The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)
Predicted rating: 4 stars
Directed by Peter Jackson (Braindead, Bad Taste). Staring Martin Freeman (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy), Sir Ian McKellen (X- Men) and Hugo Weaving (The Matrix, Captain America).
The first installment in a new trilogy is the prequel to the highly successful Lord of the Rings trilogy. The once mighty dwarven city of Erebor is destroyed by a dragon named Smaug, forcing the dwarves to flee. The film tells the story of Thorin, his band of dwarves, Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf in their quest to reclaim the city and return the pride back to the dwarven race.
*sniff *sniff, what's that smell. Oh, it's money, something Peter Jackson will be smelling a lot of when he is strolling all the way to the bank. Essentially all this film is, is a money grab. I am not saying that a Hobbit movie shouldn't have been made, it is a good idea. However I am going to put an emphasis on the A, A Hobbit movie, not three. It is highly likely, with the current cinematic environment, that these movies will go into make a billion plus dollars each. Peter Jackson knows this and all he is aiming to do is make three low risk films that will everyone will go see. Playing it safe means Jackson makes the money. If he tries to hard to make a good film and it backfires and it turns out to be terrible, he will be in the shits, something that has happened before (*cough John Carter *cough). Although, as with all theories, it has an exception, i.e. Transformers, terrible movies but made a truck load of money. Mmmm nostalgia effect.
I am going to use an American analogy here because it is easier, the older brother (The Lord of the Rings) is the quarterback of the football team and the school captain. He is the king of the school, all the girls want him and all the guys want to be him. It is now the first day of the year, his younger brother (The Hobbit) rocks up expecting to ride on his brother's successes. He is clearly the inferior sibling but some fall for this ploy, others are smarter and know what's going on. It is pretty clear that The Hobbit is riding on the successes of The Lord of the Rings. Something I think is going to work here because lots of people will go and see it.
The pacing of this movie is less than desirable. It is not awful but it is no Wrath of Khan. That's to be expected when you try to make three movies from a 300 page kids book. Well one of these movies is from the appendices. Wait, appendices. That is like me publishing a scientific paper and trying to make as much money off a few tables of data and a photo of me next to the equipment with my thumbs up. Anyway, the pacing just seems way to deliberate. There is a lot of padding going on to ensure that it ends on a climax, i.e. having them sit around for 45 minutes at the start discussing their plans. this is to be expected however when you split an original story into two, something that has happened a lot lately, as in the final chapters of Harry Potter and Twilight. Harry Potter did it ok but, not that I have seen it, I heard Twilight stunk it up big time with part 2 featuring a 45 minute montage of every character that has appeared in the series. One montage even intertwines a character that has been played by two different actors. There is a reasonable climax at the end, I am just going to harp on this point, it should have been one movie!
Whilst there are some elements of the next installment I am looking forward to like Benedict Cumberbatch as Smaug/The Necromancer, I am not really hanging out to see it. I don't think it will even make my list of top 10 movies I am looking forward to next year (keep your eyes peeled). I will still see it, I just won't be having any sleepless nights over it. By the way, old Benny is going to be a hated man in the nerd community
playing both Smaug and the villain in the new Star Trek movie (yes one
review, two Star Trek references, winning!).
I have had a read through my review and it all seems pretty scathing. I think I have been a bit harsh because it is a reasonably good film. I am just frustrated due to the money grab factor. There are some good elements, like it is visually stunning and it is a solid story. The money grab factor was really consolidated when there were 30 minutes of adverts before it started!
Overall: I am not saying a film that I have given four stars, like say 21 Jump Street, is a better movie than The Hobbit, it is just not as good as it could be. 21 Jump Street got a good rating because I was expecting it to be bad and it was awesome, I was expecting the Hobbit to be much better. 3.5 stars
Next time: So many films to chose from, Les Miserables, Wreck it Ralph, Jack Reacher. It all depends when I get back to the movies.
Thursday 27 December 2012
Thursday 6 December 2012
Red Dawn
Red Dawn (2012)
Predicted Rating: 2.5 Stars
Directed by: Dan Bradley (Directorial Debut). Starring: Chris Hemsworth (Thor, The Avengers), Josh Hutcherson (The Hunger Games) and Adrianne Palicki (Supernatural).
A remake of the 1984 film of the same name starring Patrick Swayze and Charlie Sheen, Red Dawn follows Jed Eckhart (Hemsworth), who has recently returned home from a stint in the military. Upon his return, his home town of Spokane, Washington, is invaded by North Korea, as well as the majority of the US. Jed, along with his brother Matt (Josh Peck) and a group of friends escape to the surrounding hills. Here they form a terrorist group known as the Wolverines (named after Matt's football team) and fight to stop the North Korean invasion. Matt is torn between helping the Wolverines fight for justice and rescuing his girlfriend Erica (Isabel Lucas), who has been captured by the North Koreans
I went into this movie in a reasonably bad mood so before I sat down I expected to give this movie a bad review. My rational side at the time thought this may be a tad biased. Upon further reflection after the viewing, the negative review is fully justified! This movie is plain terrible. This is something I did expect but my plan for the evening was to sit in a darkened room with my popcorn and frozen coke and watch things blow up. This was really the only good part of the original. Up until Kill Bill rocked up, it was considered the most violent movie ever made based on the VAPM (Violent Acts per Minute) scale. This movie did not live up to any expectations. As a result of my dissatisfaction for this movie, and my inability to say anything positive, I will list all of my rants below in dot form.
Overall Rating: Fairly poor attempt to make an action film, could have been a whole lot better. 1.5 stars
Next Time: Torn between Les Miserables, The Hobbit and Wreck-It Ralph on Boxing day. A triple header sounds good but contrary to popular belief, I actually have a life so we will see how we go.
Predicted Rating: 2.5 Stars
Directed by: Dan Bradley (Directorial Debut). Starring: Chris Hemsworth (Thor, The Avengers), Josh Hutcherson (The Hunger Games) and Adrianne Palicki (Supernatural).
A remake of the 1984 film of the same name starring Patrick Swayze and Charlie Sheen, Red Dawn follows Jed Eckhart (Hemsworth), who has recently returned home from a stint in the military. Upon his return, his home town of Spokane, Washington, is invaded by North Korea, as well as the majority of the US. Jed, along with his brother Matt (Josh Peck) and a group of friends escape to the surrounding hills. Here they form a terrorist group known as the Wolverines (named after Matt's football team) and fight to stop the North Korean invasion. Matt is torn between helping the Wolverines fight for justice and rescuing his girlfriend Erica (Isabel Lucas), who has been captured by the North Koreans
I went into this movie in a reasonably bad mood so before I sat down I expected to give this movie a bad review. My rational side at the time thought this may be a tad biased. Upon further reflection after the viewing, the negative review is fully justified! This movie is plain terrible. This is something I did expect but my plan for the evening was to sit in a darkened room with my popcorn and frozen coke and watch things blow up. This was really the only good part of the original. Up until Kill Bill rocked up, it was considered the most violent movie ever made based on the VAPM (Violent Acts per Minute) scale. This movie did not live up to any expectations. As a result of my dissatisfaction for this movie, and my inability to say anything positive, I will list all of my rants below in dot form.
- The camera work is absolutely awful, nauseating in most circumstances. I know having shaky cameras is supposed to represent chaos, something prominent in this film, but this just takes it to a whole new level. The car scene at the beginning is the prime example. I have seen a few car chases where the camera is supposed to be in the car but they have been watchable. The one in this movie is just plain sickening. I am glad I watched it on a small screen and not at the Titan XC or I might have needed a sick bag
- This is supposed to be a patriotic American film, did they not realise that two of the main actors are Australian! Hemsworth tries to do his best to sound American and does a pretty good job. Isabel Lucas is given as few lines as possible to hide her Paul Hogan style accent. I'd say she would say 10 words tops, so as a main character she might as well be a mute.
- Maybe this is a credit to Hemsworth pure manliness but Adrianne Palicki's love for him is almost unnatural. They are supposed to be the developing love interest of the story after exchanging looks at the start. However, it is not until about 75 minutes in the film that they share a word. After maybe 2 minutes of interaction, they go to make out but are rudely interrupted. I was thinking about not telling you the next part because it ruins the ending, but I advise not watching this film, so in the spirit of a good review I will ruin everything. Despite the sheer lack of anything between the two characters, Palicki is left utterly devastated, almost catatonic, when Hemsworth is killed, and I don't mean for a 5 minute period, for days and weeks after the event. All they did was almost make out, they weren't married for 30 years or anything.
- Josh Peck looks and sounds stoned all the time and it gets super annoying. That is all.
- I know he is supposed to be the developmental character who goes from wuss to super soldier, but come on Josh Hutcherson, you won the Hunger Games, you shouldn't be vomiting when you see a dead body.
- I am sick and tired of seeing over aged actors playing high school students. Most of them are 26 or older and some don't even look remotely like they belong in a school, I am looking your way Adrianne. Also why does Matt have to be the quaterback of his school team. The characters of these movies are always quaterbacks. At least intertwine it in the film, like make him make some ridiculous grenade throw. Give another position a chance. When have you watched a movie when the tight end or free safety has been the hero.
- When are people going to learn to leave their emotions at home when fighting in a post-apocalyptic style battle. Most of the characters are killed because their, or someone else's emotions get in the way. Matt is fully responsible for a few deaths whilst trying to rescue his girlfriend. Then the majority of other deaths are caused by petty bickering. Connor Cruise (yes Tom and Nicole's son) comes the closest after offering to cut a tracking device out of himself. He convinced otherwise by the team and then boldly stays behind to fight. That's the way son!
- Sigh another remake. I will say it again and again, remakes can be good but in moderation. Also is this the right time for this movie, probably not.
Overall Rating: Fairly poor attempt to make an action film, could have been a whole lot better. 1.5 stars
Next Time: Torn between Les Miserables, The Hobbit and Wreck-It Ralph on Boxing day. A triple header sounds good but contrary to popular belief, I actually have a life so we will see how we go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)