Oz: The Great and Powerful

I went to this, not because I wanted to, but because I had to: it's directed by Sam Raimi!  I should be clear here that I am a huge fan of the "Evil Dead" series (this refers only to the Raimi movies and not the recent remake, which I did enjoy).  When I watch the films of Sam Raimi, I'm really watching for moments reminiscent of his early films.

In this way, it may seem that I far from the right kind of person to watch this movie or, at the least, going in with skewed expectations.  What am I going to get out of a PG-rated, Disney reboot/prequel to "The Wizard of Oz?" Is it even reasonable for me to expect to see stylistic similarities between this and "Darkman?" 

I was shocked to discover that OtGaP is the Disney retelling of "Army of Darkness," complete with a graveyard mission gone wrong.  As such, I had a hell of a good time with this movie.

That's not to say this movie didn't have issues.  In fact, it has one big issue: Mr. James Franco.  To be fair to him, he's really good sometimes.  But when he's not, he's really not.  Oddly, his acting is wonderful when he's interacting with the CG characters of the film.  His chemistry with the animated characters helps give them a weight and presence they wouldn't have on their own.  But when he has to act with really people, it's like listening to a tone deaf person sing.  Everything is flat and odd sounding.  He grins constantly as if he thinks that's the secret of being charming, instead of actually being charming.  He is so awkward with the live characters that it becomes painfully obvious how cliché the script is.  He's supposed to be playing a showman and a huckster but he can't sell the emotions necessary to the plot.  It doesn't wreck the movie, but much of the motivations would have felt stronger if he'd have performed as well with humans as he did cartoons.

But there are great performances in OtGaP and they are from the trio of lovely ladies who play the witches.  Mila Kunis, Michelle Williams, and Rachel Weisz all play their roles very large.  Kunis and Weisz are given the opportunity for the most range, with Williams just having to be excessively nice and sweet.  But Kunis starts the movie very much the naïve innocent, gets a few tearful moments, and then goes full blown maniacal.  Weisz starts out as the slimy backstabber and, as the big finale gets closer, becomes more and more over her head.  All the witches are played in almost cartoonish strokes, but they work for this kind of tale.

I never thought OtGaP (I'm loving this acronym) would work.  The idea of a "Wizard of Oz" prequel being made as a family-friendly action film was worrisome to me.  But Raimi and his crew proved me wrong again.  The action in this is wonderful.  The shots are edited in such a way the action is comprehensible and fluid.  No shaky-cam.  No chaos.  Just inventive, easy-to-follow thrills.

And most of these action scenes are chases that serve not just to provide some relief from all the walking, but also showcase the wonderful world of Oz.  The set design is really great.  Oz often resembles a watercolor Dr. Seuss world.  But while he interacts with CG characters well, Franco seems oblivious to the world around him.  I don't think this is his fault.  He was probably told to look around in wonder and the world was just filled in around him.  But it usually results in him not even looking at the thing being showcased.   The opening credits were fun and the Danny Elfman score is pretty good too.

OtGaP gets a pretty strong recommendation from me.  It's especially good for families.  Some kids' movies are so bad they can make an adult practically suicidal.  But no one should be bored or miserable watching this.  There is some pretty scary stuff especially with the flying baboons, but I think that's what kids' movies are lacking.  A sense of real danger adds to the stakes of the story.

8 out of 10

The Mountain

I don't know why I had "The Mountain" in my Netflix queue (this is true of many of the titles in the queue), but there it was.  So, I watched it and its awesomeness knocked me on my ass!  This is an incredible action flick from the mid-50s.

 

Spencer Tracy is not the action hero type.  He plays this role in much the same way as his turn in "Bad Day at Black Rock" (watch it if you haven't!).  In this, he plays a former mountain climber who just wants to raise his sheep and get old.  His younger brother is an absolute shithead.  One day, a passenger plane crashes in the mountains near their town.  When a rescue team is unable to scale the mountain, the younger brother decides to go up the mountain and loot the wreckage.  In order to ensure his brother's survival, Tracy agrees to guide him up the mountain.  Family drama and high altitude action ensue.

 

I think it's a credit to Spencer Tracy's talent that he is able to be a convincing mountain climber despite being a tubby and extremely old man scaling a series of movie sets.  He is so committed to his character that I never doubted for a second that he was a world class climber.

 

Credit also goes to Robert Wagner as the sleazy, younger brother.  He is just the worst.  His performance really stretches even Tracy's acting.  It's hard to believe at times that Tracy would ever try to save this guy. 

 

But he does try, and it makes for some fantastic alpine adventure.  The climbing scenes can be pretty tense and the few (main actor-less) location shots are beautiful.  But the matte work deserves a special note.  Whether it is matted photographs or occasional paintings, there are many great shots that make it feel as if the actors are really hanging 2000 feet off the side of a mountain.

 

This movie was a welcome surprise.  Many of these old action films can be a bit hokey, but not "The Mountain."  This is the real deal and would make an excellent double feature with "The Eiger Sanction."

 

7 out of 10

Dinotasia

If you are a parent, grandparent, aunt, uncle, older sibling, or babysitter, take heed: Do NOT show this to young children!!  I don't care if they love dinosaurs.  I don't care that this is rated PG (how?!). 

 

"Dinotasia" showed up as a recommendation on Netflix.  A dinosaur movie narrated by Werner Herzog?!  How can this be anything other than amazing?  This is how: give the dinosaurs human (or at least dog-like) emotions and then violently murder them (especially the baby dinosaurs). 

 

"But Doug," you say.  "Is it really all that bad?"  Yes.  Yes, it is.  Any wound afflicted doesn't just bleed, they gush blood.  Giant, arching cascades of arterial blood.  As if the Discovery Channel thought that what "Walking With Dinosaurs" lacked was a healthy dose of "Kill Bill."  There are several scenes of dismemberment or beheading, and they all involve the camera lingering on the flailing stump as the dinosaur screams (except the beheaded one) and spews blood everywhere.

I put this on my laptop as a kind of background experience while I cooked dinner.  I thought, "I can learn about dinosaurs and cook at the same time!"  But guess what?  "Dinotasia" lacks any educational value!  We are never told what dinosaurs we are seeing or what behavior they are exhibiting.  These creatures are just there to die (there is even a constant countdown to the death of the dinosaurs).  I became so transfixed by this misguided film that I forgot about dinner.  Misguided, how?  This is not an appropriate movie for kids either in its graphic content or lack of narrative structure.  Nor does it contain much for adults who would probably expect something educational or at least a good story.  I can imagine maybe some teenagers who like anything bloody and excessive maybe getting kick out of this, but that is probably not the filmmaker's intent.

The CGI is terrible too.  Steer clear of this one.

3 out of 10



R.O.T.O.R.

Ugh.  This movie.  I'm at a loss for words.  "R.O.T.O.R." is an Ed Wood level shit-show.  This is a movie that I watched because I saw it on redlettermedia.com. (You should really click that link and watch EVERYTHING those guys make.)  I said, "Hey! I have that same movie in that same bargain bin boxset.  I should watch it too!"  This was a mistake/blessing. 

 

"R.O.T.O.R." is an amazing piece of inept filmmaking.  If you like watching train wrecks, this is just right for you.  I wish I had watched this with someone.  Because instead of being able to talk out the bizarre choices made in order to bring this story to life, I was left staring at my TV with an expression that I'm sure was nearly as dumb as this movie.

 

One of the troubling things is that the poster is FUCKING BADASS!  Just look at it.  That is so cool.  However, that supremely radical poster reflects nothing in this movie.  It's heartbreaking.  Instead, I watched an angry Texan be angry for an hour and a half.

 

So what is "R.O.T.O.R.?"  "R.O.T.O.R." is the tale of an angry Texas police scientist who develops a robot cop that is programmed to kill people who break the law.  When his creation is turned on before it is ready (25 years too early actually), it goes on the hunt for the fiancé of a man he killed for speeding.  Angry Texan must then recruit the help of a bodybuilding lady scientist in order to stop the rampaging robot.

 

This is a movie that is made for viewing with friends and alcohol.  The best bad movies are the ones that try really hard and fail miserably.  "R.O.T.O.R." fails so gloriously that a night watching it is cinematic schadenfreude at its finest.

 

2 out of 10 (but adjusted for entertainment value: 9 out of 10)

Rapt



I'm here to pick up where I left off a year ago (yikes).  I was getting a ton of site views for a while but they turned out to be bot views or something, mostly from Germany and Russia.  I became so discouraged that I walked away from the blog for awhile, fully intending to pick it up again.  That time has come.

I'm going to restart this whole blog business with "Rapt."  This is a film superficially about a kidnapping, but underneath that is a film about human selfishness.  I watched this on Netflix streaming which had the movie classified as a thriller.  That is a bit misleading.  "Rapt" actually lacks anything "thrilling," relying instead on very personal human drama.  Don't go into this expecting gunfire or chases (expect one kinda chase) or even much in the way of police procedure (but there is a little). 

 

"Rapt" concerns a businessman, Stanislaw Graff, that is kidnapped for ransom and the impact of that upon his family and business associates.  As I said earlier, the real story here is selfishness.  Graff, his family, and the kidnappers are all very focused on their own needs (however, Graff's family's selfishness is often quite justified).

 

I really enjoyed the look of this movie.  The camerawork is clean and crisp.  Even when things go handheld, they never get shaky.  And I often found myself marveling at the beauty of the shots.  It is also expertly paced.  "Rapt" moves quickly to its (awesome) conclusion.

 

Don't miss this movie.  It's the best kidnapping movie I've seen in a long while.

 

8 out of 10

 

Cocalero

Cocalero was a Netflix reccomendation.  I had a passing interest in it, added it to my queue, and there it languished for two years.  It was the first movie in my play instant queue.  Every time I went to watch something else, it was there waiting patiently for me to notice it.  Last night, I noticed.

Cocalero is a documentary about Evo Morales and his campaign to become the first indigenous (read: Indian) president of Bolivia.  Much of the film focuses on his grass roots campaign and the people who support his bid for office.  While Morales is heavily entrenched in the unions and vocally pushes for a socialist government, Cocalero comes off as very apolitical.  It is more the portrait of a man than a portrait of a political movement or idea.

The camera work is very loose.  Lots of handheld shots as we follow Morales and his friends around Bolivia.  The quality is very low.  This is not a bad thing, but more of a technological nessecity.  The crew could not be expected to carry tons of film stock or heavy digital equiment all over the place.  The result is a wonderful, little film made with what looks like a high end camcorder.

Not too much to say for this movie.  The story was intriguing enough that I had to find out more about Morales the minute it ended.  Check it out if his story interests you.  If it doesn't, don't worry about it.  This is not one of the great "must see" documentaries (of which the last couple decades have produced many) but it's a fine one for those who enjoy documentaries.

8 out of 10

Snow White and the Huntsman

Why couldn't this movie be Evil Queen and the Dwarfs?  Seriously, they are the best thing about this movie.  But I guess I should get a few other things out of the way before I gush over Charlize Theron and a miniaturized who's who of British character actors.

The most important thing to say is that Snow White and the Huntsman is not a good movie.  But it's not a bad movie either.  I would say that it is watchable.  Outside of Theron and the design (especially sets and costumes), SWatH has some major issues.  Usually, I would break down the bad things and then follow it up with all the good things to kinda redeem the movie a bit.  But I think it'll serve this review better if I just go through any elements that deserve mention and note the good and bad of that element.

The Visuals:  The trailer for SWatH is pretty good.  This is because the visual style is very intriguing.  The film is full of beautiful imagery and strange creatures.  It's eye candy and it's really nice to see.  Sometimes the camera wanders off to explore (or show off) the worlds that the filmmakers created and the pacing (which is pretty shoddy anyway) hurts for it.  But on the whole, it's a very attractive film.

The Design:  Much of what makes the movies visuals so wonderful are the design elements.  Lots of
marvelous practical sets give weight to the scenes.  The costumes (by the incredible Colleen Atwood) are wonderful especially the ones Charlize Theron rocks throughout.  And the various monsters/creatures that are encountered are pretty cool.  I'll lump makeup in here too.  Awesome makeup work, especially on the dwarfs.

The Story:  Lazy.  That's a good word for it.  SWatH has 3 screenwriters: 1 who hasn't done much, 1
who writes cliched tripe, and 1 who writes incredible screenplays.  I'm sure that the first 2 did the bulk of the work with the 3rd doing a last minute polish.  The movie makes very little sense.  Outside of the concept to overthrow the evil queen, almost no character actions or decisions make any sense.  I spent most of the movie exasperatingly throwing my hands in the air and whispering, "Who the hell wrote this thing?" while my girlfriend continually shushed me. (There are only end credits so I had to wait the entire 2 hours to find out who the hell wrote it.)

The Effects:  Makeup could've gone here too, but I'm going to focus on the CGI (very little practical effects used).  Most of it is really good.  I find that effects artists really struggle with birds and SWatH's computer birds were among the best I've come across.  There are some really bad bits though (the fairies and woodland creatures) that may not have been so bad if the whole film's effects were of that quality.  But when seen immediately after (or sometimes right next to) the really great digital work, they look absolutely cartoony.  I laughed at the fairies.  They're that bad.

The Dwarfs:  Awesome!  Awesome!  Awesome!  My favorite thing in the movie.  They're all played by very un-small British actors, many of whom you'll recognize if you squint hard enough past the prosthetics and crazy hair.  SWatH has 8 dwarfs but only six may be considered somewhat famous: Ian McShane (go watch Deadwood all of it), Ray Winstone (go watch Sexy Beast), Bob Hoskins (go watch The Long Good Friday), Toby Jones (go watch Infamous), Eddie Marsan (go watch Happy Go Lucky), and Nick Frost (go watch Hot Fuzz).  They show up, kick ass, wow you with the thought of the effects that made them possible, get you really hooked on them, and then are promptly relegated to the background and crummy attempts at comic relief.  Enjoy them while you can.

The Huntsman:  Chris Hemsworth does the best he can with the material.  I take that back.  If he didn't have that Scottish accent, he would've done the best he could with the material.  The accent is jarring especially in his voice over, but he makes up for it with a natural charisma that must be the envy of any actor working today.

The Princess:  Kristen Stewart continues to show the world that she is truly one of the worst actresses working today.  She spends the entire movie looking extremely uncomfortable.  It's the same look I have when I have a stomach ache and I'm still expected to be at work all day.  She also manages to always look like she's about to cry.  There are no points in the movie where discomfort is the appropriate emotion to convey and few where she should be about to cry (and her eyes are usually dry at those times).  I never once saw Snow White on the screen.  I only could see an actress who looked like she was really sad that she couldn't find a bathroom.

The Queen:  Charlize Theron as the evil queen, Ravenna (because she practices black magic and can turn into crows), owns this movie.  Theron's performance is worth the entire admission price.  Honestly, I was sad to see her defeated.  She understands that the script is ridiculous and plays it very over the top.

The best thing this film could've used was more of the actors to watch Ridley Scott's Legend.  Fantasy melodrama in a highly stylized film is not impossible.  In fact it can be great.  Unfortunately, SWatH is not great.  It's quality is worth a rental at best, but I worry that much of the grand visual style will be lost on the average TV screen.

6 out of 10