Having seen The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey two times now, I am ready to try my best and fairly review it.
If it is considered a failure by many other critics, I can only say it is in relation to the cinematic achievement of Peter Jackson's other three Tolkien-derived stories, and any variance from the book.
If it is a success, it is because of Jackson's vision and scope of and attention to the fine detail that the original author poured his entire life into creating. So yes, when Jackson takes his own liberties beyond a visual interpretation of the established material, it reads as fluffy in spots, silly in others, cumbersome even, but in at least one specific instance it may well be the glue that holds this less spectacular adventure together.
In all, such as in the LOTR trilogy, it strays from the HOW the story is told, yet concretely establishes the same message that the book intended. That's what stands out to me more than anything, the balance, the fine line that Jackson must toe between making it familiar to moviegoers and Tolkienites, but making it new and enticing to everyone. I believe it is accomplished, though in some spots just barely. The impeccable, interwoven score by Howard Shore certainly helps. Shore makes blah moments palatable, good scenes great, and great scenes fantastic.
The movie has been called "indefensibly long" from a professional critic...by about 20 minutes (as was Return of The King), I would concur and say evidenced during their travels on the start of their journey. The first hour or so takes a while to get through. Yet some bright moments occur, including the visuals of the prefacing tale of the dwarves first home under the mountain. Also Martin Freeman makes a great young Bilbo. Truly great. And hearing the dwarves sing their song of reclaiming what is rightfully theirs is an absolute treat. On a personal note, my 8 year old son sat through all 170 minutes, without a gesture of disinterest at any point. Take that for what it is worth.
I should also note that much of the film is spent with the classic and breathtaking camera sweeps. In this regard, the up-to-the-minute technology that has developed somehow dizzyingly outshines the other three films. These clips are beautiful, familiar, but ultimately overdone for the sake of trying to make it a reverent spectacle like LOTR, when the story itself really isn't. It is a simple story of simple people contributing whatever they can in extraordinary times. Gandalf (again played winningly by Ian McKellan) mentions this in one scene with the lovely and perfect Cate Blanchett as Galadriel (this scene of the Secret Order of the White Council is NOT in the Hobbit book, rather is referenced in the Silmarillion and LOTR).
Galadriel: "Why the halfling?"
Gandalf: "Saruman believes it is only great power that can hold evil in check but that is not what I have found. I found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep darkness at bay. Small acts of kindness and love. Why Bilbo Baggins? Perhaps it is because I am afraid. And he gives me courage."
In another moment that is not part of the Hobbit book, Bilbo sums it all up (paraphrase): 'You're right, I don't belong here. I miss my books, my bed. See, that's my home. And that's why I came back. Because you don't have one. A home--and I will do whatever I can, to help you reclaim it.' I found both of these moments quite touching.
So you see, there are several drifts from the material but the meaning of the story still holds true. Rivendell is still magical and the elves rightfully so are the closest reminder we have to what we'd call angels. Blanchett's Lady of Lorien being the prime example. The light emanates from her, the music of her innocent aura impresses deeply upon those weary with cares. The dwarvish race is still stubborn and proud, but loyal until death.
A few of the dwarves are sillier than I would've hoped, aesthetically and character-wise. I pray it doesn't become a nuisance in the last two installments. The same goes for Radagast the Brown who takes on a much larger role than the one or two sentences the Hobbit book refers to him with. The Stone Giants, too. I thought the Great Goblin king and the Trolls to be heavy-handed with CGI, rendering them goofy also and not so believable as threats. This may also be in part due to their vocal characterizations, whereas the goblins and cave trolls of Lord of The Rings that we know were devolved into non-speaking races. Azog The Defiler, who is undoubtedly a key goblin in the other Middle-earth tales is also given a more prominent role in this, in replacement of Bolg. Jackson is establishing a different tension/conflict between him and Thorin Oakenshield.
The invented backstory of Thorin the dwarf prince never quote resonates. Thankfully, Richard Armitage plays the role well, and we can overlook the misstep, because again. Although the aim is for a majestic connection to Lord of The Rings, in this case, specifically Aragorn the would-be king, it misses--still supporting the overarching theme. In a world where we fight and kill and steal, and often do so in the name of justice or vengeance for our long lost loved ones, it is the doings of the meek that will help determine the fates of many.
On that subject, the most electrifying scene, (not the most action-packed, mind you) is exactly what a Tolkien fan would expect. It is of the riddles in the dark between Bilbo and Gollum. Andy Serkis will never be able to receive high enough praise for his performance as Gollum, because the computer effect they use eliminates his physical "self." But it is undoubtedly his performance and bone-chillingly good to see. The lonely, pitiful creature that covets his precious prize argues within his duality about his connection with a life he has all but forgotten. He was once Smeagol, who lived outside of the darkness where he enjoyed company and loved to play games, and for a moment, you see why Bilbo spares him.
It is with this scene, Thorin's character flaw, and the foreshadowing of the Necromancer that Jackson holds true to the book, making the most clever moves on the chess board. It all fits (so far). I think it will continue to do so. It may not be the same shining example of book to film conversion that Fellowship of the Ring was, so do yourself a favor and don't expect it to be.
Look "simply" for a simple chap called Bilbo, a Hobbit, to take an Unexpected Journey where "Home is behind, the world ahead. And there are many paths to tread."
Monday, December 17, 2012
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Pt 3/3 of the Trilogy Blog
The conclusion of something that lasts 3 parts should recap the purpose of the story, introduce new components, and, well....conclude.
Trilogies exist because for every story there is a beginning, a middle and an end. Every movie in a trilogy is just a microcosm of this, featuring typically, an Act 1, (introduction) Act 2, (conflict/confrontation) and Act 3 (climax/resolution). Typical moviegoers cannot sit for more than about two hours and visually or intellectually consume something that they are not actually interacting with. So. You get this breakdown of about 20-30 minutes of introducing the material, then it turns a major corner for about an hour, and just as we are ready for something final to happen, it concludes. Most film stories must exist within this orbit of time and classification, unless telling a very specific historical event, such as in a documentary.
Thinking about the previous 5 movie trilogies listed: Spiderman, Austin Powers, X-Men, Bourne, Godfather...they all live in this orbit, but waiver/falter within either the three act structure as individual films, or as a full story being told from beginning to end. Here, the last five prevail.
5. Back To The Future: This, along with my #4 choice are almost interchangeable or a tie. The reason it ranks slightly lower is that BTTF Part 2 is generally regarded as a slight downgrade, as it appealed to a less diverse (in age, specifically) audience, became a bit too entangled and honestly, had such a high bar set by the predecessor that portions seemed silly rather than fun, except for hoverboards, something I'm praying are somehow invented by 2015.
The first film (which I would still rank the highest of the three) was so much fun, such a jab at what was cool, what is cool (as of 1985) and the notion of how the slightest event can influence everything, that you forget you're watching a movie about time travel by a possibly crazy old man with wild white hair that has befriended a teenage boy. Watching Michael J. Fox, who is perfect as the hero, squirm away from his teenage mother when he visits his hometown 30 years earlier is a blast. Every character is accessible, familiar, or identifiable and that is the key. If you can't see yourself in their shoes, there's very little interest in watching them take each step on their journey. A great soundtrack, wonderful bits of nostalgia and a concluding film that is a notch above Part 2, with several nods to Spaghetti Westerns that pleased a more adult crowd, Marty McFly, Doc and Biff's backwards punchlines will go down in the history....errrr...future books. Letter grades, A-, B, B+.
4. Toy Story: I am a sucker for these movies. I know that it seems ridiculous to have this ahead of the Godfather on the list, though again I remind you that the 3rd installment in Coppola's series was good, not even great, as opposed to the first two which were truly epic. While I was not as impressed with the third Toy Story film as many others were, including critics and award nominators, I appreciate the film's relevance and timeless message a decade after Toy Story 2 was released and that is what the Godfather conclusion lacked.
The original Toy Story (1995) made a permanent mark on how animated films would forever be made. Aside from its contributions to cinematic technology, it was a tender story about friendship, the feeling of being replaced, and a journey back home. There's your three act structure perfectly crafted. In the second film, we meet more characters struggling with the same issues, and somehow it works equally well, even feels fresh and brand new. And yep, by the third one, it's happening again. Maybe it's because they're willing to call a spade a spade. That things don't last forever. Toys break and get discarded, donated. Loved for an instant and set away to be forgotten. The brilliance in Disney's marketing strategy here cannot be dismissed. They get us to remember our own real life toys long displaced that gave us lasting memories.
Audience members shed tears during at least one, if not all of these touching films. The same cannot be said for the Godfather, or honestly, any of the other films on this list.
3. Star Wars (episodes IV-VI): I will not spend more than two sentences to acknowledge and ultimately dismiss the farces that made up the prequel trilogy. George Lucas didn't have the right technology to make that story in 1977, and by the time he did have it, it wasn't the story we were hoping for, or with characters...nor even actors we wanted to tell us the story. So, instead we focus on when he absolutely reshaped the sci-fi genre...and the entire cinematic world by making A New Hope. Beginning "a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away" with the world introduced to us as one where Wookiees and Banthas are commonplace, we are instantly engrossed with what is about to transpire. Plus, there's the music which is the catchiest and most immediately recognized score ever written.
There is a powerful force of evil spread everywhere and only a small contingent of those who would dare oppose it. Some of it is destiny, some of it is choice, all of it is pure magic. It features two of the greatest villains of all time and a series of so many good one-liners, they're almost tripping over themselves. Borrowing heavily from general theology, mythology and many classic novels (note my foreshadowing), Lucas captured our imaginations as well as our hearts.
It is one of only two series on this list where the second film is considered to be the best of the trilogy. The darker content of the Empire Strikes Back was gritty and left the audience wondering if maybe the bad guys had finally won. There seemed to be no chance for the Jedi and the rebels to bounce back, and who can forget the first time they watched when Vader dropped that huge bomb on us as audience members? The last movie, Return of the Jedi falters by being a bit too formulaic, and gosh darn those fuzzy little Ewoks. Still, up until about 10 years ago, this series was no doubt the best trilogy going. I would also assert it is the most memorable to the widest audience. From 6 years old to 76, everyone knows, the Force will be with you, always.
2. The Dark Knight: Forget what you know about the old TV series and forget everything that happened after Michael Keaton donned the cape the first time around. Batman Begins was the universe that comic book fans had been searching for. Christopher Nolan powerfully delivers the goods, and throughout the entire 3 films I only have two complaints. The gravelly voice of the main character never fully translated and made him somehow secondary in a series about himself. The other critique is that there are moments, specifically in the second film, where the dialogue is ill-fitting. Members of elite SWAT teams are panicking at ensuing danger "I did not sign on for this!" like they were grade schoolers. But the good news is that these two things are barely a pimple on what is otherwise a perfect complexion. Let's run down the list.
Christian Bale is the best Bruce Wayne, cocky billionaire-but-haunted playboy, ever. Cillian Murphy is a delight. Morgan Freeman is a no-brainer as a wise-cracking but seasoned assistant. Michael Caine portraying Alfred serving as a Bruce's moral compass, has some of the most touching and insightful moments in the series. Gary Oldman is Jim Gordon, plain and simple. No one else could have done it. The cinematography soars. The effects and gadgets are immaculate. Sound is spectacular. Here will I speak again about the second film being the best in the series for one very specific reason.
Heath Ledger gives one of the most captivating performances that has ever or will ever be caught on screen. I cannot imagine how anyone will ever do anything that will compare to his magnificence as the Joker. Jack Nicholson gave us a funny, but rules-oriented iconic Joker in 1989. But as Ledger clearly points out, his take on the Joker, who is a sociopath, pure and simple..."You have all of these rules and you think they'll save you. The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules." His purpose is to unwind the world. To watch it burn, by lighting his own match, but seeing good people supply the fuel, when bad things start to happen to them. It becomes a morality tale not a comic book story, and the Joker is the "agent of chaos."
He's the Joker we as fanboys wanted and deserved. May he rest in peace.
So now, onto the concluding film. And it does just that. Concludes. In fact, I will go on record as saying I believe that The Dark Knight Rises is the greatest movie trilogy conclusion ever. It meanders and clumsily so if only for a few moments, but it dares not try to replicate what had transpired before. That is what is so special about it. Tom Hardy as the sinister Bane was not trying to outdo Ledger's Joker. He wanted to play a character that would UNDO all that Batman had done, all the piety that Gotham considered itself to be, force him to watch it all, and break his spirit before destroying him. I know Hardy's muffled voice was a deterrent during initial screenings. The blu ray copy was clear as a bell, and it was pointed out to me that his voice is almost soothing, and yet he speaks of desolation. It's a nice character choice and his eyes are truly engaging.
The film pulls in every element of the whole story, from every Act, taking us all the way back Bruce's roots, it moves us through with secondary interests, like Anne Hathaway as a Cat burglar and Joseph Gordon Levitt being an incredible protege, and my oh my, it seals off what needs to be put forever away, and leaves open what must remain. Hope. So to clarify, even though I consider the second movie to be the best of the series, I contend that the third film is the best conclusion ever made. Bravo to Christopher Nolan.
1. Lord of the Rings: Honestly, was there ever doubt in your mind? I won't spend a lot of time here, because I think you knew it to be true. You take what is considered to be the best 20th century work of fantasy fiction ever written, something that every sci-fi fan in the world knows of or has seen unofficial spawns of (You didn't really think Obi-Wan was the first mysterious old man to mentor a young innocent apprentice did you?), you spend nearly $300 million to film all the installments together as one cohesive story, you develop an even newer technology that will stun your viewers, you get 30 Oscar nominations for acting, editing, writing, directing, effects, makeup, costumes, music, film and win 17 of them, including Picture and Director for Return of the King, and you gross over $3 billion. You win, man. You win. You've made the most complete grouping of three movies to tell one story in the 100+ year history of cinema.
I still enjoy the innocence of the first film the most, though many contend that the second and third films are a more accurate interpretation of a doomed Middle Earth. I find the silliness of the dialogue spats between Legolas and Gimli a bit overdone, but again, nothing is perfect. The last installment is too long by about twenty minutes, but had more than one story to conclude, and admittedly I wouldn't have known which one to "end with" either. Bottom line it goes down in history standing on its own in the respective field, as does the written series as the best in its class.
Trilogies exist because for every story there is a beginning, a middle and an end. Every movie in a trilogy is just a microcosm of this, featuring typically, an Act 1, (introduction) Act 2, (conflict/confrontation) and Act 3 (climax/resolution). Typical moviegoers cannot sit for more than about two hours and visually or intellectually consume something that they are not actually interacting with. So. You get this breakdown of about 20-30 minutes of introducing the material, then it turns a major corner for about an hour, and just as we are ready for something final to happen, it concludes. Most film stories must exist within this orbit of time and classification, unless telling a very specific historical event, such as in a documentary.
Thinking about the previous 5 movie trilogies listed: Spiderman, Austin Powers, X-Men, Bourne, Godfather...they all live in this orbit, but waiver/falter within either the three act structure as individual films, or as a full story being told from beginning to end. Here, the last five prevail.
5. Back To The Future: This, along with my #4 choice are almost interchangeable or a tie. The reason it ranks slightly lower is that BTTF Part 2 is generally regarded as a slight downgrade, as it appealed to a less diverse (in age, specifically) audience, became a bit too entangled and honestly, had such a high bar set by the predecessor that portions seemed silly rather than fun, except for hoverboards, something I'm praying are somehow invented by 2015.
The first film (which I would still rank the highest of the three) was so much fun, such a jab at what was cool, what is cool (as of 1985) and the notion of how the slightest event can influence everything, that you forget you're watching a movie about time travel by a possibly crazy old man with wild white hair that has befriended a teenage boy. Watching Michael J. Fox, who is perfect as the hero, squirm away from his teenage mother when he visits his hometown 30 years earlier is a blast. Every character is accessible, familiar, or identifiable and that is the key. If you can't see yourself in their shoes, there's very little interest in watching them take each step on their journey. A great soundtrack, wonderful bits of nostalgia and a concluding film that is a notch above Part 2, with several nods to Spaghetti Westerns that pleased a more adult crowd, Marty McFly, Doc and Biff's backwards punchlines will go down in the history....errrr...future books. Letter grades, A-, B, B+.
4. Toy Story: I am a sucker for these movies. I know that it seems ridiculous to have this ahead of the Godfather on the list, though again I remind you that the 3rd installment in Coppola's series was good, not even great, as opposed to the first two which were truly epic. While I was not as impressed with the third Toy Story film as many others were, including critics and award nominators, I appreciate the film's relevance and timeless message a decade after Toy Story 2 was released and that is what the Godfather conclusion lacked.
The original Toy Story (1995) made a permanent mark on how animated films would forever be made. Aside from its contributions to cinematic technology, it was a tender story about friendship, the feeling of being replaced, and a journey back home. There's your three act structure perfectly crafted. In the second film, we meet more characters struggling with the same issues, and somehow it works equally well, even feels fresh and brand new. And yep, by the third one, it's happening again. Maybe it's because they're willing to call a spade a spade. That things don't last forever. Toys break and get discarded, donated. Loved for an instant and set away to be forgotten. The brilliance in Disney's marketing strategy here cannot be dismissed. They get us to remember our own real life toys long displaced that gave us lasting memories.
Audience members shed tears during at least one, if not all of these touching films. The same cannot be said for the Godfather, or honestly, any of the other films on this list.
3. Star Wars (episodes IV-VI): I will not spend more than two sentences to acknowledge and ultimately dismiss the farces that made up the prequel trilogy. George Lucas didn't have the right technology to make that story in 1977, and by the time he did have it, it wasn't the story we were hoping for, or with characters...nor even actors we wanted to tell us the story. So, instead we focus on when he absolutely reshaped the sci-fi genre...and the entire cinematic world by making A New Hope. Beginning "a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away" with the world introduced to us as one where Wookiees and Banthas are commonplace, we are instantly engrossed with what is about to transpire. Plus, there's the music which is the catchiest and most immediately recognized score ever written.
There is a powerful force of evil spread everywhere and only a small contingent of those who would dare oppose it. Some of it is destiny, some of it is choice, all of it is pure magic. It features two of the greatest villains of all time and a series of so many good one-liners, they're almost tripping over themselves. Borrowing heavily from general theology, mythology and many classic novels (note my foreshadowing), Lucas captured our imaginations as well as our hearts.
It is one of only two series on this list where the second film is considered to be the best of the trilogy. The darker content of the Empire Strikes Back was gritty and left the audience wondering if maybe the bad guys had finally won. There seemed to be no chance for the Jedi and the rebels to bounce back, and who can forget the first time they watched when Vader dropped that huge bomb on us as audience members? The last movie, Return of the Jedi falters by being a bit too formulaic, and gosh darn those fuzzy little Ewoks. Still, up until about 10 years ago, this series was no doubt the best trilogy going. I would also assert it is the most memorable to the widest audience. From 6 years old to 76, everyone knows, the Force will be with you, always.
2. The Dark Knight: Forget what you know about the old TV series and forget everything that happened after Michael Keaton donned the cape the first time around. Batman Begins was the universe that comic book fans had been searching for. Christopher Nolan powerfully delivers the goods, and throughout the entire 3 films I only have two complaints. The gravelly voice of the main character never fully translated and made him somehow secondary in a series about himself. The other critique is that there are moments, specifically in the second film, where the dialogue is ill-fitting. Members of elite SWAT teams are panicking at ensuing danger "I did not sign on for this!" like they were grade schoolers. But the good news is that these two things are barely a pimple on what is otherwise a perfect complexion. Let's run down the list.
Christian Bale is the best Bruce Wayne, cocky billionaire-but-haunted playboy, ever. Cillian Murphy is a delight. Morgan Freeman is a no-brainer as a wise-cracking but seasoned assistant. Michael Caine portraying Alfred serving as a Bruce's moral compass, has some of the most touching and insightful moments in the series. Gary Oldman is Jim Gordon, plain and simple. No one else could have done it. The cinematography soars. The effects and gadgets are immaculate. Sound is spectacular. Here will I speak again about the second film being the best in the series for one very specific reason.
Heath Ledger gives one of the most captivating performances that has ever or will ever be caught on screen. I cannot imagine how anyone will ever do anything that will compare to his magnificence as the Joker. Jack Nicholson gave us a funny, but rules-oriented iconic Joker in 1989. But as Ledger clearly points out, his take on the Joker, who is a sociopath, pure and simple..."You have all of these rules and you think they'll save you. The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules." His purpose is to unwind the world. To watch it burn, by lighting his own match, but seeing good people supply the fuel, when bad things start to happen to them. It becomes a morality tale not a comic book story, and the Joker is the "agent of chaos."
He's the Joker we as fanboys wanted and deserved. May he rest in peace.
So now, onto the concluding film. And it does just that. Concludes. In fact, I will go on record as saying I believe that The Dark Knight Rises is the greatest movie trilogy conclusion ever. It meanders and clumsily so if only for a few moments, but it dares not try to replicate what had transpired before. That is what is so special about it. Tom Hardy as the sinister Bane was not trying to outdo Ledger's Joker. He wanted to play a character that would UNDO all that Batman had done, all the piety that Gotham considered itself to be, force him to watch it all, and break his spirit before destroying him. I know Hardy's muffled voice was a deterrent during initial screenings. The blu ray copy was clear as a bell, and it was pointed out to me that his voice is almost soothing, and yet he speaks of desolation. It's a nice character choice and his eyes are truly engaging.
The film pulls in every element of the whole story, from every Act, taking us all the way back Bruce's roots, it moves us through with secondary interests, like Anne Hathaway as a Cat burglar and Joseph Gordon Levitt being an incredible protege, and my oh my, it seals off what needs to be put forever away, and leaves open what must remain. Hope. So to clarify, even though I consider the second movie to be the best of the series, I contend that the third film is the best conclusion ever made. Bravo to Christopher Nolan.
1. Lord of the Rings: Honestly, was there ever doubt in your mind? I won't spend a lot of time here, because I think you knew it to be true. You take what is considered to be the best 20th century work of fantasy fiction ever written, something that every sci-fi fan in the world knows of or has seen unofficial spawns of (You didn't really think Obi-Wan was the first mysterious old man to mentor a young innocent apprentice did you?), you spend nearly $300 million to film all the installments together as one cohesive story, you develop an even newer technology that will stun your viewers, you get 30 Oscar nominations for acting, editing, writing, directing, effects, makeup, costumes, music, film and win 17 of them, including Picture and Director for Return of the King, and you gross over $3 billion. You win, man. You win. You've made the most complete grouping of three movies to tell one story in the 100+ year history of cinema.
I still enjoy the innocence of the first film the most, though many contend that the second and third films are a more accurate interpretation of a doomed Middle Earth. I find the silliness of the dialogue spats between Legolas and Gimli a bit overdone, but again, nothing is perfect. The last installment is too long by about twenty minutes, but had more than one story to conclude, and admittedly I wouldn't have known which one to "end with" either. Bottom line it goes down in history standing on its own in the respective field, as does the written series as the best in its class.
Saturday, December 8, 2012
PT 2/3 of the Trilogy Blog
So. I'm starting this second installment by retracting a statement in my post prior to this. Upon further nitpicking of my criteria, I am putting the Bourne Trilogy back in the mix. They have made a fourth movie, true. But the main character is no longer the same, and the story arc although similar to the first ones, will ultimately need to take a different path for Aaron Cross than Jason Bourne's did. If this had been a fourth Bourne film, with Jason Bourne again as the featured protagonist, it wouldn't be a trilogy anymore.
This distinction will come in handy later on down this list. Trust me. If additional films are added to a trilogy but have an ancillary story arc, even if some of the supporting players are the same, UNLESS the story is about the same main character AND meant to advance or preface the intial trilogy storyline, I do not count it against the trilogy. Indiana Jones, sadly still misses this cut as does Jack Sparrow in the Pirates movies. Now. On to the list.
10. Spiderman: Sam Raimi applies his formula and heavy-handedness in certain spots with varying success in this franchise. Sometimes this really works, when campy meshes with comics or when the symbolism of Peter's reluctant hero has to sacrifice so much of himself and what he wants for a greater good; Alfred Molina being a nice choice for Doc Oc, though it is murky on why he developed the Octo-suit. (Really? You couldn't just get some lab assistants to help with your work? You had to create something that punctured your spine so you could operate all the equipment with 10 limbs simultaneously?) And when it doesn't work, it realllly doesn't. Willem Dafoe is, not at his best (was that a nice way to say it?) as Green Goblin, nor Thomas Hayden Church.
Sadly, we had to endure Kirsten Dunst in all three films which is the biggest stain working against the trilogy. Tobey Maguire however plays a subtle, but powerful performance and I was not expecting him to be as good as he was. It really stands out too, against the difficulties of the others in the cast. The soundtracks are also quite well done. If we're giving out letter grades for these three films, B, B, C+. It will withstand the test of time, I think, too. So there's something to be said for staying power beyond a movie aficionado as the main viewer. That's where The Man With No Name Trilogy sadly just misses this list. In today's market, Sergio Leone's films wouldn't last 10 minutes before the average filmgoer...got up and left.
Side note: Spidey got an overhaul with a "reimagining" this summer. This doesn't fit into the other 3 films. It's a separate story arc, and it doesn't happen in chronology or in conjunction with any of the other films. Although Andrew Garfield plays Peter Parker a bit too doofy in spots compared to Tobey Maguire's surprisingly stellar work, everything about The Amazing Spiderman film (2012) is FAR superior. The romance, the relationship with Uncle Ben and Aunt May, a darker villain. Bravo.
9. Austin Powers: Gross? Yes. Silly? Yes. A loving and well made parody the 007 Franchise? You betcha. Some of the most memorable moments actually belong to the "villains." Dr. Evil's idioms, Mini-Me, Fat Bastard threatening to eat Mini-Me. Mike Myers did a great job making Austin the anti-James Bond, who somehow still manages to save the day and get the girl. If the gags (and some of them do really make you gag) are too much or are overdone, don't worry. Myers knows it, and they end about three seconds later than your comfort level holds your patience. Elizabeth Hurley and Beyonce Knowles are bright and beautiful leading ladies, whereas Heather Graham is merely the latter. Ultimately, it is great to see how he brings it all around with Michael Caine being incorporated as his father, and Austin feeling like he lives for his approval.
8. X-Men: I know what you're thinking, "Didn't they make a prequel?" Well, yes. It's called X-Men: First Class, but as I wrote earlier, the distinction is that First Class' main characters are not the same, and the story arc is about our introduction to Professor Xavier and how Eric becomes Magneto. When we meet these two in the trilogy, this is already established and it's no longer just their story. And I tell you this now, it is one heck of a story. If the third film didn't just kind of exist to try and tie it all together, this would be even higher on the list. That happens a lot. It's because as writers, we may find perfect beginnings or perfect endings. Seldom both, and if we do, we lose the reader/audience somewhere in the middle installment. It's hard to conclude a series that has as much going on and going for it as the X-Men, too. I don't think it really was a concluding piece. As I said, it tied things up, and that's about it. And sometimes this can pay off. In this case, I wanted more.
It also fell victim to a directorial change. I enjoy Brett Ratner's work, but in contrast to what Bryan Singer had begun with the first two movies, it doesn't measure up as well. The first film was very, very well done. The second film is one of the best comic book to movie conversions ever and Brian Cox as Stryker is sickeningly good. Hugh Jackman would not have been my first choice as the main hero, but he pulls it off big time. Ian McKellan is fantastic as Magneto and the tension between he and Patrick Stewart's Professor X is palpable and the same goes for Jackman as Wolverine and James Mardsen playing Cyclops. Plus, there's Rebecca Romijn as Mystique and Anna Paquin is a treat. Halle Berry and Famke Jenssen fall short of believable. Telling too much of the story undermines what makes them as characters, comics and as movies so entertaining. I'll just say this. It isn't some silly make-believe movie about mutants who have special powers. It's a pretty accurate look at humanity.
7. Jason Bourne: This trilogy is as even-keeled as any on the list as far as being treated with the same quality and vision. All of them are equally good in those regards and I cannot choose a favorite. Matt Damon is the right choice as the brooding amnesiac who finds out he may be a deadly assassin. Again Brian Cox is great as well as Chris Cooper. Julia Stiles and Joan Allen are there to appeal to a larger audience than the teenage boy demographic and they fulfill their purpose most of the time quite adeptly. Watching others from the "Program" chase Bourne and reveal their own self-loathing is powerful stuff. There is a crispness to how they merge together; all of the action is full throttle, absolutely electric and of all the trilogies listed here it is the easiest to sit down and watch all three installments back to back to back, simply for time's sake. Also look for Daddy Warbucks (Albert Finney) to turn in a sinister performance.
It suffers from two flaws in my mind. 1.) Since it isn't meant to tell a love story, no matter how good Damon and Franka Potente are, there just needs to be less of their time on screen implying what they mean to each other, or much more. Still I know what they were going for and truly, it works. Just barely. It's distracting at times. 2.) As I mentioned, it is easy to watch all three in a row, but it is also the hardest to come into it at any point other than from the beginning. Watching Supremacy (2nd film) first would leave a viewer scratching their head, and would undermine the story's compelling nature of watching them in order.
Obviously watching any of these on the list out of order would ruin certain aspects of the main story arc. But this one wouldn't shatter any big secrets, it would just be downright puzzling and easy to walk away from. What I'm saying is, these three don't stand on their own as well to tell a story. They need to be together, without a lot of time to think in between. The third one is so frenetic, especially the fragmented fight scenes, it can harm or enhance a viwership. It feels like you're in the midst of all the flying fists, and it's also confusing and a bit dizzying. Still, great films and I enjoy them several times a year.
6. Godfather: This is probably a few notches higher on other people's lists, but again suffers from a lack of solid 3rd component. It's a bit like having the best appetizer you've ever tasted, followed by the most savory cut of Filet Mignon you could ever imagine, and finishing it all off with a single scoop cone of vanilla ice cream. There's nothing wrong with vanilla ice cream, and in fact, if it is offered up, I don't know anyone who would turn it down. But. When you walk into an ice cream shop, and you have dozens of choices at your disposal, milkshakes, ice cream floats, sundaes, when was the last time you chose a single scoop cone of vanilla? And certainly not after the best meal of your life. I cannot get around it.
The Godfather is nearly perfect. Brando is flawless. The Godfather 2, impossibly, is just as good. DeNiro is phenomenal and the meat of the story makes Pacino better in the second film. The first film won Oscars for Best Picture, Actor, and Writing and had nominations for three of the male performers in supporting roles along with five other nods. The second won Picture, Director, Supporting Actor, Writing, Art Direction, and Original Score with five other nominations. The third? Nominated for seven. Won? None. And rightfully so. Andy Garcia is good. But not great. I think it suffered from trying to be relatable to a newer audience 17 years after the second was made, while still maintaining the "old country" family feel of the others. Ultimately though, it is the greatest portrait of the American Dream on camera, albeit a cautionary tale.
Stay tuned for the last installment of this series on trilogies.
This distinction will come in handy later on down this list. Trust me. If additional films are added to a trilogy but have an ancillary story arc, even if some of the supporting players are the same, UNLESS the story is about the same main character AND meant to advance or preface the intial trilogy storyline, I do not count it against the trilogy. Indiana Jones, sadly still misses this cut as does Jack Sparrow in the Pirates movies. Now. On to the list.
10. Spiderman: Sam Raimi applies his formula and heavy-handedness in certain spots with varying success in this franchise. Sometimes this really works, when campy meshes with comics or when the symbolism of Peter's reluctant hero has to sacrifice so much of himself and what he wants for a greater good; Alfred Molina being a nice choice for Doc Oc, though it is murky on why he developed the Octo-suit. (Really? You couldn't just get some lab assistants to help with your work? You had to create something that punctured your spine so you could operate all the equipment with 10 limbs simultaneously?) And when it doesn't work, it realllly doesn't. Willem Dafoe is, not at his best (was that a nice way to say it?) as Green Goblin, nor Thomas Hayden Church.
Sadly, we had to endure Kirsten Dunst in all three films which is the biggest stain working against the trilogy. Tobey Maguire however plays a subtle, but powerful performance and I was not expecting him to be as good as he was. It really stands out too, against the difficulties of the others in the cast. The soundtracks are also quite well done. If we're giving out letter grades for these three films, B, B, C+. It will withstand the test of time, I think, too. So there's something to be said for staying power beyond a movie aficionado as the main viewer. That's where The Man With No Name Trilogy sadly just misses this list. In today's market, Sergio Leone's films wouldn't last 10 minutes before the average filmgoer...got up and left.
Side note: Spidey got an overhaul with a "reimagining" this summer. This doesn't fit into the other 3 films. It's a separate story arc, and it doesn't happen in chronology or in conjunction with any of the other films. Although Andrew Garfield plays Peter Parker a bit too doofy in spots compared to Tobey Maguire's surprisingly stellar work, everything about The Amazing Spiderman film (2012) is FAR superior. The romance, the relationship with Uncle Ben and Aunt May, a darker villain. Bravo.
9. Austin Powers: Gross? Yes. Silly? Yes. A loving and well made parody the 007 Franchise? You betcha. Some of the most memorable moments actually belong to the "villains." Dr. Evil's idioms, Mini-Me, Fat Bastard threatening to eat Mini-Me. Mike Myers did a great job making Austin the anti-James Bond, who somehow still manages to save the day and get the girl. If the gags (and some of them do really make you gag) are too much or are overdone, don't worry. Myers knows it, and they end about three seconds later than your comfort level holds your patience. Elizabeth Hurley and Beyonce Knowles are bright and beautiful leading ladies, whereas Heather Graham is merely the latter. Ultimately, it is great to see how he brings it all around with Michael Caine being incorporated as his father, and Austin feeling like he lives for his approval.
8. X-Men: I know what you're thinking, "Didn't they make a prequel?" Well, yes. It's called X-Men: First Class, but as I wrote earlier, the distinction is that First Class' main characters are not the same, and the story arc is about our introduction to Professor Xavier and how Eric becomes Magneto. When we meet these two in the trilogy, this is already established and it's no longer just their story. And I tell you this now, it is one heck of a story. If the third film didn't just kind of exist to try and tie it all together, this would be even higher on the list. That happens a lot. It's because as writers, we may find perfect beginnings or perfect endings. Seldom both, and if we do, we lose the reader/audience somewhere in the middle installment. It's hard to conclude a series that has as much going on and going for it as the X-Men, too. I don't think it really was a concluding piece. As I said, it tied things up, and that's about it. And sometimes this can pay off. In this case, I wanted more.
It also fell victim to a directorial change. I enjoy Brett Ratner's work, but in contrast to what Bryan Singer had begun with the first two movies, it doesn't measure up as well. The first film was very, very well done. The second film is one of the best comic book to movie conversions ever and Brian Cox as Stryker is sickeningly good. Hugh Jackman would not have been my first choice as the main hero, but he pulls it off big time. Ian McKellan is fantastic as Magneto and the tension between he and Patrick Stewart's Professor X is palpable and the same goes for Jackman as Wolverine and James Mardsen playing Cyclops. Plus, there's Rebecca Romijn as Mystique and Anna Paquin is a treat. Halle Berry and Famke Jenssen fall short of believable. Telling too much of the story undermines what makes them as characters, comics and as movies so entertaining. I'll just say this. It isn't some silly make-believe movie about mutants who have special powers. It's a pretty accurate look at humanity.
7. Jason Bourne: This trilogy is as even-keeled as any on the list as far as being treated with the same quality and vision. All of them are equally good in those regards and I cannot choose a favorite. Matt Damon is the right choice as the brooding amnesiac who finds out he may be a deadly assassin. Again Brian Cox is great as well as Chris Cooper. Julia Stiles and Joan Allen are there to appeal to a larger audience than the teenage boy demographic and they fulfill their purpose most of the time quite adeptly. Watching others from the "Program" chase Bourne and reveal their own self-loathing is powerful stuff. There is a crispness to how they merge together; all of the action is full throttle, absolutely electric and of all the trilogies listed here it is the easiest to sit down and watch all three installments back to back to back, simply for time's sake. Also look for Daddy Warbucks (Albert Finney) to turn in a sinister performance.
It suffers from two flaws in my mind. 1.) Since it isn't meant to tell a love story, no matter how good Damon and Franka Potente are, there just needs to be less of their time on screen implying what they mean to each other, or much more. Still I know what they were going for and truly, it works. Just barely. It's distracting at times. 2.) As I mentioned, it is easy to watch all three in a row, but it is also the hardest to come into it at any point other than from the beginning. Watching Supremacy (2nd film) first would leave a viewer scratching their head, and would undermine the story's compelling nature of watching them in order.
Obviously watching any of these on the list out of order would ruin certain aspects of the main story arc. But this one wouldn't shatter any big secrets, it would just be downright puzzling and easy to walk away from. What I'm saying is, these three don't stand on their own as well to tell a story. They need to be together, without a lot of time to think in between. The third one is so frenetic, especially the fragmented fight scenes, it can harm or enhance a viwership. It feels like you're in the midst of all the flying fists, and it's also confusing and a bit dizzying. Still, great films and I enjoy them several times a year.
6. Godfather: This is probably a few notches higher on other people's lists, but again suffers from a lack of solid 3rd component. It's a bit like having the best appetizer you've ever tasted, followed by the most savory cut of Filet Mignon you could ever imagine, and finishing it all off with a single scoop cone of vanilla ice cream. There's nothing wrong with vanilla ice cream, and in fact, if it is offered up, I don't know anyone who would turn it down. But. When you walk into an ice cream shop, and you have dozens of choices at your disposal, milkshakes, ice cream floats, sundaes, when was the last time you chose a single scoop cone of vanilla? And certainly not after the best meal of your life. I cannot get around it.
The Godfather is nearly perfect. Brando is flawless. The Godfather 2, impossibly, is just as good. DeNiro is phenomenal and the meat of the story makes Pacino better in the second film. The first film won Oscars for Best Picture, Actor, and Writing and had nominations for three of the male performers in supporting roles along with five other nods. The second won Picture, Director, Supporting Actor, Writing, Art Direction, and Original Score with five other nominations. The third? Nominated for seven. Won? None. And rightfully so. Andy Garcia is good. But not great. I think it suffered from trying to be relatable to a newer audience 17 years after the second was made, while still maintaining the "old country" family feel of the others. Ultimately though, it is the greatest portrait of the American Dream on camera, albeit a cautionary tale.
Stay tuned for the last installment of this series on trilogies.
Friday, December 7, 2012
On Movie Trilogies and the Caped Crusader...
The rule of three....or more...There has been a long-standing rule in Hollywood among studio bigwigs and producers, directors, etc. that if you can tell a story, why not tell the story over a longer period of time, with extra twists, new characters, and at least three chances for viewers to come sit in the audience and behold what you've put together.
And so was born the Trilogy. Oh sure, some films, especially when you "boldly go where no one has gone before", or drink martinis "shaken, not stirred" or are running away from a masked madman who wields an axe or chainsaw or whatever pointy thing nearby he can grasp, you go beyond trilogy. Let's focus on the rule of three at this point, not as an analysis of profit margins, but more as a critique of why some have historically worked, and others haven't, or have left a lot to be desired with at least one of the three installments. I will not disqualify based on any genre a trilogy may inhabit, so comedies, sci-fi all have the chance to be in the mix.
Sadly though, I can no longer include Indiana Jones, since they made a fourth film, nor Pirates of the Caribbean or The Bourne Trilogy since a fourth was also added to these. They would've ranked HIGH on my list of all time best.
Start with some honorable mentions:
The Man with No Name Trilogy: (Fistful of Dollars, For a Few Dollars More, and The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly) It's Clint Eastwood, so there. The first is an unofficial remake of a Kurosawa film, and Good, Bad, Ugly has been called the best directed film of all time. Sergio Leone also did a boon for soundtracks. The music is iconic, and every Spaghetti Western will always lead you back to that soundtrack.
The Matrix Trilogy: I don't have a lot to say here. The first film stands alone. And should've stayed that way. Aside from the highway chase/fight, and a few one-liners from Agent Smith in the last two, there's no reason it couldn't have stayed a single film.
The Evil Dead Trilogy: Sam Raimi makes things fun. He really does. The first film is considered to be a shining gem in the world of campy horror, playing scary in all the right places and silly when needed. The third film, Army of Darkness is a fun way to conclude, and has some great makeup.
My second installment coming soon. It will start the countdown of all time best trilogies.
And so was born the Trilogy. Oh sure, some films, especially when you "boldly go where no one has gone before", or drink martinis "shaken, not stirred" or are running away from a masked madman who wields an axe or chainsaw or whatever pointy thing nearby he can grasp, you go beyond trilogy. Let's focus on the rule of three at this point, not as an analysis of profit margins, but more as a critique of why some have historically worked, and others haven't, or have left a lot to be desired with at least one of the three installments. I will not disqualify based on any genre a trilogy may inhabit, so comedies, sci-fi all have the chance to be in the mix.
Sadly though, I can no longer include Indiana Jones, since they made a fourth film, nor Pirates of the Caribbean or The Bourne Trilogy since a fourth was also added to these. They would've ranked HIGH on my list of all time best.
Start with some honorable mentions:
The Man with No Name Trilogy: (Fistful of Dollars, For a Few Dollars More, and The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly) It's Clint Eastwood, so there. The first is an unofficial remake of a Kurosawa film, and Good, Bad, Ugly has been called the best directed film of all time. Sergio Leone also did a boon for soundtracks. The music is iconic, and every Spaghetti Western will always lead you back to that soundtrack.
The Matrix Trilogy: I don't have a lot to say here. The first film stands alone. And should've stayed that way. Aside from the highway chase/fight, and a few one-liners from Agent Smith in the last two, there's no reason it couldn't have stayed a single film.
The Evil Dead Trilogy: Sam Raimi makes things fun. He really does. The first film is considered to be a shining gem in the world of campy horror, playing scary in all the right places and silly when needed. The third film, Army of Darkness is a fun way to conclude, and has some great makeup.
My second installment coming soon. It will start the countdown of all time best trilogies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)