Review: Evil Dead

I'm guessing everyone reading this is more or less fed up with remakes, especially of classic horror and gore movies. The question isn't that there wouldn't be any material to develop or improve upon. It's that most remakes tend to be Hollywood's most shallow, boring retreads of ideas that were already made to better effect decades ago. But the Evil Dead remake at least was made with a bit more ambition than usual.

Produced by Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell, the new version doesn't just have the same characters nor the same storyline. The basics are there, but director/screenwriter Fede Alvarez has left plenty of room for the audience to be surprised, too. Which is quite essential when attempting to scare people, to say the least. Thus, instead of a new wise-cracking Ash we have a couple of red herrings leading on who the actual lead might be.

The basics are still the same worn-out story so mocked in The Cabin In The Woods: Five twenty-somethings and their dog drive for a weekend in a secluded cabin. The intention is to make Mia (Jane Levy) get off her drug addiction. Helping her are his stoic, wood-faced brother David (Shiloh Fernandez), his boring blonde girlfriend Natalie (Elizabeth Blackmore), rock chick Olivia (Jessica Lucas) and the newly started science teacher Eric (Lou Taylor Pucci).

As if they hadn't enough trouble with Mia's mood swings, caused by the withdrawal effects, it soon dawns to everyone that something else is a lot more wrong in the cabin. Skinned cats are hanging on the cellar ceiling, and there are evidences of a strange ritual having taken place there. Eric finds a leather-bound old book, and makes the mistake of reading it aloud. Soon the evils of the forest catch up with the group, possessing them one by one.

Whereas the original Evil Dead played around a lot with the wrath of nature itself, making the secluded cabin feel a lot more claustrophobic, the horrors in the new one are much more human-based. It takes a while for the characters to notice that something within Mia is unnatural, since they all figure she acts weirdly because of her drug withdrawal. Likewise, girls shedding blood, screaming out, acting moody, crazy or even threatening isn't by itself enough to really freak David nor Eric out. Both of the boys are in a relationship with a woman, after all. There's a bit of a whiff of misogynism here.

The start of the movie is played out quite seriously, which makes one fear whether the trademarked Evil Dead humor is lost entirely (Yes, even the first one did have comedic sequences, albeit much subtler than the pure slapstick sequels. Watch it again if you don't believe me.). Luckily, splatter humor crawls into the movie slowly, going all out in the final scene. There's no denying that the tone of the movie is spot-on, and the practical gore effects are brilliant. Not a single CGI shot was used in the movie, and it's all for the better. It makes the film more physical, and makes the cringe-worthy scenes really feel in your guts.

The problem then, is that the actual characters aren't very interesting. Even if there's some attempt to flesh them out early on, they never grow on you and subsequently you don't really care what happens to them. Except for Olivia, but then again Jessica Lucas is ungodly hot in this movie. Even if the characters weren't retrieved from stock archives, at least the film could still tighten the terror and hysteria a notch or two. Maybe Alvarez didn't have the heart to torture his cast as much as Sam Raimi did.

The movie does worst when it attempts to recreate the most iconic scenes of the original. For instance the tree-rape is now more graphic, less painful and a lot more unbelievable. In the original one the fast cutting allowed imagination to fill out the most nasty parts (pun unintended, sorry). A similar effect could've worked better in several places here, too.

It's a film made for metal heads as much as anything Rob Zombie has ever produced. This is evidenced by the fact that Evil Dead brings to life several lyrics from Slayer's 1987 magnum opus, Reign In Blood. Like, say 2007's Halloween, however, it is a film that has several inventive, even great parts, but as a whole just can't carry out the legacy of the original. Shame, this one had more promise. But perhaps Alvarez will produce something entirely his own now.

★★★ 

EVIL DEAD 
USA, 2013
Language: English
Director: Fede Alvarez
Screenplay: Fede Alvarez, Rodo Sayagues Mendez
Cinematography: Peter Deming
Starring: Shiloh Fernandez, Jane Levy, Lou Taylor Pucci, Jessica Lucas, Elizabeth Blackmore

A Tale of Three Americas (Captain Americas, that is)

America, Fuck Yeah! Today is the Independence Day of United States of America. And what better way to spend it than delving into the cinematic history of its most patriotic superhero. Captain America was actually first put on film in 1944, during WWII in a movie serial. After that he's been adapted in every wave of Marvel movies (yes, there are three waves), and in addition appeared on copyright infringementing exploitation flicks such as 1973's Turkish classic 3 Dev Adam.





Or this awesome and violent Lego video by ForestFire Films. 

I'll take a look at each of his official appearances.

Captain America (1979)
Director: Rod Holcomb

In his first movie, Captain America came in the form of Reb Brown and in a cheap made-for-TV movie. Marvel attempted to make live action TV series out of its three biggest characters in the 70's, but only The Incredible Hulk was any kind of a success. There's a good reason things like the two Captain America movies and the Nicholas Hammond-starring Spider-Man show have remained so obscure. There wasn't much for an effects budget, so the makers mostly just copied other TV shows that were popular at the time, rather than stay true to the characters. That's why in the 70's, Captain America was a daredevil motorcycle driver, whose father had invented a super soldier serum, called Full Latent Ability Gain – F.L.A.G. The fact that this version of Cap had no background in nazi-fighting was a bad sign to begin with.

Steve Rogers is a former marine turned commercial artist. When he finds out about his father's invention, he doesn't want to use the formula at first. But when a group of bad guys (kind of undetermined bad guys who are enemies of America and/or want the serum, I guess) attempt to kill him, almost succeeding, Rogers has no other alternative than to become Captain America to survive. He's given a special shield and a motorcycle and makes a costume based on his own drawings.
"Be Captain America, Steve! Shove Captain America down their throats!

"Yes, this looks bad-ass. Lunch break, boys!"

Just about everything that is usually wrong with 70's American TV series (and by extend, TV movies), is wrong in here as well. The movie is aimed at Middle America which is why every character is basically played broadly as both a hillbilly and rock-stupid. The Dukes of Hazzard isn't the most smart thing to imitate, you know. The movie is also long-winded, extremely boring and exposition-laden. The producers were more concerned on how to fill the two hour slot in between the commercials than to make the film exciting or even interesting. It doesn't help that the action sucks, too. Some bad movie values are spread here and there but way too thinly. For example, after a lengthy chase at a swamp (where Cap drives a motorcycle and the bad guys' helicopter follows him) a ramp comes up from out of nowhere, which allows Cap to jump to the chopper. Also funny is Cap infiltrating a chemical plant, and being chased by lab-coated scientists. He hits an oil pipe with his shield and then watches behind a pipe with glee as the scientists slip. Yes, even the best bits are too lame to be in a Benny Hill sketch.

★

Captain America (1990)
Director: Albert Pyun

For fans of bad movies, the next wave's Cap movie offers a lot more treats. At this point, Marvel was eagerly selling rights to their flagship characters for movie options, presumably because Tim Burton's Batman had been such a big hit and Marvel wanted a slice out of the same cake. Unfortunately, they didn't get the blockbusters they wanted (at that time anyway). Many rights-holders churned out cheap exploitation movies to keep their rights until they could've gained enough money for an extensive special effects budget. That's how even the legendarily prolific bad movie director Albert Pyun got his chance to do a superhero film. The cheapo production meant that they had to do the film in the Italian exploitation way, which explains why so much of the movie's plot takes place in Italy and so many actors have atrocious Italian accents.

In 1936, Nazis kidnap a young Italian boy to experiment on, and kill his family. Seven years later, the Americans become worried about this super soldier the Nazis have, called The Red Skull (Scott Paulin). They rush to create their own super soldier, with the help of the defected Dr. Vaselli (Carla Cassola). Captain Steve Rogers (Matt Salinger) is given the honor of having superpowers, but just after the procedure, a Nazi spy kills Vallin and attempts to kill Rogers as well. Since Vallin was the only one to know how to make the super soldier formula, the new Captain America has to work on his own, and is sent to stop Red Skull from destroying the White House with a missile. However, Cap is uncovered and Red Skull ties him to the missile and fires it anyway. Just before the missile is about to hit, Cap manages to steer its course to Alaska where the missile crashes into snow but doesn't explode. Cap's heroism on the missile  is witnessed by a little boy from a window. This boy will grow up to be... the President of the United States.

So, even though Cap fumbles up pretty badly his very first mission, the Americans manage to win WWII without his help. The Red Skull falls underground and becomes the head of an extensive crime family that does impossible assassinations. He's responsible for the deaths of at least two Kennedys and Martin Luther King. Now, he's attempting to kidnap President Kimball (Ronny Cox). Why he doesn't just kill him like the others, but instead opts to brainwash him to speak against environmentalism isn't properly explained. But luckily, Captain America is thawed from ice and it's up to him to stop the Italian-living Skull from his dirty deeds. He must ask himself: Are You A Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President!?

He looks more like a lover than a fighter.

Surprisingly enough, the beginning of the movie is quite accurate to the original comics, even so much as to be quite similar to its bigger-budgeted 2011 counterpart. The olden scenes aren't shot in sepia tone, but rather, in pitch-black darkness, for instance to hide the cheapness of the sets. The laboratory set for instance doesn't have any more props than one electronic cupboard, which promptly electrifies a Nazi to death. The modern day, then, is shot in broad daylight and is noticeably worse. For instance, The Red Skull is explained to have had facial surgery, which has made him look more like Skeletor from the Masters of the Universe movie, i.e. a burnt out candle. In the beginning his red skull mask still looks somewhat believable and comic booky enough.He claims in 1944 to be studying English but his accent actually has gotten worse in the scenes set in modern day. I bet he was based on Silvio Berlusconi.

He's kind of like Tommy Wiseau playing a super villain.

Sadly, Cap's old flame Bernice (Kim Gillingham) has grown old during his long hibernation. But luckily her daughter Sharon (also Kim Gillingham) is young, beautiful, and interested in joining him on an adventure. So Cap picks her instead. Most of the film features the lovebirds hanging out in Italy sitting in cafés arguing, as if on a vacation, trying to figure where the president is being held. Now and then they are attacked by The Skull's men. Cap has to dodge al ot of machine gun fire. Several action scenes are still shot with as little light as possible in an attempt to hide the bad fight choreography and useless props. Cap versus a nunchaku-wielding ninja is particularly shameful. The chase scenes are also ludicrously bad and unexciting. The godawfulness of the film is crowned by it's cheap MIDI score, which breaks into horrid faux-Bruce Springsteen doing godawful country songs on one montage. Not very funny, but it could be a lot worse. A lot better, too.

★★

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)
Director: Joe Johnston

Joe Johnston's modern Marvel Universe update of Cap's exploits is the most streamlined, and, by any measurement, by far the best of Cap's starring movies. Johnston utilizes the old-timey boy's own storytelling style he developed for his film The Rocketeer in the early 90's. And for my money, for a much better effect here. A good, healthy budget does wonders for creating such high-flying dreams. It also helps that, this being a Marvel presentation, the film has a certain boyish charm and a twinkle in its eye by default. It doesn't seem to take itself as seriously as its two Cap-movie predecessors, yet it also doesn't rub the audience's faces in the fact that many of the things it presents are quite ridiculous. It also pays a funny homage to the original comic book and its let's-punch-Hitler attitude.

In modern day, S.H.I.E.L.D. agents in the Arctic discover a plane on ice and what appears to be Cap's famed shield. A flashback tells us how they got there. In 1941, the Nazi Occult and Science section Hydra, led by Johann Schmidt (Hugo Weaving), discovers a mystical glowing cube in Norway. The treasure, belonging to Odin himself (as seen in the same year's other Marvel film Thor, as played by Anthony Hopkins) gives away huge amounts of energy. Hydra can use it to power Dr. Arnim Zola's (Toby Jones) special weaponry, turning the course of the war for the Germans. Meanwhile, in New York, weakling Steve Rogers (Chris Evans, starting the film in a CGI frame) hopes to go fight for his country against the Nazis. The problem is, he's way too skinny, asthmatic and all around puny to be accepted. But Dr. Erskine (Stanley Tucci), the man who was already involved in the creation of German super soldier Red Skull and now wants to help the Americans perfect the formula, notices his strong will, noble attitude and considerable bravery and suggest him to be the test subject for the American super soldier program.

The procedure gives Rogers a muscular and tall frame, and the attention of agent Peggy Carter (Haley Atwell). But the rise of Hydra costs Erskine his life. The military, particularly Colonel Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) don't trust Rogers enough to send him on the battlefield, so instead, he has to do humiliating shows at 12-year-olds to get them to buy war bonds. But while on a mission in Italy, the new Captain America hears that his old friend Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan) has been captured behind enemy lines, and he decides to go rogue, rescue his friend and take on Hydra by himself.

The film's biggest flaw is that it's narrative is a little jumpy and episode-like. There are several action scenes that feel almost like climaxes in themselves. And then the actual climax doesn't awe in the way that one would expect. The flashback structure makes the whole romance subplot of the film essentially a tragedy from the get-go. The thing feels just like a prologue, which it actually is, for this summer's The Avengers. It works as a stand-alone story as well, but a bit worse than other Marvel movies. For us Marvel fanboys, luckily the film has several logically placed winks and nods. Tony Stark's father Howard (Dominic Cooper) plays a major part, also giving Cap his iconic vibranium shield. Nick Fury's comic book-version's war buddies, The Howling Commandos, also appear.

★★★

Summer Preview

It will be quite the summer of big blockbusters yet again. I love brainless entertainment, but alas, way too many big-budgeted brainmelters tend to, well, suck. Here's my own, unaligned, view on whether this summer's films will be any good or whether they will make any money. They are arranged by the US opening date, so you should check just when are they actually released in your own home country.

May 6th

Thor
Director: Kenneth Branagh
Studio: Marvel, Paramount (distribution)

Verily, prepare for battle! Thor is probably my favorite Marvel character that hasn't been featured in a film yet. Although the character and his universe are brilliant, I can understand why it might be a hard sell for the reality- and technology-based superhero film industry.

Thor is the God of Thunder who fights wrongs with his enchanted Uru hammer Mjolnir at both his magical home world Asgard as well as in our home world Midgard. Thor also speaks in strange Shakespearean dialect, which probably sold the concept to world's biggest W.S. fanboy Kenneth Branagh. But alas, ye ol' trash talk has been considerably toned down for the movie. Initially I was also disappointed on the design of the film, as it looks nothing like the viking architecture. But I've since come to terms that it is more representative of Jack Kirby's art, so let's hope the story is also representative of the craziness of his battle scenes as well as the dialogue would be representative of Stan Lee's soap opera storytelling. The trailer looks pretty good, with kickass action and a suitable amount of humour for a film this crazy. The awesomeness extends to the casting as well, as we have Anthony Hopkins playing Odin (essentially the Jewish idea of God - vengeful, petty and easily enraged) and most deliciously Idris Elba playing the Norse warrior Heimdall.  The film will be worth seeing at least because that part of the casting will bug the hell out of some batshit insane neo nazis. Have at thee! Can we have Matt Damon, Danny Trejo and Steven Seagal as the Warriors Three in the sequel?

Predicted Stars: ****
Box Office Win/Fail?: Win!

May 20th

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
Director: Rob Marshall
Studio: Disney

I didn't hate the PotC sequels as much as the rest of the world, yet I still don't carry much enthusiasm for another installment. At least this time around they aren't out to make the world's most expensive epic, which is a good start. The continuing misadventures of Jack Sparrow should allow for all sorts of adventures, and it's good that the franchise has gotten a fresh director to bring out a new vision. It's just a pity that that director of Rob Marshall, maker of... not really anything worth mentioning. Some crappy musicals and a racist melodrama, basically. Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio keep on scriptin'. I would and will only watch this for Ian McShane's performance as Blackbeard.

Predicted Stars: **
Box Office Win/Fail: Kids may still like the series, but I'll still go for Mildly Disappointing, here. 

May 27th

The Hangover: Part II
Director: Todd Phillips
Studio: Warner Bros.

Comedy sequels are usually not as funny as the first ones. As the first Hangover was based on various extremities, this can (and probably will) top it in that category and find some even more extreme antics for a boys night out. The setting in Bangkok strongly promises this. Let's hope it is still funny. The first one also had the advantage of being a sleeper hit, as this one is being advertized as a big hit from scratch. So it has that against it. Also, Zach Galifianakis has proved that he can be really, really irritating as well as funny and cuddly, so it's a fine line we're balancing here. Oh, and the celebrity cameos? They've really been done to death as a comedy form all ready. It doesn't work for New Simpsons episodes, I doubt it will work here.

Predicted Stars: ***
Box Office Win/Fail? Win.

Kung Fu Panda 2
Director: Jennifer Yuh
Studio: DreamWorks Animation

I liked the first one, but milking the franchise for too long is what ruined Shrek and it's initial film was better. Oh, DreamWorks. Will you ever learn?

Predicted Stars: **
Box Office Win/Fail?: Win. Folks like CGI critters.

June 3rd

X-Men: First Class
Director: Matthew Vaughn
Studio: 20th Century Fox



The X-Men movies have had a patchy history with movie executives, and the biggest fear concerning the latest installment is the fact that it was produced super-fast in a single year. Well, that and the series' weird continuity.  Nevertheless, Matthew Vaughn seems like a good bet to helm a superhero film, even though and because his last film was Kick-Ass, which took a hearty laugh at them. This also has a groovy premise, as it's the first Marvel film which takes place at the same time the original comic was published - in the swinging '60s.

The Hellfire Club is also a fascinating team of villains to have and they seem to be perfectly cast. Also Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy should have the right amount of charisma to pull off portraying the young Professor X and Magneto. But another problem is the series' odd fixation to throw as many mutants as possible to any given film. Now, it may give the film an epic quality, but the viewer can't really emotionally invest in too many heroes. And Havok, Banshee et al always seemed to be real C-list teammembers to me. I wonder why only Beast and Mystique are around from this "First Class" in the original X-trilogy. Could this film end with a surprising massacre?

Predicted Stars: ***
Box Office Win/Fail: Win at least in the toy merchandize business markets.

June 10th

Super 8
Director: J.J. Abrams
Studio: Paramount, Amblin



Abrams is a master in keeping the details of his blockbusters under wraps. It's true with this one as well. What is know is that the film is supposedly a throwback to the kid-friendly Amblin Entertainment films (produced and/or directed by Steven Spielberg). That's not a bad thing per se. But the title and the trailer reveal that this is another one in the line of mystery konster movies that don't interest me any more after Lost and Cloverfield. Abrams is a good director, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of a doubt, but I'm still not holding too high hopes on this.

Predicted Stars: ***
Box Office Win/Fail: I think this might be a surprise Fail. Other, bigger films, with which people know exactly what they're getting, might steal Super 8's thunder. Recent years have seen plenty of kid's adventure films fail anyway.

June 17th

Green Lantern
Director: Martin Campbell
Studio: Warner Bros.



DC has finally started to catch up on Marvel in bringing its characters on the big screen. After Batman and Superman, it is a good call to make a film about a character that has a small universe onto itself. Green Lantern (Ryan Reynolds) is a superhero that's part of an intergalactic Corps that fight evil with rings that can project anything. The problem with DC (compared to Marvel at least) is that most of its flagpole characters don't really have any personalities beyond their superpowers. Nothing could be more boring than their civilian identities. The same rings true with Green Lantern, who's just another big boyscout character. Thus, it seems they have had to steal the characteristics of Tony Stark to make GL a little more appealing for the movie. I'm not really sold on this one. But I like Ryan Reynolds as much as is allowed for a straight man, Martin Campbell can be a heck of a action director, and the idea of Space Interpol seems cool enough. It will be fun to see weird aliens dressed in Halloween costumes, at least. Let's hope for the best.

Predicted Stars: ***
Box Office Win/Fail?: The crazy alien worlds and merciless Iron Man copying might affect the film, and its marketing hasn't been up to task on the Marvel films, so I'm going to say it's going to go with Lukewarm.

June 24th

Cars 2
Directors: John Lasseter, Brad Lewis
Studio: Disney, Pixar

The least possible excitement I could probably get from an upcoming Pixar movie would be if they made a sequel to their single most (and only) unoriginal, obnoxious and boring film. Which is exactly what they did. I hate Cars and as much as I try to think about it, I can't really see how the sequel could one-up the predecessor Toy Story style. The franchise is ultimately flawed: the world is creepy, and supports excessive consumption and the characters as annoying and racist as the worst comic sidekicks George Lucas and Michael Bay ever imagined. I won't see myself watching this ever. The whole film also reeks of having been made while thinking about all the merchandizing money. I blame Disney executives, not Pixar. At least they'll deliver something genuinely interesting next year.

Predicted Stars: **
Box Office Win/Fail: Are you kidding me? It's probably the most profitable film of the year.

July 1st


Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Director: Michael Bay
Studio: Di Bonanventura Pictures, Paramount



Bwa ha ha ha! The robots will have mullets this time!

Predicted stars: *
Box Office Win/Fail?: Win. People will go on paying for Michael Bay movies, no matter what he does that should keep them away.

July 15th

Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows: Part 2
Director: David Yates
Studio: Village Roadshow Pictures, Warner Bros.



I haven't really followed the films from Part 4 on. I feel the film versions only diminish the joy I got from reading them (once, I might add). So this is the last one in the slavishly faithful series so it probably should be the finale that the series deserves. The trailer looks fine and I heard Part I was decent too. Good for the people that have the patience for these movies. It's probably one of the biggest hits of the summer.

Predicted Stars: ***
Box Office Win/Fail: WIN

July 22nd

The First Avenger: Captain America
Director: Joe Johnston
Studio: Marvel, Paramount (distributor)

One has to wonder why this wasn't put out on the 4th of July? Did they think Transformers was too much of a threat. As I'm not American, Cap certainly isn't among my favorite Marvel heroes. He's too goody two-shoes when he should have the same flaws as America has - rudeness, nosiness, seriously right-wing by his philosophy, being overweight and fighting before thinking. Nevertheless, I became intrigued of this when it was revealed that his adventure takes place during WWII, when the character was first concieved. But then again, the film isn't allowed to use Nazis as villains as a visible Swastika would terminate the toy merchandize. The choice to put the blandest of bland directors Joe Johnston to direct this also doesn't fare well. At least the film has Tommy Lee Jones and Hugo Weaving.

Predicted Stars: **
Box Office Win/Fail?: Win in the US, Fail Internationally.

July 29th

Cowboys & Aliens
Director: Jon Favreau
Studio: Universal, DreamWorks



Besides Thor, my money for the most entertaining film of the summer is are on this film.  I love westerns and having Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford do one seems like a dream come true. To have some aliens thrown to the mix seems like the frosting on the cake. It really is just another one of those ridiculously awsome internet-spurned pairings, but hell if that doesn't seem like a good match. Harrison Ford hasn't been in a kick-ass movie since Air Force One, so he needs this (I'd say he did kick ass in the latest Indy, but the movie as a whole wasn't too hot). Daniel Craig isn't sure whether he'll play James Bond ever again so he needs this. Director Jon Favreau has fallen from the favour of Marvel so he needs this. If everyone involved will want this to be good, then it should bloody well be good, then.

Predicted Stars: ****
Box Office Win/Fail: This has a danger of not being based on any previous property, so it might be a hard sell. I do hope this has a quality that will sell the film, but I fear people will rather flock to see Transformers 3.

The Smurfs
Director: Raja Gosnell
Studio: Sony Pictures

Yawn. Another Alvin and the Chipmunks -style CGI- and live action mixture. Y'know. For kids. Everyone in Hollywood (and probably in America) seems to have forgotten the Smurfs lived in medieval times in the original comics, not modern. At least Hank Azaria seems oddly adapt for playing Gargamel. Expect a lot of jokes about farting (called "smurfing" this time) and blue pieces of shit.

Predicted Stars: *
Box Office Win/Fail: Win, as much as it pains me. I really don't trust audiences to go for quality, do I?

August 5th

Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Director: Rupert Wyatt
Studio: 20th Century Fox



Having the world come to an end and go on gritty and all rebooted led to good box office scores on The Terminator franchise. So naturally the Hollywood suits figured that they'd do the same to the Planet of the Apes. It's a reboot and gritty origin story. I would've rather had the musical version. I also myself believe that the Apes should've been left in the 60's and 70's. I really can't be bothered with this one. I have a feeling a lot of moviegoers think the same way about this.

Predicted Stars: **
Box Office Win/Fail: I really don't think this has too much going for it. Fail.

August 19th

Conan the Barbarian
Director: Marcus Nispel
Studio: Lionsgate, Nu Image, Millennium Films, Paradox Entertainment



"Conan the Barbarian 2011" is actually the #1 searchword with which people come across this blog. So I promise here and now to do a review of the film when it opens. That being said, I still haven't gotten my hopes up. It's not a bad choice to close the summer period, at least if you're like me and enjoy brutal barbarians steal precious diamonds, attract skimpy-dressed ladies and fight monsters.

Predicted Stars: **
Box Office Win/Fail?: As it has no big stars, no big sale, and it has alienated the fanbase with its wussy PG-13 rating, I'm going to think the box office will only be good if the film is very good. And I have my doubts.

Fun in -10

It's the darkest, most stressful time of the year. But many of the most fun films ever made take place at Christmas. Movies like Die Hard, Gremlins, Lethal Weapon and Silent Night, Deadly Night. So I figured it would be suitable to take a look at some of the films meant to be fun released this year. Now, I will do a best of the year list nearer to the end of this year (after all, there's still about 5 % of the year left). This post will feature some action movies that we watch just for fun. They aren't probably good enough to get to my end-of-the-year list, but I can still rate them by their funness, right?

The A-Team
Director: Joe Carnahan

The A-Team (c) 2010 20th Century Fox

First stop is the film version of the TV series about a crack commando unit I used to watch every sunday morning on reruns. Despite this, I never had any idea what was the crime our heroes didn't commit, but were accused of, which made them survive as soldiers of fortune. Not surprisingly, this remake is all about that subject, as it tells the orgin of (cue machine gun shots) ...The A-Team. And I still couldn't care less about the plot. The film's strengths are the same as the series': Charismatic lead actors and stupidly complicated plans to accomplish everything. And of course, as is suitable for a summer blockbuster, a bunch of stuff blowing up.

I suppose the morale of the story is that military should be privatized and bureaucratic ladders cut down. But one can also see why Mr T refused to have anything to do with the film. In the series, the character he used to play, B.A. Baracus, is a sworn pacifist. I don't think the A-Team ever actually killed anyone, even though they are soldiers of fortune. In the movie, much of the running time this same status quo is kept. But before the finale, Liam Neeson gives Baracus (played by Quinton "Rampage" Jackson") an idealistic speech about how one must be prepared to fight for what's right, and quotes Gandhi as saying this. As the film takes place after USA has withdrawn its troops from Iraq, the message coudn't probably be clearer.

Fun: ★★★★
Film: ★★★

Iron Man 2
Director: Jon Favreau



I might be more forgiving to this film if they would've kept this awesome opening scene instead of the Spider-Man and Se7en copying vengeance montage there is in its place.

I had high hopes for Iron Man 2, as I think its predecessor was one of the funnest action films of the Naughties and could balance between light-hearted humour and massive explosions pretty niftly. It was all carried by it's boyish charm. the sequel promised more of everything, but bigger, as they usually do. And while everything seems to be OK on the surface - dialogue's still good, action is kick-ass, soundrack has AC/DC and The Clash on it - there is something amiss in the film.

It might be because the sequel tries to juggle so many stuff at once. There's Tony Stark's vunerability to his battle suit, which brings him ever closer to death and alcoholism. There's his quarrels with the US Military over the ownership of his technology and with a rival arms manufacturer Sam Rockwell (who is excellent as a puny douchebag). There's a vengeful character from his father's past (Mickey Rourke), who seems to have a one-up in creating battlesuit technology. There's his relationship with his assistant Gwyneth Palthrow, and him making her a new CEO of his company so he can deal with all the shit mentioned above. And finally, there is some pointless bullshit about the secret SHIELD organization testing Stark for the Avengers initiative to connect the film to the upcoming Avengers blockbuster. Iron Man is one of the rare superhero films where I'd rather watch the man behind the mask than the actual superhero himself. There is actually pretty little Iron Man action in the film. And two times out of three it's all very good. But the end fight feels a little anticlimatic, just like last time. It's a little worrying, since director Jon Favreau is no Pixar genius. Does he actually have any more tricks up his sleeve for the third part?

Fun: ★★★
Film: ★★★

Machete
Directors: Robert Rodriguez, Ethan Maniquis



Ah, I've waited long to see Machete. And had such bad luck doing so. When the Night Visions-prize winning mexploitation finally rolled on the screen, my expectations were as high as Cheech Marin on his glory days. And I was let down, even though the film isn't exactly bad.

Like Iron Man 2, Machete has had to cram way too much stuff into it. Everything that was in the Grindhouse fake trailer has to be there, as well as meaty enough roles for every one of the impressive ensemble cast. Even though this is the first film where Danny Trejo's starring, he still feels like a bit-part player. But he does deliver. I was surprised to notice that Machete the character actually isn't depicted as the sharpest tool in the shed. But then again, he gets double-crossed so often, and seems to always aim to look good killing, rather than efficient, that he is bound to be. Also entertaining after way too long are Robert DeNiro, Don Johnson, Michelle Rodriguez and Steven Seagal, who finally got a role insane enough for him. Yet the anti-US border politics threads are way too hardhandedly delivered for a ridiculous exploitation flick and some of the battle scenes, particularly the one in the end, are too sloppily directed. There are some fun scenes not featured on the trailer (like the one featuring a turkey thermometer), but not nearly enough. I would've been happier with just the trailer, yet it's clear other people enjoy this more, so it's good that it got made after all.

Fun: ★★★★ for newcomers, ★★ for people who have seen Grindhouse
Film: ★★★

Predators
Director: Nimród Antal

Predators (c) 2010 Troublemaker Studios

So Robert Rodriguez didn't even direct Machete alone. Is he too busy or what? Unlike the old times where he released one action film and one kids' film per year, he brought us two action films this year. And the first one he didn't even direct, just produced and helped to write.

I am a Predator apologist. I think the first film in the series is one of the best action films ever made and I enjoy the hell out of the batshit insane Predator 2. The experience of watching AvP films was softened a little because they had Predators in them. But somehow, I didn't expect that much from this film. And unlike Machete, it managed to take me by surprise. It was quite good!

In a nod to the first film, the action takes place in an actual jungle once again. This time, the soldiers have been specifically brought there to be hunted down. By evil pussy-faced aliens. There is a nice international variety to the fighters this time around, and they react in a different way on all the slaughter going on around them. The Predators themselves are kept mostly at shadows. We don't learn much new about them we didn't already know and maybe this is for the best. Some characters are better when left a little mysterious.

Predators isn't still anywhere near the goodness of the first film. The characters are too heavily archetypical to become anywhere near more interesting than the dogmeat they are. In the first Predator, this was accomplished with very little dialogue and just short scenes. I would've also hoped some more (or at least some) humour in the film too. It's nice that the Predators are taken seriously, but the first one had the best macho bullshit ever written and this one only raises a smile when the action gets insane enough. Make wittier dialogue! Machete had some good quotes, at least.

Fun: ★★★★
Film: ★★★ 1/2

Piranha 3D
Director: Alexandre Aja

Piranha 3D (c) 2010 Dimension Films

And last, we come to probably the funnest of them all. For once, this is true exploitation instead of something trying hard to be. This is seen also on the decision to convert the film in post-production to 3D, which is a cheap gimmick which allows the producers to raise ticket prices. But I digress.

Piranha 3D is an unashamedly chauvinistic film. The first half shows big-breasted ditz's and moronic douches party out at a lake and the latter half shows them being ripped to sheds by prehistoric fishes as well as various accidents caused by mass panic. Unlike with action films, with horror I like the fact that the more ridiculous the premise is, the straighter it must be played. And Piranha manages to balance just right on the line between goofy and obnoxiously self-aware. Aja as a talented horror-director even manages to create one scene with actual suspense, even though to call the characters two-dimensional would be an insult to the Pong bats.

Returning to the previous rant, the biggest fault of the movie is the crappy 3D, which is probably the worst I've ever seen. Mostly the just looks like ViewMaster slides, with flat characters lined in different depths. but occasionally it gets a lot worse, as objects are sloppily cut and their outlines exist in two different dimensions at the same time. Even the supposedly flat lake seems as round as the whirlpool from the opening scene never left. Even though I enjoyed the film, I'll probably think twice before wasting my hard-earned money on another 3D film converted in post-production.

Piranha: ★★★★
3D: ★

The Super 00's

The Best Superhero Films of the 2000s - Part V of a series

The Dark Knight (c) 2008 Warner Bros.

One would be amiss to dismiss superhero movies as a genre. They have really risen up during the last decade, mostly because they have made tons of money. They have partially made the classic one-man-army action movies obsolete. Their heroes may be powerful, but they are ordinary and vunerable at the same time. It is easier to identify oneself with Spider-Man than with John Rambo. As nowadays war movies have to be serious and westerns don't sell any more, it's the last of the classic boy's own adventures the young 'uns still have.

In fact, a superhero movie has in a way become the new century's answer to westerns. The stories in both bear strong similarities, namely in that they usually deal with an individual that brings order to chaos. The superhero genre's movies usually follow a tight pattern, that leaves few twists. As they are made to be franchises from the first film on, they can take time to deal with origins in the first, on why to sacrifice oneself for the innocent in the second and the darker side in the third.

In case you didn't figure already, I really dig the genre. I am a nerd, and mentally on the level of a 14-year-old, so there's that. But for children's movies, the recent superhero movies have given plenty to chew even for adults. To say there's something wrong with the genre essentially is to go on complaining about how superheroes are essentially stupid or how bendy the movies' logics are. Honestly, some people are such boring grumps. The studios have gotten great independent directors to do the films of the popular characters. The risk must be smaller than in completely original big-budget films as the superheroes' names are already familiar to large audiences. Thus the films practicaly sell themselves. The genre is divided enough that I've in purpose left the superhero movies out from my other lists. What troubles me is that most of the good superhero movies feature male protagonists, while Catwoman, Elektra, etc. are usually crap. I wonder why Hollywood can't make reasonable female protagonists.

So what follows is a sort-of top ten of superhero movies of the decade.

Batman Begins
2005, Dir. Christopher Nolan



In advance this was claimed to be hyper-realistic. Not so. It simply has left the Tim Burton-fantasy world and Joel Schumacher neon-vomit behind it, and happens solely in the clinical Nolan-verse. Simply because it doesn't have any elements which couldn't exist in our world doesn't make it realistic. It is the only Batman film to fully explore, what makes the character tick, and intimidation is the name of the game. It's great that as rare as it is for a superhero movie, the protagosist is morally a bit ambiguos. This will be more properly examined in the sequel. I love the scenes that are like a horror movie for petty criminals. The final third is pretty generic super hero stuff, but this is a huge step into the direction Nolan has headed head first to this day.

Big Man Japan (Dai Nipponjin)
2007, Dir. Hitoshi Matsumoto



Oh man, this would actually fit more into comedy or sci-fi, but seeing as I forgot to include it, here it is. It fits the superhero bill good, too, as it is about a normal schmuck, who occasionally heads to a power plant to get electrocuted. This makes him to grow into a giant and battle some utterly surreal monsters. It is shot as a fake mockumentary and the comedy comes from settings and enviroments. The jokes are hilariously underplayed. Even the bad CGI is utilized well to this purpose. And the main character sure is a lovable loser, working at a dangerous job and hated by the people he has sworn to protect. He is also in his father's shadow, who was a national hero in the same job. This is a truly batshit crazy Japanese Kaiju comedy, and telling anything more about it would just ruin the surprises. And you wouldn't believe me if I did. Find it.

The Dark Knight
2008, Dir. Christopher Nolan


By the way, this trailer has become a classic of it's own and one of the most well-known of all time. It has countless variations on YouTube.

Everyone loves this, as no one could've anticipated just how good this was going to be. Like Burton's Batman Returns, this is one of the rare occasions where the director didn't have to do any pandering for children, and could introduce adult themes into the superhero world. Nolan uses a bit of all sorts of great recent adult films in building this film's athmosphere. It's part Heat, part Se7en, all post-9/11, creating an astonishingly cold and grey dog-eat-dog world. But some goodness is to find in even the streets of Gotham. This surely was THE blockbuster with brains AND balls before Inception rolled along. It is a bit structurally uneven, but nevertheless damned entertaining. And not to mention the best description of American traumas in the George W. Bush era. It is a product of its time, but one that one would picture future people looking back on.

Hulk
2003, Dir. Ang Lee



This is an underrated gem. Granted, a comic-book like telling of the story of a great green ogre and a slow-moving father-issues drama aren't the pair made in heaven, but they do work surprisingly well together. This is a film so dark, that the gritty reboot looked tame in comparison. It's almost a shame this has to be a franchise movie of a popular comic book character. If it was an original creation, everyone would hail this film. Hulk's a too stupid a character to deserve a treatment this deep. Nick Nolte steals the show as the father from hell, and the movie's creations, such as Hulk-dogs, are pretty sick. The film could use a little more humour, though.

Alas, Hollywood saw that this didn't have enough action and made a sequel so stupid Hulk himself could've wrote it. In the upcoming Avengers movie they will take away the only thing that made it even a bit interesting, Edward Norton.

The Incredibles
2004, Dir. Brad Bird



Even though Pixar showed how to do it first, Hollywood couldn't tell a proper story of a superhero group as a family dynamic (Fantastic Four - although the first one isn't quite as bad as everyone says) or superheroes in a society that wants to control and limit their powers (Watchmen). The Incredibles succeeds in both of them and manages to be also funny, charming and actually exciting. And to boot, all the family characterizations are pretty spot-on, too.
Brad Bird would've wanted to have a symphatetic character that would've been killed to create an athmosphere of real danger. Pity this didn't materialize. It would've been just another slap to the face of live-action superhero movies, who can't even kill Spider-Man's girlfriend, even though it would be essential to the character. The Incredibles is one of the most sequel-worthy Pixar movies to my mind, but given how much we have other superhero movies, it's probably better they stick to more original subjects.

Iron Man
2008, Dir. Jon Favreau



It is sad that the blockbusters in the noughties were either so dark, or so crap, that whenever a decent light-hearted romp appeared, it generated a huge buzz. So was it with this and the first Pirates of the Caribbean. But still the studio execs force-feed us that Dark Knight-light crap over and over again. Yuck.

But this, along with the Spider-Man franchise, are the closest people have gotten on to realize how the Marvel characters work. Superheroism is supposed to be fun as well, as witnessed by Tony Stark in this. And the whole cast, including Jeff Bridges, seems to have had heaps of fun making this, too. The plot is generic and the story has a few worrying implications (can Iron Man truly kill terrorists just like that without anyone ever addressing the issue?), but the quality one-liners cover the stuff pretty good. Plus, the characters have actual development and SOME moral issues during the movie as well. The film embraces it's boy's own roots by not only centering the movie on technology, partying and hot chicks, but also totally metal music like AC/DC and Black Sabbath. Iron Man Rocks! I hope the sequel does too, haven't seen it yet.

Spider-Man
2002, Dir. Sam Raimi



This is a real cornerstone of the genre, side-by-side with Donner's Superman and Burton's Batman. It set the genre's archetype for this decade. Thus the film has been parodied, referenced and reproduced dozens of times already. It, as the character does, deals with an everyman, who gets the gift of great powers. Like people would, he first tries to exploit them for profit. But the bitter irony of not taking action gives him a punishment by getting an innocent man, his father-figure, killed. He wovs to use his powers for good as you might've guessed.

The film tells a quite good growing-up story as it is, even without the explosions. I also love the Green Goblin villain by Willem Dafoe, although I would've liked to save him later in the franchise to get him to be more vicious. Now he has little chance of getting the girlfriend or the mother-figure killed.

I have made it clear in this blog that even though I quite like the film, I don't think it is the Ultimate Spider-Man film. 1 & 2 feel like Burton's Batman films compared to the better, Nolan films yet to come. Let's have them, Marc Webb!

Spider-Man 2
2004, Dir. Sam Raimi



This, however, is at least closer to it. The only problems with this stem from the poor romance-dialogue (MJ's monologue at the end is particularly cringe-worthy). Also Spidey isn't nearly as concerned about maintaining his secret identity as he is in the comics. But hey, enough about the problems. What works:
This is a romance film about two people who can't work out how to be with each other and aren't sure of the other's feelings, either. This doesn't overplay the action, and has Peter Parker unable to use his powers due to low self-esteem for much of the movie. This leads also to pretty hilarious slapstick scenes. When the action finally arrives, it's pretty kickass, but never forgets who are fighting and what their personalities and dilemmas are. Also once again the villain works very good. I didn't like Dr. Octopus that much in comics, but Alfred Molina's version works fine in this. It's just that I would wish him to be a little more nefarious, too. Like in that Evil Dead 2-homaging surgery scene. Hm. Nevermind.

I'd also like to say, that this one's game version is one of the very, very, very rare tie-in license games that is fun to play.

Unbreakable
2000, Dir. M. Night Shyamalan



Ah, back when M. Night still made somewhat tolerable movies. This is actually a pretty good one, in that many people (including me) didn't realize this was a superhero movie any more than Bruce Willis's character did. It's silent, coldlighted world sold itself pretty well as a real world at the beginning. The end twist makes sense to me in the universe the movie built up to, and it was meant to work as a prelude to two more films of the franchise. Sadly, this tanked, whereas Signs and probably some other crap Shyamalan films have succeeded. The audience isn't always the smartest.

X2: X-Men United
2003, Dir. Bryan Singer



The first X-men film is overrated in my book, and the third one underrated. But everyone gets it that this does it just right. In case you didn't know, the series deals with the society's hatred of people who are different. The intolerance against mutants is compared to hatred against Jews, communists and especially homosexuals. In this the character Iceman "comes out of the closet" with his mutant powers to his family, who react by saying "Have you tried not being a mutant?"

This movie handles the big cast better than it's predecessor. The story's focus is on Wolverine (Hugh Jackman), who will find out more about his past, as hinted out in the first movie. Another primary character is Professor Xavier (Patrick Steward), who is being used against his will as a tool to destroy all mutants. As people often are in these cases in real life too. The bad guy isn't Ian McKellen's Magneto this time, but a greedy general William Stryker. Not only is he power-hungry, he holds a personal grudge against the mutants because of his son, who is also a mutant.

This movie has more action this time, but fortunately it doesn't interfere with the plot. This is how more action movies should be made; the action alongside the story, not only neat CG-sequences. Consequently, the movie's CG is quite nicely made, especially considering the diminishing returns in this series (Wolverine looks as crap as The Phantom Menace). My favorite scene would have to be the lead-up to Magneto's cunning escape from prison. "Never trust a beautiful woman. Especially one that's interested in you". Ian McKellen is easily my favorite villain on this list, surpassing even Heath Ledger's Joker.

Dammit, now I mentioned Him. I tried to write the only Dark Knight review in history that didn't. He did a good job, him.

Spider-Man: A Brand New Day

Is Spider-Man actually in any sort of danger?

Andrew Garfield was just selected to play Peter Parker and his alter-ego, The Amazing Spider-Man. The future movie will feature Parker still in high school and will be directed by (500) Days of Summer's Marc Webb. I have been surprised how much the whole of internet has been s opposed to this whole project. One reason must be that beloved director of the previous three, Sam Raimi, was so suddenly given the sack while developing Part 4.

As I am a huge nerd, I have spent way too much time thinking about the next Spider-Man movie. It's the one franchise I know through and through (although I have tried to catch up with the Marvel universe - I refuse to go to the 90's). Although I have planned out pretty good sequels in my head (Harry Osborn helps create The Scorpion in 3, Kraven hunts the Lizard in 4), I have been pretty easy to please with Sam Raimi's films. Yes, even the treequel. I recognize however, that none of them are perfect Spider-Man movies.

First, Tobey Maguire wasn't probably the best possible actor to play Spider-Man. He's just too serious and part of Spidey's charm is that he hides his nervousness with constant insulting and joking. And while Kirsten Dunst was okay as MJ, the girl next door, she was a far cry (gettit?) from the strong bombshell of the comics. She would've been better as Gwen Stacy, Spidey's great love who was killed by the Green Goblin. But we never got to see that tragic turning point on the big screen because Gobby was disposed in the first movie already.

I recognize the reason Marvel has suddenly decided to reboot the franchise not even 10 years old. Raimi was moving too fast with Spidey's life story. Rumours had been circling around that the fourth movie would've circled around Parker's wedding to Mary Jane Watson . As most people who love Spider-Man are either teenagers or can relate to him as a teenager, this makes him a bit too old for our tastes. Marriage drama isn't as interesting to the focus group as teenage love woes. Marvel recently rebooted the character in comic books from a married teacher to a college student via him having to make a deal with the devil. Let's be glad in the land of movies we can just start fresh without having to resort to that sort of plot gimmicks.

What I especially liked in Raimi's films is his knack for creating symphatetic villains. Although the Vulture isn't one of my favorite villains I would've loved to see what he and John Malkovich would've gotten out of the character. In fact, as a huge fan of Con Air, I would love to still see Malkovich as Webb's film's villain.

There has been some fear over the choosing of Webb as the film's director as he hasn't showed his action chops. Brother, I got news for you. In a production this big in Hollywood it has no importance whatsoever how good a director can direct action. They will hire the best fight choreographers, CGI artists, cinematographers etc. anyway. What is needed is an understanding of the characters, the skill to create believable romances, and a sense of humour. And Webb proved he has all of these in (500) Days of Summer. I also approve the casting decision of Garfield. I liked him in The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, although he didn't actually get much to work with there.

However, there are a couple of worrying things, too. I don't know where the "gritty" reboot rumour originates but I hope it is just a rumour. Darkness doesn't fit to a movie about a guy in tights who shoots webbing at people made of sand and mad scientists. The other worrying part about the film is that James Cameron is a consultant in the film. I hope that only means him giving tips to Webb of how to use the 3D film camera. He obviously doesn't know anything about believable romances and the Spider-Man script he wrote in the 90's is reportedly laughably bad. His script has Spider-Man shouting to Electro "I'm gonna kill you, you motherfucker!" Hardly kid's movie stuff.

Finally, I won't believe we will be given anything that has already been made good. So I'm guessing no origins or Uncle Ben in the next one. They didn't go all the way to the start in the other Marvel reboot, the Incredible Hulk either, remember. So here's putting my hope to Webb. You will do whatever a spider can.