I've seen a few movies recently, and I thought I would write a bit about them here so that everyone can gibe me for it.
Peter Pan
Abby really likes Disney's animated Peter Pan, and I was surprised to see a preview last year of a live-action version of Peter Pan coming from Universal. The movie was just recently released on DVD, and even if it was as potentially scary as the previews let on, it would hopefully be a good film for Abby when she got older, so I bought it.
I watched the movie this weekend, and it was not too bad. It strayed slightly from the familiar plotline in the animated film, but only far enough to freshen the story. For example, in the animated version, Wendy tells many stories about Peter Pan before he shows up, but in the live action version, Wendy tells stories about Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, and the like, which all include pirates in her telling.
I liked that the villainous Captain Hook was portrayed by Jason Isaacs, the same guy who plays Mr. Darling, the childrens' father. This is similar to how Hook's voice actor is the same as Mr. Darling in the animated version. In the animated version, we're left to possibly infer that the whole thing might have been a child's dream, since they start off the adventure from sleeping in bed. This is not the case in the live-action movie.
The visuals were pretty good, and the movie wasn't particularly scary, although there was a lot more getting shot than in the Disney film, which probably earned the PG rating.
This movie dealt a lot less with the themes of growing up and jealousy, and more with the theme of love between Wendy and Peter. Kind of hokey, but whatever.
Dirty Pretty Things
I must admit that I haven't yet finished Dirty Pretty Things, but it shows promise. It's filmed in a strange way that reminds me of anime, but just slightly slower paced.
Anyway, I get the idea that somebody is operating an illegal organ donor operation or something. Seriously, I need to watch the rest of the movie.
Van Helsing
"That rocked. This is the best movie I've seen all year."
Ok, that's not exactly true. I guess my big issue here is that Van Helsing is a very underdeveloped story that could have been more than "James Bond meets every classic horror monster".
Here's an example- In the real Frankenstein book, the monster is quite misunderstood. The whole novel is a quest for him to live and take revenge on those who would dare take the power of creation into their own hands. There is a serious mood here, a serious theme, one that makes this book a classic.
My point is that if you're going to draw on the classics, then your story should at least be worthy of them. This movie draws on two classic stories and folktales of werewolves, and doesn't bother to present more than a tired "Dracula wants babies for his cranky wives" plot. Next time, let's get Frankenstein's monster and have him tap dance to "Puttin' on the Ritz" and see if that does any better. At least you could bill it as a comedy/parody as opposed to action/adventure and get away with it. Maybe if you cast him next to Gene Wilder or something. Hmm...
I don't feel bad in spoiling the secret that Dracula and his wives (who are cool, but really stupid for vampires) attempt to use Frankenstein (and his monster) to give their babies life. That was the secret all along - electrocute Franky's monster to hatch the vamp kiddies. Hey, where did these babies come from anyway? That's a lot of eggs. Somehow I don't imagine those vampire chicks laying them.
Moreover, if Dracula can create vampire spawn like his wives, then what the heck does he need the flying imp babies for? Imp babies that routinely explode, I might add, and could only deplete the supply of blood that Dracula and his wives need to live.
Hey, was the origin of Van Helsing and his memory loss revealed? Tell me what it was, if you can. Why was his ring's symbol the one found on the map that was the door to Dracula's castle? Why did Dracula encase the anti-werewolf juice in a jug of holy water, if his intent was to use it to prevent his own death at the hands of a werewolf? Wouldn't he have to break through the holy water? Maybe I'm just imagining these loose ends here...
And what was with the score? I admit, I was grooving the first time they played the Van Helsing theme music, but cripes! The soundtrack to this movie must be five minutes long.
The effects were good. This happens when you spend a gajillion dollars on them. Give me a gajillion dollars and I will produce good effects, too. No, really, give me a gajillion dollars.
Here's my thought: Anna should have killed Van Helsing when he killed the first vampire wife. Then Anna could have killed Dracula, her brother the werewolf, and the stinking Frankenstein monster. That would have been cool. Her character was so much more interesting than Van Helsing, and not just because she had... a nice figure. Although that did help.
Do you know who was cooler than Van Helsing? Gr�goire de Fronsac. I rest my case.
s little I dislike more than a movie with good potential going to waste because of limp writing. See also: The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen plus Tom Sawyer. Feh. Rubbish.
And on top of all of that, Berta fell asleep in the middle of it, so it couldn't have been that riveting.
I wasn't expecting a lot from this movie, and I was still disappointed. I suppose that if I'm going to go out to see a movie, I should probably leave all of my preconceptions at home.
The Rundown
The Rundown is a movie that got away from me when it first came out. This is the one where The Rock goes to South America to retrieve the son of a mob boss who doesn't want to come home.
The first scene in this movie in which Beck (The Rock) gets medieval on the offensive line of this football team while they're partying at a club is pretty cool, I must admit.
This movie is mostly a testosterone-powered action film, but there is a bit of comedy supplied by Seann William Scott (you know, Stifler from American Pie) during his hunt for a priceless artifact.
Christopher Walken gets his in the end. Maybe I was just in the mood for mindless entertainment, but there is something to be said for a movie that is so disconnected from things that drawing parallels isn't possible. This movie wasn't trying to be anything or compare itself to anything other than the movie that it was. The acting was pretty good, and the story was a little far-fetched, but still within reason.
Upcoming Movies...
Here are some films that I will be interested to see when they come out so that I can also give them bad reviews:
- Shrek 2
- Shrek was good, but can the sequel be as good? I doubt it, but I'll want to see this anyway.
- The Day After Tomorrow
- This looks like a neat apocalypse movie. I'm sure it will have the same tone and bad story as Armageddon.
- Harry Potter and the Prizoner of Azkaban
- I have yet to conceive of a way this movie could be bad, but hey, I've been disappointed before.
- Around the World in 80 Days
- Hopefully this isn't just a comedy, and actually tries to entertain more than with Jackie Chan getting hit repeatedly in the jewels.
- Spiderman 2
- The first one was ok. This one looks cool. But I'm a sucker for a good trailer.
Here are a couple of movies that I don't want to see:
- Troy
- This is another one of those movies that can be nothing but eye candy because we already know how it ends. Something about a horse?
- Chronicles of Riddick
- Let's all watch Vin Diesel suck in another sci-fi film with a plot from a bar napkin.
The Terminal, looks kind of interesting. I think it might be based on a true story. At least, I've heard of a guy that this happened to. It could all be fiction. I suddenly feel like I've been the subject of viral marketing.
