Change Your Image
AngelDel
Reviews
Hancock (2008)
An oddly enough ride.
Hancock is enjoyable, but has three little drawbacks: Will Smith, the clumsy usage of visual effects and (how not so?) the script .
Although Will Smith has proved that he can act like an actual actor (see the heart-warming The Pursuit of Happiness), most of the films he gets involved in are just commercial blockbusters, with all their negative connotations (his first actual big-screen hit, Independence Day, may have set the tone...). And if he can get involved in the production (and he does again in Hancock) and show off a bit, better still. Show off chest muscles, or backside, or simply poses... You can tell he likes that. He shows off less minutes than in previous films, but he shows off. Just like in I, robot, or I am legend. Still, there's something about Will Smith's presence that stops you from hating him so much despite all this. Odd. Whether this is charisma or not, or whether this film should have been called "I am Hancock" is obviously not the purpose of these lines.
All the visual effects from the trailer and used as bait seem to happen rather soon in the film. Which is good, since they aren't anything special or unseen before. After that, for a moment, it seems the story will acquire deeply human overtones and leave effect in the background... but then the film takes an unfortunate and inexplicable path and we come back to visual effects ad infinitum. No surprises here.
But we also come back to a much darker atmosphere that changes the style of the film and that (again) seems to be uncalled for. There is a similar confusion with the genre itself: comedy, more dramatic at times, "adventure" parts, ... The surprising and unconventional approach probably comes from the intention of making a different superhero film. In practice, however, the producers truly seem indecisive about this, and so ended up creating a strange hybrid creature.
All the above, plus the fact that the relationship between characters is awkward and twisted results in, yes, an entertaining film, but one that doesn't make the most of itself or even reach the end of the story looking like it's the end of the story. If you are reading this in disbelief, go and watch it: the cleaners may have to kick you out, because you won't believe the film is over. As spectators, we are entitled to a fulfilling experience. And if a script doesn't give us this ultimate experience, then we feel emptiness in our film goer hearts. Subconsciously, we ask for more and we can't help cursing the experience.
The Incredibles (2004)
Incredible indeed!
As any Pixar film, this is a movie which appears to be sometimes a very funny comedy, sometimes a moving story capable of touching the toughest spectator. And, as any Pixar film (it doesn't matter if they use toys, bugs, monsters, fish or super-heroes) it remains a powerful story about relationships between human beings.
This time, they tell the story of a family of super-heroes using lots of references to super-hero movies, TV serials and comics, as well as adventure films. "The Incredibles" delights our senses with a powerful script full of sub-plots brilliantly treated, including several relationships inside the family (Mr. Incredible and Elastigirl's love, parents and siblings, children's problems) which are easily believable as well as amazingly familiar.
By combining virtual people and real actors' voices, the characters (all them, not just the main ones, but every single one) end up having more personality than many human actors: nice characters whom we get attached to and whom we worry about. Their bodies and faces make us believe in them and create a favourable atmosphere for humour. Pixar accomplishes the most difficult thing in this kind of movie: credibility. And this is the point: when a character is beaten, we know it hurts; when a character runs, we know he's going fast. When a door is opened, a train is trying to stop and people or objects are falling, we are sure that they are all heavy, as if they were real elements. From the character's expressiveness to the fanciest effect seen in the film, Pixar's animators and programmers achieve the impossible.
Completely believable hair, muscles and fabric, including several costumes per character (for the first time in a movie like this). Explosions, water, explosions in the water, lava, ice, shattering windows, energy fields, invisibility effects, light beams, plane reactors, robots
everything is possible, even stretching human limbs. We have no reason to not believe in it because it's very well done.
In regards to music and lighting, the film opts for a colourful environment typical of old-fashion comics and Saturday morning cartoons which turns into a James Bond-like environment as the story moves forward. Of course, every effect related with light and used to personalize each moment of the film (daylight, dust, clouds, fog) is perfectly created.
The "60's 007"-like look is reflected as well in the multi-location design of the film. From the interior of a volcano to the open sea, from remote forests to common cities, we visit many different beautiful sceneries. Furthermore the director consistently uses the camera intelligently throughout each set (he seldom overuses the fact that everything is 3D to take odd shots), so we don't have to see spectacular yet absurd views.
It's difficult to decide if "The Incredibles" is only one of the best animated movies so far or it's one of the best super-hero films ever created as well. Whatever the case, this is not a story just for kids. In fact, this is the first PG (Parental Guidance) movie made by Pixar. And this only means that parents will enjoy as much as their children. Or perhaps even more.
So, technical perfection, an enjoyable story and tons of fun in a film which maybe is a bit long -for an animated movie- but is incredible in all other respects.
Revolutionary Road (2008)
Leo and Kate's world of pure suffering.
One of the reasons I keep devouring stories in general, and films in particular is that I firmly believe that the authors always have something to say, something worth being heard. A powerful message, if you may, about their view of life. A revelation to present the audience with, so we can leave the room with that "wow, life is just like that" feeling.
This message may be positive or negative, but it should always be believable within the reality of the film. I confess I rather prefer a positive one. Or, if negative, at least with a tiny bit of hope hidden somewhere, I rather not leave the room feeling miserable. But I understand some audiences may enjoy this and, in any case, it doesn't matter: it's your message, isn't it?
According to Justin Haythe (writer) and Sam Mendes (director), life is just too painful to be lived, too full of suffering and sorrow as to find the time to enjoy, create or love. We are hit with a most melodramatic picture of everyday events in a script that fails to create actual conflicts and believable drama. In such a farce, the luxury of the intense performances given by Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio are outrageously wasted.
Fans of the actors will undoubtedly enjoy it, of course, and such an effort certainly deserves recognition. But the story itself contributes nothing, neither to the film history wealth, nor to the poor audience's expectations, that are likely to feel rather down after the show, or even mad at the whole world for no apparent reason, just like the protagonist couple.
The Strangers (2008)
Not very surprisingly, just disappointing.
Another dull "horror" film built with easy scary scenes and with nothing else behind to back up the sensationalistic series of events.
But rather than being utterly unnecessary, the actual problem is realising that no one even tried to create anything minimally original or even worth of the genre at any point.
As usual, it is the poor audience, lured into the cinema with attractive, promising posters and expectation-creating commercial slogans, who suffers the ultimate disappointment.
On the plus side, the protagonist couple (Scott Speedman and Liv Tyler) is really good-looking, and their mere sight will delight the audience greatly. Which must be rewarding for the producers, since, given the rest of this unidimensional product, this seems to be the one aspect they were concerned about.
Yes Man (2008)
Of course it's a yes.
Some still can't believe that Jim Carrey can indeed perform without resorting to his popular over-acting, and to those faces that have driven so many people insane with killer instinct (me included) in the past. For those as secure in this knowledge as to missing out on true wonders such as The Truman show or Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind (script that could never be praised loud enough), using Yes man as therapy for coming back to Carrey's worthy films is a must. Being fair, Yes man is somewhere in the middle (low middle, maybe) between the actor's histrionics and the two modern classics above, but hey, it's a first.
Yes man is a scream to life. For life. Quite a few hilarious moments and memorable comic scenes and characters in this very entertaining feel- good film (yeah, "feel good", never understood what is wrong with that) may only make you feel better about this complicated but enjoyable adventure of life.
ALSO, Zooey Deschanel (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) is in it. If there is a cuter, more lovable creature in God's Earth, producers have not taken notice yet, or she would be in the film instead. Producers are not idiots.
The Man from Earth (2007)
Screen writing lesson.
Jerome Bixby's script (apparently finished not long before his author's death) almost starts like a joke to unfold in a most engaging and fascinating story that challenges all sort of preconceptions. Some of the most elaborated dialogue lines of all-times cinema, excellent characters, emotional performances and beautiful, seemingly irrepetible moments, contribute to this ode to humanity, this triumph of reasoning over beliefs, to this pure message of hope for the future.
If you see it with an open mind, The Man of Earth is, I believe, all the above and more. And all with a very low budget, one set and a bunch of actors.
I saw this film recently in DVD, nearly by mistake. I then found out that it had only been released in some countries and always at a small scale. I didn't have high expectations, and I'm delighted to have found gold. As I said to a good friend recently, I'm still pondering whether this might be the best script I've ever have enjoyed.
Then again, you may hate it. Anyway, still worth watching and decide then.
The Spirit (2008)
The film that wasn't such.
If you think you can make a film with:
- A comic-book artist whose graphic style may be something of a legend in his world but has no idea whatsoever about how to direct a film.
- A couple of rough guidelines scribbled on paper, too weak to even be called story plot.
- Dialogue lines that, for the most part, try to be clever but come off as ridiculous, absurd and embarrassing to everyone involved in the film and their families. Including yourself for watching it.
- A female cast dressed up as prostitutes and whose only requirement is too look sexually attractive so that the promotional posters work. Never mind their professional reputation (it's just Scarlett Johansson, Eva Mendes, Paz Vega ... who even knows them anyway?). And don't worry about the actual film, they'll just be given any line we can come up with in the set, nobody will notice.
- Yet another silly, empty character played by Samuel L. Jackson, who seems to be more resolved than ever to flush what is left of his believability down the toilet.
Well, if you do think you can make a film with all this, then you are wrong. They tried in The Spirit and failed miserably. Whatever this by-product is, it can't even be considered a film.
I personally think that, as his tribute to his admired Will Eisner (the creator of the original character, who is probably turning in his grave since opening day), instead of creating this pointless sequence of events, Frank Miller should have been as humble as to politely say "no, thank you, get an actual director" to the offer. And same with the actors. I can't believe that they actually read the script and didn't just kill their respective agents for getting it in the first place.
Not even the visual aspect can be praised here. Yes, it replicates Miller's style faithfully, but we already saw that in Sin City (oh, no, parts 2 and 3 are coming!) and there was no need of repeating it if there was nothing else to add in any other sense. At no point is there any sign of efforts for making something that the audience might like.
All things considered, The Spirit may be the worst comic-book-based film ever. Apart from an insult to moviegoers.