Moonrise Kingdom

WHAT’S DOIN 

Moonrise Kingdom is one of those movie gems that performs well in limited release, and, several months later, you come across at the local theater while looking for something to watch on a Sunday afternoon, or, if one still exists in your neighborhood, on the shelf at the rental store. The first time I see most Wes Anderson films is on a television. This time around I was prepared for and looking forward to seeing an Anderson film in a theater. The only Wes Anderson movie I’d seen on the big screen prior to Moonrise was The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, a very underrated and entertaining film, and that was 8 years ago. The yellow palette on that large screen was a shock to the system. So many of Moonrise’s scenes could be French (not sure why I picked this country in my mind, I just did) paintings.

Moonrise did not win the title of my favorite Wes Anderson movie. That remains The Royal Tenenbaums by a wide margin. However, there was something sweet to the point of being touching in Moonrise that I think even the least sophisticated audiences could appreciate.

Anderson deserves praise for acknowledging that sexuality exists between prepubescent children, and successfully portraying a nuanced, yet tasteful and age appropriate, eroticism between two 12 year olds without being the least bit vulgar or exploitive.

GOOD TIMES

Moonrise is an exhibition of great acting by children. Kara Hayward and Jared Gilman are magnificent at capturing the subtlety of innocent love. It’s hard to believe Hayward had almost no acting experience prior to Moonrise. The performances by the other Khaki Scouts were also exceptional. The interactions between Hayward and Gilman and the scouts were the highlights of the film. I usually hate movies with children comprising most of the cast. With the exception of the lull mentioned below, I was thoroughly entertained.

NOT SO GOOD TIMES

My only complaint with Moonrise is that Anderson spent too much of the film focusing on Sam and Suzy’s trek through the woods and not enough time on the secondary characters, the cement holding together this adolescent love story. There’s a thin line between cute and annoying and, even with a total runtime of only 94 minutes, extended scenes between Gilman and Hayward were a bit much and brought the steady pace of the movie to a painful crawl.

RANDOM MUSINGS

I’ve never seen Anderson’s directorial debut, Bottle Rocket. I don’t like Owen Wilson, and what I’ve seen of Luke Wilson’s earlier work has not impressed me. Until the release of The Grand Budapest Hotel, which I just found out stars Johnny Depp, I plan to sit myself down for 91 minutes and finally give Rocket a shot. Moonrise has put a Wes Anderson taste back in my mouth but, unfortunately, I don’t own any of his movies. Until earlier today when I looked it up, I would have sworn Anderson directed I Heart Huckabees, which I do own on DVD. I was shocked to learn Huckabees was, instead, directed by David O. Russell. My point is that I’d like to explore more of Anderson’s work and, maybe, rediscover some of my favorites which, inexcusably, are not yet a part of my DVD collection.

I don’t have a great love story from my childhood. The closest is my friendship with the redheaded girl who lived around the corner from my grandmother’s house. I don’t even remember her name. I barely remember her face. And we never kissed or tried to run away together.

The Dark Knight Rises

WHAT’S DOIN

It’s hard to believe four years have passed since Heath Ledger’s brilliant performance as Joker in The Dark Knight. With Memento, The Prestige, Inception and Knight on his resume, Christopher Nolan has built up a lot of film credit with me, but I’ll be the first to admit that I was not as excited as many others when characters, storylines, stills, teaser trailers and other promotional materials for The Dark Knight Rises started being released to the public. The more snippets I saw of Rises the less I saw a well executed conclusion. After watching Rises in its entirety, it appears as if Nolan only made the third film because of some sense of obligation to the studio and fans to bring to a close his trilogy, and that I only went because I wanted closure on this update to the Batman saga, but neither of us really wanted to be there.  

My favorite Batman storyline is his initial encounter with Bane. In preparation for Rises’ release, I started reading the Knightfall comics from the 1990s which, looking back, may have been a mistake, as I found myself comparing the film to the comic and being disappointed that much of the rich material was ignored. I’ve never been a fan of Superman and, after this underwhelming wrap to the Batman trilogy, I have very low expectations for Man of Steel, the next movie Nolan is producing.

GOOD TIMES

Initially, I did not understand the casting of Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle/Catwoman. Hathaway is a great actress and I enjoy most of her work. I just could not imagine her fitting the typical Catwoman mold. I was wrong. Nolan’s Catwoman was refreshingly different, taking full advantage of Hathaway’s range as an actress. Hathaway stole every scene she was in, whether it was as Kyle or her costumed alter-ego. Catwoman’s movements were also very well done. It’s a shame Batman’s weren’t. Batman’s first fight with Bane was clumsy. And that’s being kind.

Michael Cain also turned in a stellar acting performance, even when his lines weren’t the best. The reveal scene between Cain and Christian Bale was heartbreaking.

The League of Shadows tie-in was a great idea, even if the execution wasn’t. I’m reminded of the Randy tape from Scream 3.

I enjoyed Cillian Murphy’s small part and he has the best line of the movie.

NOT SO GOOD TIMES

The eight year time jump didn’t make sense to me before watching Rises and doesn’t make any more sense after. I totally get that Nolan was trying to make Bruce Wayne appear like Howard Hughes. But when you have Batman and Bruce disappear at the same time it doesn’t take a genius to connect the dots. Who else would have access to the technology Batman uses on a regular basis? Maybe the man who owns the company where all of the technology was created who went into seclusion the same day Batman stopped patrolling Gotham? Even with the passing of The Harvey Dent Act and after mourning Dent’s death, it doesn’t make sense that Batman would stop fighting crime, wanted man or not. And why was he crippled? He’s not Batman any more so he stops taking care of his body? I’ve never been a superhero, but I don’t think being Batman is like riding a bicycle.

I have many gripes when it comes to Bane. The first I was aware of before I even got into the theater. Nolan’s version of Bane’s mask looks stupid and is impractical, especially for someone who headbutts as much as Nolan’s Bane does. You can’t have Two-Face without the coin and you can’t have Bane without Venom. What was Nolan thinking (something I asked myself a lot during this film)? I still don’t completely understand the convoluted reason(s) Nolan made up for the mask. Bane’s voice was also terrible. Any Bane dialogue was unintelligible to the point of needing subtitles. Because there were no subtitles, I often had to rely on the other characters’ reactions. Sometimes this worked. Most of the times it didn’t. The rest of my Bane gripes are in the spoilers.

The bomb scene was such a cop out. The saddest part is that it seemed to be a rip-off of the bomb scene from Batman (1966). And if it wasn’t, why didn’t Nolan do something that I swear I’ve seen already in Iron Man and The Avengers? For a writer/director who’s known for his creativity, this was a huge disappointment.

*****SPOILERS*****

The underground prison annoyed me from the beginning. If Talia/Bane escaped from the prison why would they not come back, release the prisoners, and destroy the prison? And if Bane is going to continue to use the prison for his own enemies (I didn’t know he had any enemies that he didn’t kill) why give them a rope to escape? Why didn’t they use the rope to escape? And why was there so much emphasis placed on reaching the platform? It looked to me like any capable rock climber, which I believe Batman is, could have continued climbing up until they reached the top. When Bruce becomes a prisoner it reminded me of an earlier Bale film, Rescue Dawn. It also reminds me somewhat of the prison escape from The Chronicles of Riddick. I thought part of Wayne’s rehab was going to include the Lazarus Pit but, as with the rest of Rises, I was disappointed.

If you take away Bane, the Talia al Ghul twist is perfect. Bane is a stand-alone villain, something Nolan should have learned from the failure that was Batman & Robin. Going back to the Knightfall comics, Bane’s motivation was clear. Bane wanted to “break the Bat” and take over Gotham. Nolan completely muddies Bane’s motivation in Rises. After saving Talia’s life and being rewarded by banishment from The League of Shadows, why would he continue to be loyal to Talia, his banisher’s daughter, and agree to assist the League in destroying Gotham, which is really Ra’s Al Ghul’s aim? What is the cause of Bane’s animosity towards Batman? Isn’t he more likely to be on Batman’s side? Isn’t the enemy of my enemy my friend? Either way, Bane does not play second fiddle to Talia al Ghul. To make him Talia’s attack dog is to completely misunderstand the character.

Rises’ ending made no sense, yet still managed to be the best part of the movie. Wayne seems to have taken Alfred’s advice and disappeared with Kyle. Kind of. Bruce fakes his own death, but only after he reveals his true identity to Commissioner Gordon and fixes the bat signal. What? And why fix the signal before John Blake discovers the cave and even considers taking over as Batman? If Wayne’s intention wasn’t to have Blake become Batman, is it, as Nolan suggests by revealing that Blake’s name is Robin (you have no idea how much I wish it was Jean-Paul Valley instead), to have him become his sidekick? That would make more sense, as Blake has no training and was barely able to handle himself in an attack with multiple assailants, but then it brings us back to the question of what purpose Wayne’s faked death served, especially after he let everyone who knows his true identity know he’s still alive. Wayne has no resources, unless he steals Talia’s fortune, so I don’t know how it’s financially possible for him or Blake to continue being Batman.

Something I’ve always hated about Hollywood is that when a character has one or more love interests, they kill off one of the rivals because, god forbid, everything isn’t tied up in a nice, neat bow.

*****SPOILERS*****

RANDOM MUSINGS

I work Thursday nights from 4pm to midnight so going to a midnight showing of Rises was out of the question. I made plans to go to a local movie grill with my live-in lady friend the next night after she got off work. Because I work nights, I had no idea about the theater shooting until I woke up around 1pm on Friday. I still don’t know much about the shooting, outside of the casualty count and the booby trapping of the guy’s apartment. From what little I did read, it seems as if it, like everything else in an election year, is being overly politicized.

When I entered the grill I noticed a police officer and a rent-a-cop minding the doors, which I assume was a preventative measure in response to the recent shooting. After meeting up with my lady friend, who showed up to the theater 20 minutes before I did, I was informed that she didn’t buy tickets (never send a woman to do a man’s job). The end result was missing the 7pm showing, which was sold out, and having to wait around for the 8:05. Rises is 164 minutes long. I think we spent 4 hours at the theater. Or at least I did. She left to go back to the office, which is a 30 minute drive one way, because she left her debit card under her keyboard. I know what you’re thinking, but in my defense I’m not a cheap ass. I’m a broke ass. She made it back just in time to miss the opening airplane scene.

I had one of the longest pees of my life after Rises. While waiting for the 8:05 showing I had a sweet tea at the bar and later ordered a refill and a water. I didn’t even drink the water. The plan was to pee right before the movie started but, with people cramming into the theater and searching for empty seats, I had to stay in my seat because the lady friend was still in transit. And even though I didn’t think the movie was good, I still didn’t want to miss anything. Just for the record, I had to pee with over an hour left in Rises and still waited around for the end of the credits before making my way to the bathroom.

My list of top three superhero movies remains unchanged:

1. The Dark Knight

2. The Amazing Spider-Man

3. Iron Man

The Amazing Spider-Man

WHAT’S DOIN

For months I’ve been hearing criticism about how Spider-Man didn’t need a reboot, especially since the most recent franchise, which ended only a few years ago, made so much money at the box office. I disrespectfully disagree. The Sam Raimi Spider-Man trilogy was terrible. The only watchable parts of any of the Raimi Spider-Man movies were the acting performances by Alfred Molina, Rosemary Harris, Cliff Robertson and J.K. Simmons. The rest was an insufferable mix of bad casting, bad acting, bad CG and bad writing.

From the first trailer it was clear Marc Webb captured something that escaped Raimi.

GOOD TIMES

The casting in Spider-Man was great. Tobey Maguire was pretending to be Spider-Man. Andrew Garfield is Spider-Man. The casting is made even more important when you consider the chemistry that’s supposed to exist between Peter Parker and Mary Jane/Gwen Stacy. In the Raimi trilogy, almost all of the interaction between Maguire and Kirsten Dunst was uncomfortably awkward, including the famed upside-down kiss in the rain. Contrast that with Garfield and Emma Stone, who you’d swear were a couple off-screen based on their respective performances. Pick any scene between Maguire and Dunst in which he’s telling her they can’t be together and set that next to the scene in the end of Spider-Man in which Garfield tells Stone it’s over between them. There’s no comparison.

Spider-Man’s movements seemed more organic in this movie than in the Raimi trilogy, and I think it had something to do with the influence of Parkour. There was something it’s hard to put my finger on that felt more true to Spider-Man’s mannerisms in the comics. I also enjoyed the first-person web-slinging that was showcased in the first Spider-Man teaser trailer.

Rhys Ifans’ performance as the villain was right up there with Molina. I was expecting to hate the CG on The Lizard but was pleasantly surprised.

*****SPOILERS*****

I loved the subtle change in the traditional cause of Uncle Ben’s death and how that motivated Peter to become Spider-Man. I also enjoyed how Peter’s need for revenge didn’t take over the story, and how Webb left that aspect of Spider-Man’s saga unresolved.

*****SPOILERS*****

NOT SO GOOD TIMES

The only thing I didn’t like about Spider-Man was the corny manner in which the city seemed to rally around Spider-Man during his big showdown with The Lizard,  but even that didn’t bother me as much as it usually does.

RANDOM MUSINGS

Every time one of these superhero movies comes out one of the first things I do is re-rank my top superhero movies. Here is my current top three:

1. The Dark Knight

2. The Amazing Spider-Man

3. Iron Man

Ted

WHAT’S DOIN

 

A few months ago, Ted wasn’t even on my must-see summer movie radar. Then I saw the red band trailer online and was immediately hooked. The only thing that made me somewhat reluctant to see Ted was that Seth MacFarlane wrote the screenplay, directed the film, and is the voice of Ted. I know Family Guy has a legion of fans, but flashbacks as the main vehicle for comedy and constant references to old television shows and musicals don’t do it for me. Even after having seen Ted, I can’t shake the feeling that it would have been better if it was written/directed by Adam McKay or Judd Apatow.

 

At first glance, I completely misunderstood exactly what Ted is. I thought Ted was a toy with advanced artificial intelligence that mimicked his owner’s behavior and outlasted his warranty by decades. Ted is actually a regular teddy bear, brought to life by a boy’s wish for a lifelong friend. The conflict in the story arises when John (Mark Wahlberg), now in his mid-thirties, tries to cultivate his relationship with longtime girlfriend Lori (Mila Kunis), but Ted (MacFarlane) continues to act as enabler and, more often, instigator of his adolescent behavior. John is forced to choose between his girlfriend and his best friend.

 

In short, Ted is what you’d get if Peter Griffin had a talking teddy bear as a child instead of a talking dog as an adult.

 

GOOD TIMES

 

The CG was very well done. I was expecting it to be a distraction that drowned out the comedy.  I remember MacFarlane on The Daily Show saying that he used the same technology as Avatar and was puzzled by the fact that no one ever attempted to use the tools for comedy. This was one of the great successes of Ted.

   

Patrick Stewart doing the narration was the cherry on top of a funny movie that somehow made teddy bear shtick work.

 

NOT SO GOOD TIMES

 

My biggest Ted complaint was the slow start. John’s childhood seemed to drag on forever, it wasn’t funny, and was probably the worst way to start a movie, especially a comedy.

 

The gay jokes got to be annoying and, as with the slow start, are perfect examples of things that would have been better executed by McKay or Apatow. Ted did more to convince me that MacFarlane is in the closet. If Anderson Cooper can come out…

 

RANDOM MUSINGS

 

Most actresses seem to hit a wall, but Kunis, like wine, has gotten better with age. I would drink that all day. But that wasn’t always the case. When she starred on That ‘70s Show, which was all-around terrible, Kunis was this stick of a creature with huge bug eyes and a voice that was more shriek than speech. I never understood how, year after year, she made every Hollywood hot list known to gay man. Then I saw Kunis in Forgetting Sarah Marshall and started to get it. Her voice was still deafening, but for the first time I got the attraction. Then came Black Swan. I’m a huge fan of Natalie Portman and seeing Portman and Kunis going toe-to-toe, finger-to finger was satisfyingly erotic (yes, that’s a reference to both ballet and lesbianism). I don’t even remember Kunis’ voice. By Friends with Benefits, Kunis had evolved into a sex symbol and legitimate leading lady in my mind. Continuing the streak of sexiness was Kunis 2.0 in Ted.

 

I realize that there’s a lot of age fudging in Hollywood , but who buys Wahlberg as being in his mid-thirties? He hasn’t looked that young since Three Kings. I was shocked to learn he’s only 41. He may still have a great body, but Wahlberg’s face has not aged well.

 

*****SPOILERS*****

How in the hell did MacFarlane get Giovanni Ribisi to do that dance? Regardless of the genre of the film, I think Ribisi should get credit for a great acting performance. Creepy, but great. I’m assuming MacFarlane used that same trick on Ryan Reynolds and Patrick Warburton. What Reynolds and Warburton did went well beyond losing a bet or doing a friend a solid.

*****SPOILERS*****

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

WHAT’S DOIN

Vampire Hunter made it on my short must-see summer movie list, but I should have known better considering how terrible most vampire movies end up being. Conceptually, Vampire Hunter had the potential to be great, and the promotional materials, especially the movie posters, did a very good job of selling the idea of a young Abraham Lincoln chopping off the heads of and staking early American vampires. Thinking back, I’m sure much of my misplaced enthusiasm came from my own misconception that Vampire Hunter was based on a graphic novel and not a novel. I came in expecting something closer to Watchmen, which did a great job of weaving fiction and history, was visually stunning, and told a compelling story.

At times, Vampire Hunter is indistinguishable from Wanted, but it fails in every way Wanted succeeded. Vampire Hunter also reminded me of last year’s borefest, Priest, a vampire movie based on a comic, which was a waste of the talent of some of my favorite lesser-known actors.

GOOD TIMES

The vampire CG was very well done. It was similar to the undead aesthetic of Blade 2, which is one of my favorite vampire movies, both visually and narratively.  I also liked the explanation for how vampires are able to withstand sunlight and practically disappear, and why it was necessary for Lincoln to be recruited as a vampire hunter.

*****SPOILERS*****

I was pleasantly surprised when Vampire Hunter ended without trying to rewrite history with respect to the John Wilkes Booth assassination, which I expected to be a huge part of the plot.

*****SPOILERS*****

NOT SO GOOD TIMES

When I go to the theater to watch Abraham Lincoln slay vampires, I expect him to be a badass from the beginning. The training montage does nothing but undermine any confidence I have in Lincoln’s abilities, which makes all subsequent action sequences hard to watch, and makes the task of suspending reality more difficult. The emphasis placed on Lincoln’s training made even less sense when his childhood friend, Will (Anthony Mackie), was able to dispatch vampires just as easily as Lincoln without any training whatsoever.

If Lincoln had a duty to remain in solitude and keep a low profile as part of being a vampire hunter, his political aspirations made absolutely no sense. His affection for Mary Todd also came from left field and was obvious as a lame excuse to have a damsel in distress scene in which Lincoln would save Todd from vampires.

The attempt to mix the abolition of slavery with an underground war against vampires was confusing, and I found myself rolling my eyes when vampires dressed as Confederate soldiers attacked Union lines without weapons. I was also rolling my eyes during most of the big fight scene on the train.

RANDOM MUSINGS

I couldn’t get past how much Benjamin Walker looks like Liam Neeson. It was so distracting I couldn’t even begin to evaluate his Lincoln performance.

Prometheus

WHAT’S DOIN

All I knew about Prometheus going in is that it takes place in the same universe as the Aliens franchise. Movie-goers are not rewarded with very many solid science fiction films, and after seeing the first full-length trailer I was hoping Prometheus would be that generation defining sci-fi movie that set the bar for any proceeding flicks, especially considering how filmmakers have unparalleled CG resources at their fingertips. I’ll take Prometheus over Avatar any day, but I’m still anxiously awaiting a big science fiction blockbuster that’s just as good, if not better, as sci-fi films I really enjoy, such as Gamer or Surrogates, which are complete movies that don’t depend on visual gimmicks to cover up shortcomings in the story.

GOOD TIMES

Prometheus is one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever seen on film. The plot actually keeps pace with the visuals until the very end when everything falls apart. The acting was also solid from top to bottom and, unlike in your average slasher or monster movie, I cared about the survival of most of the characters, excluding, of course, the ones you’re supposed to be rooting against.

NOT SO GOOD TIMES

*****SPOILERS*****

Nothing about Shaw’s (Noomi Rapace) pregnancy made any sense, nevermind the do-it-yourself surgery she performed. First, an octopus-like worm creature comes out of her belly after she sleeps with and is impregnated by an infected Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green). Then, that same creature grows to the size of a room, kills the remaining Engineer, and implants something in the Engineer’s body which it uses as an incubator. The result of the incubation is an Alien which seemingly ignores everything that is established by the Alien and Predator films, such as the existence of the Aliens on Earth for thousands of years, which begs the question as to why Prometheus was made in the same universe instead of creating an entirely new universe that allows for endless latitude.

Assuming for a second that the android, David (Michael Fassbender), wasn’t lying when he said there were other ships on the planet, what makes Shaw think that she can trust him after he just betrayed her? In order to get to this planet, the crew of Prometheus had to be in stasis for over two years and relied on David to run the ship until they reached their destination. The Engineers’ home planet is presumably further away than two years. If Shaw is going to stay awake for what could amount to decades, what is she going to eat during this time period? How does she survive the trip? And if she chooses stasis, what makes her think that Engineer stasis technology is compatible with humans, or that David wouldn’t wait until she was under and betray her again?

I don’t care how advanced of a being you are, you are not going to survive any stasis that lasts thousands of years. It would have made for a better story if the Prometheus crew never encountered a living Engineer and that it was their biological weapon that became a threat after one of the crew was infected.

*****SPOILERS*****

They must not teach lateral movement in the future.

RANDOM MUSINGS

I’m more interested in an exploration of Shaw’s journey than any Prometheus sequels or some sort of tie in with the Alien or Predator franchises. Also, I wonder if I’m the only person who thinks that Rapace looks just like one of the vampires from 30 Days of Night.