Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Kung Fu Panda 2 3D Review

Rated PG (Sequences of Martial Arts Action and Mild Violence)

Running Time: 1 Hour & 31 Minutes

Cast (voice)-
Jack Black-Po
Dustin Hoffman-Master Shifu
Gary Oldman-Lord Shen
Angelina Jolie-Tigress
Jackie Chan-Monkey
Seth Rogen-Mantis
Lucy Liu-Viper
David Cross-Crane
James Hong-Mr. Ping
Michelle Yeoh-The Soothsayer
Danny McBride-One-Eyed Wolf Boss
Dennis Haysbert-Master Storming Ox
Jean-Claude Van Damme-Master Croc
Victor Garber-Master Thundering Rhino
Fred Tatasciore-Po’s Father

Directed by Jennifer Yuh Nelson

Po and the Furious Five return for more awesomeness in "Kung Fu Panda 2."
After viewing the horrid sequel “The Hangover Part II,” I went into “Kung Fu Panda 2” with a bit of apprehension. The original “Kung Fu Panda” stands as one of DreamWorks Animations best thanks to its clumsy, lovable character, its strong, if familiar themes, and the fluidity of the animation which produced some excellent action scenes. However, when it came to sequels, they do not have the best track record and I think we can all agree that the last two “Shrek” films were made from a business, rather than a creative, standpoint. That’s not the case with “Kung Fu Panda 2” and with newcomer Jennifer Yuh Nelson (who directed the original film’s hand-drawn animation scenes) at the helm, this is a bigger, bolder sequel that ups the ante with spectacular set-pieces, nimbly balancing the child-friendly slapstick comedy with a darker, more mature storyline.

Long ago, peace reigned in Gong-Men City under the rule of a family of peacocks, who used fireworks to entertain its citizens. However, the son of the king, Lord Shen (Gary Oldman) discovered that the fireworks could be used for destructive means and set his sights on conquering all of ancient China. The family’s soothsayer (Michelle Yeoh) foresees that Shen will be defeated by ‘one of black-and-white’ and upon hearing this, Shen and his army of wolves attack the peaceful pandas of China, killing many and driving the rest to faraway lands. Horrified by his actions, Shen’s parents exiled him but he vowed one day that he will return. Back in the present, Po (Jack Black) is living the dream as the Dragon Warrior, and together with the Furious Five—Tigress (Angelina Jolie), Monkey (Jackie Chan), Mantis (Seth Rogen), Viper (Lucy Liu), and Crane (David Cross)—they protect the Valley of Peace from any and all threats. A group of wolf bandits arrive to pillage the small town’s metal resources but Po and his friends arrive to save the day. However, before Po can knock the one-eyed Wolf Boss (Danny McBride) unconscious, he notices a symbol on his armor and has a flashback of his mother. This distracts him and the Wolf Boss manages to escape. The stolen metal is for Lord Shen, who is using it to construct numerous cannons to conquer China. He confronts the three kung fu masters protecting Gong-Men City and kills their leader, Master Thundering Rhino (Victor Garber). When Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) learns of this attack, he sends Po and the Furious Five to liberate Gong-Men City. However, Po discovers that Lord Shen has ties to his past and knows of where he came from.

“Kung Fu Panda 2” wastes no time in getting into the action with a thrilling battle between Po, the Furious Five, and the wolf bandits but I was afraid that the film would end up being just a series of fight scenes strung together with a flimsy plot. Thankfully, my fears were unfounded and the story takes Po on the next logical step of his journey by having him confront his past. I remember in the original film where Po remarks that he can’t believe Mr. Ping (James Hong), a goose, is his father and this prompted a slight hint of guilt on Mr. Ping’s face. It was a nice touch by the animators that hinted at a larger story and it comes to the forefront here. Po learns of where he came from and it is laced with tragedy. While it’s not hard to guess the fate that befell his parents, Po’s journey here is to achieve catharsis, to accept the past but not let it control him. The past does not define him, it is the choices he makes here and now that makes him who he is and it harkens back to Master Oogway’s advice: ‘Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the present,’ allowing the themes from the original and this film to come full circle. Returning writers Jonathan Aibel and Glenn Berger create a perfect foil in Lord Shen, someone who is so obsessed with fighting fate that he is blinded by what he has become. It’s amazing that the writers managed to stuff so many themes in what is an action-oriented animated film and they deftly strike a balance of not just entertaining kids for ninety minutes but also giving something of substance to adults as well. There are several touching scenes between Po and Mr. Ping, who fears that his son won’t see him as his father anymore because he was adopted but one scene, which is a flashback and reverts to traditional hand-drawn animation, is really moving and honestly brought a tear to my eye. You’ll know it when you see it. “Kung Fu Panda 2” does end on a big cliffhanger but don’t worry, the main story is resolved in the only way Po knows: in epic awesomeness!

The animation, while it doesn’t set any new technical standards, is still stunning to behold. The 3D is a nice, if not significant, enhancement. The action scenes are fluid and it was a visual treat seeing Po and the Furious Five working in tandem and fighting as one unit. The main set-piece is a brilliant escape from a collapsing tower in Gong-Men City as it is being bombarded by Shen’s arsenal of cannons. You can see all the debris just flying in your face. However, I was a little disappointed with Po and Shen’s one-on-one fight at the end but Shen is depicted as more of a thinking man’s villain ala Lex Luthor rather than being physically adept at kung fu like Tai Lung. Flashbacks are employed using the stylized, hand-drawn animation from the first film.

The entire original cast returns with a few notable additions. Jack Black is perfect as the lovable Po and there’s this great moment that encapsulates everything about him. As he leaps into battle with his friends and allies, he takes a second to look around and yells in slo-mo: ‘I LOVE YOU GUYS!’ Gary Oldman, his voice almost unrecognizable, is excellent as Lord Shen. His voice-work captures Shen’s obsession and pettiness with fighting the fates. Unfortunately, the Furious Five end up being underutilized again outside of Angelina Jolie. Seth Rogen does have some funny lines about the mating rituals of praying mantises though. Dustin Hoffman, James Hong, and Michelle Yeoh are great as well but I was surprised to learn that Jean-Claude Van Damme lent his voice as well. He’s easy to miss but he is voicing Master Croc, one of the three masters that protect Gong-Men City.

“Kung Fu Panda 2” was released on May 26, 2011 in traditional 2D and 3D and competed against the highly anticipated but hugely inferior “The Hangover Part II.” Reception was positive with a solid 81% on Rotten Tomatoes. Critics found the story too familiar but agreed that the sequel ‘offers enough action, comedy, and visual sparkle to compensate.’ Unfortunately, releasing it the same day as “The Hangover Part II” was a mistake as it was thoroughly trounced at the box office. While its five-day Memorial Weekend take of $67 million is nothing to laugh at, it trails behind the original as it made $60 million in three days. With $122 million worldwide in the pot, it looks like we’ll be seeing “Kung Fu Panda 3” real soon and I look forward to it. As it was a weekday today and everyone is back at school, the theater sat almost empty with the exception of a handful of parents with their kids. “Kung Fu Panda 2” does what a sequel is supposed to do—it delivers on the same excellent fight scenes but also offers a story worth telling. If Hollywood is intent on being run by sequels, than at least make them like this film!

Final Rating: 5 out of 5

“Your story may not have such a happy beginning, but that doesn’t make you who you are, it is the rest of your story, who you choose to be. So who are you, Panda?"

Monday, May 30, 2011

The Hangover Part II Review

Rated R (Pervasive Language, Strong Sexual Content including Graphic Nudity, Drug Use and Brief Violent Images)

Running Time: 1 Hour & 42 Minutes

Cast:
Bradley Cooper-Phil Wenneck
Ed Helms-Stu Price
Zach Galifianakis-Alan Garner
Justin Bartha-Doug Billings
Mason Lee-Teddy
Jamie Chung-Lauren
Ken Jeong-Leslie Chow
Jeffrey Tambor-Sid Garner
Sasha Barrese-Tracy Garner
Paul Giamatti-Kingsley
Nick Cassavetes-Tattoo Joe
Yasmin Lee-Kimmy
Mike Tyson-As Himself

Directed by Todd Philips

The Wolf Pack once again find themselves forced to retrace their steps after a wild night in "The Hangover Part II."
There are a slew of R-rated comedies being released this summer but it remains to be seen if any of them will be good, although “Bridesmaids” earned a highly positive review from yours truly. Director Todd Philips’ “The Hangover,” released during summer 2009, proved to be a surprise critical and commercial hit, earning $467 million worldwide against a low $35 million production budget. As this is business as usual, a sequel was given the go-ahead, although surprisingly this decision came two months before the release of the first film as it had a strong, positive reaction at a test screening. I liked “The Hangover” well enough, it was funny, even if some of the comedy was too juvenile and everything just clicked thanks to the strong chemistry of its three leads. “The Hangover Part II” does a complete 180 as it just regurgitates the plot beat-by-beat and fails to generate any laughs at all. That’s the least of its problems as it tries so hard to elicit a response from its audience that the film ends up being mean-spirited, disgusting, and offensive. We’re only one month in for 2011 summer but this is by far, the worst film I have seen this year. 

It has been two years since Doug Billing’s (Justin Bartha) disastrous bachelor party at Las Vegas and now, it’s Stu Price’s (Ed Helms) turn to tie the knot with Lauren (Jamie Chung). Out of deference to Lauren’s parents, Stu is planning to hold the wedding ceremony in Thailand and has invited Doug and Phil Wenneck (Bradley Cooper) as well as Doug’s simple-minded brother-in-law, Alan Garner (Zach Galifianakis), albeit reluctantly after what happened in Vegas. Joining them is Lauren’s younger brother, Teddy (Mason Lee), a pre-med student at Stanford University and a music prodigy. Once the ‘Wolf Pack’ arrives in Thailand, a reception is held where Lauren’s father voices his disapproval of Stu. Before the night is over, Stu hesitantly joins the rest of his friends for roasted marshmallows around a campfire. They share a beer and toast to Stu and Lauren’s future happiness. Of course, bad luck ensues and the next day, Stu, Phil, and Alan wake up in a seedy motel in Bangkok with absolutely no recollection of what happened during the previous twelve hours. The group discovers a chain-smoking monkey in the room, along with naked gangster Leslie Chow (Ken Jeong). To Stu’s horror, they discover that Teddy has gone missing; the only thing left is his ring finger. Stu and the rest of the gang quickly scour the streets of Bangkok in search of Teddy but quickly learn that the wild night they had pales in comparison to what happened in Las Vegas. 

Sequels are tricky and a director has to balance what worked in the first film with something new in the second. Success means getting something like “The Empire Strikes Back” or “The Dark Knight” but total failure? You get a steaming pile of garbage like “The Hangover Part II” that is nothing more than a lazy cash-in that repeats everything in the first film but to no success. It’s shocking at how much Philips just takes from the original, as if afraid that changing the formula ever so slightly would offend the fans. Sure, the setting is now in Bangkok but that’s about all that’s new. This is a problem with Hollywood in general as it has become an industry dominated by sequels and more sequels but if you get anything say, “The Tree of Life,” audiences will spurn it for being ‘pretentious’ or “Bridesmaids” for that matter because some still cling to sexist beliefs that women are unable to be funny. Every plot beat and joke is clearly telegraphed before it actually happens. “The Hangover Part II” begins exactly like the first one, with Phil calling that they ‘f*cked up.’ A monkey replaces the baby from the first film. When Doug calls that Teddy has been found in a police station, we already know that it’s not going to be the one Stu is looking for. Alan ends up drugging everyone but this time with marshmallows instead of spiking their drinks. It’s also no surprise that the gang once again runs afoul of the local criminal underworld. One of the things I liked in the first film was that everyone was logically trying to retrace their steps. Here, they resort to meditation at a Buddhist temple and there’s just no rhyme or reason to anything that occurs. The pacing starts to slag in the second hour and you just wish it would just end already. 

The ‘comedy’ has been replaced with pure shock value to elicit laughter from the audience but all it does is end up being vile and offensive. In fact, the cavalier attitude displayed by Stu and his friends is appalling. At a local strip club, Stu learns that he had been sodomized by a katoey prostitute. A katoey is a male-to-female transgendered person or effeminate gay man living in Thailand. I say sodomized because that is exactly what happened. Stu was under the influence of alcohol and therefore unable to give permission consensually. When rape becomes a joke, there is a serious problem. Near the end of the film, Stu is in despair and about to give in and what does Phil do? He discusses all the possible excuses to tell Lauren’s father. An injured 16-year-old is lost in a city and Phil is making up excuses. Of course, Teddy is finally found (and again, the discovery is disappointing), no one seems all that concerned that his ring finger has been chopped off and that his music and possibly his career as a future surgeon is over. And the father still gives his blessing to Stu! Let’s not forget offensive as well. Phil remarks that Lauren has a ‘solid rack for an Asian.’ Why, thank you, Phil, you have just insulted the women of my nationality by implying that they have small breasts. The end credits once again show a slideshow of what really happened and each one is more disgusting than the one before it but Philips takes it too far by desecrating a famous photo from the Vietnam War. If you do not know which one I’m referring to, it is the one where General Nguyen Ngoc Loan is pointing a gun at the head of a Viet Cong prisoner. I wonder if people would still be laughing if a joke was made about 9/11. 

All of the cast return for the sequel but they’re less likable and smart this time around. While Ed Helms sticks with his crazy, neurotic personality, Bradley Cooper is little more than a jerk and a douche-bag. Zach Galifianakis’ Alan Garner does provide a few chuckle-worthy lines but he’s been regressed into an even more simple-minded character that just comes off as being sad and pathetic. The fun chemistry between the three is absent and all of them are at each other’s throats. Ken Jeong reprises his homosexual Asian stereotype but he throws himself into the role with such wild abandon that you can’t help but feel admiration. The female characters, such as Jamie Chung and Sasha Barrese, do nothing but look worried in the handful of scenes that they appear in. 

“The Hangover Part II” was released on May 26, 2011 to give it a jump over the Memorial Day weekend. Reviews have been negative with 35% on Rotten Tomatoes as critics noted that it ‘lacks the element of surprise—and most of the joy—that helped make the original a hit.’ Of course, it is already a box office hit with a whopping five-day total of $137 million, plus an estimated $59 million worldwide for a grand total of $196 million. A “Hangover Part III” is now likely and I shudder at the experience. Even an animated film, “Kung Fu Panda 2,” didn’t stand a chance, making $68 million when the original made that amount in three days instead of five. Audience reaction was highly positive, I mean, the woman sitting next to me couldn’t stop laughing. It’s a testament to American society when people find turd like this actually funny. Standards must be really low. I’ll probably get some flak for this review but I could care less. I wanted a funny film with fresh ideas and this is what gets shoved to us. You know, this sequel reminds me of the equally horrid “Sex and the City 2.” Consider “The Hangover Part II” a companion piece to it and avoid at all costs.

Final Rating: 0.5 out of 5

“When a monkey nibbles on a penis, it’s funny in any language!” (One of the few lines that was actually funny.)

Sunday, May 29, 2011

Kung Fu Panda Blu-Ray Review

Rated PG (Sequences of Martial Arts Action)

Running Time: 1 Hour & 32 Minutes

Cast (voice):
Jack Black-Po
Dustin Hoffman-Master Shifu
Ian McShane-Tai Lung
Angelina Jolie-Tigress
Jackie Chan-Monkey
Seth Rogen-Mantis
Lucy Liu-Viper
David Cross-Crane
Randall Duk Kim-Master Oogway
James Hong-Mr. Ping
Dan Fogler-Zeng the Messenger
Michael Clarke Duncan-Commander Vachir

Directed by Mark Osborne and John Stevenson

Are you prepared for awesomeness?!
2011 hasn’t exactly been a banner year at the domestic box office but one genre that has been doing well is the animated film, with five being released from January to April. They've grossed a combined total of $383 million so far, an 80% increase for the same period last year. Of course, the dominant animation studio has been Pixar, whose films have earned both critical acclaim and box office success. Six of their films have won Best Animated Feature at the Academy Awards. DreamWorks Animation is a close second, although they don’t always have the best track record. Their most profitable series, “Shrek,” peaked with the second installment and has worn out its welcome by the fourth entry, earning a series low of $239 million domestically. One of the few times DreamWorks has rivaled Pixar is with 2008’s “Kung Fu Panda,” a film that was obviously made with the utmost care and respect in regards to the depiction of ancient Chinese culture. While its themes and messages are familiar, “Kung Fu Panda” has enough heart, slapstick comedy, and energetic action to make it a fun ride not just for kids, but for adults as well.

Set in the Valley of Peace in ancient China, Po (Jack Black), a clumsy, overweight panda, is a kung fu fanatic who dreams of fighting alongside his idols, known as the Furious Five, which includes Tigress (Angelina Jolie), Monkey (Jackie Chan), Mantis (Seth Rogen), Viper (Lucy Liu), and Crane (David Cross). They are trained by Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) and together, they protect the Valley from danger. Po works with his father, Mr. Ping (James Hong), at his noodle shop, a job in which he longs to escape from. One day, Shifu’s former mentor, Master Oogway (Randall Duk Kim), has a vision that the evil Tai Long (Ian McShane) will escape from his imprisonment and take the legendary Dragon Scroll, which is said to contain the secrets of limitless power. A Dragon Warrior must be chosen to receive the scroll and use its knowledge to defeat Tai Long. When Po learns of this, he becomes ecstatic and rushes to the temple with the rest of the villagers. Unfortunately, he is too late and the doors close. Determined to see his heroes, he sets a number of fireworks on himself and crashes into the middle of the temple arena just as Oogway chooses the Dragon Warrior. To everyone’s surprise, Po is the one he chooses. Refusing to believe that a fat panda will save the valley, Shifu tries to make Po quit by belittling him but he persists. Po eventually wins over the Furious Five and their elderly master as he finally takes control of his destiny.

“Kung Fu Panda” doesn’t exactly reinvent the wheel when it comes to story, instead sticking with time-honored, if familiar, themes, such as hard work, determination, and a belief that by applying yourself, you can accomplish anything. As such, Po masters kung fu not through rote practice but because he never gives up and believes he can achieve his dream. Initially, he is ashamed of his obese frame yet comes to realize that appearances matter little—it is the inside that counts. It doesn’t take some scroll or any other unique object to make you special as you are already special. I was amazed at the filmmakers' commitment in making the world authentically Chinese, with the film never dragging itself down through stereotypes. One other thing the film does well is the pacing as the story never feels rushed for the sake of running time. The comedy is of the slapstick variety and ranges from chuckle-worthy to laugh-out-loud hilarious. The filmmakers' love of martial arts films shines through with Po, who goes crazy when he enters the temple and is able to name all the artifacts with ease. Later on, he becomes excited when he gets beat up with various special moves. The comedy never becomes overbearing and when appropriate, the film allows enough time for some heart-warming seriousness.

The animation is pleasing to the eye in its vibrancy but isn’t ground breaking, although the opening hand-drawn dream sequence is a nice touch. What makes it stand apart is the fluidity of the action scenes and they are amazing. The fighting is a mixture of physics-defying acrobatics seen in “The Matrix” and the graceful movements in wuxia martial arts films, such as “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.” It has a ‘whizz, bang, pow!’ feel that recalls the Adam West “Batman” television series from the 1960s. The biggest action set-piece is a battle between the Furious Five and Tai Long on a rickety suspension bridge. The blocks and blows that Tigress and Tai Long trade are exceptionally choreographed and is a thrill to watch. There’s also the prison breakout where Tai Long fights his way through hundreds of rhinoceros guards, a disguised final test where Shifu and Po battle over a remaining dumpling, and the climatic fight between Po and Tai Long, which is as eye-popping as it is fun to watch. I must say for an animated film, I was surprised by how brutal the fight between Tai Long and Shifu was but it drives home the theme of the student betraying the master, giving it a ‘fall from grace’ feel a la Paradise Lost…or maybe I’m just reading too much into it.

One of the things that separate Pixar and DreamWorks is that the latter has a habit of employing big-name celebrities for voice-work and its largely hit-or-miss. Here, the role of Po suits Jack Black as he always behaves like a live-action cartoon both in real-life and on-screen. His voice manages to capture Po’s good-natured naiveté, his enthusiasm, and his drive to learn kung fu. Dustin Hoffman and Ian McShane, while not as easily recognizable, also do great jobs as Master Shifu and Tai Long, respectively. Unfortunately, the Furious Five are underutilized. As Tigress, Angelina Jolie is the only one to have a significant amount of dialogue. The rest of the voice cast, which includes Jackie Chan, David Cross, Lucy Liu, and Seth Rogen, only have a handful of lines.

“Kung Fu Panda” on Blu-Ray looks absolutely gorgeous as every scene is chock full of small details. Look at the individual strands of fur on the various characters, the stitching on the clothing, and the various little adornments hanging on the buildings. Not to mention the bright color palette and solid blacks, making this one hell of a good-looking picture. Audio is excellent as well with crisp dialogue and immersive sound effects, especially during the fight scenes as you can feel every punch and block. There’s also a healthy dose of extras, including an audio commentary from directors John Stevenson and Mark Osborne, numerous featurettes that detail various aspects of the film plus mini-games for the kids. Exclusives include a picture-in-picture commentary and a trivia track. The only feature missing is the animated short, “Secrets of the Furious Five,” which details the origins of its members and was part of the two-disc DVD.

Released on June 6, 2008, “Kung Fu Panda” received largely positive reviews with 88% on Rotten Tomatoes. Critics noted the familiar message ‘but the pleasing mix of humor, swift martial arts action, and colorful animation makes for winning summer entertainment.’ It was nominated for Best Animated Film during the 2009 Academy Awards but, as expected by everyone, Pixar won with “Wall-E.” Box office wise, the film ate up a nice $632 million worldwide. It was exceptionally popular in China, as the panda is a national symbol but it prompted some introspection from Chinese filmmakers who questioned why the film, which captured their culture so perfectly, was made in the United States instead of China. There a myriad of reasons but as a Chinese person, I believe it has to do with the risk of offending the censors and for most filmmakers, it’s just not worth the trouble. Also, a lazy, overweight character has been a staple of American pop culture for some time i.e. “The Simpsons”, an image that wouldn’t sit well with censors if “Kung Fu Panda” was made in China. In any case, DreamWorks Animation really hit this one out of the park and while it may lack originality, “Kung Fu Panda” makes up for it in sheer heart, energy, and fun, allowing it to stand up to the very best of Pixar and other animated films.

Final Rating: 4.5 out of 5

“Quit, don't quit? Noodles, don't noodles? You are too concerned about what was and what will be. There is a saying: yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the present.”

Saturday, May 28, 2011

The Tree of Life Review

Rated PG-13 (Some Thematic Material)

Running Time: 2 Hours & 19 Minutes

Cast-
Brad Pitt-Mr. O'Brien
Jessica Chastain-Mrs. O'Brien
Sean Penn-Jack O’Brien
Hunter McCracken-Young Jack O’Brien
Laramie Eppler-R.L.
Tye Sheridan-Steve
Fiona Shaw-Grandmother O’Brien
Joanna Going-Jack's Wife

Directed by Terrence Malick

Terrence Malick's "The Tree of Life," one of the best, and most polarizing, films of 2011.
Much praise was heaped on last year’s “Inception” directed by Christopher Nolan from film critics and audiences, although a small subset were frustrated and baffled as they struggled to grasp what Nolan was trying to get across about the dream-world. Structurally, “Inception” was rather straight-forward as much of how the dream-world worked was spelled out in the film’s first forty minutes. It did demand more attention from the usual summer blockbuster but the ending was what inspired fierce debate. Nolan’s film is a cake-walk compared to Terrence Malick’s “The Tree of Life.” Malick’s career has spanned close to four decades with his directorial debut, “Badlands,” in 1973 (he had previously made a short film titled “Lanton Mills” in 1969, although like the director, it is rarely-seen and not readily available) and since then he has only directed five films. His sixth feature has just finished filming but the title or what the film is even about is anyone’s guess. “The Tree of Life” is one of the most polarizing films of 2011 but it is also a thematically rich cinematic experience that ponders the imponderable and asks questions that has eluded even the most ardent philosophers. It is a film that will inspire fierce debate as to what point Malick is trying to reach but make no mistake, “The Tree of Life” is a film that has to be seen as it defies all conventional means of film-making to create something that is less a film and more of a hauntingly beautiful symphony that washes over you.

It’s hard to define the story in “The Tree of Life” by traditional means but the main thrust of the narrative concerns a married architect named Jack O'Brien (Sean Penn) as he reflects back on his childhood living with a domineering father (Brad Pitt) and a religious mother (Jessica Chastain) in a small, rural southern town in the United States during the 1950s. “The Tree of Life” will inspire two extremes—either you’ll see it as a masterpiece of cinema or a big pretentious nothing. While I fall into the former camp, both sides can be easily argued. The film really demands the utmost attention and effectively requires multiple viewings to grasp the full picture of Malick’s canvass. The central question is what the heck this film is about and many critics have been fumbling around in their own reviews. The following is my interpretation based on my sole viewing although it is by no means the right interpretation. In fact, there is no right or wrong answer here.

A good starting is the title and for me, the film is about life, from the smallest moments to the most grandiose moments and the sum total of all these experiences. It opens with a passage from the Book of Job that quotes God, ‘Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth…when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?’ and indeed the film does explore the existence and meaning of God but comes to the conclusion that such a divine being is incomprehensible, unknowable, and indefinable in the grand scheme of things. The first hour of the film is what will try most people’s patience as we’re shown that Mr. and Mrs. O'Brien’s son has suddenly passed away, although the specifics are kept from us. Does it even matter though? Next we’re treated to a series of breath-taking images of the birth of the universe, majestic shots of planets that drive home how insignificant we are in the vastness of space. The evolution of our planet is depicted with photorealistic dinosaurs rummaging about in their natural habitat to their demise as an asteroid collides into the Earth. All this is accompanied by a whispered narration from Chastain and an operatic score that is part-adapted from classical composers to part-composed by Alexandre Desplat. These sequences often feel less of a film and more of a visual opera and it’s good to just sit back and let it wash over you. "The Tree of Life" really is one of the most visually stunning films I’ve seen and it does this without throwing money away and bombarding us with glossy explosions or effects. The cinematography is by Emmanuel Lubezki and each shot is framed with a purpose. It’s also heavy on the symbolism. Trees are a reoccurring motif and represent life but are also strong, immovable—qualities that Mr. O’Brien wishes his son to have. Sean Penn’s grown-up Jack wanders aimlessly through buildings with innumerable windows—he can see through but is unable to cross the barrier as he struggles to reconcile his feelings with his parents.

The second hour concerns Jack as a child, played with excellence by Hunter McCracken, and it’s made up of a series of moments that I believe all people can relate to. Everyone has that domineering parent that seems unusually cruel to their eyes and another parent whom you run to as refuge. Jack’s mother narrates, ‘there are two ways through life: the way of nature and the way of grace’ and this is presented by his mother and his father, respectively. Mrs. O’Brien places her faith in God but her husband views that to get ahead in the world you have to be ruthless, almost to the point of uncaring. There’s this one scene where Mr. O’Brien orders one of his sons to not speak for thirty minutes unless he has something to say and in a whisper, the son tells him to ‘be quiet…please.’ The father cannot believe what he has heard and grabs the son, preparing to hit him. Jack stands up to defend his brother but is thrown in a closet. Although it may seem abusive to a casual viewer, Mr. O’Brien’s world view and attitude stems not from hatred but of frustration, of broken dreams. His goal was to be a classical pianist but was ‘side-tracked’ and settled for a factory job to support his family. Jack’s experiences death and suffering and despite being a child, seems to have a crisis of faith as he whispers why God would let a young boy drown for no reason at all. Similar sentiments are mentioned as Chastain grapples with the loss of her son. As an adult, Jack struggles with the resentment and love he feels for his father and on a beach full of lost souls, comes to accept him, although how he reaches this epiphany isn’t made entirely clear (or maybe I missed it) and is one of the rare weak points of the film. Despite the majestic quality of the first hour, the small moments that made up Jack’s life in the second are just as important, if not more so, and the totality of these experiences is what makes you the kind of person you are.

The acting is of the highest caliber, although the film features very minimal dialogue. Brad Pitt is amazing as the domineering father and perfectly grasps his character's internal frustrations as he takes it out on his family. However, the standouts are Jessica Chastain and Hunter McCracken, whose lines only fill a handful of pages. Since so little is actually said, the two have to convey what they’re feeling through subtle and unsubtle expressions. It takes you deeper in the film as a lot of the family tension is never spoken of. I imagine Pitt and Chastain will garner some nominations as awards season ramps up in the fall. Sean Penn has little to no lines and only appears in the scenes that bookend the film. He spends most of the time wondering the streets as he reflects back on his life.

“The Tree of Life” is currently in limited release since May 27, 2011 and is only playing in four theaters, two of which is in New York. The film has received largely positive reviews with 86% on Rotten Tomatoes. Critics admitted that ‘Terrence Malick's singularly deliberate style may prove unrewarding for some, but for patient viewers, [the film] is an emotional as well as visual treat.’ Despite the reportedly mixed reception at the Cannes Film Festival, it received the highest honor, the Palme d'Or. One of the competing films was Lars von Trier’s latest, “Melancholia,” a science fiction/drama set to be released in November. I saw “The Tree of Life” at the Landmark Sunshine and a lot of the show-times were close to or were already sold out. The audience sat in complete silence as the film played but as the credits rolled I eavesdropped on some of the reactions as I was leaving. Some were debating what it was about while others openly mocked it as pretentious fluff and ‘couldn’t get into it.’ As expected, it’s rather mixed and at two extremes—you either love it or you hate it. The only other film to have inspired such debate was Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 film “2001: A Space Odyssey,” which has been compared to Malick’s film due to its similarly ponderous nature, although nowadays it is widely regarded as the science-fiction masterpiece. “The Tree of Life” is certainly a masterpiece, a poetic yet frustrating experience that will invoke a mixture of emotions. I believe Roger Ebert encapsulates the film best: ‘What Malick does in [the film] is create the span of lives. Of birth, childhood, the flush of triumph, the anger of belittlement, the poison of resentment, the warmth of forgiving.’ Malick’s quest for the meaning of life will bewilder just as it awes but it is no less a journey worth taking.

Final Rating: 5 out of 5

“There are two ways through life: the way of Nature, and the way of Grace. You have to choose which one you'll follow.”

Saturday, May 7, 2011

Thor Review

Rated PG-13 (Sequences of Intense Sci-Fi Action and Violence)

Running Time: 1 Hour & 55 Minutes

Cast-
Chris Hemsworth-Thor
Tom Hiddleston-Loki
Natalie Portman-Jane Foster
Anthony Hopkins-Odin, King of Asgard
Stellan Skarsgård-Dr. Erik Selvig
Kat Dennings-Darcy Lewis
Clark Gregg-Phil Coulson, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Colm Feore-Laufey, King of Jotunheim
Idris Elba-Heimdall
Jaimie Alexander-Sif
Ray Stevenson-Volstagg
Tadanobu Asano-Hogun
Josh Dallas-Fandral
Rene Russo-Frigga, Queen of Asgard
Jeremy Renner-Clint Barton/Hawkeye
Samuel L. Jackson-Nick Fury

Directed by Kenneth Branagh

Director Kenneth Branagh nails the central conflict between Thor and Loki in Marvel's latest film, "Thor."
Inspired by the deity of the same name from Norse mythology and created by Stan Lee, Larry Lieber, and Jack Kirby, Marvel Comics' Thor, who first appeared in Journey into Mystery #83 in 1963, is perhaps one of the more difficult superheroes to adapt to the big-screen and much of it has to do with humanizing a god in such a way that audiences can identify with and care about. Well, selecting Kenneth Branagh to direct was an inspired choice on Marvel's part as his background in Shakespearean adaptations gives "Thor" the dramatic heft needed to stand out from other big-budget summer blockbusters. It may not reach the cinematic heights of "Spider-Man 2" or "The Dark Knight," but Branagh's "Thor" successfully mixes humor with drama, blending classic Norse mythology with comic book action and Shakespearean undertones to create a thoroughly entertaining film that stands tall with the upper echelon of Marvel's film résumé.

"Thor" begins with a narration by Odin (Anthony Hopkins), ruler of Asgard, who recounts to his two sons, Thor and Loki, about the war with the Frost Giants of Jotunheim, led by King Laufey (Colm Feore), and their eventual defeat and subsequent truce. To prevent them from starting another campaign of conquest, the Asgardians seize the power source of the Frost Giants, the Casket of Ancient Winters, and puts it under heavy guard in their armory. In the present day, Thor (Chris Hemsworth)—now a brave but reckless warrior—is preparing to ascend to the throne of Asgard in a lavish ceremony but it is interrupted when three Frost Giants sneak into the armory in an attempt to steal the Casket back. Odin uses his automaton creation, the Destroyer, and stops the theft but Thor wants to confront Laufey and demand answers. Against his father's orders, Thor, along with his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston), and friends Sif (Jaimie Alexander), Volstagg (Ray Stevenson), Fandral (Joshua Dallas) and Hogun (Tadanobu Asano), travel to Jotunheim through the Bifröst Bridge. After a tense exchange, Thor's arrogance gets the better of him and he and his companions are forced to battle against a legion of Frost Giants. Odin arrives to intervene and with the truce now shattered, he takes away Thor's power and banishes him to Earth. He enchants his hammer, Mjolnir, with an unbreakable spell: 'Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor.' Now powerless, Thor awakes in New Mexico and finds himself tagging along with a group of astrophysicists which includes Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), her mentor Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard), and their assistant Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings). Mjolnir lands and creates a huge crater, with the site coming under quarantine by agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, led by Phil Coulson (Clark Gregg). As Thor spends time with Jane, he begins to fall in love with her and comes to realize the reason why his father banished him. Meanwhile, back in Asgard, Loki takes advantage of the situation and schemes to take the throne to eliminate his brother, and those who oppose him, once and for all.

With "Thor," Branagh has successfully mixed the fantasy elements of Asgard with the real-world, something a lesser director would've screwed up. Instead of making them out-right gods, the Asgardians are essentially an inter-dimensional race whose science and technology is misunderstood as magic by humans. The Bifröst Bridge actually leads to a massive, spherical portal-device that is activated by Heimdall's (Idris Elba) sword, transporting anyone to the world (called a realm in the film) of their choice by opening a wormhole in space. Yggdrasil, the world tree, is interpreted as a network that connects all the other realms. Despite being a massive comic book fan, I do not read Thor as religiously as Spider-Man but I do dabble from time-to-time. The central conflict has always been between Thor and his adopted brother Loki and this is where the Shakespeare inspiration is clearly felt. It is this complicated relationship that Branagh takes full advantage of, making it the driving force of the film. Loki, played with excellence by Tom Hiddleston, lacks the physical prowess of Thor and uses guile and deceit to win his battles. He is a snake who purrs wisdom in your ears but then does not hesitate to stab you in the back. He is like Iago from "Othello." Of course, the best villains are the ones who don't see themselves as evil, which is why Lex Luther has been such an enduring foil to Superman. His methods may be underhanded and occupies a moral gray area, but Loki, in his heart of hearts, genuinely believes that what he is doing is to the benefit of Asgard and his people. Branagh also balances the drama with a healthy dose of humor. Thor's time on Earth is a classic 'fish-out-of-water' experience as he struts around the fictional small town of Puente Antiguo, acting all high and mighty. He smashes cups to the floor to demand more coffee and walks into pet stores yelling, 'I NEED A HORSE!' When the owner says they only have cats, dogs, and birds, he says, 'Well...give me one of those that is big enough to ride!'

Still, "Thor" isn't a perfect film and the main issue I have is with its brevity as everything goes by too quick and certain subplots, like the romance, are rushed. An extra twenty to thirty minutes would've benefitted but you know how impatient the masses are. Thor's exile lasts only a few days and just like that, he falls in love with Jane and realizes the error of his ways. It just doesn't build up to it organically. Audiences looking for non-stop explosions will be disappointed as there are essentially only three action scenes. The film's major set-piece is at the end of the first act when Thor and his companions confront Laufey, leading to a massive battle between a seemingly unending army of Frost Giants. The other two action scenes are rather short. The Destroyer arrives to tear up the town but Thor handles him without breaking a sweat. Of course, he and Loki meet at the end and engage in a rather epic melee battle, although it's certainly smaller in scope compared to the fight with the Frost Giants. The visual effects, while nothing to write home about, is certainly impressive enough to convey that alien sense of wonder when the camera majestically sweeps around Asgard. As for the 3D, I didn't bother. Hollywood has burned me too many times with lazy post-conversions such as "Clash of the Titans" and "The Last Airbender" that it's just not worth the extra surcharge. I have read that "Thor" is another lazy conversion as the fight scenes end up being a blurry grey mess, which I'm not surprised to hear. However, seeing it in 2D may be a problem as theaters go out of their way to limit these showings to only four or five, while there are 15 to 20 showings of the 3D version, including IMAX.

When it comes to superhero films, one of the great things is that it can turn unknown actors/actresses into overnight stars. Chris Hemsworth, last seen as Captain James T. Kirk's father in J.J. Abrams' "Star Trek" reboot, nails the role of Thor with aplomb. He is arrogant and does not think of the consequences of his actions, driven more by anger than forethought. While his change is a little abrupt, it is his sincere delivery that convinces us. Even more impressive is Tom Hiddleston as Loki. He doesn't play him as full-on evil but as an outcast desperate to leave his brother's shadow and convince his father that he is every bit as capable in leading Asgard as Thor. In fact, Hiddleston makes Loki sympathetic as he only wants to do what he feels is right, even if it is not morally right. The rest of the supporting cast isn't given much to work with however and it's more to do with the script than their actual performances. Natalie Portman giggles and acts all flustered but is not convincing as an astrophysicist. I can buy that she and Thor are attracted to each other but a full-on romance? The film's running time just isn't long enough for it to develop. As Jane's mentor, Stellan Skarsgård delivers some sage advice while Kat Dennings serves as the film's comic relief. Anthony Hopkin's presence adds some gravitas to the proceedings but his role doesn't grow beyond that of a stern father. Thor's comrades-in-arms, played by Jaimie Alexander, Ray Stevenson, Joshua Dallas, and Tadanobu Asano also have limited screen-time but at least their camaraderie results in some funny moments.

"Thor" was released on May 6, 2011 and officially kicks off the summer movie season. Reviews have been positive, with a solid 79% on Rotten Tomatoes. Critics called the film 'a dazzling blockbuster that tempers its sweeping scope with wit, humor, and human drama.' The real test is at the box office and whether audiences will accept "Thor," seeing as he is not as popular as Spider-Man or Batman. Well, it looks like they have as the film has grossed $26 million on Friday, on its way for a $60 to $65 million weekend total. It has already made an additional $133 million from foreign grosses. While this may not seem impressive compared to last weekend's "Fast Five," "Thor" has more hurdles to overcome. Also, "Fast Five" is what I call a 'junk food film': easily digestible entertainment for the masses but lacks soul. A lot of things could have gone wrong with "Thor" and it could have a been cheesy farce but Branagh skillfully grounds the fantastical elements in a way that we can actually believe that such a world like Asgard can exist, whose inhabitants, despite wielding extraordinary powers, are just as human as you and me. That is what Branagh has done and makes "Thor" another winner for Marvel.

Final Rating: 4 out of 5

"For the first time in my life, I have no idea what I'm supposed to do..."

Note: Make sure to stay after the credits for a special scene involving a certain 'cube' with 'cosmic' repercussions in the upcoming film, "The Avengers," coming to theaters May 4, 2012!

Sunday, May 1, 2011

Fast Five Review

Rated PG-13 (Intense Sequences of Violence and Action, Sexual Content and Language)

Running Time: 2 Hours & 10 Minutes

Cast:
Vin Diesel-Dominic Toretto
Paul Walker-Brian O'Conner
Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson-Lucas ‘Luke’ Hobbs
Jordana Brewster-Mia Toretto
Tyrese Gibson-Roman Pearce
Chris 'Ludacris' Bridges-Tej Parker
Sung Kang-Han Lue
Matt Schulze-Vince
Gal Gadot-Gisele Harabo
Tego Calderon-Tego Leo
Don Omar-Rico Santos
Elsa Pataky-Officer Elena Neves
Joaquim de Almeida-Hernan Reyes
Michael Irby-Zizi
Eva Mendes-Monica Fuentes

Directed by Justin Lin

What, you think you can out-sweat me?!
For once, the trailers delivered exactly as promised: summer has indeed arrived early with the highly anticipated “Fast Five,” the fifth installment of “The Fast & the Furious” franchise. I’ve made it pretty clear that I don’t think very highly of this series, I mean it’s loud, obnoxious, and dumb ninety percent of the time but the previews showed promise and I was willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. And you know what? I came away genuinely pleased as “Fast Five” is the best of the series by far, although that’s not exactly high praise considering that it took five attempts to get it right. The writing is still sloppy, the characters still paper-thin, and the action still cartoonishly over-the-top but “Fast Five” is the most story-driven and benefits most from the camaraderie of its multicultural, ensemble cast. Let’s not also forget about the brawl of the century between Vin Diesel and Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson, whose no-holds-barred fight scene is worth the price of admission alone.

Picking up immediately after “Fast & Furious,” Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel) is on a prison bus destined for Lompoc Penitentiary, sentenced to 25 years to life for his crimes. Former FBI agent Brian O’Conner (Paul Walker), along with Dom’s sister, Mia (Jordana Brewster), Tego Leo (Tego Calderon) and Rico Santos (Don Omar) free Dom by forcing the bus to flip over. The group splits up for an unspecified period of time and eventually meets up in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Dom’s childhood friend Vince (Matt Schulze) has been living in Rio supporting his wife and son. He enlists Brian and Mia’s aid for an ‘easy’ job to steal three cars from a moving train. Dom arrives to help out but the job quickly goes awry when the crew he hired betrays them, as their goal was to steal only one of the cars, a Ford GT40, for corrupt businessman Hernan Reyes (Joaquim de Almeida). Mia drives away with the car but Dom and Brian are captured and brought before Reyes. They escape and manage to make it back to the safehouse where Mia is waiting. Vince is revealed to be working for Reyes and is forced to leave. Brian discovers that the car has a hidden computer chip that contains a record of all of Reyes' illicit business activities, including the location of over $100 million divided up into various safehouses. To avoid running for the rest of their lives, Dom plans for one last heist to take Reyes’ $100 million and assembles a team which includes Roman Pearce (Tyrese Gibson), Tej Parker (Chris 'Ludacris' Bridges), Han Lue (Sung Kang), Gisele Harabo (Gal Gadot), Tego Leo, and Rico Santos. Meanwhile, Diplomatic Security Service agent Lucas ‘Luke’ Hobbs (Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson) and his team, assisted by local officer Elena Neves (Elsa Pataky), is sent in to capture Dom and Brian and bring them to justice, by any means necessary.

“Fast Five” is an incredibly loud movie that revels in its testosterone-fueled action but director Justin Lin, in his third outing, wisely switches gears and moves the focus away from street racing to avoid a rehash, turning this entry into a heist film ala “Ocean’s Eleven,” only less suave and sophisticated. While street racing is still touched upon, it is no longer the heart of the series. Originality will be hard to find and the scenes revolving around the planning of the heist feel workmanlike and uninspired. One scene is even ripped straight out of Ridley Scott’s “American Gangster.” Later on, most of the intricate planning gets thrown out the window in favor of a ridiculous action set-piece that completely disregards real-world physics! Isacc Newton must be rolling in his grave right about now. The writing is also sloppy and often ‘cheats.’ One such example is when the crew receives a replica of the massive bank vault housing Reyes’ money and we wonder how they even managed to acquire it. This is simply explained away with a throwaway line. Some attempt at ‘drama’ is made but it is poorly paced, often coming right after a major action scene. The film also runs a little long, clocking in at over two hours with a drawn out epilogue for each of the characters.

What “Fast Five” excels at is the action set-pieces and this time around, there’s a confidence behind Lin’s direction. There are still flashy cars and bikini-clad women walking in slo-mo to please the male fan-base but they are not as excessively overdone as in the previous entries. The opening scene sets the tone with a massive prison bus flipped over that happens to leave no one hurt! During the attempt to steal the cars on a fast-moving a train, a flatbed truck is driven beside it where one person cuts into the side using nothing but an acetylene torch. The cars are pulled onto the flatbed, which tilt up and are then driven away. It all seems awfully complicated but Lin polishes it to perfection. Of course, everything starts going boom when things go wrong and the flatbed ends up ramming itself onto the side of a train with Dom and Brian escaping by driving off a deep ravine and hitting the water below. There are also intense shootouts between Hobbs and Reyes’ men and they way they’re staged recall the favela levels in Infinity Ward’s Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2. The highlight is the brawl between Diesel and Johnson and while it ends quickly, it does not disappoint. It builds up to it and finally lets loose as the two pummel each other like two incredible Hulks, throwing each other into walls and causing untold amounts of damage. “Fast Five” ends with a car chase that really defies description and has to be seen to be believed. Let’s just say it involves two cars dragging a giant bank vault with high-tension wire through the streets of Rio and smashing into many buildings and cars.

The ‘acting’ largely involves shouted lines of dialogue and tons of male posturing. It seems like Vin Diesel and Paul Walker’s career has been reduced to this franchise. Diesel’s larger-than-life presence is always welcome but Walker comes off as useless. The large ensemble cast limits how much screen-time each gets but makes up for it with their humorous camaraderie, especially between Gibson, Bridges, and Kang. Johnson really runs with his tough officer role and he’s so tough that he’s always drenched in sweat in every scene he appears in. The remaining female cast doesn’t amount to much. Jordana Brewster spends much of the film behind a computer screen, serving as the team’s Oracle like Batman. Gal Gadot only has one memorable scene and yes, it involves dropping her towel and revealing her supermodel body. Elsa Pataky is the rookie cop assisting Hobbs and is one of the more fleshed-out characters. Finally there’s Joaquim de Almeida as corrupt businessman Hernan Reyes, who’s just another in a long line of clichéd and generic villains.

Released on April 29, 2011 into regular theaters and IMAX, “Fast Five” has received a positive reception with 78% on Rotten Tomatoes, the best reviews the franchise has ever received since the original’s release in 2001 and an absolute rarity for fourth sequels. Critics called it ‘sleek, loud, and over the top, [the film] proudly embraces its brainless action thrills.’ Since the beginning of 2011, the box office has been down and although it received a slight uptick this month, this is the weekend that it might finally show positive growth. Actually, it already has as “Fast Five” has grossed a muscular $33 million on Friday on its way to an estimated $75 to $80 million weekend total. It doesn’t seem like the franchise will be put into the garage anytime soon if the post-credits scene is any indication and for the first time, I’m actually intrigued to see what happens next! Audience reaction was overwhelmingly positive and many seemed absolutely excited for a sixth entry. “Fast Five” straddles the line between outright stupidity and high entertainment, although thankfully it leans more toward the latter.  It offers what you would expect but there’s an assured confidence behind the proceedings with Lin’s direction and for the first time, the franchise has finally found its groove despite its lazy story-telling.

Final Rating: 3 out of 5

“Chances are sooner or later, we’re gonna end up behind bars or buried in a ditch somewhere…but not today.”