Insert caption here
A franchise, by definition, relies on a tried and tested formula across multiple narratives, but Pirates of the Caribbean – birthed from a themed ride at Disneyland – takes the Mickey (har har). Rather than coming up with an original idea, the writers borrowed (adapted) a Tim Powers novel called… On Stranger Tides.
How closely the movie follows the book, I can’t say (I’m not a fan of Powers) but it certainly fits the Pirates theme perfectly: pick a mythical destination, pick a fabled creature, a supernatural enemy, and a cameo appearance, then have the protagonists find object(s) in order to reach said mythical destination where a swindle and double cross occurs, but Johnny “Cap’n Jack Sparrow” Depp prevails.
The returning cast and crew phone in their parts, being almost identical to their previous incarnations with nothing new to add – which I’m sorry to say, includes the usually wonderful Hans Zimmer (the music composer). On Stranger Tides looks, feels and sounds so similar to the previous movies that it wouldn’t be fair to say it’s bad, because it would imply that the others were too (and they weren’t).
If you aren’t sick of Johnny Depp doing his Keith Richards impersonation yet (or Keith Richards doing his Johnny Depp impression for that matter), by all means go and see this movie.
This poster should be in the running (ha ha) for a "most inaccurate representation" prize
Source Code is the second feature from Duncan Jones, director of the sci-fi thriller Moon. His first movie was shot on a modest budget of $5 million, and while this cost an estimated $30 million more, retains somewhat of a “shot on a budget” feel about it – which is not a bad thing in Jones’ hands. With an interesting premise dealing with trying to change the events of the past, Jones cleverly uses the same sets over and over again to great effect, creating a kind of cinematic claustrophobia that matches how boxed in his character feels.
The story is this: a terrorist detonates a bomb on a passenger train, and announces that a second, more devastating bomb will be set off soon after. A special scientific enterprise attempts to uncover the perpetrator through a cutting-edge technique that allows Captain Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) to access the past through the memory of one of the victims on the train. But because the brain only retains 8 minutes of information, that is the time window Stevens has to uncover the truth – revisiting the same period over and over again. But as the captain uncovers details of about the terrorist plot, he also uncovers some disturbing information about himself.
Time travel stories always abound with problems, and Source Code requires a heightened suspension of disbelief in order to buy into the conceit: e.g. how does the victim’s memories contain an entire reality for Captain Stevens to interact with? Fortunately Jones had the sense to ensure that none of these were critical to the main plot, so they’re easily dispensed with, leaving a compelling character-driven story that dares to appeal to the intellect and ask complex moral questions.
They had to use a camera trick to make Vin Diesel look like the big man... The Rock is probably 10 meters back in that picture in order for it to be in scale
There’s really no getting around the fact that this movie is basically Ocean’s Eleven set in Brazil, with cars. That’s not a bad thing, since it means a token nod at trying to put together a coherent plot, although in doing so the writers have sacrificed car scenes for heist scenes. There’s still plenty of hot rods and hot bods for the young male target audience.
Playing antagonist in this one is Dwayne Johnson in nasty mode, and as far as I know this is the first time he’s playing a serious role and he’s genuinely scary. Vin Diesel is not a small man by any reckoning, but mein gott, compared to The Rock he looks puny. It may sound odd, but I think his physical bulk is what gives the otherwise terrible script some much needed momentum (moreso considering the reduced vehicular action).
I’m kinda ambivalent about this one. Everything was merely interesting, not exciting. That includes the cars, the girls, the set pieces and the story. For a franchise that sells itself on being “fast” it wasn’t able to get my heart pumping. Maybe they need to bring back “the furious” for the next one (yes, there will be a next one – there’s a sequel-tastic scene early in the credits, as if they couldn’t trust the audience to wait until the end of the credits for the stinger).
Chris Hemsworth has beefed up from his Home and Away surfie days
Here’s the latest Marvel comic-to-movie adaptation, another cog in the machine will eventually become The Avengers. For those not in the know (which included me prior to the movies), one of the business strategies used by the comic industry is to introduce fans of one hero to others through “crossovers” that featured multiple superheroes teaming up with each other. It was hoped that these partnerships would result in fans of one series also taking an interest in the others. Thor is the latest Avenger to get his own feature, after The Incredible Hulk and Iron Man (and soon to be followed by Captain America).
The movie itself is surprisingly good, of the same calibre of Marvel movie releases since they took back control of their own brand from the greedy, uncaring Hollywood studios. It’s definitely cheesy, but in a way that shows they’re not taking themselves too seriously, making it a fun experience rather than a cringey one.
Chris Hemsworth, of Home and Away TV series fame, is yet another suprisingly good Aussie male lead – although exactly why this is still surprising is beyond my mere mortal understanding. Maybe it’s because Australian stuff is generally so crap that the surprise comes from discovering (again and again) that this country actually possesses people with talent. The other surprise comes from Natalie Portman, who played a character that pretty much spent the entire movie with nothing better to do than lusting over Thor. If this was Marvel’s way to win over Portman fans from DC Comics’ excellent V for Vendetta, then I’d have to say it was a wasted opportunity.
This poster has a British, Hugh Grant movie feel to it, don't you think? Except Paul Giamatti is no Hugh Grant
What is it with Jewish guys and movies in which decidedly average schmucks get together with gorgeous girls? OK, maybe it’s a stretch, seeing I’m basing this accusation purely on Woody Allen, and the movie that I’m reviewing here: Barney’s Version. As you can see from the poster, the eponymous character played by Paul Giamatti somehow manages to get it on with Rachelle Lefevre, Minnie Driver and Rosamund Pike in quick succession.
Well I say quick, but Barney’s Version is more like a biography of Barney Panofsky, based on the book of the same name. It’s not just a slice of life, it’s almost the whole cake, offering an interesting analysis on the trials and tribulations of love, from the perspective of a plump, smarmy, bearded guy.
Barney puts in a performance worthy of his Golden Globe for Best Actor, but I liked Dustin Hoffman as Barney’s dirty old dad more. I have no idea what the big deal is about Lefevre, Driver was great as the sexy-but-bossy wife, and as for Pike – I hate to say it like this – but as hot as she may be, there’s something just not quite right about her face and her voice; like a human version of the Uncanny Valley. She also made for the least believable couple of all three women.
Casting quibbles aside, the source material imbues Barney’s with a strong emotional core, as evidenced by the fact that even though the title character is fairly reprehensible, you still find yourself rooting for him. Apparently the conceit of the book is better, and makes the ending much more meaningful and poignant, so maybe this is one to read rather than to watch.
