The Hobbit: the Battle of the Five Armies

I have a feeling Peter Jackson is pretty fed up with Middle-earth now.

Although the third Hobbit chapter will please in terms of standard expectations of production value and entertainment, it is sadly far from any artistic victory. After slowly digesting the Hobbit as a trilogy, this is also the case as a whole – amplified by a recent re-watch of the LOTR movies, which are highly superior. Granted, they do have a superior source material – the masterful epics of the ring, versus the imaginative, and messy children’s pamphlet where Tolkien only started to brush on the greatness he would reveal in his subsequent opus. Thus, it may be unfair to judge Peter Jackson`s too harshly, especially when his takeover as director was an act of pure CPR, after Guillermo del Toro left off, inexplicably to prioritize the unnecessary Pacific Rim. Jackson, previously vowing to have left Middle-earth for good as a director, can hardly have had the same motivation he bore for his previous Tolkien project.
In retrospect it think it is sad that del Toro took off, as it would be interesting to see his vision of Middle-Earth. Although only showing glimpses of utilizing his undoubted talent to the full, del Toro has a great visual signature, showcased in Pan`s Labyrinth and the Hellboys, which would  seem perfect for interpretation of Tolkien`s world. Alas, we will never know, and we got the safe version, with the same visual language of the LOTR movies, only more uninspired, more CGI and lacking in vision.

The thing that hit me the most after walking out of the cinema, was how tired I was of the barrage of clichés that Jackson blatantly pours upon us. I am not even speaking of the fact that Gandalf almost has lifted all his lines from the Lords of the Rings. The worst example is evident in the scenes with Thorin`s dragon fever – the terrible use of flashback with delay, similarly used in The Return of the King, with sam`s “Carry it for a while – carry it for while – carry it for a while”, “share the load – share the load – share the load”. Even for a cliché-revelling, B-movie buff as myself, these cheapest of instruments should only be used in the utmost end of need.

Having said that, if donning the lower expectancy goggles, this is nevertheless an entertaining romp, and Jackson has wisely managed to limit his megalomania to under 2 and half hours.

The eponymous battle however, is too messy, and poorly orchestrated in a dramaturgic sense. Questions like; where did to army of the elves go? Giant earth-tunneling worms, circus freak trolls – oh but why?
Jackson seems to have lost sight of the goal, and is pumping long balls mindlessly into the penalty area, but happily he manages to improve his power play in the end, and the major showdowns with Legolas, Bolg, Thorin and Azog are impressive. Even enough to forget the dreaded comic relief Alfrid.

The ending provides decent closure and farewell with the characters, although as many has pointed out, we do not feel to very acquainted with most of the dwarves, and even not Bilbo.

As a whole, it comes down to expectations, more than anything. Should one use the masterful LOTR trilogy as a quality template, or just consider it a bit of a silly romp, as the source material? This distinction seems to have been difficult for the director as well, considering his choice to make three movies on a massive epic scale for an adult audience, with the battle of good and evil on one side, and a head-butting dwarf riding into battle on an oversized pig on the other.

In terms of character, my jury is still out, but my loyalty to the mythos (translated; even a bad  Middle-earth movie is a good one) leaves it, at least for now, 4 and a half Bruce-noggins.

Jetlagged: Nights of horror

For those who have experienced transatlantic air travel, the horrors of jet lag are widely known, and very ghastly. Having recently returned from Mexico, the scenic route, I have indeed suffered the probing antennae of this amalgam dread of coma and insomnia. What then else to do, but to absorb the back catalogue of horror movies compiled the latter months, rendered unwatchable by the minutial necessities of family life? Nothing!

Let`s start in a totally random order, with The Purge: Anarchy. Widely commented as superior to its predecessor, I held aspirations of exactly that. And praised be, they were fulfilled. I liked the first one better than it`s IMDB score, and in the sequel, they manage to increase all the right levels, especially the ammo-levels. This is actually more frenzied shootout-action than horror.

Afflicted: Starting to get pretty fed up with the found footage thing, but this backpackers diary turned out inventive enough to score ok. At first I was certain this was going to be a straightforward, tragic document of the last journey of a terminal tourist, but they had me going – well done.

Another handheld piece, As Above, So Below, takes us into the catacombs of Paris in search of ancient, occult artefacts. The acting doesn`t knock it out of the park, but there is enough claustrophobic efficiency here to warrant a score on the positive side.

Third and final found footage, The Sacrament, an uncredited based-on-a-true-story, follows a group of journalists into an isolated religious cult to unveil cracks in the seemingly euphoric surface. A good turn from Gene Jones as the charismatic cult father. On the whole a solid delivery, nothing spectacular, but the true story basis adds extra effect.

Just a final commentary to the found footage-subgenre: The common denominator increasingly now seems to be cheating. The cameras follow the protagonist in improbable and impossible views, and dramatic scores are used for effect. If you can`t do it  without betraying the rules of the documentary genre, why just don`t go conventional?

Horns is definitely on the conventional side, if that can be said of a story about Harry Potter being accused of offing his girlfriend, and subsequently starts sprouting horns. French horror auteur Alexandre Aja is holding the reins of this blackrom-com-smalltowndrama-whodunnit- mystery, so although demented and at times retarded, you are in store for some good-looking entertainment.

Over to the classic B-movie exploitation creature horror genre, WolfCop is the next one up on my screen, after actually scoring some decent reviews promising cult potential. Sad to say, although it aims hard for the cheek in tongue 70`s gore, sex and sleaze-look, it comes off cheaper and stinkier than Blackulas used underwear. The only thing worth watching, is, like in Zombeavers, some scenes of topless gratuity, if you are a superficial male ( which you probably are to be watching this movie in the first place). Sadly that, and the presence of a smooth black Prius, identical to mine, is the only thing of worth in this piece of crap. Everything sucks here, from the terrible dialog and the failed humour to the rubber zombeavers, which, when in attack mode, are literally thrown into the frame of view.

In the last two outings in this turn the keyword is temptation. Both are illuminating the theme; how far are we willing to go for money? Both have working class family guys, who just have been laid off from work, and generally in financial malaise, being lured into a Cash Price game, and the bigger the sin, the bigger the win. The best of these are 13 Sins, showcasing some decent innovation and inspired gore. Cheap Thrills, however fail in its attempts of comedy, and both plot and the actors/characters are too uninteresting.

 

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

When the Rise of the Planet of the Apes hit the screens in 2010 I, like many others were surprised by its quality, not only limited to the impressive technical features. Like its predecessor, Dawn of the of the Apes represents the absolute state of the art of mo-cap CG technology. As they are so integral to this movie, I must begin with effects. And, I must say that I am at times totally baffled of what they have managed to do here. The apes are extremely impressive, and the faces show true emotion, at a level with the real humans in the movie. The Orangutan is virtually photo-real, I can`t find a flaw. A lot of the credit must of course go to the actors that captured the motions of the simians.
This is in spite of the fact that the very first scene left me a bit in doubt. This is scene where we are introduced to the apes as they are hunting deer, and also have an altercation with another large predator of the forest. This is a scene where the creators obviously want to showcase all they can do, but they make the same mistakes as many before them.  It is about suspension of disbelief.The bottom line; do not put a CG animal in a real movie, unless it looks REAL. The elephant at the end of Gangs of the New York, anyone?
Fortunately this is the only example of the effects faltering, and any technical disbelief is gradually and thoroughly suspended, as I accept the simian characters as genuine counterparts to their live human adversaries.

The story is set in a more or less post-apocalyptic world, where the human population has been ravaged by “the simian flu” since we departed from the previous chapter, and where the apes have multiplied and established colonies. As a group of humans stumbles upon such a colony tension grow and a clash becomes inevitable.

There is nothing ingenious about the build-up, but it is solid and well-crafted storytelling. The story echoes the classic tale of indigenous tribes against the white man, indians vs settlers. And as the good films in that genre, here there are good and bad on both sides, leading blood to be spilled and massive, epic carnage to ensue.

As the viewer is bound to feel sympathy to characters on both sides, and especially since the apes after all are animals, which makes their hardship even sting worse in our eyes, this becomes a proper emo-action – Fortunately in the good sense of the word.

The stage is well set for the next chapter, and as the final shot of the film fades out with a grief-stricken primate visage, brimming with emotion to rival the most animate of any live Homo sapiens, I am left with a digital erection that will last, if not until the next movie, well into the new year.

Gone Girl

Love is a dish best served cold.

Part thriller, part romance, part social satire, David Fincher`s latest commodity is as elaborate and intelligent as you would expect.

The story, as the title suggests, springs from the conspicuous disappearance of Amy (Rosamund Pike) from the life of husband Nick (Ben Affleck).

Piece by piece, it is revealed to us, what started as a picture perfect relationship, starts ripping in the seems. This is, at least initially, a whodunnit, and Fincher eloquently shows us fragments of their history as a couple, confusing us as to how, and by whom, the loss of Amy came to pass.

As the book upon which it was based, we are deliberately being played, as to who`s the good and who`s the bad, and this segment of the movie is quite a ride. The truth, as in real life, is grayer, of course, but I like that you get the chance to make up your own mind about the two.

There is also stark media criticism to be found here, as the press and TV quickly turns the case into a witch hunt for the easy prey Nick.

Beforehand, my greatest issues were the two leading actors, of which neither are of my favourites. Ben Affleck basically has two expressions; dead-eye stare, and smirk. Put him in Armageddon, or any rom-com and he will do fine, by his good looks alone, but for any more diverse drama where a multifaceted palette is required, he will fall short. To his defense, I must state I am a fan of the director Affleck. If only he would have the foresight to limit himself to stay behind the camera, as he did in the impressive debut Gone Baby Gone, where he left the acting to his much more interesting and expressive little brother Casey. Whilst Argo, an excellent film, was sadly marred by Affleck`s usual wooden and emotionless presence. This is also the case in Gone Girl, although, like in the Town, this is a role which suits him better.

Rosamund Pike is far, far worse. If Affleck has the dead-eyed stare, Pike suffers from gigantic tin plate eyes syndrome, with the mimicry of a porcelain doll. I have never understood why they put her in A-movies. She even was the worst thing to appear in Doom. D O O M. But, apparently a pretty face is enough.

However, having said that, the actors never destroyed the film for me, and in honesty, these are among the better performances of both, undoubtedly for Pike. They are both suited for their roles in a way, but I generally just can`t avoid being unconvinced by these two actors.

Another problem is the supporting characters. The police officers, are just cardboard figures to me, lacking in depth and strangely idle in their police work. I keep waiting for them to say or do something vital for the plot, but they are just there.

Despite its flaws, the movie is never uninteresting, as we gradually learn the truth, and the final stage of the movie neatly offers several rewarding twists and shocks. There is however never a real feeling of suspense, and I am not sure if there should be. Maybe the movie suffers as much as it gains from its cross-genre-covering ambitions.

The verdict: Smart and elegant, but flabby. I am never bored, but I am never truly engaged either. Would the movie have been better with better actors? most definitely.

4 Bruces on the Campbell scale.

IMDB

The 5 best and the 5 most overrated movies of 2013

2013 was not a year to remember in movie history, but it delivered a few nuggets. Here comes a summary of the best/my favourite movies ( not necessarily the same, an interesting debate for another time), and the most overrated. Why not the most underrated as well, you ask? Well, in my book, vanishingly few movies are underrated, especially on IMDB. Undeserved and hype-affected adoration however, is a big, fat elephant in the room, which I for one would like to address. My theory is kind of based on the Emperor`s New Clothes; no one would like to admit that they are the only who are not seeing that he is fact naked. Or at least, not so well dressed as everyone claims. So when The Dark Knight ludicrously has 9.5 points after a few days, people have a predisposed opinion that it is in fact a masterpiece, and must grant it equal praise, or become the  black sheep, the sourpuss, the despised critic. Well, I guess someone has to be that despised critic.

But let`s start at the top. Here are my favourite five of 2013:

1. Django Unchained

Meta-director Tarantino does the western after his equally successful WW2 treatment. More comedy than ever, something no one but Tarantino could combine with the stark, dark and ofttimes unflinchingly brutal slavery source material.

2. Prisoners

Best thriller of the year by far; dark, twisty about what ordinary people are capable in the face of bereavement, with a great, believable turn from Jackman and Gyllenhaal, especially the latter. The only drawback is the implausible lack of effort from family to intervene in the vengeful atrocities of their close ones.

3.12 Years a Slave

Simply strong and moving, with great performances from Ejiofor, Fassbender and Ny`ongo.Wide-ranging as it should, but still with traces of art house in its lingering, beautiful shots.

4. The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Not perfect, but all in all an excellent Middle Earth rump, with great effects, and some fantastic action sequences. Jackson still has darlingicide issues; the Smaug scene is too long!

5. Man of Steel

The guilty pleasure of the year. Dallas Buyers club, Gravity, Captain Philips among others is better, you may argue, but I left my brain at home and simply had a great two hours in the cinema!

Then, over to the most hype-inflated offerings of the year:

1.The Place Beyond the Pines.

Praised for its original structure of skipping between character perspectives, I found this overlong melodrama not credible and increasingly unengaging.

2.Lone Survivor

All in all, a tolerable war drama, but soaked neck-deep in sticky patriotism. The war scenes are at times powerful, but also at times reaching levels of downhill-rolling, slow-mo stupidity. Plus, the hail America-end, with the pictures of the real heroes, with that terrible, terrible song knocked it down one Bruce.

3.The World`s End

Simply don`t get the Pegg/Wright/Frost humor, and this is the poorest offering so far.

They are not funny, it is not funny, and along with the Apatow-wave, these guys are the most overrated in comedy the recent years.

4.Sightseers

Black comedy is my cup of tea, but this road movie about a dysfunctional couple on a killing spree is pure roadkill. I get the idea, but the two are simply obnoxious and unlikable, and the film is unfunnily violent and at best curious.

5.Fruitvale Station

This is actually an ok movie, but still overrated. It deals with heavy source material, the true story of a police shooting of young, African-american Oscar Grant, but important isn`t necessarily good. The movie trods along, proving that Grant was a normal, somewhat troubled, good-hearted young man until he meet his untimely demise, but I don`t really get the motivation of the movie. How about showing some alternative perspective, what made the shooter tick?

Fury

The new Pitt war vehicle was quite anticipated in my book. Not because of expectations of premium filmmaking, but because decent war movies, especially WW2 ones, are hard to come by. As an average male I have a weak spot for combat action, and a massive well constructed  battle scene is the closest to a filmic orgasm I can get. *ehem*.
Fury depicts the closing act of WW2, as the allied forces are battling their way into a devastated and desperate Hitler Germany.
The mood is set quickly, with bleak images of smoke-veiled battlefields, after which we are introduced to Pitt and his battle-hardened comrades.
To start with the personae, this one does not stray from the cliché mantra. The tank ensemble consist of the hard-ass leader, you have the streetwise hispanic, the (seemingly)semi-retarded red-neck, the believer and soon the innocent recruit, who will be sure to have his coming of age.

In spite of this, the first part of the movie actually overwhelms me, with it`s grittiness, solid setups and acting. Do not expect originality, but there are a couple of strong scenes, where especially the seemingly dehumanized Pitt excels, proving director Ayer`s devotion to showing the true, grim face of war. And; of course the battle scenes are excellent.
Then, gradually, the Hollywood flavour grows stronger in intensity, and then I mean the music. That Ayer and co has put their faith in the total orchestra treatment becomes fairly obvious, composer Steven Price is even let loose in the midst of the battle scenes, as if  the hordes of Greek where hurling themselves upon the walls of Troy. However, in modern, more realistic war scenes, I would dare claim it unusual, and just a tad curious. Price`s Wagnerian themes grow more and more bombastic, and at times he is firing upon us with more artillery then the combined forces on the screen. Also the emotional scenes are heavy with piano and string moods, which we would do better without, relying on the performances, which are adequately strong.
The standout drama scene which it seems Ayer wants you to remember, happens midtime, where Pitt`s Wardaddy and Logan Lerman`s young, stainless Norman, chances upon two German women in their apartment.
This is scene which lets us go deeper into Wardaddy`s layers, and show the alternative aspects of war. There is undoubtedly invested intellectual ballast here, but sadly, you remember the scene for the wrong reasons. I find myself feeling awkward, trying to figure out what is trying to be conveyed. The scene is too long, too clumsily orchestrated and in the dramatic climax, you are not moved.

Overall, the characters continuity and journeys do not convince. For example Jon Bernthal`s Coon-Ass is first being a total, well, coon-ass, to little Norman, and not long after, he is suddenly apologising, which is clearly out of character. Also Norman goes quickly from total pacifism to “f***ing die, nazis!”
Though with sound and realistic beforehand expectations, this is not a dealbreaker. As the war continues, I find myself much more comfortable, and the finale is a massive showdown of epic proportions. That being said, if the beginning of the movie gave me the feeling of Saving Private Ryan, the end is more Rambo. It`s over the top, but madly entertaining.

All in all, a solid action war movie. The set pieces and battle scenes are great, and especially Pitt is solid. When the shooting stops, there is a lot to be desired. The main issue is the identity problem. The movie can`t decide whether to be a pure action movie, or a realistic war drama. If the former is true, a lot more dialogue deadweight should be cut, and if the latter is true, a lot more should be invested in the human department, plus lose the horns  of the Valkyries. But, like Wardaddy hammering away at the gerries from the top of his tank with a 55 mm, although a bit of a bastard, this is an effective bastard, and is in the end worthy of 4.5 Bruces on the Campbell scale.

Links:

IMDB

Soundtrack

Welcome to the Moviexutioner

I love watching movies, and I love dissecting them. My goal with this blog is to express honest reviews, free of hype, political correctness and the greatest beast of all; servility. I am no art movie goon, and I enjoy a blockbuster as much as the next guy. However, production value and big names should not be enough to score 7 stars or more on the IMDB, or say 3 or more in Empire Magazine. With this blog I aim to cut through the hype and adulation, and offer real reviews. Or in other words, simply say my opinion. I for one, would rather be wrong than indifferent. See you soon.