Terminator Salvation

As my uncle and I were walking out of the theatre after seeing T4, I turned to him and said “That was a good movie. Not necessarily a good Terminator movie, but still pretty good.”  A guy walking past heard this brief exchange, and he turned to me and asked what movie we were discussing.  “The new Terminator,” I told him.  He paused, thought for a minute, and replied “Yeah, I think I’ll just rent it when it comes out on video.”

Terminator Salvation

My anticipation level for T4 in the months leading up to its release was nearly palpable.  I had watched the trailers many times, read all the pre-release interviews, checked out any pics and clips I could get my hands on, and re-watched the original three.  But when Terminator Salvation finally came out, and was met with mixed reviews, I didn’t quite get it.  I know trailers are rarely representative of the final product, but after everything I had seen and read I didn’t see how McG could screw this up.  I mean, sure, he had directed Charlies Angels: Full Throttle, but given the richness of the Terminator universe, and the amount of talent at his disposal, surely he would not disappoint here.  Unfortunately, I did not get to see T4 for a while, but in the meantime my wife and I did get the opportunity to watch We Are Marshall, a competently directed by-the-numbers inspirational sports movie, and my hopes for T4 remained high despite the somewhat negative criticism that was being leveled against it.

To be clear, this is not a movie about terminators–not in the classic sense that we all know them by now.  The first three films have followed an entertaining but predictable premise:  A gets sent back in time to kill B.  C gets sent back in time to protect B.  C is not as powerful as A.  Cue battles, explosions, and ruminations on the human condition.  Terminator Salvation has no time travel, and the entire movie takes place in the future after the infamous, but always impending, Judgement Day of the first three.  It’s more like Mad Max than Terminator, and herein lies the crux of the matter:  as long as you aren’t expecting another retread of James Cameron’s original premise, this is a very enjoyable action movie.

The many explosive action set pieces lend an epic sense to T4 that was sorely missing in T3, and the deserted wastelands of the western coast really give a sense that this is a world without hope, consisting of scattered bands of humans struggling to survive.  In fact, we see that humanity is not entirely united in its fight against the machines, and some groups are content to stay underground and exist in fear.  I rather enjoyed this larger take on our futuristic counterparts, as it shows some depth to the Terminator universe that I had previously not considered.  Much of the movie is about Marcus Wright, rather than the famous John Connor, and this is where things in the script department start to get a little derailed.

For years we have been hearing about the great leader John Connor.  Even before he was onscreen we heard about him in the original Terminator.  In T2 he was a petulant upstart with a whole lot of potential for channeling his angst into world-saving charisma.  T3 showed a JC who was more like the whiny Anakin Skywalker of Episode II, but ended with the seeds of humanity’s savior finally beginning to take root.  In T4, our fabled hero is nowhere to be found for much of the movie.  Instead we are treated to another petulant upstart, a survivalist woman who thinks she is in a Resident Evil movie, and a young girl who cannot talk (can anyone say Newt?).  Connor does get to bust some robotic heads near the end, but this movie takes so many departures on its way to the climax (which, in essence, leaves everyone no better off than they were at the beginning, and very little has actually changed or happened) that it’s somewhat of a letdown.  Sam Worthington’s performance as Marcus Wright is outstanding, and I wholeheartedly welcome him into the Terminator timeline.  Kudos also to Chckov Anton Yelchin who does a pretty darn good job as Kyle Reese.

Still, it has to be said that Terminator Salvation is exhilarating, entertaining, and a whole lot of fun to watch.  Just know that it’s not quite the T4 we were all expecting.

On a side note, any time a post-apocalyptic movie has a cast with gleaming white teeth and lip gloss, the immersive quality is immediately reduced to near-zero (see also:  Matrix 2 and 3).

Public Enemies

Michael Mann’s ‘Public Enemies’ arrives just in time this season to remind audiences looking for some smart adult action, they needn’t venture into movies about robots and aliens, or endure John Travolta’s embarrassing rants and whines on a subway train. Instead, they can sit back and watch Johnny Depp, one of the greatest actors around, single-handedly take this movie and breathe life into celluloid as 1930s American gangster and professional bank robberJohn Dillinger, on the run from and on the radar of the FBI.

Now, let’s get this out here right away, however: ‘Public Enemies’ is not a great movie. It’s far from Mann’s ‘Heat’, but it’s luminous when compared to 2006’s ‘Miami Vice’ adaptation.  In fact, I felt much the same way about this movie as I did with Ridley Scott’s ‘American Gangster.’ Now instead of Denzel Washington vs. Russell Crowe, we have Johnny Depp vs. Christian Bale — and the end results are pretty similar.  Both flicks are from master filmmakers, showcasing two stars in the lead performances, and each film is interesting and competently made — but neither sizzle.

‘Public Enemies’ most certainly has two things going for it. Johnny Depp is superb in the role. His Dillinger character is dark, mysterious, but also straight-laced. In fact, Dillinger as a character seems to have been written so mysterious that the audience never fully understands or feels that heroic connection with him. But Depp plays it up even when he’s not given dramatic scenes to shine in.  Michael Mann adds to Depp’s talent. The director cooks up shootouts with great intensity. And I suppose I can’t overlook Marion Cotillard. The Oscar-winning actress has an authentic romance with Depp’s character that never comes off contrived or tacked-on. The audience truly believes in their relationship, and it works.

The drawbacks really extend from the movie not involving the audience as it should. From Christian Bale’s straightforward and uninteresting performance as Agent Melvin Purvis, the man hunting Dillinger, to the confusing supporting characters that are never given the proper distinctive treatment, and finally the lack of excitement in the bank heists — I really wasn’t engrossed in the full spectrum of the picture. I greatly admired Depp’s work, some of the film’s intensity, and much of the ‘hunt’ of the storyline, but I didn’t feel quite as connected to Dillinger’s story and the men surrounding him as I wanted to be.  While those gripes didn’t make this a bad film, because this remains satisfactory work, this isn’t greatness. And from Michael Mann, that’s what I hope for.

[Rating:3/5]

Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs

iceage3

‘Ice Age’ has been good to Fox Studios and serviceable to audiences.  The first film was solid entertainment, the second installment a major bore, and the latest entry again decent. That’s the best compliment I can give it. As a distraction for kids, ‘Dawn of the Dinosaurs’ is better than ‘The Meltdown’ for a few reasons.

The storyline is stronger. Sid (John Leguizamo) stumbles upon three seemingly abandoned eggs beneath the ice surface and takes them to raise as his own. Out hatches three baby dinosaurs and they wreak havoc for Manny (Romano) and Ellie (Latifah) who are expecting their first youngin. When Mama T-Rex comes back for her three babies, Sid is whisked away to a jungle world beneath the ice and it’s up to Manny and team to bring him back with the help of newcomer ‘Buck,’ (the one character that doesn’t work) a swashbuckling, dinosaur-hunting weasel on a continual quest to bring down the greatest dino of them all.

The second pro: it seems as though more screen time was given to Scrat the squirrel and a new sub-plot involving a romance with Scratte, his female counterpart. Scrat’s scenes have always been the best in the series, and it’s proven even further with this sequel.i3

Final pro: Yes. This one’s in 3-D – and not a pointless 3-D. This is where 3-D sells an otherwise average movie. Pixar’s ‘Up’ didn’t need it. ‘Ice Age 3’ really puts it to use and blends the splendid animation with a surrounding landscape, and it all comes together very well. If you’re at all interested in seeing it with those goofy glasses on, more power to you — this is a strong selling point for the movie.  And, at the end of the day, I have to recommend this. It works far better than the last movie, and there’s worse animated fodder that has been released in the past. The movie is short, lively, superbly animated, in a strong 3-D format, sporadically humorous, and a solid choice for kids.  No, it’s not quite as good as ‘Up.’  It’s not Pixar. But what else is, really?

[Rating:3/5]

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

transformers

Only a few sizable blockbusters have managed to break through the box office ice this summer. ‘Star Trek’, ‘Up,’ ‘The Hangover’ and even ‘Wolverine’ have managed to earn their keep amidst several flops: ‘Terminator Salvation,’ ‘Land of the Lost,’ ‘Year One,’ ‘The Taking of Pelham 123.’  Does Michael Bay’s latest margarita of explosions, babes and robots spice things up on the silver screen?  In terms of dollars: yes.  In terms of entertainment value: not like I’d hoped.

Sam (Shia LaBeouf) is off to college for five minutes when war explodes between autobots and decepticons once again.  While Sam may not want anything to do with the fight, the ‘Fallen’ (just know they’re bad bots)  have other plans for him and need to scan his brain for some important information that will lead them to a temple in Egypt that is key to the autobots’ destruction.  Sound crazy?  I haven’t even gotten into the teleporting yet.  But maybe I’ll just stop there while the plot makes little sense as opposed to absolutely zero sense if I were to go on any further.

This latest Bay quest to blow up the world certainly shows off its budget. The special effects are revved up high as these morphing bots battle each other in several eye-hurtling wrangles of metal-on-metal thrashing.  There’s lots of yelling and screaming amidst the computer generated imagery — and let’s be honest — this is ‘Transformers’ we’re talking about, so all the critical backlash can go dismissed when it comes to cursing Michael Bay for his brainless eye-popping antics. This series was never about strong storytelling from the first teaser trailer we discovered with the 2007 picture.  Instead, Bay has created a canvas for fireballs and tearing up the laws of physics. Sounds like ‘Armageddon,’ ‘Bad Boys 2’, ‘The Island,’ and even ‘Pearl Harbor.’ Span that destruction over 2 1/2 hours, and you have the idea for both ‘Transformers’ films as well.

tformers

The problem with ‘Revenge of the Fallen’ is that the script obviously has little ambition. This thing fell together as if plot devices and dialogue rained from the sky intoa  gutter-system and out a studio drainpipe. I really have no idea why these Decepticon bots want Sam Witwicky’s knowledge of hidden systems from millions of years ago buried beneath the Egyptian pyramids that have the power to suck up the sun. I guess it will destroy Earth, but it never comes together, and never really makes any sense. All the previous characters are back too, but anyone can tell it’s only out the sheer coincidence of the confused storyline to throw these characters together again. All this confusion, punctuated with bouts of humor from some rather irritating supporting characters, human and robotic (I’m looking at you ‘Twin Bots’), sends ‘Revenge of the Fallen’ into rushed studio oblivion where fan anticipation and big booms cover all.  Let me veer on a tangent for a minute:

Shia LaBeouf.

The young man really holds this odd opus together. When the self-absorbed director and multiple screenwriters throw lemons at the kid, he makes lemonade with it. He consistently carries us through this mess and the laughable romance with Megan Fox’s character. His delivery never misses a beat when it comes to the humor and focus at the center of this soulless endeavor.  Regardless of his stance as a debatable box-office star, he holds this $200 million production together.

At the end of the day, Transformers 2 will wear the crown of box office champ of 2009, no doubt. It’s expensive, visually great, louder than a wood-chipper, and has a storyline that gets it about halfway and then falls apart into a huge, confusing onslaught of action in the last forty-five minutes or so. The first film (which I would’ve award 4 stars of 5 for its huge scale, likable find in LaBeouf, consistent humor, and simpler dopey premise) got it right. This second installment is poorly conceived and confusing, and a lot of the humor falls flat. As much as I want to recommend the action, even the ‘explosion! explosion!’ finale isn’t engaging. No Peter Travers, it’s not the worst movie of the decade. I can think of far worse to sit through. Let’s all stop hating Michael Bay – we know what we’re getting with the man. Transformers 2 is a minor failure, but give the next installment a little more time to bake and a little less ingredients, and I’ll be first in line.

[Rating:2.5/5]

Frost/Nixon

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen came out this weekend, and in almost every conceivable way it is the polar opposite of 2008’s Frost/Nixon. The former is, from what I have read, a typical Michael Bay exercise in excess: explosions, lightning-paced editing, the hottest young stars, blazing weaponry, insane chases, and more explosions. The latter has none of these, and its leads are virtual unknowns–especially compared to the headlining actors in Transformers: RotF. But it is this limited canvas with which director Ron Howard paints a very interesting, engaging, and (dare I say it? Yes, I dare!) entertaining movie about…well, about little more than a series of TV interviews between a talk show host and the former president.

Movies based on plays are a tricky proposition for today’s audiences weaned on the theatrical bombast of directors such as Michael Bay, Tony Scott, and the Wachowski Brothers. Not to mention their forebears, the great Lucas and Spielberg. Whereas movies often employ special effects, realistic audio, blaring soundtracks, and a host of other tricks to enhance the viewing experience, plays instead offer, for the most part, only dialog cemented by good ol’fashioned acting. And this is why adapting a play into a movie is a somewhat daunting task for any director, but Ron Howard manages to pull it off quite nicely.

In many ways, Frost/Nixon is the spiritual successor to Rob Reiner’s A Few Good Men. Both are based on plays. Both are about well-nigh untouchable political figures brought down by unlikely young spitfires. Both feature extended dialog-heavy sequences with no changes in setting. Music and special effects are used sparingly, characters are well-defined and interesting, and yes, both movies feature none other than the estimable Kevin Bacon. But whereas Reiner’s 1992 movie was a largely fictionalized account of military justice loosely based on the experiences of young military lawyer Donald Marcari, Ron Howard’s film is about the verbal toppling of none other than Richard Nixon himself.

Frost/Nixon follows the tale of David Frost, a talk-show host who hatches a plan to get Richard Nixon to admit to wrongdoing while in office and apologize, on camera, to the American people. His preparation and interview methods are better suited to the theatrics of a boisterous TV personality, and I enjoyed seeing him come face to face with the political powerhouse that is Mr. Nixon. What kept me entertained through the dialog-heavy film was the constant sense of awe and wonder with which Mr. Nixon is portrayed–not awe for his politics, but a healthy respect for the type of man he was: an extremely savvy politician who was not to be trifled with. Michael Sheen’s portrayal of the young, eager David Frost who is forced to come to grips with his own shortcomings and find a way to, as in A Few Good Men, get an extremely powerful man to admit to his own wrongdoings, even though it will cost him dearly, is impeccable. The two men eventually come to a mutual respect for each other, and it is this character journey that makes Frost/Nixon as entertaining as anything Michael Bay could ever do.

Well, not that a few explosions wouldn’t have helped a bit…

King Corn

I live in Minnesota, was raised in Nebraska, and have spent much of my life enjoying the benefits of the corn-based economy of the midwest. I enjoy my steaks medium rare, my corn sweet, and my corn syrup appropriately high-fructosed. Nonetheless, I thought I’d check out Aaron Woolf’s documentary about two guys who try to find out what’s really going on with America’s obsession with corn, and in the process learn a little about farming and agriculture, not to mention their own heritage as well. It’s a well-crafted film, but while Woolf does a nice job of exploring what it means to be a modern-day farmer, there is also enough limitations of the movie to really explore the issue fully.

The premise of the movie seems benign enough: two strapping East Coast lads set out to plant an acre of corn so they can find out what happens to their crop once its all growed up and ready to set out on its own. So they head off to Greene, Iowa, where (it turns out) their great-grandfathers both grew up together. They rent an acre from an old lifelong Iowa farmer and set about tilling, planting, fertilizing, and eventually spending the night with 180 bushels of their own corn. Along the way we find out about how much farming has changed in the past several decades, how our desire for cheap food has led to an explosion in corn production, and why High Fructose Corn Syrup is basically like drinking liquid secondhand smoke.

And this is where I take issue with King Corn. Sure these two guys have good intentions, but an acre of corn? Really? That’s how they’re going to find out how corn works its way into our daily diet? Why not just skip the pseudo-farming altogether and get right to the point? That being, as near as I can tell, that because government subsidies and technological advances have led to such massive increases in corn production, we now eat a lot of corn-fed beef and consume a lot of high fructose corn syrup. And they do have a point there: grass-fed cattle live better than their corn-fed counterparts, produce higher quality beef, and aren’t actually being slowly killed by the food they are eating. HFCS is not exactly good for us either, so bonus to the dudes on that one too. But it’s not as if the filmmakers are exposing some kind of long-held secret or anything. They also don’t have a very large pool of individuals to interview for the project: a professor here, a farmer there, and an anti-climactic interview with Earl Butz, the former US Secretary of Agriculture, don’t exactly make for a bulletproof argument.

So while I applaud Woolf’s intentions, I don’t know that I really learned a whole lot from King Corn that I didn’t know already. I’m guessing (though not certain) that the same would be true for most folks. Still, the movie is interesting enough to watch, and I recommend it for anyone who is interested in what goes on behind the slick veneer and shiny packaging of most of the foods we eat every day.

Iron Man

In the late 1990s I heard lots of chatter about some dude named Robert Downey, Jr. Apparently he was an actor who was in rehab a lot, from what I gathered, and there was also some sort of connection with the TV show Friends. Then came the new millennium and he faded into gossip magazine oblivion, only to be all the rage again when Iron Man was released. This was a movie I, regrettably, never saw in theatres. I do have the mega-ultra-edition DVD courtesy of my brother from last Christmas, and before that my wife and I watched it on Netflix, so perhaps I can retain a smidgen of street cred there.

The movie itself is more like a prequel than anything, as Tony Stark, played by Downey Jr. (can I just say Downey from here on out? I believe I shall.), spends much of the first half in a cave constructing the beta version of his famous iron suit. After that he spends the next 30 minutes building and testing version 1.0, and is actually only Iron Man for the final act. His stint as a superhero, in fact, is limited to one brief incident involving the rescue of a handful of villagers being bullied by his former captors from when he was in the cave at the beginning of the movie. So the title should really be something indie-ish or alt-culture like Becoming Iron Man. I doubt that would have flew well with most mainstream moviegoers this side of the Ross Film Theatre, though.

Without dwelling too much on somewhat misleading premises, though, I must say that the movie is, above all else, just really entertaining. And much of the fun of the movie comes from Downey, who plays his role as the gabillionaire playboy without a conscience to the hilt, chewing every scene he’s in and gleefully asking for more. He’s just fun to watch, whether he’s bantering with top military brass (Terrence Howard, inhabiting a role that should have gone to Cuba Gooding Jr.), playfully chiding his personal assistant, the ever-elegant Gwynneth Paltrow, or copping an attitude with his sidekick–an omnipresent computer voiced by quintessential “that one guy!” Paul Bettany. The movie could have probably been called “Iron Man Eats A Bowl of Fruit Loops” and it would have been just as fun to watch.

Of course the special effects are off the hook, the music is catchy, the acting all around is solid, but kudos really go to Mr. Dryer Sheet, who reminds us why some movie stars really are stars.

Pumping Iron

I have long been a fan of Arnold Schwarzenegger, ever since seeing his massive biceps and front tooth gap on promotional posters for the Presidential Physical Fitness award back in elementary school. Here was this gigantor dude telling me that if I only did enough pull ups and got to 20 centimeters on the sit-and-reach that I could get a little patch and the President himself would personally come and congratulate me.

I never got the medal. But, many years later, my admiration for Arnold only increased when I saw Terminator 2 in my friend’s basement, and ever since I have had somewhat of an odd admiration for not only the man’s charming ability to anchor a movie but to be a positive influence in the world of physical fitness (a decade of steroid usage in his youth notwithstanding).

However, until recently, I had not seen the movie that launched him from Austrian obscurity to international superstardom: Hercules in New York Pumping Iron. It’s the story of the 1975 My Olympia contestants, one of whom is the five-time defending champion, Mr. Schwarzenegger himself. The documentary follows the paths of a handful of contestants as they rise through the ranks of lower competitions only to end up together in South Africa for the final championship. While I’m no weight lifter, I was very interested in these men who spent hours upon hours every day lifting weights at the gym, with the one goal of winning the bodybuilding competitions. Arnold’s cockiness throughout the film was diffused by his natural charm, and by the end I grew to have a much greater appreciation for the entire bodybuilding scene, but also for the man behind the T-800 makeup.