Tag Archives: review

RED * * *

Genre: Action Comedy

Director: Robert Schwentke

Writers: Jon Hoeber and Eric Hoeber, based on the graphic novels by Warren Ellis and Cully Hammer

Cast: Bruce Willis, Mary-Louise Parker, Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich, Helen Mirren, Brian Cox

Running Length: 111 minutes

Synopsis: The film opens with Frank Morse (Bruce Willis) in Cleveland, where he is engineering flirty conversations with his pensions claim officer Sarah Ross (Mary-Louise Parker), situated in Kansas City. Frank is no ordinary pensioner, however, and when a team of hit men infiltrates his house one night, he realizes his past is catching up with him in a rather unpleasant manner. After travelling to Kansas to “kidnap” Sarah, Frank begins to round up his old team: 80-year old Joe Matheson (Morgan Freeman), who has been diagnosed with Stage 4 liver cancer but hasn’t lost his edge; the paranoid Marvin Boggs (John Malkovich) who is suspicious of everyone and everything; KGB agent Ivan Simanov (Brian Cox), who is eager to get back in the game even if it’s in collaboration with his former enemies; and Victoria (Helen Mirren), a former MI6 agent who still misses her old life as an operative. The team has to figure out who is out for their lives, but are also being pursued doggedly by CIA agent William Cooper (Karl Urban), who doesn’t really understand what RED (Retired, Extremely Dangerous) means until he goes mano a mano with the team.

Review: RED is a movie that requires a healthy serving of suspension of disbelief – Helen Mirren toting a huge-ass gun? John Malkovich being a superb marksman? It sounds more than a little unbelievable (okay, maybe excepting Bruce Willis), and yet once said suspension is in place, the film becomes a rather enjoyable romp, albeit a film that has more cheeky moments that true blue action.

Much of this has to be credited to the stellar cast. These are all old hands in the industry, and many have shown their thespian talents in previous films. Even in RED, where no one is truly taken seriously, the level of commitment each veteran has in their character is clearly visible. It’s very impressive that the producers have managed to put together such an epic ensemble cast, and the star power alone is likely to contribute to a large component of the box office takings. And unlike many other movies, in this case it’s deservedly so.

It’s very easy to tell that the actors had a ball of a time filming RED, and there’s an easy chemistry between all the main characters. Bruce Willis remains surprisingly charming even in his mid fifties, and the trio of John Malkovich, Brian Cox and Morgan Freeman hold their own as supporting characters without much scenery chewing. Far and away my favourite, however, is Helen Mirren. There’s a perverse pleasure in seeing the Queen of England handling big guns like a pro, and Mirren really milks it for all it’s worth while staying very classy. It’s a wonderful, fun performance that on its own is already worth the price of admission. 

Apart from the inspired casting and performances, the action sequences are actually rather entertaining in their own right, although obviously for a cast in this age bracket the action is pretty dialed down. Schwentke compensates for this by employing wit and humour, planting tongue firmly in cheek in many scenes. It all comes together pretty well, and RED is a rather entertaining two hours – not a groundbreaking film by any measure, but fun and easy to sit through.

Rating: * * * (out of four stars)

Standard

Due Date * *

Genre: Comedy

Director: Todd Philips

Writers: Alan R. Cohen, Alan Freedland, Adam Sztykiel, Todd Philips 

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Zach Galifianakis

Running Length: 100 minutes

Synopsis: Peter Highman (Robert Downey Jr.) is a stressed-out businessman who is trying his best to get home in LA from a business meeting from Atlanta in time to catch the birth of his first child, but a chance meeting with aspiring actor Ethan Tremblay (Zach Galifianakis) and a series of unfortunate events later, the unlikely duo is forced to pair up for a very eventful road trip across America. 

Review: If you were Todd Philips, how will you choose to follow up the highest grossing R-rated comedy of all time (The Hangover)? The obvious answer is The Hangover 2 (which of course is coming our way in 2011), but in between the two Hangovers, Philips had found a chance to squeeze in Due Date, which in many aspects is almost like a 21st century update to Planes, Trains and Automobiles. 

Starring one of the hottest leading men in Hollywood, as well as a rising star in the comedy genre, Due Date seems like a movie that cannot fail. However, the end product is a little iffy – while much of Due Date is entertaining and there are a good number of laugh out loud moments, the pacing of the film is off and the conclusion of the film is a textbook definition of the phrase “fizzle out”. While I don’t think Philips was gunning for the same success as The Hangover, this is quite apparently a quickly hashed out movie designed to make some box office bucks before the Oscar big guns and year end blockbusters start arriving at the cinemas. 

That in itself is not a crime, of course, but I just wished that Due Date could have stepped up its game a little more – both Robert Downey Jr and Zach Galifianakis are more than adequate for their roles, but there is so little character development that all the potential chemistry between the duo is lost in the film’s two dimensions. The screenplay’s attempts to inject some sentimentality into the film don’t really work well either, and come off feeling half-baked and forcefully played out. What’s worse, however, is the way events unfold in the final reel, stretching credibility to the max and ending the film on a very limp note. This is possibly one of the worst denouements in any comedy I’ve seen this year, and that’s saying a lot. 

However, Due Date is definitely not a total wash – there are enough funny (though rather expected) scenes to fill the film’s running time, with the best moments in the film coming from the scenes where Peter loses control of his emotions and lashes out at Ethan in one way or another. There are also a fair number of action sequences in the film, and these surprisingly are quite effectively shot. On top of that, Due Date manages to work in some really picturesque shots of the drive across America, and it also features an eclectic, fun soundtrack, something which many people feel is a prerequisite of any good road trip movie. If you’re into buddy movies, Due Date is decent, middling fare – here’s hoping Philips will be able to achieve something greater when The Hangover 2 comes around. 

Rating: * * (out of four stars)

Standard

Paranormal Activity 2 * 1/2

Genre: Horror

Director: Tod Williams

Writer: Michael R. Perry

Cast: Sprague Grayden, Brian Boland, Molly Ehpraim, Katie Featherston, Micah Sloat

Running Length: 91 minutes

Synopsis: Events in Paranormal Activity 2 take place between one and two months before those that were featured in Paranormal Activity. Instead of a couple, the cast has expanded to include a whole family. Kristi (Sprague Grayden) is the sister of Katie (Katie Featherstone, of the first film), and is married to Dan (Brian Boland), his second marriage after the death of his wife. Dan has a teenage daughter Ali (Molly Ehpraim), and the couple has a new baby boy, Hunter. However, things start to go bump in the night when Hunter turns one…

Review: The phenomenal box office success of the first Paranormal Activity all but assured the birth of this sequel (it’s actually both a prequel AND a sequel), but the important question is – apart from a money grab, was there any other compelling reason Paranormal Activity 2 should be made? The answer is no, and it’s quite clear as this film unfolds.

Audiences who have watched the first movie already know how this second movie is going to develop, and thus the creepiness of the first film is almost entirely obliterated. Whilst Paranormal Activity 2 has a good number of cheap “boo!” scares, it never feels as spontaneous as its predecessor. Put in another way, this movie is almost spiritually (pun not intended) identical to the first film, which is not a good thing if the only way the movie can scare its audience is by catching them off guard.

With Paranormal Activity 2, the decision was made to integrate footage from a number of fixed CCTV cameras. This reduces the contrived nature of the first film where the leads seem to be carrying their camera everywhere they went, but this artifice does not go away completely. There are still a handful of scenes which require a great suspension of disbelief: why would anyone not in a reality TV show bring along a camera wherever they went? How does a teenage girl manage to do her online research so well that she could pinpoint exactly what’s wrong in the house, and yet not manage to convince anyone in her family to get out of the house right away?

Credit should be given where it’s due, however, and at least the producers and writers (the director of the first Paranormal Activity, Oren Peli, takes a back seat and is merely credited as a writer on the second film) made an effort to integrate the events into the chronology of the first film’s events. This also allows the two leads in Paranormal Activity to return as supporting characters, and also sets in place, unsurprisingly, the possibility of a third movie.

Is Paranormal Activity 2 a true horror movie? I would have to say “not really” – much as there are many shocking moments, truly scary scenes are virtually nonexistent. The audience is fully prepared to be shocked, and there just isn’t anything new enough to pull the rug out from beneath the audience’s feet. The movie never fills one with dread, and the entire atmosphere feels watered down from the first film. It’s difficult to say if the Paranormal Activity movies can become a franchise since it’s essentially a one-trick pony, but with its first weekend box office in the USA being a runaway success, Paranormal Activity 3 is surely not far behind. Taken on its own, Paranormal Activity 2 still entertains, but as a horror film it’s a decidedly middling one. 

Rating: * ½ (out of four stars)

Standard

The Town * * * 1/2

Genre: Drama / Thriller

Director: Ben Affleck

Writers: Peter Craig and Ben Affleck & Aaron Stockard, based on the novel Prince of Thieves by Chuck Hogan

Cast: Ben Affleck, Rebecca Hall, Jeremy Renner, Jon Hamm, Blake Lively

Running Length: 125 minutes

Synopsis: The film is set in Charlestown, Boston which apparently is the “bank robbery capital of North America”, and said “trade” is passed down from generation to generation like a family business. Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck) is from one such family, and his father Stephen (Chris Cooper) is currently serving a life sentence in prison for murders associated with a robbery that went wrong. Doug himself runs a crew, which includes his best friends – James Coughlin (Jeremy Renner), Gloansy Magloan (Slaine) and Desmond Elden (Owen Burke). Doug is the brains of the operation whilst Coughlin is the unpredictable, violent one. In their latest heist, Coughlin takes the bank manager, Claire Keesey (Rebecca Hall) hostage, but is subsequently released, having never seen the robbers’ faces. However, when Doug tracks her down to ascertain that she can’t offer any helpful information to the police, he finds himself becoming attracted to her. In the mean time, the FBI is hot on the trail of the robbers, led by special agent Adam Frawley (Jon Hamm). Frawley doesn’t have enough evidence to land a conviction yet, but he is determined to put a stop to the robbers’ crime spree, preferably by catching them red handed.

Review: The trailers for The Town may have been somewhat misleading – they give the impression that this is heist film that is filled with action sequences, but in reality The Town is more a character drama with some well-placed and effectively executed action set pieces. This is a handsome, atmospheric movie filled to the brim with great acting from the ensemble cast, and a storyline that will keep most audiences engrossed throughout its two-hour running time.

Ben Affleck deserves major kudos, his sophomore directorial effort being almost as well done as his first (Gone Baby Gone). As a director, he has managed to capture the nuances of every major character in the film, and it’s truly a pleasure to observe action set pieces filmed with a steady hand, without the usual (nowadays) quick cuts and rapid edits that has plagued many an action film in recent years.

In front of the camera, Affleck also manages to acquit himself very well. His measured performance, whilst not the strongest in the film (that credit would have to be given to Jeremy Renner’s ferocious performance), makes Doug MacRay a character that audiences will have no trouble vesting their interest in. What’s probably even more surprising is that the romance between Doug and Claire is very believable, when this aspect of a heist movie is usually its weakest link.

What is the film’s weak link, unfortunately, is the climactic heist, which really is a little too preposterous for its own good. Also, for a film that seems intent to keep the volume dial down, the overreliance on firepower in this last sequence feels just a little out of place. There’s no denying, however, that this is a solidly entertaining dramatic thriller, and it proves that Ben Affleck isn’t a flash in the pan when it comes to his directorial skills.

Rating: * * * ½ (out of four stars)

Standard

Buried * * * *

Genre: Thriller

Director: Rodrigo Cortes

Writer: Chris Sparling

Cast: Ryan Reynolds

Running Length: 94 minutes

Synopsis: Paul Conroy (Ryan Reynolds) is an American working in Iraq as a non-military truck driver. Unfortunately, his convoy comes under attack and he blacks out; when he comes to, Paul discovers that he is buried alive in a wooden coffin. Fortunately, Paul discovers that he has, amongst other items, a lighter, a pencil, and a working mobile phone with half its battery life and a weak reception. Using the mobile phone, Paul desperately tries to make connections with anyone that can help him out of his predicament, but not everyone he manages to contact with the phone have his best interests at heart…

Review: It is perhaps not surprising that this movie, though starring Ryan Reynolds, was birthed not in the USA but in Spain. Very few movies made in the USA would have the audacity to try to accomplish what Rodrigo Cortes has tried to do here, but what’s even more impressive is that it works. Buried is not an easy film to watch, and it might not be even considered an entertaining film, but it manages to present its single-minded proposition with such clarity and purpose that it is impossible not to feel impressed. Rodrigo Cortes has done an amazing job (although I question his choice of denouement), and Ryan Reynolds manages to put forth what is probably his best performance to date.

Unlike most movies founded on similar “locked room” concepts (Devil is a recent example), Buried never shifts its focus from the coffin and devotes the full 94-minute running time to Ryan Reynolds and the box he is trapped in. There are no flashbacks to fill out the story, no other peripheral characters on screen (although a fair number of characters are heard via Paul’s many phone conversations), and perhaps most surprisingly, no situations that don’t work in the film’s internal logic. The film’s plot feels watertight even after the credits roll, which is quite a rare occurrence these days.

Rodrigo Cortes manages to avoid visual monotony by offering up a surprising number of camera angles and introducing new plot elements just when the film seems to settle into a comfortable (relatively) groove. This creates an excellent atmosphere for the film, and the pacing is spot on, relentlessly piling on the sense of dread, never letting up till the very end.

Ryan Reynolds is perhaps better known for his pretty boy looks and his excellent physique, but in Buried he actually puts forth a very strong performance. This being literally a one-man show, Reynolds carries the entire weight of the movie on his shoulders and yet manages to do so with great aplomb. This is not an easy role – he is confined to a small space and yet has to portray a wide gamut of emotions, ranging from fear to anger to resignation. And because Reynolds’ portrayal is so believable, it is very easy to identify with and have a vested interest in his character’s fate. 

Buried is a very intense cinematic experience which honestly isn’t for everyone – if you’re looking for the typical action thriller movie then this would not fit neatly into the mould. However, if you are willing to give the movie a chance, this could possibly be one of the best movies you’ll see this year. Even if you don’t agree, be assured that this will not be a movie that you will forget anytime soon, and in a sea of same-old, me-too movies, that in itself is a quality that’s increasingly hard to find in the theatres nowadays.

Rating:  * * * * (out of four stars)

Standard

Inception * * * *

Genre: Science Fiction / Thriller

Director: Christopher Nolan

Writer: Christopher Nolan

Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe, Dileep Rao, Cilian Murphy, Marion Cotillard, Michael Caine

Running Length: 148 minutes

Synopsis: The less one knows about the plot of Inception, the better – so I will be brief. Set in a world when humans are able to enter the dreams of others, information that has been hidden away in the mind is no longer safe from prying hands. These thieves of dreams are known as “extractors”, and Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is one of the best in the field. However, when corporate magnate Saito (Ken Watanabe) contacts Cobb and partner Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), he is not looking for extraction but “inception” – the planting of an idea in one’s head. Cobb is convinced to take on the job, and has to assemble a motley crew, each fulfilling a specific purpose, to try to successfully attempt inception.

Review: Can Christopher Nolan do no wrong? First noticed for the exceptional mind bender that was Memento, Nolan has moved on to create two of the best superhero movies of all time (namely Batman Begins and The Dark Knight), and now Inception – his 10-year old project – has finally made it to the big screens. I’m happy to say that Inception continues Nolan’s winning streak, and it’s very simply the best live-action film I’ve seen this year.

Inception has an amazingly detailed story, working on multiple levels at one go, augmented by exceptional action sequences, good performances from its leads, some stunning camerawork and stuntwork, a great score and has been edited faultlessly. Seems like a lot of superlatives in one sentence, but Inception really manages to tick off almost every check box – to say that it’s an instant classic isn’t an overstatement.

Inception is a film that demands your undivided attention – it’s a long movie (almost two and a half hours), and the storyline is so complex that even a quick toilet break may mean a gap in comprehension. Make no mistake, this is a film that stands up to repeat viewings, and practically demands it. The concept may not be very new – there are shades of The Matrix, Dark City, Minority Report and more in Inception, but much like the best of these films, Inception presents it in a new light. The multi-layered narrative structure – at one point in the movie, four narrative layers were unfolding at the same time – could have been extremely confusing, but Nolan manages to weave the narratives together seamlessly, augmented by some excellent editing, and surrounds it with a watertight internal logic that helps with audience immersion.

Intellectual stimulation aside, Inception is also very accomplished as an action movie. A number of action set pieces are very thrilling and high-octane, rivaling any big budget actioner out there for adrenaline kicks. Visual effects do not overpower the raw action, and it’s very encouraging to note that Nolan had used physical sets in a fair number of scenes instead of relying solely on green screen wizadry. One particularly impressive scene involves Joseph Gordon-Levitt careening through a hotel corridor with varying levels of gravity, and it’s an extremely well-choreographed action sequence that truly excites the mind. This level of accomplishment comes as no surprise, since Nolan has managed to put together equally impressive action set pieces in the Batman movies. This is, to use a clichéd but apt phrase, truly a thinking man’s action movie. 

This is Leonardo DiCaprio’s second outing in a psychological thriller this year, the first being Scorsese’s Shutter Island. His performance here is more subdued and not quite so over the top (read: less “crazy eyes”) than in Shutter Island, which makes Cobb a fair bit more believable as a character and serves as a good emotional anchor in the film. Ellen Page is saddled with the unenviable task of delivering almost all the expository lines in the film, but still manages to do a pretty decent job as Cobb’s muse (of sorts). Amongst the rest of the strong supporting cast, Marion Cotillard’s performance is the standout – although she appears in a mere handful of scenes, they are impactful and memorable, and Mal easily becomes a central character despite having the least screen time.  

Inception bucks the trend of remakes, retreads, sequels and mindless action films that have overwhelmingly populated cinemas in recent years, and is a fresh, new piece of cinema that excites the senses and the mind. With the commercial success of the Batman movies, Nolan could have churned out cookie-cutter action films with guaranteed box office returns, but with Inception it’s clear he was willing to make a gamble for a project that’s close to his heart. Inception succeeds on many levels and is testament to Nolan’s talent, and is the first live-action film this year that I can recommend to any moviegoer without any reservation.

Rating: * * * * (out of four stars)

Standard

Despicable Me * * *

Genre: Animation

Directors: Chris Renaud, Pierre Coffin

Writers: Cinco Paul and Ken Daurio based on a story by Sergio Pablos

Voice Cast: Steve Carrell, Jason Segel, Russell Brand, Julie Andrews, Will Arnett, Kristen Wiig

Running Length: 94 minutes

Synopsis: Gru (Steve Carrell) has prided himself on being a supervillain, but when someone else steals the Great Pyramid of Giza, Gru knows it's time to step it up a notch. His new plan – to steal the moon and hold it ransom – can only be accomplished with a Shrink Ray, but getting his hands on one can be very tough when he's pitting himself against Vector (Jason Segel), the new villain on the block. Gru chances upon an unconventional solution of adopting three orphan girls – Margo (Miranda Cosgrove), Edith (Dana Gaier) and Agnes (Elsie Fisher) – who will then become his "in" to infiltrating Vector's fortress. What Gru didn't count on, of course, was that his paternal instinct would be brought to the forefront when he is with the three girls. Superbad? Or Superdad?

Review:  Despicable Me bears more than a passing resemblance to the Shrek franchise – both movies establish an anti-hero as a central character, and both make copious use of humour and a bevy of interesting (and some will say scene-stealing) supporting characters to augment the leads. In fact, Despicable Me seems to have borrowed a fair bit off a number of other movies, but thankfully despite this the film still manages to be quite an entertaining film for young and old.

The best thing about Despicable Me is its humour, which is presented both visually and in its smart script. There are plenty of laugh-out-loud moments, and the directors wisely decided to give the minions (strange yellow gnomes spouting gibberish) a lot of exposure, with much of the sight gags coming from these creatures (and some great Spy vs Spy moments between Gru and Vector). It is great fun to watch, and even though it’s a little too piecemeal for my liking, there’s no denying that Despicable Me would be a true crowd pleaser across most audience demographics.

The voice cast is a mixed lot – Steve Carrell’s accent seems a little inconsistent, and Julie Andrews is criminally underused as Gru’s mum (although her non-committal “eehhhhh”s to Gru was one of the highlights of the film to me), but generally the cast turn in decent vocal performances, especially the directors themselves who voiced most of the gibberish spouted by the minions.

And now, the million dollar question for films released this year – to 3D or not to 3D? Despicable Me takes a slightly different route in its 3D implementation and intentionally creates scenes where the “3D effect” is very obvious, including a very tongue-in-cheek end credits sequence where the minions try to outdo each other in being “more 3D”. Yes – it’s completely a gimmick, but one that would probably be appreciated by younger audiences. I remain unimpressed, and in my opinion the film is not one that needs to be watched in 3D.

It seems that 2010 is the year of animated films, and although Despicable Me does not come close to the bar set by Pixar’s Toy Story 3, especially in terms of its story, it still manages to roundly beat almost every single live-action summer blockbuster I’ve watched this year. Even if one remains unmoved by the rather simplistic plot, only the dourest audiences would leave the cinema without at least a smile on their faces.

Rating:  * * * (out of four stars)

Standard

Toy Story 3 * * * *

Genre: Animation

Director: Lee Unkrich

Writer:  Michael Arndt, based on a story by John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton and Lee Unkrich

Voice Cast: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Joan Cusack, Ned Beatty, Don Rickles, Michael Keaton, Wallace Shawn, John Ratzenberger, Estelle Harris

Running Length: 98 minutes

Synopsis: Years have passed and Andy is now preparing to go to college. The few toys that remain – which include Woody (Tom Hanks), Jessie (Joan Cusack) and Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen),  are naturally worried for their fates, but Woody reassures them that they will all live in the attic until the next generation comes along and plays with them. Unfortunately, a series of incidents occur that lead to the toys ending up at a daycare centre, which initially seems like a dream come true as there is no lack of children to play with the toys. However, the daycare centre is ruled with an iron fist by Lots-o’-Huggin’-Bear (Ned Beatty), and Andy’s toys soon realize they need to make their way back to their owner. Escaping the daycare centre, however, is not going to be an easy task…

Review:  It’s been 15 years since the first Toy Story enchanted audiences both young and old, and 11 years since Toy Story 2 upped the ante even further. I am very pleased to say that Toy Story 3 has managed to maintain the pedigree of the Toy Story franchise, and manages to (presumably) conclude the Toy Story movies on a level that other animation studios can only dream of. With an excellent mix of action, comedy, and pathos, coupled with great characterization, good visuals, and a compelling plot for both children and adults alike, it’s not hard to presume, even at this point, that Toy Story 3 will be the best summer film I’ll see this year. I’ll even go out on a limb and say that this is probably one of the best movies of the year, if not the best.

It’s a given nowadays that computer animated films will look very polished and highly detailed, and of course Pixar is no different in this aspect. The look of Toy Story 3 is of course improved over the previous two films, but when computer animated films are released with such frequency these days, it’s no longer as easy to impress. And of course there’s the issue of 3D, which seems to be the Holy Grail for movies released of late. I believe the cinema in which I had caught the preview was not calibrated properly for 3D, which resulted in a very distracting background “shimmer” that made viewing a very taxing and distracting experience. However, even if this is accounted for, the 3D implementation of Toy Story 3 is woefully inadequate, and there are extended moments in the film where nothing very 3D seems to be going on. This is perhaps the only true blemish I can find in Toy Story 3, and hence my recommendation is to save the money and just catch the film in “plain” 2D.

Like many of its Pixar predecessors, the aspect in which Toy Story 3 truly shines is story, story, story. Although children will be able to enjoy the movie on a basic level (note that some scenes may be a little too intense for the very young), much of the movie will only truly resonate with adult viewers. Many of the gags, especially those involving Ken and Barbie’s romantic endeavours, will definitely be better appreciated by the secondary audience. Also, the amazing depth of emotion that can be found in this animated film is not even usually achieved by a live-action film, and huge props must go to Pixar for having crafted such a masterful work. One of the best examples of this is near the film’s end, after all the action has come and gone, where Andy introduces each of his toys to a little girl. Much like the first 10 minutes of Up, this scene packs such a massive emotional wallop that it wouldn’t be surprising to find more than a few audience members with tears in their eyes as the credits roll.

Few movie franchises manage to deliver after a couple of sequels, and it’s great to see that whilst Toy Story 3 has pulled it off, the denouement does also seem to suggest that there won’t be another sequel somewhere down the road. It’s possibly the best send-off we can get for these familiar and well-loved characters, and the Toy Story trilogy will live on timelessly as all great movies do. If you pick one animated film to watch in 2010, make sure it’s Toy Story 3.

Rating:  * * * * (out of four stars)

Standard

The A-Team * * 1/2

Genre: Action

Director: Joe Carnahan

Writers:  Joe Carnahan, Brian Blom & Skip Woods

Cast: Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper, Quinton “Rampage” Jackson, Sharlto Copley, Jessica Biel, Patrick Wilson

Running Length: 117 minutes

Synopsis: The A-Team serves as an “origins” movie for the TV series, explaining how the A-Team was formed. Viewers of the TV series know that the A-Team is an ex-military group of mercenaries, who were wrongly accused for a crime they didn’t commit. The movie explains how the four – uber intelligent leader Hannibal Smith (Liam Neeson), brute force B.A. Baracus (Quinton “Rampage” Jackson), pretty boy Templeton “Faceman” Peck (Bradley Cooper) and unhinged (but excellent) pilot “Mad” Murdock (Sharlto Copley). An elite military unit in Iraq, they are framed for stealing counterfeit US$100 engraving plates and are sent to prison. However, with the help of a CIA operative Lynch (Patrick Wilson), they escape and attempt to clear their names. Hot in pursuit is Lieutenant Sosa (Jessica Biel) and her military team, who also happens to be Faceman’s old flame, as well as another band of mercenaries led by Pike (Brian Bloom).

Review:  The A-Team follows the summer action blockbuster template to a T, which means an extremely thin plot, and an endless number of action sequences, peppered by humourous one liners, and a little bit of romance. In short, it serves to appeal to the teenaged boys as the main viewer demographic, who will undoubtedly enjoy the movie even if they have no idea this franchise had a previous life on the small screen. That’s not to say that older viewers and women won’t be able to enjoy the movie – there are enough references to the TV franchise (stay for the post-credits scene to catch a cameo of two of the TV alumni), just about the right mix of action and cheese to make this a relatively pleasant viewing experience. For the women (and some men), Bradley Cooper continues his streak (pun intended) of appearing bare-chested in the film, and for extended scenes to boot.

Most of the action sequences are pretty intense, but this is definitely not a movie which takes the laws of physics into consideration. They are, however, quite fun to watch even as your mind gradually shuts down from disuse as the minutes roll by (and thus the action sequences become increasingly entertaining). However, Joe Carnahan employs a Michael Bay-esque directorial style at times, which employs way too many quick cuts, to the point that some scenes look jittery and are utterly confusing (think Transformers).

Although both the plot and the cast play second fiddle to the action, the four lead actors actually pull off a pretty admirable job of aping the old TV characters. The most memorable one has to be Sharlto Copley (whose previous cinematic outing in District 9 proved pretty good as well), who is almost a carbon copy of Dwight Schulz’s performance (the original Mad Murdock).

The 2010 summer releases have been relatively disappointing to date, both for the testosterone and oestrogen parades, and fortunately The A-Team is a slight step up from the mediocre. Had the action been less frenetic and the plot a little more substantive, this would have been the first true summer blockbuster of the year; as it stands it’s a good 2-hour diversion (and possibly a guilty pleasure), but nothing more.

Rating:  * * ½ (out of four stars)

Standard

Sex and the City 2 * *

Genre: Comedy / Drama

Director: Michael Patrick King

Writer: Michael Patrick King

Cast: Sarah Jessica Parker, Kim Cattrall, Cynthia Nixon, Kristin Davis, Chris Noth, Evan Handler, David Eigenberg, John Corbett

Running Length: 146 minutes

Synopsis:  It’s been another two years since freelance writer Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker) has finally married the man of her dreams, John Preston aka “Mr Big” (Chris Noth). However, beneath the marital bliss lies some discontent – Carrie is afraid that the spark has gone out of their relationship, especially since Big seems more intent to stay home and watch TV then to go out and paint the town red. Her three best friends are also each having problems of her own: Samantha (Kim Cattrall) enters menopause and is trying her best to beat the clock with handfuls of vitamins and supplements; Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) is overworked and underappreciated in the law firm she works in; and Charlotte (Kristin Davis) finds her two children to be more than she can handle, and though her buxom nanny is a great help, she’s afraid that the nanny’s presence may cause Harry (Evan Handler) to stray. After a chance meeting with a sheik, the girls are whisked off to an all expenses paid, one-week vacation in Abu Dhabi, where Carrie chances upon old flame Aidan (John Corbett), and old emotions bubble once again to the surface. Will Carrie’s ever after be as happy as she envisaged it would be?

Review:  I’ll be the first to say that I am a big fan of the Sex and the City series, and even though the first movie had quite a few flaws, I was more than willing to let them slide and to go along for the ride. The huge box office success of the movie practically ensured the existence of this sequel, but one cannot help but wonder if it was a good idea. In the first movie, all four women had storylines of their own, which at least managed to justify the epic running length. In this second film, however, none of the women have very substantive storylines, and Samantha and Miranda are both reduced to being nothing but plot devices (just like all the men in the movie) – yet the movie is only 2 minutes shorter than its predecessor. It’s an incredibly bloated and indulgent movie, and there’s so little narrative progression and so much excess that it becomes overwhelming.

And “excess” is truly the keyword that permeates the entire movie. Sure, the out-of-reach fashions and accessories may be interesting, but this time round costume designer Patricia Fields seems to have been equipped with an ugly stick, as some of the fashions are truly gaudy and hideous. A purported $10 million wardrobe budget doesn’t manage to buy good taste, unfortunately. And yes, it’s supposed to be an escapist fantasy, but sometimes it stretches believability a little too much, and throughout the twelve-year lifespan of Sex and the City, it has never been this apparent.

And then there’s the sojourn to “Abu Dhabi” (actually Morocco, and it’s easy to see why Abu Dhabi declined to be part of this movie), which to me is the lowest point in the entire Sex and the City franchise. The name of the game after all is Sex and the City, and the characters do best when they are on their home ground of NYC, not a foreign country. This sequel makes the mistake of keeping the ladies on a foreign land for what seems like more than half the running length, in which all they do is go from tourist locale to another tourist locale. Was this meant to be a travelogue? The Mexico interlude in the first movie was somewhat acceptable because there was a fair bit of plot development, but the way the ladies behave in Abu Dhabi, particularly Samantha, crosses the line of comedy and enters into the realm of bad taste and crassness. It’s so belittling of the Muslim faith and the cultures and traditions of a foreign land that I felt mildly apologetic simply by sitting through it. Sex and the City is supposed to be fun, but it should not be at someone else’s expense.

There are still some brighter moments in the film, where what made the TV series so good comes to the forefront – an example would be the scene where Miranda and Charlotte commiserate about the difficulties of motherhood over Cosmopolitans, and for a moment one is transported back in the better days of the franchise. Unfortunately, too much of the movie is like the (rather painful) Liza Minelli performance of “Single Ladies” early on in the film – everyone looks older, and although their presence is somewhat appreciated, it eventually feels a little too desperate and sad, even for fans. Here’s hoping that Michael Patrick King finally realizes that Sex and the City’s shelf life is up, and to quit while he’s ahead, before the franchise makes a seamless transition to Golden Girls: The Movie.   

Rating:  * * (out of four stars)

Standard