Showing posts with label Brendan Fraser. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brendan Fraser. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

The Last Time: Worst Part Of Monday Is Evaluating The Worst Part Of The Weekend.


The Good: I can't find any.
The Bad: Where to start . . . acting, characters, plot, reversal at the end.
The Basics: Even the presence of decent actors cannot save this poorly presented farce of the business world and the conniving involved in it.


So, I've come to dread Monday mornings, but not for the usual reasons most people do. My weekends are like pretty much any other day, save I have some time away from shipping out orders from Saturday noon until Monday morning. This usually gives me enough time to squeeze in one movie where I'm giving it my full attention, something I am seldom able to do these days, especially with the backlog of reviews I have yet to write. The worst part about Monday morning is that my commitment to not increasing my backlog means I have to first review whatever is freshest in my mind and experience. This means, no matter how bad a film that I just saw was, I have to evaluate it first thing Monday morning. In the case of The Last Time, this means I am left dreading Monday morning.

Ted Riker is a powerhouse salesman at a company where Jamie has just begun working. It's a cutthroat business and Ted has been on top of his sales team for years. While the company is shuttering other offices, Ted's franchise is feeling pressure to perform and Jamie has been falling down as the new recruit. Ted soon finds himself attracted to Jamie's fiancee Belisa and his interest in her drives him to distraction, which may have terrible consequences for the company and Ted.

It didn't take long for this movie to get to the point where I was sitting watching it, shaking my head and saying "This movie is just bad." I mean, within fifteen minutes of the opening of the movie, my stomach was turning with how inane the dialogue was. Riker is a cynic with a foul mouth and his character is so utterly despicable that it's over the top. Michael Keaton plays Ted Riker as a parody of the evil salesman with such nasty disregard for everyone and everything that he mortgages any sense that the character has any ability to back up his arrogance.

Similarly, Brandon Fraser displays none of his acting brilliance as Jamie. No, Fraser plays Jamie with an over-the-top sense of goodness and youthful exuberance that makes him a parody of the Midwestern hayseed. Anyone with any sense of reality can see the moment the movie starts that Jamie could not have gotten where he was going with the sensibilities and naivete that he seems to possess. In a similar vein, the audience fails to believe that Riker could be so maniacal and unlikable and still be such a business powerhouse as he is characterized as.

And, of course, in the course of the film, both characters are exposed for not being who they immediately appear to be. Riker has a heart of gold that has been broken, despite his almost immediate willingness to seduce Belisa. The problem is, the way the movie is written, along with the performances, leads the viewer who has any attention span to conclude early on that all is not as it seems. And by the time the payoff eventually comes, the viewer doesn't care. We've been dragged through ninety minutes of misery and boredom and the truth is, none of the characters are likable or empathetic enough for us to care about.

Writer-director Michael Caleo seems to want to be the next Bryan Singer, by providing an ending instantly reminiscent of The Usual Suspects (reviewed here!). The problem Caleo has in executing his last minute reversal is twofold: 1. By the time it comes, the audience does not care, and 2. The audience has been expecting almost the exact reversal that comes for over an hour, so when it arrives, we are neither surprised nor impressed.

But one of the things that makes The Usual Suspects so very smart and is lacking from The Last Time is that the clues are there for the viewer to see. In this film, the "surprise" ending where the culprits and the true plot are revealed is less a payoff to diligent viewing and more a simple answer to the question of "Who is behind it and why?" In short, anyone with a pulse will be able to tell that Ted Riker is being jerked around and that question is all that remains for much of the movie.

The problem is, it's almost impossible to care about it because none of the characters are believable, interesting, or remotely empathetic. The worst of this is at the climax of the film when one of the characters seems to have a change of heart. One of the characters belongs to something of a Syndicate that seems to specialize in manipulating people like Ted (I'm writing in vague terms so as not to ruin it for those who disregard my advice and watch this piece of crap) and I can buy that. The problem is, the person begins to have a change of heart. This is the same problem I had with Elektra (reviewed here!) where a trained assassin suddenly gets a conscious. If there is a change from what a character has a history of doing, the explanation needs to be made compelling to the audience or else it does not fit. That's the crux of the problem with this story's resolution.

I'm overthinking it, though. This is just a stupid movie. It's poorly constructed, it's poorly acted and it's poorly resolved. On DVD, it's no great shakes with bonuses being a collection of deleted scenes that add nothing to the film and three previews for other movies.

If you like corporate dramas or mysteries, avoid this film. If you want to see a bunch of talented people waste their time in a crappy movie, The Last Time might be for you. For the rest of us, there are better uses of our time.

For other works with Amber Valetta, be sure to check out my reviews of:
The Spy Next Door
Gamer
The Family Man
What Lies Beneath

2/10

Check out how this film stacks up against others I have reviewed by visiting my Movie Review Index Page where the works are reviewed from best to worst!

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Even For A Kid's Movie, Inkheart Underwhelms.


The Good: Moments of character and acting, Special effects
The Bad: Pacing issues, Plot holes, Continuity/editing errors
The Basics: An imaginative concept for a fantasy movie falls flat with a lack of attention to details as Inkheart disappoints.


Note: This review was originally written after a sneak preview of “Inkheart.” I retained all of the original language of the review because this stands as something of a commemoration. A librarian who was one of the few friends I made as an adult went to the preview with me. He and I talked movies all the time and we swapped DVDs. For all of our talk of going out to movies, this remains the only one we actually made it to the theaters to see. He died rather abruptly a little over a year ago and it has taken me this long to get around to do doing some form of commemoration. Pete, you are missed!
-W.L.


There are remarkably few children's movies that I watch, know and love. No, far more often, I find myself cringing because the precepts of the children's movie is better than its execution. There are a few exceptions to this, of course, and in my life, I find I enjoy most the fantasy films that are toned down for children. So, for example, I am a fan of The Princess Bride, Labyrinth (reviewed here!), and I recall liking The Never-ending Story back in the day. But given a chance to attend a screening of Inkheart, I took it because it's what I do as a reviewer.

Now I remember why I so seldom take in movies like this! Inkheart is a good and interesting idea, but it is poorly presented, at least in this version. Based upon a novel (series) by Cornelia Funke and it is worth noting that I have not read the book(s), so this is a very pure review of just the movie. Directed by Iain Softley, Inkheart is an average-at-best children's movie and a thoroughly mediocre film riddled with problematic editing, interesting but derivative special effects, and acting and character development that is good, but ultimately unremarkable.

Mortimer Folchart is a silvertongue, a person born with an innate ability to make what he reads come into reality. Twelve years after discovering he has this talent - with apparently disastrous results - Mo and his daughter Meggie find themselves surviving by wandering Europe fixing books as Mo searches every bookstore he can find for a rare book. And Mo finds the book he is searching for, Inkheart, moments before he is met by Dustfinger, one of the characters from the novel Mo just acquired.

Unsurprised by Dustfinger's appearance, Mo and Meggie ditch him and escape to Italy to meet with Meggie's great aunt Eleanor, a woman obsessed with books. But Mo is tracked there and goons hired by the mysterious and dangerous Capricorn soon descend upon the manor and capture Meggie, Mo and Eleanor. Taken to Capricorn's castle, faced with a menagerie of creatures from works of fiction, Mo is forced to confess his nature and what happened to Meggie's mother, Resa. It soon becomes clear that Capricorn is as diabolical as the author originally created him to be as he wants Mo to summon an unspeakably powerful creature from Inkheart to help him take over the world!

Inkheart is established with a guiding principle very quickly: Mortimer witlessly reads books and conjures individuals from them without any conscious effort. Unfortunately for him, this "gift" does not come without a price. Resa disappears, sucked into the book Inkheart as Capricorn, Dustfinger and another goon come to life from it. We learn right away that this is the price: no one comes out of a book without someone else going in. As a result, when Mortimer is forced to read to Capricorn to materialize some treasure - and an unfortunate thief - one of Capricorn's goons is actually transported to the world of "Arabian Nights." The problem is that while the consequence is shown some of the time, it does not happen all of the times and as a result, there is a sloppy execution of this principle.

This sloppy execution works with split results. In one of the climactic scenes of the film, there is no consequence to a powerful creature - the Shadow - being summoned and that reads as ridiculous given the magnitude of it. However, it also makes one of the more predictable elements not occur. Inkheart has a second Silvertongue - a man who stutters - and as a result of Darius's speech impediment, characters he attempts to summon from books are released incomplete, often with writing on their bodies. Thus, it makes sense that Capricorn needs Mortimer. Unfortunately, there is someone of import that Darius has summoned incomplete and as the final battle raged, I waited for that person to be sucked into a book as the consequence for the Shadow's appearance. At least there was a surprise for me. Also on the unfortunate end, though, is that the resolution of one of the characters makes no real sense given that there is nothing said that would restore an incomplete character Darius summoned. Come to think of it, arguably the most significant summoning of the film is done without any apparent consequence to it.

Inkheart seems determined to survive based on the idea that - as a movie marketed toward children - it will not be viewed as strictly or seriously as other films. In addition to the lack of attention to story details, like making sure each summoning has a consequence, the editing is terrible and the special effects, while good, are thoroughly derivative. So, for example, the editing is so bad that the very first chase that occurs occurs with apparent time lapse photography. Mo pushes Dustfinger to the ground and it is day and he turns and begins to run and it is suddenly evening and when he hops in the car and drives away, it is suddenly dark night. The editing is choppy at parts and the director made a very poor choice for one of the most significant visual effects of the film.

When a Silvertongue summons a character from a book, director Softley used a bright light and blurring effect to denote the teleportation. This would be fine, save that when Dustfinger remembers his wife (who is played in a cameo by actress Jennifer Connelley) he used the exact same visual effect. As well, the final scene is presented in a washed out light much like that, adding some question of the reality of it (in context). As for the rest of the effects, they are good, but they are not anything that has not been seen before. The Shadow - which seemed reminiscent of the Nothing in The Never-ending Story - looks remarkably like a stripped down version of the Balrog from Peter Jackson's The Fellowship Of The Ring (reviewed here!). The effects are good, but they look like things we have seen elsewhere before.

That said, Inkheart deserves some praise. The concept is a good one and there are details that make the story richer, like Mo being a book doctor who uses his profession to get access to try to find a copy of Inkheart. As well, while it is obvious after the twelve years pass between the first and second scenes that something has happened to Resa, the film is quite good about taking the time to let that develop and be explained. It is well alluded to by mentions early in the movie of how Mo does not read to Meggie.

Mo and Resa have a compelling story and they work wonderfully as a couple. Dustfinger is a decent rogue whose presence in the film makes much of the action believable by establishing the concept that we are not all trapped with our initial characterization. Dustfinger grows past his established knavish nature. His arc is compelling and emotional. Unfortunately for Inkheart, it is hampered by a monolithic villain - Capricorn is hardly menacing or even a full step ahead of the heroes, a largely unnecessary character - Eleanor becomes a point of exposition which is unnecessary - and characters who are not nearly as smart as the audience.

This is most notable in the character of Meggie, which I suppose is understandable, because she is a child. However, faced with the knowledge that she will be asked to bring an unspeakable evil into the film, none of the characters suggest that she go along with it and screw it up purposely. Almost all of Capricorn's goons are defective, walking around, addle brained with writing upon them. They are hardly effective or impressive. All Meggie had to do to bugger Capricorn's plans was to seriously stutter and it becomes a giant creature that is hampered by its own body.

One hopes that the book addressed this better than the film. And while the characters are decent or mediocre, the acting works fairly well to embody those characters. Helen Mirren, for example, plays Eleanor quite differently from how she portrayed the title character in The Queen. Young Eliza Bennett holds her own with Mirren and lead Brandon Fraser, as well as with Andy Serkis doing his villainous best as Capricorn.

And while it would seem like Brandon Fraser would be responsible for holding together Inkheart, he shows up and performs well, but it is Paul Bettany who steals the show. As Dustfinger, Bettany energizes every scene he is in and he has the most compelling range of emotions to work from as his character goes from desperate to fearful to resigned. Bettany plays each emotion with a real resonance that makes it clear his character is conflicted internally, even from the very beginning.

Still, Bettany's acting is not enough to put this average-at-best film over the top. It is slow to start and nothing pops as well as it ought to in a fantasy film in this one. For the kids, there are some classics worth revisiting before taking this one in.

For other works featuring Paul Bettany, please be sure to check out my reviews of:
Priest
The Tourist
Iron Man 2
Legion
Iron Man
A Beautiful Mind

5/10

For other movie reviews, please be sure to visit my Movies Index Page!

© 2012, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Sunday, October 30, 2011

A Layperson's Review Of The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor: Another Boring Action-Adventure Flick!


The Good: Moments of performance, Moments of special effects
The Bad: Predictable plot, Lack of character development, Sacrifices development in favor of special effects
The Basics: Uninspired and poorly acted, The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor attempts to shower the viewer with movement and special effects to cover a poor script.


[Note: This review was originally written when "The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor" was first released to theaters and was the first of the franchise I saw. I've kept the language of the review intact because I actually enjoy the flavor of it. I hope you do, too.]

In a summer that has been characterized more for its disappointments than its roaring successes, I am finding myself wondering when we might see the influx of fresh, new, original movies from talented new writers and directors coming to theaters as a result of last year's writer's strike. I mean, when the regulars strike, isn't that when the new talent pops up and wows the executives? There must have been a lot of meetings canceled by writers on the picket line . . . Instead, we have had a summer wherein the tried and true writers and directors have disappointed movie goers with terrible movies like Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull (reviewed here!).

And the thing is, if you have been participating in Summer Blockbuster Season, odds are, you have seen previews for The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor. That being the case, most people who have seen a film this summer have seen The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor. Sadly, my impression upon seeing the preview to the movie - every time I saw it - was "They just showed the whole movie!" Unfortunately, I was not far off. And I was certainly not far enough off to enjoy the midnight screening I went to in Minneapolis of the movie. I came to The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor a virgin to The Mummy franchise (reviewed here!). In fact, I was given the opportunity to see the prior three outings before going to the screening and I declined. That way, rather than being a comparison, I could truly speak for how the movie held up on its own. Sadly, it didn't.

Alex O'Connell, a young adventurer, is exploring ruins in China when he discovers a chamber of terra cotta warriors. When the cursed leader, the Chinese Emperor Han suddenly sprouts back to life, he continues the megalomaniacal quest to take over the world that he began before he was cursed and mummified. Undead and powerful, the Dragon Emperor and his legions of warriors - also reanimated by Alex's clumsiness - begin to illustrate a capacity for world domination and Alex flees in desperation to his father. Rick O'Connell, a noted archaeologist and adventurer, has experience with returning the dead to the un-dead and when Alex returns home to beg his help, he jumps into action.

Soon, the O'Connell family is all in China, hunting clues to stop the Dragon Emperor, while Han returns to the ways that got him cursed in the first place. The O'Connells take on a sorceress ally who has intimate knowledge of Han's curse and works to thwart him . . .

Where to start with the problems of The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor? Between this and Swing Vote (reviewed here!), this is hardly the best weekend of the summer and what one suspects Hollywood needs desperately is that new, fresh talent with an eye for what has not been seen before. This is not that movie. In fact, it is plagued by moments that feel like it is utterly the same movie we have seen before in virtually every other action-adventure film ever produced. Indeed, there is nothing truly new in The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor and it comes through on all of the important levels of plot, character and acting and the supplemental front of special effects.

First, I have some respect for Eastern philosophy and for a movie taking place in China, the way maturity and age is revered is almost entirely lacking. For sure, the O'Connells employ a respectable woman whose powers only come from the wisdom of age (sort of), but the lack of respect illustrated between Alex and Rick is very American. Instead of having any sense of reverence for Rick's experience, Alex is reluctant and arrogant, defiant while requesting his aid. And Rick doesn't help things. He is characterized as somewhat buffoonish in too many parts. Sure, he looks good in a tuxedo and when he has to move, he has all of the choreographed grace of an action hero, but the character is otherwise dull. Indeed, the best elements of Rick are all characterized by his ability to move and movement does not equal character.

As one condemned to any number of movies this summer, I am getting sick of writers and directors who seem to work by that equation under the mistaken belief that those who watch movies will accept bland characters so long as they run, jump and shoot things. I do not.

The only thing less fortunate than Rick's characterization is that of the characters who accompany him. Evelyn lets off a number of wry comments and Alex seems dimly aware of the consequences of his actions early in the movie. Indeed, amid all of the forced family drama between Rick and Alex, one almost finds the rise of Han forgettable. And that type of conflict and bland acceptance that fathers and sons will not see eye-to-eye is anything but entertaining; indeed, we have seen it before. I am certain that there are any number of comparisons between the Indiana Jones films and the movies of The Mummy, but the truth is, that would be a false analogy. The Indiana Jones movies (especially the first one and, admittedly, even the latest cinematic outing) had some substance, some philosophy, something the movie wanted to say other than "hey, look at Harrison Ford run around with various costars!" The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor has nothing so smart as Nazis looking for a supernatural way to win the war and Indiana Jones fighting for freedom by recovering paranormal artifacts.

Moreover, Emperor Han is given nothing so glamorous as a reason for wanting to take over the world. World domination no longer satisfies the viewer for motivation; don't obsessive warlords realize yet that it is easy to take over the world, but impossible to keep control of it once you do?! Emperor Han seems to be bent on taking over the world and employing his seemingly invincible undead warriors simply by rote; it is what he did before, so he'll continue doing it now. The best villains have a reason and one that makes them seem more human. The reason the world isn't overrun by impractical jerks who are trying to take everything over is because it is not human nature to want to control everything (and fortunately for all of us, those who are most prepossessed toward the type of egomania needed to believe that their way is unquestionably the right and only way, tend to not get very far - usually Congress, where they are met by 534 people like them and accomplish nothing!). Watching The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor, then, is made all the less entertaining by the monolithically bad way Han is portrayed.

At least it does not challenge Jet Li to have to do much outside yell, fight and look menacing.

As for the special effects, they are able to cover up virtually everything, save the lousy acting. The performers do their best to look like they know what they are seeing when they end up in giant scenes filled with virtual characters, but there are many, many places where the characters seem detached from the world they supposedly occupy. This is an unforgivable sin in this day in age and The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor cheapens the serious movies that use effects to simply augment the good story. Here, the massive armies of undead are asked to carry the weight of the lousy script and they are crushed under that. Far too often, the special effects look like special effects and the real flesh and blood people only serve to remind the viewer of how unreal much of the rest of the movie actually is.

That said, I will admit that the dragon - even when improperly lit for the surroundings it occupies - does look pretty cool. Sadly, its presence does not justify the rest of the movie.

Brendan Fraser is saddled with the duty of selling the reality of The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor and unfortunately, through much of the film, he seems tired and bored of the role himself. For sure, his performance is different from, say, his role in Still Breathing (reviewed here!); there is nothing quirky or quiet in his performance. Instead, he is forceful, physical and he has a somewhat ridiculous obsession with screwing his face up to emote. Fraser might be an adept physical comedian, but at many points in Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor, the role does not call for that type of performance, yet that is what he gives.

The others range from adequate to terrible, from those who are comfortable working in environments opposite nothing and guessing (Jet Li) and those who seem stymied by how to act when the setting and adversaries are not present (Luke Ford). Much has been made about Maria Bello, who plays Evelyn. She apparently takes over the role from another actress and - because I have not seen those movies - I shall not comment on that. Bello does seem a little stiff though.

Some of that stiffness is hard to blame on Bello; she is given a role that is very much a sidekick and sharing that role with Ford. In other words, her stiffness might well come from being uncomfortable with having so little to do.

Sadly, by the end of the movie she is not along; that is how the viewer feels. There is a sense that we have wasted quite a bit of time and as one who has not seen the others, I am wary of wasting my time on them. One would like to believe if this is the third or fourth movie in the franchise that there was an inherent greatness in what came before. Instead, that greatness is absent in this movie.

On DVD, The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor comes with a substantive bit of bonus features. In addition to the usual deleted and extended scenes that seem invariable with this type of movie, there is a remarkably good commentary track with director Rob Cohen. As well, there are interesting special effects featurettes and stunt featurettes that make one appreciate better what ended up on screen in the film. As well, there is an interesting featurette on the casting (or recasting!) and overall, the DVD bonuses stack up rather well.

For other works written by Alfred Gough and Miles Millar, check out my reviews of:
I Am Number Four
Spider-man 2

4/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2008 W.L. Swarts.  May not be reprinted without permission.


| | |

Thursday, October 27, 2011

So Bad It's Worth Watching, The Mummy Returns Is A Camp/MST3000 Must See!


The Good: Sense of movement/pacing, Acting in general, Moments of concept
The Bad: Ridiculous special effects, Light on character development
The Basics: When The Mummy Returns, the viewer is presented with such a preposterous movie that it appears Stephen Sommers is actually trying to write a great b-rate flick!


It is a rare thing that I step outside my reviewer's professionalism and actually recommend a film for reasons other than the concept that one should see it because it is a vital work or entertaining or the whatnot. I was not, for example, impressed by The Mummy (reviewed here!) but the longer I endured The Mummy Returns, the more I enjoyed it. Yes, unlike the first film in The Mummy movies - or the most recent installment The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor - The Mummy Returns is just plain, consistently, fun. The Mummy went comedic for too long before becoming an annoying overly-telegraphed action adventure, leaving the viewer feeling like they were watching a farce, but The Mummy Returns balances the comedy and action adventure far better than the first.

But more than that, The Mummy Returns is pretty ridiculous from the very start. The prologue, which explains the tale of the Scorpion King is a fairly insulting exposition that introduces the viewer to a character played by Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson. Like the prologue to the first movie, the viewer can see what is being told as part of the voice-over, which left me immediately feeling like this was going to be a substandard rehash of an already average film. But then the movie filled up with past lives (implied in the first, made explicit here), hot air balloons, and special effects that are so deliciously campy, it is hard not to watch, turn off the brain and relentlessly mock. So, yes, The Mummy Returns is an average film, but it is worth picking up for a night with your funniest, most sarcastic friends because it has such a beautiful camp quality to it that it has to be seen to be believed. Yes, it's so bad it should be watched!

Legend tells of the Scorpion King, a warrior who attempted to take over the world, but was thwarted after years of campaigns. In his darkest moment, he made a pact with a dark god who helped him win for a while longer, until he was finally routed and the god collected his soul. Approximately every thousand years, the Scorpion King resurrects as a minion of that dark god and tries to conquer the world. This Year Of The Scorpion finds Rick and Evelyn O'Connell exploring a new set of ruins based upon a dream Evelyn had that disturbed her. Inside the ruins, Evelyn has flashes of what the place looked like at its peak, including people there and she and Rick liberate a box - and their son - from the structure before heading back to London.

In London, the O'Connell's prepare for a few days of less dangerous work when little Alex opens the mysterious box and puts on the Scorpion King's bracelet and they find their mansion under attack by agents of the museum curator. That same curator is working to raise Imhotep from his mummified status again and he has an ally; a resurrected Anck Su Namun. When Alex is captured, Rick, Evelyn, her brother Jonathan, and their mystical magi Ardeth, head off to Africa . . . in a dirigible to rescue him and save the world while Evelyn recalls her past life experience as Princess Nefertiri, Anck Su Namun's rival and witness to her and Imhotep's greatest crime!

Yes, The Mummy Returns has it all; mummies, stylized dogmen Egyptian warriors, and a CG-version of "The Rock" grafted to a scorpion's body. Yes, this is what schlock is made of! The thing is, while watching the film, I sat and knew just how bad it was, a feeling that was crystallized the moment Dizzy and his dirigible first appeared on screen. But the story elements of past life experiences, resurrected mummies and the god-bound soon-to-be-reanimated Scorpion King are all so delightfully cliche that the film becomes a terrible move, but a truly great b-film. In fact, so many action adventure films these days seem to try for greatness, but The Mummy Returns seems to concede very early in the film that it will not be and decides to just be pretty mindless fun.

Outside the ridiculous plot elements, the aspect that is most devastating to the credibility of the flick are the special effects. In the prologue, the effects are impressive, with the dogmen overrunning the desert and the effects are realistic and cool. Apparently, the prologue left the film drastically overbudget and the mummy Imhotep suffers from the same lighting problems as in the first film, bluescreen shots are painfully obvious and many of the mummy warriors are simply laughable. But the cream of the b-film criteria crop is the eventual rise of the Scorpion King. Poor Dwayne Johnson barely appears in the final scenes, replaced as he is by a poorly animated version of himself that on my HD-TV was tragically unterrifying.

On the character front, The Mummy Returns divides itself remarkably well between the passe and the utterly campy. Indeed, anyone who has seen any action adventure film - but especially sequels with a child from the two lead protagonists from the first - know that the kid is going to get abducted. Yes, the viewer waits for Alex to get abducted and the only real surprise is that in the process neither Ardeth nor the boob Jonathan bite the dust. In this way, The Mummy Returns is cliche and obvious as Alex is soon abducted by Imhotep as part of the resurrected mummy's plans to take on the Scorpion King.

But what is campy and almost clever is that The Mummy Returns mixes this obvious bit with a character twisting that is actually interesting; that of the past life story. While Imhotep is resurrected in the traditional necromancy sense, Evelyn has flashes of a past life experience as Princess Nefertiri that she does not understand. These flashes increase and reveal more about the story of Anck Su Namun, who has been physically reborn as Meela Nais. This idea at least plays out in an interesting fashion in the movie as Meela assists Imhotep in his plans and the flashbacks give a real sense of backstory to Anck Su Namun and Nefertiri. The viewer is almost able to accept, then, when Evelyn and Meela square off to do battle while Rick takes on the Scorpion King, as something other than just women pairing off to fight. No, The Mummy Returns tends to keep things as fair as fights tend to be with the men of about the same build taking on one another while the dainty women beat each other extensively to a similar pulp.

The Mummy Returns returns Patricia Velasquez (Anck Su Namun), Oded Fehr (Ardeth), and John Hannah (Jonathan Carnahan) to the screen while effectively mixing in Freddie Boath (Alex). Boath plays best off Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, who is perhaps best known now for his role of Mr. Ecko on the second season of Lost (reviewed here!). Dwayne Johnson makes good use of his time in the prologue, but most of his late-film appearance has a clear digital rendering of the actor that he cannot take credit - or blame - for the performance. Sufficed to say, this is not his dramatic opus. But Arnold Vosloo's return as the menacing Imhotep seems much more developed and less monolithic than it did in the first film. Still, Vosloo gets quite a bit of mileage out of bugging his eyes out and yelling.

But the movie rests largely on Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz and Fraser shows up and plays Rick mostly the same way he did in The Mummy. But Weisz is given physical and emotional acting challenges to live up to and in The Mummy Returns she rises to the occasion. For sure, there are stunt actresses that do much of the work between Weisz and Velasquez, as Nefertiri and Anck Su Namun do battle, but the acting challenge comes in selling the coverage in those scenes that is clearly Weisz. Those moments bind the scenes and are perfect; Weisz makes the viewer believe it is truly her out of breath and in peril who we've seen doing all her character has been doing. At the same time, Weisz plays the befuddled librarian and archaeologist brilliantly and her character is a delight to watch.

And truth be told, The Mummy is simply fun and worth watching, if for no other reason than it it imaginative and fun . . . even just for "Mystery Science Theater 3000" fare, it is hard to ask for more sometimes.

For other works with Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Other Guys
The Tooth Fairy
Planet 51
Get Smart
Southland Tales

5.5/10

For other movie reviews, please be sure to visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Unimpressed With The Start Of The Franchise, Too, I Judge The Mummy Remarkably Average.


The Good: Some decent one-liners, Moments of performance, Decent DVD bonus features
The Bad: Overbearing soundtrack, Rather light on character issues, Special effect, Some acting
The Basics: Mostly comedic, The Mummy adds up poorly when it switches to a highly telegraphed action-adventure midway through the film.


[Note: This review was originally written a few years back; the friend I reference, Pete, died just over a year ago. I present this review unedited to commemorate my lost friend! Enjoy!]

I have, believe it or not, a friend. One of the assistant librarians at my local library is a decent guy named Pete and we talk movies a lot and he often acts as Roper to my Ebert and we get along quite well. Recently, we went to take in the new Brendan Fraser movie Inkheart and because of my neurotic insistence at getting to screenings ridiculously early, we had plenty of time before the movie started and on the drive to and from the theater, to talk movies.

In the course of our discussion, The Mummy came up. I had seen and reviewed The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor as part of last year's summer blockbuster season and had found myself largely unimpressed. But Pete convinced me to give the franchise a chance and as a result, I sat down to the first of the new films in The Mummy franchise and all I could think of as I watched it was the advertising campaign for the film Arachnaphobia. When that movie was released, they kept billing it as a "Thrill-omedy!" (the combination of "thriller" and "comedy"), one suspects because it fit neither category precisely enough. The Mummy is similar; when the movie is not hampered by a soundtrack that telegraphs the excitement, it is packed with one liners that are funny little catchphrases. But, alas, that is not enough to truly make a film on.

Rick O'Connell, while working with the French Foreign Legion, unearths the ruins of the ancient city of Hamunaptra. Unfortunately, his entire squadron - save the cowardly Beni - is slaughtered and only Rick survives. Eve and Jonathan Carnahan spring Rick from prison during his execution when they come upon a map and evidence that they think will help them find Hamunaptra. Impressed into service, as Eve has bought his life, Rick guides Eve toward Hamunaptra.

In a race against a rival team - of Americans - led by Beni, Rick leads Eve and Jonathan to the ruins. Once there, the Americans steal several artifacts and in the meddling, the body of the mummy of Imhotep is disturbed. Awakened from his long slumber, he begins to hunt Eve, thinking she is the love of his immortal life, Anck Su Namun. And Rick, seeing Imhotep slaughtering the Americans to get more of a corporeal form, works to save Eve from death . . . or worse!

The Mummy is fairly solidly entertaining. While it is often compared to Raiders Of The Lost Ark (reviewed here!) the enduring themes of greed vs. culture are entirely lacking from The Mummy. It does not seem to strive to be anything more than what it is. As a result, it is fun, mildly funny, but not much more than that. In other words, the one-liners do not so much add up to characters as simply fill in the gaps between action sequences and expositional dialogue. In fact, the film often feels like it has a multiple personality disorder: it oscillates pretty radically between campy, comedy and over-telegraphed action adventure.

The first sequences in the movie involve the backstory of Imhotep and Anck Su Namun and with the voice-overs narrating the events that are already pretty obvious, the sequence is pretty campy. While it provides the requisite backstory, the voice-over is somewhat insulting to the viewer, who sees the affair and the implication of it and does not need the additional reinforcement of being told it as well.

After the campy opening which provides the history of Imhotep and his lover and how he was mummified, the film turns into a comedy with Rick and Beni fighting in Africa. Beni's comical running in the face of danger is genuinely worthy of laughter, but some of the early catch phrases and Rick's next appearance in the prison are hardly funny. The Mummy degenerates into something of a farce as it becomes a race movie between Rick's team and the Americans. The movie wastes some time trying to be funny aboard the boat to the desert near Hamunaptra and it is because of the amount of time the film devotes to slapstick farcical comedy in this section that the movie fails to come back from it. It is pretty basic moviemaking; if you set the film up with forty-five minutes of laughter, it is hard to expect something different in the last hour.

And by the time the film decides that it wants to be an action-adventure film, it goes over-the-top in that regard, too. Jerry Goldsmith's fanfares are ridiculous and intrusive, playing along each and every movement in the film in a way - like the voice-overs at the beginning - that telegraphs the emotion the viewer is supposed to be feeling. It is like the soundtrack is an obnoxious kid sitting next to one at the movie, tugging on one's sleeve piping up with, "Hey! Isn't this exciting! I'm excited! I'm so excited! You should be excited too!" over and over again. We get it by the running, the stabbing, the jumping, and the sudden reversals where the mummy armies are in front of Rick instead of behind him. We get it, it's exciting. Sit down and let us be excited about it, as opposed to reminding us to stay excited! This is not one of Goldsmith's better soundtracks.

But to be fair to Jerry Goldsmith, it is not like he had a wealth of truly great material to work with. The Mummy is an attempt at a big-budget special effects comedy or action adventure and that is what it is trading on. As a result, it is not like there are a lot of tender character moments or compelling dialogue to hold the movie when the characters aren't cracking wise or running from CG monsters.

This is especially problematic in that Rick O'Connell is not exactly a great character. Rick stumbles upon clues and the solutions to problems and is not even the driving cognitive force of the movie. For that, one needs to look at Eve. Eve is smart, educated and clumsy. Those three traits are at least one more trait than springs to mind about Rick. Even Beni has his cowardice and the cowardice as a character aspect works to serve the plot; Beni's freak-out as the Mummy moves in to kill him leads him to go through an encyclopedia of protective prayers, one of which allows him to survive as the mummy's slave.

But even Eve's surplus of character is soon sacrificed to service the plot. Strong and intellectual, Even soon is relegated to the role of damsel in distress when the reanimated mummy begins his reign of terror. It is Rick and force that are used to hold off the mummy long enough for Eve to come through (with the assist by her brother). But the amount of time Eve spends as the damsel is distressing given how strong her character begins the film as.

That said, the acting in The Mummy has its moments. They are not the traditionally great moments of acting that one would expect. But, for example, Kevin J. O'Connor is great in The Mummy. How can I say that? He performed as an awkward doctor who practiced hard science in a television series called Gideon's Crossing. He plays Beni in this so radically different, yet with equal conviction, that it affirms the quality of his performance abilities.

Also entirely convincing is Rachel Weisz as Evelyn Carnahan. Weisz is articulate around every bit of the technobabble and she does an amazing job with the physical comedy when she is compelled to play the role of Eve as clumsy. She speaks her most difficult lines with articulation and there is not a moment while she is on screen that the viewer suspects she is anyone other than Evelyn Carnahan.

Brendan Fraser's acting gift in this outing is somewhat more limited. Instead of appearing particularly impressive or action hero-like, Fraser's best work seems to be in establishing the credibility of the world that he is a part of. As a result, his eye lines are always perfect for the digital creatures and he reacts well to the threats that were clearly not real as if they were.

Unfortunately, the idea that many of the threats were clearly not real is an unfortunate but true one. The Mummy employs computer-generated special effects that unfortunately flop when looked at objectively. Perhaps one of the best examples is how Eve is cornered by the mummy after being separated from the others. The Mummy approaches her and menaces her and while its whole body is visible there is an utter lack of attention to light detail. As a result, the mummy approaches, lit as if by a giant light shining all over its body equally; it is not real or right.

On DVD, The Mummy appears as a two-disc "Ultimate" Edition that includes commentary tracks, and an entire bonus disc filled with behind-the-scenes featurettes. These featurettes are largely concerned with special effects, locations and the cast and they are a real treat for those who enjoyed the film.

Sadly, that was not me. It is a good film, but nothing to go out of one's way to see.

For other works featuring Rachel Weisz, be sure to visit my reviews of:
Definitely, Maybe
Envy
The Mummy Trilogy

5/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Sunday, September 18, 2011

The Mummy Multipack For Those Who Simply MUST Have The Mummy Trilogy. Meh.


The Good: Moments of humor, Moments of effect, DVD bonus features are thorough
The Bad: Recycled plots, Light on character development, Nothing amazing in the acting, Overbearing soundtracks.
The Basics: Fairly blase and average at best, The Mummy Trilogy is hardly essential for anyone's DVD library.


In the history of great motion picture trilogies, there are the inevitable multipacks that follow. And even the Trilogies that are not, ultimately, all that great, seem to end up as multipacks. I write that with some sense of disappointment because after years of hype, I finally sat down and watched the three Brendan Fraser Mummy movies and I found them to be alternately bad, campy and worse. As a result, the multipack which puts the three movies together is hardly enchanting and at best works itself up to the status of mildly entertaining.

The thing is, The Mummy films are essentially special effect action films. They have sub-par special effects in several key sequences that make them more laughable than exciting and the prevalence of humor throughout makes the menace hard to take seriously as well. One suspects this is why actress Rachel Weisz did not come back for the third installment of the franchise. The Mummy Trilogy is a bundle pack of the three two-disc versions of each film and it does not include any additional features or discs special for this set.

This is a simple bulk pack of:
The Mummy
The Mummy Returns
The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor

For those unfamiliar with it, The Mummy introduces Rick O'Connell. Rick O'Connell, while working with the French Foreign Legion, unearths the ruins of the ancient city of Hamunaptra. Unfortunately, his entire squadron - save the cowardly Beni - is slaughtered and only Rick survives. Eve and Jonathan Carnahan spring Rick from prison during his execution when they come upon a map and evidence that they think will help them find Hamunaptra. Impressed into service, as Eve has bought his life, Rick guides Eve toward Hamunaptra.

In a race against a rival team - of Americans - led by Beni, Rick leads Eve and Jonathan to the ruins. Once there, the Americans steal several artifacts and in the meddling, the body of the mummy of Imhotep is disturbed. Awakened from his long slumber, he begins to hunt Eve, thinking she is the love of his immortal life, Anck Su Namun. And Rick, seeing Imhotep slaughtering the Americans to get more of a corporeal form, works to save Eve from death . . . or worse!

The Mummy is fairly solidly entertaining. While it is often compared to Raiders Of The Lost Ark (reviewed here!) the enduring themes of greed vs. culture are entirely lacking from The Mummy. It does not seem to strive to be anything more than what it is. As a result, it is fun, mildly funny, but not much more than that. In other words, the one-liners do not so much add up to characters as simply fill in the gaps between action sequences and expositional dialogue. In fact, the film often feels like it has a multiple personality disorder: it oscillates pretty radically between campy, comedy and over-telegraphed action adventure.

The first sequences in the movie involve the backstory of Imhotep and Anck Su Namun and with the voice-overs narrating the events that are already pretty obvious, the sequence is pretty campy. While it provides the requisite backstory, the voice-over is somewhat insulting to the viewer, who sees the affair and the implication of it and does not need the additional reinforcement of being told it as well.

After the campy opening which provides the history of Imhotep and his lover and how he was mummified, the film turns into a comedy with Rick and Beni fighting in Africa. Beni's comical running in the face of danger is genuinely worthy of laughter, but some of the early catch phrases and Rick's next appearance in the prison are hardly funny. The Mummy degenerates into something of a farce as it becomes a race movie between Rick's team and the Americans. The movie wastes some time trying to be funny aboard the boat to the desert near Hamunaptra and it is because of the amount of time the film devotes to slapstick farcical comedy in this section that the movie fails to come back from it. It is pretty basic moviemaking; if you set the film up with forty-five minutes of laughter, it is hard to expect something different in the last hour.

And by the time the film decides that it wants to be an action-adventure film, it goes over-the-top in that regard, too. Jerry Goldsmith's fanfares are ridiculous and intrusive, playing along each and every movement in the film in a way - like the voice-overs at the beginning - that telegraphs the emotion the viewer is supposed to be feeling. It is like the soundtrack is an obnoxious kid sitting next to one at the movie, tugging on one's sleeve piping up with, "Hey! Isn't this exciting! I'm excited! I'm so excited! You should be excited too!" over and over again. We get it by the running, the stabbing, the jumping, and the sudden reversals where the mummy armies are in front of Rick instead of behind him. We get it, it's exciting. Sit down and let us be excited about it, as opposed to reminding us to stay excited! This is not one of Goldsmith's better soundtracks.

But to be fair to Jerry Goldsmith, it is not like he had a wealth of truly great material to work with. The Mummy is an attempt at a big-budget special effects comedy or action adventure and that is what it is trading on. As a result, it is not like there are a lot of tender character moments or compelling dialogue to hold the movie when the characters aren't cracking wise or running from CG monsters.

This is especially problematic in that Rick O'Connell is not exactly a great character. Rick stumbles upon clues and the solutions to problems and is not even the driving cognitive force of the movie. For that, one needs to look at Eve. Eve is smart, educated and clumsy. Those three traits are at least one more trait than springs to mind about Rick. Even Beni has his cowardice and the cowardice as a character aspect works to serve the plot; Beni's freak-out as the Mummy moves in to kill him leads him to go through an encyclopedia of protective prayers, one of which allows him to survive as the mummy's slave.

But even Eve's surplus of character is soon sacrificed to service the plot. Strong and intellectual, Even soon is relegated to the role of damsel in distress when the reanimated mummy begins his reign of terror. It is Rick and force that are used to hold off the mummy long enough for Eve to come through (with the assist by her brother). But the amount of time Eve spends as the damsel is distressing given how strong her character begins the film as.

That said, the acting in The Mummy has its moments. They are not the traditionally great moments of acting that one would expect. But, for example, Kevin J. O'Connor is great in The Mummy. How can I say that? He performed as an awkward doctor who practiced hard science in a television series called Gideon's Crossing. He plays Beni in this so radically different, yet with equal conviction, that it affirms the quality of his performance abilities.

Also entirely convincing is Rachel Weisz as Evelyn Carnahan. Weisz is articulate around every bit of the technobabble and she does an amazing job with the physical comedy when she is compelled to play the role of Eve as clumsy. She speaks her most difficult lines with articulation and there is not a moment while she is on screen that the viewer suspects she is anyone other than Evelyn Carnahan.

The best of the bunch, The Mummy Returns, continues the story by retelling essentially the same plot with an additional villain. In it, a legend tells of the Scorpion King, a warrior who attempted to take over the world, but was thwarted after years of campaigns. In his darkest moment, he made a pact with a dark god who helped him win for a while longer, until he was finally routed and the god collected his soul. Approximately every thousand years, the Scorpion King resurrects as a minion of that dark god and tries to conquer the world. This Year Of The Scorpion finds Rick and Evelyn O'Connell exploring a new set of ruins based upon a dream Evelyn had that disturbed her. Inside the ruins, Evelyn has flashes of what the place looked like at its peak, including people there and she and Rick liberate a box - and their son - from the structure before heading back to London.

In London, the O'Connell's prepare for a few days of less dangerous work when little Alex opens the mysterious box and puts on the Scorpion King's bracelet and they find their mansion under attack by agents of the museum curator. That same curator is working to raise Imhotep from his mummified status again and he has an ally; a resurrected Anck Su Namun. When Alex is captured, Rick, Evelyn, her brother Jonathan, and their mystical magi Ardeth, head off to Africa . . . in a dirigible to rescue him and save the world while Evelyn recalls her past life experience as Princess Nefertiri, Anck Su Namun's rival and witness to her and Imhotep's greatest crime!

Yes, The Mummy Returns has it all; mummies, stylized dogmen Egyptian warriors, and a CG-version of "The Rock" grafted to a scorpion's body. Yes, this is what schlock is made of! The thing is, while watching the film, I sat and knew just how bad it was, a feeling that was crystallized the moment Dizzy and his dirigible first appeared on screen. But the story elements of past life experiences, resurrected mummies and the god-bound soon-to-be-reanimated Scorpion King are all so delightfully cliche that the film becomes a terrible move, but a truly great b-film. In fact, so many action adventure films these days seem to try for greatness, but The Mummy Returns seems to concede very early in the film that it will not be and decides to just be pretty mindless fun.

Outside the ridiculous plot elements, the aspect that is most devastating to the credibility of the flick are the special effects. In the prologue, the effects are impressive, with the dogmen overrunning the desert and the effects are realistic and cool. Apparently, the prologue left the film drastically overbudget and the mummy Imhotep suffers from the same lighting problems as in the first film, bluescreen shots are painfully obvious and many of the mummy warriors are simply laughable. But the cream of the b-film criteria crop is the eventual rise of the Scorpion King. Poor Dwayne Johnson barely appears in the final scenes, replaced as he is by a poorly animated version of himself that on my HD-TV was tragically unterrifying.

On the character front, The Mummy Returns divides itself remarkably well between the passe and the utterly campy. Indeed, anyone who has seen any action adventure film - but especially sequels with a child from the two lead protagonists from the first - know that the kid is going to get abducted. Yes, the viewer waits for Alex to get abducted and the only real surprise is that in the process neither Ardeth nor the boob Jonathan bite the dust. In this way, The Mummy Returns is cliche and obvious as Alex is soon abducted by Imhotep as part of the resurrected mummy's plans to take on the Scorpion King.

But what is campy and almost clever is that The Mummy Returns mixes this obvious bit with a character twisting that is actually interesting; that of the past life story. While Imhotep is resurrected in the traditional necromancy sense, Evelyn has flashes of a past life experience as Princess Nefertiri that she does not understand. These flashes increase and reveal more about the story of Anck Su Namun, who has been physically reborn as Meela Nais. This idea at least plays out in an interesting fashion in the movie as Meela assists Imhotep in his plans and the flashbacks give a real sense of backstory to Anck Su Namun and Nefertiri. The viewer is almost able to accept, then, when Evelyn and Meela square off to do battle while Rick takes on the Scorpion King, as something other than just women pairing off to fight. No, The Mummy Returns tends to keep things as fair as fights tend to be with the men of about the same build taking on one another while the dainty women beat each other extensively to a similar pulp.

The Mummy Returns returns Patricia Velasquez (Anck Su Namun), Oded Fehr (Ardeth), and John Hannah (Jonathan Carnahan) to the screen while effectively mixing in Freddie Boath (Alex). Boath plays best off Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, who is perhaps best known now for his role of Mr. Ecko on the second season of Lost (reviewed here!). Dwayne Johnson makes good use of his time in the prologue, but most of his late-film appearance has a clear digital rendering of the actor that he cannot take credit - or blame - for the performance. Sufficed to say, this is not his dramatic opus. But Arnold Vosloo's return as the menacing Imhotep seems much more developed and less monolithic than it did in the first film. Still, Vosloo gets quite a bit of mileage out of bugging his eyes out and yelling.

But the movie rests largely on Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz and Fraser shows up and plays Rick mostly the same way he did in The Mummy. But Weisz is given physical and emotional acting challenges to live up to and in The Mummy Returns she rises to the occasion. For sure, there are stunt actresses that do much of the work between Weisz and Velasquez, as Nefertiri and Anck Su Namun do battle, but the acting challenge comes in selling the coverage in those scenes that is clearly Weisz. Those moments bind the scenes and are perfect; Weisz makes the viewer believe it is truly her out of breath and in peril who we've seen doing all her character has been doing. At the same time, Weisz plays the befuddled librarian and archaeologist brilliantly and her character is a delight to watch.

The final installment (for now) is The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor. Alex O'Connell, now grown up a bit, is a young adventurer exploring ruins in China when he discovers a chamber of terra cotta warriors. When the cursed leader, the Chinese Emperor Han suddenly sprouts back to life, he continues the megalomaniacal quest to take over the world that he began before he was cursed and mummified. Undead and powerful, the Dragon Emperor and his legions of warriors - also reanimated by Alex's clumsiness - begin to illustrate a capacity for world domination and Alex flees in desperation to his father. Rick O'Connell, a noted archaeologist and adventurer, has experience with returning the dead to the undead and when Alex returns home to beg his help, he jumps into action.

Soon, the O'Connell family is all in China, hunting clues to stop the Dragon Emperor, while Han returns to the ways that got him cursed in the first place. The O'Connells take on a sorceress ally who has intimate knowledge of Han's curse and works to thwart him . . .

Where to start with the problems of The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor? It is plagued by moments that feel like it is utterly the same movie we have seen before in virtually every other action-adventure film ever produced. Indeed, there is nothing truly new in Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor and it comes through on all of the important levels of plot, character and acting and the supplemental front of special effects.

First, I have some respect for Eastern philosophy and for a movie taking place in China, the way maturity and age is revered is almost entirely lacking. For sure, the O'Connells employ a respectable woman whose powers only come from the wisdom of age (sort of), but the lack of respect illustrated between Alex and Rick is very American. Instead of having any sense of reverence for Rick's experience, Alex is reluctant and arrogant, defiant while requesting his aid. And Rick doesn't help things. He is characterized as somewhat buffoonish in too many parts. Sure, he looks good in a tuxedo and when he has to move, he has all of the choreographed grace of an action hero, but the character is otherwise dull. Indeed, the best elements of Rick are all characterized by his ability to move and movement does not equal character.

As one condemned to any number of movies this summer, I am getting sick of writers and directors who seem to work by that equation under the mistaken belief that those who watch movies will accept bland characters so long as they run, jump and shoot things. I do not.

The only thing less fortunate than Rick's characterization is that of the characters who accompany him. Evelyn lets off a number of wry comments and Alex seems dimly aware of the consequences of his actions early in the movie. Indeed, amid all of the forced family drama between Rick and Alex, one almost finds the rise of Han forgettable. And that type of conflict and bland acceptance that fathers and sons will not see eye-to-eye is anything but entertaining; indeed, we have seen it before. I am certain that there are any number of comparisons between the Indiana Jones films and the movies of The Mummy, but the truth is, that would be a false analogy. The Indiana Jones movies (especially the first one and, admittedly, even the latest cinematic outing) had some substance, some philosophy, something the movie wanted to say other than "hey, look at Harrison Ford run around with various costars!" Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor has nothing so smart as Nazis looking for a supernatural way to win the war and Indiana Jones fighting for freedom by recovering paranormal artifacts.

Moreover, Emperor Han is given nothing so glamorous as a reason for wanting to take over the world. World domination no longer satisfies the viewer for motivation; don't obsessive warlords realize yet that it is easy to take over the world, but impossible to keep control of it once you do?! Emperor Han seems to be bent on taking over the world and employing his seemingly invincible undead warriors simply by rote; it is what he did before, so he'll continue doing it now. The best villains have a reason and one that makes them seem more human. The reason the world isn't overrun by impractical jerks who are trying to take everything over is because it is not human nature to want to control everything (and fortunately for all of us, those who are most prepossessed toward the type of egomania needed to believe that their way is unquestionably the right and only way, tend to not get very far - usually Congress, where they are met by 534 people like them and accomplish nothing!). Watching The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor, then, is made all the less entertaining by the monolithically bad way Han is portrayed.

At least it does not challenge Jet Li to have to do much outside yell, fight and look menacing.

As for the special effects, they are able to cover up virtually everything, save the lousy acting. The performers do their best to look like they know what they are seeing when they end up in giant scenes filled with virtual characters, but there are many, many places where the characters seem detached from the world they supposedly occupy. This is an unforgivable sin in this day in age and Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor cheapens the serious movies that use effects to simply augment the good story. Here, the massive armies of undead are asked to carry the weight of the lousy script and they are crushed under that. Far too often, the special effects look like special effects and the real flesh and blood people only serve to remind the viewer of how unreal much of the rest of the movie actually is.

That said, I will admit that the dragon - even when improperly lit for the surroundings it occupies - does look pretty cool. Sadly, its presence does not justify the rest of the movie.

Brendan Fraser is saddled with the duty of selling the reality of The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor and unfortunately, through much of the film, he seems tired and bored of the role himself. For sure, his performance is different from, say, his role in Still Breathing (reviewed here!); there is nothing quirky or quiet in his performance. Instead, he is forceful, physical and he has a somewhat ridiculous obsession with screwing his face up to emote. Fraser might be an adept physical comedian, but at many points in Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor, the role does not call for that type of performance, yet that is what he gives.

The others range from adequate to terrible, from those who are comfortable working in environments opposite nothing and guessing (Jet Li) and those who seem stymied by how to act when the setting and adversaries are not present (Luke Ford). Much has been made about Maria Bello, who plays Evelyn. She apparently takes over the role from another actress and - because I have not seen those movies - I shall not comment on that. Bello does seem a little stiff though.

Some of that stiffness is hard to blame on Bello; she is given a role that is very much a sidekick and sharing that role with Ford. In other words, her stiffness might well come from being uncomfortable with having so little to do.

Sadly, by the end of these movies she is not alone; that is how the viewer feels.

On DVD, the movies come with commentary tracks and featurettes, largely focused on the special effects. They get decent participation from actors and producers for the interviews in them, but they are hardly enough to make them worth buying for those who were not grabbed by the source material.

For other trilogy or saga multipacks, please check out my reviews of:
The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy
Star Wars Saga
Back To The Future Trilogy

4.5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page on the subject by clicking here!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.


| | |

Friday, August 5, 2011

Okay, I Didn't Hate It! Bedazzled Doesn't Quite Suck!



The Good: Funny, Casting, Costuming
The Bad: Obvious, Juvenile, Oftentimes repetitive
The Basics: Bedazzled is a funny enough film, the defects - utter lack of character development - are not enough to make me recommend it, though I enjoyed it more than I expected.


So, I've gotten a DVD player and I've been watching films on DVD now. I like the little extras, there is a single scene of extras in Bedazzled. It's not worth it. Why did I even bother with this film? Well, 9 out of 10 of the films I don't recommend, are ones my mother loves and I've been bringing movies for her to see when I visit her. So, I figured Bedazzled looked just dumb enough for her to like because my gut reaction was "eeehhh" (Little Homer Simpson head shake of creeped-outness there). I was right, but the way, my dear old mom loved it.

I was also wrong, though, because I didn't hate it. I expected to. It seemed so contrived, the Devil offers a man seven wishes and, naturally, he's thinking with his organ and his wishes are all about a woman. I suppose we ought all to be flattered by that. Sigh. So, the plot was contrived, that the wishes consistently go bad is somewhat obvious as is that things will work out well in the end. And - surprise! - everything you think will happen, for the most part, does.

So the friendless Elliot Richards meets the Devil. And the Devil is pretty hot, thanks to some pretty incredible costuming. The Devil offers Elliot seven wishes and Elliot, consumed with getting Alison Gardner to be his partner, makes wishes accordingly. His wishes always come with consequences; he wishes to be intelligent and have taste and he ends up a homosexual (in one of the most un-funny sequences of the film), he wishes to be emotionally sensitive and his drippiness turns Alison away, he wishes to be a mega athlete and he finds himself . . . unmanned in the genital department.

What's worth watching? Well, the costumes. Not just Elizabeth Hurley's. I mean, she is not sexy in this film because she's so obvious. I mean, it's real easy to see her breasts and legs, but they're right there all the time; it's not at all enticing. There's a fine line between arousing and obvious and the director of this film tried to draw that line with a super bold marker. It didn't work. Needless to say, though, it's quite easy to watch Elizabeth Hurley as the Devil. She's attractive and well costumed, just terrifically obviously eye candy.

The costumes extend beyond the Devil. Especially in his first wish incarnation, Elliot has pretty excellent wardrobe. The acting is fair, I suppose. Fraser is funny as Elliot, but I'm getting tired of seeing him as the lonely geek (see Still Breathing). Still, he gives an adequate performance (ever seen the NewsRadio episode where Bill McNeil is called "adequate?") as does Hurley. The acting isn't a terrifically good reason to see this film.

What is the reason to see the film is the humor. It's actually funny. The funniest part of the film does not appear in the film. There's an "extended basketball scene" on the DVD wherein Orlando Jones and Toby Huss improvise a whole longer scene as sportscasters and it's hilarious. But for the most part, I found myself laughing when I did not expect to be amused by this film. Kudos there!

The problem is, when the film picks a good joke, they stick with it and beat it into the ground. The "dumb jock" routine gets old quick when Elliot becomes a basketball player and his profuse sweating goes from being subtle and funny enough to obvious and "give me a break" level. If each joke was told only once, I suspect the film would be cut from 93 minutes down to about 50.

And the flaws of the script cannot be ignored. Believe me; I got into the film enough to desperately hope that the Devil's flirting with Elliot would end up with a final wish on Elliot's part for the Devil to be his consort. Really. There was some good tension there and when the film started just plodding on, the scenes between Elliot and the Devil were the only recourse and . . . well, I had hope it would surprise me like having Elliot become the Devil's lover. It didn't happen. Sigh.

The best moments, sadly enough, are the labels that occur during the opening credits. They're a good tension breaker for people who take films too seriously. Like me.

For other works with Brendan Fraser, please check out my reviews of:
Furry Vengeance
G.I. Joe: The Rise Of Cobra
Crash
Looney Toons: Back In Action
Gods And Monsters
Still Breathing

4.5/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page on the subject!

© 2011, 2001 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.


| | |

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Another Romantic Comedy That Is Above The Curve: Still Breathing





The Good: Good dialogue, Good acting, Interesting characters
The Bad: Predictable plot
The Basics: Amusing and interesting, Still Breathing is a pleasant look at love in a world of disillusionment.


Romantic comedies suffer greatly on rewatching value because so often the first time through the plot is so predictable that rewatching the film becomes insipid. Every now and then a romantic comedy comes along that is not boring or paced in such a way that makes it entirely predictable or uninteresting.

Still Breathing is one such film. The plot is a little more interesting than the usual romantic comedy. In fact, Still Breathing isn't terribly funny. Basically, it focuses on Fletcher and Roz. Fletcher is a Texan who dreams of a woman, he comes from a long line of men who dream of their women. He dreams of Roz when she's assaulted and he ends up in California searching for her. Roz, for her part, is a content con artist who is looking to scam a different Texan. This results in her going into a bar and asking the fateful question, "How many Texans can be in this California bar on a Wednesday afternoon?!"

So, the eccentric artist Fletcher meets Roz, builds a rock sculpture in her hand and basically challenges her by having a simple, geeky, undemanding love for her. In fact, the refreshing aspect of the film is how it doesn't follow the formulaic nature of usual romantic comedies. Roz doesn't fall for Fletcher, confess her true nature only to have Fletcher run away until he realizes Roz was truly the love of her life. Instead, Roz continues attempting her scam, she remains wary of Fletcher and denies the validity of his feelings.

Instead, Fletcher hears her confession, doesn't freak and she leaves and he continues his pursuit. The challenge of the film is in the characters.

Fletcher is quirky. He smiles at himself in the mirror, he makes rock sculptures, he plays brass instruments with his grandmother while in a rowboat. The point is, he's interesting and that comes out in every scene he's in. Rosalyn is intriguing. She's more than just a crook, she's vulnerable, disillusioned and hurt. The film is about her understanding her own denial of the truths of the world.

Perhaps romantic drama is a better term for categorizing this film, but the truth is, Still Breathing is worth your time. It has excellent dialogue. Most every line Fletcher says is quoteable, most of Roz's lines classify our world today in its bleakness. Still Breathing succeeds as a beautifully shot film filled with interesting characters who are struggling with the world around them and the realities they find there.

For other works with Brendan Fraser, please check out my reviews of:
Furry Vengeance
G.I. Joe: The Rise Of Cobra
Crash
Looney Toons: Back In Action
Gods And Monsters

8/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2001 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.




| | |