Category: Reviews

The Fault in Our Stars (2014) – movie review

140 Chacter Movie Review – #140RVW

Would it be too cutesy to say this movie was “okay”? (That’s a book joke, folks.) You had better have loved the book if you go see this one.

Spoiler-free Movie Review of The Fault in Our Stars:

This review is probably only useful to people who haven’t read this book. It should be fairly simple if you have read the book: you’ll love it. How could you not? It’s essentially an illustrated version of the novel. I can’t believe it actually required two separate people to “adapt” the book into a screenplay. Y’know, there’s a fine line between being faithful and slavish: look behind you…

So, is that a bad thing, this adherence to the source material? Not really; it’s a well written novel and a great story that works well as a movie. But I did sort of wonder why I was bothering to watch the film, since it brought absolutely nothing new to the table.

For those who haven’t read it yet, this may play a lot better. It’s the story of Hazel Grace Lancaster (superbly acted by Shailene Woodley, a mortal lock for a Best Actress nomination), a sixteen-year-old suffering from terminal cancer, who meet cutes cancer survivor Augustus Waters (Ansel Engort) at a support group. The two star-crossed lovers proceed to struggle with their illnesses, help each other, and basically make everyone in the theater cry.

One criticism of the book was that the dialogue was not realistic for teenagers – that teens just didn’t talk this way. As I stated in my review of the book, I disagree with that sentiment. While sometimes stilted and often pretentious, I do find the dialogue authentic; many teenagers are pretentious and use big words to impress people. But the criticism will only feel more justified in the film version, as no actor can deliver some of these lines without them coming off as affected.

The acting is really excellent, led by Woodley but with great performances throughout by Elgort and Nat Wolff. One of the true joys for me was that I was completely unaware of who was in this picture, as every promo image features only the leads, so I found Laura Dern & Sam Trammell as Hazel’s parents a complete surprise. Even more surprising was Willem Dafoe as the mysterious author Peter Van Houten. Odd bit of casting, but not bad at all.

In short, the movie does a very good job of telling this story for those who didn’t read the book, without improving on it in any way. (Exception: the scene at Anne Frank’s home in Amsterdam is wonderfully executed and really much more moving than in the novel.) All of the things you loved about the book you’ll love here; all the things you didn’t like will be amplified, as well, though. So if Augustus made you swoon in print, you’re in luck. If you found him slightly pompous and that affectation with the cigarette annoyingly smarmy and trite, I have some bad news for you.

While I’m not completely convinced this movie needed to be made, The Fault In Our Stars is a good little movie. Probably too long, but I doubt the teenage girls who completely dominate the film’s audience mind. (Side note: Interesting and slightly disturbing conversation between two such teens overheard by my wife after the film ended – “That was so depressing.” “Seriously. I’m going to go home and watch all of the Twilight films to feel better.”)

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Pass

The Representation Test Score: B (9 pts)

Some on the Representation Test blog comments rated this higher, but I stand by this score – although it was a tough one to judge. It’s tough to say this is representative when everyone is white and thin, and while I don’t think there are negative cultural stereotypes, they do have a bit of fun at the expense of the God-loving support leader. There’s no violence, sure, but why would there be in this story? So some of these things are difficult to answer.

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

[schema type=”movie” name=”The Fault In Our Stars” description=”Hazel and Gus are two teenagers who share an acerbic wit, a disdain for the conventional, and a love that sweeps them on a journey. Their relationship is all the more miraculous given that Hazel’s other constant companion is an oxygen tank, Gus jokes about his prosthetic leg, and they met and fell in love at a cancer support group.” director=”Josh Boone” actor_1=”Shailene Woodley” ]

Main Cast	Shailene Woodley Hazel, Ansel Elgort Gus, Nat Wolff Isaac, Laura Dern Frannie
Rating	PG-13
Release Date	Fri 06 Jun 2014 UTC
Director	Josh Boone
Genres	Drama, Romance
Plot	Hazel and Gus are two teenagers who share an acerbic wit, a disdain for the conventional, and a love that sweeps them on a journey. Their relationship is all the more miraculous given that Hazel’s other constant companion is an oxygen tank, Gus jokes about his prosthetic leg, and they met and fell in love at a cancer support group.
Poster
Runtime	126
Tagline	One sick love story
Writers	Scott Neustadter (screenplay) &, Michael H. Weber (screenplay) …
Year	2014

June 22, 2014

Jim Henson’s The Storyteller (1987)

140 Character Review – #140RVW

Wonderful series that would be ripe for a remake. Great use of technology of the time & wonderful art direction bring these tales to life…

Spoiler-free Review of Jim Henson’s The Storyteller:

I remember a few episodes of this series airing on tv when I was in high school. It was on at irregular times and some of the episodes never aired. Many people never saw it. I would tell friends in vain about this amazing tale of a soldier who captured Death, but never could show it to them.

The complete run of nine episodes of the show, plus four more episodes of Greek Myths (in which the Storyteller was played by Michael Gambon) aired in the late 90’s on HBO, but I never saw them. I had to wait for these to come out on dvd in 2003. But it’s probably better this way, since once you’ve seen one episode you can’t wait to start another.

What an amazing series. Conceived of by his daughter Lisa Henson after taking a folklore class in college, it really was an ambitious project. Each episode really is like a mini-movie, far beyond the scope of a tv show back then, and maybe even now.

As was customary with his work, Henson pushed the boundaries of what was possible in storytelling by always exploring new technologies. This led to a truly unique visual look to the series, one that has never been repeated. There are silhouettes, projected images, puppetry, green screen and a host of both in-camera and post production techniques employed. And the most important thing here is that these are all for the advancement of the stories. These were not technical exercises by a skilled filmmaker; all the work serves the stories and communicating in new ways the old tales.

I love the look of The Storyteller, but I wouldn’t be against an update. The series was shot on film, but is not of a high quality due to the post production processing work (I presume). Maybe they could even get John Hurt to reprise his role and film new stories!

An absolute masterwork that I rewatch regularly, save the best place by the fire for The Storyteller…

The nine episodes:

Hans My Hedgehog – the pilot episode
Fearnot
A Story Short
The Luck Child
The Heartless Giant
The Soldier and Death
The True Bride
Sapsorrow
The Three Ravens
Sapsorrow

Trailers for a few of the episodes:

Bechdel Test:

Pass – for the most part. This rating and that of the Representation Test are based on the whole series.

The Representation Test Score: B (7 pts)

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

[schema type=”movie” name=”Jim Henson’s The Storyteller” ]

Main Cast	John Hurt The Storyteller (9 episodes, 1987-1988), Brian Henson Storyteller’s Dog/Devil/Griffin (9 episodes, 1987-1988), Frederick Warder Giant/Half Man/Troll/Trollop (3 episodes, 1987-1988), David Greenaway Badger/Bird/Birds/Lion/Salmon/Squirrel/Wolf (3 episodes, 1988)
Rating	G
Release Date	Sun 15 May 1988 UTC
Director
Genres	Fantasy
Plot	An old storyteller tells European folk tales to his sarcastic dog.
Poster
Runtime	225
Tagline
Writers	Jim Henson (creator)
Year	1987

June 21, 2014

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)

140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

As much as I would have preferred a straight sequel to First Class, this is a very solid & fun movie. Sigh of relief – wary of time travel.

Spoiler-free Movie Review of X-Men: Days of Future Past:

Another X-Men movie, another Wolverine love-fest. Oh well. If it wasn’t a deal-killer by now it never will be.

X-Men: Days of Future Past is based on another Claremont Classic (actually, Chris Claremont/John Byrne) from 1981. I find it interesting that Marvel has no compunction with mining their vast comic libraries for storylines when it comes time to make films – and why should they? It’s simply interesting that DC Comics takes an entirely different approach, scripting new stories for their films. Not saying one is better than the other, but it is almost certainly one of the reasons there are so many more Marvel movies.

I absolutely adored X-Men: First Class, and was digusted that they felt the need to go back to the well again with the original trilogy cast again after such a successful reboot. On top of that, time travel? Time travel is among the laziest of writer tools up there with cloning and mutation. Oh wait…

So I was beyond thrilled with how good Days of Future Past turned out. True, it swaps Kitty Pryde as a main character from the comic with Wolverine, and you all know by now how I feel about the Wolverine-obsession. (Side note: shouldn’t this insistence on putting the character in everything have a name by now, like Bronies? I’ve got it! Wolvere-runs? Wolveretread?) But it actually works best from a plot standpoint to have the dude with claws Wolvereturn to the past.

The idea is that in the future the mutants are getting wiped out by Sentinels, robots that can morph and adapt basically in any way that will best kill the mutants. So they can take on mutant powers. The fact that this is patently absurd and poor science doesn’t matter – because they are so cool! Great effects.

Unfortunately, for reasons that aren’t satisfactorily explained, the Sentinels are killing people too, and the world has been ravaged (for reasons that aren’t satisfactorily explained). So the remaining mutants, including the once-again BFFs Magneto & Professor X, hole up in a temple in China to make their last stand while Kitty projects Wolverine’s consciousness back in time where he will solicit the help of the younger versions of these characters (the cast from First Class) in order to stop the event that set history on this path.

Let me state now, lest I go too far and pick apart this movie that I loved it. It was exciting and funny and a really good time. I have a bunch of questions about it and there were a number of things that I thought were simply sloppy time-travel type stuff, but I really don’t want to get bogged down in it. Comic books are full to the brim of fuzzy logic and questionable plot elements, but it doesn’t stop them from being fun, and so I really just went with the flow on this one. There’s more than enough great stuff to make you overlook a few implausible ideas.

The acting is absolutely top shelf. I’m overjoyed that they spend most of their Days in the Past not the Future. It’s far more interesting, the actors are better and it’s simply fresher. Seeing Halle Berry et al saunter on screen was a drag at the beginning of the movie. There is nothing more to tell there. The past storylines are so much richer. Spending First Class in the 60’s and now Future Past in the 70’s, I’m spoiling nothing by assuming that the Apocalypse storyline of the next film will be set in the 1980’s. And that’s fantastic. The 70’s setting makes this film really interesting and provides a great playground for the writers.

The new characters are wonderful: Peter Dinklage is his usual amazing self as Bolivar Trask, inventor of the Sentinels. The movie is very nearly stolen – no, make that definitely stolen – by Evan Peters as Quicksilver. His scenes have to be the most enjoyable in the whole picture, although I retain a real fondness for Nicholas Hoult’s Beast. There are a bunch of new to film mutants shown in the future, but they’ll mean more to comic fans than newcomers and I wouldn’t want to spoil the fun, anyway.

As with First Class, though, the movie really belongs to James McAvoy & Michael Fassbender as Charles & Eric, respectively. The relationship between these two characters is even more intriguing in this film, and McAvoy in particular shines.

Days of Future Past is a well-written and better-executed film, a high-water mark for comic movies. You probably already know this, as this review is a touch on the late side, but if you haven’t gotten to it, make time. It looks great on the big screen, where it belongs.

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Fail

The Representation Test Score: C (5 pts)

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

[schema type=”movie” name=”X-Men: Days of Future Past” description=”The X-Men send Wolverine to the past in a desperate effort to change history and prevent an event that results in doom for both humans and mutants.” director=”Bryan Singer” ]

Main Cast	Patrick Stewart Professor X, Ian McKellen Magneto, Hugh Jackman Logan/Wolverine, James McAvoy Charles Xavier
Rating	PG-13
Release Date	Fri 23 May 2014 UTC
Director	Bryan Singer
Genres	Action, Adventure, Fantasy, Sci-Fi
Plot	The X-Men send Wolverine to the past in a desperate effort to change history and prevent an event that results in doom for both humans and mutants.
Poster
Runtime	131
Tagline	His past. Our future.
Writers	Simon Kinberg (screenplay), Jane Goldman (story) …
Year	2014

June 20, 2014

How To Train Your Dragon 2 (2014)

140 Character Movie Review: #140RVW

Unnecessary but solid sequel extends the story without necessarily enhancing it. Focus on making epic franchise distracts from the humor…

Spoiler-free Review of How To Train Your Dragon 2:

British author Cressida Cowell has written a dozen books in the How To Train Your Dragon series, so I suppose my assertion that this sequel isn’t strictly necessary may seem ridiculous. Nevertheless, I persist that as much as I loved the original, it was a complete story that didn’t really need to go any further.

I do realize that there is a tv show as well as some straight to video releases. I have watched a few of them and they’re pretty good for tv. They are on an excellent production level and even have most of the same voice talent, which is remarkable. This isn’t what Saturday morning cartoons were like when I was a kid. TV cartoon versions of movies, even animated movies, fell off hugely in quality, budget and by virtually any other measure.

The setting and premise are perfect for more stories. I’m just not sure they are big screen stories. There’s an expectation, entirely reasonable in my mind, that movies you shuffle off to the theater for and shell out cash had better be significant. It puts a lot of pressure on filmmakers to produce epic spectacles.

And that’s really what’s happening here. Instead of a cute little movie about a boy and his friend, they’ve turned this thing into part 2 of a grand saga. Writer/director Dean DeBlois, who co-wrote/co-directed the original, even insisted on turning this into a trilogy as a condition of making a sequel. Sigh. What is it with trilogies? Do we have this spot in our brains that isn’t happy unless stories fit into three parts?

DeBlois has stated that his model for the film is Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back. C’mon, son. You don’t say that. You don’t even think that. Don’t invite comparisons to the greatest sequel ever made. Everyone aspires to equal Empire when they make a sequel, but what they really mean is “let’s get dark and serious”. Persistently forgetting that what makes Empire so good isn’t that it’s darker; it’s just such an amazing story. And this isn’t the franchise to go dark with.

Mind you, I love what they’ve done here. It is epic and it is well done. It just isn’t all that fun and even less funny.

The visuals are absolutely stunning. It is simply gorgeous and the character models are among the best CG I’ve ever seen. But I just can’t get past the fact that they’re making a cartoon. This level of animated brilliance has indeed produced possibly the best dragon movie yet. But it’s still populated with these goofy looking people. The better the backgrounds, fire effects and animation gets, the more ridiculous it is that we’re stuck looking at these big-eyed round faces. CG animation continues to evolve with every new picture in every facet except for the people. It’s like they got to a certain point of reasonably good looking caricatures of humans and stopped. I’m guessing because every time they’ve tried the next step, it looks creepy. Better to keep them looking like cartoons where they won’t be expected to be facsimiles of life. I understand that, I suppose, but it does mean that every studio’s output now looks identical. Worse, I’m left with the feeling that we’re in a transition stage and when we finally reach the next step of reproducing CG actors, all this stuff won’t play.

How To Train Your Dragon 2 is a really good movie, I don’t mean to be negative or imply that it isn’t. I was impressed with it and did enjoy it. I simply didn’t enjoy it in the same way as the first film. It wasn’t hugely funny – it’s not that the jokes weren’t successful, it just seemed like there weren’t many of them. It’s not a fantasy action comedy; it’s a comedic fantasy actioner. Think Dragonslayer, not Ghostbusters. Nothing wrong with that (I LOVE Dragonslayer). It’s just not at all what I was expecting. I imagine I’ll like it much better the second time when I know what I’ll be getting. Because it really is a good looking film.

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Fail

The Representation Test Score: B (7 pts)

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

[schema type=”movie” name=”How To Train Your Dragon 2″ description=”When Hiccup and Toothless discover an ice cave that is home to hundreds of new wild dragons and the mysterious Dragon Rider, the two friends find themselves at the center of a battle to protect the peace.” director=”Dean DeBlois” ]

Main Cast	Jay Baruchel Hiccup (voice), Cate Blanchett Valka (voice), Gerard Butler Stoick (voice), Craig Ferguson Gobber (voice)
Rating	PG
Release Date	Fri 13 Jun 2014 UTC
Director	Dean DeBlois
Genres	Animation, Action, Adventure, Comedy, Family, Fantasy
Plot	When Hiccup and Toothless discover an ice cave that is home to hundreds of new wild dragons and the mysterious Dragon Rider, the two friends find themselves at the center of a battle to protect the peace.
Poster
Runtime	102
Tagline
Writers	Dean DeBlois (written by), Cressida Cowell (“How to Train Your Dragon” book series)
Year	2014

June 19, 2014

The Food Guide to Love (2013)

140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

Dublin-set rom-com won’t win awards or set bar for originality, but leads Richard Coyle & Leonor Watling are beyond charming & it’s funny…

Spoiler-free Movie Review of The Food Guide to Love:

Being a huge fan of the now defunct BBC show Coupling, I’d watch Richard Coyle in just about anything. (Although I’m not going to start watching Crossbones, NBC’s silly-looking pirate drama with John Malkovich as Blackbeard. That thing has early cancellation written all over it.) As neurotic, sex-obsessed accountant Jeff Murcock on that comedy, Coyle was charming, funny and simply fun to watch. Sadly, he seems a bit stuck in TV, having trouble breaking into films only in small roles.

The Food Guide to Love is a feature, although everything about it screams straight-to-video. Not because it’s not competent – it’s quite good. There’s just an overabundance of rom-coms and only the ones with big stars seem to have legs. Coyle and co-star Leonor Watling deserve the attention, but I fear this little indie film won’t garner much.

Shot in Dublin by Spanish writer/directors Dominic Harari & Teresa Pelegri, it’s a good looking movie – great footage of the city, even if the story really could be set just about anywhere (it was written for London). The opening titles are nearly as long as the cast list, as this is one of those films that seems to be sponsored and funded by 30 different film agencies, production companies & distributors, but that’s ok because they do a nice job of setting up the main character of Coyle as Oliver Byrne, a hip and popular food writer.

Seemingly incapable of maintaining a relationship beyond 6 months, Oliver meets cute with Bibiana (Watling), a smart and politically active Spaniard who is not impressed by his fame or with what she considers his shallow interests. There’s lots of great and funny material here, and if this film starred Hugh Grant or Anne Hathaway or similar, it could be a hit. It may be just as well that it doesn’t, as that imaginary film certainly wouldn’t cast Irish actors Bronagh Gallagher & Simon Delaney in good if too small roles.

The best moments of the film actually don’t concern the love story at all, but focus on the relationship between Oliver and his parents. I actually found a few of these scenes very moving and they have stuck with me.

The film is good if not laced with originality, and really the only flaw in it is a somewhat jarring tendency to skip forward in time. You may get three scenes set over a single meal, then zoom forward a few years. It’s a little odd; feels like they could have lengthened the film a little bit to insert a few transitional scenes. But it’s a minor point; the length of the film is just right in terms of keeping your interest. Recommended.

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Fail

The Representation Test Score: B (9 pts)

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

[schema type=”movie” name=”The Food Guide to Love” description=”A dysfunctional love story about an Irish food writer and a politically committed Spanish woman. Richard Coyle and Leonor Watling star.” director=”Dominic Harari, Teresa Pelegri” actor_1=”Richard Coyle” ]

Main Cast	Richard Coyle Oliver, Leonor Watling Bibiana, Ciara Bailey Polly, Michelle Beamish Maxine
Rating	R
Release Date	Wed 18 Dec 2013 UTC
Director	Dominic Harari, Teresa Pelegri
Genres	Comedy, Romance
Plot
Poster
Runtime
Tagline
Writers	Teresa Pelegri &, Dominic Harari …
Year	2013

June 18, 2014