Wow. It's been a little while since I last posted a blog entry, but a lot has been going on. Since January I've been continually working at the job I started in Oct. 2013, and in March of this year I got to add "aunt to a nephew" to my list of titles. yes, my nephew Carter was born in March and is the sweetest thing ever! At the end of the summer I moved into my own house and have been faced with the ugly reality of paying more bills than I ever had in Mississippi (apartment living was actually a breeze compared to renting a house!). :) Nobody ever told me this was part of being an adult. Haha. Oh well.
Today I saw The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Part 1 in theaters, and though yes, I did actually wait a week *gasp* to see the film, I think it was actually well worth it; I didn't have to deal with those annoying seat kickers, annoying people that will NOT shut up, or the like. It was a great theater experience. I think I'll do that more often. Be assured, this review will have plenty of spoilers, so if you haven't seen the film and would like to save yourself the trouble, I wouldn't read any further. Although, I would like to make a teensy comment unrelated to the actual film itself: is the MPAA made up of morons? Why would you rate a movie PG-13 for 'a suggestive comment'? For real? [I think the film in question was the Age of Adaline]. However it was AWESOME seeing The Hobbit trailer on the big screen in huge, beautiful digital HD. But I digress. On to the review!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What a film. My expectations were high considering the quality of an adaptation that Catching Fire proved to be. Granted that it has been at least a year since I've read the trilogy, so I may be stretching some of my praise of the film. But first, I felt like the first half of the book was captured in the movie. Mockingjay is a very dark book, and as such has a lot of depressing moments in it. I liked that it opened with Katniss playing her 'real' game: "I'll start with what's real: my name is Katniss Everdeen. I'm from District 12. I survived the Games. Peeta was left behind/is in the Capitol", etc. This isn't how the book began, but it gave us a pretty good starting point at where Katniss is emotionally and psychologically. She's a completely shattered heroine, the tolls of being strong for those around her showing through her cracked facade. And it was a good way film-wise to include a great many pieces of the book in just one 2 minute scene [the book has a lot of little moments where Katniss completely loses her mind and has to be sedated]. So on this note, can we please just discuss Jennifer Lawrence and why she's a several times Oscar winning/nominated actress?! We've seen a steady progression of Katniss: in movie 1, she was a reluctant hero for her sister. In movie 2, she's a broken but ready to fight individual who wants to ensure Peeta survives. In Mockingjay, she's a combination of the two, more broken than willing. her accumulated personal losses have caused her a great deal of emotional damage, as evidenced in the book. In many ways, she's only a puppet for the rebellion, her strings pulled by various parties in District 13 [a fact emphasized by the numerous 3rd person mentions of Katniss while she's in the room; they talk about her as if she's not there in person]. But she has the mental faculties to make several personal demands to President Coin if she becomes the Mockingjay. She wants Peeta and the other victors freed (funny how Enobaria wasn't mentioned in that demand; wonder where she ended up), as well as wanting them to let Prim keep her cat. Jennifer does an excellent job playing this side of Katniss: at times strong, but most of the time completely lost and in pain.
Peeta. Oh Peeta. you were one reason I was dreading this movie so much! The progression of Peeta's torture was one of the things I didn't want to see, but see it we did. he starts out relatively unchanged and by the end of the film, I don't even know the character anymore. Hutcherson did a terrific job conveying all of Peeta's nuances in this film; I won't even talk about how the hate in Peeta's eyes at the end was completely believable. It'll be interesting to see how he brings Peeta to life in the next film.
Gale. I still hate the character, even though he's really not all that unlikable in the film(s). I just don't like Gale, and I still feel like he's a bit of a pansy in this installment; they should have made him tougher or something. I don't know. I didn't like his portrayal all that much. But President Coin. I know what happens to her at the end of the story but she is the one new person I dislike the most. Maybe it's BECAUSE I know what happens to her in the end, but she's just...ick. Like a two-faced snake. And in passing I'll mention some of the newcomers, Cressida, Boggs. I had my reservations about Boggs at first, but I actually really liked him. And Cressida. And the film crew (though we don't see them much at all). Part 2 will be difficult. Really difficult.
Can we also just talk about The Hanging Tree? When I first heard it, I thought, "eh". It wasn't what I pictured. But as I've listened to it, and after having seen the film, it's grown on me. It was an important song from the book, and I feel as if the filmmakers captured it in the right way. Though I would have preferred a little more build up to the song [I think I remember Katniss telling a story about it in the book], but overall it was satisfying. And while at first I disliked Lorde's "Yellow Flicker Beat", it's grown on me as well.
Music was much the same as previous films, I wasn't overwhelmed by anything.
Okay so if you've gotten this far and you STILL haven't seen the movie, I want to warn you about the ending. It's ridiculously INTENSE. I knew more or less what it would be from comments I'd read about the movie, but I didn't realize how intense it would turn out. And for all those crying about how it ended, let me remind you: the book splits pretty evenly at chapters 13 and 14. Chapter 13 ends very similarly, and since there are 27 chapters in the book (minus the epilogue), then this was an adequate place to stop. Part 2 will be hard enough with the attack on the Capitol (and everything that comes with).
Rating: 4.5/5. It's the best of the 3 so far. Go see it!
Saturday, November 29, 2014
Saturday, January 18, 2014
The Lone Ranger (2013) Review: Not Quite Like The Original...
I finally got around to watching The Lone Ranger (2013) with Johnny Depp and Armie Hammer today. I didn't see it in theaters, mostly because everyone was saying how much of a flop it was, how bad of a film it was, etc. I had some motivation to see this movie; after all, there aren't a lot of films with Gil Birmingham in them that I can watch without feeling awful after (most of his films tend to have a lot of language in them, I've learned). I can honestly say I'm glad I didn't waste the money on a theater ticket, and I'm only out $1.30 (Redbox cost). Let me start this short review by stating several things: first, I am NOT a purist Lone Ranger fan. While I'm somewhat familiar with the original story, I am not a big fan of the original (though there's no Ranger like Clayton Moore and no Tonto like Jay Silverheels), and so what I say may or may not hold much water for you. Second, I am also NOT a Native American/Comanche expert, and I don't claim to be; I only know a little about some cultures, so I go off that.
The one thing that has irked me about this movie from the very beginning was the casting of Johnny Depp as Tonto. I mean really. The man isn't native (he claims to have some ancestry through his 'grandmother', but hasn't produced any proof of this claim), though he is extremely talented. Depp is, for lack of a better term, a character actor. Just look at his career to know that: Jack Sparrow, Willy Wonka, Rango, Edward Scissorhands, etc. I will be the last person on earth to say that Depp isn't talented. On the contrary, I think he's incredibly talented and he is able to pull of comedic parts with success. But this...this just wasn't it for me. While Depp's Tonto had some comic moments, I felt overall that it was all, I dunno. Fake? Forced? Now I don't know how a Comanche, who had spent his entire life speaking his native language and then learning English later, would really speak. But a consensus among most, if not all, Natives and native tribes is that Tonto's way of speaking is demeaning. It fits into the stereotype Hollywood has produced ever since the beginning of film in the 1890s. Also regarding Tonto, there are so many talented (and available!) Native actors out there now. Michael Spears, Eddie Spears, Zahn McClarnon, Gil Birmingham, Adam Beach, Chaske Spencer, Wes Studi. Just to name a handful! And that's not even the extent of the list, to be quite honest. Those are the actors whose work I'm most familiar with. But they are proven actors, who are not only talented and who not only have impressive credits to their names, but they are also the culture (give or take) that Tonto represents. Granted, the only real native in this list who is actually of Comanche heritage is Birmingham. But, I digress. You get my drift anyway. It's ironic that Birmingham and other Native actors were included IN the film, but not in very main roles! What is up with this? Is Hollywood so set in its racial bias towards Natives in film that it can't even fathom the idea of putting a Native actor in a main role that is also iconic? For however stereotypical Tonto may be, at least Silverheels was a Native actor. And I personally feel as if Verbinski and Bruckheimer missed a rare opportunity to kind of erase that Indian stereotype by not only casting a true Native in the role, but also making Tonto a more believable, more realistically speaking and acting person. But, Hollywood is all about money, and films are all about getting the actors who will make your film sell. Guess that didn't work out so well. Just look at the box office numbers for it and all the critical reviews!
[Side note for this section: Tonto's entire look was based on a painting of a Crow warrior. I'm pretty sure that the Crow and Comanche are about as related as a dog and a cat. No Comanche actually looked like Tonto, and I find his costume design rather insulting and demeaning; they could've jazzed up a traditional Comanche warrior outfit for goodness' sake!]
As for Armie Hammer as the Lone Ranger/John Reid. Ouch. What a hapless nit-wit! Watching the Lone Ranger series, I never get the feeling that Reid is stupid. Or that he's hapless. Or that he's essentially so helpless that it's luck which gets him through situations. Clayton Moore's Lone Ranger, while it may be cheesy (it was the 1950s after all), is a guy who understands the value of life and of justice. The right kind of justice. That's kind of thrown in there in this film, but I honestly feel as if Hammer's Lone Ranger's sense of morality and soul is undermined by his pure lack of competence as a crime fighter. This is not Clayton Moore. This is not the Lone Ranger you're probably familiar with.
The gratuitous violence by the film's villains is unnecessary. The constant weirdness perpetrated by Tonto is tiresome and laughable [maybe on purpose]. Overall? This movie is NOT worth your time or money. Sure, you'll have some laughs along the way. And if you like Johnny Depp, then you'll probably like his Tonto (to me a mix of Jack Sparrow and something original). However if you are looking for a fun modern return to The Lone Ranger of Clayton Moore's and Jay Silverheels' era, then you are looking in the wrong place.
Rating: 1.5/5. Though the movie did have decent music to it. It should; the score was composed by Hans Zimmer, and pieces of the score were composed/arranged by Geoff Zanelli (responsible for the beautiful scores of Into the West (2005); at least that's what I know him from). But that's about the only good thing in this film.
The one thing that has irked me about this movie from the very beginning was the casting of Johnny Depp as Tonto. I mean really. The man isn't native (he claims to have some ancestry through his 'grandmother', but hasn't produced any proof of this claim), though he is extremely talented. Depp is, for lack of a better term, a character actor. Just look at his career to know that: Jack Sparrow, Willy Wonka, Rango, Edward Scissorhands, etc. I will be the last person on earth to say that Depp isn't talented. On the contrary, I think he's incredibly talented and he is able to pull of comedic parts with success. But this...this just wasn't it for me. While Depp's Tonto had some comic moments, I felt overall that it was all, I dunno. Fake? Forced? Now I don't know how a Comanche, who had spent his entire life speaking his native language and then learning English later, would really speak. But a consensus among most, if not all, Natives and native tribes is that Tonto's way of speaking is demeaning. It fits into the stereotype Hollywood has produced ever since the beginning of film in the 1890s. Also regarding Tonto, there are so many talented (and available!) Native actors out there now. Michael Spears, Eddie Spears, Zahn McClarnon, Gil Birmingham, Adam Beach, Chaske Spencer, Wes Studi. Just to name a handful! And that's not even the extent of the list, to be quite honest. Those are the actors whose work I'm most familiar with. But they are proven actors, who are not only talented and who not only have impressive credits to their names, but they are also the culture (give or take) that Tonto represents. Granted, the only real native in this list who is actually of Comanche heritage is Birmingham. But, I digress. You get my drift anyway. It's ironic that Birmingham and other Native actors were included IN the film, but not in very main roles! What is up with this? Is Hollywood so set in its racial bias towards Natives in film that it can't even fathom the idea of putting a Native actor in a main role that is also iconic? For however stereotypical Tonto may be, at least Silverheels was a Native actor. And I personally feel as if Verbinski and Bruckheimer missed a rare opportunity to kind of erase that Indian stereotype by not only casting a true Native in the role, but also making Tonto a more believable, more realistically speaking and acting person. But, Hollywood is all about money, and films are all about getting the actors who will make your film sell. Guess that didn't work out so well. Just look at the box office numbers for it and all the critical reviews!
[Side note for this section: Tonto's entire look was based on a painting of a Crow warrior. I'm pretty sure that the Crow and Comanche are about as related as a dog and a cat. No Comanche actually looked like Tonto, and I find his costume design rather insulting and demeaning; they could've jazzed up a traditional Comanche warrior outfit for goodness' sake!]
As for Armie Hammer as the Lone Ranger/John Reid. Ouch. What a hapless nit-wit! Watching the Lone Ranger series, I never get the feeling that Reid is stupid. Or that he's hapless. Or that he's essentially so helpless that it's luck which gets him through situations. Clayton Moore's Lone Ranger, while it may be cheesy (it was the 1950s after all), is a guy who understands the value of life and of justice. The right kind of justice. That's kind of thrown in there in this film, but I honestly feel as if Hammer's Lone Ranger's sense of morality and soul is undermined by his pure lack of competence as a crime fighter. This is not Clayton Moore. This is not the Lone Ranger you're probably familiar with.
The gratuitous violence by the film's villains is unnecessary. The constant weirdness perpetrated by Tonto is tiresome and laughable [maybe on purpose]. Overall? This movie is NOT worth your time or money. Sure, you'll have some laughs along the way. And if you like Johnny Depp, then you'll probably like his Tonto (to me a mix of Jack Sparrow and something original). However if you are looking for a fun modern return to The Lone Ranger of Clayton Moore's and Jay Silverheels' era, then you are looking in the wrong place.
Rating: 1.5/5. Though the movie did have decent music to it. It should; the score was composed by Hans Zimmer, and pieces of the score were composed/arranged by Geoff Zanelli (responsible for the beautiful scores of Into the West (2005); at least that's what I know him from). But that's about the only good thing in this film.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)