Film review #574
Director: Robert Schwentke
SYNOPSIS: Police officer Nick Walker is killed by his partner Bobby Hayes as he wants to get rid of some gold that the two found on a random drug bust. He finds himself recruited into the R.I.P.D.: The “Rest in Peace Department,” which is a supernatural force whose purpose is to hunt down people that have died and still roaming the Earth. Partnered with a veteran officer, the two discover the circumstances behind Nick’s death are tied to a much bigger plot…
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: R.I.P.D. is a sci-fi action film based on the comic book of the same name. The film opens up with police officers Nick Walker (Reynolds) and Bobby Hayes (Bacon) are discussing some gold they took on a random drug bust, but kept it for themselves. Nick decides he is going to turn the gold into evidence, and Bobby decides to kill Nick at their next drug bust when no one else is around. Nick finds himself dead, but before he is whisked away to the afterlife, he is brought to the R.I.P.D. to be recruited as an officer who specialises in thwarting people who have died and are still hanging around Earth, causing them to transform into hideous creatures called “Deados.” Nick is partnered with veteran officer Roicephus “Roy” Pulsipher, who was a sheriff in the Old West before he died, and the two manage to stumble upon a plot that threatens the whole world, which they naturally have to put a stop to. The story can very easily be summed up as a combination of the films Men in Black and Ghost: you can see certain scenes are almost complete cut-and-paste jobs from these two. Alongside this, it doesn’t have either the worldbuilding or quickfire comedy of Men in Black, nor the emotional depth of Ghost, leaving a film that just completely fails to build its own identity. The plot of an ancient artifact being built that will wipe out the Earth is basically the plot to every Men in Black film. It feels like the script was just finished at it’s first draft, and no one bothered to add in any specific details or worldbuilding to give it some depth. Despite the criticisms, the film actually does a good job of avoiding any boring exposition, and just jumps right into everything and explaining things as it goes. Part of this might be because there’s not much to actually explain, but at least the film manages to keep momentum going over the rather short runtime of just over ninety minutes.
The characters are very much what you would expect: Ryan Reynolds is Ryan Reynolds: it doesn’t matter what the name of the actual character, because he’s just playing the same character he always does. Jeff Bridges playing Old West lawman Roeciphus “Roy” Pulsipher is certainly the stand out performance. Again, he’s not got much depth beyond being the “grizzled veteran” type, but it’s guaranteed fun every time he is on screen. Kevin Bacon as the villain is unremarkable, and Nick’s wife Julia barely leaves a mark. As mentioned, the film lacks and seems to avoid the emotional depth that would have made their relationship and the significance of Nick’s death a solid plot point. Even if it was, it wouldn’t have been any different from the plot of Ghost (again, as mentioned). The film doesn’t seem to know what it wants its audience to be: it doesn’t have the established jokes and wit to be a comedy movie for young adults, the lack of emotional drama for older adults, and is a bit too adult for younger viewers, so the film just rushes straight through the middle with nothing sticking to it.
It’s difficult to find something else to say about the film, because there’s not much content to comment on. The film was blasted for being derivative of other films and a box office bomb, making nowhere near its budget upon release. However, I don’t think it’s all bad: sure, it has no substance, but it’s paced well, and maintains its momentum and energy through to make it a pretty entertaining film with no lulls. R.I.P.D. is the epitome of mindless cinematic entertainment that brings nothing new or significant to the table, but a short bit of fun if you’re in the mood.
Film review #567
Director: Bong Joon-Ho
SYNOPSIS: After an attempt to halt climate change by releasing a chemical into the atmosphere, the Earth has turned into a frozen wasteland. The only survivors live aboard a trans-continent train that takes one year to travel the globe. At the front of the train, the people live in luxury, while those at the rear live in squalor. Among them is Curtis, who is scheming to revolt and make his way to the front of the train, and lead the people there to a better life…
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: Snowpiercer is a 2013 sci-fi post-apocalypse film based on the French graphic novel of the same name. The opening introduces us to the premise of the film; in which a solution to climate change was to disperse a chemical into the atmosphere, but this had an effect of completely freezing the earth and rendering it uninhabitable. The only survivors are living aboard a train that is constantly moving around the world, completing one full trip every year. The train is separated into a very specific order, with the wealthy and privileged living a life of luxury in the front cars, and the lower class living in squalid conditions in the rear carriages. One such person, Curtis, is working on a plan to stage an uprising to get to the front of the train and take control. The film follows the revolution as it travels through the train from the back to the front, and while you might be a little sceptical of how much variety and action you can fit in a 2-hour film set inside a train, you need not worry, as the film does a solid job of keeping things interesting, and varied. You get the claustrophobic feel of the carriages thanks to the impressive camerawork and crowded sets that generate a unique environment. Different carriages look like slums, factories, classrooms, restaurants, and nightclubs, all bound up in the same physical dimensions of a train carriage, and it’s very solidly executed. The story is a fairly simple one to follow, and again, despite it’s linearity, the film is able to drop in plenty of surprises and unique obstacles as the cast travel through the train. Perhaps they could have done something a bit more impactful with the ending, but that’s the only criticism I can think of.
The cast of characters are well defined, and often exaggerated personifications of different facets of society. Curtis is the reluctant leader of the revolution, and you get a decent insight into the decisions he makes and how they weigh upon him. There’s also a constant element of danger, as the stakes are constantly raised as a reminder that no one is safe; as main characters get killed left and right, and the revolution is always in a precarious position. The cast feels genuine, and on the whole the film is well acted, with a good, varied cast.
As mentioned, the film really shines in it’s design and atmosphere: the train is able to encapsulate all these familiar environments, but with the twist of being contained in a carriage. It doesn’t rely on cheap special effects, but rather well-co-ordinated action sequences that, thanks to the cramped settings, put you right in the action. The premise of a global-spanning train might sound a bit silly, and a post-apocalyptic setting that is used because only the best ones have already been done to death, but Snowpiercer genuinely offers something refreshing and exciting, combining a harsh and gritty setting with some stylish and exuberant characters. While the ending leaves things open-ended, it’s a satisfying journey that combines a layer of seriousness and high stakes with some more absurd and exaggerated characters that lift the film out of being a total gloomfest just enough. Yes, the train is a thinly-veiled metaphor for the class-system, and there’s not a lot of surprises in that regard, but the film genuinely surprises in being an entertaining, action-packed story despite the kneejerk impressions you might have of a revolution taking place on a train. I genuinely enjoyed it more than I thought I would, and again, while not perfect, excels in enough ways to take it an entertaining and interesting watch.
The World’s End (2013)
Film review #565
Director: Edgar Wright
SYNOPSIS: Gary King is haunted by a twenty year old memory of failing to complete the Golden Mile with his friends: twelve pubs, twelve pints that stretch across his hometown of Newton Haven. He decides to reunite the five friends and convinces them to travel back to their hometown to complete the task they began twenty years ago. However, as they undertake their legendary pub crawl, they begin to notice that there is something strangely different about their home town…
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: The World’s End is a 2013 filmed directed by Edgar Wright, and the third film directed by him and starring Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, with Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fizz being the previous two. in the opening, we see Gary King, a good-for-nothing tearaway, who decides to conclude some unfinished business from twenty years prior: a legendary pub crawl across his home town, with twelve pints across twelve pubs, concluding at the World’s End pub. Gary convinces his four friends, who now all have grown up with families and careers (apart from Gary, who is basically the same as he was in high school), and they return to their home town to try and finally complete their unfinished business. however, they find their home town has changed a little…in more ways than one, as they eventually discover that the town’s population has been taken over by robot clones by an alien intelligence who wishes to “improve” humanity’s behaviour to prepare it for acceptance in the wider galactic community. The film handles the split between the more down-to-earth premise of the beginning of the film, and the sudden turn to sci-fi strongly and smartly. But this shouldn’t be much of a surprise, given that Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz also did the same thing with similar success. The World’s End feels like a continuation of what those film’s achieved in terms of storytelling and humour, delivering fast-paced dialogue, fight scenes and banter from it’s likable leads. poking fun at the trope of alien possession such as Invasion of the Body Snatchers, it provides a good setting for the characters to approach it in the guise of a pub crawl.
Simon Pegg plays the lead character of Gary King, an immature, good-for-nothing tearaway who hasn’t changed since his schooldays, and who presents us with a character we’re not sure whether to like or dislike: he exists as both someone who is problematic and an embodiment of some of the worst qualities of humanity, but also a reminder of who we once were as teenagers that quietly gets lost as the “real world” dawns upon us, highlighted by Gary’s four friends all having careers and/or families. They all provide a counterpoint to Gary’s antics, but Gary never feels outnumbered, as he’s always such a huge presence and takes control of conversations to turn them into high energy performances. Ultimately, Gary’s character arc doesn’t really get resolved in any final way, but that’s kind of the point: that people like him don’t fit into the grand plan, and that’s okay. The ending of the film isn’t able to match the rest of it, with the dialogue between Gary and the alien entity not having the same energy and witty wordplay as the rest, and the epilogue being the onset of the apocalypse may not be to everyone’s taste, but does little to sour the movie as a whole.
The film often feels like a refinement of the practices undertaken in Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, with Pegg and Frost doing their own stunts, high-octane action sequences, and quick, snappy wordplay which never misses a beat. The weak spots in the film are it falling short of following through on it’s theme of maturity, growth etc. in the end, and while it’s obviously going to be compared to the two aforementioned films, The World’s End doesn’t have those memorable moments that will distinguish itself and make you think of it on it’s own merit. The film definitely has plenty of polish and refinement, and the comedy, acting and general sense of fun are all top notch though, and make the film worth a watch regardless of any negatives that don’t sour the whole experience.
Back to the Siam (2013)
Film review #493
Director: Gonzalo Rodan
SYNOPSIS: Marty visits his friend Doc Brown and finds that he has invented a time machine…made from a fridge. A bunch of men in suits appear and try to catch Marty and the Doc, leading to Marty accidentally being transported back in time to the year 1986. There, he has to find Doc Brown again to help him fix the time machine to get back home…
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: Back to the Siam is a 2013 science-fiction film, based on…well, you can probably guess. The film centres around Marty Fox, who visits his pal Doc Brown to find he has completed work on a time machine that he has constructed himself out of a fridge. However, some men in suits come to put a stop to the Doc’s experiments, and Marty is accidentally sent back in time to 1986, damaging the time machine in the process. Marty goes to the Doc Brown in 1986 to get help in fixing the time machine and sending him home. The film is essentially made as an Argentinian Back to the Future, so while the essential plot is more or less the same, a lot of the settings, people, and scenarios are replaced by things which are more common to Argentina. For example, instead of the lightning storm which takes Marty back to the future in BttF, here it is the electricity generated when footballer Maradona scores a goal at the 1986 world cup. This is obviously a low-budget, somewhat satire of the films, so you can’t penalise it for accuracy, but the changes it has made to the film mostly fit the story well, and give the story a bit of a twist. Obviously it is based on the foundations of an already well written film in BttF, so I don’t want to give Back to the Siam too much credit for that. I could not find any English subtitles for this film, but I don’t think it really matters if you know Back to the Future like nearly everyone does, but does mean I can’t really comment on the jokes or humour. The physical humour is mostly entertaining though.
The biggest change from Back to the Future is that the “past” in this film is 1986, which is about the same time that the “present” was in BttF (1985, to be exact). This could have been a pretty interesting thing for the film to play with, but as mentioned, it’s aim is to make an Argentinian take on the original, rather than try anything too new. The main characters too are basically the same, just tweaked to reflect their locale. The character of Biff Tannen doesn’t have a counterpart in this film though, and instead the antagonists are just men in suits. The main focus of the story is the first Back to the Future film, but there’s some nods to the second and third film, so it definitely feels like a take on the franchise as a whole, which is nice, and means that the film won’t set up a sequel it will never get.
This should not come as a surprise, but this film is completely unlicensed, and has no permission to use any of the names, characters, or anything. It reminds me of the films of the 60s and 70s that would simply make films based on entire franchises without permission, typically in countries where they would not be found out and sued into oblivion. Back to the Siam doesn’t use any Back to the Future footage, but it does use a lot of the music, which it definitely doesn’t have the licence for: if you were going to argue this was simply a fan-made parody, then that might be the thing that tips it over the edge into plagiarism territory. Despite being a low budget “parody,” there’s obviously a lot of thought and effort gone into certain aspects of the film: the fridge being the time machine instead of the DeLorean (obviously there would have been no way to afford one) genuinely works and looks cool, as well as providing some fun gags. The camera work is also surprisingly good, and shows competency when switching between different angles in scenes. The biggest production issue is the audio: it constantly peaks and distorts, and voices in the same scene can often have completely different volume levels. Even doing something basic like having a limiter would have helped immensely; it’s quite odd that there’s such a disparity between the camera and audio work.
Overall, Back to the Siam is what you would expect from a low-budget parody/re-make/bootleg…whatever you want to describe it as. It uses the successful formula and story of what it is based on, and adds it’s own flair. While keeping fairly close to that original, it also sometimes decides to just go ahead and do what it wants. At one point it decides to just through in a version of “A whole new world” from Disney’s Aladdin for no reason. I appreciate the randomness though, and also the effort taken to give the source material a different flair. It’s not going to offer you anything that Back to the Future doesn’t, and a lot of the Argentinian cultural references may not offer anything if you’re not familiar with them, but it definitely could have been a lot worse.
Film review #492
Director: Gustavo Giannini
SYNOPSIS: Gabriel is a philosophy teacher at a night school. A woman named Amnis enrols in his class, who vanishes without a trace after their intimate encounter. Her interest in the artist Benjamin Solari Parravicini, and his art that apparently predicted the future, leads Gabriel to research the artist’s works and unravel just what Parravicini saw in humanity’s future…
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: 5.5.5. (also known as Prophecy) is a 2013 film from Argentina. In the opening we are introduced to Gabriel, a philosophy teacher who is running a night course at a local school. A new student named Amnis introduces herself, and talks to Gabriel about the art work of Benjamin Solari Parravicini, whose art is printed on her shirt, and apparently predicted the future in his works. After an intimate encounter with her, she vanishes without a trace. Gabriel starts trying to locate her and researching Parravicini’s work, and learns that Parravicini’s predictions have come true, such as predicting the 9/11 terrorist attacks amongst others. He, aided by his cousin Tony, seek to unravel Parravicini’s prophecies and the apparent coming of an apocalyptic event which will strike the Earth in the near-future. The story of the film revolves around piecing together Parravicini’s visions and Gabriel’s developing obsession with them. The premise is pretty interesting, and the mystery surrounding Amnis’ identity and whereabouts is something which will keep viewers intrigued about until the end. There’s a couple of other smaller threads concerning Gabriel’s ex-wife and child, Tony’s schemes and some shady people trying to stop Gabriel unravelling Parravicini’s secrets, but they only really serve to build up different sides of Gabriel’s character. The trouble with the story is it never really gets too interesting: it’s basically Gabriel just doing research. The build-up to an apocalyptic event in the near-future that Parravicini prophesised and Gabriel trying to work out when is a bit more interesting. But ultimately goes nowhere. The film obviously hinges on leaving certain questions open regarding the prophecies and whatnot, but there’s not enough concrete results or a pay-off that is needed to provide a foundation to consider the ambiguity, and it ultimately feels like it leads nowhere. Some of the more interesting aspects like the neighbourhood that apparently distorts sense of time, are one such example that is left open, but is something that would make the story more interesting if it was revealed how it figured into the story.
Perhaps one of the weakest links in the film is the character of Gabriel himself: he just isn’t an interesting lead. It is difficult to empathise with him because he rarely shows his reactions to what is happening. Whether this is down to the acting, or he is intentionally written like that I don’t know. The parts of his character like being a philosophy professor, or being a parent, only figure into the film when absolutely necessary, and otherwise don’t affect his actions. Amnis is an interesting character, and the mystery surrounding her is a good thread that flows through the film, but the reveal only raises more questions: if she was from the future, how did she time travel? Was she a prophecy that Gabriel could see? Just explaining the mechanics of things a little would not ruin the ambiguity I think. The rest of the characters, as mentioned, don’t really come into their own, and only serve to bounce off of Gabriel’s character. Tony as the vaguely “comic relief” character fulfils a very obvious role that doesn’t really fit the serious tone of the film.
The film eventually reaches a point where it turns out that a shadowy organisation has been hoarding Parravicini’s artwork and preventing his prophecies from being found out. A man starts following Gabriel and the stakes get raised, but in the end it just goes nowhere. The ending of the film is also like that, as Gabriel just admits he has lost it and needs help, just before he is seemingly killed by the mysterious man. I am left wondering what the point of it all was: there’s no real conclusion to anything, and the prophetic vision or whatever it is that ends the film comes out of nowhere, and seems like a bland attempt at trying to create an ambiguous ending in a film that is already full of holes. 5.5.5. has some good moments in it’s intriguing and somewhat interesting story, but falters with it’s cast and characters. It’s attempt to create meaning often leaves the story full of gaps, and the unconvincing responses from characters will leave viewers without direction with regards to what to feel. Not a film entirely without merit and perfectly watchable, but you might not get anything out of the experience.
Hard to be a God (2013)
Film review #480
Director: Aleksei German
SYNOPSIS: On another planet, the civilisation there is undergoing a period of time similar to the Earth’s Middle Ages. However, this civilisation has not undergone a Renaissance period, and those intellectuals, scholars and artists that would bring it about are mercilessly hunted down by the Order, who rule over the people. A group of Earth’s scientists are sent to the city of Arkanar on the planet to observe how this civilisation develops, with orders to not interfere with the society and to keep their mission secret.
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: Hard to be a God is a 2013 Russian sci-fi epic, based on the 1964 novel of the same name. The film centres around the city of Arkanar on an alien planet, where a Middle Ages civilisation is diverging from Earth’s history, and any attempts at a Renaissance-era is being snuffed out by the ruling Order, which is arresting scholars, intellectuals and artists that may bring this new era about. A group of scientists from Earth are sent to observe this society with orders not to interfere or kill anyone (very Star Trek prime directive, although the original novel came out a year or two before the original TV series). One scientist has taken the guise of Don Rumata, who claims to be the son of a local God, and smuggles the intellectuals that the Order are hunting safely out of the city. The story of the film is…a bit difficult to follow, but at the same time, there isn’t too much to follow. There’s the elements of the Earth scientists, which doesn’t really influence the plot; partly by design, as they are not allowed to interfere. Also the setting of the medieval town itself does not lend itself to a cohesive narrative, with swathes of people just trying to survive amid the filth and fear they are living through, gives the film little direction. This again, however, is by design, as the film really hinges on being able to portray the mess of medieval society, unguided by the scholars and artists. The film definitely echoes the old Soviet Union epics, particularly Tarkovsky’s Andrei Rublev, also filmed in black and white. At nearly three hours, it is definitely an endurance piece, and without that direction that a definite story would typically give a film, the viewer becomes increasingly pulled into the mire of this society, which is obviously the film’s objective. It’s definitely not for everyone, but the film clearly has a very specific ambition and vision, and for the most part, it fulfils said vision with notice effort being poured into all aspects of it.
What makes this film stand out is how the setting is brought to life: this medieval city is absolutely covered in filth and dirt: the people wade through mud everywhere they go, their faces smeared with dirt and blood, and an absurd amount of corpses and entrails hang from the ceilings and adorn the sides of the pathways. Every shot feels like it is considered and thought through: the shot is often obscured with detritus, or extras moving across the camera, constantly giving the impression of everything being claustrophobic, and it being impossible to avoid the filth of the film. Most scenes are long single takes, which must have taken considerable effort to pull off, especially considering the aforementioned amount of extras and objects the camera moves through. The only critique I would say in this respect is that sometimes the camera moves awkwardly through the scenes, but again, given how much is going on, it’s a technical achievement that this only happens very rarely. The film isn’t particularly gory, but instead focuses on this dirt and unhygienic conditions that immerse the viewer as any everyday occurrence, rather than moments of shock and violence. There are a few particularly gory parts, such as when we see someone’s eye ripped out (from behind their head anyway), and an open chest with a still beating heart in it, but these are few and far between: the choice of the film being black and white also somewhat mutes the gore, but in these particular scenes, it becomes incredibly visceral, even without the colour.
As mentioned, the story is almost lost amidst the immersion of the visuals: there’s so much going on visually and viscerally that following what the characters are saying and doing is very much a secondary concern. There’s no traditional sci-fi metaphor or influence either, other than we are told these scientists came from Earth on an observation mission. I suppose elaborating on these elements would detract from the vision of the film becoming immersed in this society. Reviews on this film typically praise the vision and ambition of the film’s production, but is much more divisive with regards to how it tells its story, and also how it portrays the Middle Ages; which certainly wasn’t devoid of scholars, art and beauty, but also definitely wasn’t the easiest of time to live through. I would generally agree with the consensus: that Hard to be a God is a film that aims to immerse its viewers into a dark, filthy and harsh world, and succeeds in doing so. Whether that is enough to immerse all viewers with a minimal story that is difficult to follow sometimes is another matter, but I think it succeeds in doing what it set out to do. If you like your epic art films, you’ll get something out of it; if you don’t, you might not last the whole three hours.
Gingerdead Man vs Evil Bong (2013)
Film review #451
Director: Charles Band
SYNOPSIS: After his many encounters with the evil bong, Larnell has finally defeated her, and opened his own weed shop. Meanwhile, down the street, Sarah Leigh has opened up her own bakery, after putting the horror of the serial killing gingerdead man behind her. Larnell and Sarah Leigh talk about entering into a business agreement to support each others stores, but their respective past horrors return and set out to get their revenge on both of them…
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: Gingerdead Man vs Evil Bong is a 2013 comedy horror film, and is a crossover of the Gingerdead Man and Evil Bong film series, both made by Full Moon Features. The film brings together – as the title suggests – two villains from their titular horror franchises and pits them against some of the protagonist’s from said franchises. It never gets more complicated than that. The film is structured into a very blatant three act structure, with the first act focusing on the Evil Bong characters, the second act focusing on the Gingerdead Man side, and the third act is the clash and combination of the two. The film leans more towards being a part of the Evil Bong series, as there are more of its characters and the set up feels much more like the films. This is probably because Charles Band, the director of the Evil Bong films, directs this one too. Like most of the Evil Bong films, the film centres on two locations, and a lot of standing around talking, rather than anything actually happening. Some of the dialogue between the familiar characters of the series is fine, but the film also throws in minor characters that serve no purpose other than to push an unfunny joke. The film also fills up its runtime by providing flashbacks from both film series to catch you up on the three films (six in total) before this one takes place, but given that the film’s are a comedy horror that doesn’t really create a coherent narrative and instead focuses on innuendo and jokes, the flashbacks seem rather pointless (a part from to pad out the runtime, which is obviously what their purpose is).
As mentioned, a number of characters from both series make an appearance in this crossover. Larnell and Rabbit are the main characters that appear from the Evil Bong franchise, and they’re more or less how you’d expect them to be. On the Gingerdead Man side, there’s only Sarah Leigh who returns; mostly because everyone else is dead by the end of the films (Sarah Leigh also doesn’t even feature in the third film). With regards to the titular villains, they are their usual selves, and there’s no real showdown between the two; instead, they mostly just trade one-liners at each other when they finally meet near the end of the film. In the bong world, the Gingerdead Man goes ‘on trial’ where he is judged by other talking pastries which makes very little sense, and has even less impact on the story. There’s some smaller cameos from the other films in the franchise (through flashbacks or otherwise) that add a bit of depth, but not much.
While there were no more stand-alone Gingerdead Man films released after this film (or after 2011′s Gingerdead Man 3 to be exact), the titular villain went on to become a recurring character in the rest of the Evil Bong films, where he sometimes works with Evil Bong and sometimes against her, and sometimes just does his own thing. Sarah Leigh also shows up in further films, cementing a weird merger of the franchises. Overall though, Gingerdead Man vs Evil Bong sounds like a ridiculous clash of ridiculous premises, but like the stand-alone films, never lives up to the premise. The villains do very little and attention is focused on scenes of dialogue between characters that never goes anywhere. Then again, it should be what you expect if you’ve watched any of the other films, as they’re al low-budget comedy horrors that never take themselves seriously. This crossover doesn’t stand out from the rest, and fails to offer anything that the other films don’t.
Infinite Santa 8000 (2013)
Film review #434
Director: Michael Neel
SYNOPSIS: A thousand years after humanity has destroyed itself, all that remains in the world is a host of mutants, robots and monsters…and Santa Claus, who has to survive by killing these monsters. When evil scientist Dr. Shackleton comes for Martha, the little girl that Santa has been taking care of, he sets on a rescue mission and to blow up any creature or killer robot that gets in his way.
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: Infinite Santa 8000 is a post-apocalyptic Christmas action film (I think that’s the best way to describe it). The setting is a post-apocalyptic world a thousand years after humanity has destroyed itself, leaving the Earth populated by mutants, monsters and killer robots of all persuasions. One survivor of the old world though, is none other than Satna Claus, who we see in the opening scenes in an arena fighting to the death against a creature to earn some scraps of meat. Victorious, he returns to the “North Pole ranch” to et with Martha: a young girl he rescued at some point. However, the evil scientist Dr. Shackleton sends the Easter Bunny to kidnap Martha and return her to him, and with that begins Santa’s crusade against the horrors the post-apocalyptic wasteland. The story of the film is very simple: Santa stopping Dr. Shackleton and dismembering everything in his way. The appeal of the film is not in its compelling narrative, but in the sheer absurdity of its concept of having Santa murder everything and anything in a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Nevertheless, the film does take itself fairly seriously, and perhaps surprisingly does a good job of depicting a bleak and hopeless world and having Santa being the only one with any sense of hope and joy. Nevertheless, there’s still plenty of over-the-top fights and action scenes that maintain a sense of momentum throughout the film. I mean, who wouldn’t want to watch a cyborg Santa chase down and fight a mutant Easter bunny? If I had to identify a weak point, I would probably cite the dialogue, as it often lacks either the energy, or the humour to make a huge impact. There’s times when you expect Santa to deliver a Christmas-themed one-liner before he dismembers somebody, but what he comes out with always feels like it comes up a little short on having the necessary impact.
The main character of Santa Claus probably needs no introduction: He’s the same bringer of festivities you know, except he is mostly a cyborg now and hacks monsters to pieces. There’s enough of a twist on the familiar concepts as well, such as the North Pole being a ranch out in the wasteland, and his reindeer being jet-boosted robots themselves (Also Rudolph is named Randolph in this version for some reason). Martha plays a familiar role of a young, innocent child that serves as the last vestige of humanity in the post-apocalyptic wasteland, and also the means for the main character to regain their humanity in some way. Given that the main character is the literal embodiment of joy and goodwill, the whole plot between Martha and Santa is fairly predictable. Nevertheless, it is still executed quite well, as we see how Santa lived through the end of the world and thought all the joy and good from the world had gone until he met her. The character designs across the board are quite intricate and full of detail, showing off the horrific mutations and augmentations that the creatures of this world have ended up with, which gives the film a definite visual appeal.
The animation and design of this film are definitely worth mentioning. As mentioned, the character designs are intricate and a decent amount of detail, which emphasises the grotesque, inhuman mutations of the creatures that roam the world. Most of the characters are still images that over across the screen in various ways to give the illusion of movement, perhaps similar to what you would see in South Park, for example. However, there is some very clever techniques used to make them move and give them a definite sense of momentum. For example, the chase between Santa and the Easter bunny maintains a serious sense of high speed and energy. In the slower scenes however, the limitations of the animation are more apparent. Fortunately, the film knows to focus on the action, and that’s what you’ll remember coming away from it. The heavy metal soundtrack also gives the film a similar high energy, and everything seems to blend together pretty well. Overall, Infinite Santa 8000 fulfils the ridiculous concept it proposes, while also clearly being a labour of love that has plenty of effort and consideration put in to make it a coherent and visually appealing experience. It has a number of shortcomings, but it certainly exceeds any expectations you may have going into it.
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2013)
Film review #378
Directors: Anthony Russo, Joe Russo
SYNOPSIS: When S.H.I.E.L.D. director Nick Fury is assassinated, Steve Rogers (Captain America) is on the trail of those responsible, but he is told to trust noone. As he investigates, he finds a shocking discovery that goes right to the heart of S.H.I.E.L.D. itself…
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: Captain America: The Winter Soldier is a 2013 superhero film that forms part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). The film starts off with Captain America in the thick of a mission to rescue hostages from a S.H.I.E.L.D. ship. There’s plenty of fluid action that provides a strong opening for the film that requires no knowledge of the characters, and eases into the story in a fun and exciting way. The plot takes on a number of twists and turns as S.H.I.E.L.D. director Nick Fury is seemingly assassinated and Captain America must investigate S.H.I.E.L.D. itself with the help of Black Widow. The film mixes layers of action, espionage and intrigue as it unravels the conspiracy surrounding S.H.I.E.L.D. It’s a strong story that will keep viewers engaged, as well as exploring the character of Captain America and elements of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It is a fine balance to give each of these elements the right amount of focus, but the film largely succeeds in doing so. If I were to pick an issue with the story, I would say that there’s a bit of a conflict between the film being self-contained and its part in the larger cinematic universe, insofar as the revelations about S.H.I.E.L.D. should have significant ramifications, but it seems they are more or less curtailed by the end in order to keep the film self-contained with a distinct resolution. Overall though, the story is fairly strong.
Captain America as a character is a soldier, a leader and a hero, and I think all of those aspects to him are given a good amount of development. How he relates to those around him and what his part is in protecting and inspiring them is something he has to constantly work through as the film progresses. The supporting cast of Black Widow and Nick Fury also get ample screen time in order to develop their characters and play a significant role in the story. The “winter soldier” also has ties to Captain America, and with everything else going on, it feels like there could have been more done with his character, but this instead seems to have been postponed in order to be dealt with in a sequel. Villains typically get short-changed in these films, as they are almost entirely self-contained in the film and do not get referenced outside of it. Pearce, the villain here, is a bit more interesting, and has particular relations with a number of characters. He doesn’t have any particular superpowers, so he’s more of a mastermind, with the winter soldier handling the action parts of the villainy. Sam Wilson, a veteran soldier, also has an interesting character arc which gives Captain America a bit of a grounding as he interacts with the soldiers without superpowers who go to war. A lot of characters, but again it’s all handled fairly well.
The style and effects in the film are just about what you would expect from these Marvel films. There are no surprises, but it has a good budget, and keeps things consistent. The fight scenes are well choreographed, and highlight the strengths of the characters. There’s nothing overwhelmingly special about the film, but it has a lot of content that pushes and develops characters in new directions and explores new facets of their characters. Like with most Marvel films it’s not going to re-define the genre, but it shows a marked improvement on earlier sequels in the MCU (Iron Man, Thor) by focusing a little more on interesting character development, varied villains and weaving a stronger story around the heroes.
Thor: The Dark World (2013)
Film review #369
Director: Alan Taylor
Thor: The Dark World (2013)
Film review #369
SYNOPSIS: A rare cosmological event is taking place in which the nine worlds will converge, creating disturbances across all of them as the barriers between them weaken. When Malekith, the ruler of the Dark Elves awakens, he sets about attempting to retrieve the Aether, a weapon of mass destruction he can use to return all of the world into darkness. Thor once again must protect Asgard and all other worlds as the Aether is absorbed into Dr. Jane Foster, a scientist and Thor’s love interest as Malekith attempts to retrieve the Aether by any means necessary…
THOUGHTS/ANALYSIS: Thor: The Dark World is a 2013 superhero film and the sequel to 2011′s Thor. It is part of the marvel cinematic universe. The film starts off telling the story of the dark elves and their leader Malekith, who many years ago tried to plunge the nine worlds into eternal darkness using a weapon known as the Aether. They were defeated by the Asgardians and forced into a state of suspended animation. In the present day, Thor is busy bringing peace to the nine worlds while a cosmological alignment of the worlds is beginning to take place, which is creating anomalies among them. Dr. Jane Foster on Earth is investigating some gravity distortions when she enters another dimension and absorbs the Aether into her body. her love interest, Thor, shows up and takes her to Asgard to treat the illness brought about by the Aether and to investigate it’s true purpose. Meanwhile, Malekith and his army have revived and plan an all out attack on Asgard in order to seize the Aether and again attempt to plunge the worlds into darkness. The plot of the film is varied, with a decent amount of action, drama and humour, but the main problem is that it just doesn’t fit together very well: the individual scenes themselves are decent, but the whole “cosmic alignment” and “plunging the world into darkness” elements are tropes that have been done to death, and offer very little surprise or interest to tie everything together. This is furthered by the moving around between Earth and Asgard that constantly shifts the focus of the film, and makes the different scenes have little relevance from one to the next. There is some effort made to give the characters a stake in the story, but again it seems to get diluted in the myriad of things that are going on, and the non-descript villain plot that is fairly standard.
The film’s strongest points are in it’s character interactions, particularly in the relationship between Thor and Loki. Following the events of The Avengers, Loki is imprisoned for life on Asgard for trying to take over Earth, with only his Mother coming to occasionally visit him. When Thor and Loki’s mother is killed By Malekith, The two brothers forge an uneasy alliance in order to get their revenge. Loki’s constant trickery and Thor’s righteousness really work well together, both as drama, and also from a humour perspective, giving them an ample amount of bickering that is fun to watch. Unfortunately, there isn’t enough of it. The whole romance between Dr. Foster and Thor doesn’t really develop from where it starts, and again is overshadowed by the Thor/Loki dynamic. Other characters play their part, but contribute very little, again because the scenes are so disparate they often fail to make an impact on the whole. An example would be the death of Thor/Loki’s mother, which isn’t mentioned at all after the funeral, and just gets forgotten.
For all these shortcomings, there are some positive points. Asgard looks great, and the action is fairly solid with a few surprises. The humour again serves as some light relief from the drama, and there’s a decent mix of all these elements. Unfortunately the plot as a w hole is fairly weak, and manages to make all the events in the film – even if they are about the end of the world – seem pretty inconsequential. Add to that the plot relying on a serious amount of coincidences that make less sense the more you think about them, and it is easy to see why people consider this film the weakest in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It’s not completely terrible, but at this point in the cinematic series, the viewer is no doubt expecting a more complex contribution with a more expansive story, which Thor: The Dark World does not fully deliver.