Looper

TAKE 1: One Man’s Opinion

…because film is largely subjective

 

by Frederick William Springer III

 

Looper

Release Date:  28 September 2012                                                      Runtime:  119 Minutes              

Review Date:  25 November 2012                                                       Rating:  4 (of 6)

Looper is different and interesting.

Make-up on Joseph Gordon-Levitt to make him appear as a young version of Bruce Willis was well done.  In fact, if I wasn’t familiar with Gordon-Levitt, I would believe he really looked that way.  Sharing very little screen time, it was also amusing to see that Gordon-Levitt adapted many of Willis’s facial expressions, many of which weren’t even used by Willis himself in this film, which makes me imagine Gordon-Levitt sitting and studying old Willis flicks to get them down pat.

The identity of the ultimate villain, The Rainmaker, is predictable as is the method The Rainmaker used to employ his success.  Not that predictability is necessarily a bad thing--one does want such things to be realistic within the context of the story.

There is one fatal flaw that defies common sense, but corrected would demise the entire storyline:  Knowing your employees might even have the slightest aversion to eliminating their future selves, why not have someone else carry out the deed?  Hypothetically, send future Looper A to present Looper C to be killed.  Then send future Looper C to present Looper A for him to assassinate.  Little to no sentimentality there and no potential problems.

The logic to the film’s resolution is also off kilter.  Present Joe imagines the outcome of the world Future Joe came from as having been a result of things they are both currently experiencing.  That is nonfactual, as we’ve seen a flashback/flashforward of how Present Joe originally became Future Joe and nothing in that timeline was due to the course they are both on now.  As such, Present Joe’s sentiment and resulting solution are misguided and I imagine do not have the effect he intended, though that is left up for the individual viewer to contemplate.

Wreck-It Ralph

TAKE 1: One Man’s Opinion

…because film is largely subjective

by Frederick William Springer III

Wreck-It Ralph

Release Date:  2 November 2012                                                           Runtime:  101 Minutes  

Review Date:  13 November 2012                                                          Rating:  3 (of 6)

 

A Toy Story it is not, Wreck-It Ralph strays and could use a Fix-It-Felix to get it back on track.

The trailer was misleading—seemingly, a villain wants to become heralded as the good guy, as lamented to a video game character cameo-laden support group, and he goes game hopping to do so.

However, in actuality, Ralph only hops into two—the fictitious Honor’s Duty and Sugar Rush.  The cameos seen in the trailer are pretty much the extent, the support group scene extended and the scenario returned to a second time.  There was one other clever prolonged cameo that lasted a scene that I won’t spoil but other than that, a second here, a glimpse there is the scope of the others.

Don’t get me wrong, I get it—Disney wants to merchandise their own original creations, not someone else’s.  They make more money that way.  I had just hoped I’d be seeing more of the likes of Q*Bert.  I mean, Sonic the Hedgehog is on their movie posters but not even really in the movie at all, only appearing briefly on a TV screen, not even in person if you will*.  And since you’ve got at least 5 games of yesteryear represented on the movie posters, you’d think they’d have a larger role.

While you’d expect a movie titled “Wreck-It Ralph” to be about Ralph’s journey, at one point you begin to feel it’s just as much Vanellope’s story, at times even more so, overshadowing Ralph’s.  I get the intention and sentiment that in order to redeem himself he needs to help someone just as much a misfit and put them first but the way it’s executed just feels like wandering.

Not a bad flick, but not quite the one I wanted to see.  And certainly not the one I wanted to hear—the soundtrack was very annoying.  I think maybe they’d term it “saccharine” but I believe in the past that label applied to some music I actually like.  Instead, it was more like nails on a chalkboard.

I did, however, enjoy the 3D aspect.  I also liked the animated short that preceded the movie.  I didn’t see Tangled in the theater to see if this is a reoccurring thing for the new Disney Animation Studios, but it’s a welcomed page from the Pixar playbook.

*I have read others noting he appeared two other times as well, but that just goes to show how easily missed/forgotten these spots were.

Frankenweenie

TAKE 1: One Man’s Opinion

…because film is largely subjective

 

by Frederick William Springer III

 

Frankenweenie

Release Date:  5 October 2012                                                               Runtime:  87 Minutes              

Review Date:  11 November 2012                                                           Rating:  2

 

More bland than ParaNorman, Frankenweenie lacks momentum right out of the gate.  Slow and steady does not win this race.

ParaNorman

TAKE 1: One Man’s Opinion

…because film is largely subjective

 

by Frederick William Springer III

 

ParaNorman

Release Date:  17 August 2012                                                            Runtime:  92 Minutes              

Review Date:  2 November 2012                                                          Rating:  2 (of 6)

 

More trick than treat, I walk away from ParaNorman with a sense of “blah.”  I cracked a smile at the vending machine scene and left all but completely emotionless throughout the rest. 

The rest of the audience laughing away here and there leaves me wondering if I have such a great disconnect with common man or if the rest of humanity is so easily amused.

The Expendables 2

TAKE 1: One Man’s Opinion

…because film is largely subjective

 

by Frederick William Springer III



The Expendables 2

Release Date:  17 August 2012                                                             Runtime:  103 Minutes              

Review Date:  14 October 2012                                                             Rating:  4 (of 6)

     If you're into action movies, and some of the biggest names in the genre, then you might enjoy yourself at The Expendables 2.

     I must say, I liked the sequel more than the original.  Why that is could be a combination of many factors.  Of all the stars in the original, Bruce Willis (Church) would have been the lure to get me into the theater but there he's limited to a one scene cameo alongside Arnold Schwarzenegger's Trench's also one scene, even briefer cameo.  Here, Willis's role is slightly expanded--since he is CIA and not a member of the Expendables team, he only has limited screen time.

     Introduced in this film, Chuck Norris makes a guest appearance as the lone wolf mercenary Booker.  Like Willis and Schwarzenegger, his time is short (but poignant), which is a shame because I wouldn't mind a movie with just these 3.  There were also jokes poking fun at Schwarzenegger, Willis and Stallone's past films as well as Norris's "Facts" popularity that were fun in a way that didn't pull you out of the movie you were watching (though, the Terminator ones did become overdone and corny).

     Overall, I think I liked the story more.  Whether that has to do with new writers, a new director bringing it to the screen or some other factor, I don't know.  The only problem I found with the movie was the scene where, not to give too much away, the Expendables lower their weapons in a hostage situation.  It didn't feel right, particularly due to the opening scene in the original film.  Some might bemoan that with Jet Li's Yang not on this mission that, in his absence, the CIA cohort that Church forces on the team is also Asian, like some quota is being filled.  But, despite this, I found Nan Yu a welcomed addition as Maggie.

     Now, for the 3^rd installment of the series, all they need to do is add Steven Seagal to the roster…Kurt Russell, Mel Gibson and Harrison Ford would be kind of cool too.

Total Recall (2012)

TAKE 1: One Man’s Opinion

…because film is largely subjective

 

by Frederick William Springer III

 

Total Recall

Release Date:  3 August 2012                                                              Runtime:  118 Minutes              

Review Date:  2 October 2012                                                              Rating:  3 (of 6)

 

     The Total Recall remake stands on its own two feet but falls short of the original.

     I recently (within the last 6 months) rewatched the Arnold Schwarzenegger version and, 20 years later, it still holds up as a great flick.  In preparation for the upcoming reboot, I also read the short story the original was loosely based upon, "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale," by Philip K. Dick.  The story, only about 20 pages in length, probably wouldn't translate well on the big screen, particularly the ending, which might work better as an episode of the Twilight Zone.  So the new isn't any more grounded in the source than the original, this really being a new interpretation of the film only, keeping many of the new characters created in that incarnation.

     One thing a big deal had been made of was keeping the three-breasted woman of the 1990 film.  However, this served absolutely no purpose here and was completely out of place in this version.  In the Schwarzenegger movie, she was encountered on Mars, where Mutants were commonplace and so, it was at least a somewhat feasible genetic defect within the parameters of the story.  Here, Colin Farrell runs into her on Earth, where no such mutants have developed.  (And, in fact, none of this movie takes place on Mars at all.)

     The acting was good, no problems there.  The role of Lori was much expanded from Kate Beckinsale's Sharon Stone counterpart with good results.  The premise was alright and it was action-packed, maybe more so than the original.  However, I think the element of fun present in the original was absent here, which made this less interesting or, at least, less engaging (both on the level of a comparison and, more importantly, as a standalone film).

     Also, probably a production design choice to convey societal despair and the dullness that made Colin Farrell's Quaid want to escape his life by going to Rekall, the overall color scheme, wardrobe and architectural structures were so dull, uniform and ominous that nothing really stood out or popped on the screen.  Again, less interesting, less engaging.

     While not a complete bomb, for a more satisfying experience I'd recommend cutting 5 minutes off your viewing time and watching the original instead.

Brave

TAKE 1: One Man’s Opinion

…because film is largely subjective

 

by Frederick William Springer III

 

Brave

Release Date:  22 June 2012                                                                Runtime:  100 Minutes              

Review Date:  2 October 2012                                                              Rating:  4 (of 6)

     I must say that there was a disparity between the movie I thought I was going to see based on the trailer and the actual film itself when I sat down and watched Brave.  Normally, I'd give kudos for this bit of misleading presentation, annoyed when all the good parts are shown in the trailer leaving no real reason to see the piece in its entirety. 

     But here, instead of being an interesting adventure of a young girl who defies being a party to an arranged marriage and seeks her own way in the world, it is really about a misshapen spell that can tear Princess Merida's family apart and her trying to rectify it.  Which, too, could work well, but I found the results of the spell a little hokey.

     That being said, I think the Pixar fanatic crowd will love it nonetheless, though I myself would rate it in the lower half of the Pixar motion picture library.  It goes without saying that the animation and graphic design are all fantastically done, candy for the eyes, as we've become accustomed to expect.  And, as has become the norm with many Pixar films, Brave does have its moments where the heartstrings are successfully pulled, too.