If you have a frontal lobe and two brain to rub together to create a spark of intelligence, then you will know that Die Hard is a series of films that have been exciting and entertaining us for the past twenty four years. The most recent film, Die Hard 4.0 (also known as Live Free or Die Hard) was released in 2007 and showed everyone that there was life in the old white vest yet.
So, with a tentative and vague release date of 2013, Bruce Willis will be returning to our screens as the classic everyman actionman man John McClane for 'A Good Day to Die Hard'.
There have only been the most threadbare of details regarding the film's plot so far but so far it looks like John McClane and his son will be travelling to Russia. Rumours are that Cole Hauser is playing a villainous role (what else?) and that Spartacus: Blood and Sand actor Jai Courtney is taking the role of McClane's son.
The sequel to 2010's most outlandish and violent film starring the most scarred and grizzled Mexican (Danny Trejo) is in the works under the charmingly titled Machete Kills.
Machete was hugely over the top, violent, sleazy and nasty even compared with the slew of modern exploitation films. Featuring a who's-who of actors of yesteryear, it was a guilty pleasure which didn't quite reach the expectations I had hoped it would.
However, after making over 4 times its budget, there was no doubt that when Rodriguez had the time, he would be looking to make a new Machete film and here it is. With no set release date, plot or cast (apart from Trejo), it may be a while before we see the details trickle through to us.
Sin City: A Dame to Kill For
The sequel to the 2005 film and all round stylistic masterpiece looks to be coming out sometime next year (finally) and if the poster is anything to go by, it looks to mirror the fantastic style of the first film.
Wow!
Trailer Watch
Ruben Fleischer looks to be directing a fantastic cast with a lot of flair in this trailer for The Gangster Squad, set for release on 7th November (not sure about the choice of music though):
According to conservative reports, over 75% of the population of the western hemisphere have seen the film already, with figures set to increase in the upcoming weeks. With critic's reviews licking the film with praise, it is the positive responses from the regular audience that has been most impressive. One man in his late fourties with brown hair described the film as 'the finest gathering of superhumans since the last supper', an event which if to be believed took place around 30 B.C, two thousand and fourty two years before this film's release.
It is the projected takings that are even more impressive however. Box office analyst company Figurewatch has given us an exclusive look at a dossier they have created. Analyst Joffrey Baratheon said " If we take the figures so far and ignore them, the potential total worldwide gross for this film could be in the thousands of bajillions, second only to Avatar". Avatar still remains the highest grossing film of all time, several critics suggest this is mainly due to the inflated costs of the 3D tickets. It is rumoured that with the money James Cameron made from Avatar, he has terraformed Venus and renamed it Pandora whilst genetically engineering all of the creatures found in the film. We tried to call Mr Cameron to verify or deny this rumour but he was unobtanium for comment.
A frankly jaw dropping cast of action stars from recent times and yester-year assemble for what could be quite good fun. Casting Van Damme as the bad guy is a nice move and having Stallone and Van Damme face off is something that'll be worth the wait. I like how you see JCVD's (as he shall be known) token move, the aerial kick.
Statham and Li are always good to watch. Schwarzenegger and Willis having their cameos in the first film extended looks to be good fun and brings legitimate claim to the potency of the cast list this film has. By the way, cue internet frenzy as Chuck Norris memes are set to return.....sigh.
Notice the same guitar riff playing in both trailers!
Webs! Lizards! Reboot!
The best trailer yet for this film still has it firmly behind Dark Knight Rises and Avengers Assemble in the trinity of 2012's superhero films. It is interesting to me that this is a Sony Pictures film (Columbia Tristar being owned by Sony) and only co-produced by Marvel Studios (much like other Marvel franchises X-Men etc). This means that whilst Spiderman is a Marvel character, we are unlikely to see him in any Marvel Studios film (possibly another Avengers film) unless Sony loses the film rights to Spiderman.
Shame!
DVD Watch:
It is with an odd sense of pride that Mission Impossible: Ghost Recon is released on DVD. The first new film Film Flare reviewed is finally out on DVD and I feel that the circle is complete.
A charmingly late 7 days after I watched this film, the review is hitting the interweb. Classy!
Based on the incredibly popular novel of the same name by Suzanne Collins (New York Times Bestsellers list for 100 consecutive weeks, Collins is also currently the best selling author on the Amazon Kindle) , this is an incredibly popular film (4 week No.1 US Box Office four weeks in a row, over $500 million grossed already).
I must begin my review by stating that I have not read the books. My views may be altered if I did read them but I have not and this may be taken into account
I was initially hesitant about seeing the film mostly because I had up to that point assumed that it was a watered down version of Battle Royale, a soulless and charmless big budget film aimed at young adults.
I was only half right.
The film does have noticeable similarities to Battle Royale, the idea of youngsters fighting to the death is similar to both films as is the purpose of the fight being a tribute or lesson to keep a fragmented society in line. Where the two differ is that whilst Battle Royale was a controversial and twisted pieces aiming its lens at social groups in schools and how school children would react in a 'kill or be killed' situation, The Hunger Games instead is a much less cynical study of individual strength and psyche. Whilst a group does form early in The Hunger Games, it is not a social clique as would have been found in BR, it is instead a group of individuals who find that grouping up early helps themselves in the short term.
Another aspect of the film that really surprised me was the highlighting of just how important and pervasive the media is in the film. Centered around the fantastic Stanley Tucci, the media and appearance play a huge role in making each participant in the Games popular (an attribute that helps the participants). Tucci interviews each youngster and tries his best to show each in their best light to give audience a good show. It was a theme I was not aware would come up when I started to watch the film.
So I guess the best and most flattering way I could describe the film would be a mix of both Battle Royale and The Running Man, in particular Richard Dawson's character in the latter (in reality, he used to host a popular US gameshow, a stunning piece of casting).
Admit it, you want to see this film now!
I've already mentioned Stanley Tucci's acting in this film and he is only one piece of a solid cast, each performing the solid script without fault. Jennifer Lawrence in particular shines as Katniss, her performance is incredibly nuanced, intelligent, strong, resourceful, shy and emotive. She does a fantastic job. So does the always entertaining Woody Harrelson. Another surprise (in a good way) is Donald Sutherland as the President, a chillingly subtle portrayal of a leader without much screen time or lines, a pleasure to watch.
The direction is perfectly fine apart from an occasional over-use of the handheld camera work, not so much an issue during quieter scenes but during the action it really turns the events on the screen into streaking blurs. This helps keep a lot of the violence implied (thereby achieving it's 12A rating despite quite a dark tone), as well as creates a documentry feel that plays against the calmer (still not static) shots of the capitol and the cameras in the Games itself.
The film goes on with a long running time of just over 2 hours and 20 minutes and it does feel long. They could have easily have trimmed at least 15 minutes without losing too much of the films power and emotion. The actual event itself doesn't happen until at least halfway through (it seems) so you have a sudden jarring change in pace from the slow buildup to the rapid culling of several minor (really, really minor) participants and the rest of the film is a slow fight for survival. Not in itself a bad thing but the pace really switches up and down very unevenly at times.
However, whilst the 84% it currently resides on at Rotten Tomatoes I think is a tiny bit high (I'd say closer to 75-80%), it is a very good film and it is proof that you can turn a popular young adult novel into a complex, thrilling and entertaining film.
Based on the novel by Guy de Maupassant, this film documents the rise (and set backs) of George Duroy, a slimy ex-army officer as he sleeps his way through every worthwhile woman in Paris. Starting as a penniless and lonely man, he rapidly carves a path through the upper levels of Parisian society, acquiring a lot of wealth and standing on the way.
Interestingly enough, the acting in the film is actually pretty good. The three main actresses, Uma Thurman, Kirstin Scott Thomas and Christina Ricci all do remarkably well with relatively weak material. Each Fleshes out their characters beyond the 'three generations of lovers' scenario would suggest.
Even Robert Pattinson, Old R-Patz himself surprised me. To be honest, he plays an utter shit in the film. Patterson said early on that the character was completely amoral but even so, the character is a true bastard. And R-Patz plays a shit pretty well, he is required to smolder a lot (no doubt a tricked learned from his Twilight days) but he is actually a very unpleasant character and you have to admire the gusto with which Pattinson throws himself into the role.
The film also looks good. The period costumes and settings are convincing and there is a suitably large visual gap between the cold, dark poorer areas of Paris and the brighter, warmer rooms of the well-off. The cast are also made up in a convincing style but I was made aware of how the actors and actresses move and emote facially in a very modern way that inadvertently creates an anachronism with the period setting of the film.
However, whilst the look of the film is fantastic and the acting is pretty good, it is there that the strengths of the film end. The story overall skips all over the place, one scene leading straight into the next shows a difference of character so strong, you wonder what revelation you missed to caused the change. Some of the script is mighty odd, leading to situation where a character is lounging around in her underwear talking about the weight of grain being shipped to Algiers.
My main complaint about the film is what I consider a major flaw. It is a film about seduction and sex and whilst there are sex scenes in the film, they are remarkably un-sexy. I guess I was just hoping that for a film filled with good looking people, the sex scenes would have had more intimacy to them. They just felt a little weak. A flaw exacerbated by the tone and nature of the film.
So in summery, not the worst film I've seen all year but certainly not far from the bottom. It looks great but in the end, looks can only take you so far.
(Yes, I did just end that review with a moral that applies to a character in the film. If you are reading this and you are from a major news or entertainment publication and you do need film reviews that end in such a witty and cheeky fashion, please email me.)
Like Edgar Rice Burroughs (or E.R.B as he shall be known, author of the John Carter novels) would have been, I am pretty amazed at the amount of money that was pumped into this film. Previous Disney live-action blockbuster Tron: Legacy took a mere $170 million to make, this film took a reputed $250 million at least.
To be honest, this is a film that should not have been made. A pulp sci-fi novel in the vein of my childhood stories, with aliens on mars, spaceships, princesses in distress seems so anachronistic with films of this generation. Films like Avatar (which I would most closely compare John Carter to) try so hard to appear socially relevant and in doing so, remove some of the joyful escapism that I crave when I go to the cinema. On top of this you include a huge budget and a lack of in-your-face advertising and it would seem that the film was doomed to fail.
That is one of several reasons I wanted to go see the film, I want this film to succeed. There are enough novels and stories to make a franchise of it and the idea of a series of films that are just pure fantasy and escapism without preaching eco-disaster appeals to me.
But the film itself is so entertaining.
It's not perfect by any means, let me get that out of the way, the pacing is sometimes uneven and the acting suffers at times.
I've read that the film should be compared to A Phantom Menace, something that I felt was unfair and did a huge disservice to John Carter. Again, I'll draw my lines and say that personally, I felt it was most similar to Avatar but with its head not up its own arsehole, a sense of fun and a tongue-in-cheek tone elevate John Carter from drudging sci-fi pap to adventurous and (at times) quite funny pulp science fiction at its most pure.
After all, you couldn't make a totally serious film about a Confederate Captain during the American Civil War who is mysteriously transported to Mars to find himself in the middle of a bitter civil war. I mean Mars, really? There hasn't been a sci-fi film involving mars for years.
But the film is fun, cheesy at times (very cheesy at times) but it is a whole heap of fun and I thoroughly enjoyed watching it. The director, Andrew Stanton (directed Finding Nemo and Wall-E) doesn't create the same images of pure beauty that you'd find in his animated films but the film overall is so pretty. The palette of mars (Barsoom as it shall be known) is muted but is offset by vivid, bright colours of the species and technology. $250 million gets you a whole heap load of very nice CGI and although it's not as cutting edge and as artistic as Tron:Legacy, the created world, cities and races are very well done and incredible to look at.
The (mostly British) cast also overall convey their roles well, Taylor Kitsch in particular makes for a very convincing, old fashioned hero. Long hair, loincloth, sword, facial hair torn straight from the cover of a pulp novel.
The rest of the cast include an unrecognisable Willem Dafoe (honestly, I didn't know he was in it until I wiki-ed the film!), Mark Strong, Dominic West, Bryan Cranston, Ciaran Hinds and Samantha Morton all help to create a roster of pulp-ish characters, the good guys are good, the bad guys are boo-hiss bad guys, the princess (Lynn Collins) knows how to handle herself in a sword fight.
It's not complex, it's not clever, but damn it is fun.
So I return to my earlier statement, this is a film that by all right should not have been made, but I'm glad it has and it provided me with two hours of joy. If you're in the mood for escapism and a rousing sci-fi adventure, it's well worth a watch!
The more observant reader would have noticed there should have been a Film Flare Film Diary (of FFFD as it shall be known) yesterday.
To be frank. The only films I watched last week were at the cinema which will have their own articles and I'm still working out what to do on the occasional week I DON'T watch a film.
But this week you will be reading about:
My 5th and final 'Best of 2011' film
The Woman in Black
Chronicle
Starting tomorrow with an all new Film Flare entry.
Here it be, another gathering of words that convey thoughts and opinions. Straight from my mind to your eyes (via the internet!).
Another seven days has slipped through the hour glass and since we are all one whole week closer to our inevitable demise, I thought I'd do a brief piece on the films I've seen in the last week to cheer us up. Enjoy!
That's another 2 seconds gone spent scrolling past this picture...
Enemy of the State (1998)
Thanks to the ever useful BBC iPlayer, I saw this film was resting online and I had a free evening to myself so I thought, why not?
I've made worse decisions in my life.
A spy/action thriller directed by Tony Scott (brother to Ridley Scott, believe it or not!). Tony Scott has directed such firm favourites as the plane fetish, repressed homosexual recruitment driveTop Gun, tough revenge flick Man on Fire, the extremely underrated Unstoppable and early 90s too-cool-for-school love story True Romance. Genre films then, by and large. Known but not 'famous', you'll find them in a large number of DVD collections.
For Enemy of the State (EotS for short), Scott teamed up with producer Jerry Bruckheimer, a man who's one goal in life seems to be the explosive destruction of every single object that has ever existed on this planet.......ever.
KA-BOOM!
Con Air, Bad Boys, The Rock, Gone in 60 Seconds, Armageddon, Pearl Habour, Black Hawk Down, Top Gun, Beverly Hill Cop. That's a lot of films, he may as well top it all off with a film called Armageddon where the whole......
What? He's done that?
Oh.
Regardless, EotS is a film that's quite large scale for Tony Scott and surprisingly restrained for Jerry Bruckheimer and it works quite well. Starring Will Smith circa Independance Day as labour lawyer Robert Dean, the plot is techno-conspiracy political surveillance. The advantage of a plot about those things is that they remain important in today's world so the plot doesn't date the film too much.
Another thing that still remains inpressive is the direction. Tony Scott really plays up the surveillance angle, most evident in several shots, especially the opening sequence. He really brings the idea that there are already X-number of cameras, helicopters, signals, etc that can be used to find or film you.
Will Smith is likable, of course. Having written his character as a lawyer, I was initially concerned he'd become super-lawyer, punching people in the face and so on but against my expectation, his actions mainly seems to be him running away. In fact, the 'action' is mostly chases and they are GOOD. Good directing and editing on top of the innovative use of surveillance means that they are actually quite smart as well as entertaining. The only part where I had a suspend disbelief is where a wildlife reseacher suddenly becomes an olympic runner but I was too in awe to notice at the time.
Apart from Mr Smith, the cast features Gene Hackman, John Voight, Gabriel Byrne, Jake Busey, Jack Black, Seth Green, Tom Sizemore (I LOVE TOM SIZEMORE IN THIS FILM!) and Jason Lee. When the credits were rolling, I was thinking:
'Damn, that's a lot of names I recognise.'
The script is not really subtle, but it's a healthy mix of smart and funny. Will Smith gets to be a tiny bit of a smart-arse but not enough to get tiresome. The supporting cast is filled up with several big names and each one does extremely well. There are no obvious weaknesses in the cast.
The only real weaknesses of the film are an over-adherence to the fact that it's first an action film. Whilst there is some spy/techno thriller in there, any grand statements the film wants to make tend to get buried under the noise. However, as an action film, it's a superior piece of work, with enough behind the noise to make you think a bit.
Seven Tom Sizemores out of Ten.
Trailer Here:
Back when they knew how to make trailers good.
The Town (2010)
First off, I need to start my piece by saying that this film has made me like Ben Affleck again.
Everything else is merely a footnote to this statement.
Ben Affleck directed and starred in this Boston based crime thriller, a mix of the intelligence and intensity of Heat coupled with a sense of belonging and family that rarely is found in films of this type.
Ben Affleck puts in an incredibly believable and nuanced performance as Doug Macray, a Charlestown native and actually quite nice guy, apart from the whole 'bank robbing thing'. Similar to Enemy of the State up there, there is a supporting cast that is incredibly strong:
John Hamm: FBI. Balancing a fine line between 'bad cop' and driven cop.
Rebecca Hall: A human centre to the proceedings. Believable and more complex than the character could be.
Chris Cooper: Memorable and unpleasant. The character is a shit too. (ho-ho.)
Jeremy Renner: Once again on A* form. Thuggish, fiery, somehow sympathetic.
Blake Lively: almost unrecognisable. Fits the tone of the film well.
Literally everyone on the screen brings their A game and it shows. Similar to Heat, the characters in this film aren't cliche, they are expanded beyond that to become believe and 'real' people.
Unlike similar films like Heat and Point Break that employ the 'close gang of friends rob banks', there is little in The Town that acts as a motive for the robberies. The money is there sure but the characters aren't living good lives like they do in Heat and they don't do it for the thrills like in Point Break. The opening quotes support the idea that they are robbing banks because it's their 'heritage', crime was passed down from generation to these characters and even though they have jobs and lives, this 'heritage' is making them continue the legacy of being in Charlestown, it's a fascinating idea and one that is at odds with almost every film in the same genre.
Even so, with a story that retreads a lot of familiar territory and characters that are SO close to being boringly familar, it is credit to the film that it nevers feels derivitive of other films. It holds its own with an incredible cast, superb level of acting and a direction that is frantic and bold. Ben Affleck may have found his expertise behind the lens rather than in front of it (leave that to his younger brother Casey), the direction, aided by cinematographer Robert Elswit and editor Dylan Tichenor is top notch. They make Charlestown look simultanously extremely appealing as well as depressing, with the script and characters too, the film comes across as an expose of Charlestown, not a love letter because the tone is so bleak but not a damnation because of the 'spirit' of the people there.
If you like crime films and think you may have seen this all before, give it a watch anyway. Pleasant surprises are my business.
Yes, Rise of the Planet of the Apes or to give it's full title 'Best Blockbuster of 2011'.
(You won't find that on IMDB, I did just make that up. You can tell because it reads a tiny bit easier than Rise of the Planet of the Apes which shall be referred to now as ROTPOTA in future to save me a fortune on keyboards.)
ROTPOTA is a film that no-one expected to be any good. The last film in the series was the frankly bad Tim Burton Planet of the Apes (2001), which was a direct remake of the classic (and slightly naff) 1968 Planet of the Apes film, starring barrel chested, gun loving apeloid Charlton Heston overacting his way through the film as if his unevolved arse depended on it.
After the original 1968 came a wave of Ape mania. People went apeshit over the films although it was only the original that came out in the swinging sixties. Thoughout the 70s came a further four films, Beneath /Escape from /Conquest of/Battle for The Planet of the Apes and then no more films.
In 2001, Tim Burton released a 'reimagining' of the original film starring 'Marky' Mark Wahlberg and Burton's own prime mate Helena Bonham Carter (okay, I'll stop with moneky puns). The film was not very well received although praise was given to Rick Baker for his monkey effects.
Planet of the Apes (2001)
Planet of the Apes (1968)
Before the release of the Tim Burton Planet of the Apes, distributing company Fox said that if the film was a success, it would commission a sequel, therefore starting the franchise from fresh. However, whilst the film was a financial success (£360 million Box Office vs £100 million budget) Fox decided against the idea of a sequel and the franchise went dead once more.
Rupert Wyatt (previous work includes writing and directing The Escapist) began filming ROTPOTA in 2010, wishing the film to be an original story and a part of the mythology instead of a continuation of the previous films or another re-imagining. The idea of a prequel fills most intelligent film lovers with dread, almost as much as a remake. However, this film doesn't end where the original POTA begins, it's aim was just to show how the situation in POTA happened.
ROTPOTA itself is a prime example of when most elements of film go right. The effects (by Peter Jackson's WETA Digital) are spectacular and unlike the previous films, the ape effects were digital rather than physical.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)
Beneath the CGI is stalwart physical magician Andy Serkis who is something of a mystery in this film. He plays the main ape Caesar and I cannot for the life of me tell if all of the motions are his own, the monkey IS a monkey. Moves like one, interacts physically like one, expresses itself like one (for the most part) but I've been told it's Andy Serkis in a funny suit. He is amazing. You completely forget he's there. Which is a shame because he is amazing, you completely forget he's there, which is a shame......etc etc. (link it to a Reuter's article, if you're wondering.)
Beyond the incredible apes, not much room is left for the human cast though. Will Rodman (played by James Franco) is a likable role, at times soft and sweet, sometimes his eyebrows furrow and his forehead wrinkles if he's seen something he dislikes.
The relationship between James Franco and Caesar is brilliant. Having it take place over several years cements the changes between them and makes the inevitable 'Rise' of the title surprisingly emotional. John Lithgow is also remarkably good as the human plot catalyst and Rodman's dad. The love interest Caroline (Frieda Pinto) is almost excess to requirements and her screen time reflects this. The relationships that matter are Rodman, Caesar and Rodman's father.
Brian Cox, Tom Felton (almost shaking off that, 'Hey, it's Draco Malfoy!' thing) and Heartless Businessman fill out the supporting cast. Not complex, but the suit their purpose and none of them let the film down at all. And once the Ape uprising does happen, it is an incredible series of scenes entirely worthy of the surprisingly long buildup.
A few cheeky (and powerful) nods to the original film and the ending of the film point towards a sequal and maybe, finally, the franchise will start off again, like a monkey pun I can't be bothered to write.
Just finished watching a 2010 Korean thriller film called The Yellow Sea.
The vague story (again, without spoilers) is that a taxi driver with an unhealthy addiction of gambling away his money finds himself in the employ of an unsavoury fellow who wants our penniless taxi driver to travel to South Korea and kill a man.
Again, without revealing too much, all I'll really say is that there is a LOT of violence involving these:
And these:
And as a consequence, there is a huge amount of:
The trouble with the film is that nearer the beginning, the violence and repercussions of the violent actions are much more harrowing and gruesome but as the film runs its 140 minute length, you actually start to become less affected by the violence (apart from in a few cases).
Regardless, there are one or two thrilling chases which certainly keep you at the edge of your seat and the film is very well acted and suitably dirty and grimy. Even at over two hours long, the film doesn't drag or lose pacing at any point although towards the end, you wish there would be a quiet scene just so you can digest the plot advancements before the maniacal pacing starts again.
Just like watching Oldboy, it's a cinematic feast but it's not a fun film. It won't brighten your day, unless you've had the shittest day in the history of mankind.
If you can stomach watching two men gruesomely fight to the death on the pavement of a South Korean bus station using nothing but their god given feet and fists....and a hatchet, then this film is worth a watch.
Score:
Seven bloody knife wounds out of ten.
Just before I sign off, I just wanted to share the trailer for the new, upcoming sequel to Clash of the Titans.
Oh yes!
The film no-one liked has spawned a sequel that no-one asked for. It's called Wrath of the Titans...Oorah!
