But not in the usual sense of old.

Frozen proves a worthy successor to the similarly themed, equally wonderful Tangled (2010), which also re-established Disney's formidable talent to craft charming, adventurous and romantic fantasy films for all ages after over a decade of creative drought, as well as updating its female characters to the 21^st century, a time in which the main focus of a woman is no longer a man to marry (but also not excluding the possibility as not to upset the traditionalists in the audience). Frozen introduces two solid female characters who care first and foremost about eachother, though one of them does not allow herself to show said fact. Both women are sizzling with recognizable character flaws and strengths, familiar emotional family conflict and the talent to burst into song, so despite their ultimately antagonistic nature (though the traditional 'good versus bad' set-up is carefully avoided in their strained relationship), you root for them and their sibling affection both to survive against all odds. Simultaneously, while the sterotypical good looking prince to wed is not an image to be discarded, it develops into quite another direction than is usual, and the expected notion of cheesy True Love messages doesn't end up covering the usual sexual connection between boy and girl. The voice cast delivers impeccable acting and shares an audible chemistry, standout performances including a hilarious Scandinavian tradesman (jå!) and Olaf, the token sidekick, who is not nearly as irritating as he could have been and actually warms everybody's heart with his simple but unattainable desire. Similarly enjoyable are the clan of stone trolls, Kristoff's surrogate family, a group of Smurfesque creatures with the ability to succesfully camouflage themselves as rocks, and who unfortunately don't nearly have as much screen time or background exploration as we would have liked. And if you're afraid the reindeer talks (since animals with the ability to speak are an oft dreaded Disney staple still), fear not: his master does so for him to witty, almost self-reflective results. The songs are a welcome return to tradition; though for a moment at the start of the film they seem to comprise most of the dialogue, better balance to the music is applied later on. Apart from pleasing the aural senses, Frozen offers a delightful visual feast as well with its wondrous winter landscapes and ever present snow motifs, but considering the darkness of many scenes coupled with the obligatory 3D effect, not all the imagery ends up looking as amazing as it could have been. However, many of the 3D shots in the lighter scenes hit their mark, especially those involving snow and icicles, so seeing the 2D version instead isn't wholly recommended either.

In a time where Pixar is increasingly going down the drain creatively because of its lack of inspiration and its current focus on prequels and sequels, a thoroughly wonderful and ideologically original pure Disney film like Frozen is a welcome sight. Even the coolest minds and the coldest hearts will find it hard not to melt due to this film's built-in warmth, and with the dominant motif of snow and ice, Frozen proves to be a perfect Holiday movie for old and young alike.

Today's Mini-Review: Thor: The Dark World

The Odinson returns in his second solo venture, more grandiose than the last, but still very close in narrative make-up to its predecessor, despite a change of director. Kenneth Branagh declined the offer to helm this second installment while female director Patty Jenkins was fired early on, at which point Game of Thrones director Alan Taylor took over the reins, and quite successfully so. The Shakespearean overtones are nevertheless kept in, only enlarged by his Martinian experience with grand halls, epic battles and conniving siblings, all too similar in nature to the subject matter so far. After leaving the Avengers and returning home with his captive brother Loki, Thor (Chris Hemsworth more beefed up than ever) has been kept busy for two years fighting rampaging marauders and other dangers to cosmic stability across the Nine Realms. Meanwhile, his human love Jane (Natalie Portman) also hasn't taken time off in search for her divine boytoy by using every scientific means at her disposal. On investigation in Britain, she stumbles upon a portal to another place where she is infected by the Aether, a dangerous, ancient material that is the key energy source of the largely extinct Dark Elves that once battled the Asgardians for dominance in times immemorial, and lost. Sensing the Aether has awoken, the few remaining members of this shadowy race prepare for another shot at universal power grabbing under the leadership of the wrathful Malekith (Christopher Eccleston wearing creepy make-up). When they unexpectedly assault Asgard and kill Thor's mother, the distraught wielder of the powerful hammer Mjölnir disobeys his heavenly father's commands and recruits his untrustworthy brother Loki (an impeccable Tom Hiddleston, again playing the trickster god with the usual vigour that makes him the most fascinating Marvel villain of them all) to defeat the Dark Elves before their nefarious plans for Jane and the universe are brought to their catastrophic conclusion. The only bond that shares them at this point in their overly tumultuous relationship is the mutual love for their mother's memory: otherwise there is no trust or love lost between them. Will Thor manage to save his girlfriend and everything else, without ending with a knife in his back at the hands of his seemingly imbalanced brother, or crushed by the ever stronger Malekith? It will remain to be seen during a bombastic battle in the British capital (instead of set in the States, as has been usual in Marvel movies thus far).

The problem audiences might have with Thor: The Dark World is the fact it doesn't dare to leave its established comfort zone and therefore sticks suspiciously close to what we have already seen in the previous film. Though Thor's cosmic portion of the Marvel Universe is certainly expanded in terms of scope and story, thematically speaking there's little to be found that feels new. The nature of heroism, the love for a mortal woman, the rivalry between brothers: it has all been done before, but at least The Dark World doesn't do it badly. In terms of style Asgard has never looked so glorious to behold: a sharp contrast to the dreadful dead soil of the barren world of Svartalfheim that had to be conquered and annihilated for the Norse gods to rise to power – which makes you rethink how much of 'the good guys' they really claim to be – as we are told in a fabulous prologue that feels a lot like the opening of a certain Peter Jackson fantasy blockbuster. Apart from the many predictable but entertaining scenes of supernatural action The Dark World provides, also ever present is the level of humour that reminds us we ought not to take any of this too seriously, as well as keeping us from forgetting we're watching a comic book adaptation. Key in this is a reversal of the dynamics between Jane and Thor seen previously, where he was cast out of his world in order to come to terms with a “lesser state” of existence for his own good. This time it's Jane's turn to be a stranger in a strange land as she's swept to Asgard where her Earthly unsophisticatedness causes many a merry moment: not because she's overwhelmed by it all, but due to her impulse to make scientific sense of her new environment, which startles the Asgardian natives somewhat. Those who hoped for more Asgardian style dialogue, as present in the comics, will find themselves disappointed though, as the gods unfortunately speak as much of a contemporary language as our own. Thor and Jane make a decent on-screen couple, but it's the supporting cast that succeeds the most in keeping us engaged, with Hiddleston worthy of most praise. It is often said a movie is only as good as its bad guy, which should have made The Dark World a very good movie, but Loki is forced by the plot to be submissive in terms of villainy to Malekith, despite the fact Loki far exceeds this new villain in being interesting (no criticism on Eccleston's performance it must be stated), mostly thanks to his almost heartfelt loss of his mother, which for a moment makes you think he genuinely wants to help Thor in exacting revenge. And by pulling that off convincingly, Hiddleston again reveals why he was such a good choice for this loveable rogue. Dark or not, it's Loki's world, and we would do well never to underestimate him as everyone else does.

And be sure to stick with the credits a while longer to witness a largely unrelated but neverthless hugely intriguing typical Marvel 'bridge' to next year's Guardians of the Galaxy, which will expand the cosmic corner of the Marvel Cinematic Universe even further. It stars Benicio Del Toro with a funny accent and a silly hairdo, so you have no valid reason to miss out on it, really.

Today's News: Elves, Elves everywhere but not a dragon to see

I'm way behind on posting my latest MS news due to lack of time - yes, really! - but fortunately the last two items both revolved around the same film so I merged them into this one blog update. Call it laziness or call it intelligence and a desire not to feel repetitive. I much prefer the latter.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151404/nieuwe_posters_the_hobbit_the_desolation_of_smaug

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151464/nieuwe_poster_en_trailer_voor_the_hobbit_the_desolation_of_smaug

Neat new sneak peek (extended trailer really, but that sounds less appealing) and solid new batch of posters. Only seven new character posters this time instead of the 16 released for An Unexpected Journey. Makes sense, considering most of the Dwarves featured in Bilbo's fellowship aren't of enough import to warrant additional posters of their own, while the new characters, mostly Elves (and the girlbait/boybait actors portraying them, Orlando Bloom and Evangeline Lily (*swoon*: it works! And she bugs the Tolkien purists too, what more could you want?), are in need of audience attention. The timing for the increase of material in The Hobbit's marketing campaign is nothing short of impeccable, considering the release of the big budget (and naturally overhyped, but no doubt still thoroughly enjoyable) fall blockbusters Thor: The Dark World (seen it, liked it well enough) and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. All those vast legions of cinema-goers will be treated to just the right amount of footage to get them warmed up for another epic fantasy fest during the upcoming Holidays. And it comes as no surprise that we still see little of that overgrown hotheaded lizard that is so eminently part of the title, but only briefly glimpsed and overheard in this new trailer. If we want to see what it looks like, we need to buy ourselves a movie ticket. That's how marketing works, and the people providing such for The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug understand this all too well.