Change Your Image
NCHaskew
Reviews
Godzilla (2014)
King of the Monster Movies
Let me just start out by saying my taste in movies, since my mindset may be drastically different from people interested in this movie. I'll just say, I love the old Godzilla movies. They were silly, cheesy, and a lot of fun, yet they still were able to add weight and a strong connection at the end of the day. At the same time, I really appreciate the art of film-making and story-telling in general. I love movies like Memento, Pulp Fiction, and the like. A film that shows the maker's genuine interest in the subject and the process of creating. That being said, I absolutely loved this film. It is true, like many people said, this movie is a bit slow, with Godzilla not making an appearance until about halfway through. So if you were wanting a film that is constantly strutting him in all his monstery glory, I would say you may not enjoy that film (though I would recommend Godzilla: Final Wars, if that's what you're looking for.)
So, what does a Godzilla movie focus on, if not Godzilla? Well, the people surrounding him of course--characters we can actually connect to. This movie is superbly cast with Bryan Cranston, Ken Watanabe, and Aaron Taylor-Johnson. And in that first hour, you truly grow to bond with these characters. You like them, and you feel their fear, and sincerely hope that all turns out well in the end. Which really helps to set the stage when we get to Godzilla's appearance. After establishing the world, the threat (two ancient leviathans awakened by radiation to wreak havoc), we have Godzilla emerging to confront them. And his emergence is absolutely biblical. His very appearance onto land creates a tsunami, and when he roars, you can feel Ken Watanabe's words, describing him as a god, nature's power personified. When you hear that war, you can feel the past, present, and future of Godzilla's awesome might.
What makes this monster movie so spectacular is how the film-makers let the creatures speak for themselves. It doesn't jerk itself off, showing characters constantly running in terror or standing awe-struck for minutes on end. Which is not to say they don't show fear or awe, but they take the time to regain their composure and focus on their missions. One of the greatest moments is when Elizabeth Olsen, portraying a soldier's wife, finally breaks down and confesses her fear to her husband, after standing as a rock for most of the movie, showing her son how to be brave. It moved me to tears. These characters are smart, strong, and determined. They face an insurmountable challenge, and they find solace in each other. I won't go into details on the story, but once it comes to that third act, that climax with Godzilla facing his opponents and the humans striving for survival, you will be on the edge of your seat.
So if you're looking for a bunch of monster-fighting and lots of explosions, this isn't the movie for you. All of that stuff is there, but not as much as you would expect in a monster movie. I would stick with Pacific Rim and the like, if that's your fancy. But if you want good story, great performances, mind-blowing effects, and a atmosphere so tense it's nearly tangible, then head straight for the theaters while Godzilla is still around.
Black Sheep (2006)
The Best Horror Movie Focusing on Sheep
I have to say this is an extraordinarily difficult title to review. I of course went into it expecting one of those movies that's so bad that it's funny (you know the ones--we all watch them eventually.) But what I got was so much more.
Don't get me wrong, you still have to use that basic mentality and not take anything seriously, but the weird thing is...I think that's what the movie makers were doing as well. I swear, if you're one of those people who makes a ridiculous prediction, you will see most of them come true. Here were some of mine and a rough summary of the movie.
A couple of annoyingly pro-environmentalists (complete with aggravatingly hipster girl and douschie boyfriend) steal some sort of demon/mutant/fetus sheep in a glass jar (literally directly in front of the scientists working on them.) Now I bet that fetus sheep's going to attack them. 10 minutes later, dousch-man falls, breaks jar, and gets his ear bitten off by a puppet/mutant/fetus sheep.
Now, since this is some sort of sickening genetic experiment, I bet the man is now infected. Turns out he was! I bet he'll turn into a sheep-man. Slowly through the movie, we see him turn into...a MINOTAUR...I mean, a sheep-man. To be honest, they look kind of the same (not that minotaurs appear in the movie--that would be absurd.) And by that, I mean, the sheep-man actually looks badass, and is able to send the main guy (who coincidentally has an intense phobia of sheep--he had a messed up childhood) flying across a room with a minor backhand.
Anyway, the fetus mutant sheep ends up mixing with a normal flock of sheep and, you guessed it. They all get infected. The hoard of demon sheep can now begin to take over the world. But we'll get there.
As it turns out, the head of this scientist team (who I'm still not entirely sure what they are trying to do) turns out to be the douschy older brother of the main guy. He plans to present what I think is supposed to be the perfect sheep to a convention of scientists from around the world. But on the way there, he gets infected by the first sheep-man and eventually shares his fate. Rather than freak out, he accepts it fully. Fully to the point of heavily-implied bestiality with the "perfect sheep" which may or may not have been concocted from his own sperm.
Somehow, his little brother also gets infected, and if you're guessing climactic, sheep-brother battle in the ruins of a sheep demon world, you'd guess right. I can't give too much away, but just know if I could recite this entire movie back to you, I would. This is truly a movie you just HAVE to see.
As far as putting it through the movie gauntlet rating, I'd say it ranks pretty high. Acting: ranges from creepily good to laughably bad. Effects: surprisingly good and occasionally laughably bad (you're working with sheep demons here, give them a break.) Storyline: fairly ingenious (I couldn't best it if I had to use sheep as my antagonists.) Cinemaphotography: excellent. The wide shots of New Zealand grasslands are incredible at setting the mood. Climax: ultimate pay-off. You'll laugh until you cry.
So overall, I'd say yes, I am a fan of Black Sheep. Looking at it from the perspective of a movie-maker, I find it inventive and entertaining. If you're someone who needs to analyze the psychological aspects or take notes on the motivation and backstory, this movie isn't for you (and you may have a disorder of some sort.) But if you're someone who can suspend your disbelief and just enjoy the absurd, you will love Black Sheep. I guarantee it.
Battle: Los Angeles (2011)
Alien Movie or War Movie?
I'll be honest--this isn't a movie I'm eager to review. I merely feel duty-bound to help clear up the confusing viewpoints of this movie. It really seems that there are only two possibilities: it was amazing to some or terrible to others. But honestly--it's neither. It's certainly nothing special, but it's not terrible either. How's the acting? OK. Story? All right. Effects. Fine...this isn't really a movie I can base on raw structure. Really, the only way to get an accurate read on it is to have a definite genre. Is this an alien movie or is it a war movie?
Obviously, the main antagonist of the film is the aliens, but there isn't enough of a focus on them for it to truly be their movie. Really, the nature of the aliens and their goal are only explained in background events and throwaway lines. Every now and then a character walks by a TV where a news report assures the audience that the big bad guys are aliens and some random soldier basically goes "They want our water," and leaves. There's no aliens trying to communicate, no seeing their fleet orbiting from space, not even little kids going "Hey, we should try uniting aliens and mankind." (Oh, Spielberg, where are you?) OK, the soldiers capture one and stab around trying to find how to kill it...but it's just not the same. There's no sign of awe or disbelief at the fantastic idea that mankind is not alone in the universe. An alien movie without that amazement and curiosity is no alien movie at all. The real focus is the human soldiers and their struggle to fight, and for that reason I would call this a war movie. With that in mind, it should make it slightly more enjoyable, knowing that what you see is what you get--shooting, yelling, and stuff blowing.
How good of a war movie is this? Well, here's how I would put it: "Battle Los Angeles" is to "Black Hawk Down" as "Black Hawk Down" is to "Saving Private Ryan." In my opinion, "Saving Private Ryan" is the greatest war movie in history--because it perfectly mixes intense action and great effects with heartfelt characters and strong sense of purpose for the war. "Black Hawk Down" also has amazing effects, but there's just less of a sense of purpose and there isn't enough delving into the heart of the characters. I only cared about Ewan McGregor's character, and I suspect that's only because he plays Obi-Wan Kenobi in the Star Wars prequels.
"Battle Los Anegeles" takes away even more heart and throws in more effects. It's true, there isn't all that much combat for at least half an hour, but the characters just don't come off as likable people who are unfortunately thrust into a tough situation. There's a little tension between the squad and Aaron Eckhart's character, who got his team killed on his last mission, but I just didn't care. There was even a moment where one of the characters they tried making the coolest getting onto a medical chopper, another character saying all's well, and then the chopper gets blown up...and everyone's over it in a matter of minutes. Well, I guess if the characters don't care, why should the audience? Also, all the military jargon seemed too forced, like the writers just played Call of Duty for a day and sprinkled in whatever they heard characters say into the script (Like "Frag out!" and "Tossing Frag.") It was basically the characters going "I can out-soldier you," "No, I can out-soldier you." It wasn't THAT big a deal, but that extra push just separated the characters from the audience even MORE so.
So overall, this is one of those movies you just sit down and eat some popcorn with and don't mind getting refills while the movie's playing, or something you play in the background when you're just hanging out with friends. It's OK, but I know I'll very easily forget it. If you want aliens, see "ET," or "District 9." If you want war, see "Saving Private Ryan," or "Band of Brothers."
Smallville (2001)
The Last Son of Krypton
Throughout the years, Superman has had numerous ups and downs, with two main depictions of him clashing: the powerful god and the cheesy boyscout. Smallville took a new approach: the every man trying to find himself. It was a bold approach, and so crazy and radical, it just might work.
That being said, if you go into this series wanting the Superman you know and love, you'll be disappointed. Don't get me wrong, he becomes Superman...in the last 5 minutes of the 218th episode...and only in cgi, distant shots. What you'll get in this series is Clark Kent, the farm boy with a strong sense of right and wrong and, endowed with superhuman powers, seeks to enforce his beliefs. I believe Zach Snyder, director of the upcoming Superman reboot "Man of Steel" said it best: "Smallville kept Superman alive. He's in a hospital bed and on life support, but he's alive." That being said, this show is not what you expect when you think of Superman's origins. What's the genre? Drama. What's the main focus? Teen angst. What are the common conflicts? Melodrama...but I promise, it's not as bad as it seems.
Here are some things the show does very well. It helps show how Superman gained that kind of boy scout-ish nature: his parents guided him with a very conservative upbringing and respect for hard work and honesty. It helps show how Superman came to meet a lot of Justice League's members, including Flash, Aquaman, and Green Arrow. It also provides origin stories to the more famous villains, such as General Zod, Doomsday, and Brainiac. But there are two things the show does best of all: provides years of character development for Clark Kent and Lex Luthor, the enemies whose conflict is the stuff of legend.
Throughout the series, we see Clark (and the rest of the show) slowly change from a boy realizing he has strange powers, to realizing his alien nature, embracing it, and finding a harmony between Krypton and earth. That being said, Clark Kent's not the best part of the show--not to say that Tom Welling isn't possibly the best incarnation of the Man of Steel (apart from his aversion to wear those blessed blue and red tights.) But he gets entirely blown out of the water by Michael Rosenbaum, or as Smallville knows him: LEX LUTHOR.
Oh my gosh, this was the first time I could admire such a villain--no offense to Gene Hackman or Kevin Spacey, the Luthors of Supermans past; but this guy just blows them out of the water. He starts out as just your everyday billionaire who has an insatiable hunger for knowledge. While he sometimes appears morally ambiguous, he always believes he is doing the right thing, as apparently others do as well, since he starts out as Clark's best friend. Over time, however, his curiosity is only met with lies and secrets and the deeper he digs, the darker he becomes, until his lust for knowledge becomes a lust for power. This inevitably strains his and Clark's relationship until it explodes into the rivalry that is Lex Luthor vs. Superman.
Unfortunately, Rosenbaum left the show after seven seasons, and Lex Luthor went MIA until the series' finale when Michael returned. Luckily, the series recovered by introducing the villain-a-season structure. Doomsday was season 8 (unfortunately a TV-budget doesn't bring out the best unstoppable, superhuman serial killer...except for Sylar...watch "Heroes.") Zod became season 9's main antagonist, and was almost as amazing as Lex Luthor (with the season finale having the best fight in Smallville ever...and neither character had superpowers...you have to see it to believe it.) And season 10 introduced the closest thing Superman faces to Satan himself: DARKSEID...but again, with a TV-budget, his pomp and circumstance was cut horribly, horribly short. Without a doubt, Michael Rosenbaum's return was the best part of the series' finale, apart from the whole "Superman" part...
While that friends turned enemies motif IS spectacularly done, it doesn't always overshadow the many annoying trends this show tends to have. The most nagging is all the teen angst. This is embodied by Lana Lang, or as I like to call her: evil, not as cool Lois Lane. She has the worst on-again, off-again relationship with Clark that annoyed me for SEVEN SEASONS. Seven. Even though Lois Lane was introduced in season 4, Lana continued to drag Clark down from his destiny and kept him consumed in guilt for an additional 3 seasons more. And she made cameos in the 8th season, giving Clark more unnecessary emotional pain. Her lack of tolerance for secrets and her continual insistence to know EVERYTHING was only commendable for so long. Her character gets all weird, has a romance with Lex (low blow), and goes on to be some weird, Kryptonite-infected superhuman? I don't know, whatever gets her out of the mythology.
Lana was really my only big complaint, apart from the early season's villain-a-week structure, slightly drawn out story (Superman's origins didn't REALLY need 10 years of explaining), the occasional weird, out-there subplots that were totally a step away from Superman's mythology (ranging from Clark and Jor-El's relationship being nothing like the comics to three witches torturing Clark in search of Kryptonian stones), and shoddy special effects (which did gradually improved and even surpassed Superman Returns' effects by the season finale.)
Having said all that, I would definitely recommend this series to someone who has the patience to learn ALL about Superman's (re-imagined) back story without really seeing Superman. It's definitely a good thing to do while you wait for The Man of Steel to hit the theaters in December of 2012.
Judge Dredd (1995)
I Don't Exactly Dread Judge Dredd
I'll start off this review with a simple statement: I actually do recommend this movie. That being said, let me explain the parameters of this recommendation: don't go into this movie expecting quality effects, acting, or plot. If you're looking for that, pass this film over. It's honestly just one of those guilty pleasures of being so bad that it's entertaining. I'll note some of the things that personally got me laughing.
1.) The movie starts off with the classic cheesy 80s back story, shown in scrawling text (which is simultaneously narrated by James Earl Jones.) It describes that "in the third millennium, the world changed..." and is decidedly called "Cursed Earth," which seems to only have two kinds of areas: Deserts and "Mega-Cities." The desert is actually right outside the Mega-City...trust me, it makes no sense.
2.) The entire cast seems to only need to fit two requirements:
-They are shorter than Sylvester Stallone.
-They talk WORSE than Sylvester Stallone (just for fun, try to see if any one person in the film says "law" normally...I dare you.) Don't get me wrong, those requirements are no small feats to accomplish, but it just made the film more peculiar; but entertaining nonetheless.
3.) They have the funniest names for things:
-What would you call a big city? If you said "Metropolis," you've clearly never heard of "MEGA-CITIES." Does "Mega-City" just sound more intimidating and dark and brooding? I don't know--don't spoil the fun.
-Also, what sounds like the worst prison in the world? Something even more dark and shady than "Mega-City?" Think again; for the main villain escapes from the highest-tech security facility in the world, known as..."ASPEN PENAL COLONY"!!! I swear, I could not make this up.
-Not to mention the main antagonist is none other than Judge Dredd (Sylvester Stallone)'s little brother: RICO DREDD!!! No, he's not a 10 year old Mexican kid, though he is about a foot shorter than Stallone and tries to talk like Hannibal Lecter...too bad he has a lisp...
4.) The technology of the time period is some of the weirdest things I've seen:
-There are droids that serve food who all the while say "Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment, and OK for you!"
-There's also a droid which is basically a horrible rip-off of the Terminator, except incredibly rusted, much more gargantuan, and punches incredibly slow--yet it sends people flying. But don't worry: it can easily be turned on and off if you just switch ONE wire...ONE! I have a suspicion that this story must be where Terminator fails go to die.
-The Judge's guns (which are handguns) have at least 10 different kinds of ammo in it: semi-auto with rapid fire, armor-piercing, grenade-launcher, double whammy (which is two bullets that shoot at the same time to hit two people.)...need I continue? Oh yeah, and every time a bullet is fired, the gun (and this just a hand-gun, mind you) is able to stamp on a DNA-identifier so that ballistics can say who fired the bullet....all right, now I'm done making fun of the guns.
-Not exactly "technology," but the Judge's suits are definitely not at police-standard: tights, helmet, gold shoulder pads, and (just for The Italian Stallion) a gold codpiece...I can't even go on.
All in all, this movie is just kind of a cheap humor experience, but I enjoyed it and recommend it to anyone who likes to make fun of those good old cheesy 80s sci-fi flicks. Afterwards you may say that you wish there was a legitimate action version for the Judge, but don't worry: a reboot is approaching which stars Karl Urban as Judge Dredd. I'm hoping for the best.
The Social Network (2010)
Socially Awesome
I went into this movie knowing only that it was about the creation of Facebook and was apparently incredible (I believe Rolling Stones rated it as the #1 movie of 2010, beating movies such as True Grit and The King's Speech.) That being said, I began it assuming that it was a good movie--for it's genre--but that it wouldn't be too interesting to me--being a biography (a genre which I am not a huge fan of.) I couldn't have been further from the truth.
Of course, it WAS a remarkable movie--but not just for its genre, but by any standard. It is probably the only movie I've seen that is astoundingly dialog heavy--so dialog heavy that other movies would capsize--but remains interesting and entertaining. Almost all the characters have at least half their dialog infused with some subtle sarcasm, but not so much that it keeps you from connecting emotionally with them. Rather, I feel it helps you relate to them more and makes them more real.
I have a special shout-out to co-stars Andrew Garfield and Jesse Eisenberg. Andrew Garfield does an amazing job as Eduardo Saverin, the co-founder of Facebook and former CFO. His character is easily the one I personally sympathized with the most, but it wasn't so over the top that it was all pity, no play. Rather, he was very believable as a nice, young man who faces a tragic, unfortunate hardship when he is blotted out of the Facebook company and his friendship with Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) disappears. I praise Garfield's talents and I can't wait to see him in "The Amazing Spider-Man." As for Jesse Eisenberg, I was almost just as astounded with his performance as I was with Andrew Garfield's. The only other movie of his that I have seen is Zombieland, but looking into his acting portfolio, it appeared to me that most of his movies appeared to be similar: very fun, but simplistic. That being said, I had previously feared that his career would be defined as a "wannabe Michael Cerna." This movie obliterated my fear of such a fate. His character, Mark Zuckerberg, creator of Facebook, is a socially awkward, heavily sarcastic Harvard undergraduate.
Now, I may have lost you at "socially awkward," and you are questioning my logic, with the idea of this character being different for the actor and being socially awkward appearing to be extremely contradictory. But let me assure you, this is a completely different "socially awkward" character than what you may think. Unlike the socially awkward character he played in Zombieland, when I say "socially awkward," I'm just putting it delicately. A better description would be "an asshole who is so overwhelmed with his intelligence that he's terrible with casual conversation or courtesies," but I thought this would be rather harsh to say right off the bat.
Having said that, his character was still one you could sympathize with, but not one that is above reproach or one that can often second-guess morally and logically. In any case, I was blown away by how different Jesse Eisenberg was from how I expected it. When I watched The Social Network, I didn't see Jesse Eisenberg playing Mark Zuckerberg, I saw Mark Zuckerberg caught on tape. And for that, my hat's off to him.
As for the story, I would really say you'd have to see it for yourself to understand what makes it incredible. I will say this: the movie gives itself a reason to tell the story of Facebook's origins by flashing between Zuckerberg and all others involved being in his two different court cases--one against the Winklevoss brothers and one against Eduardo. I thought the concept was clever and gave the movie more of a purpose than just "ever wonder how Facebook started? Well..." All in all, The Social Network is well worth the time of any serious movie-watcher, and I know this critic will gladly watch it again in the future. I'll facebook you later!
ThanksKilling (2008)
Suffering the Horror of Thankskilling
Let me start off by saying that I do not see this article as a movie review: it is simply a warning. Whatever you do, DO NOT watch this movie. It is, in all seriousness, the worst film I have ever seen, and I don't expect it to lose that title any time soon. Don't get me wrong, I didn't go into this film thinking it would be Oscar-worthy by any means, and I can laugh at stupid comedy that pokes fun at horror movies. But this film misses both marks and is simply BAD.
Just how bad is this movie? Let me put it into perspective: it's about a killer turkey who goes on a homicidal rampage because a dog peed on his Indian burial...and it only gets worse from there.
The reasons for this being the atrocious mess that it is are many and obvious, and this article simply does not have enough words to outline them all. I'll touch on what ones I felt personally offended by as a movie critic.
1.) The acting is TERRIBLE. Everything is extremely underacted (an angered hick whisper-yells as he falls to his knees and mourns the turkey-murder of his dog, Blassy. That may have been the best acting in the film.)
2.) NO ONE seems to notice that the turkey is a TURKEY!!! This may be because of the fact that it's only a sock-puppet of a vulture, but still, at least have your cast ACT like it's a turkey. Some examples of their odd ignorance: a man pulls his car over because he thinks the turkey looks sexy...the turkey goes to an unimportant character using the disguise of those nose-mustache-glasses things, and this character thinks it's just a midget...this character turns out to be one of the main character's father. This is relevant because the turkey peels his face off and uses it as a mask...which somehow fools the kids. I don't know, maybe the shift from a 6-foot plump police officer to a 2-foot vulture sock puppet wearing a skin mask isn't as noticeable in person, but it was VERY noticeable on camera.
3.) The turkey's powers (yes, it DOES go there) are some of worst special effects that I've seen. When telling a story about the turkey (because it's a famous camp-side horror tale, don't you know?) it switches to a crap cartoon outline. One of the main characters is ravenously hungry and, surprise surprise, imagines a cartoon roasted turkey, which evaporates as he devours it in one bite. This cartoon turkey (which he ate in one bite) turns out to be THE turkey...with a shotgun...who blows his way out of his belly...all with that character being unaware of this until his stomach is blown out.
4.) Even the creators of this show can see how terrible it is, but they attempt to make up for it by switching to horror comedy. The only problem is, horror comedy requires wit...and clever jokes...both of which this film LACKS. Another sign that they understand its failure of a film is that, unlike the Friday the 13th series, they have decided to skip 6 or 7 even more horrid sequels and skip straight to the space-trash that will be Thankskilling 2. I dread the day that sequel shows up, much as I rue the day I watched this film...but moving on.
There are a multitude of other problems, and I shudder at all the possible things I could write down. But I hope that what I have revealed is enough to convince you that this is NOT a good movie. Trust me, I went into it thinking I could laugh at it's lack of quality...but I couldn't...it skips the laughable phase and goes straight to torturous. Save yourself, stick to movies that involved effort in production.
Heroes (2006)
NBC's Greatest Work vs. NBC's Greatest Folly
Watching this TV show for the first time was one of the greatest TV moments I've experienced. For one thing, I am a fan of both superheroes and movies, and this TV show consistently has the cinema photography, special effects, and all around feel of a superhero movie. It is easily my favorite TV series.
Let my start off by a bit of a comparison between the seasons. In order of greatest to worst, in my opinion, it goes one, four, three, two.
Season 1 is the greatest because it was the first of its kind. Well done, effects-laden superhero TV show that consistently got better and better.
Season 2 loses significant progress by the pointless subplot of Maya and Alejandro, whose only purpose in the season is returning Sylar to the story. While this is mostly due to the Writer's Strike and the fact that the season had to be cut short, it was still an overall disappointment.
I believe season 3 starts to get the series back to its original potential (although I felt Peter Petrelli's new ability was somewhat lame and Arthur Petrelli was the greatest waste of potential in the whole series.) Still, the idea of a focus on villains was a beautiful touch and the fugitives volume provided another cool aspect of the world's probable reaction to mutants. It also places Nathan Petrelli back into his more antagonistic nature, which helped keep him consistent with his good-guy, bad-guy character Heroes fans know oh so well.
Season 4 was the greatest recovery this series made. Each episode was very well connected to the next, much like season 1's structure. Bringing in Samuel Sullivan and the carnival plot was an amazing addition, and Nathan's epic struggle with giving into Sylar's vicious might was the most touching moment the series had. Tears filled my eyes as Peter gave up his brother and Nathan finally had his heroic ending. The season continues to build to a climax as Sylar official switches to being a Hero, an idea he had been struggling with throughout the entire series, and Samuel Sullivan preparing for a huge onslaught against normal humans. The series has an enraging ending, being canceled at the very moment that Claire Bennet announces to the world that there are super-humans out there. This is now the most frustratingly unanswered cliff hanger a series has ever left its audience with. But I digress.
Let me close by giving a special shout-out to Zachary Quinto, who is definitely the greatest part of the series, surpassing all of the villains each season introduces even when he isn't technically the main focus of the story. His continually struggle against his sociopathic nature is very well played and very believable, always having a reason to either question himself or be fully confident.
In any case, the series was an amazing show and I am very saddened by NBC's greedy reason for ending it: being unsatisfied with it's diminishing viewer-ship (which NBC itself was the cause of, continually changing its time slot to times when they KNOW no one watches.) It was a great blunder and as such, NBC pulled the plug on its greatest TV show, though it hopes to make up for it with their upcoming series "The Cape," which I doubt will be anywhere near as good as Heroes. It may actually be decent, but Heroes was without a doubt the closest thing to the perfect superhero show and had the potential to last for a very long time and retain its high quality.
The Dark Knight (2008)
The Dark Knight Brings a New Dawn
Let me start off by saying that I approach this film with the utmost respect and honor. Before I go into detail, I have to first address just what this film means for me. Before I saw this film, I was just a regular, teen-aged movie-goer who just enjoyed watching some good action. Watching this movie is what turned me into the cinema fanatic and amateur film critic I am today. It doesn't sound like much, but this movie has rocked me to my core. It is, quite simply, the best movie in the world. This is, of course, due to its incredible cast and crew.
I have a special shout-out to three particular people. The first is Christopher Nolan, my all-time favorite director. This man may be the embodiment of good directing. Admittedly, his earlier films, like The Following, were a little harder to follow, but ever since, his movies have gotten better and better, and The Dark Knight is definitely his Ninth Symphony.
The second shout out goes to John Nolan. You guessed it: he's Christopher Nolan's brother and writer for The Dark Knight's script. Embarrassingly, I don't know a lot about him, but I know he also collaborated with Chris for Batman Begins and I believe Inception. I swear, I think the Nolan brothers may have the hand of Midas in the film industry. Props to them.
And the final shout out goes to Heath Ledger, may he rest in peace. His performance as The Joker was perhaps the greatest performance this world has ever known and he was one of the main parts of what turned me into an aspiring actor...again, it doesn't seem like much, but it's the principal of the thing.
Now, getting to the movie, I honestly don't know where to start. My only complaint, and I have long since let this go, is that they replaced the actress for Rachel Dawes. While this is one of my biggest pet-peeves in film series, I understand that sometimes it's unavoidable and even necessary at points. And honestly, neither actress really catches my attention because Batman Begins had Liam Neeson and The Dark Knight had Heath Ledger, two of the greatest actors ever, in whose shadows love interests become irrelevant. This is one of my favorite things about Nolan's Batman series in general: there's a love interest, but it's only a subplot! Hardly even that! I can't tell you how refreshing that is to find in a hero movie.
Other than that, I don't think I can even specifically describe what makes The Dark Knight amazing. Great cinema photography, great special effects, great story, great fights, great acting...this movie has EVERYTHING I could ever want in a movie...but, being a Christian, I don't need a sex scene, which this movie lacks, happily...so if that's what you're looking for, you're wasting your time with movies...go throw your life away on the internet.
For those of you who actually respect movies, just go watch The Dark Knight. None of my words can add or subtract from it. Just watch it and experience it for yourself.
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010)
A Voyage Done Right
I must admit, walking into the theater to see this movie, I had great fear for the Narnian film universe. I had heard multiple tales of how the film strayed too far from the book and essentially destroyed the future this series might have had in store. My fears were quickly allayed.
For one thing, the movie omits very little from the book, only rearranging certain events and adding extra bits here and there. All of these changes are merely tools to keep the story flowing smoothly, which is effectively done. The film expands on the idea of a Nightmare Island and turns it into this ever-present corrupting mist. This helps builds intensity and gives the story more purpose then the book's more laid-back plot of searching for seven Telmarine lords, which the movie includes as well. The movie also helps bring more relevance to the seven lords by adding the plot that their seven swords are the key to bringing down this corrupting mist.
Also in an effort to keep the story flowing, they swapped Coriakin's Island and Dragon Island so that Coriakin came first in order to inform the crew of the Dawn Treader (and the audience) of the importance of the seven swords. I'm all for giving a film a basic problem-solution plot. There's nothing wrong with it, as long as it's done well.
The movie also keeps Eustace as a dragon much longer and gives him a battle scene with a sea serpent, instead of the dull, repair labor the book gives him. While the urge to argue that this was merely for the purpose of giving the film an effects-laden battle (and I'm sure that was part of it), the film also takes advantage of this longer dragon story to give a better transition from Eustace the annoyingly rude little bugger to Eustace the honorable young man who ultimately inherits the Pevensie's Narnian journeys in later stories. It also helps better portray his growing relationship with Reechipeep, expanding the book's basic idea of him being his tutor to becoming a better man.
Also a praise to the film is a return to Aslan's Christ-like symbolism, which felt strangely absent or hollow in Prince Caspian. Director Michael Apted (who also directed Amazing Grace, another great Christian-themed film) did a suburb job of recapturing this. Don't get me wrong; his actual presence in the film is still significantly shorter than The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, but it's more relevant and his closing lines revealing to Lucy and Edmund that he has "another name" on Earth brought tears to my eyes as it was verbatim to the book's reference to Christianity. And of course, anything Liam Neeson says is amazing. Aslan's changing Eustace back to a boy is a little different from the book, but I understand how it would have been awkward to have in the film, so no complaints...you'll have to read the book to know what I'm talking about...it's just to odd a thing to describe.
I also applaud Will Poulter's performance as Eustace Scrubb, who, quite frankly, steals the spotlight from Lucy and Edmund with his wonderful change to being another Earth-originating adventurer of Narnia. I am definitely eager to see him continue this role in Silver Chair and, hoping against hope, The Last Battle. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
My one complaint of the movie is that they never really specify WHY and HOW this "Dark Mist" is so powerful, though they say several times that it will "soon be unstoppable." This didn't bother me TOO much, but we all have our things to be OCD about, so it may be a deal-breaker to some...but only if they're EXTREMELY picky about detail.
In any case, this movie is by far better than Prince Caspian and a welcome addition to the Narnian film series. Fingers crossed for Silver Chair!