Tuesday, May 29, 2007

20 Things I Learned From 90's Movies

The cinematic sources for these statements are pretty easy to guess, for the most part; at least I think so. I even put them in chronological order, more or less. Stumped? Let me know.

You can't buy the necessities of life with cookies.

You are what you do.

You can't leave the desk like that!

We covet what we see every day.

Ten thousand years will give you such a crick in the neck.

It's all about the information.

Life finds a way.

Nothing's more suspicious than frog's breath.

There are seventeen different things a guy can do when he lies to give himself away.

Title does not dictate behavior.

Sometimes there just aren't enough rocks.

Life has its little bonuses.

Rockets explode!

Plants don't talk.

Don't fold the maps.

The pen is blue.

Mathematics is the only truly universal language.

Gripes go up.

One of the drawbacks to being intangible is that you have no say in the editorial process.

The things you own end up owning you.

Friday, May 25, 2007

Pirates 3: At World's End

I would have written this earlier today, after getting home from the midnight show around 5am, but I'm not as young as I used to be, so I just went straight to bed. Pathetic, I know...what can you do?

And the review is...glowingly positive. Seems a change of pace after I bashed the previous two, but honestly, this one doesn't suffer from the problems of its predecessors. Pirates 3 is compelling where the first two are silly, moving where the others are cheesy, and funny where the first two are annoying. And it was really funny; I need to see it again without so many people around so I can hear what was said after some of the better moments. A few of the gags are a bit too easy and lowbrow; a surprising quantity of dick jokes for a Disney movie. There are some great bits with Jack the Monkey; I won't spill them here.

Everything that worked in the first two movies still works here, sometimes even better than before. And while the consensus of early news reviews is focused on how confusing and confounded the many plots and subplots are, I had no problem following the entire story all the way through. And on the second one, it did seem a bit over-convoluted to me, needlessly so. This is even more complex, yet I was never left wondering what was going on. It's possible that, having seen the second one just a few days ago, the plots and relationships were fresh in my mind and that made it easier to follow, but I believe, in addition to my awareness, the filmmakers actually did a better job of telling this story. They made everyone's motivations clear, and they edit the movie together in such a way that I was never left waiting to get back to another part of the story. It all makes sense together, as complex as it is, and I don't feel they succeeded in doing this for the previous two films.

There are a couple things I wasn't entirely sure about, and a few other things that could have been done better, but nothing that detracts from the overall experience. With the first two, I was sitting there thinking "Well that's dumb, but oh well" about every ten minutes. Didn't happen this time; they were minor elements. I won't say what because I don't want to spoil anything.

The aspects I admire in the first two were even stronger here. The visual effects are stunning, the images grandiose and astonishing. Even the simple, non-action sequences were quite beautiful to gaze at. Speaking of beautiful to gaze at, Keira Knightly and Orlando Bloom...what can I say; they're more gorgeous than ever, especially when they share the screen. And the best thing about the first two movies...Johnny Depp, the actor, the performer, the movie star...he really turns it up here. Again, I wish to spoil nothing, but in one major sequence, and several minor ones, he gives the most amazing series of performances. Nobody can do what he does with such a perfect mix of charm, bravado, and silliness. As good as he was before, he is that much better here. He continues to be a unique treasure in the world of film, and one of my personal favorites.

The rest of the regular cast are just as good as ever; Geoffrey Rush in particular seems to be having a grand old time. His delivery is so distinctive and precise; he really sets the tone for most of the film. Yes, Keith Richards has a cameo. It did seem to fit the story and serve a small purpose, instead of simply being a casting stunt, but the crowd in the theater kept murmuring the whole time he was on screen, so I can't say for sure how well it worked.

The story, as the third of a trilogy, does a good job of bringing it all back around in a natural way. Nothing feels forced like the other two, as if something needed to happen to push the story toward the next sequence, even if it comes out of nowhere. Everything here feels motivated, and true, right down to the way each character ends up once the movie is over. I've heard it said there are big surprises regarding which characters are killed off, and when, and how, but I wouldn't say I was surprised by any of them. Like I said, it's organic, not forced, and it works for the story. Some fans may be disappointed by the death of certain characters, others may be glad to see them go, but all in all, I think the filmmakers did what needed to be done.

Not than anyone really needs encouragement, if they already want to see this movie, but I think it's definitely worth seeing. If you haven't seen the other two, you probably won't have a clue what's going on, but if you don't like the other two, you could still be impressed by At World's End, as I was, and did not expect to be. So forget about the box office, and just go see a good movie. For me, that's all it's ever truly about.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Pirates....arrrrr

The new Pirates of the Caribbean movie comes out this weekend, and a friend invited me to a midnight show on Thursday. Since I never got around to seeing the second one, I rented it a couple days ago. Wouldn't want to go to the theater unprepared, now would I? So, with the second movie fresh in my mind, and the third one looming on the horizon, I have pirates on the brain. And there are a few things I don't understand.

The main thing that boggles my sensibilities is the hype. The fandom. I'm often a movie geek myself, and I can really get into the intricacies of a cinematic creation, but, man...these Pirates fans are out there! They are so into it, and I honestly don't see what's so special about the films. They're entertaining; absolutely. They're fun, they give the viewer an enjoyable experience, they star three of the most beautiful people on the planet...but they're really not that good. The story goes all over the place. Events seem to occur for the sole purpose of creating an action sequence, and not out of a naturally developing storyline. It's not great writing. It's creating a script out of a movie, not the other way around.

Okay, so most fans aren't really going to care about the story as much as I do, right? Well, no; they actually seem to care a great deal about the tiniest details. Problem is, they seem to think these details actually make sense. They respond to the character's actions and motivations as if half the things they do don't come out of nowhere, simply so the movie can continue. And I know, people will say that Jack Sparrow's motivations are supposed to be unclear, because he's a pirate, a scalawag, a deceitful, charming rogue...that's not what I'm talking about. That's context; I'm referring to content.

Near the beginning of Pirates 2, Bootstrap Bill Turner shows up to talk to Jack...where did he come from? How did he get there? He grabs Jack's hand and somehow causes this weird black spot to show up there, which apparently means the Kraken will now chase Jack, because he has the black spot...how did he give him the spot? Later, Davy Jones takes the spot away? How? Why? Even later, the spot suddenly grows back! With no provocation? WTF?

I know there are answers to these questions, that the fans I'm referring to know all about these things, but my point is, the movie doesn't make these things clear in the first place, because it doesn't think it has to. I think it should, because I consider it bad writing not to, but, as long as a viewer understands that this black spot on Jack's hand means the Kraken will come after him, that's enough. If you understand that, you know why he gets away from the open sea, and you know why the Kraken shows up later. And the Kraken has to show up later, because it's a big cool action sequence, and, this being a summer movie, it needs to have a number of big cool action sequences. Who cares why, right? I do...

So anyway, these fans get into the tiniest little details about Will and Elizabeth, and whatever Jack is up to, like the movie is a giant tapestry of mystery and there are riddles to be solved...like it's an intricate construct of love and betrayal and supernatural elements and blah blah blah...it isn't. Even though many small details are skipped over for the sake of bringing the storyline to all the major sequences, it's pretty straightforward. The fans talk about clues and hints and the simplest of actions as if they have some great meaning beyond their part in the story...they don't. It's just a fun movie. Let it go, freaks.

Enough about the movies; I've also got real pirates on the brain. Well, maybe not real pirates, but what is referred to these days as piracy, namely, bootleg DVD's. I don't get it. Who would want them? Why would anyone want to buy, even at what might be considered a nice cheap price, what is basically a home video of an actual movie? Someone sits in the theater with a camera, records the movie, and people actually want to watch this recording? Why? It looks like crap, it sounds awful, and if you want to get technical, it's stolen property. I fail to comprehend the inclination. It's low quality, and illegal. How is that appealing? Come to think of it, I may have just figured this out...

This may sound familiar to some of you, if you're reading this; you know who you are: good, fast, cheap; pick two. That's on the production end of making a movie. But this piracy/bootleg problem may be operating under the same dictum, and apparently, there are millions of fools out there choosing fast and cheap for their viewing pleasure. It's pretty stupid, really. I mean, if you need it fast, go to the theater! That's why it's there, for you to go see it right away! If you avoid the theater because you need it cheap, then wait for the video store to sell a used DVD. If you can't wait and you can't pay, you won't get quality. And if you don't need it to be good...why do you even bother? What's the point of watching or owning a movie if it's no good?

Even though I'm not a big fan of the Pirates movies, I do think they're worth the rental price. If I did really like them, I'd certainly think they were worth the purchase price. I even think the third one is worth the ticket price I paid to see it tomorrow night. Because I may not be a fan of these particular movies, but I am a movie fan. I only wish that everyone who buys or views a movie had as much respect for the craft as I do.

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Sequels

I'm not against them...I even get really interested, in some of them. I just wish they would actually make good movies, not only with the sequels, but in the first place. I can think of five second sequels (that's a quantity of third movies, not movies five seconds long, heh heh) coming out this summer, two of which are already in theaters...yes, that's FIVE movies that are the THIRD in what may very likely end up becoming more than a trilogy. I'm sure anyone who reads this has already heard of the movies, but those five, off the top of my head, are: Spider-Man 3, Shrek the Third, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, Ocean's Thirteen, and Rush Hour 3. Here's a quick cast-off opinion for each.

I used to be a big fan of Sam Raimi; I think the Spider-movies are stupid and overblown. What happened to him? A lot of spectacle, but nothing spectacular. Tobey sucks. Kirsten is so much better than that. I hear a lot of people say the first one wasn't so good, sure, but the second one was near-perfect...I think those people are nuts. The second one was just as stupid, only in different ways. He keeps taking off his mask for no reason; that alone is enough for me to frown and shake my head, but there's so much more...

I like the first Shrek because it's funny, even though the story doesn't hold together, and elements of the animation are quite amazing, such as the lighting, backgrounds, and textures, but the facial expression is really pretty bland, especially compared to the work by Pixar. Now, the only reason I make a direct comparison here is that in 2001, Shrek won the first Oscar for Best Animated Feature, when it was so clearly more deserved by Monsters, Inc. That will continue to piss me off until the end of time. I have not yet gotten around to renting Shrek 2. I'm sure it will be funny and pretty, yet lacking in story and emotionally expressive character animation.

The first Pirates looked great, sounded great, made good use of its large budget...still kinda stupid, though, and I expect the same of the second one, which, again, I have not yet gotten around to renting. I will; I swear.

Ocean's Eleven is not a great movie, or even a good movie, but it is a fun movie. Entertainment for the sake of entertainment, and there aren't enough movies like it these days. I really enjoy it, and I watch it all the time. Twelve, though...blecch. They tried too hard to recreate the fun, and it was simply too ridiculous. Too much plot. If the third one gets back to what made the first one enjoyable, which is the interaction of all these actors who seem to be having a great time, it just might work out okay.

Rush Hour is a dumbass action comedy, an old formula that only works when the characters themselves are more interesting than merely entertaining. These guys are not interesting. I had, and still have, no reason to see the second one; now that there's finally a third, I have no reason to see that one either.

There is a distinct possibility that any or all of these franchises will not stop at three. I don't think that's a bad thing...I just wish they wouldn't spend so much money on sequels, and have more set aside for original ideas, for simple, interesting cinema. I know it's a business, and every business needs a big moneymaker, but...it's just too much. How many other sequels, and comic book adaptations, and remakes, will be out by the end of year? I don't much feel like counting, but the funny thing is, some movies fit more than one of these categories...think about it. How sad is that?

Thursday, May 17, 2007

And We're Off...

For anyone who's happened onto this page, I'll be adding things here and there as I post from day to day, and I assure you there will be something of interest very soon, especially if you love to read and think about movies...maybe even watch one on occasion. Thanks for checking it out.