Review: El Laberinto del Fauno (Pan's Labyrinth) (Guillermo del Toro, 2006, USA).
Looks like I'm going to be towing the critical line on this one.
I'm not even sure I can really write a review after one viewing, this is a film you could watch 20 times and not fully absorbed all there is to it.But, I'll try! Ofelia (Ivanna Baquero) and her mother Carmen (Adriana Gil) are being driven to stay with Carmen's new husband, Captain Vidal (Sergei Lopez) when they stop because Carmen is feeling sick while carrying Vidal's child. While stopped Ofelia finds a rock and places back in a statue where it looks like the rock should be. Doing this, she unleashes a force which could take her to her rightful place, a Princess of the underworld, or damn her to a mortal's life on Earth.
To even tell anymore of this film would ruin it. You need to go in as fresh as possible to fully get everything out of the film. I knew certain things and I feel like it made it less fresh for me and for that I am a lot sadder. All there is to say is that there are twists and turns. Aspects of the Spanish Civil War come into the picture in surprising, disturbing, and moving ways. The film is technically perfect. The art direction, writing, effects, practical make up (Doug Jones does an astounding job as the mysterious faun Pan and as the Pale Man, of who I will say no more), and performances are nothing short of incredible especially based on the small budget del Toro had to work with. Speaking of del Toro, it feels like all the films he has made before have led up to this being his seminal work and he knocks it out of the park. This film, like Cars, is the director's most personal work, and yet it doesn't feel self- indulgent at all. del Toro has things to say to all of us and does them in amazing ways. To say this is the best film of the year feels almost like an insult to the cast and crew, it is certainly the best film of the century so far and I say that with a straight face. That's all I can say.
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Saturday, November 25, 2006
DVD Review: Cars
DVD Review: Cars (John Lasseter, 2006, USA).
Pixar, the animation house which could do no wrong. After the massive successes of their previous films, the man who started it all with the Toy Story films came back to make what he regarded as his most personal project yet. Ironically, my biggest problem with the film is the impersonal feel which runs throughout.
Lighting McQueen, voiced by Owen Wilson, is an arrogant young racer who wants to win the biggest prize in racing, the Piston Cup. in doing this he can live his dreams and sign for the biggest sponsor there is and become the most famous car in the world. While on his way to a decisive race he finds himself in the sleepy of town of radiator Springs where he leanrsa that life doesn't need to be raced through, sometimes you have to slow down..... If that sounds trite, thats because it is. That's all there is to this film, a cocky arrogant youngster finds out that life isn't about pursuing success in your field, its about friends and appreciating whats around you. Like hicks and desert plains.
This film feels manufactured, like something which has come of a conveyor belt, and if this was just a Disney film, I wouldn't be surprised, but this is Pixar! Makers of Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc and The Incredibles, some of the most original, satisfying, funny and downright great animated films there have ever been. And so for a a film like Cars to come from them, is such a crying shame. McQueen goes through many standard narrative tropes. Cocky kid learns lessons slowly, is faced with a stumbling block, gets though it and becomes a changed person. Success isn't everything, friends are important, these are pure cliche. While it could be argued that other Pixar films have extolled these values, I would argue that they have never done so while pushing them down our necks through montages and songs, they have done so through very clever writing and inspired plots. While the writing through this film si sharp at times, and Tow-Mater voiced by American comic Larry the Cable Guy, gets some very good stuff to work with, the whole thing felt flat with me. When the most exciting thing in a film happens in the first 15 minutes (the brilliant race which opens the movie) you know you are in trouble. All the technical aspects are brilliant, the cars themselves look incredible, the landscapes terrific, but with Pixar, the storytelling always shone through. It's just to bad they seem to have forgotten their own rules while making Cars.
Extras: Pretty light for a Pixar film, could be a sign that Disney accept that this didn't do so well in comparison to the other films. We get the obligatory shorts, one created for the DVD, Mater and the Ghostlight which is funny without being memorable, and the short which preceded Cars in the cinema, One Man Band, a funny little thing which while entertaining, you would never feel the urge to watch again. A few standard featurettes fill the disc out and they just go to further emphasise the flatness of the whole package. Bitterly disappointed.
Back tomorrow with my review of Pan's Labyrinth.
Pixar, the animation house which could do no wrong. After the massive successes of their previous films, the man who started it all with the Toy Story films came back to make what he regarded as his most personal project yet. Ironically, my biggest problem with the film is the impersonal feel which runs throughout.
Lighting McQueen, voiced by Owen Wilson, is an arrogant young racer who wants to win the biggest prize in racing, the Piston Cup. in doing this he can live his dreams and sign for the biggest sponsor there is and become the most famous car in the world. While on his way to a decisive race he finds himself in the sleepy of town of radiator Springs where he leanrsa that life doesn't need to be raced through, sometimes you have to slow down..... If that sounds trite, thats because it is. That's all there is to this film, a cocky arrogant youngster finds out that life isn't about pursuing success in your field, its about friends and appreciating whats around you. Like hicks and desert plains.
This film feels manufactured, like something which has come of a conveyor belt, and if this was just a Disney film, I wouldn't be surprised, but this is Pixar! Makers of Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc and The Incredibles, some of the most original, satisfying, funny and downright great animated films there have ever been. And so for a a film like Cars to come from them, is such a crying shame. McQueen goes through many standard narrative tropes. Cocky kid learns lessons slowly, is faced with a stumbling block, gets though it and becomes a changed person. Success isn't everything, friends are important, these are pure cliche. While it could be argued that other Pixar films have extolled these values, I would argue that they have never done so while pushing them down our necks through montages and songs, they have done so through very clever writing and inspired plots. While the writing through this film si sharp at times, and Tow-Mater voiced by American comic Larry the Cable Guy, gets some very good stuff to work with, the whole thing felt flat with me. When the most exciting thing in a film happens in the first 15 minutes (the brilliant race which opens the movie) you know you are in trouble. All the technical aspects are brilliant, the cars themselves look incredible, the landscapes terrific, but with Pixar, the storytelling always shone through. It's just to bad they seem to have forgotten their own rules while making Cars.
Extras: Pretty light for a Pixar film, could be a sign that Disney accept that this didn't do so well in comparison to the other films. We get the obligatory shorts, one created for the DVD, Mater and the Ghostlight which is funny without being memorable, and the short which preceded Cars in the cinema, One Man Band, a funny little thing which while entertaining, you would never feel the urge to watch again. A few standard featurettes fill the disc out and they just go to further emphasise the flatness of the whole package. Bitterly disappointed.
Back tomorrow with my review of Pan's Labyrinth.
Thursday, November 23, 2006
DVD Review: Superman 2 - The Richard Donner Cut
Superman 2: The Richard Donner Cut (Richard Donner, 1980, 2006, USA).
So my review of Godzilla will be up some other time but for now...
Superman 2 had a troubled production as Richard Donner, the man responsible for Superman 1, was kicked off the production by the producers and it was taken over by Richard Lester. Fans have known for years that the material Donner shot was still intact and so, after much petitioning, and coinciding with the forthcoming DVD release of Bryan Singer's affectionate remake Superman Returns, this cut has been assembled by editor Michael Thau under Donner's supervision.
This cut has some of the footage found in Lester's finished film but also contains some amazingly revealing stuff. One of the things about the original release was that while fun in a comic-book way, it felt like the seriousness Donner, along with the man who created the story Mario Puzo, was lost in exchange for a slightly more campy tone (Although who cannot love Terrance Stamp's incredibly hammy performance as General Zod, KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!!). While the campiness remains in this version, we also see what could have been. The reintroduction of Marlon Brando as Jor-El, highlights the struggle which forms the backbone to the movie: Can Superman have what he wants while still upholding his duty to man? The debates he and Superman have reinforce this issue. The presence of Lois Lane dressed only in Superman's shirt during this scene also heightens the mature tone. It is not just this which has changed. The opening in Paris has been cut completely and to me this is a good thing as it always seemed like a throwaway sequence in the context of the movie.Lois Lane trying to prove that Clark is Superman is a far better opening as
it adds to as I mentioned before is the main theme of the movie. Also thank god that the frankly bizarre fight at the end with the attacking S's had been cut and replaced with something far more down to earth. However, the reuse of footage from the end of Superman 1 is jarring, although it makes sense in the context of the individual film (Although in terms of continuity, the last scene really does not make sense!) The same goes with the reuse of part of the score but as it really is one of the best film scores ever, I ain't complaining! There is far more which I won't go into here, but it really is amazing how much was found and restored. The footage has been very well restored and the gaps in the film do not ever really jar.
In all, a fascinating look into a film which could, and should, have been but it is very very nice to see it avaliable for anyone interested.
So my review of Godzilla will be up some other time but for now...
Superman 2 had a troubled production as Richard Donner, the man responsible for Superman 1, was kicked off the production by the producers and it was taken over by Richard Lester. Fans have known for years that the material Donner shot was still intact and so, after much petitioning, and coinciding with the forthcoming DVD release of Bryan Singer's affectionate remake Superman Returns, this cut has been assembled by editor Michael Thau under Donner's supervision.
This cut has some of the footage found in Lester's finished film but also contains some amazingly revealing stuff. One of the things about the original release was that while fun in a comic-book way, it felt like the seriousness Donner, along with the man who created the story Mario Puzo, was lost in exchange for a slightly more campy tone (Although who cannot love Terrance Stamp's incredibly hammy performance as General Zod, KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!!). While the campiness remains in this version, we also see what could have been. The reintroduction of Marlon Brando as Jor-El, highlights the struggle which forms the backbone to the movie: Can Superman have what he wants while still upholding his duty to man? The debates he and Superman have reinforce this issue. The presence of Lois Lane dressed only in Superman's shirt during this scene also heightens the mature tone. It is not just this which has changed. The opening in Paris has been cut completely and to me this is a good thing as it always seemed like a throwaway sequence in the context of the movie.Lois Lane trying to prove that Clark is Superman is a far better opening as
it adds to as I mentioned before is the main theme of the movie. Also thank god that the frankly bizarre fight at the end with the attacking S's had been cut and replaced with something far more down to earth. However, the reuse of footage from the end of Superman 1 is jarring, although it makes sense in the context of the individual film (Although in terms of continuity, the last scene really does not make sense!) The same goes with the reuse of part of the score but as it really is one of the best film scores ever, I ain't complaining! There is far more which I won't go into here, but it really is amazing how much was found and restored. The footage has been very well restored and the gaps in the film do not ever really jar.
In all, a fascinating look into a film which could, and should, have been but it is very very nice to see it avaliable for anyone interested.
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Review: Tenacious D In The Pick Of Destiny
Review: Tenacious D In The Pick Of Destiny (Liam Lynch, 2006, USA).
This is up early as I wanted to get it off my chest so I can concentrate on Godzilla tomorrow.
Jack Black and Kyle Gass' first theatrical piece recalls the often genius HBO specials which they made in the early noughties but to me is an overall disappointment When a film's soundtrack album is funnier than the film itself, you know you are in trouble.
The formation of Tenacious D leads to an ageing rocker (Ben Stiller in a not-funny-enough cameo) pointing the wannabe rock gods giving the guys instructions to gain the Pick of Destiny. They get it, fight Satan and thats it, film over. Along the way, there is much randomness including a cheeringly bizarre early Clockwork Orange homage, and a magical mushroom induced trip with Sasquatch. I'll be honest, those are the only 2 parts I can really remember (and I was sober throughout). The two leads put their all into the film, but it lacks focus and, perhaps, key, a big enough budget for them t0o truly achieve what they want. A car chase aside, the film feels far to much like their HBO specials when you would think they would break everything out with a theatrical stage. The climatic battle with Satan is barely glimpsed in the trailers for a reason; it feels to small to fill the screen. I am sure that in the original script, it was not set in a deserted car park! This is a shame to because the musical num,bers are mainly terrific but outside of them, there are few laughs to be had unless you a re a 15-year old who has just been introduced to the world of weed. The direction is competent enough and Liam Lynch seems to have done as much as he can with the budget. And yet, again, it just feels too small! A crying shame, as this really was one of my most anticipated films of the year. Honestly! I must say also, the opening sequence was wicked, Meat Loaf should have been in the film far more and the kid who plays young JB looks so much like Jack Black, its scary. Too bad the film couldn't match my expectations.
next theatrical review should be Pan's Labyrinth, my most anticipated film of the Winter after Casino Royale. That won't leave me as cold as Tenacious D: POD but if it does, I may cry!
This is up early as I wanted to get it off my chest so I can concentrate on Godzilla tomorrow.
Jack Black and Kyle Gass' first theatrical piece recalls the often genius HBO specials which they made in the early noughties but to me is an overall disappointment When a film's soundtrack album is funnier than the film itself, you know you are in trouble.
The formation of Tenacious D leads to an ageing rocker (Ben Stiller in a not-funny-enough cameo) pointing the wannabe rock gods giving the guys instructions to gain the Pick of Destiny. They get it, fight Satan and thats it, film over. Along the way, there is much randomness including a cheeringly bizarre early Clockwork Orange homage, and a magical mushroom induced trip with Sasquatch. I'll be honest, those are the only 2 parts I can really remember (and I was sober throughout). The two leads put their all into the film, but it lacks focus and, perhaps, key, a big enough budget for them t0o truly achieve what they want. A car chase aside, the film feels far to much like their HBO specials when you would think they would break everything out with a theatrical stage. The climatic battle with Satan is barely glimpsed in the trailers for a reason; it feels to small to fill the screen. I am sure that in the original script, it was not set in a deserted car park! This is a shame to because the musical num,bers are mainly terrific but outside of them, there are few laughs to be had unless you a re a 15-year old who has just been introduced to the world of weed. The direction is competent enough and Liam Lynch seems to have done as much as he can with the budget. And yet, again, it just feels too small! A crying shame, as this really was one of my most anticipated films of the year. Honestly! I must say also, the opening sequence was wicked, Meat Loaf should have been in the film far more and the kid who plays young JB looks so much like Jack Black, its scary. Too bad the film couldn't match my expectations.
next theatrical review should be Pan's Labyrinth, my most anticipated film of the Winter after Casino Royale. That won't leave me as cold as Tenacious D: POD but if it does, I may cry!
New stuff later....
Reviews of Tenacious D: The Pick of Destiny and the original Godzilla movie newly out on DVD , will be up sometime tomorrow....
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Review: Casino Royale
So I couldn't bloody wait for this. I had holiday from work so instead of waiting till I could see it with friends, I went by myself. A Thursday, 2.15 showing and it was two thirds full, something I doubt would have happened with Die Another Day, or any Brosnan era film such is the anticipation for this film.
Starts with the much-talked of black and white sequence (nice touch with the B/W studio logos to). This sets up the tone of the entire film; downplayed, more based in reality and a new era for Bond. His first kill is harsh, pushing the 12a rating and is pretty great. This is also where we see where this Bond is going to be different, Craig can actually ACT. He is a proper actor. I am sorry and flame me if you will but no Bond since Connery has acted, they have played "Bond". In this scene you can see how unsure Craig is when he finally kills his first man. His second is done with Bond-like panache and yet this sequence sets him up niely; he knows how to do his job, but he is defenitly not the "Bond" we have come to know him as.
This feeling continues on. the first major action sequenc e featuring the frankly scary talents of free-runner Sebastian Foucan has Bond eventually catching his target but having a very tough time doing it. He has to rely on shortcuts to catch the free-runner, he falls down and obviously hurts himself often,, whereas Foucan is able to leap through a window above a door, Craig has to crash through it (one of the many natural, brilliant laughs found in this film). After this sequence, Bond needs treatment, something not often seen (though admittedly a more gimmicky way of showing this was seen in "Die Another Day".
As well as shoowing this new Bond's physical limitations, his mental limitations become key to the plot. The script for this film by regualr Bond scripters, Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, with polishing done by Oscar-winner Paul Haggis, is able tyo show how the job and the encounters he has within it have made Bond the man we see him as in the other Bond films. By the end of this film we understand how he has come to regard women as coldly as he does thorughoiut the Bond cannon (with a very honoruable exception made to On Her Majesty's Secert Service, itself a reboot of the franchise). Bond is hurt in this film, as said earlier, in both mental and physical ways and as I do not wish to include spoilers that is as much as I will say.
So Daniel Craig? Who gives a shit if he is Bond, he is magnificent. Oozing charm, wit and yet obviously showing that he is not the Bond we know yet, he excels in this role and long may it continue. Eva Green as Vesper Lynd is great, her role is far larger and much more developed than any other Bond girl and considering that she does not appear until nearly an hour into the film, this is no mean feat. You believe every move she makes and yet in hindsight, this should not be the case. She had me as much as she had Bond when it came to her motivations (Looked gourgeous to). Mads Mikklesen as Le Chffre does a commendable job as an enemy who is not as much of a threat as other villians of the best. He is in it to save himself as much as further any other cause and this kind of motivation sucked me in much more than diamonds being put together to control the suns rays, or whatever it was the villain in Die Another Day was doing. The lead in his character makes to future Bond films is very interesting to, could we be seeing another SPECTRE? A mention must also go to Jeffrey Wright as Felix Leiter who I sorely hope becomes a recurring character as it is great to see an actor of his class trun up in this supporting role.
Martin Campbell does a great job of directing. This guy has been directing action movies for years but with some of these set-pieces, and the car crash, he has obviously pulled all the stops out and congrats to him. I have also got to say something bout the score. While i cannot remember any of the title song, the score was amazing (In fact I am downloading it now). the way it develops the Bond themes over time before unleashing at the end is simply awesome. And the title sequence also? Maginifcant, love the diamonds motif!
Any downsides? As many reviews have started the pacing, in between the torture scene (also pushing 12a, but with some brilliant lines, and Venice specifically is a little slow, considering its run time is around 140 minutes, 10-20 minutes being cut specifically from this section would not have been missed.
Overall though? A great film, not just a great Bond film. thanks largely to Daniel Craig and his actual ACTING but also the great supporting cast, stunts, music, direction and considering the pedigree of Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, the writing, this is one of the best of the year for me. Pure fun and a great way to kickstart the Bond franchise. I, for one, cannot wait for Bond to return.
Starts with the much-talked of black and white sequence (nice touch with the B/W studio logos to). This sets up the tone of the entire film; downplayed, more based in reality and a new era for Bond. His first kill is harsh, pushing the 12a rating and is pretty great. This is also where we see where this Bond is going to be different, Craig can actually ACT. He is a proper actor. I am sorry and flame me if you will but no Bond since Connery has acted, they have played "Bond". In this scene you can see how unsure Craig is when he finally kills his first man. His second is done with Bond-like panache and yet this sequence sets him up niely; he knows how to do his job, but he is defenitly not the "Bond" we have come to know him as.
This feeling continues on. the first major action sequenc e featuring the frankly scary talents of free-runner Sebastian Foucan has Bond eventually catching his target but having a very tough time doing it. He has to rely on shortcuts to catch the free-runner, he falls down and obviously hurts himself often,, whereas Foucan is able to leap through a window above a door, Craig has to crash through it (one of the many natural, brilliant laughs found in this film). After this sequence, Bond needs treatment, something not often seen (though admittedly a more gimmicky way of showing this was seen in "Die Another Day".
As well as shoowing this new Bond's physical limitations, his mental limitations become key to the plot. The script for this film by regualr Bond scripters, Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, with polishing done by Oscar-winner Paul Haggis, is able tyo show how the job and the encounters he has within it have made Bond the man we see him as in the other Bond films. By the end of this film we understand how he has come to regard women as coldly as he does thorughoiut the Bond cannon (with a very honoruable exception made to On Her Majesty's Secert Service, itself a reboot of the franchise). Bond is hurt in this film, as said earlier, in both mental and physical ways and as I do not wish to include spoilers that is as much as I will say.
So Daniel Craig? Who gives a shit if he is Bond, he is magnificent. Oozing charm, wit and yet obviously showing that he is not the Bond we know yet, he excels in this role and long may it continue. Eva Green as Vesper Lynd is great, her role is far larger and much more developed than any other Bond girl and considering that she does not appear until nearly an hour into the film, this is no mean feat. You believe every move she makes and yet in hindsight, this should not be the case. She had me as much as she had Bond when it came to her motivations (Looked gourgeous to). Mads Mikklesen as Le Chffre does a commendable job as an enemy who is not as much of a threat as other villians of the best. He is in it to save himself as much as further any other cause and this kind of motivation sucked me in much more than diamonds being put together to control the suns rays, or whatever it was the villain in Die Another Day was doing. The lead in his character makes to future Bond films is very interesting to, could we be seeing another SPECTRE? A mention must also go to Jeffrey Wright as Felix Leiter who I sorely hope becomes a recurring character as it is great to see an actor of his class trun up in this supporting role.
Martin Campbell does a great job of directing. This guy has been directing action movies for years but with some of these set-pieces, and the car crash, he has obviously pulled all the stops out and congrats to him. I have also got to say something bout the score. While i cannot remember any of the title song, the score was amazing (In fact I am downloading it now). the way it develops the Bond themes over time before unleashing at the end is simply awesome. And the title sequence also? Maginifcant, love the diamonds motif!
Any downsides? As many reviews have started the pacing, in between the torture scene (also pushing 12a, but with some brilliant lines, and Venice specifically is a little slow, considering its run time is around 140 minutes, 10-20 minutes being cut specifically from this section would not have been missed.
Overall though? A great film, not just a great Bond film. thanks largely to Daniel Craig and his actual ACTING but also the great supporting cast, stunts, music, direction and considering the pedigree of Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, the writing, this is one of the best of the year for me. Pure fun and a great way to kickstart the Bond franchise. I, for one, cannot wait for Bond to return.
Monday, November 13, 2006
Spelling
Just re-read that post, many apologies about the spelling, I was in a rush, will be better in the future, thanks....
First Post!!! - Mission Impossible 3 DVD Review....
I don't know who will read this but I may as well introduce myself. My name's Ian Loring, I've just graduated form University of the West of England with a Film Studies degree. I'm writing this blog, which will be reviews and maybe some other stuff, to kinda keep up writing about Films. I hope to do an MA at some point but not just yet and this is something to practice my writing. Anyone is more than likely to give constructive criticism and I would really appreciate it. With that out of the way, lets begin!
DVD Review: Mission Impossible 3 (J.J Abrams, 2006, USA)
After the monster smash which was M-I: 2, M-I:3 was seen as a sure-fire hit. Its amazing what can happen in the development of blockbusters though eh? First David Fincher filled then vacated the director's chair (imagine that....) then celebrated director Joe Carnahan, of Narc fame, filled the chair before leaving due to "creative differences" (Carnahan has now moved on to make Smokin' Aces whose trailer on the Apple site looks suitably gun-tastic). The man who Tom Cruise, as producer, finally selected for the job is the TV demi-God J J Abrams, whose work on Felicity, Alias, and crucially Lost convinced Cruise that he could give the reins of his franchise to a man who had never directed for film before. Abrams wrote a new script (with co-writers Alex Kurtzman and Robert Orci) and filming went from there. How did the new guy do?
Well in my mind it seems like the big budget pilot for a reborn M:I TV series, albeit one witht he best TV visual effects ever seen. Let me explain my stance. The film does a complete about turn on M:I 2. This film has some sense of characterisation, it tries to bring in new characters with new relationships and new dilemmas. ALl the characters apart from Cruise and Ving Rhames are all new to us, and yet it feels like we are going to learn a lot more about them, or it feels like we should know a lot more about them before the film starts. For example, Johnathan Rhys Meyers' character; he complains in the film about his status as "the driver", he seems to want to do more. If this had been a TV series, you get the feeling this would have been more developed, that we would actually learn about this. Instead, it made me flat out convinced that he would be a traitor. Instead Billy Crudup's character fills that genre trope, though he does so well.
Michelle Monaghan also does well with a thankless role that again you feel Abrams wants to explore much further though he would not get the chance. Phillip Seymour Hoffman positively drips menace as Owen Davian and yet you feel he would make a terrific "big bad", an enemy who could be developed over a lot of TV time. This whole sense of newness in the film puts me off it. I admire what they tried to do, indeed it is certainly one of the best blockbusters in many years in terms of character development and the action sequences are breathlessly done (the bridge sequence, certainly my pick for action scene of the year) but I just wanted more on the relationships. Something I thought I would never say about this film. Oh and by the way I know I haven't mentioned Simon Pegg. But hey everyone knows the guys a fucking god so I need say no more. One more thing... Cruise? He's Tom Cruise he can try and act all he wants but the man fills the "celebrity" stereotype so much, I can't see him as any character. Still though as misguided in many things as I thing he is, the guy is more than capable of putting everything into his action and you can't naysay him for that at least.
DVD:
Video: Pretty damn great, though it is so recent a release it would be hard not to be. DVD mastering has been perfected for so long that i think this is as good as you will get with DVD level quality
Audio: Fine, I don't have a surrond sequence but the mix levels were fine.
Extras (One disc edition): Standard EPK stuff, Generation Cruise seems to be there entirely to make those annoyed by Cruise to be even more so. Commentary? Fuck me Tom Cruise is a happy little monkey isn't he? One thing I did notice is that several times in this, Abrams says somthing then Cruise interprets it as how he sees it and runs with it while Abrams shuts up and agrees. Makes you wonder who had the trousers in their relationship on set.
Verdict: Disapointing but in a suprising way, though a heartily recommended rental
Ok thanks for reading, hopefully back with another tomorrow...
Oh and head to the Apple site and download the Simpsons Movie trailer. That and Spider-Man 3. Next summer man..... oh yesh!
DVD Review: Mission Impossible 3 (J.J Abrams, 2006, USA)
After the monster smash which was M-I: 2, M-I:3 was seen as a sure-fire hit. Its amazing what can happen in the development of blockbusters though eh? First David Fincher filled then vacated the director's chair (imagine that....) then celebrated director Joe Carnahan, of Narc fame, filled the chair before leaving due to "creative differences" (Carnahan has now moved on to make Smokin' Aces whose trailer on the Apple site looks suitably gun-tastic). The man who Tom Cruise, as producer, finally selected for the job is the TV demi-God J J Abrams, whose work on Felicity, Alias, and crucially Lost convinced Cruise that he could give the reins of his franchise to a man who had never directed for film before. Abrams wrote a new script (with co-writers Alex Kurtzman and Robert Orci) and filming went from there. How did the new guy do?
Well in my mind it seems like the big budget pilot for a reborn M:I TV series, albeit one witht he best TV visual effects ever seen. Let me explain my stance. The film does a complete about turn on M:I 2. This film has some sense of characterisation, it tries to bring in new characters with new relationships and new dilemmas. ALl the characters apart from Cruise and Ving Rhames are all new to us, and yet it feels like we are going to learn a lot more about them, or it feels like we should know a lot more about them before the film starts. For example, Johnathan Rhys Meyers' character; he complains in the film about his status as "the driver", he seems to want to do more. If this had been a TV series, you get the feeling this would have been more developed, that we would actually learn about this. Instead, it made me flat out convinced that he would be a traitor. Instead Billy Crudup's character fills that genre trope, though he does so well.
Michelle Monaghan also does well with a thankless role that again you feel Abrams wants to explore much further though he would not get the chance. Phillip Seymour Hoffman positively drips menace as Owen Davian and yet you feel he would make a terrific "big bad", an enemy who could be developed over a lot of TV time. This whole sense of newness in the film puts me off it. I admire what they tried to do, indeed it is certainly one of the best blockbusters in many years in terms of character development and the action sequences are breathlessly done (the bridge sequence, certainly my pick for action scene of the year) but I just wanted more on the relationships. Something I thought I would never say about this film. Oh and by the way I know I haven't mentioned Simon Pegg. But hey everyone knows the guys a fucking god so I need say no more. One more thing... Cruise? He's Tom Cruise he can try and act all he wants but the man fills the "celebrity" stereotype so much, I can't see him as any character. Still though as misguided in many things as I thing he is, the guy is more than capable of putting everything into his action and you can't naysay him for that at least.
DVD:
Video: Pretty damn great, though it is so recent a release it would be hard not to be. DVD mastering has been perfected for so long that i think this is as good as you will get with DVD level quality
Audio: Fine, I don't have a surrond sequence but the mix levels were fine.
Extras (One disc edition): Standard EPK stuff, Generation Cruise seems to be there entirely to make those annoyed by Cruise to be even more so. Commentary? Fuck me Tom Cruise is a happy little monkey isn't he? One thing I did notice is that several times in this, Abrams says somthing then Cruise interprets it as how he sees it and runs with it while Abrams shuts up and agrees. Makes you wonder who had the trousers in their relationship on set.
Verdict: Disapointing but in a suprising way, though a heartily recommended rental
Ok thanks for reading, hopefully back with another tomorrow...
Oh and head to the Apple site and download the Simpsons Movie trailer. That and Spider-Man 3. Next summer man..... oh yesh!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)