Showing posts with label visual effects. Show all posts
Showing posts with label visual effects. Show all posts

Monday, 28 December 2015

Favourite movies I watched in 2015 (That I hadn't seen before)

My 2015 list is going to be a bit different from most "year-in-review" lists, as I didn't manage to get to the cinema this year and I have a huge back-log of recently released movies on Bluray waiting for me here (like X-Men: Days of Future Past, Avengers: Age of Ultron, Cinderella, Snowpiercer, Kingman: The Secret Service..). Most of the movies I watched this year are either from last year, or older movies I've finally gotten around to viewing, but even though they might not be new, I did have some really amazing movie-experiences this year.

10. Edge of Tomorrow/ Live, Die, Repeat (2014)
Edge of Tomorrow was such a nice surprise, totally overlooked at the box-office, so it appeared on Netflix not long after its cinema-run, and ended up being one of the better sci-fi movies I watched this year. Tom Cruise really came out gunning with this awkward, arrogant, spineless, self-aware character, while Emily Blunt got to play a truly kick-ass warrior. I could have done without the romance and I didn't like the ending, but for a movie where I went in expecting nothing, I got a truly great experience in return.


9. Captain America: Winter Soldier (2014)
I had almost given up on the superhero genre, I'm just sick of the shiny, flashy, pretty-but-not-much-substance movies we've had lately, but the Winter Soldier single-handedly dragged me back in and invigorated my interest in the Marvel cinematic universe.
The distinct old spy-movie feel, the consistent use of practical effects and fight choreography and the darker feel and more extreme measures all combined to present a "dirtier" superhero movie and made Winter Soldier my favourite Avengers movie so far.

8. The Scorpion King (2002)
I basically bought the entire Mummy/Scorpion King franchise just to watch Ron Perlman in the Scorpion King 3, but The Scorpion King was such a fun surprise. The sound design is ludicrous and the story is basically non-existent, but the movie is so aware of its own campy nature, presenting an incredibly entertaining action-romp where at one point Dwayne Johnson pretends to be a guy's shadow before jumping out and stabbing him(!).
I love that Dwayne isn't afraid to look silly or be defeated, and it was so nice to see one of my favourite actors again - Michael Clarke Duncan (RIP) - in a big role.

7. Standing Ovation (2010)/The Ice Pirates (1984)
In August I put on an afternoon movie to have on in the background, and ended up sitting there, mouth open, amazed and confused throughout the movie. Standing Ovation is a children's movie, a musical, a slap-stick comedy, a dark realistic family drama and a gangster movie all melded into one very inconsistently toned experience. I had no idea where the story was going, and it kept surprising me every scene transition. The ending is unfortunately full-on children's movie, but everything up to that was weird, confusing, funny and emotional.
I became very interested in this director's work, and have been catching up on more of his movies since. Not that impressed by Mannequin 2 or Mac and Me (though I thought it was better than most, probably), but Ice Pirates was another amazing gem; a comedy, science-fiction, pirate movie, some incredibly dark post-apocalypse elements and a weird "happy?" ending.
These elements combine into almost rapid-fire tonal changes - kidnapping and rape-alluding, industrial castration/brain-washing machines, murder of an entire robot family, slavery, food/water-shortage and serial-killers - wrapped in a lighthearted space-romp.
Neither Standing Ovation or Ice Pirates are very good quality-wise, but they introduced me to one of the most interesting directors I've seen in a while - Stewart Raffill, as well as being thoroughly entertaining, interesting experiences.

6. L'illusionniste/The Illusionist (2010)
Not to be confused with the Edwart Norton movie with the same name, the Illusionist is a bitter-sweet almost silent animated movie by the director of "Les triplettes de Belleville" about two people who sorely needed to communicate.
An ageing, forgotten French stage-magician meets a Scottish girl who believes in magic and we follow them through their ensuring combined adventures.
I found the ending to be both the end of their journey and a new start, and found the entire movie a beautiful, tragic and serene experience.

Tuesday, 8 September 2015

Stuart Little ramblings


(Small note: I'm trying to actually post everything I write, so this is my draft of a review of Stuart Little)

Stuart Little is a cute, safe movie. Though the story (Shyamalan? Really?) won't win any awards, it also doesn't feature any problematic scenes, and seems like it would shine as a family movie you can just put on when you want some safe mid-day entertainment while you get stuff done.
There's a few things here you don't usually see in children's movies.
I like that none of the adults are bad guys. Stuart's adoptive parents really try their best and love him for who he is, they make mistakes, but they wholeheartedly love their sons, and the rest of the family are supportive and good guys too. Even the orphanage manager and Stuart's "real" parents are good guys, leaving this as one of the few children's movies that doesn't feature adults as bad guys.


What makes the movie stand out among the crop is the team behind it. Everyone connected to this project treated the movie seriously and with respect. From Hugh Laurie's amazing performance as mr. Little to the great New York score, the movie features interesting direction the whole way through. The set pieces (especially the Little house) have a very deliberate design that makes everything a bit otherworldly, the boat race in Central Park is very interestingly directed, using either stop motion or puppeteering, and all the cats are played by actual cats with only their faces cgi'd, which lets the movie focus on Stuart's animation.


But what really makes the movie worth watching, even as an adult, is the amazing cinematography by Guillermo Navarro, most known for classics such as Pan's Labyrinth, Jackie Brown and Hellboy II. There's wide lens shots, pan shots, creative camera angles.. There's one scene in particular, where Stuart is contemplating life with his real parents and the loss of the Little family, where he looks out of the window and the camera slowly pans out from his close-up to show the New York City backdrop in a way that could rival any emotional moment in any classic.
I have never seen this level of cinematography in a children's movie, and I sorely appreciate how much love, care and quality Navarro put into his work.

Saturday, 15 August 2015

Arctic Outbreak/The Thaw review


Arctic Outbreak, or "the Thaw" (real name according to movie and Imdb, no idea why it's been renamed) is... Err.. Hmm. 
The first 40 minutes are bad. Really bad. A boring, preachy drek that insists on not showing you anything that's going on, and skips 2 days forwards over what could have been the most interesting part of the story. 
The second half is too filled with shiny cgi to actually be scary, and the "shock twist" is blatantly obvious if you bothered to stay through the first half. 

And yet.. I kinda like it. The second half is almost a psychological thriller, and even though it falls into some of the common disaster movie tropes (no one ever knows even basic first-aid), it also subverts several of them. 
You so seldom see people willing to take the difficult choices, willing to maim themselves to get rid of infection or sacrifice themselves to save others, and here most of the main characters do, they even react rationally and efficient in crisis situations. The action hero of the story is the most unlikely one, and she makes a choice in the end I've never seen a woman make on film before. 



Most of the actors give decent performances too, notable exception being Val Kilmer, who just couldn't be bothered. 

I just.. There's so much wrong, the editing is bad, the score is manipulative bleh, the movie has no idea if it wants to be a disaster movie, a gross-out horror, a psychological thriller or an environmentalism warning, and yet.. 

I think I like what this movie could have been. If the first half had focused on the 2 days we skipped over; showing the beginning of the infection and them slowly figuring things out, if they'd not had a cgi-budget and had to do everything with props, puppets and prosthetics, if the bug threat had been turned into an invisible horror instead of a overwhelming, always visible thing, and the whole "epidemic as scare that'll finally convince people of the reality of global warming" plot-line had been dropped.. 
There's some really good ideas in there, and good acting performances too, I just wish the final result was something I on good conscience could recommend to others (it's not). 
:S

Tuesday, 11 August 2015

Talking about Homeward Bound

Rewatched Homeward bound last night. That movie still holds up today. The editing and cinematography is great, there's no special effects, the pets don't move their mouth when they talk, and they don't understand the humans, making them a lot more animal-like than other family pet movies. Also the dog that plays Chance is such an adorable doofus. He keeps crashing into things and tripping over his own legs. 

There's this great subtle side-story where the new father (who married into the family) stands alone to the right in the shot while the family grieves the lost pets, but at the end he's playing with the children and standing with the family when the pets come back. In the time we've followed the pets' journey to get back to their family (and becoming their own little pet family, with Chance being the "New one") the human family has become a family too. 
Totally love the subtle, visual pictures that give depth to the movie's story and moral.

Friday, 23 May 2014

Bit-size impressions: A Monster in Paris


The script is very easy, and the object design is really poor, but the songs are great and the world design is amazing. It's worth watching just for the overview designs. 

I just wish I could see it with the original voices, the dubbing ruins so many of the characters.

Saturday, 12 April 2014

The Mutant Chronicles - Why? Just... why.


Argh, this movie had such potential! The animation and digital effects/backgrounds are great (For their budget), the main actors are all capable, and still it ended up as this horrible train wreck. 
And poor Perlman's talent was wasted up until the last 10 mins, where his mask play was the best thing in the whole movie! 

The plot, the effects, over the top violence and the script all seemed to lend itself to an over the top, spark-in-the-eye sort of film, but instead we got a very serious, trying to be epic, slow-shot, philosophical discussions mixed with splatter action scenes type film. 

It's not even a good, funny train wreck, it's just sad, because you keep seeing what it could have been.  

Bah!


Saturday, 29 March 2014

Bit-size impressions: Cat. 7: The End of the World


Well, this went from a catastrophy movie grounded in science with too many characters and weak script (cat 6) to a pure sci-fi mess with Horror shooting. 
Stop with the fancy editing!

Friday, 10 May 2013

Bit-size impressions: Dark Shadows



Vampires, over the top art design and extreme personalities.. 
Johnny Depp doing the same old role.

Friday, 26 March 2010

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs


Hmm, I'm not sure how to feel about this film. I've been complaining lately that so many animation films try to target too many audience groups and end up not targeting any, but this film is clearly aware of who it's made for; children.
The humour is mostly physical-, sight- and word gags, that work surprisingly well within this film, and is suited for the bright and colourful design.
The film's lowest moments are actually when the script writers are trying to be smart or do grown-up comedy. Most of the films emotional moments are driven by childish comedy, and it works.

Plot-wise it's very simple, adding a black-and-white villain for really no purpose at all, and the film is really driven more by the animation and gags rather than any real plot. In that way it's very similar to "Meet the Robinson's", Disney's second non-Pixar 3d film.
The film wavers between just being a funny, silly film, and actually trying to take it's plot seriously, and that is it's downfall, especially since most of the actors seem clearly aware that this is a silly, children's film, and do their lines in that style. Neil Patrick Harris is the real shining gem here, even if he only says a few words throughout the film.

As a children's film the moral is also very obvious and in your face, with the usual "being special is good" and "realizing yourself" developments for the main characters. It also includes the overly-used Disney favourite of single dad not being able to communicate with his son and alienating him. I'll give them props for the creative solution though.

As it is it's a good film, but it had potential to be just a really silly, amusing children's film, and it's a bit sad that it fell short by, as all recent (non-Pixar) animations have done, trying to take itself more seriously than its script allows. You're not Pixar, Sony, try to make your own twist on animation instead of trying (unsuccessfully) to copy what has come before. But, based on Sony's previous track record with animation, this is a huge step up (Don't even get me started on "Open season"..), and I'm interested in seeing where they'll go from here.

And now I'll try to wash my brain of the image of feet trapped inside polymer for over 15 years.. Bleergh!

Thursday, 18 March 2010

Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland



I'm not sure what to think about this one. I think my one, general reaction is; I'm underwhelmed.
"Alice in Wonderland" is such a huge and quirky world, there's so much to work with, so much to build from, and this film just isn't creative.

It seems to be targeting people that have some idea of what Alice in Wonderland is, having maybe seen the disney (animation) version many years ago, but not read the books or know the story.
It also tries, like so many films lately, to cater to both children and adults, but fails to find a middle ground. I would not take young children to see this film.
If you take away the wonder aspect and just look at the film, it's a very standard fantasy/action film with all the usual elements; growing up, finding themselves, moral (being special is what makes you great), great big monster to fight, tasks to overcome and a romantic interest.
Besides the "young girl making her mark in a time where women shut up and act pretty" theme, the film doesn't bring much new to the fantasy genre.
Looking at it from a wonder aspect, there's so much more that could have been done. I want surrealism, I want quirky, I want mad! I don't want a hatter that's practically normal and a queen that's just evil.

It's also sad because the (supporting) cast is a.m.a.z.i.n.g! Crispin Glover, Stephen Fry, Alan Rickman, Christopher Lee.. *swoons* I'm also fond of Mia. She's a good actor, and it's nice to see an actress that's normal pretty looking, instead of a model beauty. I also think Anne Hathaway does a good job with the role she's been given. she's obviously been told to play a queen that's over-acting. The "real" white queen shine through a few times, though not really enough to show us who she really is.

Johnny Depp on the other hand.. I love Depp, he's a master of quirky characters, but I have to agree with others; we've seen this one before. I would have liked less Jack Sparrow and more Willy Wonka.

I didn't hate the film, by no means, I'm just, disappointed. Again, I seem to be disappointed with the lack of imagination and surrealism. And I hated, hated, HATED the romantic sub-plot!

I'm also seeing a worrying trend with Tim Burton's later films. It's becoming more and more Burton, and less about the original material. I love you Burton, I love your vision, your art direction, but you're starting to put a bit too much of yourself into your films. I want to see a real Tim Burton original again, written, directed, even produced by you, where you can really go all out and show us who you are. Just don't do it with a source material a lot of us love.

Saturday, 13 September 2008

Wanted - Did you say action?


First impressions right after leaving the cinema:
I've just watched 1 hour and 50 mins pure action, and I didn't react badly to it,
I would rather be trained by these professional assassins than by V (from V for Vendetta) which I find a bit funny,
and I feel so bad for those rats!

The good: the direction and art direction in this movie is amazing. Instead of making a gritty, dark action film, he made a stylized, shiny and over the top action film, that despite all the horrible things that happen still seem rather light, which I think it had to be, to be able to sit through it. The action sequences feature bullet time, rewinding, experimental camera angles and effective zooming. Everything from the shooting to the cgi works perfectly together and if you are interested in art direction and/or action direction, it's a must see. And.. that's really the only reason to see it.

The plot is very basic, with no fleshed out characters, and plot twists you can see a mile away. I understand that the film is based on a comic book with no real story, but I would think it would be possible to write an action film script with actual plot twists. The predictable plot twists also ruin the few moments in the film that are supposed to be touching. The big supposedly touching moment in the film, right after the most spectacular shooting yet, ends up just being a "meh" moment. Besides for Wesley, an account manager that doesn't care about anything, not even the fact that his girlfriend is having an affair with his best friend, but for some reason has a very strong will to live, none of the characters have much personality. They're there to do their thing, being an expert knife fighter, or a bomb expert or the devoted romantic interest, and their one dimensionality ends up making you not care at all when the big fights ensues.

It's obvious that Bekmambetov went into this project wanting to create a pure, visually stunning action film, and that he has managed admirably, but you end up wondering if the film had been better if they'd just cut out all the plot elements put in to try to make you care, and make the plot seem stronger. No plot is actually better than a weak plot, but is it really impossible to write a good plot for an action film?