Sonic The Hedgehog Cert: PG / 99 mins / Dir. Jeff Fowler / Trailer
A disclaimer where it's due: during the early '90s console-wars I was always, if anything, a Mario-kid. This was only because we happened to have Nintendo devices in the house rather than Sega, but the long term knock-on effect of this is that I have precisely zero baggage with Sonic The Hedgehog, other than trailers which did nothing to convince me it was worth seeing.
And while I'd usually affect an air of understated cultural superiority with a subtext of "Hey, the hedgehog can take as long as he likes to arrive, it was the Italian plumber who got the cool movie", there are tribes in the depths of the Amazon rainforest as yet untouched by wider civilisation who know that's not true.
So fair play to director Jeff Fowler for having a crack at this now.
LYING Because it does feel like Sonic The Hedgehog is a screenplay that's been lying on a shelf for a couple of decades, waiting for the technology to catch up and do it justice. The initial pitch of a young alien transported to Earth from his homeworld, too fearful to reveal himself and too shy to make friends, is certainly timeless enough. And that's packaged here by writers Josh Miller and Patrick Casey into a present day, extra-terrestrial hero's journey road trip buddy-com, surprisingly uncomplicated and free of post-modern irony.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of its 2020 unveiling (and certainly the one forgiving its excesses) is that is that Sonic The Hedgehog is a film made unapologetically for kids, rather than the streetwise, retro-loving adults these things are usually aimed at. And when watched with that in mind, it's pretty damned good, never speaking down to its audience but still keeping things pleasingly undemanding. Plot-markers are carefully laid out and called back in, and in the context of the script it all makes relative sense.
HUNGRY The animation for Sonic himself is decent, although his facial contortions aren't quite as expressive as Ben Schwartz's voice performance, which in turn feels slightly too 'old' for a character who's meant to be at the back-end of adolescence. James Marsden*1 puts in a solid role as human sidekick Tom, supported by Tika Sumpter as his long-suffering wife Maddie; effectively the surrogate parents-to-be of this unexpected arrival. The movie looks mostly great, even if there's a part of me that now wants to see the entire thing with the awful Sonic, just out of morbid curiosity.
But a chase is nothing without a pursuer, and Sonic would be nothing without Dr. Robotnik - here, a government-funded black ops stooge played by an old-school-channelling Jim Carrey. Which is a nice way of saying that Jim Carrey is good at being Jim Carrey™, or rather, being that version of Jim Carrey which makes people who don't like Jim Carrey™ avoid all of his work on general principle. Somehow his nostalgic performance feels out of place in a nostalgic adventure. And the number of Carrey's scenes where he appears with no one else in shot - suggesting weeks of solo soundstage filming as he ad-libs material deemed good enough to bulk out the runtime - is quite worrying.
BETTE
And as suggested by the opening of this review, comparisons will inevitably be made to the infamous screen-adaptation of Super Mario Bros. Although in some ways the movie's perhaps closer to Doom - a game which never really had too much of a narrative to begin with, and where the movie version is a passably contrived story that plays out while the audience wait for The Set-Piece Sequences to link visually to its gaming-past. When these arrive in Sonic they're pretty joyous, but it's an ironically slow journey in getting there.
Worth noting though are a couple riffs on the Quicksilver super-slo-mo scenes from new-era X-Men, not least because they're each far better than the second time that series tried to coast on its bullet-time charm.
DICKIE
At a neat 98 minutes, this never outstays its welcome or oversteps its boundaries. Young voices in the room were code-compliant throughout and found the whole thing highly amusing, so Jeff Fowler has clearly done well for his audience.
The only real downside to Sonic The Hedgehog is that it's kinda forgettable, it's certainly disposable and there'll be little in there to bolster repeat viewings. I certainly don't feel the need to watch it again, and that will probably remain the case until the heavily-baited sequel comes knocking. Yet that's a sequel I find myself looking forward to, and I certainly wasn't that person when I sat down in Screen 5 two hours earlier. So the film's done that right, too.
If you're of an age and outlook to suspect that Sonic will be bulldozing over your childhood, then it's certainly true that you won't get the most out of this. Then again, Jeff Fowler hasn't really made it for you, so...
Think of E.T. without the heart and Super Mario Bros without the embarrassment.
Except it's not as bad as that sounds.
If you keep your expectations grounded (despite my positive words), yes.
There won't be a lot of rewatch-value in this unless you're a Sonic-obsessive, in which case you don't need my opinion anyway.
Well this might be the first time I've enjoyed James Marsden in a movie, so...
That's entirely possible.
There isn't.
A couple of very close-calls, though.
Level 1: As well as a clanging-great Obi-Wan Kenobi reference in the first five minutes, that Biker Scout from The Mandalorian is in this.
Exec 1: Mate, I've only got one of the ruddy X-MEN for our film!!
Exec 2: Oh wow, who? You get that Logan?
Exec 1: Well no, it's--
Exec 2: Professor X though, right? That'll be cool--
Exec 1: err no, it's not Prof--
Exec 2:. ..Jean Grey?
Exec 1:.Okay look, the X-Men thing's not really important...
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Dumb And Dumber To Cert: 15 / 109 mins / Dir. Peter Farrelly & Bobby Farrelly
Ah, 1994. It seems like only weeks ago that my best friend and I sat in the front row of Canterbury ABC cinema watching Dumb And Dumber, each working our way steadily through a bottle of wine*1, and laughing uproariously along to Jim Carrey at the height of his game. I had a coffee this evening, and I didn't laugh quite that much. Perhaps this is a lesson.
Set twenty years after the events of the first movie, Dumb And Dumber To sees our heroes reunited and embarking on a road-trip to track down Harry's recently discovered long-lost daughter, Penny; so that Harry can try and convince her to be a kidney donor for him, and so that Lloyd can woo her into marrying him. All they have to do is meet up with Penny at the KEN science expo in El Paso where she's due to give a speech on behalf of her genius adoptive-father. What could possibly go wrong?
With the hapless pair taking a cross-country trip to seek out an attractive young woman whilst becoming embroiled in a botched crime-caper, the film is a thoroughly shameless rehash of what's gone before. It's carried off, for the most part, by the chemistry between Jeff Daniels and Jim Carrey, and they still play the physical gags to perfection after all these years. Sadly, even these two are frequently derailed by a script which is still in its second-draft, peppered with verbal jokes which don't quite work for the characters delivering them, and even a few toe-curling callbacks to the 1994 original*2.
All in all the film sort-of-works, coasting largely on the charm of having Harry and Lloyd back together. But this is a film that the Farrelly brothers should have put out in the late 1990's, when a lot of its more off-colour humour and naivety could have been forgiven by being caught up in the whirlwind of delivering an anticipated sequel. Sadly, this isn't the case in 2014; this film didn't need to be made*3. That is was is a testament to the continued bankability of Carrey, Daniels and the Farrellys, but while it's certainly nothing to be ashamed of, I doubt the film will be headlining many of the cast's CVs in the near future.
Extra points though, for a Hot Fuzz-level cameo by Bill Murray.
For all my moaning and over-analysis though, I rather enjoyed Dumb And Dumber To. It's certainly got a higher hit-rate than certain othercomedies this year, and as transparently unnecessary as it is, the film comes from a far less cynical place than its stablemates.
But I'd be lying if I said it wouldn't be improved by a bottle of wine…
Well, it sets the tone, certainly.
Mostly, although not always as much as I should have, I suspect.
Didn't hear one, but the volume in Screen Four was set to Deafening™ this evening, and there are a couple of scenes where I may have missed one. I'll go with no, though.
Can we stop putting Rob Riggle in things now, though? He's not as good as he seems to think he is...
*1 They were more innocent times. Well, they were times when cinema staff were less inclined to search customers on the way into the auditorium, certainly.
*2 Basically just Jim Carrey saying a few key phrases from the first film, occasionally, with very little reason or context; the most basic and insulting type of callback.
*3 The most worrying moment is the film's end credits which feature side-by-side clips of the first film and the one you've just watched, essentially reminding you of how fantastic Dumb And Dumber was and also that you haven't enjoyed this one quite as much. Or in the case of many critics, anywhere near as much, apparently.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Kick-Ass 2(Spoiler-free) Cert: 15 / 103 mins / Dir. Jeff Wadlow
Expectation is the enemy, and the victor, of many a sequel. Some manage to equal their predecessor, a few even surpass it, but following up a breakout hit like Kick-Ass was never going to be easy, no matter how much it stood holding the door open for another movie. Not only is K-A2 contending with its elder sibling, it's also surrounded by many other page-to-screen adaptations, and being a bit indie is no longer a unique selling point. So, how does it fare?
Well, the first half never quite clears the hurdle of 'largely unnecessary sequel', with clunky dialogue, glaring flashbacks and a clockwork mechanism of setup / fight-scene / setup / fight-scene. The thread with Mindy/Hit-Girl trying to fit in at school was the worst offender, with a resolution so telegraphed as to almost be a waste of everyone's time. But thankfully the second half reaches down and gives the first a hand. Everything from the return of Hit-Girl onwards is quite marvellous, and the story suddenly starts to feel like it has some consequence. This really is Moretz's film (despite what I've just grumbled about), and she gets the best deal in terms of having material to work with. That said, Taylor-Johnson and Mintz-Plasse are on great form as the returning hero and villain respectively, and Jim Carrey gives a fantastic dialled-down performance as Colonel Stars and Stripes. Everyone else, unfortunately, is in one-trick-pony territory, and there just isn't the time or scope to give such a massive cast-list that much to do, no matter how entertaining they are. I also noticed a very strong Brit presence on-screen, which was nice. I suspect it's a combination of the Matthew Vaughn connection and the UK location filming, but I'm not complaining.
Ultimately, I enjoyed Kick-Ass 2 very much, but I'd be fibbing if I said it was anywhere near as iconic as its forebear. A third installment would benefit greatly from having Vaughn back at the helm. It spends a little too much time moralising, and not quite enough having fun. But when it is enjoying itself, you can't help but be swept along for the ride.
Oh, and stick around after the credits for a short, final scene.
Almost.
Mostly.
I'd say so, yes.
If you're already a fan, the cinema.
No.
I will.
I didn't hear one, but it could well have been buried. There was a lot of screaming..
Now that Geek has almost become the new mainstream, is the comic-book-movie well starting to run dry?
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Imagine, if you will, what you expect a co-headlining Jim Carrey / Steve Carrell movie to be like. Now if you're still on-board, welcome in, that'll be £8.60 plus your drinks and popcorn, sit where you like there's plenty of room. Everyone else? You're right, it's not for you. Although it was never going to be.
The film is as entirely predictable as that trailer, (you've just seen the best gags) if nowhere near as tight. The Incredible Burt Wonderstone is so mechanically structured and delivered you can almost see the scriptwriters pedalling in the background. When it works, it's chucklesome at best. When it doesn't, it's painful*1. Although there's an intentional campy one-upmanship to the proceedings, I suspect this storyline about two ageing performers constantly trying to shout louder than one another for desperate attention has been applied without a shred of self-awareness or irony. I'm genuinely amazed that Adam Sandler doesn't have an appearance anywhere.
But it's not all bad. The film shrugs its shoulders and asks '…well, what were you expecting?' And it has a point. This crudely applied slapstick of torn-trousers and drillbits-to-the-head is exactly what I expected. I did chuckle at some of the jokes, and I did smile at the end when the soundtrack told me to. In its own half-arsed way, it delivers. It doesn't deliver much, but it never promised it.
I expect many people to tear this film a new one and be very sniffy about it*2, but you already knew what was on the menu when you saw the poster, never mind watched the trailer. You only have yourselves to blame. As do I.
Yeah… yeah.
Sometimes.
Oh, probably.
DVD. At a push. Pay no more than £4.
Afraid so.
Not unless drunk.
No.
*1 You have to wonder what kind of scriptwriting meetings resulted in the decision to use the word 'rapist' as a running joke. Nope, not even kidding.
*2 Yes, including me. What of it?
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
A disclaimer where it's due: during the early '90s console-wars I was always, if anything, a Mario-kid. This was only because we happened to have Nintendo devices in the house rather than Sega, but the long term knock-on effect of this is that I have precisely zero baggage with Sonic The Hedgehog, other than trailers which did nothing to convince me it was worth seeing.
