Dark Waters Cert: 12A / 127 mins / Dir. Todd Haynes / Trailer
Interesting sidetrack on the excellent Sciptnotes podcast recently, where it was discussed that production companies routinely buy the rights not only to news stories but also magazine articles about news stories. And it's not that these are tales of real-life angst just yearning for the big screen treatment and a wider audience, more that their leading actors enjoy the earnest, awards-bait frowning, and the films themselves routinely make modest but reliable amounts of money. A reminder that commerce will always beat art in these times.
And I only mention all this because it's like a tonal template for Todd Haynes' Dark Waters, a hand-wringing political thriller about that time DuPont poisoned an entire town for forty years. Mark Ruffalo leads as the underdog lawyer*1 trying to take on The Man™ in a story which begins in 1998 then spans eighteen years, and boy do the audience feel every single one of them*2. That said, if your movie regularly has to caption-card that it's a year later because nothing of narrative note has happened in the intervening months, this may be a sign that it'd make a better documentary (although in one photo-heavy recap, it basically turns into one anyway).
Whether or not the audience is familiar with the source material, there are absolutely no surprises here. Mario Correa and Matthew Michael Carnahan wrangle the legal saga into the most rudimentary screenplay imaginable, less of a crafted story and more a list of events in chronological order. With sincerity doubling up for intrigue, there's no doubt Dark Waters' heart is in the right place, but the end result is very nuts-and-bolts. Because so much of the film takes place at boardroom and kitchen tables, there's an awful lot of telling-not-showing going on. Even when the film does opt to show, the action is so On The Nose that it could pass for a pair of pince-nez.
To be fair, Dark Waters isn't exactly the film the trailer makes it out to be. It's somehow even more so. Act I tells us that the town may be being poisoned, Act II tells us that they are and Act III tells us that they were. All with a colour palette so desaturated that I was about to go out into the foyer and complain that the red bulb had packed up in the projector.
If the real message here is that many people give up on lengthy litigation dramas because death just seems like an easier option, then well done.
Dear The Film Industry,
Please stop making direct-port films from magazine articles*3.
We already have the news.
We go to the cinema to get away from all that.
(because you know if Ruffalo's character had been female then Jessica Chastain would have been cast in this)
It is not.
If you've got this far through the review, you're either definitely going to anyway or are definitely not.
Absolutely not.
That's very likely.
There isn't.
Level 2: Mark Ruffalo has been in all manner of Avengers movies with, among others, Sam 'Windu' Jackson.
*1 In one scene, Tim Robbins hilariously puts forward the notion that lawyers are actually the good guys in this crazy world of ours, and I'll be honest I don't laugh that hard in most comedies that I watch, so fair play. [ BACK ]
*2 In a sort of cinematic Dorian Gray twist, the actors barely age at all on-screen while the audience feel themselves growing older instead. Putting more grey in Ruffalo's hair and changing Anne Hathaway's wig doesn't count. [ BACK ]
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.
Well, I didn't think I'd be making comparative references against the third Avengers get-together until at least this time next year, but a conversation at the weekend raised the point that for the more, ahem, civilian viewer, there are two superhero movies out at the moment. Inevitably, some casual cinema-goers are going to be standing in the foyer deciding which one they want to watch*1.
Because for a lot of people, the choice will be between a pair of Marvel flicks starring a partially-CGI'd Josh Brolin as a bad-ass with a time-slider*2. But that's not really an accurate comparison, is it? Or is it? Infinity War and Deadpool 2 are very different products, albeit for partly the same audience*3. The merc-with-the=mouth has come armed with the fuckbombs, but it's Earth's Mightiest Heroes who carry the weightier story.
And yet in the weeks since my first two passes, I'd forgotten how funny Infinity War is, especially given its consistently escalating death-toll. Although obviously it's very different from that other movie, tonally. Avengers' humour is very much the Private Eye to Deadpool's Viz. Both are great institutions which can't replace each other, and don't try.
So, watching Infinity War again after a few weeks, I'm pretty much of the opinion that any deaths which occurred before the Infinity Gauntlet was fully operational (only four, remember) will be permanent. The amount of build-up, screen-time or dramatic weight allocated to each one seems fairly irreversible, and the film's legacy would be cheapened if these characters managed to find themselves magically resurrected by the end of Avengers 4.
Conversely, the casting-losses which occur once Thanos snaps his fingers (the other twelve*4) are, to put it mildly, suspiciously rapid given their narrative stature. The heroes that flutter out of existence leave behind an intriguingly-thinned (and deliberately 'classic') team for next May's concluding chapter, but the ultimate resolution lies in the knowledge that Spider-Man 2, Black Panther 2 and Guardians 3 have already been commissioned.
But hey, I've previously joined the chorus bemoaning Marvel's reluctance to apply a little consequence to their continuity, and it's still by no means certain who will survive into Phase 4. At a rate of three cinematic entries a year, the MCU is now dense enough to give classic heroes the rest they've earned, while still maintaining forward momentum. Maybe, as a man from another galaxy once said, "it's time to let old things die".
Because we all know this isn't the end of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It's not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning...*5
Avengers films.
it is.
It is.
2019 will tell, I guess.
Not likely, since you'll love it as well. Right?.
There is, layered in when Ebony Maw goes for a space-walk.
*1 And of course that's perhaps not the way things should work. But let's not forget I sat in a Saturday night screening of A Ghost Story and watched people walk out mid-way, almost certain that they'd made their choice on a whim since Annabelle: Creation was playing two screens down and was likely the choice on the other side of their coin. Not all moviegoers are as disciplined or as informed as us, dear reader. And that's why I'm here; to help. Or maybe to lecture. Either/or. Okay, it's probably the second one. [ BACK ]
*2 Okay, Thanos-related plot question. When Thor is on the Milano, he tells the Guardians that Thanos "stole the stone and slaughtered half my people". So... where are the survivors, exactly? Because everyone on-screen looked pretty much floaty-in-space-dead to me, the Asgardian ship looked completely mullered, and the Guardians of The Galaxy (the only responders to the distress-call) didn't pick up anyone else from the wreckage.
It had previously struck me that there's not much of a big deal made of Thor being the last Asgardian now, especially as the whole point of Ragnarok was that the refugees fleeing the planet were the symbol of endurance and hope. But yeah, maybe half of that film's survivors are pootling off on the B-Ark somewhere, right? [ BACK ]
*3 For the record, there are currently Deadpool 2 cup-toppers on sale in the foyer. I expect that for the 12A certificate hero-flicks aimed at family audiences, but this is a hard 15. T-shirts absolutely, popcorn buckets at a push, but cup-toppers? Maybe it's meant to be ironic. Although I'm pretty sure the money that Fox are making from the products looks the same either way...
[ BACK ]
*4 Yes, of course I made a list. And no, I'm not going to reproduce it here. I know I marked the review 'spoilers' but I'm not a complete animal... [ BACK ]
*5 Yeah, I went there. I'll be wearing a plastic Union Jack bowler hat and writing angry letters to local newspapers, next. [ BACK ]
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.
Thor: Ragnarok (2D / second-pass / SPOILERS)
Cert: 12A / 130 mins / Dir. Taika Waititi / Trailer
And so, I somehow find myself with surprisingly little to say about Thor: Ragnarok. Especially odd given a) how much I loved the film the first time around, and b) how long it's taken me to schedule this second-pass despite singing the praises of the film to everyone in between*1, to the point where I've missed the 3D screenings*2, so have only seen this most psychedelic of Marvel movies in two dimensions.
And this shorter-than-usual review is certainly not because I enjoyed the movie any less the second time; quite the opposite in fact. The self-defeating mechanics of the villains in Surtur and Hela made more sense when viewed from a distance, as that's basically something that's spread out over the whole screenplay but quickly explained by Thor in the middle of the final battle. It's a neat solution to Marvel's usual problem of either nerfing the bad guys and making them too easily beaten, or having them survive and making the heroes look weak. Because everybody loses here, we all win.
And speaking of losses, I also love how much has changed at the end of Ragnarok. I've mentioned on occasion that despite enjoying The Dark World very much, not a lot has developed by the time the credits roll other than Frigga sailing off the waterfall and Odin being missin-in-action. This time round, Thor's lost Mjölnir, lost his hair, lost an eye, lost his father (for real this time), lost his home and very nearly lost his people. And yet the film is so resolutely hopeful in its final moments.
Mark Mothersbaugh's score stood out a little more this time, too. I still maintain that the orchestral sections are mainly Loud Film-Type Noises™, but I'm loving the more disco-infused synth tracks which evoke the iconic Scarface soundtrack by Giorgio Moroder. Although I also still maintain that the Led Zeppelin moments are greater than either of those.
The under-writing of Hela's character is more evident on re-watching, with the Goddess of Death never really making it past the pantomime-villain marker, even though she's personally responsible for a considerable number of screen-fatalities. Also, some of Cate Blanchett's ADR-work for the character is dreadful; the sync is word-perfect, but the emotion in her 'final' voice doesn't match the face she was acting with on-set. But I got an extra chuckle from watching Matt Damon in the theatre-scene, as it occurred to me that this is the second time he's played Loki, the first being in Kevin Smith's Dogma.
But all in all this is magnificent, Marvel reaching further than before and still effortlessly securing their grasp. Ragnarok is a great end to a great year for the studio (cinematically, at least)…
All of The Marvels.
Hell, yes.
Hell, yes.
This film will be on the front-page of many CVs for some time to come.
A little bit, but not enough for you to worry about.
Another pass; still didn't hear one. Not impressed.
Level 1: As well as what could be described as an absolute shit-ton of visual and audio effects crew, this film features the guy who's the voice of Gar Saxon.
*1 Come on, I'm a busy blogger. I can't very well go swanning off to watch repeat-viewings of movies when things like A Bad Moms Christmas are awaiting the scalpel of criticism. [ BACK ]
*2 The 3D/RealD showings traditionally play for the first two weeks of a 'big' release, with that second being significantly pared down in the screen-share. But when Ragnarok opened at my local, it didn't go into 3D until its second full week. So all those of us queuing up on the first day to see the movie were all paying less to the cinema, the distributor and to Marvel as a result. I've got no great feeling on 3D either way, but I like to try and see Marvel movies in the format at least once, where it's available. [ BACK ]
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.
Thor: Ragnarok (2D / first-pass / SPOILER-FREE)
Cert: 12A / 130 mins / Dir. Taika Waititi / Trailer
“You must finish what you’ve started. […] Your ancestors called it magic and you call it science. Well, I come from a place where they’re one and the same thing…”
While nothing is ever truly certain in this world, it would be fairly safe to say that 17 movies into a series that’s less than a decade old, Marvel Studios have turned the magic into a consistent, repeatable science. Even the weakest entries are still pretty good, and the Phase Three behemoth continues its strong form with Thor: Ragnarok, the third standalone entry for the god of thunder.
It’s slightly ironic that 2013’s Thor: The Dark World initially cued up the planet-hopping ethos which James Gunn's Guardians Of The Galaxy perfected, while falling slightly short of the finishing post itself. Because Ragnarok evokes the best of Gunn's work, while owing a debt to 2016’s Doctor Strange for successfully introducing actual sorcery into a cause-and-effect universe. The Thor of the third-coming rides the wave of its siblings, all with a heavy dose of dry humour. There are spaceships, there are spells; there are battleaxes and there are guffaws at every turn.
With Taika Waititi at the helm and a screenplay from Eric Pearson, Craig Kyle and Christopher Yost (all three of whom have previously worked on Marvel properties), the film is in safe and loving hands from the outset. But that’s not to say that the characters are wrapped in narrative cotton wool. The events in Ragnarok have lasting consequences for the future of the Marvel Cinematic Universe...
Chris Hemsworth is well in his stride as the eponymous hero of course, as is Tom Hiddleston as his antagonistic brother Loki. Anthony Hopkins’ Odin is back with minimal scenery-chewing, while Idris Elba’s Heimdall plays a key role this time, even if he feels shortchanged in terms of screen-time. Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk makes a long-overdue return, playing the role in the way he’s made it his own; furious, petulant and thoroughly endearing. The Warriors Three have a fleeting reappearance, while the post-credits scene from Doctor Strange is given some fleshing out in its own full sequence. New to the cast and thrust centre-stage is Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie, a hands-on role for a great performer (even if her character setup becomes lost in the overall noise of the movie).
The most anticipated name on the roster, though, is that of Cate Blanchett as Hela, the goddess of death. An actress who rarely disappoints, she plays true to form here, but never quite manages the true malice her role requires. ‘Revenge’ is a staple motivation for comic-book villains, but it’s really the only card in Hela’s deck, and Cate can’t seem to get past the theatrical posturing of her character and down to business. While it’s certainly an improvement on Christopher Ecclestone’s Malekith from The Dark World, it seems that Marvel haven’t quite solved their villain-problem yet.
But one thing which is in plentiful supply is charismatic supporting players. At one point where Thor awakens strapped into a chair being conveyed to meet ‘The Grandmaster’, a silhouette intro-montage plays on the walls behind him. Suddenly, a lone figure strikes a pose which is held in unmistakable freeze-frame; Jeff Goldblum has entered the screenplay. Every line, every gesture, every mid-sentence pause of Goldblum’s deftly steals the scene it’s in. Luckily for the film he’s used with restraint, but The Grandmaster is an absolute joy to behold.
Coming a very close second place in the attention-grabbing stakes is the mo-cap and voice turn from the director as Korg, arguably the Drax of Ragnarok, with Waititi’s native Kiwi-twang offsetting his fearsome rock-like appearance in deadpan observational comedy.
Mark Mothersbaugh is on scoring duties, and while the soundtrack makes the right noises in the right places, it’s not as thematically strong as previous entries from the likes of Michael Giacchino or Brian Tyler. In fact, other than a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it snippet, none of Tyler’s work from The Dark World makes a return - especially odd given how much time the film spends on Asgard and in the company of characters we’ve met there before. On a first-pass, the most standout musical moments seem to be where Led Zeppelin are inserted into the mix, which is fair enough.
All in all, Thor: Ragnarok is Marvel Studios rounding off 2017 with the A-game they’ve brought throughout. Fun, exciting battles and bickering, in exotic locations and with lasting character development. Fantastic stuff.
The battle at the end of the universe took place in Screen 5 of my local cinema, and Taika Waititi finished what Kenneth Branagh started. Marvel’s marketing department call it magic and and their effects crews call it science. But from where I sat tonight? They’re one and the same thing…
The business-end:
• Is there a Wilhelm Scream? Didn't hear one this time.
• Is there a Stan Lee cameo? Yes.
• Is there a mid-credits scene? Yes.
• Is there a post-credits scene? Yes.
Well, the Marvel Cinematic Universe movies, to be fair…
Oh, yes.
Oh, yes.
Strong previous-game all round, but it's a strong contender.
I very well might.
I didn't hear one this time, but hit me up if you did yeah?
Level 1: The voice of Savage Opress is a voice in this.
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.
So, magic-troupe, The Four Horsemen, with their entourage and nemeses in tow, return in the sequel to 2013's Now You See Me*1. Well, 75% of the Four Horsemen return, but since Isla Fisher's off having a baby and the follow-up simply couldn't wait, her character is indelicately written out and Lizzy Caplan is even more indelicately drafted in as The Girl One™. And Caplan's good (although she always is), but the handling of the situation feels insulting to both the cast and the audience alike (although Mélanie Laurent's protagonist from the first movie isn't even mentioned, let alone discarded).
Relying heavily on the audience being familiar with NYSM, Ed Solomon's screenplay doesn't spend a lot of time setting up the modus operandi or filling in the blanks between installments (about a year in plot-time). Aiming for a slick, globe-trotting caper but feeling more like someone running for a bus, the film's pacing is all over the place, and the various sub-plots are just as inconsequential as the headline-act. Whereas the previous entry was a series of loosely connected set-pieces holding together a heist-movie, this one feels more like an over-produced first draft of an episode of Hustle, with the central characters jumping through hoops to steal a Magic Computer Chip Macguffin™ that even the script doesn't bother explaining adequately.
Messrs Ruffalo, Eisenberg and Franco reprise their roles to varying degrees of success, but Woody Harrelson's turn as Merritt as well as his own twin brother means he's arguably putting in the most work out of all the players, and apparently having the most fun as a result. Michael Caine phones in another performance, but at least Morgan Freeman's not on cinematic autopilot for this outing, although he's still being absolutely no more than Morgan Freeman™ (although when was the last time he wasn't?). Meanwhile, Daniel Radcliffe struggles to find meaningful work after graduating Hogwarts. Keep looking, Dan.
And I know that this is a bugbear of mine second only to accents, but what the hell is with the geography in this movie? Once the Four Horsemen hit Ol' London Town and split up to give separate diversionary street-magic shows, Merritt's brother (Harrelson) takes Merritt (Harrelson) to one side and crows, "So where are you guys moving towards? By the Thames? Tower Bridge? Greenwich? Greenwich! I know where you're going..!". Except that when he's saying all this, they're already standing in Greenwich. Yeah you're right, I'm sure no-one else will have noticed...
Luckily, the film is just enough fun to paper over the cracks caused by the amount of sense it doesn't make. Just. That said, it's not as likeable as its predecessor and doesn't carry the goodwill it seems to think it can coast on. In the best showbiz tradition, Now You See Me 2 is fairly entertaining but utterly disposable. The second time this year I've been underwhelmed by Four Horsemen.
After the faux-moralistic, climactic showdown, perhaps the most ambitious trick the film attempts is in its final moments where Morgan Freeman's Thaddeus tries to convince the Horsemen (and by extension, the audience) that they've been through something meaningful.
But by that point, we've all seen behind the curtain and realised there was nothing there, after all...
Level 1: Although it's a very low-key link, Shina Shihoko Nagai and Attila G. Kerekes have a small roles in this movie, as well as the upcoming Star Wars: Rogue One.
*1 And before I get started (unless you're reading this footnote after the review), I feel I should say that while I really enjoyed the first Now You See Me at the time, it's left me with a sort of cinematic itch. And not a good one. The problem (if you see it as a problem) is that I'm not really a fan of watching Magicians™. I'm fascinated by what they do and admire if immensely from a technical and performance point-of-view, but I'm one of those irritating realists who believes in Illusions™, rather than Magic™. I'll be just as gob-smacked as the next punter when the JCB (or whatever) apparently disappears, but I don't believe for a second that supernatural forces are at play. And since it's the actual job of the Magician™ to resolutely not explain how they've achieved the illusion, this ultimately leaves me more irritated than awe-struck. The more a performer plays their art down, the more smug they seem to become, somehow.
Anyway, the reason I'm raising this is that while it may be a fantastic experience to watch this stuff in a live environment (or even a recording which was made in one), using it as the basis for a film is completely pointless. Moreover, this would still apply even if the core team were actual illusionists, rather than actors-playing-illusionists. You can already do anything in a film, it's called film-making. If you're the kind of viewer who oohs-and-aahs at Jesse Eisenberg making the rain go up (even though that trick is explained in the film), you're probably going to shit yourself when you watch Age of Ultron. If the line between movie-real and audience-real is sometimes fuzzy, Now You See Me is the cinematic equivalent of Gaussian Blur…
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.
Interesting sidetrack on the excellent Sciptnotes podcast recently, where it was discussed that production companies routinely buy the rights not only to news stories but also magazine articles about news stories. And it's not that these are tales of real-life angst just yearning for the big screen treatment and a wider audience, more that their leading actors enjoy the earnest, awards-bait frowning, and the films themselves routinely make modest but reliable amounts of money. A reminder that commerce will always beat art in these times.
