Adjustment Bureau

I really hate to down-grade a movie just because it doesn’t fit into an established genre. After all, some of history’s greatest sleeper hits, like The Crow or Dark City, are impossible to find a shelf for. Some, like The Matrix, actually wound up founding their own genre. The problem is, those genres do exist for a reason. There are certain kinds of stories that hit the mark and resonate with humanity, and for every movie that was good enough to break the mold, like those above, there are probably several that tried and failed, like this one. It brings to mind a scene from Tales from the Crypt, in which a starving artist protests to a museum curator, “You promised to give me a showing if I came up with something new!” She laughs, “I meant something new, and good.”

At the start of The Adjustment Bureau (Dir. George Nolfi, 2011), we meet David Norris (Matt Damon), who is running for Senator from New York. He is way ahead at first but, over the course of a five-minute montage, the campaign takes a turn for the worse. On election night, he realizes he’s done and enters a rest room to work on his concession speech. Inside, he finds a woman named Elise (Emily Blunt) hiding from security (long story). He is quite taken with her, and, after security shows up, and she runs away, he reenters his “victory” party and gives the greatest speech he has given in his life.

The scene switches to one month later, and Norris has returned to his old job in a corporate office, anticipating the next senate race. He boards a bus and, to his surprise, finds Elise. He sits beside her, they have instant chemistry, and he gets her phone number.

So it’s been a long set up process, but it looks like the story is finally starting to go some where.

Norris arrives at work, walks into his boss’s office, and suddenly sees his boss, immobilized in a standing position, surrounded by menacing figures in suits and opaque helmets who are scanning him with lasers. Norris runs, and is chased by an army of men in suits. Each time he stops at a coworker’s desk for help, he finds them immobilized and apparently unconscious.

Well, alright! This movie turns out to be a Matrix-esq thriller. Sure, it won’t be as good as The Matrix, but I’m intrigued. Who are these guys? From what sinister place do they come? What twists in this movie will make us question what we think we know?

Norris is captured and finds himself tied to a chair in a warehouse, surrounded by the men in black (above). The man in charge identifies himself as Richardson (John Slattery) and tells Norris “We are the ones who make sure things happen according to plan.” He responds to a few more question with equally cryptic, bureaucratic terms. They gave Norris’ boss an “adjustment.” He will be fine, and will not remember what happened. This is being done because Norris was not supposed to see Elise a second time, according to something called “the Plan,” which is being developed by the head of the Adjustment Bureau, known only as “the Chairman.” If Norris ever reveals what he’s seen to anyone, he will be “reset” (essentially lobotomized). Richardson burns Elise’s phone number and tells Norris to forget her. Norris is then returned to his office, where no one else is aware of what’s happened.

David takes the same bus for the next three years, hoping to see Elise. One day, he finally does, and tries to reconnect with her.

So … now we’re back to the romantic comedy?

She initially pushes him away for not calling her for three years, but seems unable to resist the natural chemistry they always have. He winds up taking her to lunch. As they walk around town, enjoying each other’s company, Richardson and the Bureau start following them around, trying to interfere. Richardson will give an order such as “have his aide call him now.” And then Norris’ cell will ring. A Bureau member tells Richardson “If they kiss, anything strong enough to break them up will cause ripples over your limit.”

Really? … This movie has an army of threatening figures in suits, armed with seemingly god-like powers and scarily cryptic dialogue, and this is what they spend their time on?

This is how the movie goes. As Norris and Elise flirt, fight, fall in love, break up, and get back together, we see these “agents” peeking around corners, running in and out of magic doors, and causing things like lost keys and untied shoes to nudge events back on Plan.

As I waited for this movie to end, I found myself wondering who out there would really get into it. It doesn’t work as a guy movie. There isn’t enough action to make it interesting. The agents are cool at first, but never develop into anything. Their offices and their attire are something right out of the 1940s, and they all have banal, hyper-anglo names like Mitchell and Thompson. By the end, watching them work is about as interesting as watching a clerk file papers.

While these guys look like something out of The Matrix, they might be more at home in a movie like Just Like Heaven or Simply Irresistible; films that play with the idea of some higher power intervening in romantic relationships. But The Adjustment Bureau doesn’t work as one of those movies either, partly because we don’t see much of Elise and there isn’t enough attention paid to the details of their relationship. So, as a chick flick, it still comes up short.

It also fails to deliver as any serious contemplation of the questions it raises. We see arguments about fate vs. free will, love vs. success, etc., but none of them do more than throw out the standard lines. All the bureaucratic mumbo jumbo really gets old after awhile. There are a lot of eye-roll-inducing lines like “Chairman has the Plan. We only see part of it.” Why can’t they just call him “God” like everybody else?

Most ships follow the established trade routes and, in so doing, still deliver some worthwhile goods. Once in a while, a ship leaves all known territory and discovers a new world. But this one leaves one harbor, only to make a dash for the safety of another, only to turn at the last minute and head for another, until it’s lost at sea. I have to give Nolfi some credit for trying to be different. So here’s to those who wait forever for ships that don’t come in.

[Rating:1.5/5]

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

All too often it seems Hollywood has a penchant for releasing a ‘Huh? They’re really making that??’ movie.  In fact, my response to the news of a prequel to Planet of the Apes was just that.  I didn’t see the need to revisit a franchise that had laid dormant for a decade.  Of all the summer blockbusters released over the last three months, this one interested me the least.  Go figure that Rise of the Planet of the Apes is one of the best movies of this summer or any summer.

James Franco plays Will Rodman, a geneticist on the verge of a medical breakthrough.  He has designed a serum that has the potential to cure Alzheimer’s disease.  This venture has impassioned him as he watches his father (John Lithgow) fall victim to the illness.  After testing on apes, the research proves that the cure is functional and ready for human trials.  Unfortunately, a laboratory accident prevents potential investors of the drug from approving it.  Will’s project faces termination, as do the apes.  Unable to kill a newborn chimp, Will takes in little Caesar only to see that the drug has been genetically passed on from the chimp’s mother.  Will documents Caesar’s increased brain activity and motor functions over the course of several years.

Caesar has extraordinary capabilities.  He can write, read, use sign language, reason, and protect.  It doesn’t take long for him to realize that outside of Will’s home, the rest of society sees him as a dangerous pet—unequal to that of a human.  He feels the isolation of being an outcast and is ultimately taken by the state to a facility for apes after a violent accident.  Caesar is abused and mistreated, as are the other apes in confinement.  He sees only one solution to free his companions and stop the maltreatment of his kind.

If you thought Rise would be a noisy spectacle without a brain in its head, let me surprise you—this could be the thinking man’s movie of the season.  Directed by Rupert Wyatt, the film restores this franchise and provides an ample amount of emotion and heart to the blockbuster.  Forget about the humans onscreen—this movie is all about Caesar, an impressive digital creation of motion capture technology played by Andy Serkis of Lord of the Rings fame.  Serkis gives Caesar a real performance, providing the apes a reason to become angry, impassioned, willed, and ultimately the dominant species of the planet.  Wyatt succeeds in combining a rock solid story with heartfelt drama and impressive special effects that will likely contend as the year’s best.

The film also draws up important questions about the limits of science and where we draw the line in the quest to advance medicine.  Tim Burton’s 2001 Planet of the Apes only flirted with the idea of one species being a slave to another as a matter of moral significance.  Rise dives in head-first and has the audience weigh out the pros and the cons.  Of course the film leads up to a massive ape revolution that has been showcased in the advertisements, but the writers and Wyatt make more out of this golden opportunity than a stage of destruction—they’ve given us a story of an ape fighting for his place in this world.  This left me wondering if there could be a more human film this season than Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

[Rating:4.5/5]

Cowboys & Aliens

Jake Lonergan (Daniel Craig) enters the town of Absolution in 1873 as a man with no name.  In fact, he’s a man without an identity.  He doesn’t know his own ‘who,’ ‘where,’ or why.  What he does know is that he can speak English, he’s wounded, he can easily disarm and maim a group of men singlehandedly, and he has a permanent shiny bracelet on his wrist.  Soon enough he is made aware that he is a wanted murderer and thief—what he did exactly he can’t recall.  Luckily for him he angered the wrong fellow, Dolarhyde (Harrison Ford), a wealthy rancher trying to industrialize Absolution.  Dolarhyde’s son Percy (Paul Dano) is a wreckless and cowardly twit.  The town has had about enough of him and Lonergan fails to last even minutes in his presence without putting him in his place.  When both Jake and Percy finds themselves under arrest, Dolarhyde comes to rip them both from the hands of the law.  Things aren’t boding well for our antihero until bright lights peer in from above.  The bracelet on his wrist starts blinking.  Enemy alien spaceships zoom in overhead and begin snatching people up from the street, including Dolaryde’s boy and the town sheriff.  The cowboys are forced to chase after their loves ones that were abducted by ‘demons.’  Lonergan is coerced into joining Dolarhyde and his posse as he searches for answers to his past.

While part of me feels that Director Jon Favreau could have just as easily skipped the whole ‘aliens invade’ plot and delivered the best straight-up western of the last decade or so, I would be lying if I said I didn’t still enjoy the heck out of Cowboys & Aliens.  Favreau could’ve turned this into a gooey camp fest, but instead he’s taking things dead on serious.  The threat is immense.  The violence is gritty.  Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig are bent on saving the Old West and they deliver top-dollar performances.  Even with such silliness in the plot (and there are a few howlers and head-scratchers—some of them hybrids), the movie plays like it’s a full-out invasion assault.  I rather appreciated that even if it seems other viewers wanted a more self-aware picture.  Sorry folks, there’s no snakes on this plane.

Favreau improves on Iron Man 2.  He feels much more like a competent action director.  Cowboys & Aliens has several impressive gunfights and aerial battles, giant special effects, and it moves at great speed.  In between the lightning and thunder, we get actors doing something great—called acting.  Ford, Craig, Sam Rockwell, Paul Dano, and others have interesting dialogue and several moments of humor.  I really felt like Favreau and his team put together the ideal summer popcorn film.  Cowboys, aliens, guns, pow and laughs—what more can you want?

[Rating:4/5]

Hot Chick

Jessica Spencer (Rachel McAdams) is a stuck-up, self-absorbed, cruel little harpie who strings along and breaks the hearts of boys and girls alike (in different ways). She’s exactly the type of girl that makes you think “Boy I hope she wakes up one morning to find that she’s traded bodies with Rob Schneider, and is destined to be chased from her home by her family, maced by her best friend, forced into a fist fight, watch her boyfriend find someone else, and scratch out a living cleaning toilets and mowing yards!” And, just as you’d expect, that’s exactly what happens. Via a ridiculous plot device that I won’t even bother with, Jessica and a male mugger (Schneider) wake up one morning on opposite sides of town, begin their morning urination ritual, and suddenly realize that something is very, very wrong. Hilarity ensues.

No, really, it does. The biggest surprise of The Hot Chick is that it is actually really good. Most of the credit for that has to go to Schneider, as he pulls off one of the toughest acting assignments I’ve ever seen with flying colors. I am not, generally a Schneider fan. I consider his acting sophomoric and distasteful. But it seems he was born to play a teenage girl. No, I mean that as a compliment. Watching Schneider prance, preen, giggle and bat eyes in this movie, you really do forget that he’s acting and he isn’t really a teen chick in the wrong body (at least I … assume he isn’t). I don’t know what Schneider does in his personal time, but he spends a lot of this movie hanging out (so to speak) in tight, pink T-shirts and tight panties, and pillow fighting with Jessica’s BFF’s until it seems almost natural.

Jessica’s best friend (Anna Faris) really wanted to see Jessica’s new … best friend.

Aside from Schneider’s antics, the story is built around Jessica’s quest to get her body back, with the help of a bunch of other girls, once she’s convinced them of her identity, as well as get her boyfriend back. Her boyfriend has been stolen by an equally stuck-up cheerleader from a rival school, and I have to say, there is something very satisfying about watching Schneider head-butt her. There’s something even more satisfying about seeing a rich daddy’s-girl, now stuck in a male body, trying to do manual labour. Probably the funniest scene in the movie is when Jessica (Schneider) enters a men’s room, and finds all the stalls occupied, and has no choice but to use the urinal. She then begins asking other men how to pee standing. (Side note: it’s not like it’s that hard.)

There are a few holes in the plot. It’s interesting that nobody seems to notice Jessica’s missing for a week. Also, her boyfriend, Billy, goes on his own internal journey. This ads some human interest to the plot, but they could have had him turn into a decent guy without having him turn into a total man-gina. All in all though, this is a movie well worth seeing.

[Rating:4/5]

 

Van Helsing

Yeah, that’s right. I like Van Helsing (2004), one of the most hated movies of the last 20 years. I have seen so many reviews, blogs and videos trashing this movie, that I felt I had to speak up to defend it. So before you blow me off as an idiot, hear me out.

There’s no denying that Van Helsing is stupid, but it’s no stupider than a lot of movies out there. In fact, Van Helsing is probably the magnum opus of its director, considering that its director is Steven Sommers, one of the most bubble-headed directors of all time. To put Van Helsing in the proper context, it’s necessary to take a brief look at Sommers’ filmography.

Sommers’ first box office hit was The Mummy (1999), which I’ve already reviewed, a brain-dead piece of clap-trap that existed soley for the sake of mindless violence and spectacle. Some people read from a book, which brings the Mummy back from the dead, he kills half the world, and then the same people are supposed to be heroes just for cleaning up their own mess. For reasons I’ve never understood, The Mummy continues to be a favorite movie of many people. Next, Sommers vomited out The Mummy Returns (2001), a fairly standard sequel with a lot more horrific deaths, and even more ridiculous plot points. The herione of the first movie (Rachel Weiss) is suddenly declared to be a reincarnation of Egyptian princess Nephretiri. Don’t ask me how that works, as reincarnation was never discussed in the first movie, or in Egyptian mythology for that matter. Then, Sommers took a minor character from Returns, the Scorpion King (Dwayne Johnson, a.k.a. “The Rock”), and stretched his back story into a full length movie. The Scorpion King was yet another mental death-trap for teens, given a mild-souding PG-13 rating and yet loaded with violence and near-nudity. The story was little more than an excuse for the Rock to show off.

And after all this, we got Van Helsing. Apparently bored with making three movies out of one Universal Studios moster, Sommers decided to make one movie and include three Universal mosters — Dracula (Richard Roxburg), The Wolfman (Will Kemp), and Frankenstien’s Moster (Schuler Hensley). While I can understand why some people hate Van Helsing, I cannot understand why some people lapped up The Mummy and then hated Van Helsing.

Why is Van Helsing awesome? Here's why.

First, vampires and werewolves are way cooler than mummies. Second, our hero, Van Helsing, is played by Hugh freaking Jackman, probably the greatest specimen of manliness since Harisson Ford (okay, so I’m not imune to man-crushes. Sue me). The Mummy has Brendan Frasier. This is the guy who played Dudley Do Right and George of the Jungle, and then got beat up by cartoons in Looney Tunes, Back in Action. And third, Van Helsing has a collection of gadgets that would make James Bond jealous. He fights monsters with buzz saws, crossbows that launch silver arrows, a shotgun, a pop-out silver stake, pop out crosses, grapling hooks, and thats just to name a few!

The action sequences in this movie define the word epic, involving huge sets, hundreds of extras (monster fodder) and dazling special effects. Every detail of them was meticulously planned out (too bad you can’t say the same for the plot). Moments that I initially dismissed as rediculous (e.g. the roof of a carriage catching fire durring a werewolf attack) actually do happen for an (admittedly implausible) reason (e.g. the werewolf crashing against a lantern on the side of the carraige and sliding across the roof). This movie has more effective jump-scares than many other movies combined, and even pulls off a number of really difficult delayed-jump-scares (the kind where you sort-of see it coming, but that only increases its effect on you). On top of all this, it still manages to slip in quite a few funny moments.

Jackman is, of course, dashing as a younger version of Bram Stoker’s hero, but Aussie star Richard Roxberg is equally great as the Lord of Evil himself, Count Dracula. There’s a little bit of Bella Lugosi in his performance, a little of Gary Oldman, and a little of the historical Dracula, but it’s mostly his own creation. It ranges from quiet, brooding moments to wild rage, and manages to make it all quite sinister and intimidating. In any case, it’s much more interesting than watching Arnold Vosloo make faces like he needs to blow his nose. This is a major strength of the movie that compensates for lack of a coherent plot: you have these epic characters that are so vividly realized, and they’re played off eachother so powerfully that you almost don’t need a story. Leading Lady Kate Beckinsale (as Transylvanian she-warior Anna Valerious) looks great in her slinky outfits and also pulls of the action side of the roll. It’s hard to believe she once had this roll. A word also needs to be said about David Wenham, who, prior to this roll, had been voted “Australia’s Sexiest Man Alive.” However, for this movie, he put tack behind his ears to make himself look like Dumbo, donned a friar’s outfit, and speant the movie jabbering and bumbling around, just so we could have a laugh. Thanks, David.

Finally, there are the special effects. I know, I know. Just like all of you, I’ve talked a lot about how I’m tired of special effects, and they don’t impress me anymore. But any honest viewer has to admit that, even by 2011 standards, Van Helsing’s special effects truly are incredible. Most of it is C.G.I. However, if you watch the making-of features, there are some surprises. For example, when Dracula’s brides transform and take flight, the bodies are C.G.I., but their faces are still their own, covered in makeup. Rather than rely on C.G.I., Sommers used it to enhance the sets and props, which look good of their own accord.

When it comes to special effects, even today, movies tend to cheat. Forexample, if someone is going to transform (e.g. into a werewolf) we usually see the beginning of the transformation, then they fall below the camera, or stumble behind something, then we see the finall result, and the producer saves $50,000. Not in Van Helsing. It helps that “subtlety” is not in Sommers’ vocabulary. We see everything every time, and everything looks absulutely real. The werewolves, in particular, look amazing; you can actually see individual hairs blowing in the wind. In one scene, it’s raining, and the hair gets matted down, but still looks natural. There are all kinds of little touches throughout the movie. For example, in one scene, a vampiress (Elena Anaya) takes a stake in the heart. She then explodes into slime. Animating liquid is hard enough, but they didn’t stop there. They actually kept the shape of her screaming face in the slime as it flies at the camera. I didn’t even notice this until the third or fourth time I watched it. From the first scene to the last, you see proof that the post-production team worked tremendously hard on this one.

Is Van Helsing destined for a spot in the anals of great movies? Psh. Heck, no. But is it the steaming turd so many make it out to be? Not at all. What is it? A roaring good time that cast and crew put a lot of sweat into, and a sign that Sommers can make a decent movie, if he really tries. And there’s hope for more, because he still hasn’t done the Creature from the Black Lagoon.

[Rating:3.5/5]

Captain America

With all of the superheros making it to the big screen these days, there seem to be just as many misses as there are hits. The challenge seems to be translating the fantastical element of the comic universe into real-world existence these characters have to endure in a live-action film — while still appealing to the hardcore fanbase — while reaching out to the casual moviegoer — all without making the film and its characters seem downright ridiculous. Nolan found notable success with Batman, Singer found some luck with the X-men, Favreau did admirably with Iron Man, and Raimi did a decent job with Spider-man (before they decided to scratch the whole thing and do a reboot). Some less successful attempts to bridge the fantasy and reality include Ang Lee’s Hulk (which I didn’t actually mind), Singer’s Superman (which suffered more from a skewed story arc than anything else) and Schumacher’s Batman films (rubber nipples). So where does Captain America fall in all this? Definitely one of the most successful attempts to date.

Captain America continues Marvel’s very successful approach of creating a cohesive cinematic world in which all its characters can live and interact with one another – culminating in the eagerly anticipated Avengers film next May.  With subtle nods to its other characters and intertwining story elements, fans who have seen the other Marvel films will feel like they’re on the inside track (even if you’re not an avid comic reader) and those who are only stopping in for the one film won’t feel left out. It’s like the zen balance of reaching the mass movie-going audience. Ultimately this film succeeds at establishing itself in reality because it succeeds as a period film set in WWII, which brings with it great costumes, sets, and overall ambiance. The film is filled with comedic relief, provides the required amount of action sequences, and most importantly characters with substance so the audience can feel invested. It should also be noted that each of these elements are balanced admirably so that it never feels too heavy-handed in any one area.

Neither Ackles or Krasinski made the cut, although both were considered. Apparently in early scripts Captain hunted demons and worked in a paper factory.

When the first names were tossed around for who would don the red, white, and blue, several well-known actors were suggested. Originally my vote was for Jensen Ackles, known best for his work on the show Supernatural. He had the wit they were looking for, the look, and genuinely I’d be interested in seeing him get some work outside the world of the CW. But sadly, due to scheduling conflicts, he was removed from the running. Meanwhile Marvel went a totally different direction by throwing out their original shortlist, and calling up Chris Evans, who already existed in the Marvel universe as Johnny Storm a.k.a. the Human Torch in Fantastic Four. (Don’t worry, they’re rebooting that too, so this continuity error will be remedied.) I thought Evans was the best part about Fantastic Four (he and Chiklis were perfectly cast in my opinion) but I was wary about him as Captain America. After seeing this film, my worries were put to rest.

The serum added volume to his body AND his hair. P.S. look for me this Halloween in my spot-on pre-serum Steve Rogers costume.

Evans embodies (pun intended?) everything the character needs. He exudes the likable, genuine and witty qualities of a scrawny but big-hearted guy placed in an artificially huge body. Even though his pre-super body is doubled in via CGI, the meshing of the two performances creates a believable character because Evans conveys those qualities so effortlessly. (It should also be noted that the CGI is so well done that it takes a conscious eye to notice the work.) Joss Whedon has some great character mixing to do between the do-good nobility of Steve Rogers with the smarminess of Robert Downey Jr.’s Tony Stark in The Avengers. Should create quite the… *ahem* stark contrast. (Had to do it.)

Oh no! Megatron got the energon cube!

Other notable performances include Tommy Lee Jones as a military general (some great comedic moments here), Stanley Tucci as the scientist who creates the super-serum, and even Hugo Weaving as the key villain, Red Skull.  I have to admit, ever since The Matrix, Weaving has always carried an Agent Smith vibe into his other work, which made Lord of the Rings a bit weird for me. At least in Transformers he was just a voice actor. But in this role Weaving’s character found a different feel that gave him the villainous quality, without that cool, calculating calm of Smith.

Can you imagine the entire movie with this? If you're still having trouble, go watch the 1990 version. I'll wait here while you do..... See!

One of the greatest things about this film is that it actually single-handedly addresses the whining demands of the hardcore fans with a cold, hard dose of reality. This doesn’t spoil much, but if you really hate all spoilers, hop over this paragraph. For part of the film, the Captain is used for war propaganda, and tours with a USO show in a ridiculous costume that is a direct translation of the old spandex suit of yore. You watch that section and can practically hear the producers saying “See, that’s why you can’t do things exactly as they are in the comics – they don’t translate to real life in a non-humorous manner.” So kudos for the respectful nod and somewhat subtle education by the filmmaker.

The film is not flawless by any means. Although all the elements are balanced throughout the film, it does seem like the action and resolution of the crisis are a bit hasty and lackluster. In terms of the story arc, it’s a very slow build in the initial rising action (not uncommon with an origin story, and necessary for good character development) with sort of a plateau leading up to the climax and not so much a resolution as a quick setup for future Captain films. However, this doesn’t dilute the enjoyment of the film, it merely left me wanting a bit more. At the same time, I’m not sure how much one can watch of a guy running around punching people, dodging bullets/lasers, and occasionally throwing a shield without getting bored. So they at least avoided that pitfall.

Overall I would highly recommend Captain America as part of your summer movie-going experience. I won’t go as far to say it’s the best super hero film ever, but it definitely stands on par with the original Iron Man in terms of action blended with comic-relief. Also be sure to stay until the very end of the credits for a highly worthwhile bonus.

[Rating:4/5]

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

The final bout between good and evil in J.K. Rowling’s majestic universe comes to a close after eight films.  With Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 there isn’t much need for an in-depth criticism on the final movie (or half-movie).  Rather I am provided a welcome opportunity to reflect on the series as one of the most impressive accomplishments committed to film.

Few literary adaptations could translate so well into eight thrilling motion pictures.  Rowling’s pages have not only given youngsters a hunger for reading, but cinematic magic has also applied sight and sound to that text over the course of 10 years—and to universal acclaim.  Audiences love these books and they love these movies.

As a capper to Harry Potter, Deathly Hallows Part 2 is of course bittersweet.  Harry, Ron and Hermione continue their search for the remaining horcruxes that contain pieces of the dark Lord Voldemort’s soul, pieces that make him immortal.  Hogwarts is under the iron fist of betrayer Severus Snape until Harry returns to defend Hogwarts and prepare for his final confrontation with Voldemort.  Secrets are revealed.  Lives are lost.  A looming doubt about Harry’s fate (for those who haven’t read the novel) hangs over two hours.

The last entry falls under the direction of David Yates once again.  Having helmed half of the installments of the series, he has proven ever-capable.  Chris Columbus brought the innocence and sense of discovery to The Sorcerer’s Stone and The Chamber of Secrets.  Alfonso Cuaron brought a refreshing angst and eccentricity to The Prisoner of Azkaban.  Mike Newell allowed for a sharp transition to the gloom of the series with The Goblet of Fire.  Yates has since handled the darkest corners of the Harry Potter universe as the fun and games have been exchanged for Harry’s personal endeavor to save both the world of magic and the world of humans.

Since 2001, the films have remained remarkably consistent even as the actors have aged a great deal and the tone of the story has evolved.  Deathly Hallows Part 2 continues the tradition of solid craftsmanship.  Sure, it hurts the film that it is really only half of a film.  In fact, I made the mistake of not revisiting Deathly Hallows Part 1 before jumping into Part 2.  For those on the fence about needing a refresher beforehand, I strongly recommend it.  Yates has split one 4-hour-plus movie into two parts and he doesn’t leave us any footnotes along the way.  As a standalone installment, Part 2 really hurts without watching Part 1 along with it.  The tension and rising action have to be brought in the pockets of audiences and applied from the get-go.  While that may not be a fair criticism of the movie as it is intended as part of a larger story arc, it is worth noting.

In terms of ending the saga, the film does a perfectly satisfactory job.  The actors are on their game.  The special effects and action sequences are grandiose, and yet interestingly punctuated by several extended moments of quiet.  I may have expected more of a thrilling showdown between Harry and Voldemort, but the buildup has been over seven previous films so I can understand that anticipation may have gotten the best of me.  What I enjoyed most about this final entry were the surprises along the way and the tender moments among the notable characters of the series that earn their last minutes in the spotlight.

I would say I’ve enjoyed other chapters from this saga more than Deathly Hallows Part 2, but as a sendoff to the Harry Potter universe, the film is again very well-made and audiences are going to love it and will likely still be hungry for more.  The hint of future installments of J.K. Rowling’s world have been set.  Even if they never come to fruition, at least her accomplished works are ready and available to young readers.  As for the future of Harry Potter, I’m willing to bet on a return of sorts for a new generation ready for magic.

[Rating:4/5]

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Transformers-Dark-of-Moon-PosterWhen going to any Michael Bay film, it’s best to check your brain at the door from the get-go and just abandon yourself to the idea that you will not be watching high-quality cinema.  You’ll get explosions, hot chicks, muscled-up dudes, fast cars, and more explosions.  But even so, some of his films really go for broke and shoot for the bottom of the movie barrel.  Nevertheless, I was pretty excited for his third entry into the burgeoning Transformers movie franchise partly because the trailer was completely awesome, partly because Michael Bay said it would be way better than the second film, and partly because I dig explosions and giant fighting robots.  I also fully expected an assault on my senses as well as my intellect, and while Bay was correct in that his final foray into Cybertronian lore did indeed far surpass Revenge of the Fallen, it was only worthwhile as simple entertainment and not much more.

I saw Dark of the Moon on the Friday of its opening weekend in a packed theater, but as I write this review a week and a half later I’m struggling to come up with images, scenes, or even characters from the movie that made an impression on me.  It’s not that the movie didn’t have its moments…it’s that nothing really stands out.  When I think of other big-budget disaster movies like 2012 or The Towering Inferno, certain images come to mind like Woody Harrelson watching Yellowstone Park explode, or Paul Newman strapping himself to a pillar in an attempt to survive a flood of water.  But with Dark of the Moon it’s all a blur, like someone took all the elements that are supposed to make up a cool summer blockbuster and threw them together without stopping to consider whether any of it really mattered.

transformers-dark-of-moon-Shia-LaBeouf-Sam-Witwicky

Believe it or not, all he did was press "PC LOAD LETTER" on the copy machine.

One of the most pressing issues with Bay’s treatment of Hasbro’s cartoon begat as a vehicle for selling toys is that his tone just doesn’t work. The original Transformers cartoons, as well as the 1986 animated movie which exceedingly surpasses Bay’s films in every way possible, were serious but fun in a campy sort of way.  Bay’s films are serious but attempt to be fun in a wince-inducing sort of way.  Juxtaposing world-is-at-stake alien invasions and Black Hawk Down-style demolition setpieces with scenes of our intrepid hero Sam Witwicky (Shia LeBoeuf, as spastic as ever) making out with his Barbie doll girlfriend or trading barbs with sarcastic transformers on his living room couch just doesn’t work.  Mistaking the Transformers universe for Bad Boys III, Bay can’t help but infuse his own brand of crass humor and off-color inappropriateness (this film is marketed to young boys, with a section at Wal-Mart selling Bumblebee and Optimus Prime bedsheets and sun visors) into a film where it simply has no reason to be.

That being said, some parts of Dark of the Moon really were amazing to behold in a July 4 fireworks “oohh…aahh” sort of way. Watching Optimus Prime lay waste to a horde of decepticons during the siege of Chicago was pretty awesome, and Bay really does pull out most of the stops in creating an avalanche of destruction in the third act of the film.  There’s even a modicum of something approaching plot depth, which a bit of unexpected double-crossing and other grade-school-level turncoat action.  All the human characters in this film exist to fulfill one-dimensional casting calls:  Tough Military Dude, Hot Girlfriend, Wacky Parents, Slick Boss, Spunky Kid, and so on.  In the first of Bay’s films these characters had something called motive, (Captain Lennox even spent a minute pining for his wife and baby girl back home in the first movie, but in Dark of the Moon his character does nothing but grunt and shoot) but here all individuals exist solely to propel the action forward and spout bits of plot exposition.  Like I said at the start, all this is to be expected given the film’s pedigree, but it’s just too bad the film doesn’t strive to do anything but wow and amaze an audience.  In the end, Shakespeare himself put it best: “it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

Rating:[Rating:3/5]