Reel Facts & Opinions

FACT: Director Bryan Singer (X-MEN, X2, VALKYRIE) has confirmed that his planned remake of the epic EXCALIBUR has been scrapped. Warner Bros. apparently decided to go with another “King Arthur” type-film and didn’t want to produce competing films. Singer has decided to move forward with his BATTLESTAR GALACTICA adaptation.

OPINION: How much crappy news can we possibly cram into one Reel Speak FACT? First of all, Singer has spent WAY too much time doing remakes and adaptations as of late; all he has done is comic-book flicks in the form of the first two X-MEN films and SUPERMAN RETURNS (he also produced this year’s X-MEN FIRST CLASS). His WWII period-piece VALKYRIE proves that he can take a significant piece of non-fiction and make it worthwhile. Why is he hung up on remaking proven favorites? Both EXCALIBUR and GALACTICA have massive and passionate cult followings; the uphill battle he would be facing in pleasing the established audiences would be massive. Come on Bryan, come up with something on your own.

FACT: Matt Reeves has been named the director of the new upcoming TWILIGHT ZONE feature flick. Reeves has previously directed CLOVERFIELD and LET ME IN, and somehow beat out some heavyweight names in the form of Christopher Nolan, Michael Bay, Alfonso Cuaron, and Rupert Wyatt.

OPINION: Nolan seemed to be the best choice for a TWILIGHT ZONE feature, as his INCEPTION, MEMENTO and THE PRESTIGE films played out like TZ stories anyway. Wyatt may very well surprise, but this blogger still feels that TZ stories are better off left as shorts, and that an “anthology” styled flick would be the way to go with a different director for each chapter. Besides that, Nolan is better off coming up with his own ideas (coughsingercough).

FACT: Speaking of Nolan, the LOS ANGELES TIMES is reporting that when his global production of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES moves to New York City this month, the Occupy Wall Street protests “may” be background for several scenes in the film.

OPINION: Before all you Occupiers start celebrating, please realize that Nolan is unlikely including the protests for the sake of pushing an agenda or a political point. The key term in the article is BACKGROUND, and it will be interesting to see how Nolan works the colorful and diverse background into his epic superhero film.

What say you?

A Reel Review: BLACKTHORN

Some people were just born to play cowboys; John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, and Sam Elliott have always looked and felt right at home in the old west and made careers out of it. Riding under the radar all this while has been Sam Shepard, who only a few years after portraying Frank James, dons the gunslinger gig again. This time, in the role of another legendary outlaw, Butch Cassidy.

Decades after his alleged death, Cassidy (Shepard) is living quietly in semi-retirement in South America. Deciding to pack his life savings and head home to America to meet his son for the first time, he loses his house, and money in a shootout. He encounters Eduardo (Eduardo Apodaca), a former miner who promises to reimburse Cassidy all of his money (and then some), if he will protect him from the gang he stole the moolah from. Cassidy agrees, and he and Eduardo become targets for gangs and lawmen.

At the mid-point of BLACKTHORN, Cassidy thoughtfully says that there are only two points in a man’s life; when he leaves home, and when he comes back. BLACKTHORNE can easily be summed up in that neat little line. The film has a simple plot on the surface; find the money, get the hell out of dodge alive. But it is really the story of Cassidy’s life, intertwined with a morality tale; Cassidy is constantly faced with moral and ethical choices as he tries to find a new life with his old one just not far enough behind.

But what really makes BLACKTHORN shine are the flashbacks. Smartly intercut between present-day scenes, we get to see Cassidy and the Sundance Kid in all of their youthful, enthusiastic-about-life glory. They serve a purpose in showing how Cassidy wound up alone in South America, and they offer a stark contrast to youth and old age.

Director Mateo Gil knows exactly what he has here, and knows what to do with it. The beautiful landscapes of the old west are brought to life in vivid photography; who knew such vast places still existed? He also manages to shoot (photographically) Shepard in some gorgeous frames; the shots look like something you want hanging on your wall…classic and beautiful. Outside of some few outstanding gunfights, the pacing is slow, but appropriate (after all, ALL westerns should have slow pacing). The score alternates from some epic and classic guitar picking to some present-day folk-tunes; with the latter never sounding out of place.

Shepard IS Butch Cassidy. No one else on this earth could have pulled this off with the intensity and maturity that a veteran actor has. There is constant wisdom, melancholy and toughness that he shows just from a single look. And who knew he could sing a ballad so well?

Shepard is a real treat to watch. Equally pleasing are the flashback scenes with a young Cassidy and Sundance (played by Nikolaj Coster-Waldau and Padraic Delaney, respectively). The two have instant chemistry and pull off some real magic on-screen; magic not seen since two guys named Redford and Newman had the roles.

The finale has a bit of a twist that really puts Cassidy in a moral bind, and is a perfect way to end out the ride. The final few minutes may feel like things are unresolved, but further thought reveals BLACKTHORN to be pushing a message of the gift of youth, and wisdom of old age. There are a lot of smarts to be found here. BLACKTHORN is one hell of a film.

BOTTOM LINE: See it

Reel Facts & Opinions

FACT: A Detroit woman has filed a lawsuit against the distributors of DRIVE and her local theatre for using a “misleading trailer” to get her to see the film. The woman expected DRIVE to be more of a FAST AND THE FURIOUS type-film, rather than an art house style with minimal driving and car chases.

OPINION: Hopefully, this woman never saw the trailer to INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, which was marketed heavily as a shoot-em up war movie and turned out to be a prodding character drama. But back to business…what this woman, and the litigators are likely to reveal is that ALL movie trailers are out to deceive people; they are out to make people think that their movie is good and worth seeing. A good trailer should be able to get people out to see anything, no matter how awful the actual movie may be. Just look at the fantastic trailers we got for WOLVERINE and THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL, and how poor both films wound up; it’s something that’s been going on in movie history for a hundred years, and will likely go for another hundred. Hopefully this suit will get thrown out.

What say you?

Reel Facts & Opinions

FACT: With the (goddamn) 3D version of THE LION KING raking in over $100 worldwide and still climbing, Disney (apparently with nothing better to do), is planning on releasing four of its classic films in the 3rd dimension. BEAUTY AND THE BEAST will open in January 2012, FINDING NEMO in September 2012, MONSTERS INC. in January 2013, and THE LITTLE MERMAID in September 2013.

This makes the (goddamn) 3D schedule fairly beefy over the next few years. James Cameron is releasing TITANIC in GD3D in April 2012 (just shy of the 100th anniversary of the sinking), and George Lucas will begin releasing his STAR WARS saga, in order in February 2012, beginning with EPISODE I.

OPINION: As stated, neither Disney, Cameron, or Lucas has anything better to do but play around with this cursed fad; no new stories to write, no new ideas to film. But if we have to deal with this, and we do…

The 3rd dimension is all about depth; it only works if the filmmakers kept depth in mind when they were filming on set, or rendering an artificial environment (of course, all fillmakers should be doing that no matter what the hell dimension they are shooting for). This docket of films offers some, but not a lot of eye-popping opportunities. Like the chandelier/dance scene in BEAST, the large door-room scene in MONSTERS, INC., and several wide exterior-shots in NEMO.

Moving right along…Lucas’ pod-race in EPISODE I, along with the final space battle offers great opportunities of depth. Cameron’s TITANIC holds less opportunities, but that initial low-angle shot of the Titanic’s wrecked bow coming out of the darkness might be pretty darn cool.

As great as (goddamn) 3D may be in large scenes, it suffers horribly when the going gets intimate. Will the 3rd dimension add anything to Jack and Rose floating in the ocean, or any bedroom scene in MONSTERS? The answer is (goddamn) no. At that point the stupid glasses become an annoyance, and things feel better off if you only had to put the blasted things on during certain parts of the movie. Of course that’s an even bigger pain in the arse.

Every one of these films that are being released with the added dimension were big money-makers in their day, and each hold a place in our culture, and in our hearts. Any one of them can and would do very well in a digital 2D release. Certain films seem made for the big screen, and every one of these upcoming releases fall under that category. Let them stand on their own.

What say you?

A Reel Review: REAL STEEL

REAL STEEL is a perfect example of a milk-shake movie; a million elements from a million movies mixed together for a sweet and refreshing flavor. Specifically, it takes pieces and parts from several sports (coughrockycough), family drama and sci-fi movies and simply gives them a new setting. Aside from the visuals, there is nothing here that hasn’t been seen before; and like a good milkshake, it’s enjoyable and out of your system just as fast as it went in.

In the not-to-distant future where robots have taken the place of humans in the sport of boxing, Charlie (Hugh Jackman) is a down-and-out former boxer who is struggling to pay off his massive debts while his remote-controlled robots gets smashed to pieces in competition. His world gets even more complicated when he discovers that he has a son, Max (Dakota Goyo) from his newly deceased former girlfriend. Charlie strikes a monetary deal with Max’s family to take him in, and discovers that Max has a talent and love for robot-boxing. They stumble upon an old robot named Atom; a diminutive, under-dog sparring-bot which Charlie teaches how to box. Together with Charlie’s gal-pal Bailey (Evangeline Lilly), he goes on to realize that Max’s importance in his life goes beyond the success he can bring him in the ring.

So STEEL is another high-concept film (fighting robots) coupled with a simplistic, and cliché family drama (deadbeat dad learning lessons from his stubborn son); with subplots of redemption and moral ethics just to be safe. The main tale here is older than time and thinly drawn with flat characters. Again, there is nothing new here, and it is hard to be objective when the plot is so familiar and predictable. It is only when the fighting robots come into play that things get better.

And when those fighting robots do come along, it is lights out filmmaking. Brought to life with stunning combos of CGI and animatronics, the fight scenes, comedy routines, and intimate scenes bring weight and legitimacy to REAL STEEL. It is fun to see the robots pummel each other, and we root for the underdog (Atom) because our characters have so much invested in him. Although the film feels and looks like the playroom of a five year old boy, it is fun while it lasts.

Jackman attacks the role with more charisma than we’ve seen from him in a while, and really seems to believe in what he’s doing. Goyo does very well as the annoying kid, but like most kids on film, comes off as way too sophisticated for an 11-year old.

Director Shawn Levy keeps the sci-fi elements very grounded; the fights are never confusing and he keeps his lenses on small-town America. Danny Elfman’s score is a ROCKY rip-off, and the use of Alexi Murdoch in the opening credits comes off as a lame attempt at maturity.

There is a nice buildup to the finale, which unfortunately ends with an resolution that can be seen from a mile away. The final fight is Rocky vs. Apollo I all over again, and the entire film can be summed up right there; even though it is tired and cliché, it works overall because it is a fresh look at an overused drama. Adults should be wary of being bored, and of their kids being inspired to punch cardboard boxes for hours.

BOTTOM LINE: Rent it

A Reel Review: THE IDES OF MARCH

Donkeys and Elephants will likely use THE IDES OF MARCH as a political football; finding ways to point the finger at the players involved, trying to pinpoint one side or the other as the villain in the film. The parties would be mistaken to do so, for MARCH does not bother, or care which side is on the right or wrong. It spends all of its time exposing the behind-the-curtain goings-on of a Presidential campaign, in which there are no real winners or losers; all players involved are victims of the game they play.

Steve (Ryan Gosling) is a campaign co-manager for Governor Morris (George Clooney), who is running for President and is in a heated, deadlocked campaign in the Ohio Primaries. Steve really believes in his candidate, and works closely with campaign manager Paul (Phillip Seymour Hoffman), and plays cat-and-mouse tactics with reporter Ida (Marisa Tomei). After being offered a job from the opposing side from Tom Duffy (Paul Giamatti), Steve has an affair with young intern Mollie (Evan Rachel-Wood). He then falls into a scandal; one which will threaten his career and the campaign he has dedicated his life to.

MARCH wisely spends its time not focusing so much on the players, but the game that they play. It is loaded with political maneuvering; switching allegiances and ditching loyalty all for the sake of saving ass. It is a Shakespearean-like drama; Steve’s job security after the secret meeting with the opposing side is in peril, but he uses his affair with the intern to uncover a secret to save himself and perhaps his candidate. Steve is faced with many ethical, moral and legal dilemmas, and director George Clooney does fantastic work in maneuvering his characters around like chess pieces.

Clooney spends most of his time behind the camera; limiting his screen time to short, but very effective bites. Gosling proves his worth here; finding ways to display emotion and feeling without even speaking. Hoffman and Giamatti are spectacular as always.

The finale is a bit of a shocker, with certain players selling their soul to the devil not only for the sake of saving themselves, but for the job that they believe in. MARCH will likely find its way into film-appreciation classes over the coming years; not for the sake of political debate, but for the moral and ethical decisions that we all struggle with. That makes it timeless.

BOTTOM LINE: See it

A Reel Education: How Steve Jobs Changed the Movies

The sad and untimely passing of Steve Jobs has sparked many a remembrance this week; remembrances that recall his landmark achievements in the technology world. What is often overlooked is his contribution to the film industry; perhaps one of the largest and important contributions in the past 20 years. You may have heard of it; they call it Pixar Animation Studios.

Pixar began in 1979, known as the Graphics Group. It was part of the computer division of Lucasfilm before it was acquired by Steve Jobs in 1986. Investing his own millions in the company, Jobs and Pixar went into the computer hardware business. Its core product was the Pixar Image Computer, which was sold primarily to government agencies and the medical community. It was also used by Disney to improve their 2D hand-drawn animation films.

Sales for Pixar’s hardware were poor, so the company focused more on its animation department. In 1990, Jobs made the gutsy move of selling off the hardware division and putting Pixar into the movie business full-time. A deal with Disney was struck to produce three computer-animated films, with the first being TOY STORY in 1995. The rest, as they say, is history.

To date, Pixar’s twelve films have grossed an estimated $6.3 billion worldwide, and have won a total of 26 Academy Awards. But Jobs and Pixar’s stamp on the business goes beyond the green and the gold. Whether they intended to or not, the new computer-animation process obliterated the old, 2D hand-drawn animated film. It also inspired other companies like DreamWorks who went on to produce the SHREK franchise. In 2001, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, recognizing the growing world of animated films, added a new category; Best Animated Film. A category that Pixar would dominate over the next decade.

Pixar’s films succeed because of excellent writing; writing that spawns simple and familiar stories in a fresh and fun manner. While Jobs likely never wrote one word in a screenplay, it was his business sense that kept Pixar functioning better than an iPod. It was a bold move for him to put Pixar into the untested waters of full-time computer-animated films, but he believed in it. It’s that type of faith that he put into everything he did.

Reel Facts & Opinions

FACT: A new feature based on the classic TWILIGHT ZONE TV series is now in development. Directing candidates include Alfonso Cuaron (CHILDREN OF MEN), Rupert Wyatt (RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES), Michael Bay (TRANSFORMERS) and Christopher Nolan (THE DARK KNIGHT). Unlike the feature produced in the 1980’s, this new film will feature a single storyline with just one director, and is reportedly based upon an original episode.

OPINION: Nolan is the clear frontrunner in the race to the Zone. On the surface, this seems like a great idea. But then again, Nolan doing a Humpty Dumpty film gets people excited, too. Twilight Zone episodes, which are basically short-films, are not easily stretched out to an 80 to 100 minute movie (just look at the recent THE BOX, which did poorly). The series always feels right at home when taken in shorter bites. This blogger would prefer to see another anthology film with a different director helming each story, as it would properly introduce a new generation to the Zone. Let Bay direct one, let Nolan, Wyatt, and Cuaron each direct one. Then invite Quentin Tarantino and you’ve got gold.

FACT: Speaking of Tarantino, Kurt Russell has replaced Kevin Costner in QT’s upcoming revenge-western DJANGO UNCHAINED. Russell will play Ace Woody (which sounds like a TOY STORY reject); an evil plantation owner responsible for training male slaves in fighting competition and female slaves in prostitution.

OPINION: Costner’s dropping out is disappointing, but bringing in Russell feels like a lateral move. Tarantino has been flirting with the western genre for years, so it’ll be good to finally see him dive in head first, although it’s all but a given that DJANGO will be one long Sergio Leone tribute/homage. How much would you like to bet we see Ace Woody in the Eastwood poncho?

FACT: With (goddamn) 3D revenue dwindling in the United States, the format may be facing the grave taking another blow last week courtesy of Sony Pictures. Sony has informed theatre owners that in May of 2012 they will no longer pay for the 3D glasses that go with the 3D movies. Other studios are expected to do the same. The move would bring the U.S. in line with the U.K. and Australia when moviegoers buy their glasses at the theatre and keep ‘em.

OPINION: One day, we will all look back on (goddamn) 3D as a strange footnote in film history, with this being the first nail in the coffin. If Sony is taking inspiration from the U.K., then God save the Queen...

What say you?

A Reel Review: HIGHER GROUND

Prior to her role as a police-psychologist in THE DEPARTED, Vera Farmiga was a relative unknown. It was only after the Oscar hoopla when everyone started asking, who’s that girl, and discovering that she had a decent body of work over the past eight years. In her directorial debut, HIGHER GROUND, Vera takes her talent to a new level, and is clearly not afraid to tackle a most serious and often controversial subject; faith and religion.

Growing up in the Bible belt, young Corinne seeks to learn outside of the near-forced religion, and becomes increasingly frustrated by banned books at the library. Growing into young adulthood, she narrowly escapes a bus accident with her husband and child, and thus begins a strong faith-based life. Now an adult with several children, Corinne (Vera) and her husband Ethan (Joshua Leonard) find their marriage and world on the rocks when Corinne loses faith after her best friend falls seriously ill.

HIGHER GROUND tells the tale of a tightly wound spiritual community who gets thrown a curveball when one of their own begins to question her faith. It is also Corinne’s story as she struggles with her world. Her faith comes and goes throughout her life, and when she begins to look outside of the dogmatic routines her family and friends are in, she discovers the things that she and her children have been missing out on; simple things like art and literature. Her transition and journey are very compelling and interesting to watch.

But make no mistake; this is not an anti-religion film as much as it is a personal journey story; centering on the choices that we make. It preaches without really preaching.

Vera’s direction includes a lot of brilliant allegory, along with a very good sense of fleshing out the supporting characters that Corinne is surrounded by. This community does everything by the (good) book; constantly preaching, quoting verses, and singing songs. They are a community that will either save your soul or drive you nuts. Vera knows exactly how to treat these characters; letting them create the world Corinne struggles with.

Vera manages to be just as talented in front of the camera just as she is behind it. Her struggles often go without any spoken dialogue, and her strong facial expressions give away her internal struggles. She also manages to get great performances out of the child-actors; pulled off only the way a mom can.

What is really unique about HIGHER GROUND is that it raises a great deal of questions, but doesn’t bother to answer them. While that may frustrate some viewers, the flip side to that is Vera is not a director who pretends to have all the answers. That is a rarity these days.

BOTTOM LINE: See it

A Reel Education: GHOSTBUSTERS Back on the Big Screen

Columbia has announced that GHOSTBUSTERS will be returning to the big-screen next month. For three Thursdays beginning October 13th, the original film will be shown in 500 theatres across the country.

On the surface, this seems like a great thing; introducing the film to a new generation while possibly drumming up interest in the long-stalled GHOSTBUSTERS 3. The long-time fans will likely come out in hordes, and Ray Parker Jr. will be back on the map.

However, the press releases do not mention exactly how the film will be presented; Digital? Film? Should that matter? You bet your Stay-Pufts it does.

Columbia has three options in distributing the film:

1. Original 35mm Print: Believe it or not, most theatres in the U.S. are still projecting their films in the old, yet tried-and-true 35mm film format. If this be case, then this chic may be toast. Film is great, but it is not durable. Assuming Columbia will not order new prints to be pressed (approx. $2500 per print), they would be shipping original prints out to the theatres. These prints, which will now be 27 years old, would likely be marred by scratches, dirt, and other defects. Even if the prints get cleaned, it is likely that they would suffer from faded colors; making for a very unremarkable picture. And this blogger cringes at how it would sound.

2. Digital 1K Projection: If you have attended a “live” event at your local movie theatre, that show was likely projected on a 1K digital projector (1K meaning 1280 pixels of resolution). These projectors are capable of running standard DVD’s and other digital video formats. This would be better looking and sounding than a thrashed 27 year-old piece of film, but a 1K picture projected on a big screen would make for a very grainy picture.

3. Digital 2K or 4K Projection: The absolute top of the pyramid in all movie projection. 2K displays at 2048 pixels of resolution, and the newer 4K at 4096. These bad-boys display with outstanding picture and sound, and can also project (glorious) Blu-Ray without losing any quality. This new piece of tech has allowed theatres to re-run decades-old films in all of their visual glory.

So why should all this crap matter? If a proud Dad is taking his kids to the theatre to introduce them to Slimer and Venkman for the first time, he should not have that experience ruined by a shitty picture and even shittier sound. Every movie-goer should be seeking a perfect presentation every time out. If you’re excited to see GHOSTBUSTERS, or any other re-issue in the theatre again, that’s great. Just find out what you are seeing before shelling out the green.

And make sure it’s not being shown in (goddamn) 3D.