Super 8 - Review

I'd waited so long for this film to come out in the UK, I'd almost forgotten about it until tonight. I've avoided just about every bit of spoilerish material on this one in an attempt to go into a film for once with very little idea of what I'm about to see. And man, was it worth it.

Super 8 is such an amazing mashup of ideas and themes from 80s sci-fi adventure movies and youth oriented films like Stand By Me, E.T and Close Encounters. But never once is it overtly plaguristic. There is definitely an original vision here - albeit a very nostalgic one. I've glimpsed other reviews stating that the film was disappointing when compared to the films of Spielberg in his prime, but honestly, I couldn't really say much negative about this film at all. I also think it's unfair to compare this so lazily to Spielberg movies, as this is definitely something new, but clearly delivered by a filmmaker who is as fond of those 80s movies as I am.

The story wasn't exactly ingenius, but it was driven by a bunch of genuine characters that took the focus away from technicalities and let us enjoy a truly character driven film. The banter and sweary dialogue between them was very realistic, as was the humour. I don't think i've seen a buddy movie this well written for a very long time. It makes me wonder if it's movies of the 80s we've been missing from our screens so badly, or purely movies of this quality that have been absent from our cinemas for so long.

Effects were almost flawless, but were hardly the centrepiece of this one. There were a few real eye opening moments in there, and a good balance of CG and practical effects that kept the visuals from being distracting, which is how it should be.

The music was another success from Giacchino, writing a score that complimented but didn't overwhelm the film. It was memorable music for certain, but not overtly in your face. Sure, this is no John Williams score, but as i've pointed out, anyone going in expecting that should go and rent a Spielberg movie.

I could really write so much here. Super 8 pushed all the right buttons for me. This will be a definite Bluray purchase, and I'm adding it to my list of top movies (see the blog navigation bar) as we speak. I know this film won't please everyone, but when the credits rolled, I knew immediately I'd found the movie i'd been looking for since...well, the 80s, and it'll take something genuinely impressive to beat it this year.

Captain America: The First Avenger - Review

I've always thought Captain America could make a pretty awesome movie. Something about a comic book character who fights for justice, but does it by bashing Nazis over the head with a big shield that doubles as a massive frisbee. Cool concept, and like I'd hoped, the Nazi bashing in this film was thoroughly enjoyable to watch and brought back that 'raiders' feeling I got so many years ago watching Harrison Ford plug evil nazis in the face. This aspect of the film was great fun, as was the casting of Chris Evans as the Cap' and Tommy Lee Jones in a role perfectly tailored for him. Hugo Weaving as Red Skull was pretty cool, even if his accent was a bit dodgy most of the time.

The computer effects on this one were a mixed bag. The effects used to join Chris Evans' face onto a scrawny body were achieved seamlessly, yet the action sequences looked too 'cut and paste' for my liking, where it was too obvious when digital characters had been added to scenes.

There were far too many hammy moments in this for me to genuinely say I thought it was a great film. Too much family-friendly romancing with the predictable and convenient love interest played by Hayley Atwell.
Maybe it wasn't awkward, but just implausible. One minute Steve Rogers meets military agent lady, next minute he's carrying round a picture of her into battle. He's supposed to be 'ard, he's Captain America, yet he comes across as falling for the first woman he sees. Just didn't feel right, especially crammed into the tight timeframe.

When I think about it, I put this down to the generally shallow characterisation throughout the film. None of the characters were particularly well developed, so when they went about dramatic actions in the story, you couldn't really empathise with them or understand their motivations. The script itself may be to blame, or the uninspired direction of Joe 'Jurassic Park 3' Johnston, but all in all I had a hard time feeling anything much for any of the characters, and when the action kicked off, my excitement levels dipped before they reached anything substantial - primarily because the characters were too 'cardboard cutout' to care much about.
But hey, this is a Marvel film, and perhaps Batman Begins and the Dark Knight have spoiled me too much by causing me to expect some real character development in a comic book movie.

But to be fair, if someone said to me name the best aspect of the film, I'd say the ending was nicely set up and moved the character into modern times in a natural and fitting way. I know i said I disliked the love interest sidestory, and it was cringeworthy, but it did set up the ending nicely. The film didn't have the cheesy gung-ho ending I was expecting it to have, but instead a rather down-beat ending that put a refreshing spin on the whole thing, and that was a nice surprise. It heightened my opinion of the film right at the end.

Captain America wasn't as awesome as the movie I was hoping to see, but it was still enjoyable as a non-too-serious adventure flick, and the ending did leave me looking forward to Joss Whedon's 'The Avengers,' so it served its purpose well.

3D Cinema

This won't be an article where I attempt to criticise the incorrect use of 3D in movies, or how it's damaging the artistic process of film-making. Instead this will be my own perspective on the current 3D craze, and how I feel about the technology.

To be honest I can't directly criticise the effectiveness of 3D, simply because I can't see 3D at all. When I went to the first overhyped and mass marketed 3D film, Avatar, I sat there with my big stereoscopic glasses on and waited for something to jump out at me. Nothing. It was like watching a movie wearing heavy sunglasses, and absolutely no 3D.

I was curious as to whether it was a unique problem, so I began asking opticians and browsing the Internet for further information. It seems that in America alone, nearly 15% of their total population can't see 3D correctly, and a substantial number of those people can't see the 3D images at all. And you don't even need to have a previous history of eye problems to miss out on the experience of 3D.
It's down to something called binocular vision, where the brain can only process the image from one eye at a time, therefore unable to join the dual images from both eyes together to form the 3D image. It's the same as those eye puzzles you get in books sometimes, where you stare at the image long enough and you see a teacup (or something) form out of the two images. I can't see those either, as the principle is exactly the same as 3D.
Apparently, hundreds of people with no history of eye problems are discovering this condition now after failing to correctly see a 3D film. So why does hardly anyone know about this? Well the answer is simple. That 15% of US population represents the minority, and as long as the film distributors can convince the majority of viewers to invest in a more expensive 3D ticket, they don't really care.

As this condition can not be remedied, I wonder how many other people out there suffer from a simultaneous love of film and lack of 3D vision, who are also wondering if the future of cinema and home entertainment will cater for them aswell as everyone else.

Personally, I think 3D will die out once the next big technical revolution comes along in film. 3D rears its head whenever the film industry is trying to boost ticket sales and prices to compete with piracy and home markets. I genuinely hope it dies out, because for me, it's a huge change in the way entertainment is perceived that I can't experience, and I can only hope that it's just a fad that finds its niche market, and doesn't ignore us 2D viewers and leave us by the wayside.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon - Review

Transformers: Dark of the Moon was better than I expected it to be, but it could easily win the award for most drawn out, overbloated narrative in all of modern cinema. Despite all of the explosions, the remarkable special effects, the John Malkovich cameo and the government agent in a wheelchair, Michael Bay has a serious issue with pacing. Ever since that godawful mess Pearl Harbour, he seems to have some obsession with really long movies - and not justifiably long. Long as in building up to a battle for half the movie, and when it finally arrives, dragging out the battle for a further hour of plotless antics. I mean, the effects were REALLY great, but utilised by a different director this could have been incredible. Which is a shame, because Transformers 1 was thoroughly enjoyable. Having said that, Revenge of the Fallen was an undeniable mess, and this third installment is a definite improvement.
And what is it with Michael Bay anyway? The man has a serious fetish for destruction. I don't think I've seen quite so many explosions in one movie (except perhaps Pearl Harbour). I can't see how this guy's career can progress any further beyond this volume of explosions, unless his next film is about the big bang and the creation of the universe. Or maybe they'll hire him for the 'When World's Collide' remake, and it'll be 2 hours of buildup before the 2 planets inevitably smash into each other for 20 minutes and everything goes bang.
Generally though, my complaints didn't start until the day after, when I realised how dumb this movie really was. But during the viewing experience, I was thorougly entertained by the eye candy, and thought the price of admission was well worth it. Just another Hollywood film then.