Thread: Viddy's Views

Nice review I would give it a C too

You didn't find Dark City's "fight scene" at the end to be painfully cheesy?

But yes, I agree about the pacing of Watchmen. The graphic novel should've been a mini-series instead of a film -- it's too much.

Yes actually I did find the finalle of Dark City to be cheesy, especially with the stagey bits where Rufus Sewell is floating up in the air, but the buildup to that moment is so incredibly brilliant and the viewer wants the him to succeed in destroying this nightmarish dystopic Hell so much, that I can easily forgive those five minutes or so that are completely out of sync with the brillance of the previous 90 minutes of the film.

Inception (2010, Christopher Nolan)



Dreams aren't exactly a new concept to focus a film around, and Inception is the latest of several "action idea" films to hit the screens. Dreams within dreams within dreams is a cool concept, I'll admit. A few other films that treaded down similar territory as Inception - some more alike, some less include; Total Recall, The Matrix, Dark City, and so on. Movies that deal with dreams and reality that are in less of an action vein include Vanilla Sky, The Science of Sleep, Being John Malkovich, and on and on... Why do I name drop these other films? I do so to point out that Inception is really not groundbreaking at all, and this concept has been floating around in Hollywood for several decades now. I guess I find it a bit perplexing when I read reviews or hear people discuss how groundbreaking and inovative the film is. Not really, audiences have seen this type of thing before and done much better.
The film begins with putting the audience into the action and then progresses into an extended exposition explaining the premise. Leonard DiCaprio is a thief and fugitive who steals information by putting people to sleep and then entering their dreams to extract information. Even more difficult to do is to implement rather than extract information, thus the title of the film. Cillian Murphy, one of my favorite young actors, plays Leo's target for the film for whom our protagonist must dissaude from following in his father's business.
A simple plot really, but the film would like the viewer to think it's more complicated than it really is. Of course Christopher Nolan throws in a backstory about how Leo lost his wife and now she haunts his dreams and his career and so on. This would work if there was any chemistry between the two characters of which there is not. Also there is no effort spent on developing the relationship or scenes spent on showing the two together in love aside from a couple scenes where they say they are in love. Regardless this romantic/haunting love backstory is thrown into the film for two main purposes. Number one is of course marketing and demographic based. Without this sideplot the film would be a difficult sell to females who must tag along with their boyfriends to see the film. The second reason of course is to give Leo's character a movtivation and driving force, but to show he is fallable, which gives the illusion of a three dimension character, when really his character is very thinly drawn.
Juno Hard Candy is also thrown into the film who looks a little too young and child-like for the role of a person responsible for creating a dreamworld. But she's a fresh face who will attract young audiences who would normally go see a Michael Bay film this time of year, so it was for all purposes a smart casting move. As a viewer I found it insulting that her character is let in on everything and understands more after a day or two of working with Leo than his entire crew who has been working with him for years. But that fits within the film rules because Leo's crew are secondary characters, while Juno is a primary character. Also miscast is Joseph Gordon-Levitt who plays an action role, but also looks like a little kid. For this part it calls for someone a bit more gruff.
Up until now my complaints about Inception have mainly been limited to the plot, which by the way the film breaks every rule that it builds up with the last frame. SPOILERS, but either the top will spin or it won't spin. If it spins it is a dream. If it falls it is reality. Well Nolan jerks his audience around by having it wobble and then stand up straight, clearly going for the ambiguous "let's discuss it and try to figure it out" ending. Too bad he can't stick to his own film's rules. I dare anyone who has not seen this film, but will or who will see it a subsequent time to count how many seconds each shot is held. I don't think you will get above five seconds. The camera is constantly moving and the editing is as frentic as a Michael Bay film, with no shot held to enjoy the beauty of the mise en scene. The soundtrack is stock "urgent" music and never lets up. There is very little dialogue in the film outside of exposition, and plot. There is no chemistry between any of the characters, or reason I should care about any of this.
Chris Nolan is a fine filmmaker, but clearly he has been goaded by the suits in Hollywood to make hybrid films that attract both the film snob viewer and the Michael Bay viewer. In that regard Inception is a masterpiece of marketing because it is able to attract and cater to a broad group of viewers. Memento was amazing, but Inception... ehhhh not so much. If I want a "thinking film" I'll watch one, and if I want an action film I'll watch one. I'll even watch Total Recall if I want a brilliant hybrid of the two. I'll watch Inception again if I want a headache.

Grade: D

Outland (1981 Peter Hyams)



Peter Hyams seems to make very decent science-fiction pictures, and Outland is one of his top ones. You may even label him a "sci-fi" director. Of course his movies tend to be more layered than a simple genre label can describe. Outland has been described as High Noon in space, but I think that is a bit of an over-simplification. Yes the plot is similar with Sean Connery standing in for Gary Cooper as a new marshall sent to keep order on a mining operation on Jupiter's moon "I-O." Peter Boyle plays the head administrator stationed on the moon for the company and after a series of suicides and unlikely deaths Connery uncovers a plot. Boyle sends two hired-killers to stop him.
The first half of the film has some excellent build-up and atmosphere. The special effects are clunky, but for me they work in putting me in the mining station and believing that the world Hyams creates exists beyond the camera. I enjoy the subtle acting Connery employs here, which is the opposite of his arrogant and seemingly invulnerable Bond character. I will probably go so far as to say Outland is Sean Connery's best role from an acting perspective. Outland does contain several nice action scenes. The finale is servicable, though predictable. The most tense bit of the film is an extended foot-chase through the bars, operations, and corridors of the mining facility. Excellently paced and edited to follow the action. It takes place roughly an hour into the film.

Grade: B