Author Archives: Leonard Wilson

Review: The Newsroom S1:E2 – “News Night 2.0”

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

After seeing the second episode of The Newsroom, which is my first Aaron Sorkin show experience, I’ve learned four things:

1.) In the Sorkin Universe, guys may be asses, but girls seem to make all the huge mistakes.

2.) Everyone is just one moment away from emotionally exploding.

3.) The “Walk and Talk” gets things done.

4.) There are very few moments of silence.

Okay, here we are with the second episode for The Newsroom. This one appears to be tighter compared to the pilot episode and an overall improvement from that, though it still has it’s problems. The episode overall is about the construction of News Night 2.0, the revised version of the broadcast that will concentrate on giving the news and not letting the ratings control the content. It’s a great plan, but issues do arise. Charlie (Sam Waterston) has to warn one of Will’s colleagues, Reese (Chris Messina) about giving Will the numbers on the ratings. As Will is a big fan of the ratings, Charlie fears that this will sway him from following the new broadcast process. Reese explains that he’s not the bad guy, but is only giving Will what he wants. Despite the warning, he still speaks with Will in a later scene.

That I liked, the notion that Will is still laboring under the belief that he should shoot for the news that people want to hear versus the news they should. This episode was partially supposed to show how going against that process didn’t work out for him and should ground him going forward. In some ways, I think it succeeded. The News Night Team is trying something different, but in order for that to work, everyone has to be on board. By the end of the episode, you come to find out who’s with Mac on this, and who’s against it. I’m loving where the show is going on that front.

We now have our antagonists in Reese, who wants Will to keep the old format going and we have Don. Don is staying with the NewsNigh Team to make sure the transition goes well, but at the same time, is rooting for Will to fail because it puts his new show in that prized time slot. I’m under the impression that later on, we’ll see both of these individuals trying to sabotage things.

Here’s what worked for me:

– The Introduction of both Reese and Sloan. Both Chris Messina and Olivia Munn had some good scenes in the episode. They both appeared to be even keeled for the most part. Reese’s “walk and talk” with Will was nice, though in doing a bit of research, I’ve discovered it’s bit of a Sorkin staple.  Olivia Munn’s character, Sloan Sabbith is introduced when Mackenzie hires her to perform the Financial News segment to start before Will’s broadcast. I’m hoping her character gets some more time in. Of course, I’ve been a fan of Olivia’s for years, so there’s some bias there, admittedly. It’s cool seeing how far she’s come. Sabbith also happens to be one of the only girls who hasn’t had some kind of serious emotional crash, yet (and that’s still questionable).

– More pop and zip. Overall the episode moved very well. I didn’t get the feeling of slowdown from the pilot, with it’s empty areas and all the time spent trying to figure out who was what. It was basically, “What’s our show?”, “Who do we need to get it going?”, “Oh damn, we messed up!”, “The Broadcast”, “The Aftermath”. I wouldn’t mind seeing that template keep going. By the time we reached Will’s actual broadcast, I was all smiles. It’s quick, to the point and there’s just never a quiet moment. Everyone has something to say to fill in the space, all the time. I wish I could write the dialog in my fiction like that.

And then there’s the one glaring problem:

– Women are Always the Source of the Issue in a World Where Men Seemingly Do No Wrong. During last year’s Oscars, Lisa Marie and I got into a debate over her hatred of Sorkin and my love for The Social Network. We agreed to disagree that he can do dialog and that he kinda, sorta, maybe has a problem with writing women. I was pretty sure I won that argument when Sorkin accepted his Oscar – I was rooting for him to win. This episode, however had me face palming myself, like a PR agent watching their star client mess up with everyone watching.

Again, where Sorkin excels in dialog and moving that forward, the girls get the short end of the stick. Every mistake and problem that occurs in this episode is the direct result of something a girl should have done or didn’t do or blew out of proportion. The flow moves in this pattern:

1.) Girl makes big mistake. As her Superior Male supervisor is going to blow up because of it, she loses her mind in a theatrical fashion. (Both Maggie and Mac do this to great effect, it’s like they haven’t had tea or something.).

2.) Girl gets verbally chewed out by Superior Male. This also seems to happen publicly where people can see it.

3.) Girl apologizes, kowtows and hopes the Male she works for doesn’t look bad because of her actions.

It may sound a little exaggerated, but it’s there. Now you may say, “Len, that’s not right. The girls are on equal footing with the guys. And you’re a guy, it shouldn’t matter, should it?” Perhaps it shouldn’t, but as someone who prefers seeing women in media that don’t complain about broken fingernails, The Newsroom still needs improvement on this level. I can’t claim to understand women in the slightest, but I’ve seen and have known tons of them that just aren’t this…submissive, for want of a better word. Case in point – It’s stated that Mackenzie McHale was a journalist in war-torn areas for a long time. Yet, in the Newsroom, she comes across as being particularly clumsy and high-strung. I would have expected a calmer person, kind of a like a Kathryn Bigelow. Could you imagine Mac, the way she is in the Newsroom, being as effective in a warlike environment? That bothered me a bit, honestly. If Sorkin could fix that one part, he’d be downright perfect. It has me wondering what the first show he doesn’t write will be like. That this has become the only problem for me says a lot for how much better the show’s done in these two episodes.

So basically, I’m loving where the show is going, but it needs to up the girl factor. I’m hoping Sloan may be that factor. For the next episode, I’ll try not to be issue like a dead horse, but if they keep giving me the ammo, I’m be tempted to fire off a round or two.

Quick Review: The Newsroom (S1:E1) – “We Just Decided To.”

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

Quick story before the review. If you’d like to skip this, just scroll down a bit.

About a month before The Social Network came out, I was able to catch a special sneak preview of the film in Manhattan. The preview was special because after the film, Sony planned to have a Q&A session with some of the stars. While waiting on line and listening to some of the conversations, one person pointed out that they were waiting to see Aaron Sorkin.

“Excuse me, who?” I asked. The name didn’t ring any kind of bells with me. No Ratattouille – light in front of my eyes or anything.

“Sorkin. The West Wing.” She said.

“Ah, I’ve heard of that, but never saw it.” I said.

“A Few Good Men?” she added.

“Ah, I see!” I exclaimed, smiling. My sister and I loved that movie.  She actually memorized the “You can’t Handle the Truth” speech, we liked it so much. Okay, I had a handle who this was.

When the movie ended, we were presented with Armie Hammer, Andrew Garfield, Jesse Eisenberg, Olivia Munn, and Aaron Sorkin, seated in front of the audience. Being in the third row, they were all in hitting distance of my soda. The Q&A lasted for about a half hour or so. Walking out of there, my thoughts were that Aaron Sorkin was just a writer. By the time I got home and hit the internet, I found out that opinions on him, however, were polarized. It’s kind of interesting when all you have to do is throw out a person’s last name to start anyone talking. His work was either really revered or spat upon like a leper. I hadn’t seen anything like it since Joss Whedon, who’s writing I never knew of during the Roseanne years, absolutely could not stand during the Buffy years, and who finally won me over after seeing early morning episodes of Angel on TNT as the show was ending its main run.

So, that’s where I stand with Sorkin. He’s not a “Writer That Can Do No Wrong”, but I’ll admit that I like the conversational style he uses for characters. It’s almost similar to David E. Kelley’s work in a way. It’s not always required and can sometimes hinder things – Matthew Weiner is a good example of someone who does just fine without the tommy gun speeches – but it does work when it needs to.

My Thoughts (Where the Review actually begins…): 

The Newsroom starts out with a televised interview where a number of people are arguing politics back and forth. Seated between them is Will McAvoy (Jeff Daniels), who doesn’t have much to say, but listens. As he does so, he has a moment where he kind of zones out when he notices a woman up in the stands. This gives us a hint to the vertigo issues he supposedly has. When asked why he thinks that America is the greatest country in the world, he notices the same girl who holds up a notepad reading “It’s not, but it could be.” Will chooses to give an even keel answer, but when forced to give ‘a human reaction’, he admits to not feeling that America’s all that. He loses it, stating that even though we proclaim ourselves to be the only free country in the world, there are tons out there. “Canada has freedom! Japan has Freedom. Belgium has freedom!”, he rattles off. He points out that the only thing America really is good at is having a high incarceration rate, for the most part. He then goes on to add the good things the country did over the years. Once the interview ends and he leaves, he turns to his colleagues and asks “What did I say out there?!”

And that was all before the opening credits. I thought that was a good way to start. Definitely a hook, though the responses overall to the scene could be interesting.

Will returns into work the following morning to find most of his staff missing. After a conversation with Maggie (Allison Pill), he finds out he needs to speak with his superior, Charlie (Sam Waterston). I like Allison Pill as an actress. She was great in The Pillars of the Earth, but here is where Sorkin kind of stumbles. Granted, her character is handling being newly promoted to a position she isn’t ready for, but she’s almost too jittery. She’s almost a ball of nerves. It’s the Winifred Burkle / Lexi Grey / Ally McBeal archetype of the “New Girl with a Lot on her Plate”. Before you start in on me, take a look at the first season of Weiner’s Mad Men and you’ll see an example in Elizabeth Moss that’s handled stronger than Pill’s character is here. It’s almost the same situation, but where Moss’ character finds small ways to stand on her own, Maggie’s just a little lost. I’m hoping that in future episodes, she’s able to shake that and come into her own.

We’re also introduced to some of the other characters that run the Newsroom. You have Don (Thomas Sadoski), Will’s former Associate Producer and Neal (Dev Patel), who is the resident tech analyst. We find that Charlie has brought on Mackenzie MacHale (Emily Mortimer) on as the Executive Producer, who Will has a serious problem with. Most of the episode is spent in Will’s office, arguing over how we can do better, and how he has the opportunity to make the news show stronger than what it was. Personally, I felt there were more interesting things going on outside of Will’s office then in it. At one point, a news blip comes in (courtesy of an iNews like program, which was nice), which touches on the start of the oil spill in Louisiana in 2010. It’s then that we’re told this is the time period we’re in. The show begins to accelerate and by the time that Will is actually on air, we get the notion of what the show could be if they rubbed out a little of conversations in between. That was very cool, like watching a submarine crew at work. The newscast scene is actually the strongest part of the episode overall, and Sorkin’s machine gun style dialogue helps there a lot, I felt. Dialog, he can do.

The only problem is for me is that we’re locked to this one location. It’s like watching a play unfold.  You’re in one location, and all of this information comes in. It’s discussed and action’s taken, but I didn’t get the feeling that the characters were growing or had room to. Let me put it this way. The star of the show isn’t any one person. It’s the News desk. The most important part of the show happened at the News desk, and while that was great, I’m thinking that for the characters involved, where are the subtle changes?

Here’s the thing (and I go to back to Mad Men, which I’ve also started watching from the beginning). By the end of the first episode of that show, you come to find that it’s main character, Don Draper, changes. You’re shown details that shape his attitude and come to find that he’s not the picture perfect fellow you may have thought he was. I didn’t get any of that with this episode of The Newsroom. I’m eager to see where it goes, because I like what’s being said, but I haven’t hit a point where any one of these people – even Will – is someone I feel I could hook on to. There’s always at least one character that stands out in a show for me – whether it’s Aaron Paul’s Jesse Pinkman in Breaking Bad or Andrew Lincoln’s Rick Grimes in The Walking Dead. I’m hoping that something changes here to help me find that. The only hint of growth or personal reflection seemed to come at the last few minutes between Mac and Will, when he discusses the conversation he had with her father. That, I would love to see more of.

Overall, the Newsroom isn’t a bad show. It kind of moves like a pilot should, a one shot that has to hit the audience with it’s strongest punch to make sure they’re hooked, while at the same time trying to plant seeds for future episodes. It does what it tries to – give the news – but I walked away feeling like I visited this business, watched what went on and then promptly left with only the mildest of introductions to the staff. I don’t really know anyone here.

It can definitely be improved upon, and it’s all the start of something. I’m just not exactly sure I know what that is.

Quick Review: Brave (dir. by Mark Andrews & Brenda Chapman)

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

Brave already has a great review by Lisa Marie, check it out to get another insight into the film. One of the great things about the Shattered Lens is that even if a movie’s been reviewed once, another review can create a review as well.

Before Brave starts, Pixar presents their Oscar Nominated short film, La Luna, directed by Enrico Casarosa. La Luna is a simple piece about a little boy (Bambino) on a tiny boat who is taking on the Family Business. Sitting with his father and grandfather, they watch as a full moon rises high in the sky above them. Setting up a ladder, Bambino heads up to the moon, to find it littered with tiny glowing stars. The trio act as cleaners of the Moon. It’s a cute little story that for me, anyway, makes me smile when I look up at the Moon. I’m hoping Pixar maybe considers making a best of video with all their mini stories.

Brave is the story of Merida (brilliantly voiced by Boardwalk Empire’s Kelly MacDonald), a young princess in what appears to be Scotland, who is due to be married off to one of the children of her area’s neighboring lands. Granted, this isn’t something she’s looking forward to, as the wedding plans are being set up by her mother. Honestly, in watching Brave, I got the feeling that Merida really wasn’t into any of the Princess things she was supposed to be following (“No weapons on the table.”, “A princess is proper”, etc.), she seemed to just enjoy her freedom of being a young woman, of just living her life.

Brave marks the second film that wasn’t directed by one of the Pixar Majors (Pete Doctor of Monsters Inc., John Lassiter of Toy Story and Cars, Andrew Stanton of Wall-E, Finding Nemo and John Carter, and newcomer Brad Bird  of Ratatouille and The Incredibles), the first being Toy Story 3. With all of the staff that Pixar has, it makes sense that eventually, the Pixar Babies would have to step up and try their hand at feature films – even if this means that Pixar breaks their streak of great animation and filmmaking.

If Brave is any indication, Pixar is in very good hands. Directors Brenda Chapman and Mark Andrews carry Chapman’s story far better than Lassiter did with Cars 2. It’s the story of a daughter, her mother and the connection between them. It’s of wanting to follow your own path vs. the paths that others want us to follow, and it manages to do all of this effortlessly. Like Tangled, our heroine takes charge of her own path, even if it means stumbling here and there. What makes Brave even better (and what my Mom would personally enjoy) is that Merida, much like Drew Barrymore’s character in Ever After, doesn’t need any guys rescuing her from her situation, save for perhaps one key moment that doesn’t count only because it’s family oriented anyway. There’s a great sense of strength in the character.

When Merida decides to fight for herself in an Archery test to ward off the would be suitors,  she gets into a huge argument with her mother (Emma Thompson), that ends up with some harsh things being said. Merida eventually finds her way to a witch who lets her change her fate. Like Disney’s Brother Bear, the change in question is that her mother is turned into a bear. With Merida’s father (voiced by The Boondock Saints’ Billy Connolly) swearing vengeance against the black bear that took of his leg, Merida and her mother have to both keep away from him as well as fix the relationship between them or else the mother will stay a bear, forever.

This is where Brave shines. Between the communications between the Mama Bear and Merida and the gravity of their situation, Chapman creates some great emotional opportunities for them. An added touch was the notion that the longer the mother stays a bear, the more she loses her humanity and becomes a real bear. I took this to be similar to someone suffering from dementia or Alzheimer’s in a way, and that was where Pixar really got me on this one.

If there’s anything about Brave that I would change, it would be that there could have been a bit more back story on the legend that the mother told Merida (on the villain). I would have liked to know more about all of that, but in hindsight, the movie tells you all you really need to know, because the focus is still just on Merida and her Mother. There’s also just a hint of nudity, nothing terrible at all, but it’s a different route than other Pixar films have went. Additionally, kids may also find that the bear attack sequences may be a little too scary (at least the younger viewers might).

Overall, Brave’s a wonderful film and I’m ready to pick up the Blu-Ray the moment it comes out.

Quick Review: Chernobyl Diaries (dir. by Bradley Parker)

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

ImageThe Short of It:

While it’s not the greatest story in the world, The Chernobyl Diaries uses one of the best possible locations for a horror setting.  The cliches are a dime a dozen and you’ll pretty much forget the characters by the time you walk out of the theatre. The film contains a number of jump scenes, but when you ultimately find out what’s going on, you may be disappointed. It felt like they could have done a little more with it.

The Long Story:

Oren Peli, creator of the Paranormal Activity films, had a hand in writing the story for Chernobyl Diaries, which is interesting when considering that most of his movies so far have been of the found footage variety. While the film starts off looking like it may be entirely found footage, it conveniently changes over to a standard filming setup, which helps the way everything is presented. I’m thankful they went this route, personally. After Chronicle, I’m not sure I could deal with another found footage film.

Chernobyl Diaries centers around six tourists in Russia, who get the divine notion to take an extreme tour through the town of Pripryat, just near the site of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster from the 1980’s. Once they arrive, however, they find that that an armed roadblock keeps them from the city. Undaunted, they locate a back road into town and make their way through, setting up camp for the day. The spend their time walking around the area to  take photos and have discussions about what happened here. I’m not sure if the movie was actually filmed in the city, but the landscape did look very good. That may be one of the things that I can take away from this movie that was worth it. The settings definitely worked, even if the actual gore didn’t. After their mode of transport is damaged, they’re left stranded in the area and searching for a way out. That is the entire plot of the film. The characters don’t count (save that two are related), and the mystery behind what happened there is non-existant. It’s simply 6 people dropping themselves in a hellish situation and trying to find their way out.

Again, this is one of the coolest places to stage a horror film. Imagine with the fallout that occurred, something or someone had to be left behind during the evacuations, waiting to attack others. The problem with this is the audience already knows this. After so many of these types of films, you expect something out there. I thought they could have made what existed a bit extreme, but the effects were such standard fare that one might say they’ve seen better in any episode of The Walking Dead. There’s low budget, and then there’s The Blair Witch Project, then your typical Sci-Fi channel weekend flick and then you have Chernobyl Diaries. For a first time director, Bradley Parker does okay with what he has, but it’s nothing terribly awe-inspiring.

That isn’t to say that the movie doesn’t scare. Trying to escape a town in the dark can’t be easy, and there are a few jump moments that had the audience screaming, but by the time the film ended, some complained about wanting to get their money back. Truthfully, I myself had to cover my ears a few times in certain moments, but this really needed more overall.

Watch it if it happens to come on late at night, but really, the film just isn’t worth paying for.

Movie Review: The Avengers (dir. by Joss Whedon)

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

I’m almost certain that this won’t be the only review for Marvel’s The Avengers here on the Shattered Lens. Arleigh is watching it as we speak, and while I can give my thoughts on the film, they won’t be from a comic insider’s point of view. It’s not my strong point. You see, I grew up on Spider-Man comics, and totally shunned the Marvel Team Up / Group stories. Never read an X-Men comic until after that film came out and The Avengers overall are new to me. I know who they are, but I can’t tell you if the movie gives you everything the comics were. Keep your eyes open for the other reviews to help build a better picture of things.

What I can say is that the movie easily touches on everything that Disney / Marvel has built upon with the movies before it. Starting in 2008, Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor and Captain America: The First Avenger were all pieces of a larger puzzle. After 4 years, The Avengers does its best to utilize all of it, to a great success. That’s the amazing element of this movie. You aren’t essentially required to watch the other movies to enjoy The Avengers. In 2 hours, you’re given a film that stands completely on it’s own if you’ve never seen the other films, yet is an added bonus if you have. Even better, the characters that didn’t have a chance to get their own films still have moments where we can learn about them and where they get to shine. One could maybe say the same about The X-Men in that you have a group of heroes that have to work together, but you’ve never really had a set up to display all of their abilities and background the way Disney/Marvel did this.

Warner Brothers and DC should be crying right now at the missed opportunity here. All of their comic creations were already under one roof, and they really should have been able to have had a Justice League film by now if they wanted to. I wouldn’t be shocked at all if they tried to mimic Marvel Studios right now.

When I first heard that Joss Whedon was doing the directing, I groaned. I have a love / hate relationship with Whedon’s work. I was never a big Buffy: The Vampire Slayer fan, but I really enjoyed Angel when it went into syndication, seeing all of it’s seasons more than once. Of course, everyone loves Firefly, but the film based on that, Serenity, tanked at the box office (I was there at the first Friday to support it, though). I wrote off the Avengers as something that was destined to fail, because Whedon loves to inject pop culture references at every given and small bits of humor into things that are usually serious. I felt the only saving grace would be that Whedon is something of a master when it comes to ensembles, which is why I figured Marvel Studios went with him. It may work for something like Cabin in the Woods (“When did you start reading science books?!” / “You! I learned it by watching you!”), but for a superhero movie, come on.

And yet, here I sit, feeling I owe Whedon the biggest of apologies. The Avengers has equal parts humor and action and it comes together so well that I’m not sure I know who else could pull this off. Let’s put it this way. The only true lull in the whole movie is at the beginning of the film, because it still needs to set up the big problem for the Avengers to handle. Other than that, the movie moves very well for a film with so many characters.

Previously on The Avengers…

Without giving much away, The Avengers is basically the story of S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), who has to bring a group of heroes together to face a foe that’s too powerful for one good guy to handle on their own (or so that’s how they sell it). However, before they can take on the battle they’re supposed to, they have to find a way to get along with each other and that’s the building point of this tale. The action, when it happens is fresh and fast and there isn’t a slow moment that passes without pushing the story forward. For as long as the movie is, it moves very well.

The Character Study…

Like I said, One of the marvels of The Avengers is that all of the characters are given their time to shine. Since this is the big story we’ve all been waiting for, the film does take it’s time to give the characters brief explanations of where they’re from and how they fit into the entire scheme of things. These summaries give the audience just enough to be satisfied without turning the movie into a set of background dossiers like Watchmen. Of particular note is Mark Ruffalo’s Bruce Banner / Hulk, who may have had the hardest duty here, playing a character that most people associated with Edward Norton in The Incredible Hulk. He makes the role his own, and just like with Bana in Ang Lee’s version of the green guy’s story, Norton’s quickly forgotten (or was for me, anyway). Ruffalo’s version of Banner is very hesitant, almost scared of what he can unleash. Norton pulled this off as well, but I have to admit that I felt a little sad for Ruffalo’s Banner at the start. He keeps his distance because of how dangerous he can be, and I can’t imagine how rough that would be. Still, he and his alter ego get their spotlight moments, too.

None of the characters veer off from how they were established in their own films. Robert Downey, Jr’s Tony Stark is just as much of a wise cracking ass as he was in his movies, and Captain America is just as noble. Chris Hemsworth carries Thor without a problem. If there’s any one character that has a tough time fitting in, it would have to be Jeremy Renner’s Hawkeye. Though he had a blip of a cameo in Kenneth Branaugh’s Thor, and manages to have some presence here, but if he wasn’t in the story I don’t think he’d be terribly missed. The story manages to cushion this by having the Black Widow (Scarlett Johannson) be something of a fighting partner with him. For a character without anything super about her, she holds her own amongst the team, even better in some occasions.

Most superhero movies have gone the route of adding villains as the number of films increase. Superman had Lex Luthor in the first film and then the three Kryptonians. Spider-Man 3 had both Venom and the New Green Goblin to deal with. Even the Dark Knight had Joker and Two-Face. One would think that given the number of superheroes on board, you’d have just about the same number of Arch villains to deal with. The Avengers spins this notion on it’s ear by just giving you one main enemy in Tom Hiddleston’s Loki, and as a demigod, he’s as formidable as one could expect. I thought that was a great touch, considering what we usually get in superhero movies.

One thing about The Avengers that helps it move along is the humor that’s injected throughout the film. It’s not so heavy that you can’t take the film seriously, but there’s just enough to find yourself accidentally chuckling or downright applauding at scenes. Of course, this is classic Whedon. Even his Astonishing X-Men comic line had the same elements. Just when you think everything’s becoming a little too dramatic, the film throws a comedic curveball that breaks the tension. What felt like overuse in Buffy The Vampire Slayer turns out to be really fun here. This doesn’t mean that the film avoids being serious. There are moments where it’s incredibly so. It’s just that the story knows when to laugh at itself. I applauded and laughed out loud too many times during this movie. Were it not for the audience laughing with me, I’m pretty sure I’d be that guy getting shushed down in front. Wow, it was just fun!

…But What about the Kids? 

Can kids go see The Avengers? Of course. It may get a little scary for the littlest of viewers, but overall, it should be a fun ride for anyone who enjoyed the other films in Marvel’s arsenal. There’s no time for anything steamy (unless you want to count a little flirting between two characters anything), but maybe the violence may be something to be wary off. Then again, it may not really be that bad. It’s up to the Parental Guidance and all that. They will probably love the 3D version, which is actually used well in the aerial sequences but can tend to fade as one watches it. It definitely has a great look to it, but the 3D isn’t exactly required here. That’s up to the viewer to choose.

Overall, The Avengers is a wild ride and a great triumph when looking at what was built to reach that point. It’s easily the Inception for me this year, that film that I know I’m going to be running back to a few times before it’s had it’s run, and as of right now, I’m far less excited about Prometheus and The Dark Knight Rises at this point. My movie year’s pretty complete at the moment and the Summer officially starts with this film, the way I see it. I wouldn’t mind seeing another Marvel team up like this.

Oh, one more thing. Stay when the credits roll. There are 2 tidbits that need to be viewed. One just after the credits start and one at the very end.

Quick Review: The Raid: Redemption (dir. by Gareth Evans)

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

I have to admit, Gareth Evans’ “The Raid: Redemption” wasn’t on my collective radar. It was by way of two friends on Twitter that I was even aware of it, but damn was it worth it. I can easily recommend The Raid as the movie to catch this weekend if you can find it playing near you (and if you happen to like action films). It’s been a while since I’ve run to the theatre twice in one week for the same film. It’s not perfect, and won’t win any kind of dramatic awards, but it’ll probably have you coming back for a second dose of the action.

The film has three things going for it:

1.) The action is intense, when it happens. The breaks between action moments are small.

2.) The film is short. At about 100 minutes, you almost won’t even realize when the film’s done.

3.) The music really moves it.

Evans and The Raid’s main star, Iko Uwais worked together back in 2009’s Merantau, which I’m looking to see now. The premise of The Raid: Redemption is a simple one. Rama (Uwais), along with 20 other SWAT team (or SWAT Team like) members perform a raid on a building owned by a criminal lord. Once the team gets in, they find the tables turned on them, with everyone in the building becoming their enemy.  This forces the team to try to stay alive and find a way to either escape, or get the Boss. That’s all it is, and honestly, that’s all The Raid would need to be as an action film. It’s as simple a story as Fist of Fury, Hard Boiled, and quite possibly The Expendables. There’s a side element in the film that I won’t go into detail on, which adds to things a little, but all the audience needs to know is that in The Raid, you’re getting pure action. If you’re walking into this expecting something more thought invoking (and that’s not a detriment to the film), you may want to look elsewhere.

Another high point of the film is its soundtrack, performed by  Mike Shinoda (of Linkin Park) and Joe Trapanese has a number of kinetic tracks in it that help to fuel the battles. It comes together very well, though part of me wishes that the main theme had a larger instrumental piece to it.

The pacing for The Raid is pretty good. Again, the time between fights are minimal, and most of it is used to showcase some of the situations the team and the members that live in the complex are in. While a few of these can be tense, they don’t really relax to the point where you’d hope to see more action.

If The Raid suffers from any drawbacks, it’s that that the fights themselves can end up being a little on the repetitive side. Mind you, this could be just a side effect of having seen the film twice already but you’ll find that by the time you get to the second to last fight, some of the moves seem to be repeated. Still, you won’t see anything better than this if you’re looking for a straight laced action film. An easily recommended pick.

Quick Review: The Hunger Games (dir. by Gary Ross)

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

The Hunger Games is something of an event film, which means that this may not be the only review for the movie. Especially since I haven’t seen Battle Royale, which many say The Hunger Games is very similar to, there’ll probably be a number of viewpoints to this movie.

Update: leon3duke has added his own in-depth review of The Hunger Games. Definitely worth reading.

I consider myself fortunate that I knew next to nothing about the movie adaptation to Suzanne Collins “The Hunger Games” or the novel itself. When I purchased my ticket for a midnight showing, there were only about 10 people around, many of them wearing T-Shirts with the logo. However, when the movie house started asking for the tickets, that 10 turned into 30. By the time the movie started, the 30 became about 50 or so. Not exactly a packed spectacle for where I reside, but I know the ones in Manhattan were.

If any comparisons can be made, I guess it could be to 1987’s The Running Man, with maybe a dash of The Truman Show, but The Hunger Games stands on it’s own because it’s protagonist, Katniss Everdeen, comes across as being in danger every step of the way. That’s enough to keep the audience enthralled. Arnold, not so much.

So, what are the Hunger Games? It’s overall a really great film with a strong female lead in Jennifer Lawrence.

In the future, the nation goes through a number of changes. Wars, famine and poverty ravage the land and eventually, a sense of peace is found. Panem, as the country is called, is divided into 12 Districts. Much like Joss Whedon’s Firefly, the land is broken between the rich who live in the Capitol and the Districts, which live off of a bartering system and are extremely poor. At one time, a 13th Division challenged the rule of the Capitol and had to be taken down. As punishment and to remind the other districts of how great the Capitol is, each District picks one boy and girl between the ages of 12 and 18 to participate in a last one to the death event known as the Hunger Games.

Lawrence (X-Men First Class, Winter’s Bone) easily carries the film as Katniss Everdeen, a resident of District 12, who is great at Archery and uses her skills to hunt for food for her family. When her sister, Prim (Willow Shields) is chosen as a Hunger Games Tribute, she volunteers to take her place. Leaving behind her mother, sister and best friend (Liam Helmsworth), Katniss is taken to the Capitol to participate. Joining her is another member of her District, Peeta (Josh Hutcherson).

Katniss and Peeta are then introduced to their team, lead by Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson), Effie Trinket (a nearly unrecognizable Elizabeth Banks), and Cinna (Lenny Kravitz). Harrelson pretty much nails every scene he’s in, something I’ve noticed lately with a lot of his roles. I found it interesting as well to see Lawrence play opposite Lenny, considering she only recently acted alongside his daughter Zoe in X-Men: First Class last year. He actually does well with the time he has on-screen.

That there is the core of the film. Can Katniss survive The Hunger Games? There’s much more to that, but in originally writing this, I ended up explaining most of the film.

The movie does get bloody. It doesn’t try to make light of any of the situations the characters are in, but being a PG-13 film, it doesn’t turn into anything on the lines of a Saw film (which makes me wonder how that would have turned out).

Can I take the kids to this one? 

You can, yes, but note that even though this based on a story written for young audiences, it does have its share of blood and violence. Then again, considering that you can get the same kind of violence from video games these days, I’d say only the really young may be bothered. If there’s any problem regarding kids, it could be a patience factor. Kids expecting non stop action may get a little bored, but if they already read the book, they probably won’t have any problems with it at all and know what to expect. In terms of sexual situations, there aren’t any.

How long is the film? Am I going to yawn? 

The Hunger Games clocks in at about 142 minutes (2 hours and 22 minutes). The first half of the film needs to set up for the second half (The Games themselves), and while it doesn’t move slow, it takes it’s time in letting the audience know what the stakes are for them and to show the contrasts between the districts and the Capitol. Think of it like Batman Begins. Before we get to see Batman, we had to be able to see Bruce Wayne go through his training. There’s not action all the way through the movie, which actually works in it’s favor. The same kind of applies for The Hunger Games. If that made you yawn, then that first half of this film may have the same effect. I loved it, myself, because a lot of that information felt necessary to me, but what works for me may not work for everyone else.

Overall, The Hunger Games was definitely worth it, at least for an initial viewing. I hope that if they go with a sequel (given the success of this one, that’s pretty much guaranteed), they expand more on Panem and some of the events that brought things to where they are now.

Latest Prometheus Trailer via AMC Theatres

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

AMC Theatres were cool enough to have Prometheus Director Sir Ridley Scott and Co-Writer Damon Lindelof on hand to discuss some of the ideas behind their film, which opens in June. It looks like the new trailer that comes with it gives away a little more to the overall story, which has easily pushed this into my first pick for that “must see” movie this year. Some of the questions were pretty interesting, some dealing with the possible religious aspects of the story (in terms of the “Big Questions” that are asked), while others asked about connections to the Original Alien. One of the things that Scott pointed out was that he’d been there and done that with the first movie, so he didn’t want this one to be the same as that. One question and answer leaves me with my ears ringing and a cheese like grin stuck on my face:

Attendant: (Paraphrased) “In the original Alien, you had the monster come out of the man’s chest, and the actors didn’t know about it. Should we expect any surprises like that with this film?”

Sir Ridley Scott: “Oooooh yes!” (emphatically nods).

Thanks go out to AMC for making the trailer available on Youtube. Cool stuff. The actual Livestream of the Ridley Scott / Damon Lindelof interview can be found on the Livestream site, which is still repeating the interview that aired earlier this evening.

Hottie of the Day: Lynn Collins

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

I’ll admit that I’m not very experienced in writing about The Hottie of the Day. The things that move me about women may not be what moves everyone else. Along with that, you have to find something really cool and interesting to say about the subject, when in fact, you’re taking the phrase “Wow, she’s hot.” and expanding on that. Maybe if I get better, I’ll do more.

This may be a tough one, though.

My last entry in this part of the Shattered Lens was Olive Oyl. On seeing John Carter this past Friday, though, I couldn’t take my eyes off of Lynn Collins on the scenes she was in. Playing a princess with a warriors spirit (and an awesome tan), Collins quit smoking and went through a bit of training for the fight sequences. For this, and a number of other example, she becomes the Shattered Lens’ Hottie of the Day for March 11, 2012.

If she looks at all familiar, it’s probably because she’s had a number of films under her belt. Although she had a small part in Joel Schumacher’s “The Number 23” some years ago, Collins may be remembered best as Wolverine’s former love in X-Men Origins: Wolverine. In that film, she played Kayla Silverfox, a mutant with the ability to sway people’s minds via touch. She was later featured in Alan Ball’s Towelhead, as the girlfriend of the protagonist’s father. Ball would later go on to feature Collins in the first few episodes of HBO’s True Blood as Dawn, one of the barmaids at Merlotte’s who had a tryst with Jason Stackhouse. Though her character didn’t last through too many episodes, she made her short stay a memorable one.

Lynn has been in a number of independent films, such as Numb with Matthew Perry, where she had to deal with Perry’s penchant for Kleptomania. She also starred in Uncertainty with Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Collins, a mix of Irish and Native American backgrounds, is married to fellow actor Steven Strait, who was in The Covenant (also with John Carter’s Taylor Kitsch) and Roland Emmerich’s 10,000 B.C.

Here’s hoping that we see a lot more of Collins in the years to come.

On a side note, I wouldn’t mind if it’s her face behind Tali’Zorah’s Quarian mask in Mass Effect 3. That’s just me. 🙂

Quick Review: John Carter (dir. by Andrew Stanton)

Posted on by Leonard Wilson

John CarterThe First Impression:

John Carter is a cute Disney film that you may enjoy more than you’d thought you would. It’s lively like The Rocketeer was and really has some great moments and interesting characters. Both the leads carry their roles well, and are eye candy for the audience. It’s worthy of all of the love it should get, but obvious comparisons to movies that came before it (even though the story predates those films), along with a shockingly forgettable score by Michael Giacchino may actually hurt it. If you’re expecting blood and guts, not so much. It’s a Disney film. The kids should love it, though the pace of the film in the beginning may seem a little slow for younger audiences. Skip the 3D version and go for the 2D instead.

The Longer Version:

It’s really sad when you see a movie that deserves all the love in the world, but for some reason just doesn’t quite hit the mark. Part of that is due to the way this was marketed. It really didn’t feel to me that Disney was putting their all behind this. When you look at how heavily marketed Tron: Legacy was, this seemed like a “Hey, we made it, just give us money.” kind of push.

As far as John Carter is concerned, maybe it’s better to look at it like this. We tend to compare things to make sense of them:

This object reminds me of that object.

All of James Cameron’s Avatar reminds me of Ferngully.

Remember, Short Controlled Bursts. What movie comes to mind when I say that?

This is ultimately the problem with Andrew Stanton’s John Carter. In watching it, you’ll end up making comparisons to so many other films that came before it. However, knowing that it was based on the stories of Edgar Rice Burroughs, it’s a lot like seeing Lord of the Rings for the first time when all you know of Elves and Dwarves comes from Dungeons & Dragons, The Elder Scrolls games or World or Warcraft. Burroughs’ material predates just about everything it showcases, from a pop culture standpoint. Hell, for all I know, John Carter was probably the original inspiration for the Kwisatz Haderach in Frank Herbert’s Dune (though that’s just my speculation). The problem is, with comparisons being what they are, audiences may view John Carter as a copycat of all the movies that were probably influenced by it.

I didn’t walk into John Carter with a lot of expectations. Andrew Stanton, for me, has the track record of being Pixar’s Dark Horse. This is the same guy that killed off a mother and a hundred of her babies in the opening moments of Finding Nemo. A man who gave a bleak, dirty and desolate future in Wall-E. Yet, both of those films had a theme of love and of heroes that rose to the occasion, so seeing the previews for John Carter told me enough.

John Carter is the story of a man in search of a cave full of gold. He wants no part of anyone’s battles and when he’s asked to join a faction, he does his best to avoid it. This leads him to a situation where he’s transported to another world. Just as it was with Earth, he encounters a number of different factions (all of which seem to feel he could aid them), but he simply wishes to return home. When he meets a fierce female fighter (who also happens to be a scientist), they work on figuring out how he arrived on Barsoom and how to get back.

The beautiful thing about John Carter is that it really feels like one of those old serials, or to make a more modern comparison, like an adventure film on the Indiana Jones level of things. There are a number of scenes where I found myself genuinely laughing at what was on screen. The visuals could be better in some places, but it’s nothing that’s groundbreaking. I look at John Carter as a pop culture lesson. You can see where other stories have used elements in the Burroughs tale. In that, it worked for me. The action scenes were really enjoyable for me, but some of the scenes between that could have been tighter. When you find out the reasoning behind Carters arrival, you may end up wondering why more wasn’t done with it with that story arc (on a technical level, anyway). As I’m unfamiliar with the original John Carter stories, I watched a few interviews of the cast and Taylor Kitsch noted that in the books themselves, Carter was pretty much the same person through every one. Stanton added a bit of character depth to him, with a little help from Spider-Man 2 scribe Michael Chabon. Chabon’s also responsible for the great Wonder Boys and The Adventures of Kavalier and Clay, which I still haven’t finished as of this writing. Carter is a conflicted individual for Disney purposes, but you shouldn’t expect Oscar performances here. It’s far better then Immortals was, in that sense.

Both Taylor Kitsch and Lynn Collins do well with their roles. Having worked together for about a hiccup in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, they have a good chemistry together. Kitsch is gruff with his mannerisms, and I can almost forgive him for playing Gambit. Collins is beautiful, statuesque even, and her character really does a lot of damage, fight wise. She’s very strong in some areas, though later on in the film, it felt like they may have eased that down a bit. Willem Dafoe has an inspired role in the leader of one of the alien groups that find Carter first when he arrives in Barsoom. Of course, no film would be complete without a villain and John Carter features two in Dominic West (Zack Snyder’s “300”) and Mark Strong (who’s almost always a go to bad guy). West’s character is more of the take action baddie, while Strong’s character is more of a calculating, behind the scenes one. Of note are Samantha Morton (“Minority Report”) as Sola and a little creature called Woola, that really reminded me a lot of Dug from Disney / Pixar’s Up. I wouldn’t mind having a few of those around the house.

The music for this film worked when the scenes were slow. However, when it called for action, I really didn’t feel anything special about it. I stayed to watch the credits only to find that it was Michael Giacchino’s work, who’s normally really good. I don’t know, this one seemed like it was phoned in for the action scenes. It’s okay, but I didn’t have that urge to buy the soundtrack afterward (which I have done for more memorable scores after leaving the theatre).

Overall, John Carter was a fun film in the vein of Disney’s earlier movies, but it’s not anything you absolutely have to run out to the theatre for. I’d love to see it do well and hope that there’s a sequel on the way, but when you’re paying a good $15 dollars for a 3D movie ticket ($20 for an IMAX 3D showing), the visual return on investment isn’t all that great. The story was enjoyable and didn’t slow down too much, but you may find yourself thinking that you’ve seen this film before in the way that so many other movies reference Burrough’s tale.

As a bonus, Disney released 10 minutes of the film. Enjoy: