Skyline review

In no way, shape or form is "Skyline" a good, decent, passable or even mediocre film. "Skyline" is utter piss from opening to closing. Word to the wise for anyone wanting make a film to 'stick it' to the studio system, try not to make a film far, far worst then they could. This was the plan set up by the Brother Strause; heads of the effects company Hy-dra-lux. They've worked on "Avatar" and the "Iron Man" movies, however we forget so did about a dozen other effects houses and more than likely better ones than theirs. The brothers Strause were also the duo behind "Aliens vs. Predators: Requiem" which managed to suck far more than Paul W.S. Anderson's PG-13 predecessor. At least with Anderson's you see the aliens and predators.

Plain and simple these guys have NO CLUE how to make a movie on any level expect put a bunch of highly unimpressive CGI effects into a city, add some sports cars and hots chicks and BAM instant hit. Again... this is why I can never hate Michael Bay. He can do a similar set up, but with better effects, hotter chicks and sports cars that get to perform on camera. Oh and his films tend to also be shot beautifully. "Skyline" effectively makes the real L.A. skyline look gloomy and dull. It's just a bunch of bright lights and buildings. There was nothing added to make us feel anything for what was about to happen to this city and this planet. No care or emotion or lead up. Nope, we just get 94 minutes of a bunch of self-important doucebags who wake up from a party to discover bright lights have landed all around the city and are sucking people up. Eric Balfour ('Texas Chainsaw Massacre'), Donald Faison ('Scrubs'), Brittany Daniels ('Joe Dirt') and Scottie Thompson ('NCIS') play the 'lovable' and 'interesting' group we follow throughout this event.

The one upside to them is they're not hate-able, just boring. About 85% of the film is them sitting in posh high rise apartments peaking through automatic blinds to see what's going on in the streets. After they get tired of that they talk or rather mash around their mouths and things that kind of sound like words come out. Oh and they smoosh up their faces sometimes too. I think they were trying to discover what emotion is. I could be wrong on that one though. Someone on set might have farted. What fills up the rest of "Skyline" is just shotty effects and technical work. Having just seen "Unstoppable" the day before, one thing that stood out was it's sound design. Trains are huge behemoths and they deliver sounds and metal crunching noises that make us believe that fully. We get a feeling of how dangerous these machines really are. In "Skyline" I couldn't tell you want the aliens or their ships sound like. They have a noise... but it's not distant and I get nothing from it.

The overall designs for the alien shit is just as bad. Basically they took elements from "Independence Day" and Spielberg's "War of the Worlds" and smashed them together in as crude a way as possible. Their ship is a giant cluster of steel concealing a blue orb. The aliens themselves are a mix of the previous two films designs with a touch of "Dreamcatcher"; which is to say the aliens eat people using their giant teeth filled vagina mouths. Oh and they regenerate. Because that was really needed.

However the saddest moment of "Skyline" is within it's finale. At one point there is a perfectly fine moment to end this enormous piece of crap. It wouldn't have saved the movie, but it would've been more respectable and logical. NOPE! The brother Strause go for one last hooray within the alien ship. I won't tell you what happens except to say that they rip-off "District 9" in the dumbest goddamn way possible. And by doing that effectively lowered the film to the level of 'a sci-fi channel original movie'. "Skyline" is about two steps away from being on the same level as "Giant Boa vs. Giant Python 2". Congrats boys, in just two films you've nearly hit a directorial low that only likes of Uwe Boll and Ed Wood have achieved so quickly.

Inception review

Christopher Nolan's "Inception" is a fully realized science fiction opus, in which Nolan goes to great lengths to completely convince us of this science of dream invasion and what not. To date I can fully say this is Nolan's most complex film and also most wonderfully misleading as far as what we're really dealing with. I think it's great to see that in addition to providing trailers that just give us nothing but money shots, he's also gave us a film that's got an action sense about it however isn't quite what I'd call an action movie because after a while it's no longer driven by action, but the emotion of the characters.

You probably know the players and what they do by now. You know DiCaprio's Cobb is a dream thief and he's given a chance to 'make it back home' with one last job of inception. Inception is the planting of an idea in someones mind; as opposed to extraction which is them going in and stealing an idea (what they primarily do since inception is said to be near impossible). Cobb's team is great and if ever there was an exciting group of young actors to come together on screen for something like this, you couldn't do better. Joesph Gordon-Levitt is Arthur (pointman), Ellen Page is Ariadne (the architect), Tom Hardy is Eames (the forger), Dileep Rao is Yusuf (the chemist) and Ken Wantanbe is Saito (the tourist). Their job is to planet an idea in the mind of Robert Fischer Jr. (Cillian Murphy) that would destroy his father's empire. This will involve many complicated devices to work including dreaming within dreams and so on and so forth. All matters that are made more sensible and interesting by Nolan in the film than little ole' me could ever make them seem.

The dream worlds are created a way that's fresh for film. They are fully moving cities, snow capped mountains with bases, cliff side retreats and so on. Sure there are a many elements of the fantastic that occur, but it's nothing like the fully fantasy dream worlds we're used to. There are rules and concepts that haven't been explored or visualized the way they are here. Furthermore there's a heavy emphasis on physical action (aka what things look like when ACTUALLY blow up and not just CGI blow up). There's a difference and it's always something more visually striking and dynamic about the right thing. Much like when they flipped the semi truck in "The Dark Knight". You can pick up on a few influences of Nolan including 'On Her Majesty's Service' and 'Blade Runner' to some extent as well as a few noir and heist movie elements. But all in all this is a very original piece of work.

But it's not all derived from Nolan's script or directing. Like I said a HUGE part of the film deals with emotion and just who these characters are. Cobb is a troubled man and getting into dream cons with him has it's ups and it's downs. The downs being his wife Mal (Marion Cottillard), who appears to sabotage missions if Cobb tends to know too much about the lay out of a location or even sometimes when Cobb is losing control of his own thoughts. Their story is perhaps the most important of any in the film and something that's been left quiet when discussing it. There's a reason and I'm not going to spoil that. In fact I'm not really going to spoil much more of the film because it's one of those rare occasions when the film has manged to advertise itself this much, but still provide a theatrical experience that you are unknown to until you're there watching it.

In the 142 minutes of "Inception" I found myself engrossed in the action, engrossed in the story and engrossed and invested in these characters. I'm not attempting to boast hype or spin any wheels, but it's quite something when a movie (especially in the summer) can really do all the things that have been done here. Hans Zimmer's score plays slightly counter to traditional summer action scores and has a much more dramatic and emotionally driven feel. I really love that Zimmer is experimenting more now that he did in the 80's and 90's; creating a different sound for these types of films that fits like a glove. Wally Pfister continues to shoot beautifully and is well on his way to becoming one of those cinematographers that's a go to guy for great imagery (like Robert Richardson, Robert Elswit, Roger Deakins etc). And finally the performances in the film run like clock work. Not one performer misses a beat and not one is unconvincing of who they pretend or proclaim to be. The entire final act becomes less about action and race against time, but about these people and what happened to them. I can honestly say the finale kinda killed him in that respect and I loved it. It's a feeling almost completely reserved for the good ole' end of the year Oscar movies that get their jollies by depressing the fuck outta you and then sending you home.

"Inception" probably won't convert non-fans of Nolan, but anytime something like this can get into that mass audience range and actually be successful, I'll take it. The hope is that other filmmakers will learn from what Nolan's been doing in the blockbuster range and perhaps others will go down that road. Start creating genre films for the summer season that have more to them then the usual bang-bang. It's definitely the best thing I've seen all summer and among the best of the year, although is WAY too soon to see how it stacks up among others I liked. What I'm trying to say is you should probably see it. If you're tired of enduring the same junky summer films we've been getting, the bland animated films or the lackluster action pictures... then here you go. Don't wait... just go and experience it for yourself and see how it grabs you.

Predators review

I find it incredibly odd how FOX in only a year and half has turned around from releasing 90 minute, half-assed, wussed up movies; to putting out some flicks that are actually closer to the gleefully over the top and fun films they became popular for. Despite my feelings on final act of "The A-Team" it was still one of the few summer films I had fun watching. Now they've managed to not just make another extremely fun film, but also the best "Predator" sequel/re-issue to date.

The best choice FOX could've have made was placing it in the hands of Robert Rodriguez and allowing him to produce it and lead the film under his Troublemaker Studios banner (which he's attempting to heavily expand so they can greenlight films). Rodriguez's interesting plucked up director Nimrod Antal ('Armored', 'Vacancy' and 'Kontroll') who opted to go less CGI and more practical action and effects. The end result in a fantastic throwback hunt picture instead of an all out action film or a half-assed attempt at a science fiction film. Oscar winner Adrian Brody leads up the cast which includes other less conventional performers Alice Braga, Topher Grace, Walton Goggins and Mahershalalhahaz Ali; as well as the likes of Machete himself Danny Trejo and Morpheus, Laurence Fishburne. Rather than deal with action throughout, we're given lots of time with the characters as they figure out where they are and what's going on.

As much as I dig Brody, I did tire of him figuring it all out first. Yes, he's probably the ultimate badass of the group, but still I might have liked it more had they gone with letting the discovery happen more so as they trekked through the jungle. When it came to the action sequences, they are spread quite apart. One thing I tend to forget about the first film is how there's only really heavy action in the beginning and the end; thus with this film there is partial action sprinkled about, but the real stuff doesn't come until the final act. But it's pretty worth it. They also work to add a bit more to the predator lore with the addition of a sort of alien, hunting dog creature that can gore you or at the least snuff out where you are in the woods.

As far as the 'Predator' film legacy goes, this is a tad under the first, but far above all the others. The crew really seemed to be fans of these characters and of the first movie so it appears that the proper mindset has returned to the alien badasses... thus no more running silhouettes with the predator and human running to fight together and save the day (thanks Paul W.orthless S.hit Anderson) . The entire vibe is that of the original movie. Photography wise, score wise (which by the way at the beginning the credits is a little number fans of the original might remember) and pace wise. Out of a summer of pretty rotten films with not even a sliver of fun or excitement, FINALLY we have something to kick back and really be entertained.

Iron Man 2 review

As I stated in my last post, the hype machine got to me and I actually started looking forward to the return of Tony Stark. To recap my feeling on the first film they are now as they were two years ago. "Iron Man" was an good origins story, a nice character piece, but a slight bore of an overall movie. The few action set pieces weren't anything new and the finale was drawn out and yet still unimpressive. At the end of the day it was something I thought of on the same lines as Bryan Singer's first "X-Men" film. It works, but it's got problems. So this brings me to "Iron Man 2". At no point did I think, 'man this movies gonna suck'. Because I didn't feel that way, I just didn't feel like it would blow me away like the first did for everybody. Interestingly enough the films been capturing favorable reviews, but not as favorable as the first. Perhaps it's me but could someone out there explain why the first was considered so damn wonderful. Anyways, no I actually liked "Iron Man 2" more than expected, but it continues to suffer from a few very key flaws. The biggest one is that they pack the film with characters and major names, but tend to under use them. For example Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow has almost nothing to do in the movie and the little she does do could have come from a number of blank characters and actors. I'd have been more impressed if they used her in the same grand reveal way as Sam Jackson at the end of the first film. Paltrow doesn't really perk up till the final act or Cheadle for that matter so really it's a one man show for the majority of the film. That said when they do have a chance to really bring something to their scenes they do so quite well. I just wish they were given Downey Jr. screen time to a certain extent.

The climax arrives quickly after massive amounts of build out however it is more impressive than the first film's ending so I'm thankful for that. 'Tropic Thunder' co-writer and Lynch Mob member (group of actors connected with filmmaker David Lynch, not a group of people going around hanging other people. I can't stress this enough) Justin Treroux mainlines a surprisingly funny and quirkier than before story that isn't afraid to push Tony's disregard for peoples feelings or safety into the forefront of the picture. They show him more so for who he is which is a bad drunk and kind of a horse's ass. But it always boils down to he's our funny horse's ass and I guess that's something. Now for Micky Rourke, he fuckin' sold it. He plays Ivan to a tee and isn't a snarling villain, but a slightly more dimensional villain that does have a reasons for what he's doing and it's fairly valid. Samuel L. Jackson's extended Nick Fury cameo is also great because he really decides to lay into the role. He doesn't play it quiet and reserved but much more human. He's funny and witty, but on the level so as to never become a comical character there just for laughs.

Another beef I had with the first film was the lackluster action scenes which thankfully and to the films saving grace have been fixed. It appears director (and actor) Jon Favreau has learned some new tricks and puts them to use well within the movie. The best part of it... is that it's not all CGI. There's quite a bit of live action practical stunts being done and they really make a difference in some of these big sequences. Now they have a better feel to them whereas before it was like a cut scene from a video game. The race track sequence where Ivan attacks Tony is a prime example of the use of practical stunts that were noticeable and impressive as well as doing some very fine CGI and real world integration work. Neither film is action heavy which is a good thing and also neither films plots have calling for them to be action heavy. No, the main focus is very much Tony, his major problem and the man that he is at this point. He's flawed as all hell and is on a self-destructive path. At the end of this film we don't feel like he's any closer to a break through which will allow him to not do the things he does to people; we simply feel that Tony has lived to play another day.

But what can you say really? It's a big summer tent pole movie that kicks off the season and honestly it did a nice job of that. It's a solid super hero picture that'll provide it's share of enjoyment for a few weeks and works on those nice geeky, but not too geeky levels that the public can really dig into. Hell there's nothing wrong with popcorn fun as long as it's actually fun and this is. Now... for the secret scene or whatever you wish to call it. Unlike with the first film where the world was buzzing about what was at the end, I heard almost nothing about this one. Luckily someone told me to just stay and watch and I'd see for myself and that I did. It's a fabulous little tease of who we'll be seeing next summer from the Marvel universe. On a film lovers note said film in discussion has a fantastic cast and an interesting an extremely against the grain director behind it which could equal something very fresh for the genre. As a fan of the character in question I must say FUCK YES! No longer are we dealing with simple men and their devices, for now we have a film about a man born into badassery. I wait with baited breath that first official teaser trailer.

The Book of Eli review

When I dish out cash to see a post apocalyptic movie I have exceptions. I want characters, I want a fucking journey that when I leave the theater I'm going to think about and carry with me for a while. And when it's rated R I expect even more. You have the right to pull out all the stops and really create something hard edged and as always badass. Welcome to the gritty future of "The Book of Eli", a movie that's more 'Terminator' without robots than all that silvery shit and CGI in "Terminator Salvation". A movie that belongs aside such post end of the world grit as "Mad Max" and "The Road Warrior".

Now something better about the film is that this ain't just a post apocalypse film. It's in fact a samurai picture with a little western thrown in. The Hughes brothers who haven't done a film since 2001's Jack the ripper flick "From Hell" which was stylish, entertaining and flawed due to it's pacing, returns the brothers to the public eye and after this I hope we see more of their films sooner rather than later. They infuse the film with tons of saturated images of the world we knew and characters big and small that are always entertaining and often have more going on then we notice at first glance. But first let me conquer the elephant of the film, the Christianity aspect. What's surprising is that the film doesn't deal with it as God is good and Christians need run the world or anything like that. The film shows the power and importance of religion and the ideas behind it. People can use religion for different reasons and that's something used in the film, but never said in so many words.

Eli's faith is what drives him. This quest west to where he believes the book will be safe. Is it a big Christian alegory like "The Chronicles of Narnia"? Not in any way, sense or form and if you think so then really you don't need to be watching films like this. But now lets shift gears, Denzel is in many ways a badass. Even when playing the types of characters he often plays, he's still a badass that can control any situation. As Eli we see a character unlike most that he's played, a monk and killer with a machete that knows how to handle himself in the wasteland. He has a couple of great long shot fight sequences that'll be remembered. It's brutal and fast paced... not unlike what we see in samurai pictures. Gary Oldman returns to top villainy form as the head of a town. He abuses his wife played by Jennifer Beals and he exploits his step daughter played by Mila Kunis. He's searching for this bible because he too wants it and while the trailers may make you think he's simply out to use it for evil, it's not quite so cut and dry.

He does want the people to be civilized and he knows the power that those words can have over the people. There is more to it, but I don't want to spoil the whole scope of the picture. And it really is a big scoped film that creates a world and the people within it. It's not just a bunch of destroyed cities and desert and action set pieces. There's a system at work with the few civil minded people existing in the world and it works for them. As an action picture Hughes brothers know what works and what works is when you have everything encompassed into a single frame. The sequences in which Kunis tosses a grenade down the road and it blows an armored car to pieces. Instead of cutting the scene to pieces they do two simple shots and both include the actors, the explosion and the pieces landing around them. The same goes for the fight scenes and several of the films shoot outs, the longer the shot goes on the more engrossing the action becomes. The best of the best action filmmakers know this.

So with all my love of "The Book of Eli" not everybody's gonna like it. People who can't figure out the real religious parts of the movie and realize some of the undertones and questions it attempts to raise won't like it because they think it's trying to convert them (which I'd love to hear them convince me of) or they find that any religious aspect in any film cheesy (which I'll defend here till I'm out of breath). It's an action movie that actually attempts to make you think about society and what religion can do to humanity. It's also a genre picture in the best sort of way. It pays it's tiny homages throughout the film and in different ways and is still very original and endlessly entertaining. If you like films like "Zatoichi", "A Fistful of Dollars", "For a Few Dollars More" or the "Mad Max" films then yes this is right up your alley. If not, well there's plenty of copies of "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" to go around.

Avatar review

So over a decade after James Cameron blew the Oscars away with his epic story of romance in the face of doom in one of histories most memorable disasters, he follows up with a science fiction adventure, war story involving blue people. Was this really the best choice for him after such a massive achievement as "Titanic"? That's damn sure not for me to say. Cameron's work in the sci-fi genre has had echos well into our time. His designs, themes, style and technology has been used in everything from "Starship Troopers", "Halo" and "District 9" to "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button". He is the creator of Digital Domain, one of the best computer animating companies around. So him trumping up this whole 'movies will never be the same' business is pretty ballsy. I can't necessarily say movies will never be the same, but I can say that he's made a damn entertaining movie that does live up to his reputation and trademark style.

"Avatar" isn't the most original sci-fi movie to come along. Neither was Abrams' "Star Trek" and Jackon's "King Kong" and they were quite fantastic as well. What "Avatar" is, is Cameron's love of classic sci-fi adventures he read when he was younger (i.e. "Dune" and "John Carter of Mars"). What is pretty original and overall astounding is Pandora, the alien planet the film takes place on. It's not quite as gimmicky as Skull Island, but it's interesting in just how much eco-life was created for the film. It's great looking, but not really spacey. Cameron's inspiration for 90% of the creatures is based on deep water sea creatures that is his seen while diving. His thought is that as much as we sit down and try to think of how to make up creatures, Earth has dozens that are more bizarre and alien looking then whats in our imaginations.

Now we come to the Na'vi. Actually... lets first talk about the overall visuals. They're fucking fantastic. This is exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to look and style when it comes to CGI. The animation is far more detailed than any of the science fiction flicks this year and several action sequences using people falling, flying and what not look far less phony then what I've been seeing. This is aided by Cameron's strikingly non-gimmicky use of 3D. Sometimes it's in your face, but in the normal ways in which a good action film is made. The military designs are classic Cameron of "Aliens" and "Terminator", with huge flying machines with buttons and lights and tons of random shit, but the difference is that it all seems to have a purpose. There's something very matter of fact about the usage of his tech. The whole avatar program, led by Sigourney Weaver who plays the character like Ripley, had she become a doctor; is a simple brain connecting system.

Think what happens in "The Matrix" sort of. Sam Worthington's Jake Sulley is fun type of lead because he has a real motivation for coming into this project. He's a quick learner and he's got a mouth. He's fun to watch in human form or avatar form because of how fantasticly expressive Worthington is. At first he comes off a bit of a cardboard solider character, but after a while you get his true colors. On the flip side you've got Stephen Lang as the gung-ho Col. Quaritch. Quartich is a classic Cameron villian, the sense that he's ruthless, cunning and damn hard to kill. Then we have Zoe Saldana as Neytiri. Her job maybe was the best here because she had to be extremely expressive, emotional, had to learn a new language and fight. Saldana has been on a roll with a lot of high profile movies and she's been great jobs in them. She's well on her way to becoming a major name actress.

The backlash to this movie has been unworldly stupid. It's been like the whole Bond not Blond thing with Daniel Craig. The fact is the adventure movie genre is in pain and it's because of the lack of original ideas which is stemmed from the lack of respect those films are getting. With "Avatar" there is a hope that things might change. Scratch that, 2009 might change that. For the first time in a long time genre films like this one are getting major respect and even awards praise ("Avatar" has been nominated for Best Picture at the Golden Globes). It is a fantastic adventure film, fun and impressive from beginning to end and shows that Cameron can still make a great picture, even with being out of the game for so long.

"Avatar" **** out of ****