Monthly Archives: October 2013

Savages (2012)

Posted on by
Reply

WFTCRMImageFetchRoze-Rating: 2.5 / 5

Successful entrepreneurs Ben (Aaron Johnson) and Chon (Taylor Kitsch), use their diverse backgrounds to produce the best marijuana ever made. Ben is level headed and uses his money to give back to the poor, making him the brains and ethics of the business. Chon, an ex Navy SEAL uses his anger and trained skills to make sure people pay for their product. What they have in common is the desire to grow the best marijuana and the love for a girl called Ophelia (Blake Lively). Once they get involved with a massive Mexican Drug Cartel and refuse to work with them, life becomes a lot less laid back and they have to do what they can to save Ophelia.

It may be a harsh score, but I went into the film hoping for something great and instead got something very flat and average. This film has a great cast and all pretty experienced, which is why there aren’t many let downs in that area. Benicio Del Toro gave a pretty scary performance making him the ultimate highlight of the film, as well as the two lead men Taylor Kitsch and Aaron Johnson who play their characters to perfection. The two biggest problems were Blake Lively and Salma Kayek. I felt Blake Lively’s character was too unrelatable and ultimately forgettable, which is why throughout the film, your not really caring much for her. Salma Hayek’s character wasn’t scary, nor was she likeable. For a character who is in charge of quite a successful drug business, you expect them to be a lot more grittier and intense but Hayek’s take on it was very underwhelming and not believable. 

There were too many mood and tone changes between Blake Lively and Salma Hayek’s characters to know whether they had a bond or not, and in the end it just felt like a waste of screen time. At times, you also couldn’t tell what Blake Lively was talking about, that scene when she was in her hostage cell is an example, it was like gibberish. The trailer was very misleading, I thought there was going to be some revenge action but there was only one scene that I can remember which contained a little bit, and it wasn’t thrilling, nor were the moments which intended to be. The only time I genuinely felt emotionally connected to the film was when Del Toro was in the picture, the only interesting character there.

It was a pretty good idea for Taylor KItsch to have his own group of men to do any handy work with, so it would have been awesome to see more of that. The story line and plot in the end didn’t really entice me, nor did the characters. A positive would be the style conveyed throughout this film, it’s pretty nice at times, such as the vivid colours and the dopey scenes. Other than that, pretty much a let down and way too long.

Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol

Posted on by
Reply

migp_wp6_1920Micro Review

Roze-Rating: 5 / 5

This fourth Mission: Impossible instalment boasts flashy locations and intense action sequences, making it easily the best film of the franchise. Everything about this film is fun to watch, which is what makes it so good. It doesn’t take itself seriously like the previous films do, and often parodies them, as you will notice right from the start as Ethan Hunt’s (Tom Cruise) mission message fails to self destruct. The action sequences are also a lot more intense and spectacular compared to its predecessors, being set in glamorous settings. One particular setting being Dubai, which provides one of the most memorable scenes I will ever see, which happens to be on the Burj Khalifa. The fact that it’s set in the middle east and it exuding the culture makes it that much closer to me, having lived there for a large portion of my life. The cast is also a massive highlight of this film, and the team Ethan Hunt is left with prove to be a perfect match up, as I’m sure most people would agree that it would be a disappointment to see another sequel without the same group of actors. It was also refreshing to see Ethan Hunt go through a mission with a team from start to finish as opposed to being solo for most of the film.

As mentioned before, the cast is amazing, Simon Pegg playing Benji brings his humour to the film, aiding the comedy and making the situations a lot more light hearted. Jeremy Renner coming off two massive films, “The Town” and “The Hurt Locker” proved to be a rising star playing Agent Brandt, a mysterious Analyst somehow pulled into the action. He was definitely a very popular choice, for me anyways because he’s just a damn good actor. last but not least Paula Patton, who seemed quite a random pick, with limited experience as an action star, but totally proved she was tough and gritty enough to play the part as Agent Carter.

Also the great thing about this film is that everything is quite unpredictable at times, and you eventually start to question whether the plan will go smoothly or not. It’s a perfect film if your looking for a lot of fun, explosions and style along the way, popcorn stuff.

Archer (Season 1-2)

Posted on by
Reply

Archer_partyingRoze-Rating: Give it a go

I find it hard to start watching series regardless of how good it may be because it’s quite a big commitment. It may seem like I’m over thinking it but I know that once I’m hooked, I’m totally HOOKED, and watching 50 odd minute episodes when there’s 4 or more seasons just seems too intimidating. Which is why I tend to watch comedy series only cause I know I can get three episodes in within an hour without feeling guilty and unproductive, even if I am a lazy ass, it’s still nice to think otherwise (sigh).

Anyways, I scoured the world wide web for a new series to watch which was guaranteed to be funny and entertaining and found Archer. It had pretty good responses and I’m a big fan of family guy and south park so animation wasn’t a problem. Although when I checked it out on youtube I was almost put off because the animation seemed odd compared to other animated comedies, but after watching it I have gladly retreated from that opinion. I think it’s hard to rate a series because it’s all down to an individuals taste, and once you watch an episode you can decide if it’s for you or not, unlike a film where once you’ve committed to it, you will most likely watch it all, especially if your in the cinema. It would take one shitty movie for someone to walk out after spending all that money. Good thing I lived in a country where the cinema wasn’t expensive at all, because I would have been pissed if I spent 17 NZ Dollars (5.300 OR) on “Blonde and Blonder”, last time I will let my penis pick the movie.

So I’ve managed to get through two seasons of Archer within a week with the third one to go, and I just had to review it and somehow show my support because I don’t think enough people know about this series, and it is a god damn injustice to this piece of comedy gold. I don’t understand how show’s like “Mad Love” get 8 odd million viewers per episode in America, and Archer only gets 1 million. Don’t get me wrong, those typical sitcom’s with live audiences can be some of the funniest crap on TV but I think they are making sitcom’s for the sake of it now. Yes back to Archer, it ticks off all the boxes for a good comedy series and as the series progress there are significant changes with every episode which improve on the last. Which is a testament to the creators I think for noticing its faults and making it even better than before.

So it’s about a secret agency ISIS which is no where near it’s prime, employing people which other agencies would consider liabilities. The agency is run by Malory Archer (Jessica Walter), mother of the protagonist Sterling Malory Archer (Refered to as Archer), code name “Duchess” (H. Jon Benjamin) who is an alcohol addicted, sex crazed, cocky, mommy’s boy. The craziness ensues as a result of Archer’s actions or at the behest of his sexual active mother. Of course to aid the already hostel environment that the mother-son relationship provides, we have a group of ISIS employee’s who are just as crazy as the next character. With some big names playing the characters, there’s little that can go wrong. We have Cyril Figgis (Chris Parnell) a comptroller for ISIS who is perceived as a pretty normal character at first, but just wait, those first impressions will change immensely. Cheryl Tunt (Judy Greer) a… well she’s into some crazy shit and doesn’t have the intelligence to hide it like other closet fetish addicts are. Doctor Algernop Krieger (Lucky Yates) is one of the more mysterious characters as it takes awhile to figure him out and what kind of “crazy” he is. Lana Kane (Aisha Tyler) definitely one of the sanest characters and the best looking, it’s amazing how cartoons can look sexy, maybe that’s the pervert in me, but she does have some nicely animated… assets. Anyways her ambition and jealously towards Archer’s special treatment from his mother get the best of her at times. Lastly we have Pam Poovey (Amber Nash) who is probably one of the most weirdest and sickest characters you will see on television, but it’s hilarious in the best of ways. She prides herself for her incompetent ability of keeping secrets and having no feminine bone in her. The one thing each character has in common is that they are all unhealthily addicted to sex, but it’s not the worst addiction to have, waaaaay.

A good description of Archer would be if James Bond and Maxwell Smart made a baby and that baby was put in an environment similar to “The Office” while keeping the threats and thrills of a 007 agent. At first you will criticize the series for lacking in the James Bond-esque action and situations, but by the time you get into the second season you will notice how much its improved in terms of action while staying true to its humor. The animation also adds to the charm of Archer, and really backs up the dialogue where most of the humor comes from of course. It’s also quite unique and sets itself apart from other animated comedies, it gives it a darker and cruder side, which a lot of the humor ends up being. If you haven’t seen Archer, it’s definitely worth a watch. Enjoy.

Argo (2012)

Posted on by
Reply

argo-image06Roze-Rating: 5 / 5 

Ben Affleck directs his third film following the successes of “Gone Baby Gone” and “The Town”, and doesn’t fail to impress this time round with arguably his best piece of directorial work yet. He takes on a film based on true events which occurred in 1979 during the Iranian Revolution, who were outraged by American support towards the overthrown Shah. In retaliation to the Shah’s fleeing from Iran, a crowd of Iranian revolutionaries raided the American Embassy taking the majority of the American staff hostage, but six managed to escape, taking refuge at the Canadian Ambassadors house. During this crises plans had developed from the CIA to rescue the six unknown escapee’s, only to realize that non of their idea’s were actually viable. It took CIA specialist, Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) to come up with the next “bad” idea which turned out to be the best of the bunch. The elaborate plan consisted of developing a fake sci-fi film during its production stage so that the six hostages and himself could portray a film crew going into Iran for a location scout. Only that pretending the film crew had entered the country with him and leaving two days later would be bigger than just a white lie.

The film consists of two tones, a comedic and dark tone. During the planning stage of the rescue, which take’s place mostly in Hollywood is the more light hearted mood, which old timer Alan Arkin plays to comedic perfection, stealing most of the laughs. It was great to see John Goodman and Arkin together, playing the experienced boys in the film industry, which really created a good contrast to all the seriousness based in Iran. Once the tones switch to the setting of Iran, there is a much more claustrophobic feeling which is perfectly captured through filming and the performances of the six escapees. I really liked how the film transitioned between these tones, making the film flow smoothly and reminding the audiences that failure remains the most likely outcome.

There was something very genuine about this film, and it had to do with the filming and attention to detail. The fact that you felt as though you were actually in the late 70s possibly watching a 70s film just entices you more. The costumes, hairstyles and props were amazing, evidently shown during the end credits as they compared pictures of the actual people they were portraying with the actors. There was also something very 70s about the filming, there was a certain grain to the picture which gave it a more classic look as opposed to a crystal clear picture. It also helped fit in the real life footage with the film footage, effectively making them both feel connected and set in the same time. This film doesn’t contain adrenaline pumping action but consists of probably the best nail biting scenes you will see in film, which is totally aided from the filming. From the close up reaction shots to the shaky camera work, it all blends together to make something ultimately heart pounding. The scenes where the escapees are together debating their fate, were also my favorite scenes, because you can sense their panic and despair.

The whole cast are amazing and each important character had something special about them. I think the six escapees stole the film in terms of their performances, because they worked together so perfectly that you believed their emotions and their panic and their diminishing hope. Each scene where they are all together exudes pure realism, which I thought was pretty unique in films of this genre. Alan Arkin and John Goodman put in the comedic aspect of the film with their comedic timing. Bryan Cranston gave it his all during the last scenes which lives as one of my favorite performances by him, and Ben Affleck, solid as always. Overall solid performances, can’t fault that.

When looking back at the film in terms of plot, the story line is actually very thin, and doesn’t contain much substance, which is just a huge testament to the importance of filming style, because without the influence of Ben Affleck and the filming crew, this film would have been very unsatisfying. Great film.

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

Posted on by
Reply

hd-wallpapers-batman-the-dark-knight-rises-cinema-wallpaper-all-2560x1440-wallpaper

Roze-Rating: 4.5 / 5

The Dark Knight Rises came with huge anticipation, after having huge success with Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. I didn’t watch the previous films until a few months ago, but after watching them I knew that the final addition to the trilogy was going to be something special, especially after seeing the additions of Tom Hardy and Anne Hatheway. Hardy of course with big shoes to fill after a great performance from Heath Ledger playing the infamous Joker, who set’s the stage for today’s Gotham City.

This film goes way back into the previous two films to capture the rise of Bruce Wayne and his vigilante side, batman. Not only does the effects of the Joker impact the ways of Gotham City, but Bruce Wayne’s past catches up with him unexpectedly when a member of the League of Shadows forces him to rev up the Batmobile for a final time. Without  knowledge from previous films, this could prove to be a very confusing two and a half hours, made apparent by a couple of girls beside me who kept asking me “what’s happening?”, “who’s that?”, “is he a bad guy?”, which made the film experience not as awesome as it could have been, but at least it tested my batman knowledge to an extent. The fact that this film explored a lot of Bruce Wayne’s past, also juggling introductions of Catwoman and Bane, made for a film with a lot of substance. For some films, this could prove to be a downfall, but the intelligent plot and fluent story telling made it entertaining and not hard to grasp at all, which wasn’t the same story for the girls beside me. The story alone was interesting enough to engage the audience but from a film with a reputation of great action, it wasn’t enough, and that’s where the film faults. If there was room for more action and darkness, this would have been the perfect film, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that it proves to be the perfect finale to a great trilogy. Tom Hardy makes previous villains of the Batman franchise proud, with an intense performance, having only the expressions from his eyes and limbs to express his character. I also fell for Catwoman, who was perfectly played by Anne Hatheway, finding the perfect balance between seductiveness and grit, there could be potential for an origin film there, which I would be totally up for.

After an epic showdown, the film ends perfectly concluding Batman’s legacy, leaving a moment which made me literally leap in excitement; a moment which will leave hardcore comic fans salivating for more. It also leaves a lot of room for possible sequels, so this might not be the end of The Dark Knight, but the birth of something really special. I just hope that the speculation towards a Batman reboot for a possible Justice League film isn’t true, because that’s just asking for some hate.

Do you guys think there is room for a sequel? and who do you think will be involved? Would you also be up for Justice League film without Christian Bale? and do you think it will live up to the success of The Avengers?

The Expatriate (2012)

Posted on by
Reply

expatriateRoze-Rating: 2 / 5

This film is set in Europe about an ex CIA operative who is looking to move on with his past life of violence and concentrate on being a good father. All that suddenly changes when Ben Logan (Aaron Eckhart) and his daughter Amy (Liana Liberato) narrowly miss a hit murder while they were at the hospital over night. Due to the following day’s strange events, they realise that something has gone terribly wrong, and they may be in the middle of a termination plan as an attempt to cover up a government conspiracy. This also proves to be a time where father and daughter get to know each other even more, but maybe not for the best.

This was clearly a hit and miss film. It overall lacked originality, as you got the sense that it was going to be a Jason Bourne type film. The start may have resembled the Bourne films, but the rest was certainly not. From watching the trailer, you get the sense that it’s going to be an action spy thriller, with some decent action scenes, but this film didn’t seem to offer anything vital, especially to the genre it boasts. Usually with films like this, you expect it to at least shine at something, but this film honestly doesn’t, in terms of the genre, there aren’t any memorable action scenes, characters or quotes.

The film lacked memorable action scenes, and when they did come around, they were short, lacked conviction and didn’t offer any thrills. The character Aaron Eckhart had to play was showcased as an extremely intelligent CIA operative trained to kill, despite this impressive range of skills, the film makers didn’t use any of it to their advantage in any scenes, which made the character seem a lot less impressive and ultimately unrelatable. People want to see a bad ass agent go nuts and partake in crazy secret agent stuff, so that they can go home and think “I wish I was him”, but this character left so little to desire. There was also another problem I had with the film, the hit-men featured to “terminate” their objective were incredibly sloppy and lacked finesse, which are characteristics you wouldn’t expect from a man in that career. This just made the film a lot less believable, because as a professional killer, it would be pretty poor to be spraying bullets everywhere and hitting everything BUT the target intended, so I couldn’t take that aspect seriously.

When it comes down to the plot, there were too many links to Aaron Eckharts character to fully understand who he was involved with, which made it seem like it was made complicated for the sake of it without making it seem intelligent and concise. This made it very confusing at points, and in the end, it really wasn’t worth the brain power and confusion just for something quite petty.

The one bright spark of this film is the female role of Liana Liberato, playing Amy Logan, who was incredibly solid and did her role well. It was nothing more than just solid because the script didn’t leave her much to play with, but this film may give her the opportunity to test that acting skill in the future.

Ultimately for a film of this genre, there should have been more action, a lot more intelligence in terms of the plot and its characters and just a proper emotional connection between audience and character. Positive is that the two main characters pulled out a couple of good performances, but even they couldn’t save such a script.

Marvel’s The Avengers (2012)

Posted on by
Reply

the_avengers-wide

Roze-Rating: 5 / 5

Marvel sets the world alight with this ground breaking film which incorporate’s seven Marvel Comic heroes introduced from five previous films, illustrating their path into the S.H.I.E.L.D. Avengers initiative. The Avengers broke significant records during it’s release, namely the all-time domestic weekend record, taking an estimated $200.3 million, thankfully the financial success of the film did not go in vain.

To prepare myself for this well anticipated film, I spent some time getting a hold of the films leading up to it, and made sure it was in order, starting with “Ironman”, starring Robert Downey Jr. He fit into the role of Tony Stark so well that even during the film’s multiple premier’s, he exuded pure Tony Stark mannerism’s and style. The next film created quite a debate leading up to The Avengers. “The Incredible Hulk”, starring the experienced Ed Norton, who plays Bruce Banner with a likeable charm, resultantly winning the hearts of the Marvel fans. Of course, when the news got out that he had been replaced with Mark Ruffalo, this created quite a bit of negativity and doubt over the Bruce Banner character. He soon proved critics and pessimists wrong, taking a different direction with the character in the best way possible.  Ironman 2 sheds a lot more light on Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and his intentions about introducing the S.H.I.E.L.D. initiative, which is why The Avengers film is present with us now. It also introduces Natasha Romanoff, known as Black Widow, who is played perfectly by Scarlett Johansson, showing the athleticism and no nonsense characteristics of her role. Following these films are Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Captain America (Chris Evans), which are generally Origin films, with exception to Thor, which introduces the space threat within the Marvel Universe, emphasizing the potential threats on earth.

The Avengers depicts the final stage of S.H.I.E.L.D.’s Avenger initiative, which involves the process of assembling each character to triumph against Loki and his increasing army. Managing a cast of main characters, would prove to be a difficult task, but the thoroughness of the script, really finds the perfect balance between each characters screen time; leaving no room for an independent hero. That’s where the film flourishes, we are able to get to know each character that much more and how they all react in the presence of each other. It is normal for families to fall out every now and again, and this film really is about the ultimate group of heroes who have their differences uniting at a time of desperation to save the world. One particular scene, where they are all in the middle of battle back to back and the camera pans around them, really symbolizes that perfectly, and is sure to send shivers down your spine. Another great aspect of this film is the comedy it possesses. The moments which are intended to make you laugh will achieve that genuinely, but props must go to Robert Downey Jr. who uses his improv skills at it’s best. Finally, the action is great, filled with iconic comic moments, from the Hulk smash to the flawless archery skills of Hawkeye. There will be no let down towards that aspect of the film, and nor does the film on the whole. If you are looking to watch a film with masses of action, mixed with comedy, then this film will offer vast’s amount of fun, leaving you thinking of it for quite some time.

The best feature of Marvel film’s are the sneaky Easter eggs they subtly fit into the film, which only the hardcore fans are likely to find, but then they add the end credit addition for the less hardcore fans. This is where the fun continues, being able to anticipate future film plots, and debating with other fans, which is why the Marvel experience, is quite a special one to take part in.

Who do you guys think the villain during the end credits was? What impact do you reckon he will have on the future Marvel films? Which Marvel film are you looking forward to the most, Ironman 3, Thor: The Dark Wolrld, Captain America: The Winter Soldier or Ant-Man?

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

Posted on by
Reply

the-amazing-spider-manRoze-Rating: 4.5 / 5

There was a lot of confusion and pessimism towards this Spider-Man reboot. People were confused about the change of cast thinking that the previous Spider-Man trilogy had not finished, but with a cast like this, I think it was hard to figure out where it could go wrong. I myself was a huge fan of the Spider-Man trilogy and was pretty intrigued about this reboot, especially when I heard Emma Stone was in it, who is my favourite female actor at the moment. Going into the film I was expecting something familiar but I’m glad to say that there was a lot of things different about this film compared to the original and most of those things were huge positives.

A lot of the advertising at first for this film was that it would expose the “untold story” about Peter Parker in terms of where he came from and his parents. To an extent this film explores what exactly happened to his parents, how they were related to Oscorp and how they died but it only touches on it in small doses. If your going to see the film purely for that aspect of the film, then there will be a bit of disappointment, but I guess that’s where they attract you back into the character for this film but also the sequel. As usual these comic films have snippets at the end to leave you guessing who the next villain will be etc, and there’s a mysterious looking man who mentions Peters father, insinuating that there’s still a lot untold, this will be frustrating but I guess that’s where the fanboys come in and speculation begins, which is the whole spirit of these comic films, the film is one thing but the speculation and the hype also adds to the awesome experience.

The film features Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man and he totally triumphed, giving the web slinger a whole new identity compared to the original Spider-Man. From playing a few Spidey games and cartoons, the character seemed a lot more witty and annoying than Toby McGuires version, and I think that’s where Andrew Garfield got it right. He was more than just a nerd, he had attitude, heart and style, which is why the little touches like the skateboard and the way he treated his enemies as quite vital to the role. It was also awesome to find out that he was a childhood fan of Spider-Man and looked up to the character, so you knew that he was coming from the right places. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy, DAYM, great person for the role, I mean she brings a lot to her characters and this character was never intended to be just cute and a damsel in distress, she brought a lot of charisma and humour to make her a much more interesting and smart character to root for. The chemistry between Garfield and Stone seemed very natural, I don’t know if it’s because they are an item (Damn you Garfield!) but what they were doing worked. Perfect awkward moments mixed with the dialogue, but when they kissed on that roof, Gwen looked a bit too turned on by the fact Peter was Spider-Man, but I’m not complaining. As for the rest of the cast, solid performances of course, especially Rhys Ifans playing over obsessed scientist Dr. Conners, who lets the pressure of Oscorp and his own desire for limb regrowth get to him, ultimately becoming The Lizard.

The action is great, some memorable scenes and I like how they stayed true to all of his trademark moves, seemed identical to the game at some points, which was pretty awesome. The effects weren’t cheap and the The Lizard looked pretty bad ass. Compared to the original, I can’t remember anything negative about the effects, but this version definitely brought something new to the film with the first person scenes, which made you feel even more absorbed into this world that they created. Overall pretty solid action.

I think the only negative of this film compared to the original is that the original had a lot more iconic moments which will live on, while this film didn’t really produce any except for the crane scene. The fact that the original had those iconic and memorable moments made leaving the cinema slightly dissatisfying, because I expected there to be a “with great power, comes great responsibility” line, but it never came, it was all disjointed. I think this film tried a bit too hard to be different from the original which is quite apparent with the way they did the origin story for this film, but it still works, so no complaints there.

The Bourne Legacy (2012)

Posted on by
Reply

The Bourne Legacy Jeremy RennerRoze-Rating: 3.5 / 5

I was pretty excited to watch this film, just the fact that Jason Bourne wasn’t involved, and how that was going to work. I had a lot of faith in this film since one of my favourite actors was cast as the main man. Jeremy Renner coming off four major films, The Hurt Locker, Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, The Town and The Avengers, all of which are amazing films, seemed like the perfect person to play Aaron Cross, and he was, but the film itself was quite a let down.

It was always going to be hard to incorporate Aaron Cross into the Bourne series, and the story alone is smart and convincing enough for Jeremy Renner to enter the world of Jason Bourne, but the film told the story in an inefficient and dis-jointed manner, it needed more flow for audiences to get a grasp of what was happening. After the first 45 minutes, which were very tedious due to its slow pace, the film really kicked to life and gave Aaron Cross a purpose. The action sequences were engaging and exciting, but overall lacked the intensity and tension that the previous films provided. The ending didn’t really conclude on anything which made it seem a little bit pointless, but maybe that was the intention to illustrate some unfinished business. Another thought walking away from the film was that it felt like a very thin plot, compared to the previous films which were very complex and interesting, it felt too much like an origin story without the aftermath. For this film to be as satisfying as its predecessors, it needed a compressed beginning and an extra hour of Aaron Cross bringing hell to Blackbire, alternative government programs and the pharmaceutical industry.

This film really needed to be longer to include more action, but more evidently it needed the previous director of the Bourne series to give it the TRUE atmosphere and intensity it needed, which could have been the difference between another classic and this. But as a Bourne fan, I am hoping that Jeremy Renner can have another go with a more vengeful and determined Aaron Cross joining the war against the corrupt government programs.

What did you think of the new Bourne actor Jeremy Renner? Would you guys be up for a sequel with both Aaron Cross and Jason Bourne? And what did you think of the introduction of Aaron Cross, do you think they should have finished at The Bourne Ultimatum?

Total Recall (2012)

Posted on by
Reply

colin-farrell-total-recallRoze-Rating: 3.5 / 5

This film is a remake of the same titled 1990 version starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, which achieved raving reviews. I haven’t seen the original version but from research the remake covers most of the events which take place in the original, except for a significant mars scene. The remake also focuses more on the political side of the story. It takes place at the end of the 21st century after a nuclear war had broken out affecting almost the whole earth, leaving only “The United Federation of Britain (UFB)” and “The Colony”. This nuclear outbreak prompted the governments to build a gravitational elevator which transports people from one side of the earth to the other, so that workers can be used within the UFB. One worker Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell), is extremely unhappy with his life, despite having a loving wife, he still seeks a way to escape his lifestyle and live his dreams, motivating himself even more to visit “Rekall”; a solution for his problem. The procedure goes terribly wrong and Quaid finds himself in a world that he may regret wishing for.

This film suffers from being a remake, which explains a lot of the negativity surrounding it. If its predecessor never existed then this would be a pretty solid but regular blockbuster film, which is why I have rated it “3.5 / 5″, which could rightly be a lot different had I watched the original. That being said, I thoroughly enjoyed a few aspects of the film, which I can safely assume improved upon the original, such as the special effects, action and filming.

The special effects helped create a whole new world which was quite frankly awesome to look at, it truly looked like a post apocalyptic world, with seemingly floating buildings and magnetic cars moving with no wheels. The fact that they could create the look of this fictional setting with a genuine slum tone and a coherent style was magic to my eyes. This aspect of the film, ultimately sets up the rest of the film in terms of action sequences and atmosphere.

The action was easily the best part of this film, making it a lot of fun to watch since it wasn’t your typical gun fight, fist fight or human fight. The war zones were infested with robot killers and people dressed in robot looking gear which you could instantly tell was going to be unique compared to your average blockbuster. The best scene will have to be the elevator scene, giving it a real comic sensation, where your getting main characters switching from elevator to elevator trying not to get crushed. The main cast were exceptional with their action sequences, especially Kate Beckinsale, who has proved time and time again that she can take on gritty action chick characters from her roles in “Underworld”.

Aiding the relentless action was the sharp camera work and it’s movement, which gave it a futuristic look. This was appropriate since the contraption Quain used seemed very video game like, and that’s exactly how the film felt. For instance the way the camera would quickly sway from one kill to the other and the zero gravity action scenes. It made the sequences a lot more exciting and engaging to watch.

The plot is very complex and it leaves a lot of room for an elaborate psychological game to inhabit the film and it’s characters as well as the audience. The reason for this is because I found that I was constantly second-guessing myself after a certain event would take place, and I went from one opinion to another then back again. If done correctly this would have been a pretty great film, but they were extremely safe with it. The dialogue was too literal, and you found yourself listening to a character practically explaining every single significant occurrence which affected the storyline. This made it a lot easier to understand, but it wasn’t subtle or mysterious and took away a lot of the fun that could have come with it. It also felt unrealistic as characters would spend quite awhile just explaining. A clear example of this would be at the start with Kate Beckinsale’s character, when she confronts Quiad, which didn’t make sense anyway.

A lot of potential was lost with that one little lost opportunity, but other than that better than average blockbuster Sci-Fi flick, with top quality action. Popcorn stuff.