Starring: Henry Cavill, Armie Hammer, Alicia, Vikander
Directed By: Guy Ritchie
Written By: Guy Ritchie & Lionel Wigram, based on the television series by Sam Rolfe
Warner Bros., 2015
PG-13; 116 minutes
4.5 stars (out of 5)
_______________________________________________________
When this movie came out, I avoided reviews that would give away the plot, but I did see one question pop up again and again: Who is this movie for?
The teens and young adults, or new adults, or whatever they're calling them this week, won't have any reference for this movie, and the older viewers ostensibly weren't going to find the show they loved in this film franchise. I can't speak to the latter because I've never seen the show. I don't know how much like the show this film is or isn't. I can only guess that it has about as much in common with the source material as Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes does to Doyle. It's there to an extent and punched up in a lot of weird ways.
Still, as someone who'd never seen the show, I really did enjoy the movie. Okay, it has some big sins. Lots of exposition in dialogue (spy movies get away with that through "debriefings"), and then also some backstory written on the screen. But at least there's no voiceover narration, right?
As for the plot, it's fairly straight forward (and they explain it as they go along anyway). In a nutshell, the Russians and Americans team up to get information about an Italian family that is supposedly harboring a scientist who is developing a nuclear warhead. The whole thing is set during the Cold War, of course, and the opening credits are a quickie history lesson for those who didn't live through it.
This looks like a Guy Ritchie movie, by which I mean, if I hadn't know who'd directed it, I would've guessed without too much trouble. But I like Guy Ritchie movies, so . . . Cool.
Some of the humor is a little flat. They go for easy, predictable jokes. They try a little too hard in places. Yet they manage to avoid falling into parody or camp. It is a surprisingly satisfying balance that they strike.
And what Ritchie seems to do remarkably well in all his movies is to assemble a cast that has real chemistry. They're fun to watch, and the audience feels in a way they're joining in. RDJ and Jude Law have it, and Cavill and Hammer do, too. Which is why I'm really sorry this film didn't do better at the box office because I'd absolutely keep coming back for more.
So the answer to that first question is: People like me.
Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of those.
Showing posts with label reboots. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reboots. Show all posts
9.20.2015
3.24.2015
The Return of The X-Files
FOX has confirmed a 6-episode return of The X-Files. I know because every newsfeed and my entire Facebook stream is filled with it.
I was a religious X-Files fan up until around 1999 or 2000. Somewhere in moving to Boston and becoming a grad student, and in David Duchovny leaving and Jason Patric stepping in, I lost the thread and didn't feel driven to pick it back up at any point.
But prior to all that, whoa boy, big fan. My best friend Tara and I would write "Memos to the Crew" back and forth—joke letters in which I pretended to be Chris Carter and she would be the crew, writing to complain about David and Gillian's antic behavior. I've still got them all somewhere . . . We also had an ongoing joke that Chris Carter and I were psychically linked because every time I suggested something might happen on the show, it did.
My final project at UT was an X-Files spec script. I remember working that summer on the Hope Floats set, and there was a FOX directory of course, and I called Chris Carter's office once but hung up when his assistant answer. (I assume it was his assistant.) Too shy for this biz, I suppose.
But anyway. I keep seeing the news of an X-Files return ("limited-run series"), and how they're touting the fact Duchovny and Anderson will be back, too. And I have to wonder: How much of them "being back" is part of a setup to pass the baton to other, younger agents? How much of it is designed to hopefully set up a new series?
I could be wrong, of course. But it seems like the logical move. Carry forward the old fans, bring in new ones.
Let's see if that old psychic link holds up.
I was a religious X-Files fan up until around 1999 or 2000. Somewhere in moving to Boston and becoming a grad student, and in David Duchovny leaving and Jason Patric stepping in, I lost the thread and didn't feel driven to pick it back up at any point.
But prior to all that, whoa boy, big fan. My best friend Tara and I would write "Memos to the Crew" back and forth—joke letters in which I pretended to be Chris Carter and she would be the crew, writing to complain about David and Gillian's antic behavior. I've still got them all somewhere . . . We also had an ongoing joke that Chris Carter and I were psychically linked because every time I suggested something might happen on the show, it did.
My final project at UT was an X-Files spec script. I remember working that summer on the Hope Floats set, and there was a FOX directory of course, and I called Chris Carter's office once but hung up when his assistant answer. (I assume it was his assistant.) Too shy for this biz, I suppose.
But anyway. I keep seeing the news of an X-Files return ("limited-run series"), and how they're touting the fact Duchovny and Anderson will be back, too. And I have to wonder: How much of them "being back" is part of a setup to pass the baton to other, younger agents? How much of it is designed to hopefully set up a new series?
I could be wrong, of course. But it seems like the logical move. Carry forward the old fans, bring in new ones.
Let's see if that old psychic link holds up.
12.17.2013
Battlestar Galactica Forces Me to Switch Eye Doctors
I have—had—a really cool eye doctor. He comes from a family of doctors to begin with (his brother is my dentist, and their dad was an eye doctor too), and he was the first optometrist to give me contacts for astigmatism. I mean, I've been wearing contacts since I was 15, and I've always known I had astigmatism, so why didn't one of my previous doctors give me these lenses?
But anyway, the thing about this doctor is that he really enjoys chatting, so sometimes the appointments take a while. I don't mind because we both love science fiction and have lots to talk about.
Except . . . Last time I was in, he told me I had to try watching the updated Battlestar Galactica. It was like homework. From an eye doctor. It was fine because I had been planning to try the show anyway; I loved the original as a kid. (I'm not that old—though today is my birthday!—I watched reruns with my dad.) Had the biggest crushes on Dirk Benedict and Richard Hatch, though I would have been hard pressed to decide between them. I used to make up all kinds of stories about Starbuck and Apollo, though, and all the trouble they would get into.
As for the present, well, my eye doctor told me to start with the two-part miniseries, and I finally sat down and watched the first part. (And I do love Edward James Olmos, too, from those Miami Vice days . . . Though I once asked my dad why his face had all those sorts of dimples in it, and Dad said, "Bad acne as a child," but I thought he said, "Bad acting as a child," as was astounded that bad acting could do that to a person.)
I didn't like it.
It was just so . . . slow.
And I'm therefore not at all compelled to watch the second part, much less the whole of the television series.
Let me say that, yes, I do value character development, and I am pleased to see that this version of Battlestar Galactica took the time to build that. So many shows don't. But . . . There were almost too many characters being developed here. I think shows like Babylon 5 do it better in that they only focus on one or two at a time, yet everyone gets their moments to grow and shine. And maybe BG, once in series, does the same. But this miniseries just could not hold my interest. Gah.
But how do I go back to my eye doctor and say as much to him? I may actually have to change doctors to soothe my guilt, though why I feel guilty is a mystery. Maybe I'm worried I'll disappoint him? Thus far we've been so much on the same page about these things. (He does also love B5.) How can I face him and say I didn't like BG?
Well, my next appointment isn't until spring. Maybe he will have forgotten by then? Seems unlikely. There's probably even a note in my file or something. Maybe I should skip the remainder of the miniseries and just try the show itself? Hmm. Possibly.
But that chick will never take the place of Dirk Benedict. No way.
But anyway, the thing about this doctor is that he really enjoys chatting, so sometimes the appointments take a while. I don't mind because we both love science fiction and have lots to talk about.
Except . . . Last time I was in, he told me I had to try watching the updated Battlestar Galactica. It was like homework. From an eye doctor. It was fine because I had been planning to try the show anyway; I loved the original as a kid. (I'm not that old—though today is my birthday!—I watched reruns with my dad.) Had the biggest crushes on Dirk Benedict and Richard Hatch, though I would have been hard pressed to decide between them. I used to make up all kinds of stories about Starbuck and Apollo, though, and all the trouble they would get into.
As for the present, well, my eye doctor told me to start with the two-part miniseries, and I finally sat down and watched the first part. (And I do love Edward James Olmos, too, from those Miami Vice days . . . Though I once asked my dad why his face had all those sorts of dimples in it, and Dad said, "Bad acne as a child," but I thought he said, "Bad acting as a child," as was astounded that bad acting could do that to a person.)
I didn't like it.
It was just so . . . slow.
And I'm therefore not at all compelled to watch the second part, much less the whole of the television series.
Let me say that, yes, I do value character development, and I am pleased to see that this version of Battlestar Galactica took the time to build that. So many shows don't. But . . . There were almost too many characters being developed here. I think shows like Babylon 5 do it better in that they only focus on one or two at a time, yet everyone gets their moments to grow and shine. And maybe BG, once in series, does the same. But this miniseries just could not hold my interest. Gah.
But how do I go back to my eye doctor and say as much to him? I may actually have to change doctors to soothe my guilt, though why I feel guilty is a mystery. Maybe I'm worried I'll disappoint him? Thus far we've been so much on the same page about these things. (He does also love B5.) How can I face him and say I didn't like BG?
Well, my next appointment isn't until spring. Maybe he will have forgotten by then? Seems unlikely. There's probably even a note in my file or something. Maybe I should skip the remainder of the miniseries and just try the show itself? Hmm. Possibly.
But that chick will never take the place of Dirk Benedict. No way.
10.27.2012
Movies: Dark Shadows
Starring: Johnny Depp, Michelle Pfeiffer, Eva Green, Bella Heathcote
Directed By: Tim Burton
Written By: Seth Grahame-Smith (screenplay); John August & Seth Grahame-Smith (story), based on the television series by Dan Curtis
Warner Bros., Village Roadshow Pictures
PG-13; 113 min
3 stars (out of 5)
_______________________________________________________
I am not personally familiar with the 60s phenom that was Dark Shadows, though my mother assures me it was well worth rushing home from school to watch it. I did very much enjoy the short-lived 90s reboot that featured Ben Cross as Barnabas Collins; I even have the Innovation comic book tie-ins.
For those unversed in the story, it is that of the aforementioned Barnabas, 1700s-magnate-turned-vampire reawakened in the 1960s (or, for this film, 70s). The original television series was a daytime soap filled with witches and curses and star-crossed lovers. The 90s remake did not fare well, probably because they attempted to air it at primetime (perhaps they believed the success of Twin Peaks opened the door for that kind of thing; alas, they were wrong). In any case, the original version had a solid cult following, with Burton and Depp counting themselves among their number, hence the idea to make a movie.
Unfortunately, they seemed to be unclear whether to go for camp—which the 60s series unwittingly became due to low production values—or horror, and so the film Dark Shadows is a strange and ungelled mash of both. It has definitely funny moments, some intentional and some not, and the final scene calls on any number of horror tropes, though it never actually becomes frightening in any way. Meanwhile, with so many characters and so little time, there is a quantity of wasted talent and unexplored plotlines littering the stage here.
Even so, I enjoyed Dark Shadows more than I expected to, which is why I give it a solid three stars. I went in with not very high hopes, which is, I suppose, the key to truly enjoying a movie: not giving yourself room to be disappointed. Dark Shadows did not do well in cinemas this past summer thanks to a crowded market and middling reviews, plus fans of the 60s serial were disappointed and even irked by a movie that seemed to be making fun of something dear to their nostalgic hearts. But I don't think that was Burton's or Depp's intent. Best I can gather, they meant to (a) play up what they especially loved about the show to begin with, and (b) introduce it to a whole new generation. It didn't work, sadly, and I can't say I'd go so far as to recommend this movie. But I wouldn't warn anyone away from it, either. It is what it is, which is to say it's nothing special—just an odd duck outside of its time, rather like Barnabas Collins. Look at the movie as you might look at him, with a sense of: Huh. Isn't that weird? And then walk away shaking your head.
10.08.2012
Television: Upstairs, Downstairs
I started watching this by accident. (And I do mean the current one, not the show from the 1970s.) I switched the Apple TV back over to the cable box last Sunday evening, and Upstairs, Downstairs was starting. Next thing I knew, I was completely drawn in.
Now, I've only ever watched three episodes of Downton Abbey. I did that out of a sense of duty, and because so many of my friends love that program. It's the kind of thing I would normally really like. Maybe I wasn't in the right frame of mind at the time, or wasn't able to concentrate, and I should give it another shot. But whatever the reason, I was entirely able to get into Upstairs, Downstairs in a way I so far haven't been able to for Downton Abbey.
Last night I remembered Upstairs, Downstairs was airing and made a point to watch. It hadn't been a fluke; I liked it just as much this time, though the episodes had not been in sequence. (Apparently I'd seen the premiere episode and last night's was the first of Series 2 . . . But I read online that I had only missed two episodes since the first series only had three.) As opposed to being a full-on retread, this Upstairs, Downstairs is a kind of continuation from the 70s serial that was so popular. As things stand, Britain is now on the brink of World War II. Still, as they say, the more things change . . .
In any case, I can recommend it as very engaging and with just the right amount of humor. From what I understand it's no big hit or anything, but I consider it a solid show, perfect for a Sunday evening.
Now, I've only ever watched three episodes of Downton Abbey. I did that out of a sense of duty, and because so many of my friends love that program. It's the kind of thing I would normally really like. Maybe I wasn't in the right frame of mind at the time, or wasn't able to concentrate, and I should give it another shot. But whatever the reason, I was entirely able to get into Upstairs, Downstairs in a way I so far haven't been able to for Downton Abbey.
Last night I remembered Upstairs, Downstairs was airing and made a point to watch. It hadn't been a fluke; I liked it just as much this time, though the episodes had not been in sequence. (Apparently I'd seen the premiere episode and last night's was the first of Series 2 . . . But I read online that I had only missed two episodes since the first series only had three.) As opposed to being a full-on retread, this Upstairs, Downstairs is a kind of continuation from the 70s serial that was so popular. As things stand, Britain is now on the brink of World War II. Still, as they say, the more things change . . .
In any case, I can recommend it as very engaging and with just the right amount of humor. From what I understand it's no big hit or anything, but I consider it a solid show, perfect for a Sunday evening.
5.18.2012
Movies: Highlander Reboot
A little tidbit from Variety in my inbox today: Ryan Reynolds is in talks to lead in the Highlander film reboot. I can pretty easily picture Reynolds brandishing a sword. I'm just wondering whether we really need more Highlander.
This is quite the statement coming from a girl whose college nickname was Methos. (There are a certain number of people who still call me this, in fact; they may not actually know my real name.) A core group of us tripped into the collective name of "Zeistmeisters" after a laughable dinner discussion in the dining hall. Admittedly, I was more a fan of the television series, which was on when I was in high school and college, than the films, but in any case, Highlander occupies a special place in my heart and personal history.
That being said, there are a couple of [biased] reasons for my not wanting to see more of these movies: (a) I've outgrown them and would rather leave the past in the past, and/or (b) I don't want to see something old, familiar and comfortable rehashed and/or ruined.
I'm also not sure who the target audience is for something like this. Older people who have fond memories of the original movies? (I was too young for those.) People like me who remember the television series? (But were terribly disappointed by the movies that followed.) Are they rebooting Highlander in the hopes of starting another action franchise that will appeal to younger audiences? It's a mystery, but it seems possible any new outing might fall through the demographic cracks.
Then again, if they get Ryan Reynolds . . . Except he proved not to be such a huge draw to Green Lantern . . . My guess is more women want to see him in a heartthrob lead than as a swashbuckler. Even an Immortal, emotionally damaged and vulnerable heartthrob swashbuckler. And Reynolds doesn't seem to be man's man enough for the other side of the equation.
Not having seen a script, I can't make any more than passing guesses at the whole of a new Highlander franchise, with or without Reynolds. Anything, if done right and well, could work. But some things are difficult to do right and well; they require a delicate balance and very fine tuning. Something action/fantasy-oriented like Highlander is just that kind of thing—something easy to do badly and incredibly onerous to do well. Curious to see how it turns out.
Or maybe not.
This is quite the statement coming from a girl whose college nickname was Methos. (There are a certain number of people who still call me this, in fact; they may not actually know my real name.) A core group of us tripped into the collective name of "Zeistmeisters" after a laughable dinner discussion in the dining hall. Admittedly, I was more a fan of the television series, which was on when I was in high school and college, than the films, but in any case, Highlander occupies a special place in my heart and personal history.
That being said, there are a couple of [biased] reasons for my not wanting to see more of these movies: (a) I've outgrown them and would rather leave the past in the past, and/or (b) I don't want to see something old, familiar and comfortable rehashed and/or ruined.
I'm also not sure who the target audience is for something like this. Older people who have fond memories of the original movies? (I was too young for those.) People like me who remember the television series? (But were terribly disappointed by the movies that followed.) Are they rebooting Highlander in the hopes of starting another action franchise that will appeal to younger audiences? It's a mystery, but it seems possible any new outing might fall through the demographic cracks.
Then again, if they get Ryan Reynolds . . . Except he proved not to be such a huge draw to Green Lantern . . . My guess is more women want to see him in a heartthrob lead than as a swashbuckler. Even an Immortal, emotionally damaged and vulnerable heartthrob swashbuckler. And Reynolds doesn't seem to be man's man enough for the other side of the equation.
Not having seen a script, I can't make any more than passing guesses at the whole of a new Highlander franchise, with or without Reynolds. Anything, if done right and well, could work. But some things are difficult to do right and well; they require a delicate balance and very fine tuning. Something action/fantasy-oriented like Highlander is just that kind of thing—something easy to do badly and incredibly onerous to do well. Curious to see how it turns out.
Or maybe not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)