Showing posts with label geeking out. Show all posts
Showing posts with label geeking out. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

HALF-ASSED REUNION

As the new Indiana Jones flick was looming, I was hoping for the best, but bracing myself for the worse. 

And why not, with a dopey title like Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull?

It looks like another unnecessary sequel (Beyond The Poseidon Adventure, anyone?). Why not just create an all new character and franchise? 

The first film, Raiders Of The Lost Ark, I think is pretty damn near perfect. 

The second one, The Temple Of Doom was a depressing mess, with that annoying kid and the ditsy chick running around. 

The third flick, The Last Crusade was an upgrade, I liked the River Phoenix flashback, but I found the Sean Connery as papa Jones a little too cutsy, he reminded me of cuddly Ewok.

After this new one opened a couple friends, who are big fans of the series, said they really hated it. 

So I went to the Dome yesterday with really low expectations and I’m here to report... it was worse then I could of even imagined.

So, here are some initial thoughts (for those that HAVE already seen the flick).


- Does George Lucas like people? Does he know any... human beings?

- THE LOOK of the movie immediately lost me. Other then some of the collage campus everything looked like a set. Or worse, like it was shot against a BLUE-SCREEN. Remember the stunts in Raiders? When Indy attacked the Nazi convoy that was a real human being hanging on to ropes and being dragged by real trucks. 

- I was never in awe of the action here, other then some moments in the motor cycle chase through campus, everything looked created on a computer. Shia LaBeouf’s sword fight dangling between the two cars (getting hit in the balls by branches, hee hee) and his Tarzan swing through the trees looked so fake, not to mention the monkeys, why do they jump into the car and attack the Russian driver. 

- And how about the Pixar GROUNDHOG? I was waiting for Bill Murray and his golf clubs.

- The BIG CAR CHASE, editing-wise, made no sense, who was chasing who? Where did Marion disappear to and then show back up? Same with the Russian trucks that were originally in  the rear.  When LaBeouf get stuck in the trees we cut back to more high speed chase for a while and then some how his tree position is way ahead of them.

- How about that terrible last shot of the spaceship (or whatever you call it) rising, creating such a  whirl of wind that boulders and trees go flying all around it. But our heroes sit right there watching it and never get hit by flying gravel. Indy’s hat doesn’t even blow off his head.

I could never buy Indy and his posse (including the aged Karen Allen, chubby Ray Winstone and ancient John Hurt) running around at full speed. They then manage to survive three deadly waterfall drops. One was ridiculous enough, but by the third waterfall the editors gave up even showing it. 

- I do like the idea of an adventure taking place in the early fifties. Though the over the top period details in the beginning (the car load of teeny boppers driving to Elvis’s Hound Dog) felt forced. A little later the details and extras in the Soda Shop reminded me of Spielberg’s 1941, which was like a live cartoon. 

- The politics of Indy being blacklisted from the University felt rushed (what I assume was days after the debriefing with the Feds).

- Surviving the ATOMIC BOMB BLAST was the first of many near death moments that were never acknowledged.

THE CAST has gotten a lot of chat. Harrison Ford, was fine.

- I like the idea of the Russians being the baddies, but other then Cate Blanchett’s eccentric pageboy haircut nothing about the villains was memorable.

- I was dreading Shia LaBeouf, but I didn’t mind him. It wasn’t his fault that the script was so inconsistent about him being Smart/dim and scared/brave. And he had TWO crying stage-tears moments. I think Meryl Streep only had one teary-eyed moment in Sophie’s Choice.  Shia got at least two wet face moments here.

- The John Hurt character was a bizarre lazy way to by the Writers to get Indy involved. Wasn’t the Russians kidnapping him on American soil enough to get Indy into the adventure? Instead having to go rescue some fay British kook, is what sends him packing? 

- Why was  Ray Winstone‘s character even in the movie? Pointless. Again the writing is so lazy. He’s a friend, then a spy, then a mole, but always just greedy. Hadn’t he been in adventures with Indy before? Why was ahead all agape to see lost treasures, as if for the first time?

- I remember in Raiders, Karen Allen‘s Marion to be a plucky loud mouth, but here, they touch on that, but mostly she is reduced to smiling and giggling. I know people want to give Allen as pass for sentimental reasons, but I thought her ‘acting’ was terrible. 

- A MESS: So many ideas were brought up with no payoff or lame payoff.

Why did they make a point of LaBouf bring his motorcycle on the airplane but then the moment they get there he ditches it? 

- I know every time some ex tells me I have a child I didn’t know about. I have an internal debate between suicide or murder. But Indy just smirks and later gets all cuddly with the hag. I wish I had that kinda class.  


I need a break.

 More of me bitching about this flick to come.... PART TWO

-sweeneyrules

Thursday, February 14, 2008

No time for love Dr. Jones...

Most people have like hot dates and stuff tonight. I think i'm just going to sit at home and watch this over and over again.





-BP

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

WHAT’S READIN’? 01.09 In Da Club

In Annie Hall what did Woody Allen say Groucho Marx said about clubs?


Slate.com is hosting this year's Movie Club. I always enjoy the annual pen pal bull-session between film critics. Every year a group of them send each other cute little letters back and forth geeking out on the year in films .


Heading the team, I often disagree with with him but I always enjoy reading Scott Foundas writing. This years he’s gaga for There Will Be Blood and he just may be the only major critic who dug De Palma’s Redatced (have you heard De Plama talk about this flick? The old-bugger thinks with this movie he invented using different film stocks and fake-docu-style, like he discovered youtube last year and he thinks he discovered it first).


Joining him this year is Dana Stevens, of Slate, her top ten list was fairly rational, all though... man, I really disliked that I’m Not There, which most of the cool-hip critics loved (for that matter, I wasn’t crazy about many of this years acclaimed flicks like Atonement, Sweeney Todd, The Darjeeling Limited, Grindhouse, Rescue Dawn, and the last quarter of There Will Be Blood, etc.)


The lil' critics circle also includes Wesley Morris of the Boston Globe, he gives a little shout-out to some cool ushers at his favorite theater in Boston, I guess as a way of currying favor, maybe score some free milkduds.

Lemme just say... Yo Playa, nobody in the world cares about the quality of the theater screens in Bean Town. I’m so sick of Boston. "Oh it's gritty and tough and cool" shut-up! And believe me, dude, the rest of the nation from casual sports fans to movie nerds are sick of Bostonians agog over their beloved Afflickville.

Okay, I see you over there, Austin Texas, stop smirking, I might have something for you too.


Anyway... and rounding out the gang is Nathan Lee of the Village Voice who has a total hard on for Richard Kelly’s, Southland Tales he hoisted it into his number one spot on his 2007 ten best list, no really. His list also includes I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry, no really.


I think I enjoyed reading it more in the past when it had critics like A.O. Scott or David Edelstein and my idol, Manohla Dargis, who I rarely agree with, but she knows what-the-fuck she's talking about and I learn something from her. Maybe the Movie Club articles felt less obvious, maybe less dorky or something. Maybe the critics were a little more 'highbrow', but not in that "trying to be hoity-toity" way. They just were, caused they're smart writers and you know, talk all fancy-talk.


But still it’s a fun read, these are good writers too, just kinda lame. I enjoy having arguments in my head with em.

Speaking of my head, I gotta see what this Dana Stevens of Slate looks like. For some odd reason, from her writing, I’m thinking... I'm thinking me and her might just hit it off (she is a she, right?). Yeah, maybe. We could get drunk and sing songs from Once and bang and watch like, Iranian movies together and discuss ‘the use of Irony’ in the Coen Brothers work. I just better not tell her that I didn’t care for that Drew Barrymore flick Music And Lyrics, that might drive a wedge between our passion. Oh well, I’ll just keep it in my head.


- sean sweeney rules