Thursday, June 23, 2011
THE TREE OF LIFE
The enigmatic Terrence Malick strikes again. I watched this last weekend at the Michigan Theater in Ann Arbor, amidst a decently populated house. The majority of the audience came to see a new Brad Pitt and/or Sean Penn film, and were wholly unprepared for what was in store. Well, really, we all were. Even with my knowledge and experience of Malick's previous works, I sheltered myself from the hype enough that I wasn't sure where he was taking me on this particular trip.
It turns out that he was making the film that his entire career has been building up to - the summation of all of his works, spanning from the dawn of time to the land beyond death. I'm fascinated to see where he goes from here, because I would be shocked if he were able to go bigger. But hey. . . Kubrick followed up 2001 with A Clockwork Orange, so. . . Is it time for Malick to do his Richard III? We'll just have to wait and see. (He's already been filming a new movie, starring Ben Affleck, but as per usual no one knows what it's really about.)
A lot of directors use fast-paced editing, and I usually hate it. I like my films to be fairly "neat" in construction, and a film moving at the speed of a freight train is often jarring to me, and lacking emotional heft. Some few, great directors pull it off nicely - the aforementioned Kubrick with Clockwork; Scorsese with The Departed - and Malick uses his editing in a similarly unique way. He shows us snippets of scenes, traces of intimate moments; and besides the plot of this film, it's that element I believe people find the hardest to wrap their heads around. The point is this. . . Each moment in the characters lives are like pieces of a puzzle; pieces which, when placed end to end, are revealed as parts of a greater truth. In Tree, we're watching a man's life flash before his eyes. But not only his life - also everything that led to his creation, and every consequence of his decisions thereafter.
As I've said before - you don't watch Malick for the narrative. He's a poet, using the cinema in its purest possible form. Not only is this my favorite film of the year so far, but its my favorite that I've seen since Where The Wild Things Are.
ECSTATIC ABOUT
Monday, June 20, 2011
CHANGES
Longtime readers (all twelve of you, minus the ones who refuse to think of a year as "long") may be wondering why my output has decreased so significantly in the past month or so. The simple answer to that question is this: I was getting bored with it. Now, on to the more complex answer. . .
You may notice a couple of changes that I've made to the site. First off, I'm no longer going as Frederick Frog, but as my actual name, Phil Dean. Seeing as how the vast majority of my regular readership comes via my Facebook page, this animalistic ruse seemed particularly ridiculous. It was really the remnant of an earlier design for the site, and I've made the necessary correction.
Secondly, my review system - if you'll but take a gander at the right side of the page, I'll save myself the redundancy of explaining it twice. The short version is that I was getting sick of the perceived elitism and condescension inherent in my previous judgmental wordings.
Thirdly, I've made a huge, HUGE, HUUUGGGEEE, change in my life. . .
Huge.
I've decided to no longer seek out movie news. In fact, I've decided to intentionally shelter myself from it.
I'm doing this for a number of reasons. One has to do with the negativity of the online film nerd community. Much vitriol has been spent towards maintaining the hegemony of the nerd film dynamic - i.e., a film involving wizards or superheroes either "Sux" or "Rox". I'm interested in a reasoned, open discussion, not a shouting match.
I also just miss the ignorance that I used to have. While I stay clear of spoiler material, I still absorb information about casting, basic plot synopsis, and "buzz" on scripts, ofttimes several years before the movie in question is to be released. How fun would it have been to see X-Men: First Class and not know ahead of time that Jennifer Lawrence was in it, thus being pleasantly surprised by her appearance as Mystique? Would it be possible to make myself isolated enough so that immediately before release, I could say "Holy shit! They made a Green Lantern movie?!". Only time will tell. Either way, I think that the less I know going into a film, the less likely I am to subconsciously pre-judge it before I see it.
And most importantly? I often go on little "diets", taking away elements of my personality that I consider vices. That's how I quit smoking. How I cut down significantly on drinking alcohol. Movie News is, when I came to think about it, how I waste a great deal of my time. Time which I could be spending on other pursuits. I'm getting back into my screenwriting in a big way, and closely following who the frontrunners are to direct Jurassic Park 4 is simply another distraction that prevents me from realizing my actualization.
So where do I go from here? I'd like to continue doing Blunderbuss, but I don't know what form it will take. Reviews will continue, but perhaps in a more laid back style. Ideally, I'd like this site to be more of a conversation piece than a polemic, so let me start by asking this: What would you like to see? What would you be interested in me writing about? What's been working for you so far?
Thanks for reading my erratic posts this past year! I hope to continue the madness into 2012 (and the end times).
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
X-MEN: FIRST CLASS
X-MEN: FIRST CLASS
Director - Matthew Vaughn
Stars - Michael Fassbender, James McAvoy, Jennifer Lawrence
This is the fifth film in the X-Men movie franchise, and the second prequel (The previous film in the series, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, was set before the first three but after this. Stay with me here!). In case you're unfamiliar with the premise of the series, its this: Mankind is evolving, and the newly discovered "Mutants", who have abilities such as teleportation and telepathy, find themselves the targets of ordinary humans who hate and fear them. The X-Men are advocates of peace, and a lasting co-existence between their fellow mutantkind, and mankind. In First Class, we see the origins of the X-Men, gathered together in the early 1960's.
Do you have to be a fan of the series to enjoy this, or even know what's going on? Not per-se, but it sure would help. Most of the best moments in the film are "fan bait" - little cameos or character references that X-Heads are sure to love. But the film can't quite decide whether its a prequel or a reboot, and thats where I'm a bit stumped. Its efforts to connect the dots with the other films is noble, but seriously - why bother? The continuity has been fucked for some time now. Or did no one else notice that Sabretooth transformed from a mute wrestler into Liev Schrieber? That the continuity seems to be fluid doesn't bother me, and doesn't appear to bother anyone else.
I will say this - you have to be a hardcore fan of superheroes to enjoy this. While something like The Dark Knight, soaked to the bone in gritty realism, acts as a good gateway drug for the non-converted, this film is flashy, goofy, and balls-out earnest. Fair-weather friends of the spandex set need not apply.
Director Matthew Vaughn, having just come off the meta (and brilliant) superhero film Kick-Ass, brings his indie sensibilities and energy to this WAY underfunded affair. The fx scenes won't blow your mind, but he makes them work well. Vaughn understands the rhythm of an action scene better than most of the big name directors out there, so what he lacks in budget, he makes up for in actual skill.
The performances here, particularly by lead actors Michael Fassbender, James McAvoy, and Jennifer Lawrence, are very strong. That's where one of my main complaints lies - I like these characters so much, I wanted to see much more of their interplay, but the movie is rushing through exposition like a freight train. I know this might initially sound ridiculous, but I would've preferred if they'd stretched this story out over the course of three films. Its solid, but there are just too many things going on, and too many characters to touch on, for them to really focus on the development of the group.
I've said in the past that the X-Men series is one of the best half-assed franchises of all time, and the tradition continues. For every exuberant action set-piece, or perfectly delivered line of dialogue, there are moments that rival the unintentional goofiness of the Star Wars Prequels. However, for the most part, this film sheds quite a bit of the bloat that made the last two films kind of a chore, streamlining the narrative in a satisfying way. I'm hoping this does well, because I'd like to see the further adventures of the swinging sixties X-Men.
In short - for the average moviegoer, I would rate this as "Good". I loved it, but acknowledge that it has some serious fucking problems. But for myself, and fellow X-Men fanatics. . .
FREDERICK OPINES - GREAT
Director - Matthew Vaughn
Stars - Michael Fassbender, James McAvoy, Jennifer Lawrence
This is the fifth film in the X-Men movie franchise, and the second prequel (The previous film in the series, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, was set before the first three but after this. Stay with me here!). In case you're unfamiliar with the premise of the series, its this: Mankind is evolving, and the newly discovered "Mutants", who have abilities such as teleportation and telepathy, find themselves the targets of ordinary humans who hate and fear them. The X-Men are advocates of peace, and a lasting co-existence between their fellow mutantkind, and mankind. In First Class, we see the origins of the X-Men, gathered together in the early 1960's.
Do you have to be a fan of the series to enjoy this, or even know what's going on? Not per-se, but it sure would help. Most of the best moments in the film are "fan bait" - little cameos or character references that X-Heads are sure to love. But the film can't quite decide whether its a prequel or a reboot, and thats where I'm a bit stumped. Its efforts to connect the dots with the other films is noble, but seriously - why bother? The continuity has been fucked for some time now. Or did no one else notice that Sabretooth transformed from a mute wrestler into Liev Schrieber? That the continuity seems to be fluid doesn't bother me, and doesn't appear to bother anyone else.
I will say this - you have to be a hardcore fan of superheroes to enjoy this. While something like The Dark Knight, soaked to the bone in gritty realism, acts as a good gateway drug for the non-converted, this film is flashy, goofy, and balls-out earnest. Fair-weather friends of the spandex set need not apply.
Director Matthew Vaughn, having just come off the meta (and brilliant) superhero film Kick-Ass, brings his indie sensibilities and energy to this WAY underfunded affair. The fx scenes won't blow your mind, but he makes them work well. Vaughn understands the rhythm of an action scene better than most of the big name directors out there, so what he lacks in budget, he makes up for in actual skill.
The performances here, particularly by lead actors Michael Fassbender, James McAvoy, and Jennifer Lawrence, are very strong. That's where one of my main complaints lies - I like these characters so much, I wanted to see much more of their interplay, but the movie is rushing through exposition like a freight train. I know this might initially sound ridiculous, but I would've preferred if they'd stretched this story out over the course of three films. Its solid, but there are just too many things going on, and too many characters to touch on, for them to really focus on the development of the group.
I've said in the past that the X-Men series is one of the best half-assed franchises of all time, and the tradition continues. For every exuberant action set-piece, or perfectly delivered line of dialogue, there are moments that rival the unintentional goofiness of the Star Wars Prequels. However, for the most part, this film sheds quite a bit of the bloat that made the last two films kind of a chore, streamlining the narrative in a satisfying way. I'm hoping this does well, because I'd like to see the further adventures of the swinging sixties X-Men.
In short - for the average moviegoer, I would rate this as "Good". I loved it, but acknowledge that it has some serious fucking problems. But for myself, and fellow X-Men fanatics. . .
FREDERICK OPINES - GREAT
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES
PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES (2011)
Director: Rob Marshall
Stars: Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush, Ian McShane, Penelope Cruz
Everyone seems to like the first film (if one is inclined to enjoy that type of story), but opinions on Pirates 2 and 3 vary from lukewarm to abysmal. Being a fan of the original trilogy in total, I do agree with arguments that the second and third films were a bit overambitious - but maybe its exactly that ambition that I like about them. They're two of the only big-budget, blockbuster films I can think of where the stories lost me at times - but due to their complexity, not their stupidity. They're bloated, yes, but also very smartly crafted.
Disney, haven taken criticisms of the trilogy to heart, have heard the cries of fans who like their bread white and their sex missionary. In other words, On Stranger Tides has been dumbed down a bit, for your viewing pleasure. Well. . . for the most part. Some side-plots are either left unexplained, or very cryptically so, such as the majority of the romance between Philip the Missionary and Syrena the Mermaid. Does this sink the movie? No.
What does sink the movie is the flat, uninspiring direction from Rob Marshall (Chicago) - the dude who somehow stole the Director's Guild Award away from Roman Polanski (for The Pianist) and Martin Scorsese (for Gangs Of New York). I was baffled when I first heard about Marshall being hired to take over the franchise, and I remain equally baffled having just come home from watching it. "Sure," I once thought to myself, "let's give him a chance. After all, I wasn't the biggest fan of Gore Verbinski before he directed the first film." I was wrong to have even the smallest degree of faith in his abilities. Lines that could have killed, and are delivered perfectly by Mr. Depp, lay flat and lifeless onscreen. What should be a rousing escape scene just looks like a YouTube video of some idiot swinging from a chandelier.
Verbinski picked some unique looking faces for his band of scallywags, like The Office star Mackenzie Crook, and filmed them in a grotesque, Gilliam-like wide-angle close-ups. Here, we have a stable of fairly boring looking, indistinguishable pirates shot in flat medium and wide shots. The usually brilliant Darius Wolski returns as Director Of Photography, yet is given nothing interesting to shoot or frame.
Most damning of all, the characters clearly aren't being played the way they should. According to the dialogue in the film, I'm to assume that Blackbeard is a terrifying motherfucker - "The pirate that all pirates fear", or some such thing - yet the usually great Ian McShane is just playing him as a huge asshole. Similarly, Penelope Cruz's character is supposedly feared by her crew, and is set up as being the female counterpart to Depp's Jack Sparrow, but the way she plays it leaves me unconvinced. Again - those are both fantastic actors, who generally know what they're doing. I'm leaving the blame for their performances solely on Marshall's doorstep.
This isn't a franchise killer, I don't think - the reviews so far have been pretty bad, but I could see less discerning moviegoers having a decent enough time with this. I didn't find it to be painful - just boring. I would go see a future installment, if they can get a better director back at the helm.
FREDERICK OPINES - BAD
Director: Rob Marshall
Stars: Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush, Ian McShane, Penelope Cruz
Everyone seems to like the first film (if one is inclined to enjoy that type of story), but opinions on Pirates 2 and 3 vary from lukewarm to abysmal. Being a fan of the original trilogy in total, I do agree with arguments that the second and third films were a bit overambitious - but maybe its exactly that ambition that I like about them. They're two of the only big-budget, blockbuster films I can think of where the stories lost me at times - but due to their complexity, not their stupidity. They're bloated, yes, but also very smartly crafted.
Disney, haven taken criticisms of the trilogy to heart, have heard the cries of fans who like their bread white and their sex missionary. In other words, On Stranger Tides has been dumbed down a bit, for your viewing pleasure. Well. . . for the most part. Some side-plots are either left unexplained, or very cryptically so, such as the majority of the romance between Philip the Missionary and Syrena the Mermaid. Does this sink the movie? No.
What does sink the movie is the flat, uninspiring direction from Rob Marshall (Chicago) - the dude who somehow stole the Director's Guild Award away from Roman Polanski (for The Pianist) and Martin Scorsese (for Gangs Of New York). I was baffled when I first heard about Marshall being hired to take over the franchise, and I remain equally baffled having just come home from watching it. "Sure," I once thought to myself, "let's give him a chance. After all, I wasn't the biggest fan of Gore Verbinski before he directed the first film." I was wrong to have even the smallest degree of faith in his abilities. Lines that could have killed, and are delivered perfectly by Mr. Depp, lay flat and lifeless onscreen. What should be a rousing escape scene just looks like a YouTube video of some idiot swinging from a chandelier.
Verbinski picked some unique looking faces for his band of scallywags, like The Office star Mackenzie Crook, and filmed them in a grotesque, Gilliam-like wide-angle close-ups. Here, we have a stable of fairly boring looking, indistinguishable pirates shot in flat medium and wide shots. The usually brilliant Darius Wolski returns as Director Of Photography, yet is given nothing interesting to shoot or frame.
Most damning of all, the characters clearly aren't being played the way they should. According to the dialogue in the film, I'm to assume that Blackbeard is a terrifying motherfucker - "The pirate that all pirates fear", or some such thing - yet the usually great Ian McShane is just playing him as a huge asshole. Similarly, Penelope Cruz's character is supposedly feared by her crew, and is set up as being the female counterpart to Depp's Jack Sparrow, but the way she plays it leaves me unconvinced. Again - those are both fantastic actors, who generally know what they're doing. I'm leaving the blame for their performances solely on Marshall's doorstep.
This isn't a franchise killer, I don't think - the reviews so far have been pretty bad, but I could see less discerning moviegoers having a decent enough time with this. I didn't find it to be painful - just boring. I would go see a future installment, if they can get a better director back at the helm.
FREDERICK OPINES - BAD
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
CAVE OF FORGOTTEN DREAMS
CAVE OF FORGOTTEN DREAMS (2011)
Director: Werner Herzog
Starring: Werner Herzog, Some Scientists, and Cave Paintings
Cave of Forgotten Dreams is the latest documentary from director Werner Herzog, the mad German who brought us such films as Rescue Dawn, Aguirre the Wrath of God, and Encounters at the End of the World. Here he takes a 3D camera to France's Chauvet Cave - a place which contains the oldest known cave paintings, some dating back as far as 32,000 years ago.
There have been films I've seen where I would describe the 3D effects as "neat", but this is the first film I've seen in which the 3D is almost essential to the viewing experience. The cave paintings of lions, rhinos, and other, sometimes extinct, animals were drawn on uneven surfaces, utilizing the light and texture in fascinating ways. This is the type of film that I would usually recommend as a rental -but unless you have a 3D television, you owe it to yourself to catch this in the theater.
If you're unfamiliar with Herzog's previous work, particularly his documentaries, you may find yourself confused as to why he spends so much time interviewing a scientist about his time working in the circus, or why there's a side-trip to a nearby mutant crocodile conservatory. Trust me - it all has purpose. Herzog seeks to demystify what we predetermine to be "normal", and in doing so is also seeking out that which makes us fundamentally "human".
Seeing pictures of some of the earliest know works of art, alongside various pieces from other archeological sites, I find myself filled with a sense of true wonder and awe. I'm forced to recognize that despite my lack of religion, there is something "spiritual" inside of me. On top of that, I realize that several of my favorite films have a spiritual bent - 2001: A Space Odyssey, clearly, as well as even something as "popcorny" as Raiders Of The Lost Ark. Quite possibly my two favorite scenes in Raiders are the Well Of Souls sequence, which plays out almost like a religious revelation, and the scene in which villain Belloq challenges Indy to blow up the Ark - Indy cannot, for he is entranced by the potential discoveries that sit inside, waiting to be discovered.
A strong contender for my top of the year list, and a definite must watch if it plays in your area.
FREDERICK OPINES - GREAT
Director: Werner Herzog
Starring: Werner Herzog, Some Scientists, and Cave Paintings
Cave of Forgotten Dreams is the latest documentary from director Werner Herzog, the mad German who brought us such films as Rescue Dawn, Aguirre the Wrath of God, and Encounters at the End of the World. Here he takes a 3D camera to France's Chauvet Cave - a place which contains the oldest known cave paintings, some dating back as far as 32,000 years ago.
There have been films I've seen where I would describe the 3D effects as "neat", but this is the first film I've seen in which the 3D is almost essential to the viewing experience. The cave paintings of lions, rhinos, and other, sometimes extinct, animals were drawn on uneven surfaces, utilizing the light and texture in fascinating ways. This is the type of film that I would usually recommend as a rental -but unless you have a 3D television, you owe it to yourself to catch this in the theater.
If you're unfamiliar with Herzog's previous work, particularly his documentaries, you may find yourself confused as to why he spends so much time interviewing a scientist about his time working in the circus, or why there's a side-trip to a nearby mutant crocodile conservatory. Trust me - it all has purpose. Herzog seeks to demystify what we predetermine to be "normal", and in doing so is also seeking out that which makes us fundamentally "human".
Seeing pictures of some of the earliest know works of art, alongside various pieces from other archeological sites, I find myself filled with a sense of true wonder and awe. I'm forced to recognize that despite my lack of religion, there is something "spiritual" inside of me. On top of that, I realize that several of my favorite films have a spiritual bent - 2001: A Space Odyssey, clearly, as well as even something as "popcorny" as Raiders Of The Lost Ark. Quite possibly my two favorite scenes in Raiders are the Well Of Souls sequence, which plays out almost like a religious revelation, and the scene in which villain Belloq challenges Indy to blow up the Ark - Indy cannot, for he is entranced by the potential discoveries that sit inside, waiting to be discovered.
A strong contender for my top of the year list, and a definite must watch if it plays in your area.
FREDERICK OPINES - GREAT
Thursday, May 5, 2011
"Fast Five" As Allegory For The Story Of Christ The Redeemer (SPOILERS!)
FAST FIVE (2011)
Director: Justin Lin
Stars: Vin Diesel, Paul Walker, Jordana Brewster, Dwayne Johnson
When last we left our heroes, in Fast & Furious (2009), Brian (Walker) and Mia (Brewster) were about to bust Dom (Diesel) out of a prison bus, as he was being transported to serve out his life sentence in Chino. They succeed - miraculously managing to not kill anyone after they flip the bus over at high speed, as we later learn from a local news broadcast (we're given no guarantees about the survival of the several other thousand people indirectly effected by vehicular crime throughout the film). Wanting to begin life anew, they head to Rio de Janeiro - their every move watched over by the statue of Christ the Redeemer, as we are reminded of several times throughout the film.
But while they now reside in paradise, they have not yet fully purged themselves of sin - Brian and the newly pregnant Mia have become impoverished, tying them closer to the physical world than the spiritual. After being double-crossed on a job by local businessman, and criminal entrepreneur, Hernan Reyes (Joaquim de Almeida, "The Latin Jack Ryan"), the protagonists decide to rid the area of his corruptive influence by stealing all of his money - giving themselves a chance to be born anew.
Hernan Reyes is the devil - he corrupts mostly through seduction, not violence. In a scene in which he talks to potential business partners, Hernan explains why the Portuguese were successful in conquering Brazil, while the Spaniards were not - the Portuguese came with trinkets, placating the natives with objects of desire. In order to keep receiving these needful things, they need only give over their service. . . their very souls, in essence. Reyes continues this model in the 21st century - he rules first through gifts, secondly through violence.
In order to pull off the heist, Dom organizes a crew consisting of characters culled from previous Fast & Furious films - a gathering of Apostles, who by merely believing in Dom are given the chance at a new life. It seems as if nothing can stand in their way. . .
. . .until the arrival of DSS Special Agent Luke Hobbs (Johnson), a man that Brian knew of in his previous life. Brian refers to Hobbs as being "Old Testament" - God's Wrath incarnate. He has arrived in Rio to mete out justice in blood, and doesn't care about the motivations or complexities of the human spirit. When confronted with the irregularity of Dom having supposedly killed a trio of DEA agents in cold blood, despite his relatively non-murderous relationship with the law in the past (the agents were in fact murdered by one of Hernan's men), Hobbs merely responds to the questioning police officer with a dismissive line about "names land on my desk, I take them down". In other words, "ours is not to question why", in regards to a higher power.
The police officer asking the questions about Dom's possible motivations is Elena Neves, a local cop whose police officer husband was killed by one of Hernan's men while on duty. Hernan killed him because he could not possess his soul, as he does most of the other police in Rio, and Elena finds herself living day to day, lost in a world of darkness. Enlisted by Hobbs as a local guide/interpreter, she manages to temporarily stop Dom during one of his getaways, before he manages to elude her. He does, however, accidently leave his crucifix necklace behind - the very symbol of the soul he's attempting to free from corruption. Elena retrieves the necklace, keeping it for herself. She finds herself becoming more and more enamored with it, and of the possibility of a life free from corruption.
Eventually, Hobbs finds his man. It's Old Testament versus New, as Dom and Hobbs fistfight it out for supremacy. In the end, Dom has the advantage, but despite his murderous rage, he decides not to kill - that is a life that he has left behind him. In triumph, Hobbs the righteous warrior carts his prize away.
But victory is not to last. Hobbs gets ambushed by Hernan's men, who end up killing his entire crew, with the exception of Elena. Elena frees Dom and the rest of the prisoners, who in turn save Hobbs life. As a token of gratitude, and as a means to take an eye for an eye from Hernan, Hobbs then agrees to help Dom and team with their heist.
The heist goes according to plan - except that no one knew what the plan was exactly, except for Dom himself. Brian and Dom drag a gigantic, hitched safe down the streets of Rio with two muscle cars, until they're halfway across a bridge - then realizing that they're never going to be able to outrun Hernan and the cops on such a straight and narrow path. Dom disconnects Brian from the safe, telling him to go on - Brian's child will be born free of original sin. Dom turns his car around, cranks up the nitro, and pulls the safe behind him. On a path as narrow as the eye of a needle, Dom swings the safe back and forth, knocking cars off of the road - money becoming the very means of destruction of these men of industry. In the end, Satan, as embodied by Hernan, is destroyed by Dom's hurtling vehicle - the angel of seduction and sedation destroyed by the propulsive instrument of humanity.
Hobbs arrives on the scene, to exact what vengeance he can from Hernan's wreckage. In an uncharacteristic act of mercy, in response to Dom's own, Hobbs gives Dom and team twenty-four hours of running time, before beginning his pursuit. Dom, and Brian, who had never truly left his side, depart. Dom had sacrificed himself to save them all, and had been reborn again, as had all of his people.
Hobbs examines the safe - empty. Just as the world of the flesh has been severed, so too has the reliance on earthly possessions. The money has been transmuted from lifeless bits of tree into the dreams, hopes and passions of those who now possess it.
FREDERICK OPINES - GOOD
Director: Justin Lin
Stars: Vin Diesel, Paul Walker, Jordana Brewster, Dwayne Johnson
When last we left our heroes, in Fast & Furious (2009), Brian (Walker) and Mia (Brewster) were about to bust Dom (Diesel) out of a prison bus, as he was being transported to serve out his life sentence in Chino. They succeed - miraculously managing to not kill anyone after they flip the bus over at high speed, as we later learn from a local news broadcast (we're given no guarantees about the survival of the several other thousand people indirectly effected by vehicular crime throughout the film). Wanting to begin life anew, they head to Rio de Janeiro - their every move watched over by the statue of Christ the Redeemer, as we are reminded of several times throughout the film.
But while they now reside in paradise, they have not yet fully purged themselves of sin - Brian and the newly pregnant Mia have become impoverished, tying them closer to the physical world than the spiritual. After being double-crossed on a job by local businessman, and criminal entrepreneur, Hernan Reyes (Joaquim de Almeida, "The Latin Jack Ryan"), the protagonists decide to rid the area of his corruptive influence by stealing all of his money - giving themselves a chance to be born anew.
Hernan Reyes is the devil - he corrupts mostly through seduction, not violence. In a scene in which he talks to potential business partners, Hernan explains why the Portuguese were successful in conquering Brazil, while the Spaniards were not - the Portuguese came with trinkets, placating the natives with objects of desire. In order to keep receiving these needful things, they need only give over their service. . . their very souls, in essence. Reyes continues this model in the 21st century - he rules first through gifts, secondly through violence.
In order to pull off the heist, Dom organizes a crew consisting of characters culled from previous Fast & Furious films - a gathering of Apostles, who by merely believing in Dom are given the chance at a new life. It seems as if nothing can stand in their way. . .
. . .until the arrival of DSS Special Agent Luke Hobbs (Johnson), a man that Brian knew of in his previous life. Brian refers to Hobbs as being "Old Testament" - God's Wrath incarnate. He has arrived in Rio to mete out justice in blood, and doesn't care about the motivations or complexities of the human spirit. When confronted with the irregularity of Dom having supposedly killed a trio of DEA agents in cold blood, despite his relatively non-murderous relationship with the law in the past (the agents were in fact murdered by one of Hernan's men), Hobbs merely responds to the questioning police officer with a dismissive line about "names land on my desk, I take them down". In other words, "ours is not to question why", in regards to a higher power.
The police officer asking the questions about Dom's possible motivations is Elena Neves, a local cop whose police officer husband was killed by one of Hernan's men while on duty. Hernan killed him because he could not possess his soul, as he does most of the other police in Rio, and Elena finds herself living day to day, lost in a world of darkness. Enlisted by Hobbs as a local guide/interpreter, she manages to temporarily stop Dom during one of his getaways, before he manages to elude her. He does, however, accidently leave his crucifix necklace behind - the very symbol of the soul he's attempting to free from corruption. Elena retrieves the necklace, keeping it for herself. She finds herself becoming more and more enamored with it, and of the possibility of a life free from corruption.
Eventually, Hobbs finds his man. It's Old Testament versus New, as Dom and Hobbs fistfight it out for supremacy. In the end, Dom has the advantage, but despite his murderous rage, he decides not to kill - that is a life that he has left behind him. In triumph, Hobbs the righteous warrior carts his prize away.
But victory is not to last. Hobbs gets ambushed by Hernan's men, who end up killing his entire crew, with the exception of Elena. Elena frees Dom and the rest of the prisoners, who in turn save Hobbs life. As a token of gratitude, and as a means to take an eye for an eye from Hernan, Hobbs then agrees to help Dom and team with their heist.
The heist goes according to plan - except that no one knew what the plan was exactly, except for Dom himself. Brian and Dom drag a gigantic, hitched safe down the streets of Rio with two muscle cars, until they're halfway across a bridge - then realizing that they're never going to be able to outrun Hernan and the cops on such a straight and narrow path. Dom disconnects Brian from the safe, telling him to go on - Brian's child will be born free of original sin. Dom turns his car around, cranks up the nitro, and pulls the safe behind him. On a path as narrow as the eye of a needle, Dom swings the safe back and forth, knocking cars off of the road - money becoming the very means of destruction of these men of industry. In the end, Satan, as embodied by Hernan, is destroyed by Dom's hurtling vehicle - the angel of seduction and sedation destroyed by the propulsive instrument of humanity.
Hobbs arrives on the scene, to exact what vengeance he can from Hernan's wreckage. In an uncharacteristic act of mercy, in response to Dom's own, Hobbs gives Dom and team twenty-four hours of running time, before beginning his pursuit. Dom, and Brian, who had never truly left his side, depart. Dom had sacrificed himself to save them all, and had been reborn again, as had all of his people.
Hobbs examines the safe - empty. Just as the world of the flesh has been severed, so too has the reliance on earthly possessions. The money has been transmuted from lifeless bits of tree into the dreams, hopes and passions of those who now possess it.
FREDERICK OPINES - GOOD
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
The Ludicrous Nature of Brand Loyalty
Terminator 5 is being shopped around, with Fast Five director Justin Lin and the Governator himself, Arnold Schwarzenegger, attached. Depending on the cost, this is a smart buy for any studio - the Terminator is a recognizable brand, and, much more importantly, so is Arnold. People would come out to see this for curiosity's sake, even if it were the sequel to Jingle All The Way.
From the perspective of a discerning film fan, I don't really understand the audience excitement about this. Ok - there's a new Terminator film being made. But what does "terminator" mean to you, and why is there an instant, positive reaction?
Here's a list of my favorite elements of the Terminator franchise:
1. James Cameron's groundbreaking action scenes, utilizing mostly practical effects, stunts and destruction.
2. As a strong representative of the Cyberpunk wave in the 80's, and helping to usher in the era of CGI in the 90's (in an extremely tasteful manner, in comparison to many films since).
3. As a time capsule, and a bit of nostalgia from my youth.
4. A (somewhat) original premise, that effectively blended the thriller/action genre with robots, laser guns, and time travel paradoxes.
5. Schwarzenegger in his prime.
Now, if this sequel were to be made (which seems fairly certain), which of those elements will transfer over? Not Cameron - he's busy securing college money for his Great-Great-Great-Great-Grandkids by directing Avatar 2 and 3. So we've got Lin - a solid, if fairly uninspiring, action director. Is this part of a movement, or original in any way? We have no plot synopsis as of yet, so its difficult to say - but the lack of creativity evidenced in the casting Arnold would lead me to answer "no" and "no" to those questions. I'm guessing this will be the same-old, same-old. And speaking of "old" - I think its fairly safe to say that Arnold is no longer in his prime.
So, in essence, since the new installment of the franchise will be deprived of everything that most people like about it in the first place, it seems fair to say that this might as well be a brand new movie about a cyborg, from a so-so director, starring a has-been action star.
It's the way in which we have to view things as either good or bad, black or white, which contributes to this blind fandom. It's alright to love the TV show Firefly - but recognize that the show does have its flaws, no matter how hard you'd like to ignore them. In the same manner, you can love The Terminator and T2 without blindly supporting any work that bears the same moniker.
I'm not saying that a fifth Terminator film will necessarily be bad - but I'm not assuming that it'll be good, either.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)






