Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen Review



People sometimes wonder why I angrily bash some bad movies when they're not meant to be taken seriously anyway. The fact is, I do not care about bad movies, I watch a few, shrugs or chuckles and move on. It's the worst films that get to me. Films that are so bad they provoke some unpleasant feelings from you, making you want to beat some people up (probably the director). Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen is one such films.

It's hard to see how this film could go wrong. I rather liked the first film, it was one of those guilty pleasure films that has great special effects (one of which is Megan Fox) and awesome moments; as long as they continue to do more of the same, it should be fine, right? Turns out whatever good things that happened on the first film was just happy accidents. The sequel is like a repeat of the first film without the things that make it good and for that, director Michael Bay has to absorb all the blame because there's no mistaking from that this is the film that he wants to make. There's a good reason that I wrote in my review of the first film that "A Michael Bay film" is one of the scariest four words ever and this film only drives the nail to the coffin for that. This is probably the last Michael Bay film I will ever see.

Another GM Car Commercial funded by taxpayer bailout

The plot, if you can call it that, is of course about a new battle that pit the good guys Autobots vs bad guys Decepticons. We learn early that The Transformers have visited Earth in 17000 BC when one of them, The Fallen (voice of Tony Todd), attempted to destroy the earth but were banished by his better brothers. Fast forward to the present day when we learn that The Fallen is the mastermind of the attack of the Decepticons on the first film. This time, he's planning another assault, by first resurrecting his apprentice, Megatron (voice of Hugo Weaving), to find a device called "The Matrix of Leadership" to finish what he started. The location of The Matrix is unwittingly placed onto the head of Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf), the accidental human protagonist who accidentally acquired it by touching a small remaining piece of Allspark from the first film. So begin the race between The Autobots lead by Optimus Prime (voice of Peter Cullen) and The Decepticons to find Sam and The Matrix, and this is only the first half of the film.

I wasn't really sure why I like the first film but after watching this film, the reasons dawn on me. Transformers is just another Michael Bay film with a few elements of a good, enjoyable film. To understand why, one needs to understand Michael Bay.

Michael Bay isn't seeing what the audience is seeing

Michael Bay is often criticized for making mindless action movies, but many critics fail to take notice that there are many directors who blow stuffs up and make mindless blockbusters but only Michael Bay can make a Michael Bay action film. His works are easily identifiable by watching them; just as easy to identify a Kubrick's or Scorsese's. In other words, Michael Bay is an auteur director, an artist, except one whose work express so much hatred and contempt at the audience. Rarely a scene goes by where any of these things don't happen: 1) a bright/orangey oversaturated cinematography, 2) Camera that spins round and round characters when talking or posing, 3) Disturbing fetish of female babes physiques, 4) Disturbing fetish of macho male characters (usually cops/military) usually through the use of slow motion, 5) Sickeningly excessive worship of the US military 6) Characters that talk too loud, too dirty or are too retarded for no apparent reason. All these often occur unnecessarily and worse, hinder any possible chance of character or story development because any attempt to understand or enjoy what's going on is lost in the mayhem. Is it too much to ask for a simple, coherent story, a camera that doesn't move, likeable and identifiable characters that don't talk like they're retarded? These are not hard when an overwhelming majority of films have them, even some of the worst films. Michael Bay isn't interested in those things, he's only interested doing things in his own twisted, fucked-up way. The only way to enjoy his films is to turn off your brain and be completely mindless. In a way, he is the anti-storytelling filmmaker, a dangerous one.

More US Military propaganda than Optimus Prime in the movie.

The first Transformers possess all the hallmarks of a Michael Bay film but it also coincidentally have got some basics right: The Autobots, despite their shabby treatment, are basically a likable, underdog protagonists* who are inferior and always behind the Decepticons, and Megatron is only shown in the beginning and the end and prove to be a menacing presence that makes the final showdown between him and Optimus Prime worthwhile despite the chaos. This film has none of that to redeem any negativity created by Michael Bay. A key protagonist robot* dies halfway through and he's replaced by 2 new annoying robots who talk like offensive black/mexican gangsta stereotypes. Megatron, so menacing in the first film, was resurrected only to play a 2nd fiddle to the new villain, The Fallen, who actually don't do much and gets killed off way too easily in the end. There are some things that defy common sense (not that films like this demand them, but nevertheless) like the destruction of many cities in the world halfway in the movie and yet the world carries on like it never happens (contrast this with Michael Bay's Armageddon) and the shabby treatment of a potentially awesome villain: a multiple transformers combining into one giant mega robot like Voltron, Devastator; he shows up, do some awesome stuffs only to get shot down by a US Warship (victim of Bay's relentless US Military worship). Speaking of US Military worship. many scenes of fights are not even between the robots, but between 2 sides and the US Military who are capable of shooting down the robots, I don't know if Bay is aware, but if the transformers can be defeated by the US Military, then they lose their awesomeness. I know, what you're thinking, there's still Megan Fox, right? Guess what, she only have 1 brief clothes changing moment of hotness early in the movie, the rest she just spend running and running around fully clothed. What's left is just endless Michael Bay's regular bashing of the audience running for 2.5 hours.

Some reviews have called this film racist, misogynistic and obnoxious. As a tried and true Michael Bay film, it deserves to be called all of them. I don't think Michael Bay intends to change soon and so there's no point for me watching another contemptuous work of his. I'm done with Michael Bay.

Rating: 1 out of 5

Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen

Cast: Shia LaBeouf, Megan Fox, Ramon Rodriguez, Josh Duhamel, Tyrese Gibson, John Turturro
Voice Cast: Peter Cullen, Hugo Weaving, Tony Todd
Directed By: Michael Bay
Written By: Ehren Kruger & Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci

Star Trek Review



Prologue:

One of my most unforgettable movie watching memories when I first lived in United States was watching the reaction of the audience to the Star Trek: Nemesis teaser trailer - the cheers, claps and hollers at the trailer not only showed me how enthusiastic american audience can be when watching movies, but also how enthusiastic americans are to Star Trek.

Besides seeing a few episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation in the early 90s, a couple of the STNG Movies (Generations and Insurrection) as well as having a certain fondness of the bald Patrick Stewart as Captain Picard, I am hardly a Star Trek fan. In fact, by the time I watched the original Star Wars trilogy and got won over by the spectacles and the drama, I can't see how people could sit through so many episodes of what basically amount to scenes of officers working in a spaceship or stories of alien races resolving their differences diplomatically. Granted, this impression was only created by my limited exposure and I'm surely going to be bludgeoned by the devoted Trekkies who read this. But nevertheless, I am not alone in having that view: Star Trek: Nemesis flopped in 2002 and by the time the last Star Trek TV Series, Enterprise, went off air in 2005, the public no longer cares about Star Trek.

The only party who really miss Star Trek, besides the zealously loyal Trekkies, is Paramount Pictures who own the rights. Unable to just let this cash cow sit idle, Paramount hired the hot mega producer/writer/director of the moment, JJ Abrams (TV's Felicity, Alias and MI:3, Cloverfield), to revitalize the series. In order to revive the franchise, JJ Abrams and co decided to reboot the series and tell the story of Star Trek right from the very beginning - a prequel on how the original crew from the original 1969 series got together - with a fresh, modern approach and casting new, upcoming actors in the iconic roles that many original fans worship (and to appease them, Leonard Nimoy, the original Spock, also appears).


Review:

The result of JJ Abram's take, on the surface, appears to echo the reboot of James Bond franchise in Casino Royale: a bold, new, more action, more kick ass fresh take on an aging franchise. One of the biggest complains about the old Star Trek films are that they look like TV movies that with a higher budget. This film definitely has no such syndrome: JJ Abrams and co have spared no effort to make this film as slick and exciting as a modern summer movie can be. It has much more spaceship battles than its predecessors that would give the recent Star Wars prequel trilogy, the cast are young and definitely sexier and even the command center receives a white, slick, almost-sterile makeover. However, unlike Casino Royale, the new Star Trek movie does not have a compelling or original story that matches its ambitious intent and the worst outcome of this is we never really know or care about the characters*.

The acting and depiction of the iconic roles have been widely praised but that's because many praises come from the loyal fans who know these characters by heart and compares them on how faithful they are to their original counterparts. Unfortunately for those unfamiliar, the results can be underwhelming. This reboot feels just like as if JJ Abrams has given a fresh paint onto a cracking wall, but whatever praises you can give to the paint, the wall is still cracking.


Star Trek opens in the year 2233. A Federation starship USS Kelvin encounters a hostile Romulan ship commanded by Nero (played by Eric Bana), and the temporary Captain George Kirk had to sacrifice himself along with the ship to rescue everyone, including his newly born son, James T Kirk (adult played by Chris Pine). While Kirk grows up as a fatherless and rebellious kid on earth, a half vulcan and half human boy on another planet called Vulcan named Spock (adult played by Zachary Quinto) struggles to fit in with his fellow vulcans who values logic above emotion. 25 years later both of them would end up on the same Starship USS Enterprise together with familar faces like medical officer Bones (Karl Urban), communications officer Uhura, lieutenant Hikari Sulu (John Cho) and ensign Pavel Chekov (Anton Yelchin). On their fateous first mission, they encounter Nero again who still harbours an unfinished business with the Federation and "Spock" and plans to destroy them. A disagreement caused Spock to eject Kirk from the ship into an unknown planet where he encounters an old Spock (Leonard Nimoy) from the original series who explains to Kirk how a great conflict between him and Nero from the original universe brought them into the current universe and that he has to reunite with the crew to stop Nero. With the help of another familiar faces, engineer Scotty(Simon Pegg), can Kirk get back to the crew and unite with them to save the day?

Perhaps the biggest (and most ironic) problem of the movie is that in order to modernize the story, it borrows so much from Star Wars that it almost becomes another Star Wars clone. This problem does not just extend to the space battles and some of the creature designs (Scotty's best friend embarassingly resembles a Wookie), but to the important character Kirk himself. In the original series, Kirk is depicted as a brash, cocky captain. Here he is depicted as a young, brash, cocky captain whose such nature emerge as a result of daddy problems. In fact, nothing can emphasize it any heavier than in the scene where he meets the old Spock and ask if his father has survived in the original timeline. The similarity is so startling, collegehumor makes a video about it. This, of course, actually emphasize how poor and boring the original concept of officers working in spaceship is. But given the film's success, the audience can't tell the difference and don't mind really.

Other problem include Zachary Quinto's depiction of Spock who channels his famous character from Heroes, Sylar whenever he gets emotional. JJ Abrams directing of action was inept when he made MI:3 and is still inept here by employing a lot of fast cuts that end up more distracting and exciting. The best thing about this film is perhaps the return of Leonard Nimoy as the old spock. Even if I have not watched a single episode or movies of the original crew, I felt it was a great performance filled with dignity and affection. Overall, this is just a cosmetic reboot by JJ Abrams and perhaps best of all, I'm still unconverted to the cause.

Rating: 3 out of 5


* (SPOILERS) - this is especially true when we learn the events that set the plot of the movie in motion. In the original Universe, Spock promised to save planet Romulan from destruction by a supernova but he was too late. A surviving Romulan, Nero sought revenge on him and while they were chasing each other, they got sucked into the black hole where they get thrown back earlier in time. Nero arrived 25 years earlier than Spock and meanwhile he planned to destroy Spock's home planet for him to witness as well as plotting to destroy the Federation. Okay, it's this kind of scifi plot that is grand but possess quite shallow emotional resonance. Losing your planet is a huge deal, but it's not something we see happen everyday and the film fails to convey the scale of the pain to the audience. That's why Nero and his plot are initially interesting but they end up just like another excuse to get the Enterprise crew to save the day. Just like any other Star Trek episode.

Friday, June 12, 2009

Sell Out! Review


Sell Out! opens with an art show reporter Rafflesia Pong (played by Jerrica Lai) interviewing Yeo Jun Han (director of the film!), whose short film just won some random award from some obscure European film festival. While Rafflesia questions why "boring", "arty" asian films like Yeo's could win international acclaims and wonders if it's the westerners' tendency to view unfamiliarity as a sign of quality, Yeo (wearing nothing but shorts) rants back about the lack of realism in films like actions and musicals and that he makes films only to reflect the reality. This is immediately followed by a shootout scene and Yeo himself bursting into songs. With this opening this Malaysian film signals its no holds barred intention at satire early. Too bad that while the film's bold, saturated attempt at satire is worth praising, it is too in love with its own jokes and agenda that it forgets how to tell them well. As a result, many of the jokes that work well on paper end up flat and unfunny onscreen, making this film a missed opportunity.

The plot, or something that resembles it, tells the story of 2 employees of a big corporation called FONY Conglomerate. One is Rafflesia who's in danger of losing her show and job because she is losing ratings to a competing reality show hosted by the latest Eurasian "it" girl. The other is Eric Tan (Peter Davis) an idealistic engineer who pitches an efficient, reliable soy bean machine product to the FONY corporation executives, but they refuse to release it unless Eric dumb it down (or build a failure mechanism that activates after warranty expire). When Rafflesia's interview of her dying boyfriend raised ratings and inspired her to start a reality show about interviewing dying people and Eric literally develops a second personality who encourages him to commercialize his invention, both start to "sell out" as the movie starts to break into musical segments and karaoke interludes too.


One thing that Sell Out! cannot be accused of is lacking ambition and targets. Sell Out! ridicules everything from the titular tendency of people to sell out (whether they like it or not), to the profit driven practices of corporation, overworship of exotic asian movies by western film festivals, the popularity of Eurasian personalities in Southeast Asia and last but not least, the government. However, Yeo is more interested in using the jokes to get his points across rather than letting them work on the story. As a result, the movie bombards many jokes left and right but most of them fall flat because they don't have enough buildup and context besides the director's points. It also doesn't help that most of the characters are caricature including the leads . Worst of all, while Yeo may be a great satirist, he is a terrible songwriter (his lyrics are mostly the rhyming "break my heart, tear us apart" boyband songs variety) that the movie suffers when it switches gears to its musical segments.

One of the best thing about this movie is actress Jerrica Lai who brings a spirited portrayal to what amounts as a chess pawn character for the director. She also has a wonderful voice, the best among all the singing cast, to overcome Yeo's terrible songwriting; it's too bad that her first song arrives at the latter half of the film. Peter Davis, on the other hand, is really lifeless that makes one wonder if he's truly bad or he's part of the joke that satirize Eurasian celebrities.

It's encouraging to see more full satirical films like this coming out of Asia, especially Malaysia. However while the effort is certainly admirable, it's certainly preferable to see a film that actually succeeds at delivering both the laughs and a good story. Let's hope that we'll see films like that in the future, but Sell Out! is definitely not it. But perhaps the best compliment that can be given to Sell Out! is despite everything, it never actually sells out at all.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5

Sell Out!
Written and Directed by: Yeo Jun-Han
Starring: Jerrica Lai and Peter Davis

Trailer:

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Terminator Salvation Review



As Terminator Salvation ends, one can't help but witness how far something great has fallen. Nothing, not the film's much higher budget and production values than the original film, not the attempts to inject quality by involving Christian Bale and Jonathan Nolan (as an uncredited writer) from last year's The Dark Knight, can disguise the transformation the films have gone through from something fascinating, human to a cold, soulless, moneymaking entity, somewhat like the adversarial Machines depicted in the film.

Terminator Salvation opens briefly in 2003 where a San Francisco death row inmate called Marcus Wright (played by Sam Worthington) volunteers his body to Cyberdine for research. Fast forward to 2018 where humanity is at war with The Machines. The now adult John Connor (Christian Bale), the prophesied saviour of humanity, leads an assault onto an enemy post where he discovers a weapon to kill The Machines for good as well as a plot to assasinate him and a person named Kyle Reese (for reasons familiar only to those who have watched the first film). Meanwhile, Marcus wakes up in the enemy post, unaware of where or when in time he is and unsure of how he survives his execution. As he wanders, he meets Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin) who accompanies him back to San Francisco to seek answers. But San Francisco is now The Machine's headquarter which John Connor plot to destroy and their paths will cross with surprising results (or maybe not, if you have seen the trailer).

The main problem with the film is that it has nothing really new or interesting to add to the existing storyline. All the previous 3 films have more or less the same plot of a good guy and a bad guy being sent to the past to change the course of the future but each film as its own compelling ideas that develop their materials into something better*. This film is more concerned instead about adding more details about the series main players and fan services that are often unnecessary; things like how John Connor got his scar, how Kyle Reese got his jacket and becomes a warrior and Sarah Connor's voice tapes (Linda Hamilton reprising her role). All these, at best, only serve to only explain further what we already knew from the previous films without giving anything new or compelling. At worst, however, the additions ruin the memory of previous films, like the use of Sarah Connor's voice tapes whose voiceover is so crucial in T2 but here she is reduced to a few meaningless sentences along the line of "I don't know what else to say, John, the future is in your hand." While there are attempts to be deeper through the new character of Marcus when we learn who he truly is, but whatever little success the character provides gets lost when we reach the chickened-out ending** whose sole purpose is to continue to another movie and pleasing the fans at the same time.




Like other Summer blockbusters, this film has high budget to bring the best action and spectacles to rival the series benchmark T2 as well as acquiring quality actors like Christian Bale whose presence is much needed to make up for the absence of series stalwart Arnold Schwarzenegger***. However, like a typical summer blockbuster today, higher budget and production values work against the film's success. For some perspective, consider the first Terminator film - it was a product of its time and works splendidly because of it. It benefitted a lot from its low budget, lots of night scenes and 80s setting to create a bleak apocalyptic techno-noir atmosphere. Terminator Salvation, on the other hand, attempts to create a bleak future by showing a lot of desolate desert landscape through a desaturated lens to create a grim, gritty look but it comes off like the prettiest looking apocalypse instead. The first film's Michael Biehn, Linda Hamilton and Arnold are hardly award winning actors but they did effectively with their characters to create sympathy, dread and fear. This film has Christian Bale who, to the dismay of many who wants to see John Connor comes of age, rants and rants and shoots stuffs and then rants some more. On top of that, there's the character, Blair, a resistance pilot played by Moon Bloodgood, who is one good example that symbolize what's so wrong with this film. She is a confident and sexy character but that's the last thing a film like this needs and yet she's there. This film has all the money to buy the best special effects, actors and writers but it cannot obtain its heart and soul.

Perhaps this film and the franchise has become a victim of its own success. The first film is strong  enough to stand on its own. However, Terminator 2, as good as it is, was such a success that it made Terminator a franchise that demands more movies and merchandise and therefore money to be made. Over the last 20+ years since The Terminator was made, the rights to the franchise have changed hands to different owners who only want to make more money out of this franchise. Therefore, it's only fitting that the series sunk this low. In fact, with a planned Terminator 5 coming with the story having John Connor travel back in time, The series starts to resemble another series that stars Arnold Schwarzenegger's rival: Rocky. However, unlike that inspiring underdog series, there's perhaps no redemption for this one.

Rating: 2/5

Terminator Salvation
Directed by: McG
Written by: John Brancato & Michael Ferris
Starring: Christian Bale, Sam Worthington, Anton Yelchin, Bryce Dallas Howard, Moon Bloodgood, Common, Michael Ironside and Helena Bonham Carter

Footnotes (SPOILER):
* - The first film story cleverly explore the idea of whether fate is in our hand or predetermined. The 2nd film successfully develops the relationship between the child John Connor and the robotic T-800 as a father figure that pays off in an emotional ending. The 3rd film doesn't add anything new but at least it explores the existing themes and in an interesting way: John Connor's complicated relationship with the new T-800 who does not remember him and John's journey and acceptance to be a reluctant hero that mirrors his mother in the first film. 

** - In the original intended ending for this film, John Connor is killed and the resistance asks Marcus to be "John Connor" by planting his face onto Marcus' cybernetic body to keep the legacy of John Connor alive. This would have made a much more interesting ending that explores what it means to be a legend and under such circumstances, whether the difference between human and robot still applies. Alas the ending was leaked online before the movie goes on production and the ending got changed to the current one that is safer but shallow.  

*** Arnold Schwarzenegger is the most crucial part of the Terminator series. His casting against type as a villain in the first film works spectacularly as his indestructible persona os turned against the audience. The T-800 character mirrors the actor in some way - around the time of T3 release before Arnold becomes the governor of California, Arnold's star has waned and T3 was his last swansong. This adds a lot of unexpected poignancy when seeing an obsolete T-800 model getting its ass kicked by a younger, more advanced T-X model and still carries his mission dutifully to the bitter end. Arnold's absence is so deeply missed that Terminator Salvation best moment is when his CGI cameo comes out for a few second to fight John Connor. Too bad the filmmaker ruins the moment totally by having both characters fight so quickly as if to ignore the bond that has been formed by John and this model.