Today's News: 'twas a slow week of it

What with all the reviews and such, it took me a while to get around to posting new news (aside from that little item yesterday, but that wasn't news to my mind, it was a gift from the gods), but then, last week wasn't particularly noteworthy in that regard. Here's the entire crop of the previous week:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158028/nieuwe_trailer_netflix_serie_marco_polo

This show is starting to look increasingly epic. Just the way I like my historical drama on telly. Of course, with a modern twist here and there: I doubt any naked sword fights took place during Polo's actual visit, but I'm not complaining. It appears Netflix has a solid first entry into the historical epic on its hands with Marco Polo, likely to rival HBO's quality programs - Deadwood, Rome, Boardwalk Empire - that dabble in the same genre with such notable success. The only thing that bothers me somewhat is the overuse of spoken English. More actual Chinese (and/or Italian for that matter) would have been appreciated to add to the levels of authenticity (especially when actors from those parts are cast), but that goes for any similar show produced in the English language by rival networks, too. Otherwise, this is definitely a series to look forward to.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158043/trailer_son_of_a_gun_online

I'm less impressed by this one. The twisty crime thriller has kinda become a staple in recent years, most of these copying Tarantino's flicks. Son of a Gun apparently does not, judging from this trailer, but otherwise hardly appears innovative. Except maybe for its status as an Australian entry into the genre, can't recall too many of those. Casting Ewan McGregor as a bad guy - with beard, like some sleazy Obi-Wan Kenobi - is a more inspired move though, as he's not often seen in such a capacity, almost playing against type. But the notion of this top dog criminal taking a youngster under his wing for his own shady purposes rather than for his new buddy's benefits is hardly the stuff of novelty, nor is the secret agenda the teenager cherishes to get out on top himself against all odds. I'm reminded of the French film Un Prophete, for example, which featured a very similar story line, minus all the action. I guess there's only so much you can do with prisons and break-outs in whatever country. It's just the way you spice things up that makea any difference.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158068/_greengrass_regisseert_1984

It had to happen sooner rather than later. With all the dystopian movies currently hitting Hollywood's primary audience where it counts the most - their wallets - it's no surprise the granddaddy of all imperfect society stories is slated for a reprise. The Hunger Games, Divergent, The Maze Runner, they all took a page or two from Orwell's (in)famous reflections on ruthless governments absolutely controlling their populace. There's also a lot of sexual material present to appeal to the audience's hormones. Problem is, the original 1984 is a much more adult story, centered around adult protagonists. I doubt the studio will change that core aspect of the story to appeal to the spectators currently gobbling up dystopian fare en masse, nor do I think a serious director like Paul Greengrass would let them. However, just the notion of a society where everybody is under total control of the government's watchful eyes might bring to mind to more mature audiences who don't know jack-squat about Orwell's visionary writings the similar young adult flicks that are doing big business at the boxoffice at the moment. They might turn it down just on its dystopian qualities, ranking it as just another Hunger Games copycat (what do people know, eh?). Or the subject matter might just be too dismally bleak for them, which it just happens to be (nor should that be tampered with). However, I hope adult and younger audiences alike give it a chance, as this particular story remains as urgent thematically as it was at its inception in the late Forties.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158085/adams_speelt_joplin

Janis Joplin is something I know jack-squat of, admittedly. Popular musicians, be they from the Sixties or from more contemporary times, just have never particuarly held my interest. Too busy with watching movies to care about music, I suppose. I only knew Joplin died of an overdose (had to learn it from Austin Powers, I'll have you know). I wouldn't ever recognize her songs. I do know Amy Adams is a fine actress though, so that at least is one thing this biopic about the ill-fated songstress has going for it. I also know director Jean-Marc Vallee has a knack for historical drama, which the story of Joplin's life (and more so, her death) can be called after fifty years. So the motion picture adaptation of Joplin's life and times at least seems to be in good, Academy Award nominated hands, I'd say.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158088/video_the_last_goodbye_voor_derde_hobbit_online

Get out your handkerchiefs, everybody! This video is quite a tearfest. It seems to have been made as much for the fans of both Middle-Earth franchises as for the people involved in making them. We're treated to footage from all six films, most of it fondly remembered, other bits eagerly anticipated. We also get to see a lot of folks hugging each other on set, bringing to mind those good times for those lucky few who helped bring the two trilogies to life. Over all of it Billy Boyd's singing is heard. I don't find the music or lyrics nearly as moving as the imagery, I must confess. The text isn't that much different from the likes of Into the West or May It Be, which graced two our of three Lord of the Rings movies, nor does the melody sound that much different or inspired to my ears. Nevertheless, the message is clear: this is indeed a goodbye, as we're on the threshold of the last (Peter Jackson) directed Tolkien adaptation, and that's a bittersweet thought indeed. Of course, remakes of both projects are bound to occur some time in the future, but for now, it's a sad thought that it will finally end here. It's been a great journey though, one that will forever be cherished for decades to come by the generations that grew up with it. So, from the bottom of my heart: thank you, Peter Jackson and the entire cast and crew of both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings trilogies!

Today's Column: what rhymes with 'Netflix'?

This month's column of mine:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157836/column_wat_rijmt_er_op_netflix

Call it petty whining, but each year I'm having an increasingly hard time finding suitable birthday and Sinterklaas gifts for my ever more demanding loved ones. DVDs are just an outdated medium by now, while few of them ever bothered to make the switch to Blu-Ray at all, rather than sticking to watching things online only (if at all). Sure, you can play a DVD on (most) computers, but it's not the same. Plus, watching things on computers and assorted mobile devices certainly saves shelf space (though of course it doesn't look nearly as sophisticated to visitors!). Point is, I fully agree with all the advantages the digital realm offers. After all, if people stopped watching DVDs, consider the production costs, both financial and material, that would be spared. Fewer DVDs sold means fewer resources wasted on an ever more declining medium. I'm all for that - and the same with books and CDs, naturally - yet I'm so stuck in my own routines that I can't switch to the same life style myself. I just love the feel of a DVD/Blu-Ray, the notion of owning something tangible forever, rather than saving ones and zeros in code on some digital plane, or just plucking things online whenever I feel like it and deleting them when I'm done, like a fleeting dream not long remembered. I applaud my friends and family for their modern mindset, but they can't expect everyone to think alike. So I'll continue to give them DVDs as long as that option is open to me, even though I know they have no particular desire (or space) to own them. I cannot help but stick to what I know best. But if my friends and family can't accept that about me, I guess they'll just have to chalk it up as a bad habit of mine.

Today's News: movies, chappies and junkies

There's been some neat news these past few days, and I got a chance to post my fair share:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157896/nieuwe_trailer_voor_the_hobbit_the_battle_of_the_five_armies

A rather decent little trailer, says I. Seems Middle-Earth will go out with an appopriate bang, as did The Hobbit book to a lesser extent. Moderation surely isn't Peter Jackson's style, particularly if he knows he's not likely to show off like this again. Might as well go all-out one last time. Tolkien purists surely gave up on him right after An Unexpected Journey anyway. This precious trailer looks breathtaking and makes me water my mouth accordingly. However, I'm not the one who needs to be convinced to go see this movie, as I've been planning to do so for a few years now. I guess this trailer doesn't really need to be enticing anyway, as people who want to see the movie will see it anyway and people who don't, won't be pulled in any more by this preview, even if it does look awesome. This trailer definitely is for the fans, who live in the greatest of anticipation for one more month before the cinematic age of Middle-Earth comes crashing down. Unless they do find a way to decently adapt The Silmarillion for the big screen after all.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157867/eerste_trailer_minions

Then there's this trailer. There's a multitude of evil minions in Tolkien's stories, but none are as cute as these. You don't see Orcs getting a movie of their own. (Well, you do, but that's not what I mean.) But it's clear people enjoyed the shenanigans of Gru's little aides more than they did Gru's own sinister schemes, so a spin-off was required by the laws of Hollywood. It's still unclear whether Steve Carell's Gru is in the movie, as some sites claim he is while others deny as much. I think it likely this will serve as an origin story, showing how Gru and the Minions hooked up. Do we need to know that? Not really. I guess people just really like the Minions so much they want to see more of them than their creators originally intended. They're kinda like the Smurfs in that regard: they're small and there's many of them with various personalities, they have their own language, they're monochromatic, etc. If they're indeed a runaway success, will that mean we'll forget about Gru the same way the majority of the Smurfs reader are not aware of Johan and Pirrewiet? That would be a shame, as I think the Minions work best playing off Gru, who himself is an equally delightful character (the voice and nose alone crack me up). It's up to this Minions movie to determine whether the Minions have a staying power of their on, or whether we prefer Gru to be present as well.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157866/junkie_xl_werkt_mee_aan_soundtrack_batman_v_superman

As a fellow Dutchman it's of course expected of me to feel a sense of pride at Junkie XL's accomplishments. Well sure: good job, Mr. XL! Other than that this news doesn't evoke much emotional feelings in me other than gladness we'll be getting a good score for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (now if only we also got a good title...). Hans Zimmer's status as one of the world's leading movie soundtrack composers has long since been established. His tunes can be heard during my workouts on many an occasion (Gladiator is a particular favourite of mine). Junkie XL is just a bonus. His track record of Hollywood scores is still on the short side, but so far he has done well. I liked his score for 300: Rise of an Empire more than the one from its predecessor. Divergent's soundtrack is not nearly as memorable - can't remember a single accord of it for the life of me, to be honest - but at least it didn't leave as sour a taste as the rest of that film did. I like the notion of two composers sharing duties between superheroes' separate scores. It makes sense someone else trackles Batman for this film, as Zimmer already scored that character for the entire Dark Knight trilogy. Since this is a different Batman, a different theme is in order and so a different composer is a logical conclusion. Since we are talking about the same Superman as the one from Man of Steel however, it's only apt that Zimmer keeps scoring him. Big question now is: who's gonna score the inevitable combined superhero/Justice League theme? Zimmer, XL or somebody else entirely?

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157879/eerste_trailer_chappie

Neill Blomkamp continues to dabble in socially pertinent science fiction flicks. It worked out great in District 9, a little less so with Elysium, but there's still more contemporary injustice to be commented upon. From the looks of the trailer, Chappie seems to deal with a 'nature versus nurture' debate: does an artificial intelligence become a criminal because he was "raised" in such an environment, or were there signs of bad behaviour in his personality from the get-go? Does he acknowledge good from evil to begin with, or are such notions beyond his understanding because of the limits in his programming? Is a life of crime considered a logical and reasonable existence under the situations according to the codes written within him? It'll be interesting to see what Blomkamp has to say on the matter, since things are never so black and white in his work. The gritty, down-to-earth look of his Sci-Fi remains catchy, especially in a story closer to home than one dealing with space stations and exoskeletons. This film definitely is worth keeping an eye on. It'll be fascinating to see a robot attempting a robbery for financial gain, rather than a bunch of them trying to take over the world for a change.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157895/titel_star_wars_episode_vii_onthuld

Meh... Damn silly title. I can understand it's not an Episode proper, considering the new studio, the new director and the new direction the franchise takes (but despite the very old cast members returning). But I still find Star Wars Episode VII to be a catchier title than Star Wars: The Force Awakens. The latter kinda sounds like a video game, a bastard child of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed or something. And is this title suggesting the actual Force was asleep during all the previous movies? Yeah, right! I guess J.J. Abrams is the 'Force' in question and he has awoken to make something new and exciting of the franchise (or so he thinks), rather than the dull generic crap he pushed on us with his dreadful Star Trek reboots, during which he was obviously too much asleep to give a crap. And please tell me that isn't the official logo for the movie. It looks like a cheap fan creation. Not that there aren't any fans who could have come up with better titles, of course. How about Star Wars Episode VII: The Empire Takes Over the Franchise?

Today's Triple News: Comic-Con comes but once a year

With Comic-Con currently in progression, there's bits of news to post online almost every minute. Of course, not everything is breaking news, and I can't post it all by myself. But I post whatever I can whenever I can, like these few bits of news:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156653/eerste_fotos_en_poster_derde_hobbit

Now that's a damn spectacular teaser poster! While many teaser posters tend to take a rather minimalist (though often inventive) approach to get audiences aware of the impending arrival of the movie in question, this one goes straight for one of the highlights in the movie. It can afford too, since the scene in question, though of major importance and containing some hefty spoilers for those who haven't read the books, takes place early in the movie, with most of the story, including the titular battle, following in its wake. It doesn't give away the outcome of this particular fight - Bard the Bowman versus the humongous dragon Smaug - but makes the inquisitive viewer, especially those who have seen both previous installments, want to see how it ends. Of course, it would seem unlikely Bard stands a chance, but there's been enough small bits of information feeded to audiences in The Desolation of Smaug to let us know even this giant dragon is not wholly invincible. In the meantime, Lake Town burns, just as Smaug promised. That will have consequences, naturally. And that's when the story of this third Hobbit movie really kicks into gear. So expect another three-hour epic fantasy flick in typical Peter Jackson style, laced with neat-o effects and some lovely acting interspersed throughout. As for the first two stills also released here, they aren't nearly as eye catching, but examination of the characters suggests shifting alliances, which might cause them to contain more story information than this poster. It's just not brought in as exciting a manner.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156651/anthony_hopkins_in_hbos_westworld

Another major A-list actor has been added to HBO's repertoire. I'm not talking about Evan Rachel Wood, though I don't mean to negatively critique her fine abilities to act. But hey, she already was an HBO alum thanks to her role in True Blood as a spoiled and childish vampire queen. But Hopkins, one of the greatest and most distinguished British actors ever, a 'Sir' nonetheless... you can't get much better than that for any role, be it on TV or on the big screen. Ten years ago, nobody would have believed someone of such stature would ever bother doing TV. It signifies just how much television has changed in respect as a medium. TV is where the best writing and the best acting is found nowadays, few people will disagree. Hopkins sure wouldn't, considering the praise he put into a letter to Bryan Cranston, telling him how thoroughly impressed he was by his performance on Breaking Bad and admiring the series high quality overall. It seems Hopkins himself caught the television bug as well afterwards. Good for us, as grand actors are never a bad thing in any medium, plus it might balance J.J. Abrams' input on HBO's Westworld. Hopkins is playing a bad guy, something he does even better than anything else he plays (cannibal or otherwise). Wood however gets to play a sympathetic character, and an abused artificial one at that. I am hesitant about the love plot written in for her, but at least it adds a dynamic not seen in the original Westworld, a good but dated Sci-Fi movie in itself. The stakes just got raised for HBO. Fortunately there's money to spare soon, now that both True Blood and Boardwalk Empire are coming to an end. All good things must be replaced by other good things after all.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156689/comic-con_meer_concept_art_voor_avengers_2

No Comic-Con without a comic book movie, preferably one from Marvel. They call this 'concept art', but from the looks of it, all the concepts found in this poster had already been accepted into the movie as a whole. As we have seen in the various behind-the-scenes stills and official photos for Avengers: Age of Ultron, all the Avengers seen on this eight panel picture look almost exactly as they will in the film. With the possible exception of the Vision, as this is the first glimpse of that character we're offered. They stuck close to his looks in the comics, it would appear, though at this angle it's hard to say for sure. The overall shape and colour scheme sure seem to fit. By comparison, Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch don't look nearly as trite-but-true to their comic book counterparts, though that's done to make them feel a little more realistic. This Quicksilver looks a heck of a lot different from the one seen in X-Men: Days of Future Past so as to minimize confusion between both incarnations. It's gonna be a hard act to outrun the previous take on Quicksilver, though the presence of his sister (and her eventual husband, artificial and all) will surely be helpful in that regard. As is the suggestion this poster gives this Quicksilver will be much more involved into the superhero action, fighting nasty robots and such. The X-Men Quicksilver just bailed out on that one and let his fellow mutants handle those Sentinels all by themselves...

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 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 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.

Today's News: Hobbit part 2 promotion picking up some speed at last

A MovieScene quickie:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/150483/nieuwe_banner_the_hobbit_desolation_of_smaug

Good though teasery piece of artwork. It shows next to nothing of what we new material can expect and in fact much more we already knew we could expect. There's one Hobbit and at least four Dwarves (one of them less hairy and more hunky than the others) that made if as far as Part 2 for example. And there's a dark forest filled with gargantuan spiders that threaten their health. Anything else from this one? Nope. Except the anticipation of more excitement and superior fantasy epicness this movie promised before and continues to guarantee us now. Of course, a new trailer also helps in that last bit of stirring our 'want-to-see' feelings:

 

It works. I want to see this now. 

Movies gone by: the continuation of the continuation of etc.

Today I'll briefly discuss a few more movies I missed discussing in the past few months due to unfortunate circumstances, again. This task is made harder by the fact I still keep seeing new movies every week, but eventually I'll catch up and I'm back on schedule once more. Here's a few good movies for y'all.

Looper: ****/*****, or 7/10

Fairly imaginative Sci-Fi thriller. In the not too distant future, time travel allows crime bosses to send undesirables back in time to have them shot and cleaned up by 'loopers', hitmen of thirty years past specializing in taking out the future's trash. The catch: these assassins ultimately also have to take out their future selves and so 'close their loop'. A particularly efficient looper, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, one day fails to eliminate his older counterpart (Bruce Willis) and ends up on the run to stay out of his former friends' hands. Meanwhile, his almost doppelganger sets out on a scheme to kill the top crime lord of the future, still a kid in this time. Will the young looper team up with himself, or will he try to kill him after all to make up for his failure? A good premise but the movie fails to fully deliver on it in the second half of the film when things quiet down a little too much as JG-L arrives on a farm and falls in love with the mother of his future employer (Emily Blunt). Also thrown in the mix are this little boy's mutant telekinetic abilities, a fairly random feeling addition to overly complicate the plot further. Nevertheless, strong performances throughout (especially the boy (who is one of the finest child actors I've ever seen) and Gordon-Levitt seamlessly incorporating Willis' mannerisms to make for a more believable connection between the pair), some solid action scenes, a harrowing punishment scene (where another failed looper is slowly shown cut into pieces) and a typical but still effective mindfucking temporal conclusion make for a certainly decent watch.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey: *****/*****, or 9/10

Ah, the big epic conclusion of the already splendid movie year 2012! I could easily write a 3,000 word review of this (and should have) but for now this little bit must suffice. I can safely say I haven't had this much fun since Return of the King in 2003. This is about as successful a return to Middle-Earth on Peter Jackson's part as we could have hoped for, and he more than makes up for his abysmal failure The Lovely Bones (2009). Still, this first installment of the Hobbit trilogy is not up to par with the superb Lord of the Rings trilogy, mostly due to a different tone, courtesy of the original novel. This does make for a more lighthearted and warm spirited film, which is not necessarily a bad thing since it does not make the film feel like a retreat of LotR and gives it an identity all its own. The story is known all too well of course. Carefree Hobbit Bilbo Baggins (excellent Martin Freeman) is suckered into setting out on a long journey by wizard Gandalf (excellent Sir Ian McKellen) to the Lonely Mountain Erebor to help a band of Dwarves, led by the noble Thorin Oakenshield (excellent Richard Armitage), reclaim their home and treasure from the giant dragon Smaug (only shown in bits and pieces in this film). On the way the group has to deal with Goblins, Elves, Trolls and Orcs: especially the latter, led by the giant warrior Azog, have no intention of making it easy on the brave travelers. A wonderful revisit of Tolkien's world in full cinematic glory, the movie encompasses old characters (Elrond, Galadriel, Saruman and most impressively of all, Gollum) and locations (the Shire, Rivendel) as well as many new ones. PJ and friends have added a lot of material taken from the appendices of the original LotR novels to get this new trilogy and the previous one more in sync with each other, which does make for longer movies (and even longer extended editions, yay!), but not necessarily worse results. Though the scenes created specifically for this film (Galadriel's relationship with Gandalf, the White Council meeting and such) prove somewhat lacking in terms of writing, it's more than agreeable to see such beloved familiar faces again, and it might prove to be worth it as these subplots are further developed in the next two films. In regard to look and feel, this movie is perfectly in line with the Middle-Earth we have loved for over a decade, also thanks to the contributions of all of PJ's old accomplices (including composer Howard Shore who again delivers a fine score). If the upcoming two Hobbit films are as decent as this one, we have little to worry about. Except maybe spiders.

Today's News, and HFR

Posted this little bit of news on MovieScene the other day, so of course it was bound to appear here as well. Note: it got edited, and the glaring spelling error in Jim Carrey's name is not mine:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/143774/foto_jim_carrey_in_kick-ass_2




Yup, that's right: Jim Carrey is playing a character (named Colonel Stars and Stripes, an obvious reference to the renowned super-patriot Captain America) in Kick-Ass 2. And why not? He's no stranger to comicbook movies, having done Batman Forever and The Mask in the past. With such a track record, you can of course doubt he's a stranger to good comicbook movies, but for now I have full faith in Kick-Ass 2, considering all the old favorites (minus Nicolas Cage's character Big Daddy) are back with a vengeance. There's just little than can go wrong with this movie, which is still being based around a fairly simple premise: ordinary people take to the streets in silly costumes and beat up bad guys. Or so they think. It worked fine the last time around. Naturally there is the danger of the film feeling redundant due to repetition, or the presence of a new director (Jeff Wadlow) who has yet to fully prove his competence in the chair, but so far no really awkward news has reached my ears about this project (except maybe for Matthew Vaughn not returning as director, but at least he will still produce). Judging from this single picture (which is much too little to make a truly based judgment about the whole film) Kick-Ass 2 is simply continuing what Kick-Ass started, meaning we'll get more wacky characters in doubtful mental conditions fighting crime in overly outrageous and no doubt excessively violent manner. Plus more Hit Girl. What's not to like?!

I also, finally, got to see The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey in IMAX 3D HFR, now that the Christmas break has ended and there's finally some showings of the film that are not sold out. Of course I had already seen the movie in the regular 3D version - which I mentioned before was fucking awesome, an opinion I'll stick by - so I got to focus a bit more on the technology behind the film's projection than on the actual movie itself. I must say, HFR is not as bad as I feared it would be. I had already had a few sneak peeks through the projection booth's windows, at which point I was not wearing glasses so it looked absolutely hideous, due to the motion of the camera and characters which seemed cranked up a little too much, making it feel unnatural. As it turns out, HFR is indeed a tool in service of 3D projection. The image looks a lot more quieted down and smooth when wearing the necessary glasses, and it's indeed tremendously sharp to behold. There was only a handful of scenes, mostly concerning fast paced action or close-ups of characters's hands and objects, where you were made aware the film was indeed shot at 48 frames per second, and in those few instances it did indeed momentarily make the projection technology draw attention to itself: this had to be expected, since all the fuss about HFR should warrant the occasional feeling of a different viewing experience, positive or negative.

The sharpness of the imagery does make the job of the visual FX teams creating the movie's vast array of digital effects more difficult. Digital effects stand out more in 48fps, being exposed for the pixels they are. It was clear the FX teams worked overtimes to make their computer generated wizardry appear photorealistic, and for the most part, they succeeded. Gollum was the absolute highlight, looking about as real as he could ever hope to get and, also thanks to Andy Serkis' input of course, giving a totally compelling performance. That said, several shots of charging Wargs and vicious Goblins looked less convincing, but never truly bad. It's clear movies that will be shot in HFR better have the budget to make their VFX look good, since if they fail in this regard, lousy digital imagery will destroy the spectator's viewing experience by exposing the cinematic trickery for what it is.



The question now of course remains: where does HFR go from here? So far the reception of Peter Jackson's new preferred way of shooting a movie has been lukewarm in Hollywood. Which is not surprising, since basically HFR at this point is a gimmick in a gimmick: it looks good in 3D, but has yet to prove visually pleasing in the regular 2D-format, which is still (fortunately) the dominant way of film projection. Though James Cameron has expressed interest in the technology, it'll be years before we see HFR applied to other movies than the upcoming pair of Hobbit sequels. And if the recent evolution of the current 3D-format is any indication, greedy producers hoping to cash in on the phenomenon's hype will quickly apply a cheaper type of HFR to things like low budget horror movies, all too easily satiating the market and ruining HFR's name in the process by not convincing the audience of the need for the format. It can of course be argued there is no particular need for HFR at all. After all, the regular 3D version of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey already was fully engaging as a marvelously pleasing visual presentation, and few audience members complained about image blurring during action sequences. Mostly, viewers were too busy focusing on the movie itself, the story, the characters, the things that still remain, and for that matter will always remain, the most important ingredients for making a good film. At least Peter Jackson still understood that part of moviemaking too.

Ooh, aah, that's how it always starts...

...then later nothing happens. Unfortunately my PC is still out of order for at least another week (screw you, Microsoft!), so all my noble intentions towards updating this blog (almost) every day have turned to naught so far. However, today big news - or something like it - hit the Internet and I just had to post it on MovieScene since it's right up my alley (and nobody else had done it yet). And if I post something on MovieScene, I just have to post it here too:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/143549/jurassic_park_iv_krijgt_eindelijk_release-datum

So it seems Jurassic Park IV is finally going to happen, after over a decade of fruitless tidbits of news, idle speculation and many a misleading message from Mr. Spielberg or one of his producer lackeys regarding the status of the project, which they claimed was gonna happen, after which nothing happened at all for another year until they claimed the same thing all over again just to keep all the fans' hopes up. However, this time a release date has been set - June 13 of 2014, only 5 days before my birthday - and in Hollywood, a release date is very definitive. If you don't make a date, your career is either just over or you're powerful enough to defy Hollywood itself (Spielberg falls into the latter category, but so far he has adhered to set release dates). Plus, the studio claims the movie will be shot (not just released, but actually made) in 3D, indicating just how much faith the studio has in the project (and in the upcoming 3D re-release of the original Jurassic Park, which is also good to know) and therefore in its new deadline. So for all intents and purposes, it seems JP IV is finally our of pre-production hell and gearing up full steam. It better be, since June 2014 isn't that far off, so time is limited. It seems the script, the one thing that has kept the project from happening for so long, is finally done, courtesy of the duo behind the script of the surprisingly good Rise of the Planet of the Apes, also drenched with scenes of genetic tampering on animals to the detriment of humanity, so at least these people, Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver, are likely to understand the JP mythos. Let's hope they kept the proposed human/dinosaur hybrids out of the loop, there's still plenty of real dinosaurs waiting for their big-screen break. Micropachycephalosaurus, anyone?


So this exciting bit of news I managed to post at least. However, there's still so much I can't explore on this blog no matter how much I would want to. Saw Amour and Life of Pi this week, as always I have an opinion about the Oscar nominees and I have yet to review The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey in detail. Suffice to say for now it's fucking awesome and the lack of a computer at least allows me ample time to build this plastic gem: