Dredd

Judge Dredd comics are very hard things to translate to another medium. The overall bleak, nihilistic and yet blackly humorous ‘Ho-hum, let’s just get on with it despite all this violence’ tone needs a lot of contextualising. The previous attempt with Stallone didn’t work at all, but had a campy charm. On the other hand, this one, while it may not have had the horrible matter-of-fact shots of dead bodies going into recyc machines that have endured with me since early childhood, it managed to maintain the tone of bleak hopelessness and casual violence while introducing a perfect little humanising element – the young, sensitive rookie being taken out with Dredd for her first day. It gives the audience someone to empathise with while letting Dredd maintain his icy cool attitude.

The plot, written by The Beach and The Tesseract author Alex Garland, who seems to have given up on novels in favour of scriptwriting, was actually very simple, to the point it felt to me like a half-hour episode of a TV series fleshed out rather than a large-scale movie plot, and honestly I wasn’t at all impressed by the idea at the end, where a device has to transmit a signal rather than what it triggered simply happening when the signal stops, which is what anyone in Mama’s situation would have opted for. Still, the small scale was clearly intentional, to allow for the world to soak in. But I think a bit more of a chance could have been taken expanding the storyline outside its location, perhaps to the justice headquarters or some narcotics refinery outside, just to give more of a sense of scale, even if it meant sacrificing that neat conclusion.

The result is that the film is entertaining and satisfying – and of course very gory – but ultimately doesn’t feel like it’s o much of a scale and thus feels a long way from memorable, which is its main fault. Still, if I’ll remember anything from the film, it’s the beautiful ultra-slow-motion scenes of water droplets – and the chilling ideas the gang members have for using the drug that induces a feeling of time passing incredibly slowly…

The Expendables, then, which was our film for the sort-of party yesterday. I wanted to put on The Expendables in particlar because (a) we could largely ignore it and I knew nothing we put on was going to get watched seriously, and (b) I kinda wanna see the silly sequel so needed to watch the silly first film. No need for a decent review – basically, a bunch of huge names of 80s and 90s action films get together, then Sylvester Stallone, Jet Li, Dolf Lundgren, Jason Statham and Terry Crews (whose ridiculous ‘muscle music’ video for Old Spice I recently had hysterics over) go and overthrow a South American dictatorship with only Stone Cold Steve Austin to stand in their way. Mickey Rourke also turns up as the behind-the-scenes man. They essentially blow a lot of stuff up, fight a lot, have a car chase and win in the end. What more do you need from this action piece?

I was only a little sad it wasn’t the ensemble piece it was set up to be. Stallone was the only big, nostalgic name to be featured throughout. Jet Li was an action star but doesn’t have the stature of the big names that made the project appealing, Statham and Crews are really new to being called ‘stars’ and Dolph Lundgren was always a step below the big, big names. Of those biggest names, it unfortunately turned out that Willis and Schwarzenegger only had the smallest of cameos and even then in a scene with Stallone where they were conspicuously never all sharing the same shot, making me doubt all three were even in the same room at any point. Doing a little Googling, this seems too have been a common observation.

But hey. It’s dumb fun and taken in that context was hilarious. ‘Porn for action fans’ is probably right. It was never meant to be anything but silly and enjoyable, and that’s exactly what it was. And the sequel includes  Van Damme and the remarkably old Chuck Norris. Sign me up!

The Rutles: All You Need is Cash

At last, I got around to watching the original band documentary parody film, the precursor to This is Spinal Tap and another step along the way of reminiscing about The Bonzos. In 1975, Eric Idle of Monty Python and Neil Innes of the Bonzos got together for a sketch parodying the Beatles. The skits made the transitions to Idle’s appearances on Saturday Night Live, and then in 1978 this feature film followed, and despite an iffy start has endured as a bit of a cult classic – though of course, Spinal Tap does pretty much everything this does, but better: by parodying a whole movement rather than an individual band, it’s more affectionate and gets laughs because you know there will be people who actually believe it, and it’s just got bigger laughs. 

All You Need is Cash starts awkwardly, with Eric Idle’s usual trying-too-hard way of trying to inject laughs into straight exposition casting away all possibility of veracity without actually being very funny. The parody of the early Beatles are obvious and predictable, though the music – aping a general style rather than individual songs – are clever. Fortunately, it gets a lot better as it goes on, with big laughs in the reporter’s trip to New Orleans, Dirk’s highly awkward marriage and the brilliant scene where George Harrison (as an interviewer) asks Michael Palin (as the Rutle Corp.’s spokesperson) about problems with people stealing things while an increasingly outlandish succession of items is wheeled out behind them. There are brilliant moments in the interviews with Mick Jagger and great little cameos from Ron Wood, Roger McGough and the biggest names from SNL – Aykroyd, Belushi and Murray. It also has a brilliant parody of the Yellow Submarine animation and expertly skewers the Maharishi in a surreal way. I also had a fit of giggles to the ‘Ouch!’ video, even though it was the lowest and most politically incorrect form of humour. Neil Innes’ Lennon impression also develops into a thing of great brilliance, both in his spoken impression (like the shower sit-in) and especially in the music – ‘Cheese and Onions’ is a marvel of pinpoint accuracy.

While it’s great that it was released early enough that John Lennon could appreciate it and fixed on what were relatively recent events, I had to cringe at how it treated Brian Epstein, no matter how vilified he has been. I know over a decade is much too long to cry ‘too soon!’ but the humour aimed at him went from gentle teasing – the awkward interview where it was suggested all he liked about the Beatles was how tight their trousers were – to jibes at his being Jewish (his book here being ‘A Cellar Full of Goys’), but mostly I didn’t like the humour extracted from the Rutles’ awkward reaction to his death (or, here, his moving to Australia). It all seemed too cruel to be amusing.

Overall, though, I feel like All You Need is Cash is under-appreciated. It’s not as good as Spinal Tap, but almost everyone who loves that film would really enjoy this one, too. But it seems to me it doesn’t get much of a look in. And that’s a shame. 

Batman: The Dark Knight Rises

Though it never reaches the same heights as the first two films in Nolan’s reimagined Batman series, overall it was a more cohesive film, with fewer negative points as well – it was never as impressive as the first film’s delivery of a new, grittier flavour, nor as thrillingly strange as the second, but it was also solid and entertaining throughout, despite a slow start.

What’s really remarkable is that despite the costumes and exaggerated combat, this isn’t really a comic book film like Thor or the new Superman. It’s actually much more like an exaggerated spy film about terrorists, one of the recent Bond flicks or a Bourne film, which despite the lack of masks have similar action and exaggerated combat despite the ostensible realism.

But indeed, while one of the best things about the re-envisioned Joker of the second film was that he used Guerrilla tactics, here what made Bane’s story so fascinating was that it was set up like a large-scale bit of terrorism: this Bane isn’t a Venom-pumped, leotard-wearing merc in a mask that recalls Mexican wrestlers, but a formidable leader of an extremist faction quite willing to die for him, using the media to his advantage and spouting anarchic ideals – though lying about them.

And then the emotional heart of the film – working somewhat less well – is Bruce Wayne’s struggle to find meaning in his life without Batman, which is ultimately fruitless. What does ensue, however, is some very memorable imagery about rehabilitation and climbing out of a desperate prison, some incredible scenes of street combat and a clash between Batman and a huge but eloquent, persuasive and supremely confident man.

The film throws up a huge number of questions, none of which it cares to answer – which I rather liked. Is it a critique of anarchy? Are the disgusting, corrupt businessmen in the right here or the violent criminals who overthrow them – or are both repulsive? Is fear really what makes you strong? Is the hidden antagonist really dead? Is the little parting stinger with Joseph Gordon-Levitt – hooray for a superb career trajectory for cute lil’ Tommy – going to signify anything more (I doubt it, as this is a very neat end to a trilogy, but it would be nice, and I feel silly for forgetting the possibility has occurred to me in the trailers, only to forget it until Batman’s line about a mask, very shortly before the reveal)? Is too much technology always going to be weaponised for terror? And should thieves, vigilantes, lying officials and the super-rich always be applauded as long as they end up sacrificing themselves for what is good?

And does the fact that really, the only way Batman could have got out of that last predicament was with the help of Superman hint at a Justice League film to mirror the Avengers success? Haha – no hope of that!

There was much else to smile about in this film – an excellent new Catwoman, some superb scenes with Michael Caine, visceral action scenes and an amusing oblique reference to Killer Croc – though in truth it just lacked enough iconic imagery to really endure. Still, it’s part of what may be the great apex of superhero films, and I’d rather see it again than the lauded The Avengers, even if the new Spiderman was more entertaining and heartfelt than either.

If anything, what I hope for now is more DC properties to be tapped. Superman gets his new film next year, which may or may not be gritty and severe, but it’s really the wider universe I’d like to see tapped. Not necessarily The Flash, arguably the obvious choice, or Dr Strange, who apparently is likely to get the big screen treatment soon, but ones less often seen onscreen.

Actually, the truth is I’d love to see a Captain Marvel film with Freddie and lots of Elvis references. Unlikely, I know, but hey – if Ant Man can get a big-screen adaptation, The Big Red Cheese certainly should be able to! 

Batman Begins: http://adzfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/batman-begins.html

The Dark Knight: http://adzfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/batman-dark-knight.html

The Amazing Spider-Man

Watched The Amazing Spider-Man, the franchise’s reboot with Andrew Garfield instead of Tobey Maguire. It’s been criticised as unnecessary, but reboots are fashionable and it was certainly a different enough angle from the other series to work. It was also by far the best of the bunch, and Garfield is a far, far better Parker than Maguire, if a little too old to play him as a teen. He’s likeable even when he’s making terrible choices or being a jerk, can pull off both the vulnerable geeky Parker and the wise-cracking Spiderman, and fills out that costume very nicely with his skinny but muscular frame. All can agree he’s cute.

This version of the story has Parker very much searching for the truth about his father despite how lovely Uncle Ben and Aunt May are. It actually makes for a much neater storyline, because it means that the superhero’s rise and the appearance of the supervillain are linked rather than coincidental. The main story opens with that familiar staple of Western culture: how utterly horrific the American high school experience must be, with good ole Flash in bully mode again. The radioactive spider bite comes from Oscorp labs, where Peter is looking for information about his father, which is better than just going on a school trip. The radioactive spiders are also the source of his webbing, which is another way the story is neatened.

Spider Man doesn’t yet love Mary Jane, so here we get Gwen Stacy instead (no ‘oh snap’ jokes, please). George Stacy is given an interesting role as a father who is at first combative and scary, but is won over and eventually provides some of the most significant emotional points of the film after what happens to Uncle Ben – also meaning there is no need for a JJJ yet. Meanwhile, the antagonist is Curt Connors, here given an extra link to Parker’s past, and a potentially goofy villain made mostly believable and compelling. Everything has just been written in a much tighter and slicker way – Parker has just the right balance of being a selfish teenage jerk at the start (forgetting his obligations, disobeying teachers, picking fights) and being full of remorse later on, as well as revelling in being behind a mask. The plot is generally very tight, with only one real objection from me (Connors comes up with a master plan, but decides to go after Parker at his school first, allowing him the lead he needs to find him and clues to his plan), and Garfield’s charm really helps with a character difficult to get just right.

I’m glad The Social Network seems to have propelled him to major stardom. I’m actually looking forward to the sequels more than to any continuation of the Avengers storylines except perhaps Iron Man. Who was the shadowy figure in the stinger?

Men in Black 3

It seemed a pretty odd idea to finish this trilogy after a gap of ten years – 15 since the original. Apart from marvelling at how little Will Smith has aged, it mostly made fans and newcomers alike think…what’s the point? Why now, rather than in 2006?

This third part in many ways felt superfluous and certainly never reaches the heights of the original film, but it was entertaining, well-crafted and had some really amusing moments as well as fine performances.

When a formidable criminal Boglodyte known as Boris the Animal escapes from his lunar prison, he has one aim in sight – go back in time, kill Agent K and thus stop the chain of events that leads him to being locked away. He accomplishes this, but only Agent J remembers the true timeline, and as plot contrivance teaches us is inevitable, Boris never having been locked up means he can lead an invasion fleet to Earth which just so happens to arrive at the time a few hours after he went back to change things, so Agent J has to go back to prevent this future from ever happening.

Off he goes, to 1969, leading to lots of amusing jokes about how much worse racial discrimination was then, and how the crazy pop culture of the time was influenced by aliens – and undercover agents. Though the Warhol gag would have worked better without the feeling of repetition having seen Lady Gaga listed as an alien earlier. He finds the younger K, brilliantly played by Josh Brolin (who I’d seen before as the bad guy in True Grit but didn’t recognise), so further amusing hijinks happen as a man from the future tries to make his story believable. They set out investigating, finally finding the psychic alien Griffin, played in a sweet, winsome way by Michael Stuhlbarg, who I knew I had seen in something before but never would have been able to recall was the kindly, Jewish-looking film historian in Hugo. Griffin’s ability to see myriad possible futures, as well as being in possession of an important anti-invasion device, make him a bit of a cheap plot device, but he moves things along and soon Boris and the Agents meet for a showdown – with a very iconic event as backdrop.

Meanwhile, we can find out a bit more about Agent K, giving him a bit more humanity with the love interest of Agent O (older version played with just the right amount of staid eccentricity by Emma Thompson), and even about Agent J’s past through a rather contrived and mawkish twist.

The film feels mostly pretty inconsequential, and suffers from how Rip Torn’s character’s being written out and the non-appearance of the talking pug feel like actors just refusing to reprise their roles, but it is still perfectly entertaining, and the cast, old and new, look like they’re having an extremely good time. Boris, played by one of the Flight of the Concord guys in a way that makes him seem much older and larger, is exuberant, the Agent Ks are believably the same people, and crucially despite being an old, very rich Scientologist who has pushed his kids into the limelight and who didn’t even provide one of his cheesy raps for this film, Will Smith remains very likeable indeed.

Nobody ought to expect a masterpiece from this film. Don’t even expect something that matches up to the first film (though it’s as good as the very forgettable MIBII). But catch it if you can – I’m glad I did, even if only days from the end of its run.

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

Like so many of these very silly ideas, this was a fun concept and had some big laughs towards the beginning, but then had to actually string it out into a full feature with a satisfying ending and actually got rather dull towards the end.

The title is brilliant, and it’s certainly what it says on the tin. After kicking off in very obviously comic book style, dispensing with details like his sister and his step-mother, we see Lincoln seeking revenge for his mother’s death with a pistol. The firearm goes wrong, but eventually the young Lincoln manages to make it go off and bewilderingly the pellet both lodges in the other man’s eye and kills him – maybe it ricocheted back from the back of his skull! Such things do not need to be overthought.

The man of course comes back to life and Lincoln is saved only by another man – a man who hunts vampires. Lincoln learns his craft, starting from an incredibly comic book scene where he channels his anger through his axe-blows, and soon the future president is a supernaturally gifted vampire hunter.

Balancing living an anonymous life hunting the dead in the southern States with the beginnings of a political career, Lincoln also finds love. However, when he finally takes out the vampire he wanted revenge upon, he provokes the ire of the head vampire, and things must inevitably come to a head – against the background of the confederates taking up arms and the American Civil War beginning.

Don’t look here for a politically correct film. It’s not. It won’t pass feminist tests about whether women speak to one another. It’s horribly insensitive about race, with the slaves literally treated as food, plenty of tokenism and – even if spoken by the antagonist – lines equating slavery of human beings to other, more trivial forms of slavery that nobody argues against. It’s certainly disrespectful to the dead, who after all died less than two hundred years ago, especially when it came to portraying those fighting for the South as being allied with bloodsucking vampires. But it’s all a ridiculous film about Lincoln hunting vampires with an axe, so who cares?

The problem is that it doesn’t fully embrace its daftness. This needed to go into camp excess, to be a 300 or a Sin City. It needed absurd amounts of style and silliness. Instead, it plays it as a straight comic book horror film, and so by the time there’s a big confrontation on a train, it’s much too serious – and even the amusing way it makes a fork an image of great importance can’t save it from getting dull enough I almost nodded off.

Strong performances from Benjamin Walker, the ubiquitous Dominic Cooper (here doing a simple, cool performance, which suits him best) and Mary Elizabeth Winstead – the girl from Scott Pilgrim – help carry things along, but ultimately it needed a stronger script and more style. Or at least even more silliness. Because the last thing I expected this to be was dull.

The second misfire with Tim Burton’s name attached (even if not as director) in the last couple of months. Still, it’s piqued my interest for Spielberg’s Lincoln.