Review: The Inbetweeners Movie

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Review: Final Destination 5 (2011)

Final Destination 5 (2011)

DIRECTOR: Steven Quale
SCREENWRITER: Eric Heisserer (based on characters by Jeffrey Reddick)

I had seen the previous four Final Destination movies but did not get round to having a repeat marathon before seeing this new entry. That matters little since every film essentially has the same plot (with only the first two films building an arc of sorts while subsequent films make references to previous ones while deaths from all the films are recreated or replayed as a montage in the fourth and fifth films). Kim Newman compares the films to the Road Runner animations in which the same joke happens again. Technically, as the "villain" - i.e. Death - has no visual form besides its manipulation of the environment then it requires no makeover should the series be rebooted and it can go on forever (perhaps, ironically, outliving its audience). Newman also points out the element of "safety in the workplace" and this might have played into the terror I experienced in this entry whereas previous viewings mainly concerned seeing how the deaths were staged.

This might be the best entry in the series since my favourite, Final Destination 2 (2003), the one which for me set the series as fun B-movies though I felt Final Destination 3 (2006) was too cartoony but I had fun with "The Final Destination" (2009), the first in 3D. Final Destination 5 is an example of proof, if needed, that 3D, if needed, is better used for trashy fun horror cinema (another example being Resident Evil: Afterlife, which sees a hot woman - Ali Larter also from the first two Final Destinations - battling a monster while water sprinkles down in slow-motion). The only thing that needs working on is the colour reduction (apparently the makers of Saw 3D turned up the brightness, which explains the fan-criticized "pink" blood).

Despite the fourth film promising to be THE Final Destination (which brings to mind Monty Python's The Meaning of Life including a chapter called The MEANING of Life, with emphasis on MEANING provided by the Narrator), there is a neat ending to this entry which somewhat justifies its existence (without giving too much away, I will just say that "5" is just a number) and this will probably, at least for now, really be the final destination.

This is probably also the only Final Destination to star lookalikes of both Tom Cruise (Miles Fisher) and David Milliband (Nicholas D'Agosto), the former's resemblance arguably being one of the scariest things in the film, besides the cringing health-and-safety hazards as Death sets of the Domino effects, and the gruesome deaths - the most gross-out involving the breaking of pretty much every bone in the body.

Top and Bottom Films of the Year (So Far)

As one of my favourite film critics, Mark Kermode, as reported on his five best and five worst films of the year (... So Far) (see YouTube videos), here are my approximate, revised lists of Top 5 (and five honourable mentions in alphabetical order) and Bottom 5 (as opposed to five worst) films of the year so far.





Top Five
1. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
2. 127 Hours
3. Sucker Punch
4. Black Swan
5. Never Let Me Go

Honourable Mentions:
Captain America: The First Avenger
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Source Code
Super 8
Thor

Bottom Five (alphabetical order)
Fast Five (aka Fast and the Furious 5)
The Hangover Part II
The Smurfs
Unknown
Your Highness (though I'm tempted to swap it with Bridesmaids)

FILM REVIEW: Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES (2011)

DIRECTOR: Rupert Wyatt
WRITERS: Rick Jaffa, Amanda Silver ("Suggested" by the novel "La planete des singes" by Piere Boulle).

CONTAINS SPOILERS

Having finally caught up with the five "classic" Ape films, having only seen about half of the original "Planet...", a snippet of the TV series, and Tim Burton's remake (or as Mark Whalberg referred to it as "Tim Burton's take on..."), I was able enough to spot references to past movies.

The first five films had used "Battle of the Planet of the Apes" to bring the series into a timey-whimey full circle (though some may disagree and see a potential alternate future). This is one of those reboots that lives up to the term by starting over from a beginning and brings the premise of the original "Planet..." up to date with a news item on the space shuttle "Icarus" launching for Mars and apparently later reported in a discarded newspaper as "Lost in space?" One can assume this is setting up a future sequel. This does conclude with an open ending and fulfils the title in that the Apes do rise (and subsequently run off into the forest but a closing shot sees Caesar and his fellow apes treetop and looking out at the city - a inter-end-credits sequence hints at a threat that can wipe out mankind as it spreads across the planet) (c.f. the straight-to-DVD "Cabin Fever 2").

This is also a reboot in the same spirit of 2006's "Casino Royale" (starting all over again, now), 2009's "Star Trek" (which also brought its own franchise moreorless full circle by staring offscreen years after 2002's "Star Trek: Nemesis" in a 'Next Generation' timeline ad going back to before 'The Original Series' and reinventing the timeline) and 2003's "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" (the apocalyptic event happening later than previously established). In "Escape from the Planet of the Apes", in which ape couple Cornelius and Zira escaped the destruction of future Earth in Charlton Heston's spaceship and came to the present, there was talk of potential alternate timelines and whether the future could be changed. One could see this as one of those, even if it does have next-to-nothing to do with previous entries, canonically speaking. As with "Terminator 3", the apocalypse is simply happening later and with a different (and interesting) cause. Perhaps a future installment will see a crossover between different timelines (such as this one, the previous five, the remake, the TV series, the comics, and the source novel) although I would not be quick to assume that would happen.

The cause in this case is scientific research into a cure for Alzheimer's, a cure which helps the brain repair itself by growing new cells (at least I think that's what it was). The project is called Genesis (or Gen-Sys) so there is an element of tampering with Creation (as with all the apes movies there are themes of religion and evolution and a mixture of both). One of the scientists working on it is Will (James Franco) who tests it on his father. The cure appears to work at first but when the Alzheimer's returns, the consequences play into what follows. They are testing the cure on chimpanzees and one called "Bright Eyes" (a reversal, the name given to Charlton Heston's astronaut Taylor in "Planet..." when captured and examined by Zira) surpasses the perfect score on a test. But when she escapes and is shot dead by Security, Will and his assistant finds that she was protecting her offspring. Will secretly takes the baby chimp home and raises it over the next eight years. The chimp is named Caesar and as with his "Conquest of..."/"Battle for..." predecessor, he will lead the apes in a revolution. Only whereas previously, it was a case of leading the enslaved apes against their human masters in a futureworld of 1991, this will be a contemporary prison breakout of sorts.

Will continues examining Caesar and it turns out he has inherited the cure from his mother. Will teaches him sign language and this leads to Caesar matchmaking him with Freida Pinto, who I guess plays a vet (or a doctor). After five years, Caesar is wearing clothes and taken on a leashed walk to the forest and perhaps the first hint of a future leader is given when he scares off an aggressive pet Alsatian (a dog associated with Nazis).

When Will's father's illness returns, his attempt to drive the car of the neighbour next door leads to Caesar coming to his defence and injuring the neighbour. He is thus taken away and placed in an ape house where he is first put in an empty jungle gym (and in a "Truman Show" moment finds the landscape to be a wall) before being imprisoned behind bars at the mercy of an employee played by Tom Felton (who essentially plays his Draco Malfoy from the "Harry Potter" movies). Cruelties include being water-hosed (c.f. "Conquest..."). Caesar is also abused by fellow apes but soon learns to communicate with an circus orang-utan via sign language and subtitles (there are precursors to the previous films with chimp teaming up with orangutang and gorilla, before in later entries, their eventual racial/caste/class division).

Meanwhile the scientists carry on experiment with the chimps, at the protest of Will, and when it is released in gaseous form during an experiment, Will's assistant manages to inhale some when applying his mask. This too will have consequences not only in a subplot of a sort, but may also play out in future installments, perhaps an alternative fate than the nuclear kind implied in previous films.

When "Draco" brings some drink-possessing friends to a private tour of the ape house, one of them gets too close to Caesar, who is able to pocket a pocket knife. After taking some canisters with the cure from Will's fridge, Caesar gases the ape house and they escape on a rampage.

Like the reference to Bright Eyes, there are other references parallels to scenes from the previous films. The ape house cells are like those containing the mute humans in "Planet..." ("Draco" even shouts "It's a madhouse!" and curses Caesar with the iconic "damn dirty ape!"); a zoo containing a circular cage with apes is like a precursor to the wooden one seen in "Planet..." and "Battle for...". There is the moment prophesied in "Escape from..." when Caesar stands up and defies his human captor with "No!".

As mentioned this revolution differs from the previous series, in which Caesar (then the offspring of future apes Cornelius and Zira and is thus the "first" talking ape) leads the enslaved apes against their human masters in the futureworld of 1991 after an unseen plague kills of cats and dogs and apes are taken in as pets at first. Again, here a plague might develop across future installments.

The good news is that this installment is pretty good, exciting even, when it comes to the apes rampaging across the city. The CGI and motion capture does take getting used to (the weakest being the baby Caesar). The most gratuitous use is probably when Caesar swings his way upstairs in Will's house in what appears to be one take. But when it's good, it's good and rather involving - at times. Whereas I could easily believe the apes in the previous entries were "real" (granted they are meant to be more "humanised" though one of my "favourite" moments of ape-acting in costume and makeup is in "Conquest of..." in which a chimp waiter panics and runs from a small fire in a restaurant), this has a different emotional investment of its own, with Andy Serkis bringing some kind of physical presence to Caesar (if not completely solidly immersed in a kind of reality but still able to have us emotionally engaged with him most of the time) such as when in the company of humans (e.g. Will taking him on a walk and showing him the facility where he was born). With emotional investment, an example is Caesar closing his eyes in frustration when "abandoned" again by Will at the ape house. It is also quite good when Caesar stands tall in front of his "father" at the conclusion, as well as scenes where he is with his fellow apes (arguably the most convincing ape is the circus orang-utan).

The problem though is that I can look at certain shots of them and tell that it is CGI/motion capture and admire the emotions Serkis makes, where as I could BELIEVE in the costume and make-up of previous entries (though I admit I admired greatly Roddy McDowell playing an ape being tortured in "Conquest of..." before playing an ape playing dead). I will grant though that the apes in this case are earlier incarnations of their planet-ruling descendents (in previous entries, the "normal" apes are referred to as primitive) and the enslaved apes come from a perceived future where they stand besides man in social contexts (one could ask though why a real baby chimp was not used to portray Caesar as had been in "Escape from...").

I am interested in seeing how this plays out though in future installments and how future apes will be portrayed.

Film Review: Super 8 (2011)

Written and Directed by J.J. Abrams

"Super 8" is written and directed by J.J. Abrams, who also directed "Star Trek", my favourite film of 2009. Keep that in mind not only when seeing the now-(in)famous lens flare but also a gas station called "Kelvin" (the Starfleet ship Captain Kirk's father served on).

The film opens with an apparent accident - I think it was at a factory. We then cut to a funeral wake where our protagonist-to-be young Joseph is sat outside on a swing, surrounded by snow. Joseph is holding a silver necklace, which later turns out to be a locket. A blonde man - later revealed to be Alice's drinking and bad tempered father disturbs the wake and is sent away.

Four months later, Joseph and his friends Charles, Preston, Cary and Martin are working on their own zombie film ("The Case") and convince girl Alice to drive them to the location shoot taking place at night at what I suppose is a train station. Alice is reluctant at first as - at her age - she has no license to drive and is aware that Joseph's father is the deputy sheriff. However, they are soon on location and Alice is to be the film's protagonist's wife as they bid an emotional farewell on the station platform. As an example of creative film-making, one of the kids will play an extra using the telephone in the background. They rehearse the scene and the boys are surprised by Alice's display of genuine emotion. A train is seen speeding up to the area and they decide to film the scene with the train passing by. However, Joseph spots a truck driving onto the track and collides with the train, setting off a series of almost-literally deafening explosions that the kids (and the filmstock) manage to survive. Before the military arrive and investigate (which includes trucks which have red containers with three white spots on them), the kids find crates filled with mysterious cubes, one of which Joseph pockets. They also find the driver, who is in possession of a map.

Other mysterious events occur such as dogs running out of town - one of which is Joseph's dog Lucy (although I do not recall seeing her earlier in the film), electric powerlines vanishing and car engines being stolen. During this, Joseph is forbidden from seeing Alice first by Alice's father and then by his own. But the two of them still meet in secret. Charles and Joseph discover some kind of creature on the footage taken on the night of the "accident". The military instigate a fire that forces the town's population to evacuate while the kids investigate a link between the creature and the driver who rammed the train (aided by a pothead photo-developer).

I used the spoof "if movie posters were honest" poster which titles the film as "E.T. with Lens Flare" (the latter of which I have already mentioned). There are possible connections with "E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial" (it's been ages since I've seen it in full). Of course, Steven Spielberg is producer and it has a circa 1980 setting in a town which has been visited by an alien (in this case, of a subterranean nature) and there is a scene in which a character races on a bicycle (also seen in the Michael Bay-directed and Spielberg exec-produced "Transformers", 2007, which has also been compared to "E.T.". Perhaps that explains the yellow car, which brings to my mind Bumblebee). Perhaps the key difference between this and "E.T." is that whereas Elliot has no father figure, both Joseph and Alice have no mother (Joseph's mother had died while Alice's apparently walked out on her and her father, which presumably explains his drinking and anger). That and the alien creature is not - apparently - very nice, although there is the notion of it being able to make a psychic connection with a human.

My favourite scenes were those with the kids making their zombie film and seeing it projected (stay during the end credits for the film in full, thus giving you a nice Double Bill). The one that sticks in my mind the most, is the already-mentioned train station rehearsal in which Alice's tears are real. In fact, the film-making sequences made me want to get a camera and some friends to do some filming (perhaps this would be good practise for the career to which I aspire).

My two main problems is that I am unsure some of the kids (namely Martin and Preston) get as much screentime as Joseph, Alice and Charles. In fact, Charles appears to be dropped from the third act and replaced by Cary (whose use of fireworks - aka special effects - come into play). However, they are all together for the end credits premier of "The Case".

Another quibble is the creature, while mostly hidden in the dark is another that could be compared to the "Cloverfield" monster (on which Abrams was a producer), along with creatures such as those in "Skyline" and "Monsters". Next time, can we have a monster movie with a much more original-looking monster?

Movie Review: Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

DIRECTOR: Joe Johnston
SCREENWRITER: Chistopher Markus, Stephen McFeely (based on the comic books by Jon Simon and Jack Kirby)

Normally at the end of a Marvel film in the pre-Avengers series, there is a teaser for the next instalment. Iron Man concluded with an eye-patched Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury introducing himself to Robert Downey Jr’s Tony Stark, thus setting up the arc and a subplot for Iron Man 2; Downey Jr would also cameo in The Incredible Hulk while Thor’s hammer was discovered at the end of Iron Man 2. Thor’s ending I didn’t quite get and will revisit. Captain America: The First Avenger makes the exception of having a post-credit sequence of sorts at the very start and with The Avengers movie on the horizon, we pretty much know how The First Avenger will end. But that is no hindrance is it may be the most fun and dramatic (read “tragic”) entry in the series so far, though I shall revisit all the other entries. Thor was fun (and funny) whereas Iron Man 2 (and maybe The Incredible Hulk) were more in “meh” territory.

There were a couple of things I missed such as what the power was that Yohann Schmidt/Red Skull gets hold of (something about Odin I think, which again ties into Thor) as well as what it was Captain America was given to strengthen him up. Whatever it is, it “makes good – great and bad – worst”. There is a theme of sorts of bullies standing up – the shorter and skinnier Capt. America is beaten up for asking a talker in the cinema to be quiet as he shouted over newsreel war footage. In fact the shorter and skinnier Capt. America takes getting used to at first. But it is his “weakness” that is needed for a (good) German Doctor’s experiment as he apparently has more compassion. He even tried to get into the army a few times and perhaps one could see a ‘David and Goliath’ allegory. After becoming the First Avenger, he goes through the post-transformation phase seen in 2002’s Spider-Man and 2008’s Iron Man by wearing a prototype (or two) of the costume (plus the Shield) before later donning the final version. In fact, it is here that my main gripe about the film comes in, in which Capt. America is seen in his new suit in a montage of action scenes like the film became a trailer of itself (see also Transformers: Dark of the Moon), though of course this could also be a reference to newsreel war footage (incidentally, when the monochrome footage plays in the movie theatre in the film, it is 4:3 but shown in close-up for us, it is 16:9). There is a kind of science-fictiony idea that Capt. America inspires his own real-life franchise with comics, movies and an anthem, The Star-Spangled Man (I will probably buy the soundtrack). The main science-fictiony stuff is of the retro/pulp kind with control panels, switches and most importantly of all – WW2 with lasers. If Thor would fit in a trilogy with 1977’s Star Wars and 1980’s Flash Gordon, The First Avenger could be said to go back further to the older Flash Gordons (as parodied in Star Trek: Voyager’s Captain Proton holodeck programme). Richard Armitage (Guy of Gisborne in the BBC’s Robin Hood series) gets to pilot a submarine, but unfortunately not for very long.

Another minor gripe is the apparent use of 3D (I saw it in 2D), namely a flagpole falling over, a gun being pointed and the Shield being used as a frisbee.

I started off by talking about “post-credit sequences”. Be very sure to stay until after this film. Not only is there a scene that set-ups up The Avengers, but you might well be applauding by the end.

London Film & Comic Con 2011

This was taken at my first London Film & Comic Con on Saturday 9th July 2011. This was also the year that I began posing with actors and actresses at Milton Keynes' Collectormania, which I frequented. I was blessed to have a ticket numbered in the 1-400 range, which meant that although I had to queue for a while, I got to pose with Karen Gillan - aka Amy Pond in "Doctor Who" - in the first of her two photo sessions.





Honorable mention should also go to Louise Jameson - aka Leela, also of Doctor Who fame. I had quite narrowly missed her photosession after getting a ticket (delayed train, long-but-fairly-speedy-queue to the con, wrong queue for photoshoot tickets) but I was told she might to some pick-ups later. After repeated returns (I had been told to ask) to the location of the shoot, the team managed to arrange her return and it turns out I was the only one. It was taken straight after Walter Koenig (Chekov in Star Trek) and managed to exchange more words than the usual shoots I attended.