Reviews from the Dark Side presents
Homefront
Released 11/27/13, now in theaters
Jason Statham returns this Thanksgiving week in the action thriller, Homefront. The screenplay was written by Statham's Expendables running buddy, Sylvester Stallone. As a big fan of Statham myself, I was hoping Homefront was at least a return to form for him after the disappointing and achingly boring, Parker, from earlier in the year.
Statham is DEA agent Phil Broker. As the film begins, he's working deep undercover in a motorcycle gang that is getting its feet wet in the crystal meth trade. The mission goes sideways (don't they always) and the leader's son is shot down by police.
Reeling from the experience, Broker resigns from the DEA and lands in his deceased wife's Louisiana hometown to live a quiet life with his young daughter. Small-town bliss isn't meant to be for the Brokers when an unfortunate chain of events is started by daughter, Maddy. She dispatches a school bully using fighting skills taught to her by her father. Matters are made worse when the bully's father and mother confront Phil on the issue and Phil easily takes the father down. Enraged mother, Cassie (Kate Bosworth), then seeks the aid of her brother, "Gator" Bodine (James Franco), local meth cooker and wanna-be gangster. First, Gator sends his hired thugs to teach Phil a lesson. When that quickly goes bad, he breaks into Phil's house and discovers all he needs to know about Phil's past life.
Gator needs a distribution network for his meth. Who better than the motorcycle gang Phil infiltrated on his last mission? And, as incentive for the gang to do business with him, he sends his ex-biker roadie girlfriend, Sheryl (Winona Ryder), to broker a deal with the incarcerated leader who has a score to settle with Phil. She'll trade the agent's location in exchange for the gang's distribution of Gator's drugs.
Homefront represents a return to form for a Statham action movie. This is the good. The dry wit and fast, blinding fight scenes are back. And there are few who can deliver a simple line of underlying menace better than Statham. "Whatever you're thinking, rethink it!", will go down as one of my favorite pieces of dialog in 2013.
The bad is that Homefront is a bit stagnant when Statham isn't busting heads. Statham is easily the most watchable character in the film. Franco does his best "evil hillbilly" impression, but he's just not very scary.
And someone please tell me why characters in movies act like blithering idiots when there is danger? You have Phil's daughter who gives him major attitude when he decides the heat in town is just too much after days of fighting off Gator's thugs. She sees his bruises and cuts. But now that she thinks she's finally made friends, she doesn't want to go? How about when the bullets start flying outside of the house? As Phil is attempting to usher her to the basement to keep her safe, he almost has to physically toss her in as she keeps asking "What's going on?" Did you not hear the bullets outside young Maddy?
Like last year's Taken 2, Homefront is made palatable on the strength of its star. That is, if you're a Statham fan. It's always good seeing him do what he does best. But the film is average if you take him away. It's worth a viewing as a rental, but that's about all.
The Dark Lord of the Sith says:
*** stars
Ratings Legend
Zero *= Don't waste your time. Pure dreck! Dreck is too good for this! Blind me please!
1 *= Fuggedaboutit!
2 *= Average, Mediocre, Nothing Special
3 *= Good viewing. Much better than a poke in the eye.
4 *= Great. Could possibly foot the price of a non-Matinee.
5 *= Pure eye candy. Hall of Fame material here.
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Sunday, November 24, 2013
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
Reviews from the Dark Side presents
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
Released 11/22/13, now in theaters
Revolution is the word of the day in this week's The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, the first sequel to 2012's, The Hunger Games. Catching Fire follows the further adventures of reluctant heroine, Katniss Everdeen, as she unknowingly inspires rebellion against the oppressive government of post-apocalyptic, Panem. Most of The Hunger Games returns, including Oscar-winner, Jennifer Lawrence.
The story picks up shortly after the events of the first film and finds the two survivors of the 74th Annual Hunger Games, Katniss and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), returned to their home in District 12 for a brief intermission before starting their victory tour through the 12 districts. Before embarking on the tour, Katniss receives a visit from Panem President Snow (Donald Sutherland) who is not at all happy with her actions in the last Hunger Games. There was supposed to be only one winner of this gladiatorial slaughter and Katniss manipulated events so her co-tribute, Peeta, would survive as well. Her manipulation of the Games has been viewed as defiance among the districts and uprisings against Panem have begun. Snow has a proposition for Katniss. She plays the loving girlfriend/fiancée to Peeta during the tour to give the appearance of support for the current regime and make the masses forget about revolution, or all of her friends and family die.
Despite her best, if reluctant, efforts to quell the spirit of defiance, unrest rises in the districts anyway. Unrest which is always put down brutally, many times in front of Katniss who has now become a symbol to the revolutionaries. This presents a problem to President Snow who can't just put Katniss down and make her a martyr. He has to discredit her among the masses before disposing of her. Enter Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman), the new director of the Games who comes up with an ingenious idea for the 75th Hunger Games known as the Quarter Quell. This will be the Third Quarter Quell which will pull its contestants from the pool of living tributes that have won past years' Hunger Games. The thought is that if the general public witnesses their heroine ruthlessly destroying her opponents in the arena, she will be erased as a symbol of the rebellion. So, the "couple" from District 12 once again is thrown into combat with better trained killers than they faced before. But, fortunately for Katniss and Peeta, not all may be what it appears on the surface and they may have allies in unusual places.
I was able to enjoy Catching Fire a little more than I did last year's The Hunger Games . I'm not sure if it's because I cheated and read ahead and now know how this whole thing ends, or, if it's because this film wasn't achingly drawn out, but I found Catching Fire more compelling. I will give credit where it's due to director, Francis Lawrence, for that.
Catching Fire is an unusual, but intriguing amalgam of political intrigue, gladiatorial combat, and media sensationalism. Panem is a bleak place where most of its citizens live a bleak existence (particularly in District 12). Catching Fire also serves as a metaphor for government betrayal as well. The winning tributes are promised a life privilege and luxury after surviving brutal violence only to be thrown back into that violence on a whim. It's a scary and sad situation conjured by a conniving leadership.
The real attraction here, as with the first film, is Jennifer Lawrence. Is there anyone in Hollywood that is on fire (no pun intended) more than she is right now? With an Oscar ,and now, an immensely popular trilogy under her belt, there' little she can do wrong lately. And hers is easily the most watchable character in the series. She has charisma in spades. Most of the other characters feel like props with no discernible personalities. Sure, there is the quirkiness of Stanley Tucci's and Elizabeth Banks' characters. And Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson) is the closest thing to a well-rounded character outside of Katniss. But many of the characters are pretty much cannon fodder.
The costume designs are beautifully rendered in Catching Fire. The chariot scene featuring our heroes clothing set ablaze is stunning. As impressive as that scene was, it was topped later when Katniss' white dress transforms into the dark likeness of a Mockingjay (a bird) , a symbol of the revolution. Kudos to the costume designer and FX team for such vivid imagination.
Catching Fire improves on the ideas that were started The Hunger Games. While this film is long, little of it feels like wasted motion. I'm on board for the two-part finale coming in 2014-15. That's something I couldn't say after I saw the first movie.
The Dark Lord of the Sith says:
***1/2 stars
Ratings Legend
Zero *= Don't waste your time. Pure dreck! Dreck is too good for this! Blind me please!
1 *= Fuggedaboutit!
2 *= Average, Mediocre, Nothing Special
3 *= Good viewing. Much better than a poke in the eye.
4 *= Great. Could possibly foot the price of a non-Matinee.
5 *= Pure eye candy. Hall of Fame material here.
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
Released 11/22/13, now in theaters
Revolution is the word of the day in this week's The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, the first sequel to 2012's, The Hunger Games. Catching Fire follows the further adventures of reluctant heroine, Katniss Everdeen, as she unknowingly inspires rebellion against the oppressive government of post-apocalyptic, Panem. Most of The Hunger Games returns, including Oscar-winner, Jennifer Lawrence.
The story picks up shortly after the events of the first film and finds the two survivors of the 74th Annual Hunger Games, Katniss and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), returned to their home in District 12 for a brief intermission before starting their victory tour through the 12 districts. Before embarking on the tour, Katniss receives a visit from Panem President Snow (Donald Sutherland) who is not at all happy with her actions in the last Hunger Games. There was supposed to be only one winner of this gladiatorial slaughter and Katniss manipulated events so her co-tribute, Peeta, would survive as well. Her manipulation of the Games has been viewed as defiance among the districts and uprisings against Panem have begun. Snow has a proposition for Katniss. She plays the loving girlfriend/fiancée to Peeta during the tour to give the appearance of support for the current regime and make the masses forget about revolution, or all of her friends and family die.
Despite her best, if reluctant, efforts to quell the spirit of defiance, unrest rises in the districts anyway. Unrest which is always put down brutally, many times in front of Katniss who has now become a symbol to the revolutionaries. This presents a problem to President Snow who can't just put Katniss down and make her a martyr. He has to discredit her among the masses before disposing of her. Enter Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman), the new director of the Games who comes up with an ingenious idea for the 75th Hunger Games known as the Quarter Quell. This will be the Third Quarter Quell which will pull its contestants from the pool of living tributes that have won past years' Hunger Games. The thought is that if the general public witnesses their heroine ruthlessly destroying her opponents in the arena, she will be erased as a symbol of the rebellion. So, the "couple" from District 12 once again is thrown into combat with better trained killers than they faced before. But, fortunately for Katniss and Peeta, not all may be what it appears on the surface and they may have allies in unusual places.
I was able to enjoy Catching Fire a little more than I did last year's The Hunger Games . I'm not sure if it's because I cheated and read ahead and now know how this whole thing ends, or, if it's because this film wasn't achingly drawn out, but I found Catching Fire more compelling. I will give credit where it's due to director, Francis Lawrence, for that.
Catching Fire is an unusual, but intriguing amalgam of political intrigue, gladiatorial combat, and media sensationalism. Panem is a bleak place where most of its citizens live a bleak existence (particularly in District 12). Catching Fire also serves as a metaphor for government betrayal as well. The winning tributes are promised a life privilege and luxury after surviving brutal violence only to be thrown back into that violence on a whim. It's a scary and sad situation conjured by a conniving leadership.
The real attraction here, as with the first film, is Jennifer Lawrence. Is there anyone in Hollywood that is on fire (no pun intended) more than she is right now? With an Oscar ,and now, an immensely popular trilogy under her belt, there' little she can do wrong lately. And hers is easily the most watchable character in the series. She has charisma in spades. Most of the other characters feel like props with no discernible personalities. Sure, there is the quirkiness of Stanley Tucci's and Elizabeth Banks' characters. And Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson) is the closest thing to a well-rounded character outside of Katniss. But many of the characters are pretty much cannon fodder.
The costume designs are beautifully rendered in Catching Fire. The chariot scene featuring our heroes clothing set ablaze is stunning. As impressive as that scene was, it was topped later when Katniss' white dress transforms into the dark likeness of a Mockingjay (a bird) , a symbol of the revolution. Kudos to the costume designer and FX team for such vivid imagination.
Catching Fire improves on the ideas that were started The Hunger Games. While this film is long, little of it feels like wasted motion. I'm on board for the two-part finale coming in 2014-15. That's something I couldn't say after I saw the first movie.
The Dark Lord of the Sith says:
***1/2 stars
Ratings Legend
Zero *= Don't waste your time. Pure dreck! Dreck is too good for this! Blind me please!
1 *= Fuggedaboutit!
2 *= Average, Mediocre, Nothing Special
3 *= Good viewing. Much better than a poke in the eye.
4 *= Great. Could possibly foot the price of a non-Matinee.
5 *= Pure eye candy. Hall of Fame material here.
Monday, November 11, 2013
Thor: The Dark World
Reviews from the Dark Side presents
Thor: The Dark World
Released 11/8/13, now in theaters
The Odinson returns this week in the sequel to 2011's, Thor, in Thor: The Dark World. This movie is a continuance of Marvel Films Phase 2 collection following the individual adventures of the Avengers before culminating in the upcoming Avengers sequel in 2015. Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, and Natalie Portman reprise their roles from the first film. Alan Taylor takes over the directing duties from Kenneth Branagh. After the Avengers, Thor was teleported back to his homeland of Asgard and has not been seen since. What world-shattering event could bring him back to Earth (besides lip-locking Jane Foster)?
The scourge of the Asgardian nine realms, The Dark Elves, have returned with their sinister leader, Malekith (Christopher Eccleston). Eons ago, Malekith attempted to plunge the universe into darkness using the ancient power of the Aether, a weapon made of immense ethereal energy. The Dark Elf and his army were defeated by the Asgardians led by Odin's (Anthony Hopkins) father, Bor. Bor contained the Aether within a large stone and placed it in another dimension so it would remain hidden for eternity. Unknown to Bor, Malekith and some of his followers escape into suspended animation until the present day when they are awakened by the Aether's release. It seems Earthwoman, Dr. Jane Foster (Portman) has found the weapon and has inadvertently been infected by it.
Meanwhile, since the events in the Avengers, Thor (Hemsworth) has been in Asgard quelling rebellions within the Asgardian Nine Realms attempting to finally bring peace and harmony to the lands. When Jane found the Aether, she disappeared between realms gaining the attention of the all-seeing Asgardian gatekeeper, Heimdall (Idris Elba), who, in turn, informs Thor. Thor travels back to Earth using the newly reconstructed Bifrost and takes Jane back to Asgard after she accidentally unleashes an unearthly force due to the Aether. Hoping that Odin and the Asgardian healers can help Jane, Thor discovers he has an even larger problem. A rare cosmic alignment of the Nine Realms called the Convergence is approaching. It's Malekith's intention to use the Aether to plunge the realms into eternal darkness during this alignment. All seems hopeless after the Dark Elf, drawn to Jane, surprise attacks Asgard. Thor has to then turn to the last Asgardian he ever thought he would ask for help.
There is something that has bothered me about how Thor has been portrayed on the big screen. I've never understood why the thunder god angle hasn't been played up. He's portrayed more as an Asgardian alien than a Norse God. And, that's disappointing to me. Thor is not Superman. He never has been; he never will be. Thor has always been more sword and sorcery than technological wonder. He's the God of Thunder, an elemental force unto himself. There's not really any science involved here. He's a product of the union between the King of the Norse Gods and Gaea, the Goddess of Earth (you know, Mother Nature). There's actually a reason why he commands the elements. If you don't know the character's comic backstory, there's no movie explanation as to why it always seems to rain when he's around.
Thor: The Dark World felt very Stargate at times to me. Lasers, glowing swords, and spaceships are very nice to look at visually. But, it just doesn't seem very Thor. I always pictured Asgard and the Nine Realms (aside from Earth) in more of a Lord of the Rings setting. I know this is the comic geek in me talking, so, take what I say with a grain of salt if you must.
All of this being said, there is a lot to like about this film, particularly the performances of both Hemsworth and Hiddleston. I've said this previously about Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, and, I believe the same holds true for Chris Hemsworth. He owns this role. He has the look, the charisma, and grace that defines the character. I know that if enough of these movies are made, Hemsworth won't always be Thor. But, his successor will have a tough act to follow.
Tom Hiddleston always seems to play Loki with an evil, menacing glee. And, he lives up to the moniker of "The Trickster" once again. And. like Hemsworth as Thor, Hiddleston is the quintessential Loki, totally untrustworthy and slimy. You never know whose side he is really on. But rest assured, Loki is always on his own side and he'll use anyone and anything to push his agenda.
If you're like me, you were probably hoping for more "hammer time" in 2011's Thor. And, that's exactly what you get in "The Dark World." And isn't that what you really came to see? Don't we all want a large hammer to pound on the ground to make everyone fall down?
If I'm truly honest, the Dark Elves felt slightly like props for Thor to knock down. Oh, they were vicious enough, but you're kind of clueless as to why they want to destroy the universe. If Malekith uses the Aether for this purpose, doesn't he destroy his own people as well? I don't think they were fleshed out as characters very well.
And is it me, or do the human characters feel like they're in the way and slightly unnecessary? Natalie Portman serves a purpose, I suppose, as Thor's love interest (much better chemistry here than with Hayden Christensen). But Kat Dennings, Stellen Skargard and the other Earthlings are annoyances that slow the movie down at times.
I don't deny I have my criticisms, but I will reiterate there is much to like here and I did like this movie despite the misgivings. It's mostly on the strength of Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston. Both are more than worth the price of admission. There are great action sequences as you would expect. There's another Avenger who makes a cameo (sort of). And, of course, there's the obligatory Stan Lee scene. It also has some silly humor to boot. It's a worthy, if not, spectacular addition to Marvel's pantheon of films.
And do I have to tell you to stay through the end credits? It's a Marvel movie. You know there will be a scene or two when the credits role. Thor: The Dark World gives you two, one after the cast credits and one after the final credits. I have two words to describe what's foreshadowed in one of the scenes. Infinity Gauntlet. Don't know what that is? I would recommend grabbing the trade paperback. All I know is that I can't wait for Thanos to show his ugly purple mug again (last seen in the Avengers).
And I have one last note. I saw Thor: The Dark World on an IMAX-type screen in 3D. While it does look magnificent on the large screen, the 3D is nothing special and not worth the money. Another tip from your friendly neighborhood movie critic.
The Dark Lord of the Sith says:
***1/4 stars
Ratings Legend
Zero *= Don't waste your time. Pure dreck! Dreck is too good for this! Blind me please!
1 *= Fuggedaboutit!
2 *= Average, Mediocre, Nothing Special
3 *= Good viewing. Much better than a poke in the eye.
4 *= Great. Could possibly foot the price of a non-Matinee.
5 *= Pure eye candy. Hall of Fame material here.
Thor: The Dark World
Released 11/8/13, now in theaters
The Odinson returns this week in the sequel to 2011's, Thor, in Thor: The Dark World. This movie is a continuance of Marvel Films Phase 2 collection following the individual adventures of the Avengers before culminating in the upcoming Avengers sequel in 2015. Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, and Natalie Portman reprise their roles from the first film. Alan Taylor takes over the directing duties from Kenneth Branagh. After the Avengers, Thor was teleported back to his homeland of Asgard and has not been seen since. What world-shattering event could bring him back to Earth (besides lip-locking Jane Foster)?
The scourge of the Asgardian nine realms, The Dark Elves, have returned with their sinister leader, Malekith (Christopher Eccleston). Eons ago, Malekith attempted to plunge the universe into darkness using the ancient power of the Aether, a weapon made of immense ethereal energy. The Dark Elf and his army were defeated by the Asgardians led by Odin's (Anthony Hopkins) father, Bor. Bor contained the Aether within a large stone and placed it in another dimension so it would remain hidden for eternity. Unknown to Bor, Malekith and some of his followers escape into suspended animation until the present day when they are awakened by the Aether's release. It seems Earthwoman, Dr. Jane Foster (Portman) has found the weapon and has inadvertently been infected by it.
Meanwhile, since the events in the Avengers, Thor (Hemsworth) has been in Asgard quelling rebellions within the Asgardian Nine Realms attempting to finally bring peace and harmony to the lands. When Jane found the Aether, she disappeared between realms gaining the attention of the all-seeing Asgardian gatekeeper, Heimdall (Idris Elba), who, in turn, informs Thor. Thor travels back to Earth using the newly reconstructed Bifrost and takes Jane back to Asgard after she accidentally unleashes an unearthly force due to the Aether. Hoping that Odin and the Asgardian healers can help Jane, Thor discovers he has an even larger problem. A rare cosmic alignment of the Nine Realms called the Convergence is approaching. It's Malekith's intention to use the Aether to plunge the realms into eternal darkness during this alignment. All seems hopeless after the Dark Elf, drawn to Jane, surprise attacks Asgard. Thor has to then turn to the last Asgardian he ever thought he would ask for help.
There is something that has bothered me about how Thor has been portrayed on the big screen. I've never understood why the thunder god angle hasn't been played up. He's portrayed more as an Asgardian alien than a Norse God. And, that's disappointing to me. Thor is not Superman. He never has been; he never will be. Thor has always been more sword and sorcery than technological wonder. He's the God of Thunder, an elemental force unto himself. There's not really any science involved here. He's a product of the union between the King of the Norse Gods and Gaea, the Goddess of Earth (you know, Mother Nature). There's actually a reason why he commands the elements. If you don't know the character's comic backstory, there's no movie explanation as to why it always seems to rain when he's around.
Thor: The Dark World felt very Stargate at times to me. Lasers, glowing swords, and spaceships are very nice to look at visually. But, it just doesn't seem very Thor. I always pictured Asgard and the Nine Realms (aside from Earth) in more of a Lord of the Rings setting. I know this is the comic geek in me talking, so, take what I say with a grain of salt if you must.
All of this being said, there is a lot to like about this film, particularly the performances of both Hemsworth and Hiddleston. I've said this previously about Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, and, I believe the same holds true for Chris Hemsworth. He owns this role. He has the look, the charisma, and grace that defines the character. I know that if enough of these movies are made, Hemsworth won't always be Thor. But, his successor will have a tough act to follow.
Tom Hiddleston always seems to play Loki with an evil, menacing glee. And, he lives up to the moniker of "The Trickster" once again. And. like Hemsworth as Thor, Hiddleston is the quintessential Loki, totally untrustworthy and slimy. You never know whose side he is really on. But rest assured, Loki is always on his own side and he'll use anyone and anything to push his agenda.
If you're like me, you were probably hoping for more "hammer time" in 2011's Thor. And, that's exactly what you get in "The Dark World." And isn't that what you really came to see? Don't we all want a large hammer to pound on the ground to make everyone fall down?
If I'm truly honest, the Dark Elves felt slightly like props for Thor to knock down. Oh, they were vicious enough, but you're kind of clueless as to why they want to destroy the universe. If Malekith uses the Aether for this purpose, doesn't he destroy his own people as well? I don't think they were fleshed out as characters very well.
And is it me, or do the human characters feel like they're in the way and slightly unnecessary? Natalie Portman serves a purpose, I suppose, as Thor's love interest (much better chemistry here than with Hayden Christensen). But Kat Dennings, Stellen Skargard and the other Earthlings are annoyances that slow the movie down at times.
I don't deny I have my criticisms, but I will reiterate there is much to like here and I did like this movie despite the misgivings. It's mostly on the strength of Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston. Both are more than worth the price of admission. There are great action sequences as you would expect. There's another Avenger who makes a cameo (sort of). And, of course, there's the obligatory Stan Lee scene. It also has some silly humor to boot. It's a worthy, if not, spectacular addition to Marvel's pantheon of films.
And do I have to tell you to stay through the end credits? It's a Marvel movie. You know there will be a scene or two when the credits role. Thor: The Dark World gives you two, one after the cast credits and one after the final credits. I have two words to describe what's foreshadowed in one of the scenes. Infinity Gauntlet. Don't know what that is? I would recommend grabbing the trade paperback. All I know is that I can't wait for Thanos to show his ugly purple mug again (last seen in the Avengers).
And I have one last note. I saw Thor: The Dark World on an IMAX-type screen in 3D. While it does look magnificent on the large screen, the 3D is nothing special and not worth the money. Another tip from your friendly neighborhood movie critic.
The Dark Lord of the Sith says:
***1/4 stars
Ratings Legend
Zero *= Don't waste your time. Pure dreck! Dreck is too good for this! Blind me please!
1 *= Fuggedaboutit!
2 *= Average, Mediocre, Nothing Special
3 *= Good viewing. Much better than a poke in the eye.
4 *= Great. Could possibly foot the price of a non-Matinee.
5 *= Pure eye candy. Hall of Fame material here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Night Swim- Ahhh, a new year and with it brings cinema filled with all sorts of possibilities. We start 2024 with this little Blumhouse h... -
You People- This Netflix Original comically explores race relations through the co-mingling of family. A couple, a Jewish man and an Afri...
