Tag Archives: sci-fi

The World’s End

Posted on by

worlds end

Director: Edgar Wright

Writer: Simon Pegg, Edgar Wright

Starring:  Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, Martin Freeman, Paddy Considine, Eddie Marsan, Rosamund Pike

Tomatometer: 90/88/80 (all critics, top critics, audience)

Spoiler-free Summary: Gary King is a drunk man-child.  His happiest memory involves a somewhat legendary, yet unfinished, pub crawl that took place 20 years earlier.  In an attempt to recapture his glory days, Gary rounds up his four former mates for a second stab at the “Golden Mile”.

Two Cents: There are two types of comedies in Hollywood.  Most comedies fall into the lowbrow bin (Happy Gilmore, Old School, Caddyshack, etc.).  A few can be considered highbrow (just about anything from the Coen brothers, Wes Anderson, or Woody Allen).  Somehow, Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright have managed to carve out a third category – hybrow, a hybrid of the two brows.  I could have gone with “unibrow“, but that’s already taken.

Sure, if we discussed it for a few minutes, we’d come up with a few other films that could be considered a perfect cross between low and highbrow humor, but I’d argue that most of those films, more likely, are either low-end highbrow or high-end lowbrow.  In the interest of saving time, let’s get back to the task at hand.

It takes a true genius to turn a debaucherous pub crawl into a piercing look at middle age.  Luckily, this movie had a few geniuses pulling its strings.  Simon Pegg is probably most recognizable for his supporting role in the two most recent Star Trek movies and the last two Mission: Impossible installments.  However, that’s just a watered-down and Hollywoodified version of the British actor.  The real Pegg only comes out to play when he’s teamed up with his pals Edgar Wright and Nick Frost.  In three films together, this trio has reached a level of writer-director-actor chemistry that is extremely rare in today’s Hollywood landscape.  DiCaprio and Scorsese have it, Burton and Depp have it, but there aren’t many others.  (Note: Technically, The World’s End is part of a trilogy, which also includes Shaun of the Dead  and Hot Fuzz, but each of the three movies can stand firmly on its own.  I prefer to look at them as separate films, simply because I want more!)

No matter what ridiculous scenes might show up in a script, the most humorous part of any comedy is its dialogue.  If the dialogue doesn’t feel natural and witty, a comedy has no chance at being truly funny.  Dialogue is what separates a movie from a YouTube clip.  The World’s End is oozing with clever and hilarious lines layered with boatloads of subtext, the mark of truly gifted writers.  Still, the movie never gets bogged down in being funny.  The 12 pubs on the crawl serve as a spectacular device for briskly moving the story forward and creating believable opportunities for the introduction of supporting characters.

I don’t want to give away any plot points, so I’ll keep this review brief.  The acting is great, the jokes are top-notch, and there’s even a surprise visit from Bill Nighy’s voice.  What more could you want?

Should I/Shouldn’t I: You may feel ill-equipped to watch The World’s End, if you haven’t yet seen Shaun and Fuzz.  Rest assured, that won’t make much of a difference.  If you’ve been waiting for a truly funny comedy that doesn’t rely exclusively on “toilet humor” and the f-word, but still makes you long for your teenage years, this is it.  

Sundae Rating: Two scoops with whipped cream

Elysium

Posted on by

elysium

Director: Neill Blomkamp

Writer: Neill Blomkamp

Starring:  Matt Damon, Jodie Foster, Sharlto Copley

Tomatometer: 66/67/70 (all critics, top critics, audience)

Spoiler-free Summary: In 2154, Earth is overpopulated, poor, and in ruin. Floating somewhere between Earth and the moon is Elysium, a secure paradise inhabited by what used to be Earth’s upper class.  Once Max, a blue collar factory worker, is exposed to a lethal dose of radiation, he makes a deal with a smuggler who promises to get Max to Elysium and into one of their cure-all medical chambers.

Feel free to enjoy this aptly titled song from one of my favorite movies while you read.

Two Cents: With the NFL season fast approaching, this is an appropriate time to discuss the phenomenon known as the “sophomore slump”.  In football, it is widely believed, players who breakout as stars during their respective rookie seasons have a tendency to underwhelm the following year.  One great recent example is Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton.  During his rookie year, Newton amazed fans, and even set a plethora of rookie records.  In his sophomore campaign, though, Newton’s statistics actually declined in a variety of important categories – passing yards, completion percentage, passing touchdowns, rushing touchdowns, and more.  Loads of players have experienced similar declines.

At its core, the sophomore slump phenomenon revolves around the belief that the element of surprise is a significant factor in success.  Newton spent his whole life preparing for his first season in the NFL.  When he finally made it, all that work paid off.  (This aspect is similar to what many musicians go through with a second album.  The first album consists of all the best material the musician has written up until that point.  The second mostly consists of material form a span of a year or two.  Consider Alanis Morissette’s career after Jagged Little Pill.)  However, during his second season, once his opponents knew what to expect from him, Newton had to spend much of his time learning new ways to complete old tasks.  Performance builds both high expectations and heightened resistance.

That concludes my unnecessarily wordy tangent.

When Neill Blomkamp directed District 9, his first feature-length film, he was, for all intents and purposes, a complete nobody.  Lucky for him, he had two aces in the hole – a whopping spoonful of talent and a rich, influential PR department in the form of Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson.  While no one expected much from the South African whiz kid, Blomkamp directed (and co-wrote) one of the most critically acclaimed sci-fi films in recent memory (90/89/79 on Rotten Tomatoes, for what it’s worth).  He both raised the bar for original sci-fi entertainment and brought in over $210,000,000 in worldwide ticket sales, all without a single famous actor.  Needless to say, a lot was expected from Blomkamp’s second feature film, Elysium.

With megastars like Matt Damon and Jodie Foster along for the ride, Elysium certainly has more of a Hollywood feel than did District 9.  Unfortunately, Hollywood has a spotty record when it comes to making things better.  Damon is good, but not great.  We’ve seen so many great performances from him in the past, and this time he seems to let the special effects do most of the talking.  Jodie Foster is terrible as Elysium’s defense minister.  Her performance is nearly as uncomfortable as her rambling Golden Globes Awards speech.  Supporting roles from William Fichtner and Diego Luna are somewhat wasted and underwhelming.

Sharlto Copley shines as military contractor Kruger, even though he feels a bit scrawny for the macho role.  The surprise of the cast is Wagner Moura, who plays Spider, the smuggler.  Moura’s gravely voice and perfected limp contribute to a complex and admirable character who steals a number of scenes.

Elysium is such a blatant Occupy Wall Street homage that Blomkamp loses sight of his (presumed) goal of telling an original story.  There’s not enough development of the two worlds – Earth and Elysium.  Blomkamp seems to assume that the viewer “gets it”, as if he can simply say, “There are poor people and there are rich people; let’s move on”.  This story could have benefitted greatly from a deeper dive into how the 99% and the 1% are actually living in 2154.  In addition, that development should have included an explanation as to why the rich are keeping their medical advances from the poor.  They’ve already created their own planet; do they really need a monopoly on medicine?  There are some plot holes, as well.

The good news about most sophomore slumps is that they are just that, slumps.  There’s no reason to think Blomkamp’s third movie, Chappie, won’t be a gem.  He’s still got loads of talent, and, with Elysium under his belt, he’ll likely have a much better handle on building a movie Hollywood style, the second time around.  Heck, in two weeks, I might even pick Cam Newton for my fantasy team.

Should I/Shouldn’t I: Don’t get me wrong.  Elysium is a good movie.  It’s got a decent plot, great visual effects, and, generally, solid performances.  It just won’t blow you away like District 9 did (I hope you’ve seen it).  It’s still exciting to see some original sci-fi material making it onto the silver screen.  Some of the sci-fi reboots in recent years have been pretty impressive, but the genre is in desperate need of an influx of new blood.  Blomkamp is certainly talented enough to provide that infusion, but Elysium probably won’t get much mention in his lifetime achievement award speech.  

Sundae Rating: Two scoops

Star Trek Into Darkness

Posted on by

star trek

Director: J.J. Abrams

Writer: Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof

Based On: Television series (Star Trek) by Gene Roddenberry

Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Benedict Cumberbatch

Tomatometer: 86/78/89 (all critics, top critics, audience)

Spoiler-free Summary: Captain Kirk saves Mr. Spock’s life, breaking Starfleet protocol in the process.  Kirk gets demoted and loses his ship, the U.S.S. Enterprise.  Meanwhile, a mysterious Starfleet officer seems pretty excited about killing his colleagues.  Naturally, the only man who can save the universe is William Shatner.

Two Cents: …to boldly go where so many have gone before.

Star Trek Into Darkness is a very solid summer blockbuster – it’s got action, adventure, plot twists, and a subtitle.  What it lacks is originality.  Sure, this sequel is entertaining, but, after striking gold with his first Star Trek movie, it seems as though J.J. Abrams is running out of tricks.  One of the great things about science fiction is that it’s completely fabricated.  There’s no limit to the possibilities when it comes to characters, plot lines, locations, vehicles, gadgets, etc.  Literally (used correctly, not the way it would be used by someone who was raised by wolves), the possibilities are limitless.  So, why can’t J.J. Abrams, the crowned prince of science fiction (and Felicity, oddly enough), come up with anything new?

I understand the requisite nods to the old Star Trek series and films, but Abrams does more than nod, he practically headbutts them right in the groin, making certain elements (especially the dialogue) seem awkward and forced.  Not only that, he nods to the nods!  At one point, the forced similarity between Karl Urban’s Bones and the original character becomes so annoying that Chris Pine’s Captain Kirk points out just how annoying it is.  J.J., my dear friend, if you think it’s annoying, don’t tell everyone you think it’s annoying, just take it out.  Oh, and a punch sounds nothing like a car crash – even in space – so, cool it on the sound effects.

Benedict Cumberbatch is becoming a seriously big deal.  If you don’t recognize him, you haven’t been spending enough time in a seated position.  He was in War Horse, Atonement, and Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, among others, and, personally, I was first introduced to him (along with his Star Trek costar Alice Eve) in a great film called Starter for 10.  He is, by galaxies, the best actor in Star Trek Into Darkness, and he was a fantastic choice for his character, Space Hitler.  He’ll actually be playing a similar character in the Hobbit franchise, as well.

Chris Pine, one of my favorite young stars (and my personal choice to play the lead in a screenplay I’m writing), definitely holds his own, as well.  Not only does Pine attempt to save the universe, he (along with Cumberbatch) saves this movie from being somewhat laughable.  His Kirk is the most deeply defined character, and his screen presence is undeniable.  I happen to like a lot of the other cast members in this movie, but there’s so much cheese and nostalgia (to put it nicely) that it’s difficult to figure out who’s really acting (probably no one) and who’s just doing impressions.

J.J. Abrams is definitely at the top of the sci-fi mountain in Hollywood, but I refuse to believe that he’s at the top of his game.  Considering Abrams’s history with writers Orci, Kurtzman, and Lindelof (co-creator of Lost), I expected something groundbreaking.  Hopefully, Abrams is saving his tricks for the new Star Wars movie (Abrams is actually a fan of that franchise), because there hasn’t been a good one of those in 30 years.

Should I/Shouldn’t I: It’s summer!  You should absolutely go see one of the biggest blockbusters of the year.  Star Trek Into Darkness is fun and action-packed, and you will enjoy it.  As long as you don’t expect to be beamed into a dimension where cinematic geniuses break the summer movie mold and alter the sci-fi genre as we know it, you’ll be happy you went to the theater.  However, there will be a new space movie coming out every other week this summer, so, if funds are tight, feel free to save your money for a different one.

Sundae Rating: Two scoops