Review: HIGH-RISE

             

               I’ll be honest, I got a little hesitant after hearing about a new adaptation of an old dystopian classic. In an age where people, me especially, get infuriated or exhausted for every HUNGER GAMES knock-off gets released, it is a shame where even movies with the pitch “based on the classic novel” gets more derivative today than in their peak. Seriously, do you realize how successful THE GIVER and ENDER'S GAME would’ve been before THE HUNGER GAMES? Sad as it may seem, it comes as no surprise; after all, there is so much angles you can cover in these movies that has not been recycled elsewhere.

            Which is why I am almost glad that director Ben Wheatley manages to show a near unique approach for HIGH-RISE, a movie based on the classic JG Ballard novel. It takes a familiar premise (what if in SNOWPIERCER, they used a giant apartment tower instead of a train to separate the middle, poor, and wealthy class) and brings exploitation level edge to the movie; an elegant, GREAT GATSBY-style commentary on the class system at first, but then transcends to edgy and haphazard mayhem in the film’s final stretch. And while I admire this experiment as much as Wheatley’s directing skills to go with it, the movie, however, turns up into a huge mess. Despite what it accomplishes (acting, directing, music, novel style) HIGH-RISE ultimately comes off as a stumbling and weirdly unsettling.  

            But first, our premise. In the near future, classes of society are now inhabiting a giant apartment complex led by an architect played by Jeremy Irons. Despite a divide between the working class, the poor, and the wealthy, the building provides all of society’s amenities like gyms, supermarkets, parties, and state-of-the-art life systems. Tom Hiddleston plays a middle-grade doctor who moves into the High Rise and is lovely greeted by the other wealthy individuals, played by Luke Evans and Sienna Miller. But once a power-outage hits the tower, all the lower class bursts out and cause mayhem all throughout the place, while the upper class engulf into the madness themselves.

           

            Right off the bat, this is a very different intention when it comes to the genre. Instead of issuing a warning of economic crisis via exaggeration in a dystopian society, HIGH-RISE pretty much just commentates on it, that the whole class system benefits from one another and any sort of major issue would cause massive outbreak. It’s an accessible perspective, but the execution is all over the place once the first act flies by. The characters never transcend beyond tedious metaphors, the plot clearly trudges through its thin second half, and the supposed edgy depictions of immorality looks silly and drawn-out. Hell, despite Hiddleston’s charismatic performance, there is ultimately no point or clear thematic meaning to his character outside of the film constantly making reference to his sister’s tragic death. Luke Evans character comes close to being almost interesting, as a former documentary filmmaker who decides to film the deterioration of the tower.

            Speaking of which, the movie clearly doesn’t explore much of its concept as much as it thinks it is. How are the poor people dealing with the life on the lower floors of the building? Does it comment about how we treat about minorities? Are women in this building anything more other than sex toys and/or vile tools for male masculinity? These barely get any attention, as the film too often keeps the perspective on the middle to high floors and explores their emotional delirium rather repetitively. Yes, they party too roughly and almost kill themselves. Yes, they fuck almost regularly. Yes, the women are treated so vilely that we should feel bad for them despite their thinly etched characters. Is that really all you can show?

Most of this would’ve at least look intriguing instead of either getting stale or never transcend beyond the dull standard portrayal of rape, murder and drugs. I get that Ben Wheatley tries to bring an uneasiness to his films to explore emotional psyche, but it seems too random and without much point. I mean c’mon, I have yet to find someone who actually classifies “A FIELD IN ENGLAND” something other than “random bullshit”.

The worst part about this movie is how much saving graces this movie has to almost recommend for. The acting is top-notch, the cinematography is great, the classic music is elegant and lovely, and the message, however sloppy and played-out at this point, gives more to think about. But once digging below the surface, I would not be surprised if anyone would be put off (or even just get confused) by its tedium. See it and judge for yourself.

Rating: 6/10 (OKAY)

Review: THE HUNTSMAN: WINTERS WAR

             

             I really wanted to hate THE HUNTSMAN: WINTERS WAR. On the surface, all the elements of any bad fantasy movies come into play with such potency that saying “this movie is not good” would be an understatement. The acting ranges from bland to phony, the CGI is overused and unimpressive, there is virtually no plot other than haphazard check listing of random events, the tone jumbles between self-serious to cheesy camp too frequently, and it is overall little more than mimicking the flashy aestheticism of the epic, sweeping fantasy genre. But… I still enjoyed it. Big, anchoring problems aside, there is a level of self-aware charm that blooms within the films absurdity that it almost goes out of its way to punish those who take it seriously. It’s yet another stupid, poorly constructed LORD OF THE RINGS clone, but I simply cannot deny how much fun both I and the filmmakers are having overall.

            Acting as both a prequel and a sequel to the first movie (yes, that again) WINTERS WAR apes the same carbon-copy fantasy style from the first movie on a different telling on the more recent Disney tales of FROZEN and BRAVE, in which the Ice Queen (Emily Blunt) acts as a sister of Charlize Theron’s character from the first movie and accidentally exposes her ice powers after realizing that her child has been murdered by, supposedly, her illicit husband. This scars her for the rest of her life as she builds and rules her own kingdom run by Huntsmen under the law that “love is forbidden”. But, big shock, a couple falls in love (Thor from the first movie and Jessica Chastain trying to sound and look like Merida) so the Queen banishes them with an unexplained and just ultimately forgotten mind-bending powers.

Fast forward to after the first movie, Thor and 2/7 of the dwarves come back to wander around for a few minutes until they run into Merida, who has info that the mirror is being pursuit by Elsa and the Huntsman, but is also mad at Thor for apparently leaving her. So they quarrel each while finding the mirror for another few minutes until they run into the queen and BLAH BLAH BLAH I don’t even care anymore, and quite frankly neither does the movie.

Apart of basically forgetting that the first movie ever happened other than the mirror coming back (thank god, because so did I), the movie basically does little to develop a coherent plot other than randomly-linked events. First Thor goes to a random pub, then he meets Merida, then she tells him that they need to find the mirror for some reason, then the Queen finds them and captures Merida, and then Thor and his buddies plot an invasion of the queen’s fortress to fight the queen. There is no glue holding it together and that is to say nothing how sloppy and dumb the rest of the writing is. The film poorly attempts to acknowledge certain story clichés (who saves who, the aspect of true love, etc.) but instead of transcending away from said clichés like other better stories, it just…does them. It does not even explain character actions, the rules of the universe or anything worth a damn. However, as stated before, the movie discriminates those who give it more thought that it deserves and just botches all sorts of logic and reason just because. At one point where Thor attempts his totally implausible invasion plan, he trips on the roof and falls flat on his face and saying “this is the worst plan ever” and it is there that sums up the whole movie: “We don’t even care anymore, but aren’t these actors having fun despite that?”

Granted, the actors are having a blast playing their one-note characters. Chris Hemsworth finally gains some levity among the otherwise handsome brute from the last movie. Chastain does a TERRIBLE Scottish accent, but she still has fun as the bow-and-arrow heroine spewing on-the-nose dialogue. Nick Frost and Rob Brydon are fun as the dwarves, who have been stripped down to little more than comic relief.

And, of course, the two main female antagonists easily steal the show as their conflicts between each other instantly caught my attention. Apparently Theron scorns Elsa (yeah I know she has another name, but it would be pointless NOT to call her Elsa) for being too weak to inherit the throne of a lifelong dynasty of evil rulers and goes out of her way to ruin her life just to toughen her up a bit. This comes as close to the film actually having some substance as it possibly can, and by the point the frankly underwhelming boss fight climax passed, I was still satisfied with how it concluded. Doubly so considering that Emily Blunt is literally the last person to be cast as a villain the same caliber as Theron. Don’t get me wrong; she is more than capable in other, better roles, but she has limited charisma to be the over-the-top Rita Repulsa character. But the movies “genius” is having that limitation be the actual dilemma of her character, overshadowed by her better, more evil sister. Had this been a whole different story, the movie would’ve had even less going for it than what already is.

So in conclusion, no it is not good. But in a strange way, it is almost a thrill to watch, mostly due to the filmmakers flopping in their efforts and just have fun for a change. This will likely be overrated by the new generation as this weird, campy relic from the past with the same appreciation as LABYRINTH or WILLOW. In either case, go watch and see for yourselves.

Review: THE JUNGLE BOOK

                                                      GO. SEE. THE JUNGLE BOOK!       

             So far the whole execution of the “classic Disney live-action remake” project gradually represents an increasing slope in terms of quality. MALEFICENT tries and fails to balance both the mythological aspects of the original source material and a sub textually darker KILL BILL storyline; CINDERELLA proved to expand the broadest elements of its kin, albeit a little shoddy at times. Their challenge this time: "how do we create a sprawling, effects-pushing adventure based on an old, virtually weird, and jazz-laden cartoon based on a dark imperialistic commentary and appeal to both source materials? And the payoff: Personally, even considering some clumsy moments and frequent shifts in tone, I was pretty impressed. Out of all their movies in this live-action experiment, THE JUNGLE BOOK is easily the third-strike home run I’ve been anticipating for all this time and easily the biggest, narratively complex adaptation of this story since… well, ever!

MINOR SPOILERS FROM THIS POINT ON!!

              The story, almost verbatim of the original movie, centers on Mowgli who lives with a pack of wolves under the supervision of Ben Kingsley’s Bagheera and his wolf parents (one of them voiced by Gus Fring – really). After a confrontation of Sheer Khan (Idris Elba [EEEP!!]) with the intent of killing Mowgli just because, the wolves decided to send the man cub back to his hometown with Bagheera’s assistance. Along the way the film detours into the same scenes we expect but with different yet oddly boasting tweaks and revisions. Scarlett Johansson as a man-hungry snake Ka, Christopher Walken as a massive Gigantopithecus, Bill Murray as Garfield as Baloo, etc.

              This movie, to put it bluntly, is one hell of a bizarre movie, and yet it works! When he isn’t held back by shoddy scripts or no clear sense of purpose, director Jon Favreau is easily the best at implementing comedic quirks, unintentional or not, to deceptively lean films, the kind of aesthetic that elevates his movies like Iron Man and the underappreciated ZATHURA. Any questions that might be raised by the weirdness of this film like “why is a giant Christopher Walken monkey singing “I want to be like you” in a giant cave” or “how can a tiger actually throw a wolf off a cliff with his jaws” could easily be answered with “because it’s freaking hilarious!” And… yeah! I can agree, it is freaking hilarious! Elements like these would not work anywhere else, but somehow fits the peculiar charm of the source material brilliantly, and I could not find any director like Favreau gelling it together.

              But that is what I already expect to enjoy, but what I never expected is how much is implemented in the actual narrative. For a rather simple tale, the film provides quite a lot of complexities to the arched aspects of the original movie as well as paying a few lip service to the actual Jungle book. For example, Mowgli easily becomes more creatively independent in this films as he crafts MacGyver-style gadgetry in order to comply with his wildlife and, during a typical misunderstanding third-act segway, actually mans up and faces the tiger head-on. Baloo acts like the more self-aware version of his character; instead of a cool, upbeat, obliviously selfish Baloo, we get an actually selfish, lazy, slightly competent Baloo (Bill Murray, as always, is the master of this routine) who gets a huge arc in his story as his friendship with Mowgli actually means something, even at the verge of risking his life. But the biggest one is probably the book's controversial aspect, which is the concept of Imperialism. In the climax, Sheer Khan taunts a revenge-stricken Mowgli, as Khan claims that he came to virtually terrorize the society he once inhabited. Even though that last part doesn’t get too dark (I mean, it is a kids films after all), it is about as shocking as a typical Kipling adaptation can go. 

              The cast is terrific as expected, and that is to say nothing of the faultless animal renditions that manages to succeed in the ever-troubling issue of having their lips move. Ben Kingsley as Bagheera gives a shockingly resemblance to the original voice, while the cast of the wolves give great comfort. Bill Murray as Baloo – Its Bill Murray. C’mon! Christopher Walken as King Louie is about as ridiculously cool as you expect it to be. Scarlett Johansson is barely in the movie, but her voice of Ka fits the seducing aspect of both the character and her masculine-drawing pop-culture image. However, if there is a weak performance, it might be Mowgli himself. He’s fine as the film continues, but I can clearly see a fine line of what a good-for-an-kid-actor performance can manage while acting with empty space portraying CGI animals.

              But if that is the weak point, Idris Elba as Shere Khan easily tips to the other spectrum, and HOLY CRAP is he a riot! To say that he steals the show would discredit for how much he devours and conquers it! In addition to the filmmakers clearly having fun with the reincarnation of one of Disney's charismatic "bad for bad sakes" villains, they also reinforce a tangible backstory to this feline, where he encounters men once and the mere thought of Mowgli clenches his fangs. Believe my guys, HE. DOES. NOT. MESS. AROUND! Seriously, he intimidates baby wolves, throws a wolf off a cliff with his bare teeth, takes on a freaking HORDE of animals during the third act, and even haunts the proceedings even when he's not onscreen. Better yet, his ultimate demise is quite fittingly the most ludicrously awesome death scene ever! For such a broad, cartoonishly evil feline, Elba clearly hams it up in one of the most over-the-top Disney villains since probably Glenn Close as Cruella de Ville.

             If there is a legit problem, it's the film's tone. In a noble effort to both the nostalgic whimsy of the classic movie and the rich, dark concepts of Kipling's original novel, the film occasionally stumbles to find the right balance. In scenes where we have the titular song numbers and child-friendly adventure, they sometimes cut directly by either dark animal killings or Sheer Khan's semi-Imperialistic philosophising. Not that it is not unfitting, but a better execution would've gloss these issues over easily.

            As a effects showcase, I am still shocked that this turned out the way it is. This film checks off the list as being the best visual experience since AVATAR, with the best CG animals since LIFE OF PIE, and easily the best source material adaptation out of a billion of them since LORD OF THE RINGS. As a movie, I am still not sure whether or not it works, what with the odd blending in tone, but I'm glad I watched it. Go see it!

RATING: 8/10 (GREAT)

A look back at: GOD'S NOT DEAD

Today marks the theatrical release of GOD'S NOT DEAD 2, a sequel of a bold, inspirational, totally not offensive film produced by the ever-so evil ingenious Pure Flix Films in the hopes to cater to mindless faith-based dipshits inspire young and oh-so oppressed teens around the world. That is by no means surprising nor baffling to me, as the first movie conjured quite a huge number of feedback during its release. Besides, even not considering that, who wouldn't want to make another one of these? So in honor of the sequel, I will attempt to look back on this soon-to-be classic film about a boy who desperately forces expresses his beliefs on the evil cynicism of atheism that apparently looms large over his college curriculum.

The movie wisely starts with a montage of our main characters and how they start their day, accompanied poorly by both a well-fitting and catchy Christian song as well as a carefully constructed terrible editing. Then we are introduced to our main character named Josh Whedon (ah, meta humor! How clever!)as he attends a class instructed by not Hercules, a cynical God-hating professors with the intent to unrealistically force his atheism on these poor, marginally white college students by signing "God is Dead" on a sheet of paper. However Josh wouldn't comply so easily, so a dispute ensues between teacher and student as the teacher assigns him to dispute his claims in a presentation (so realistic it seems surreal).

Meanwhile, we get other subplots about other people in an attempt to hammer in the already-obvious message build the world with deeply-tormented characters. For example, there is a subplot that involves a pessimistic atheist exposing one of those fake rednecks from DUCK DYNASTY (I know right?!) who serves no other purpose other than to express the good word nonchalantly. There is also a Muslim girl who wishes to comply to American civilization in secret from her God-fearing father. These are essential, as they both serve another ingenious implication: that atheism, or any other form of religion is simply EVIL and they should suffer the worst. So we see the atheist reporter actually possess cancer and gets dumped by his business tycoon God-hating monster of a boyfriend, as well as the Muslim girl enduring beatings by his father. Oh, and the professor? Just a God-hating a-hole who discredits his own Christian wife and wouldn't take care of her ill-stricken mother. You see? God is good, and anything else is bad!! And the film ingeniously influences a great deal of blatancy with its message just to make sure the evangelical audience will feel great about their narrow positions.

Speaking of blatant, the film smartly emphasises Josh's lectures implicitly to remind us what the audience already knows to mind in the first place, right down to having the other students serving as catalysts of supposed real-life non-believers. In the first lecture, about the big-bang theory, Josh boldly claims that any sort of disprove of God is any sort of bias (I don't smell irony, do you?) and that the big bang itself is just over complicated mumbo-jumbo, with God being the actual cause of the creation of the universe (Ha! Take that Newton!). The second lecture, about macroevolution, Josh then claims that Stephen Hawking and Charles Darwin are both biased morons and that there is no way that evolution could make such a huge, non-proven leap from tadpole to human. Of course, the evil professor Hercules disproves the poor kid.

However, in the third and final lecture, Josh then learns that all the professors' intent to scorn on his hard work was all in vain due to his experiences with losing his mother and not having God save her life. That is also one of the other geniuses of this movie; atheists hate God also because they have tragic backstories. Brilliant! But don't worry, the professor gets what is coming to him as he is run over by a car and is confronted by a priest, thereby trusting his faith in the lord. Wow, I don't know about you, but God does not screw around! Doubly so, because even though Josh has basically prove nothing about his beliefs that has not been proven to be wrong, God then proves his existence by almost killing a man! I mean, never mind those rapists, murderers, and felons roaming around in the world. God is just fixated (rightfully so) on someone who dares to feel richeous about their discredit of his religion!

So the day is saved, Josh proves meany professor dude wrong by default, the Muslim girl complies to Christian faith, the reporter lady gets cured by little more than the good word itself, and the movie ends with a cringeworthy heart-pumping Christian Concert. Within these closing scenes, the movie also prompts us to send texts to our friends saying "GOD'S NOT DEAD" OH-HO movie, you smart devil you!

Honestly, there are quite a lot of great Christian movies during the year this movie got released. From the eye-opening, twee, quirky, non-stupid science-fiction I ORIGINS, the not-bland retelling of Jesus in SON OF GOD, and the inspiring, not-fabricated story about how a boy met God in HEAVEN IS FOR REAL. But this movie stands at the top because of its bold, brash, totally not intellectually offensively move towards disproving atheists or any other religions. And now with the sequel, we now see them take their supposedly undisputed beliefs in WASHINGTON! Oh boy I cannot wait

(2/10; Happy April Fools!)