Wednesday, April 29, 2009

X-Men Origins : Wolverine (2009) | REVIEW

I just got home from watching X-Men Origins : Wolverine and am happy to say that my sheer hate for it from before has subsided to a huge degree. In fact, I had a lot of fun and the movie is very enjoyable. A word of warning though, enter the cinema with an open mind and DO NOT connect this movie with the comics and graphic novels. And focus only on Wolverine, Sabretooth, and William Stryker because the other mutants aren't handled in the best of ways. Grab a cup of coffee because this is going to be quite a long review.

This Flick Is About...
X-Men Origins : Wolverine goes way back before the time of the X-Men trilogy and dwells into the shrouded past of Logan / Wolverine; a past that he still tries to recover in X-Men : The Last Stand. We finally see the tragedies that take place and what drives Logan to participate in the infamous Weapon X project. The movie focuses on Logan's complicated relationship with his brother, Victor Creed, his alliances and enemies, and how he ultimately becomes the indestructible mutant that he is today.
----------------------------------------------------
The movie is very loosely based on the Origins graphic novel in which fans get to see Logan's childhood for the first time. I say loosely because that's what it is. It may even be an understatement. While they keep the bone-claws intact, we are introduced to Logan's brother immediately, Victor Creed, who eventually becomes the bloodthirsty Sabretooth. While rumors in the comic world state that Sabretooth may have some connection to Logan's childhood, there is absolutely nothing about the two being brothers. That's just pushing it. There's also a mixture of tales from other comics and graphic novels, but the stories, relationships, and timeline of events are drastically changed to cater to a wider audience.

In order to fit as many mutants in, the source material is compromised to a massive degree and what we have is an alternate version of Wolverine's past. That's why it's essential for anyone who watches this to completely take the comics out of their heads. If you watch this as a die-hard fan you will hate it with a burning passion. I mean it. As an adaptation the movie is screwed beyond belief but as a standalone movie where liberties are allowed to be taken, it fares very well and is a film that's packed with awesome scenes and a lot of fun.

To my surprise, Sabretooth was handled very well. He's vicious, animalistic, bloodthirsty, and selfish; all the traits that make the beast who he is in the comics. I'm not sure why he runs around on all fours, though. I'm not going to spoil anything, but they tend to screw him up too, in a way. Gambit could have been better. While Taylor Kitsch does an okay job at playing the card-chargin' Cajun, he doesn't fully pull off Gambit's swiftness or slickness. I still say Josh Holloway would have been awesome for the role. The chemistry between him and Hugh Jackman is just something that's waiting to happen one way or the other. Anyway, if Gambit ever gets recast, Josh will be the way to go. Danny Huston does a good job (not at all his best effort) at playing the forever-manipulative William Stryker, pioneer of the Weapon X project, and Will.i.am isn't too bad either. Dominic Monaghan plays Chris Bradley / Bolt (a not-too-popular mutant in X-Men lore) and Kevin Durand plays The Blob. They, too, do pretty well.

Now you're probably thinking, "Didn't you just say they weren't handled too well?" If I answered that I'd spoil the movie for you and the fun of watching it so I won't. And now you're saying, "Hey, what about Deadpool? You forgot Deadpool?" No, I didn't really. Let me first say that Deadpool is awesome in this flick. Ryan Reynolds fits perfectly into the boots of the 'mean-mouthed merc'. But (aha, there's a but), if you're going in there to watch Deadpool and Deadpool alone, be warned. I'm sure what conspires around this character will not be digested too easily with the fanbase. That's all I can say without ruining the plot.

So most of the characters are played pretty well, what about Hugh Jackman as Wolverine? Make no mistake, this is the best version of Wolverine that has been put on screen to date. It is on par with Logan's introductory scene inside a steel cage in the first X-Men and there's more rage and anger and clawing and scratching than X-Men 2. Way more. I'm not even going to comment on X-Men : The Last Stand because I hate Brett Ratner and I hated Wolverine in it so, there you go. Jackman does an awesome job. Nothing to worry about from that aspect.

The finalized CGI in the movie looks so much better than what was shown in the trailers and clips. There are some bad parts and lousy effects, sure, but overall it's good. When I say 'good' I hope you understand I mean compared to the trailers. The 'Phoenix' scenes in X-Men : The Last Stand had CGI that was a dozen times better than Wolverine. Compared to the bad shots we saw in the trailers, the finalized CGI is okay.

From a technical standpoint the film looks really bad. The editing is almost amateurish, the transitions are poor and low-budget-like, and these ruins scenes that could have looked better. A lot of shots are left lingering until the scene grows stale. Some shots make scenes look cheesy while others were obviously done with very little care. X-Men Origins : Wolverine makes it clear that there was a troubled set, conflicting opinions, clashes of power, and 'too many artists on one canvas'. I dare say that Gavin Hood will not return to direct a sequel. While certain sequences in the film look very planned and clean, others look rushed or just neglected. It's as if Gavin just wanted to get this over with because he's not a fan and I'm guessing producers were getting their heads up in his @$$ a lot.

What bothers me is that comic book adaptations have evolved from being just corny movies for little kids who cheer for men in tights. Movies like Batman Begins and The Dark Knight showed us that movies based on comics deserve great directors, proper filmmaking, and phenomenal acting. Christopher Nolan chose to actually respect the character's dignity, incorporate good acting, do without bad CGI, and actually give a $h*t about the filmmaking process. Hugh Jackman once said that Wolverine would be inspired by Batman Begins. In that case it should have been a good flick first instead of being whored out as a cash cow. Even if it isn't a commercial blockbuster, it will be respected and a good sequel will garner a wider audience. Are studios so oblivious that they learn nothing from other movies?!

Speaking of Batman, one of the things I love about The Dark Knight is the fact that after watching it, my childhood fantasies of running around in a black cape and attacking bad guys now have a huge question mark slammed behind it. For the first time, you don't want to be Batman. You finally understand that it's a burden, a responsibility, and even a curse at times. People's lives hang in the balance, you are always blamed no matter how good you are, and in the end you sacrifice the simple pleasures of a normal person. That's exactly why I also love Watchmen. And that's what I expected most from Wolverine when I first came to know it was being made. Wolverine is tormented. His history is a mess, he's emotionally-scarred, and his thoughts are constantly ravaged by incidents that he will never forget even if he tries to. X-Men Origins fails to deliver this message. It is a weak attempt at explaining Wolverine's past and why he is who he is in the present. The explanation as to why he loses his memory is outwardly stupid and the storyline of his childhood and early years is so badly contorted that it doesn't make half the sense that the graphic novel does.

Another very bothersome part of the movies are the powers given to the mutants. Gambit has telekinesis for some reason, and is also an acrobat who climbs walls and performs stunts in mid-air. Gambit, my friends, transfers energy into external objects and aims them at his opponents. He cannot control where they hit once they leave his hands, he can only aim at will. I don't even want to touch on Deadpool because it would ruin the storyline. Sabretooth has cat-like claws that can extend, not to mention that he's Wolverine's brother which is just wrong all over.

The rage that Wolverine shows after the Adamantium bonding is awesome, but the film fails to keep that momentum going. While in the comics he hunts deer and wild animals just to survive the cold and the outdoors, he does nothing of the sort in the movie. Why, because kids will not relate to the killing of deer? Well Wolverine isn't supposed to be a kid's hero to begin with; and that is something that studios have yet to comprehend.

Still, I had fun. Why and how is beyond question. I just did. I am actually more satisfied with this flick than X-Men : The Last Stand, maybe because Wolverine is portrayed properly. And like I said, I was able to completely forget about the comics and the lore behind Wolverine. I watched is as though I was watching a Wolverine that I didn't know about; as if it was my first time learning about his past. Add to that the fact that I expected nothing or (if possible) less than nothing from the film. I hated it without even giving it a chance, and I guess that turned out to be a blessing in disguise. It made me appreciate whatever happened on screen even though I knew it wasn't the best of things. It was good compared to the lousy imaginations I had of it in my head.

I like the soundtrack for X-Men Origins : Wolverine. It doesn't have a signature theme like all three X-Men films but it does suit the flick pretty well. It's kinda' grungy, kinda' packed with that energy, and kinda' emotional at times when it needs to be. It's not the best of scores but it's far from being bad.

I gotta' say that this movie was very wrongly marketed, though. The over-the-top cheesy posters with the meaningless posing and Creed-music-band-like photoshoots really made people puke a little. The movie is way more serious and portrays Wolverine much better. I guess I haven't emphasized this enough; Wolverine does not wait for effin' photoshoots! If the ad campaign behind this was taken care of in a better way, it'd definitely have more people interested.

That's pretty much all there is to say about Wolverine. It's a load of fun, it has it's good moments and it's bad moments, but I think overall the good overshines the bad (thankfully). It's not the grittiest of movies but I think it is the darkest among Marvel movies [Punisher(s) excluded]. But all in all, it's a fantastic watch and a great popcorn movie. It has a lot of action, a lot of good fight scenes, and my biggest fear of Victor Creed being a douchebag was diminished. He's good and the Logan / Victor fight scenes are not bad.

Also, have some patience and wait for the credits to end. There's more after the names are done.

An interesting bit about this is that there's more than one version of X-Men Origins : Wolverine. That's right. I guess in order to counter the loss due to the leaked copy, director Gavin Hood and Fox have made "multiple" versions of the flick, all incorporating different 'secret endings'. That means the one I watched may be different from what you watched or are about to watch. Maybe different regions carry different prints? That's cool and all, but it's a sleazy way of getting people to go watch your movie. You say "multiple prints" loosely so that people just keep spending their cash to go watch the whole movie over and over again and for all you know, they've already seen that secret ending a couple of times over...so what now, go watch it again for the 11th time? Anyway, some of the bad stuff mentioned above may be done right or corrected or brought justice to via the alternate endings (which might explain more) but I'm writing from what I saw. So stay in your seat until all the creds are done, and then go watch it again and tell me which one you saw, alright?

I'm just going to wait for the DVD in which I'm sure I'll get "20minutes of extra, never-before-seen footage and All 5 Secret Endings in a Two-Disc Special Edition Collector's Adamantium Steelbox Casing" which will cost me a fortune.

Also, keep your eyes open for a surprise or two, a lot of mutant cameos, and some cool nods to comic fans and the lore of it all in general.

My suggestion? Screw the leaked version like I did and go watch it the way it should be watched; in a cinema! It's probably the best popcorn movie this year...until Transformers : Revenge Of The Fallen comes out. No one makes popcorn flicks like the 'Bay Man'!
--------------------------------------------------------
Wrap : I give X-Men Origins : Wolverine a good 3.7 out of 5.0. Remember, as an adaptation of ANY of the Wolverine-related comics, it seriously sucks. Trust me, you do not want to connect this with any timeline or any version of the comics. Forget what you know about Wolverine and take this as a version created for film and in connection with 20th Century's X-Men universe. As a standalone film it's just tons of fun. I'm all in for a good sequel, and although as a fan I think the film could have been ten times better and more faithful to the comics, as a regular film buff I'm glad to the fact that I was able to let go of all expectations and because of that my love for the character on screen is restored. :)

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Who Should They Play? | #1

I've decided to start a new column / special / thing on this site called "Who Should They Play?", and the first edition under this title starts today. Who Should They Play will feature actors put next to characters that they are most suited for, in my opinion anyway. Not that any of you might care, but it's a blog so you can comment as you wish below. :)

Anyway, the characters featured will most likely be from comic books, graphic novels, and video games...because I can't just turn around and say "Russel Crowe should play Harrison Ford!" That wouldn't make any sense now, would it? What I'm trying to say is the fitting of actors to their characters has to make sense. Not just random thoughts. Now, on with the article!
-----------------------------------------------------

Rodrigo Santoro as the 'Prince of Persia'.

I'm completely aware of the fact that Jake Gyllenhaalidon'tknowhowtospellhisname is playing Prince Dastan (where did that name come from anyway) in the upcoming Prince of Persia flick, produced by Jerry Bruckheimer. That's your audience-magnet right there. Jerry Bruckheimer. All they have to do in the trailer is have a huge sequence that says "From the creators of Pirates Of The Caribbean" and you're sold. That line equals huge lumps of money just pouring at their feet.

Anyway, Jake is playing the Prince and although I've seen photos of him in character which look pretty good, I don't understand how a full-blooded Caucasian male could so easily pass as a Persian prince. Maybe they'll tan him for the movie, but still. There are actors out there who look Persian, have played a Persian, and would be better off having this role. Hence I bring you Rodrigo Santoro. You may or may not know him. If you can't recognize the man, he played King Xerxes in 300. Ah, now you know.

Rodrigo is a good actor. We've seen how he can pull off Persian. He completely disappeared into his role as Xerxes. He did well on Lost a couple of seasons ago. And if you look at that picture on the left, he suits the role more than Jake does. Now I can hear a bunch of you saying "You douche, the Prince movie is based off the NEW Prince Of Persia game where Dastan doesn't look like that anymore!" To that I say, too bad. Sure, the new Prince may look like Jake, but how cool was the older-looking Prince of Persia. Rugged, badass, heroic, and with two sweet blades. I'm a sucker for awesome-looking swords and daggers and blades.

Anyhow, there you have it. In my opinion, Rodrigo Santoro should have played, or should play (in case of a remake / reboot / sequel / actor dropping out) the Prince Of Persia.

Constantine 2 Coming Soon?

This news definitely made my day.

SCI FI Wire talked to X-Men Origins: Wolverine producer Lauren Shuler Donner about the possible Magneto film and asked whether Constantine 2 was still in the cards. About Magneto, she said: "I don't know. We have a great script. Honestly, we have all been just so focused on getting 'Wolverine' out that we didn't take the time to sit down and explore 'What are the movies we're going to do next within the genre?' We will do that. We will do that. We all want to. 'Magneto' is a fantastic script, and hopefully we'll make it. I don't know."She added that Constantine 2 is looking "very good. Thinking about it. Looking for a writer."

I emphasize on the part where Lauren speaks about Constantine 2 'looking very good'. I'm not sure why sequels to the better movies from this genre never get made as fast as they should. It's almost as if people like crappy movies and lousy trilogies. Just a couple of days ago disappointing news about a 30 Days Of Night sequel was out, saying that it will most probably be a straight-to-DVD release! Sam Raimi, producer of the flick, even told his director "not to judge the DVD market so quickly, especially the sci-fi genre." Yeah, Sam Raimi's a real &%$in' messiah. The straight-to-DVD market equals cheap, low-grade movies that have lousy visual effects and wouldn't make a buck's profit if they were released in cinemas.

Anyway, movies like Sin City 2, Constantine 2, and 30 Days Of Night 2 get put on hold while the second and third Twilight movies are already in the making? Way to go, Hollywood. I honestly think director Francis Lawrence did a great job with both Constantine and I Am Legend (except for I Am Legend's puke-like CGI), and it would be great if he helmed the sequel to Constantine as well. of course Keneau has to play the part as well...unless they're going to screw this one up with a 'Adventures Of Young Constantine' type of flick.

Oh and honestly, and I would like to see a Magneto movie. Not that 20th Century Fox is going to do it any justice but a guy can hope, right? A lot of people seem to not give a rat's@$$ about the 'master of magnetism' but I think his past would make a great story. The prologue to X-Men was probably one of the best scenes in the entire trilogy. If the movies stayed with that tone they would still carry value and not look like a brigade of over-the-top corniness. Ian McKellen sucks as Magneto, but a prequel would mean a better suited actor. Of course, Fox will turn this into a s**tgig before you can even say 'magnets' and in the end it'll turn out being an alternate version for X-Men 5.

*sigh*. Enough ranting and raving. Let's hope Constantine 2 gets made, Sin City 2 and 3 roll along with the rumored Johnny Depp playing a part, and 30 Days Of Night 2 gets a proper theatrical release. People need to start watching better movies. And vampires need to be scary and mean and just plain anti-social...not some 80's hairdo teengirl heartthrob who hunts deer for lunch. It's a vampire! A v-a-m-p-i-r-e! Dracula? Friggin' evil, man! Guy turns into a bat in a second and sucks your blood. A vampire! Argh!

Monday, April 27, 2009

Punisher : War Zone (2008) | REVIEW

It's been a pretty long time since I've had a review up. My apologies (I say that a lot these days). I'm literally drowning in work, work, and more work...plus I'm up to a couple of new projects that I haven't really decided on yet. Anyway, I managed to allocate some time to watch Punisher : War Zone on DVD the other day since I've been wanting to for quite some time, and I hate to say this but Marvel &^$$%-up yet again. I guess you can't really expect much from a movie like Punisher but I had my hopes up for a few reasons. [a] Lexi Alexander; if you've seen Green Street Hooligans you know what I'm talking about. The lady knows what violence is. [b] Ray Stevenson; I'm not hating on Thomas Jane but this dude looks like he was born to play Frank Castle. [c] A solid [R] rating; meaning there's all the room for the revenge-crazed vigilante to do all the bodily damage he wants to on his foes. Anyway...

This Flick Is About....
Punisher : War Zone stars Ray Stevenson as the vigilante who's avenging the tragic deaths of his entire family by a group of mobsters. The ex-army personnel has a high-tech infantry of weapons at his disposal and plans on doing whatever it takes to mark and exterminate all the scum that made him the loner that he is today. Punisher : War Zone is not a direct sequel to the first Punisher movie starring Thomas Jane, but isn't an origin story either. In this installment, Frank Castle must take down the 'resurrected' villain known as Jigsaw, a criminal mastermind whom Punisher disfigured.
----------------------------

While I'm not a big fan of movies like Rambo and typical 'actioners', I enjoy movies that have good fight sequences to offer, especially those that are choreographed so well that every move works in a flow, causing the next strike and acting as a reaction to the previous action. The Incredible Hulk had amazing action sequences. It wasn't just shaky, fast-moving cameras. It was more precise, focused, and like a series of moves that were sewn together so well that they formed a whole beautiful (if that's what you wanna' call it) scene. 300 did the same thing, with sheer awesomeness. Punisher could have done the same thing, but decided not to. When people kept saying the new Punisher was awesome in terms of violence and gore, it had me excited. Not that I'm a sicko or anything, but because that's exactly what the Punisher does. I have to admit, the movie does have it's cool parts that are awfully gritty and violent and just plain scary, but those scenes are not even close to being enough to save this flick.

What the Punisher does have, in fact, are very brief scenes of terribly violent actions. That's it. No good fight scenes, no slow-mo beautiful shots, no clever camera angles. It just has short moments of the Punisher blowing some guy's head off or decapitating someone or shoving a chair into a person's skull. And while those scenes successfully make you say "Woah!", it only lasts as long as it stays on screen and the residual value is incredibly small. Once that's done it's back to square one; boredom.

The score for the movie is very nice. It reminds me of Batman Begins. But then again, not every movie demands a James Newton Howard-ish score. The Punisher needs a grungier soundtrack. And while some scenes are backed by hardcore metal tracks from the likes of Slipknot, a lot of scenes have very emotional, orchestral music that doesn't fit. Punisher needs a soundtrack like 300; powerful, gritty, grungy, and not one like The Lion King.

The acting (my God) is bad. Ray Stevenson does an okay job I suppose. The Punisher isn't really a very charismatic character so I guess it's fine. Dominic West plays Jigsaw which was a good call because he's able to handle the character well. Then there's Wayne Knight who plays 'Micro', and he's fine. As for the rest, it's just a barrage of mediocre 'I'm-trying-too-hard' type acting that easily puts you off. Julie Benz is by far the worst. She looks like she's reading off a blurry teleprompter that's too far away.

Doug Hutchison plays 'Loony Bin' Jim, Jigsaw's brother, who's a psycho mental patient. He manages to pull-off the psycho part well but when it comes to the dialogue and the accent, it just bothers me. I suppose since they're all in a mob it's supposed to be one of those 'New York-ish', Italian-ish, accents. Whenever Looney Bin talks, though, I'm not sure if he's really Italian or half-Hispanic or semi-English or just plain Irish. It's really annoying listening to him speak. You want Punisher to walk in there and blow his jaw right off not because he's a bad guy but because the way he speaks is just really, really annoying. I'm not sure if it's just me, though. Maybe one day he'll be honored with a Nobel prize for uniting the world by merging every accent known to man in one sentence of speech. Hmm.

You're probably wondering, "Is Punisher a fun movie at all?" The answer is "somewhat". By that I mean it depends on your mood and situation at the time. If you rented a bunch of movies from NetFlix and your list has The International, 12 Rounds, Halloween, and Punisher : War Zone, I suggest you watch all the other movies first and then see if you still have time for Punisher. Whereas if your list has Rogue, Street Fighter : Legend Of Chun-Li This Movie Is So Damn Bad, The Grudge 3, and Punisher : War Zone, then Punisher ranks as the first movie you should watch. It's a gem among bad movies, is what I'm saying. I like the colors and it's fun when you have time to spare on a free day. With work on your hands though, this movie is a waste of time.

On a whole, Marvel and Lionsgate blew it again with yet another Punisher movie. To be fair, Punisher isn't really a very interesting character to begin with, but he's definitely more badass than what Ray Stevenson had to offer. While he looked the role, he was incredibly laid-back for a man who had his family gunned down and is on the path of absolute vengeance. There's also some subliminal message about God and religion and how killing for a just cause is fine and whatnot. I wasn't really interested nor did I have the time to decipher a message that a movie like Punisher had to offer.
--------------------------------------------------
Wrap : I give Punisher : War Zone a 2.0 out of 5.0. It had its moments, it's a good movie to watch when there's nothing else to do, and the color / tonal value of the flick was nice to see. The acting was bad, storyline was terrible, and the violence wasn't what I expected it to be. There's artistic violence and just plain "Yikes" moments, and Punisher had a lot of the latter. Like I said, this is a movie you could do without if you can't find the time. There are a lot of better films out there.