You are browsing the Blog for sequel.

← Previous Entries

Movie Review: Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) (2D)

May 30, 2013 in Movie Reviews, Reviews

star-trek-into-darkness-movie-poster

I’ve allowed a few weeks for Star Trek Into Darkness to sink in, but my opinion of it remains the same.

It’s a very good film that is extremely entertaining and features excellent action sequences, special effects and a brilliant villain, but it ultimately lacks the wow factor of its predecessor and somehow ends up feeling like a glorified big screen season finale of a TV series.

The 2009 reboot, Star Trek, also directed by JJ Abrams (who will now also take over the Star Wars franchise, yikes) was phenomenal. It was a film non-Trekkies such as myself could enjoy but it also had something for the die hard fans (or so I have been told). Apart from a slightly disappointing villain (not Eric Bana’s fault — more a problem with the character itself), it was a film that had it all — action, drama and romance; and enough space fantasies to make fan boys spray their shorts and casual fans become fan boys.

Four years later, we have the sequel, Star Trek Into Darkness, which hits the ground running with a spectacular opening sequence featuring the crew of the USS Enterprise headed by captain James T Kirk (Chris Pine) and first officer Spock (Zachary Quinto).

Naturally, Kirk’s maverick decision-making lands him in hot water and at odds with Spock, but then disaster strikes courtesy of a brand new villain played by the man with the best name and arguably best voice in Hollywood, Benedict Cumberbatch. It is then up to the regrouped Enterprise crew to track him down and avenge their losses.

Into Darkness has a lot going for it. The cast, of course, is fantastic. Apart from the aforementioned Pine, Quinto and Cumberbatch, there’s the old gang of John Cho (ie, Harold), Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban (who provides the dry humour), Simon Pegg (who provides the Simon Pegg humour), Anton Yelchin and Bruce Greenwood. Another newcomer is Alice Eve, who provides the obligatory eye candy. All of them have key roles to play and don’t just blend into the background, which is a reflection of Abrams’ mastery of character and character development. At its core, however, the film is still driven by the love/hate/trust/loyalty relationship between Kirk and Spock, which takes another big step forward in this sequel (it’s getting to that bizarre bromance, bizarre sexual tension level). As for Cumberbatch, all I can say is that this dude rocks. He’s terrifying, he arouses sympathy; he’s just an electrifying and magnetic screen presence. I think I love this man.

Given how fantastic Star Trek was as a reboot of a legendary franchise, it was always going to be difficult for the sequel to match it. You have to strike a balance between reintroducing the characters and not rehashing too much; you have to take the action and relationships to new heights; you have to make the faithfuls happy with references to the original series; you have to try and do something different, be it the storyline, the action or even the jokes.

For the most part, Into Darkness achieves all of these. For the Trekkies in particular, there are some special treats, especially if you have stayed away from the trailers and the gossip. As a non-Trekkie, even I had an inkling that some of the revelations in this film were HUGE. It sets things up nicely if they decide to extend the franchise, which they almost definitely will.

I have few complaints. The pace of the film moves so quickly that you rarely have time to stop and think about how illogical or improbable the things happening on screen are, which is a sign of good filmmaking. I was sort of expecting more despair given that the title of the film is, after all, Into Darkness. I thought there would be more “darkness”, more hopelessness for Kirk and the gang to crawl out of, but it wasn’t that bad, all things considered. (Speaking of which, it seems Hollywood has been using the exact same formula for these big action blockbusters for quite some time now. Hero gets defeated — absolutely smashed, really — by a seemingly unstoppable villain. Hero rises from the dead and goes on a journey of recovery. Hero returns and triumphs against all odds. Celebration!)

The more troubling thing for me was that the film, or maybe the script, didn’t feel like it was depicting an extraordinary event too big for the small screen. It’s difficult to describe the feeling, but at times it felt like I was watching an epic season finale on a big screen rather than a blockbuster made especially for the big screen. It’s a strange thing to say considering the scale of the film, the star power and the special effects were all more than sufficient, but that was just the way I felt.

Does that mean Into Darkness is an unworthy sequel? Absolutely not. In fact, it’s one of the better executed sequels in recent years. It didn’t blow me away like the first film, but it still provides 133 minutes of solid entertainment that everyone from old Trekkies, new-Trekkies and non-Trekkies to casual science-fiction and blockbuster fans can thoroughly enjoy.

4 stars out of 5

PS: You don’t need me to tell you again. Ignore the 3D version. Please. I beg you. Don’t waste your time and money.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

Movie Review: Alex Cross (2012)

January 13, 2013 in Movie Reviews, Reviews

alex-cross-poster

It’s probably best if you don’t remember the old Alex Cross played by Morgan Freeman from Kiss the Girls and Along Came a Spider. This new Alex Cross from the franchise “reboot” (of sorts) is not a charismatic, middle-aged man with a magnetic, made-for-narration voice. This new Alex Cross is played by a hulking, 6’5″ dude best known for performing in drag.

I can only imagine how Alex Cross, vaguely based on the 12th novel of the series, Cross, by James Patterson, would have turned out had the producers been able to secure their first choice, Idris Elba from The Wire. It wouldn’t have made up for the atrocious script and the deficiencies in the direction, but at least our protagonist would have the edge that Tyler Perry sorely lacks. Perry is clearly very good at what he does (his fortune from the Madea movies, where he plays a thuggish elderly woman, speaks for itself), but this role just felt uncomfortable for him.

Let me backtrack a little. Alex Cross is a psychologist and police lieutenant in Detroit who accepts a job as an FBI profiler. In Alex Cross, he and his partner (Ed Burns) begin a dangerous cat and mouse game with a psychotic killer known as Picasso, played by Matthew Fox from Lost, who enjoys drugging and torturing his victims. That’s basically it. Picasso does a lot of crazy stuff and acts all crazy and Alex Cross and his partner try to track him down and bring him to justice.

The biggest problem with this movie is the script, which I am told has very little to do with the original story. Alex Cross is supposed to be some super clever detective, but in this film all he does is get angry, jerked around and continuously outsmarted by the villain. What’s the point of this movie if all our detective uses is his massive muscles and not his brain?

My second issue is with the direction of Rob Cohen, who really shouldn’t be that bad because he’s the director of The Fast and the Furious, Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story and Stealth, none of which are nearly as horrible as this effort. But instead, the film comes across like a B-grade, straight-to-DVD affair that reeks of laziness. The movie flatlines all the way through without any genuine thrills or excitement. Even the special effects are weak. And what the heck is the deal with those amateurish slow-mo effects during the fight scenes?

This brings me to Tyler Perry, who, to be fair, wasn’t given much to work with but still underperformed as the titular character. I didn’t feel his intelligence or his emotion, even at a pivotal moment when tragedy struck. Still, he was better than Ed Burns and his annoying voice.

Matthew Fox apparently underwent some serious workouts and diets to totally transform his body for this role, and it looks like it was a waste of time. His villain looks menacing enough but isn’t given much substance. He’s undoubtedly crazy, but just not very interesting. Hannibal Lecter he certainly isn’t.

Not much else to say except to confirm that Alex Cross was indeed a huge disappointment. A sequel with Perry reprising the role was announced before this one was even released, but I wonder whether the plans will change with the film being bombarded by poor reviews and a subpar box office performance.

1.5 stars out of 5

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

Movie Review: Jack Reacher (2012)

January 8, 2013 in Movie Reviews, Reviews

jack-reacher-poster-international

It’s unfortunate that Jack Reacher got a bad rap before the film was even made, simply because Tom Cruise was cast as the titular character.

I haven’t read any of the popular novel series by Lee Child upon which the film was based (I believe the particular book for this film is One Shot), but from what I understand Jack Reacher is a mammoth blonde haired and blue eyed dude who is like 6’5″ and naturally ripped like the Rock on steroids (hang on…), and Mr Scientology is a brunette and reportedly anything from 5’7″ to 5’9″ — and that may be with or without lifts.

But having not read the books, it made no difference to me. In fact, there was really only one instance in the entire film where Cruise’s size, or lack thereof, posed a problem for the storyline, and even then they fudged it quite well so you wouldn’t really notice.

Irrespective of the so-called casting issue, Jack Reacher is a superior action thriller. To be honest, it wasn’t exactly the type of film I thought it would be. I had expected it to be all about this macho superhero dude who goes around beating up a whole bunch of bad guys like Liam Neeson in Taken, and to be be fair, there is a bit of that, but Jack Reacher actually has a rather intelligent mystery at its heart.

Without giving to much away, the film begins with a seemingly random act of violence that appears to be an open and shut case. Even a soft-hearted defense attorney played by Rosamund Pike felt it was an unwinnable case — that is, of course, until enigmatic loner Jack Reacher is called out to investigate.

Jack Reacher is one of those guys who only exists in the macho fantasies of daydreamers and novelists. Women love him and men want to be him, or at least beat him up. He is a genius investigator, has a photographic memory, is unstoppable in hand-to-hand combat and is also somehow an expert marksman. And on top of all that he is all about justice and has a heart of gold.

If you can stomach this type of imaginary guy less likely to exist in real life than Edward Cullen, then Jack Reacher is an absolute blast to watch. It is a stylish film that keeps audiences guessing with twists and turns while providing thrills with car chases, violent confrontations and skillful detective work.  I had no problem believing that Cruise (who had Child’s blessings, by the way) could be  someone who could kick so much ass while delivering perfect one-liners, and it’s a credit to his acting abilities that he could pull off such a role.

Pike did an adequate job without being particularly impressive, and Robert Duvall had a small but crucial role later on in the film. The supporting cast standout, however, has to be legendary German director Werner Herzog as the shadowy villain, who won me over just by his awesome voice alone.

Sure, there are some plot holes and inconsistencies and things that don’t make a whole lot of sense, but on the whole, Jack Reacher is a very solid start to a franchise that I can definitely see myself following if more sequels are rolled out.

4 stars out of 5

Tags: , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

Movie Review: Taken 2 (2012)

October 21, 2012 in Movie Reviews, Reviews

The moral of the story is simple: don’t f*&% with Liam Neeson.

After getting a thorough ass-whooping in the first film, which I declared was one of the best action films of the past decade, those pesky Albanians did not learn their lesson. The father of one of the human traffickers wanted revenge, and he was going to make Bryan Mills pay with a lot more inept henchmen. Bad idea.

I may sound like I’m teasing, but I actually enjoyed Taken 2 a lot. It was impossible to live up to the original anyway, which surprised just about everyone with its brutal efficiency and the total badassness of Neeson’s Mills, a former CIA operative who can kill you in just about every way imaginable. True, Taken 2 is a lazy and completely unnecessary sequel that is even more far-fetched than the original, and let’s face it, was made with only $$$ in mind, but it still manages to thrill by re-captivating some of the magic of the original.

The premise ofTaken 2 is about as unimaginative as it gets: the father of the dude whom Mills electrocuted in the first film in Paris promises to avenge his son’s death. Mills is in Istanbul for freelance security work and is visited by his ex-wife (Famke Janssen) — who is conveniently having “problems” with her second husband — and their daughter (Maggie Grace, who is surprisingly convincing as someone young enough to be going for her driver’s licence). Nasty henchmen try to “take” them all (and succeeds with two of them, hence Taken “2″ — get it?), unleashing the killing machine in Mills once again.

Taken 2 steals shamelessly from its predecessor without really attempting to do anything new or different. Liam Neeson shows off some incredible secret agent brains in addition to killing enemies with guns, melee weapons and his bare hands, and Maggie Grace has a much larger role, but that’s about it. Director Olivier Megaton (surely that cannot be a real name), whose previous efforts include Columbiana and Transporter 3, replaces Pierre Morel, but I didn’t really feel that much of a difference in style. There are gun fights, hand-to-hand combat and car chases galore, all of it happening at break-neck speed after the predictable initial set-up.

The script, written again by Luc Besson and Robert Mark Kamen, is lazy — there’s no way to deny that. It assumes we know what Bryan Mills is and what he and has family have been through, and character development is essentially provided through flashbacks to the first film. The bad guy is pretty pathetic and is driven only by revenge, but at the same time he has some strange reasons for not wanting to kill Mills when given the opportunity. The Albanians also sometimes speak to each other in what I presume is Albanian, and at other times in English with Eastern European accents — none of it makes much sense.

But on the other hand, there’s nothing quite like watching the captivating Neeson — who is 60 years old in real life, by the way — run around beating up and killing a whole bunch of bad guys. It’s brainless entertainment but it’s fun and exciting while it lasts.

In other words, if you enjoyed Taken, there’s a good chance you’ll enjoy parts, or at least elements, of Taken 2. It’s no secret that the film was cashing in on the success of the original, which is vastly superior in every way, but watching Liam Neeson go on a rampage for an action-packed 91 minutes is still preferable to the majority of action films these days.

3.5 stars out of 5!

PS: If there is going to be a third film, which is highly possible given the loose ends in the script, I’ll definitely be watching.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

Movie Review: The Expendables 2 (2012)

September 9, 2012 in Movie Reviews, Reviews

So I keep hearing that The Expendables 2 is what the first film should have been.

My expectations for the first film were, unfortunately, slightly higher. That said, Expendables 2 is a vast improvement on its predecessor because it decided to have do more with fact that it features a whole bunch of high-profile action stars who aren’t afraid to poke fun at themselves. It’s has more characters, longer cameos, bigger explosions, upgraded fight scenes and a lot of great one liners. I wish it could have been a little more, but perhaps I’m asking for too much.

The story picks up not too long after the first one ended. Sty Stallone and Jason Statham are still leading their team of mercenaries, which includes other action heroes such as martial arts expert Jet Li, MMA fighter Randy Couture (Mr “You got a door? You got a gym!”), Ivan Drago aka Dolph Lundgren , and the guy I will always associate with White Chicks, Terry Crews. Of the original team, only Mickey Rourke dropped out.

This time, the team has two strange new additions: Liam Hemsworth (who is not an action star — yet — though his brother Chris is) as a sniper, and Chinese actress Yu Nan (selected probably because of her proficiency in English), who keeps up the Asian quotient on the squad after Jet Li jets off minutes into the film (he hadn’t planned on being in it but Stallone insisted).

I think the plot had something to do with baddies forcing poor villagers in Eastern Europe to help them mine plutonium, but no one really cares about plot in a film like this.

The Expendables 2 still contains “serious” scenes and “character development” scenes, but on the whole the film was more lighthearted than the first. The jokes are frequent, and unlike in the first film, much funnier, and the fight scenes are better choreographed. There are plenty of blown off limbs and exploding bodies but it’s all so intentionally over-the-top that no one would call it realistic violence.

There are three major positives worth mentioning about this film.

The first is the new villain, Jean-Claude Van Damme, who plays a guy creatively named…er, Vilain. Van Damme does a delicious villain and actually gets to perform some of his trademark Kickboxer movers, such as that flying roundhouse he loves so much. Van Damme is backed up by the familiar face of Scott Adkins, who has been in a bunch of supporting roles and B-grade action films over the years.

The second is the extended cameos of Willis and Arnie. The biggest disappointment of the first film was that they appeared for about 5 seconds together and did nothing. This time, the trio finally get together and get their hands dirty. Even though it’s not for very long, it’s still better than nothing, and they even get to shoot witty remarks at each other. It was fun.

The third is the much-talked about appearance of Chuck Norris, who has somehow grown to legendary status thanks to those never-ending internet jokes. Chuck lives up to those jokes and even tells a few of his own. His presence is the brightest highlight of the entire film, and it’s a shame he couldn’t have gotten more screen time. I would pay to watch a Chuck Norris spin-off where all he does is live up to his legend.

What you should have noticed by now is that none of the three positives involve Stallone’s team of mercenaries. That’s because they still kind of sucked. The biggest culprit is still Stallone himself, who must be the lamest of them all by keeping a “straight face”  (okay, I see that’s a term grossly inappropriate for him) throughout the entire film. He remains jacked up on steroids, human growth hormones or whatever Lance Armstrong has been taking, but he exhibits no charm and no skill other than growling incoherently (I think he’s still saying “Adriannnnn!”), running in over-sized platform boots and squinting through those two pellets he calls eyes. But hey, it’s his movie and his idea, so he still has to be “the man” by default. I wanted more Rambo and Rocky, less whatever his name is in the film.

Statham has two good scenes where he gets to strut his stuff, but Crews, Lundgren and Couture fade into the background and practically do nothing. Hemsworth and Yu Nan don’t do a whole lot other actors couldn’t have done either. It’s disappointing and a waste of an opportunity.

I also didn’t get all the pointless talking that was supposedly aimed at character development. They were boring, and no one can tell what Stallone is trying to say anyway.

Ultimately, the film was still a solid piece of entertainment and plenty of popcorn fun. Kudos for improving on the first one and providing a blueprint for that inevitable third movie. It’s possible they may have already exhausted all they can do with this franchise but I suppose as long as there are new action stars to add people will still flock to watch it — me included.

3.5 stars out of 5

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
No Comments »

← Previous Entries