A Movie A Day #3: The Firm (1989, directed by Alan Clarke)

Posted on January 3, 2017 by Jedadiah Leland

The Firm, which should not be confused with the John Grisham novel or the Tom Cruise film adaptation, was a 70-minute film about football hooliganism that was made for the BBC’s Screen Two in 1989. In the United States, it has never really been understood just how big a problem football hooliganism was in the United Kingdom in the 1980s. That’s because, despite the best efforts of ESPN, most Americans don’t care about soccer. In America, “soccer riot” sounds like the punchline of a bad joke. But in Europe, it was a very real problem. If you want to understand why some people call football hooliganism “the English Disease,” The Firm is the film to see.

Clive “Bex” Bissell (Gary Oldman) has a nice home, a well-paying job as an estate agent, a loving wife (played by Lesley Manville, who actually was married to Oldman at the time), a newborn son, and a large circle of friends. He’s also the head of the Inner City Crew, a violent group of football hooligans (known as a firm) who follow West Ham United across Britain and pick fights with other firms. (Bex is actually a second-generation football hooligan and his father is constantly complaining that the new generation isn’t tough or violent enough.) Bex does it for the buzz. As another member of the ICC puts it, after listening to a fatuous television commentator going on about how football hooligans are actually searching for some sort of larger meaning in their lives, “Why doesn’t he just say that we like hitting people?” With the 1988 European Championships coming up, Bex wants to unite all the regional firms into one national organization, with himself in charge. To do that, he’ll have to defeat two rival firm leaders, Oboe (Andrew Wilde) and Yeti (Phil Davis).

For a film about people about who are willing to kill over association football, very little soccer is actually seen in The Firm. The ICC plays a game, which is interrupted by Yeti driving across the field. Later, Yeti and his lieutenants walk through a stadium, looking for a fight and ignoring the match being played in front of them. Bex’s childhood bedroom is covered with newspaper clippings about West Ham United but Bex is more interested in the buzz than in football.

The Firm is full of classic scenes, from Bex initiating the newest member of the ICC to the disturbing moment that Bex’s son gets a hold of his knife to the final bar brawl. For me, my favorite scene is when the three rival firms hold a meeting in a posh hotel room:

Along with featuring one of Gary Oldman’s best performances, The Firm was also the last film to be directed by the great Alan Clarke. Making good use of the steadicam walking shots that he was famous for and taking an unflinching approach to the story’s violence, Clarke not only directed the definitive film about football hooliganism but also provided a portrait of life in the final years of Margaret Thatcher’s Britain.

For tomorrow’s movie a day, we stay in Britain as Anthony Perkins fights terrorists in The Glory Boys.

Lisa’s Way Too Early Oscar Predictions For January

Posted on January 1, 2017 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Why are these Oscar predictions “way too early?”

Well, unlike every other movie blogger right now, I am not attempting to predict who and what will be nominated on January 24th. Instead, with this post, I am attempting to predict which 2017 releases will be nominated next year! In short, I am attempting to predict what movies and which performers will emerge as Oscar contenders over the next 12 months.

Needless to say, this is more than a little bit foolish on my part. I haven’t seen any of the films listed below. Some of these films don’t have release dates and others are coming out so early in the year that, in order to be contenders, they’ll have to be so spectacular that neither the Academy nor the critics end up forgetting about them. For the most part, the true picture of the Oscar race usually doesn’t start to emerge until the summer.

For now, these predictions are, for the most part, wild guesses and they should be taken with more than just a grain of salt. Each month, I will revise my predictions. At the very least, next year, we’ll probably be able to look back at this post and laugh.

(Whenever trying to make early Oscar predictions, one should remember all of the award bloggers who predicted Nicole Kidman would win an Oscar for Grace of Monaco, just to then see the movie make its long-delayed premiere on Lifetime.)

With all that in mind, here are my way too early Oscar predictions for January!

Best Picture

All Eyez on Me

Battle of the Sexes

The Beguiled

Blade Runner 2047

Crown Heights

Darkest Hour

Downsizing

Dunkirk

T2: Trainspotting

War Machine

Again, for the most part, these predictions are a combination of wild guesses, instinct, and wishful thinking. It’s entirely possible that none of these films will actually be nominated for best picture. (Some might even end up premiering on Lifetime, you never know.) Here’s why I think that some of them might be remembered next year at this time:

All Eyez On Me is a biopic of Tupac Shakur. Assuming the film is done correctly, Shakur’s life would seem to have all the elements that usually go into an Oscar-winning film.

Battle of the Sexes is a film based on a true incident, a 1970s tennis match between a feminist and a self-declared male chauvinist. It’s directed by the team behind the Oscar-nominated Little Miss Sunshine and it stars two former nominees, Emma Stone and Steve Carell.

The Beguiled might be wishful thinking on my part but, at this point, wishful thinking is all I have to go on for most of these predictions. The Beguiled is a remake of a Clint Eastwood film and it’s directed by one of my favorite directors, Sofia Coppola! Much like Battle of the Sexes, its misogynist-gets-what’s-coming-to-him storyline might make it the perfect film for the first year of the Trump presidency.

Blade Runner 2047 is one of the most eagerly anticipated films of 2017 and it’s directed by Denis Villeneuve, who is hot off of Arrival. The Oscar success of Mad Max: Fury Road proved that a sequel can be a contender.

Every year, at least one contender emerges out of Sundance and this year, it could very well be Crown Heights. It tells a fact-based story, about a man trying to win his best friend’s release from prison after the latter is wrongly convicted. That all sounds very Oscar baity.

Speaking of Oscar bait, Darkest Hour stars Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill. If that doesn’t sound like Oscar bait, I don’t know what does.

Downsizing is Alexander Payne’s latest film. It’s about a man (Matt Damon), who shrinks himself. It may not sound like typical Oscar bait but Payne is definitely a favorite of the Academy’s.

Dunkirk is Christopher Nolan’s big epic for 2017. Will it be another huge success or will it just be bombastic? We’ll see. The Academy has a weakness for World War II films and it could be argued that the very successful yet never nominated Nolan is overdue for some Academy recognition. (It is true that Inception received a nomination for best picture but Nolan himself was snubbed.)

T2: Trainspotting is probably coming out too early in the year to be a legitimate contender but who knows? The trailer was great. Danny Boyle is directing it. And, much as with Blade Runner 2047, Mad Max: Fury Road proved that a well-made and intelligent sequel can find favor with the Academy.

War Machine is described as being a satire about the war in Afghanistan. Could it be another Big Short? With Obama out of office, the Academy might be more open to political satire than they’ve been in the past.

Best Director

Danny Boyle for T2: Trainspotting

Sofia Coppola for The Beguiled

Christopher Nolan for Dunkirk

Alexander Payne for Downsizing

Denis Villeneuve for Blade Runner 2047

Again, there’s a lot of random guessing here. Personally, I’d love to see Sofia Coppola receive a second nomination for best director. Payne and Boyle are always possibilities and, if Villeneuve’s work on Arrival is ignored this year, nominating him for Blade Runner would be a good way to make up for it. As for Nolan, he’s going to get nominated some day. Why not for Dunkirk?

Best Actor

Tom Cruise in American Made

Sam Elliott in The Hero

Hugh Jackman in The Greatest Showman

Logan Lerman in Sidney Hall

Gary Oldman in Darkest Hour

In American Made, Tom Cruise plays a real-life drug runner. It sounds like one of those change-of-pace roles that often results in an Oscar nomination. Gary Oldman has never won an Oscar and has only been nominated once. The Academy might want to rectify that situation by nominating him for playing Winston Churchill. And finally, Hugh Jackman as P.T. Barnum in a big budget musical that’s scheduled to open on Christmas Day? It sounds like either a total disaster or the formula for Oscar gold!

Logan Lerman is one of those actors who appears to be destined to eventually be nominated for an Oscar and, in Sidney Hall, he ages over thirty years. Finally, Sam Elliott is a beloved veteran who has never been nominated. If The Hero is a hit at Sundance, it’s easy to imagine the Oscar campaign that will follow.

Best Actress

Jessica Chastain in The Zookeeper’s Wife

Judi Dench in Victoria and Abdul

Nicole Kidman in The Beguiled

Emma Stone in Battle of the Sexes

Naomi Watts in The Book of Henry

As of this writing, Meryl Streep does not have a movie scheduled to be released in 2017, which means that another actress will get the sport usually reserved for her. But who? Jessica Chastain could be nominated because she’s Jessica Chastain and the Academy loves her. Judi Dench plays Queen Victoria for a second time in Victoria and Abdul. The Academy loves movies about British royalty and Dench has already been nominated once for bringing Victoria to life. Naomi Watts plays a loving but possibly crazy mother in The Book of Henry, which again sounds like a very Oscar baity role. If Emma Stone doesn’t win for La La Land, the Academy could make it up to her by nominating her for Battle of the Sexes.

As for Nicole Kidman in The Beguiled — well, let’s call that wishful thinking. My hope is that Sofia Coppola will do great things with The Beguiled and she will get another great performance out of Nicole Kidman. We’ll see if I’m right.

Best Supporting Actor

Robert Carlyle in T2: Trainspotting

Johnny Depp in Murder on The Orient Experss

James Franco in The Masterpiece

Bill Skarsgard in It

Kevin Spacey in Billionaire Boys Club

Admittedly, the guesses here are fairly random but there is a logic behind each nominee. Robert Carlyle was great in Trainspotting so he might be just as great in T2. In Billionaire Boys Club, Kevin Spacey plays a sleazy con artist and that sounds like the type of role with which he could do wonders. If It is to be a success, Bill Skarsgard is going to have to be a terrifying Pennywise. If Heath Ledger could win for playing the Joker, surely Skarsgard could be nominated for playing Pennywise.

As for James Franco in The Masterpiece … yes, it’s more wishful thinking on my part. Franco will be playing Tommy Wiseau, the director of the notorious The Room. Wiseau is, needless to say, an eccentric figure. Not only do I think James Franco could give an award-worthy performance in the role but I also just like the idea of someone getting an Oscar for playing Tommy Wiseau.

Finally, we have Johnny Depp in Murder on The Orient Express. Why not? It seems like someone from that film’s huge cast is destined to be nominated so why not Johnny Depp?

Best Supporting Actress

Jennifer Aniston in The Yellow Birds

Danai Guirra in All Eyez On Me

Kelly MacDonald in T2: Trainspotting

Kristin Scott Thomas in Darkest Hour

Tilda Swinton in War Machine

These guesses are even more random than my guesses for supporting actor. Jennifer Aniston and Danai Guirra will both be playing mothers who lose their sons. A lot of people were surprised when Aniston was not nominated for Cake so here’s a chance for the Academy to make it up to her. As for Kristin Scott Thomas, she’ll be playing Winston Churchill’s wife and the Academy loves historical wives (i.e., Helena Bonham Carter in The King’s Speech and Felicity Jones in The Theory of Everything).

As for the last two predictions, Tilda Swinton is listed because she’s Tilda Swinton. Kelly MacDonald is listed for the same reason that I put Robert Carlyle down for supporting actor. She was just so good in the first film.

So, there you go! Those are my too early Oscar predictions for January! Will they prove to be accurate? Probably not.

But we’ll see how things change over the next couple of months. At the very least, you’ll be able to look back at this post and laugh at me for thinking that … oh, let’s say Battle of the Sexes … would ever be nominated for an Academy Award.

As for me, I’ll be revising my predictions in February. At least by that point, maybe the Sundance Film Festival will have provided some guidance…

Shattered Politics #67: The Contender (dir by Rod Lurie)

Posted on February 4, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(Spoilers)

The 2000 political melodrama The Contender is one of the most hypocritical films that I’ve ever seen.

The Contender tells the story of what happens when U.S. Sen. Laine Hanson (played by Joan Allen) is nominated to be vice president by President Jackson Evans (Jeff Bridges). During Laine’s confirmation hearings, Rep. Shelly Runyon (Gary Oldman) dredges up rumors that, at a college frat party, Laine took part in a threesome in exchange for money.

When Runyon asks Laine about the rumors, she replies that she refuses to answer any questions about what she may or may not have done while she was younger. She replies that it is “simply beneath my dignity” and you know what? She’s absolutely right. First off, if someone could be disqualified just because of what they did in college then nobody would eve be eligible to be President. Secondly, and far more importantly, nobody would care about Laine’s sexual history if she was a man.

For over two hours, Laine refuses to answer any questions about the allegations and instead, she turns the tables on her attackers. And while this alone would not have made The Contender a good film (because, after all, The Contender was written and directed by Rod “Straw Dogs” Lurie), it at least would have been a film that I could respect.

But, Rod Lurie being Rod Lurie, he just couldn’t help but fuck it all up.

Towards the end of the film, Laine is attending a White House reception. She and President Evans sit down on the White House lawn and, as the stars shine above them, Evans says, “Just between us, is it true?”

Now, there’s two things that Laine could have said here that would have kept this film from falling apart. Laine could have said, “It’s none of your business.” And that would have been the right thing to say because, quite frankly, it is none of the President’s business. The whole point of the movie has been that it’s not anyone’s business.

Or, if the film actually had any guts, Laine could have said, “Yes, it’s totally true. Like most people, I experimented when I was in college. But that doesn’t have anything to do with whether or not I’m qualified to be your vice president.”

But no. Instead, Laine smiles and says, “Nothing happened. Two guys propositioned me, I said no, and they spread rumors.”

So, basically, the film is saying, “It’s nobody’s business if Laine was sexually active in college but don’t worry, Mr. and Mrs. American Audience, she was a virgin until she turned 30. So, it’s still okay for you to like her…”

And that’s the thing about The Contender. It’s a film that doesn’t have the courage of its own convictions. It’s a film that drags on for over two hours and it expects you to forgive it just because it pretends to have good intentions. As a woman, there’s nothing I hate more than being pandered to and, for all of its attempts to come across as being feminist, The Contender is all about pandering.

What makes The Contender an interesting bad film — as opposed to just your usual bad film — is how even the littlest details feel false. It’s obvious that Lurie knew all of the legal details that go into confirming a Vice President but he didn’t know how to make any of those details dramatically compelling. So, the film becomes a bit of a know-it-all lecture. By the time that Saul Rubinek popped up and said, “Do you know what Nelson Rockefeller said about the vice presidency?,” I found myself snapping back, “No, what did Nelson Rockefeller say about the Vice Presidency? Please tell because ah am so sure that it is just goin’ to be the most fascinatin’ thang that ah will ever hear in mah entire life!”

(The more annoyed I get, the more pronounced my Texas accent.)

There’s a lot of weird little things about The Contender that just don’t work. They may not sound like major problems but when combined together, they start to add up. For instance, there’s a long shot where we see U.S. Rep. Reginald Webster (Christian Slater) and his blonde wife at a White House reception and the shot just lingers on them for no particular reason. Long after you would expect the shot to end, it’s still going. This wouldn’t be an issue if there was some narrative reason for that shot. Instead, it’s just randomly dropped in there.

And then, after Laine is nominated, we see the front page of a newpaper and there, in the middle of the page, is a headshot of Joan Allen. Underneath it, a small headline reads, “It’s Laine!” It just feels so fake. Wouldn’t the nomination of the first female vice present actually rate a bigger headline and a more dynamic picture?

Speaking of fake, towards the end of the film, President Evans picks up a framed magazine cover and stares down at it. The magazine, itself, looks like one of those joke “Man of the Year” pictures that people pose for at a state fair. On the cover is a picture of Last Picture Show era Jeff Bridges. The headline on the magazine reads: “President Jackson Evans. His ideas have changed the world.” Not his actions, mind you. Not his policies. Instead, his ideas have changed the world. But the film shows us no evidence of this and, during Laine’s confirmation hearings, everyone spends the whole time debating the same old shit that they always seem to be debating in Washington.

(Of course, if you’re lucky enough to have a name like Jackson Evans, I guess you might as well become President.)

Of course, when it looks like Laine might not be confirmed, President Evans speaks before Congress. “For the first time, a woman will serve in the executive!” he declares, which seems like a hilariously awkward way to put it. (People in this film don’t talk like human being as much as they talk like characters in some fucked up Washington D.C. fanfic.) He then adds, “There are traitors among us!”

So, I guess the message here is yay for demagogues.

And don’t even get me started on Kathryn Morris, as the cheerful FBI agent who investigates Laine’s past and who, at one point, announces, “Laine is hope!” Would a male FBI agent ever have to deliver a line that stupid?

And also don’t even get me started on the subplot about Gov. Jack Hathaway (William Petersen), who stages an auto accident in an attempt to convince President Evans to nominate him for vice president.

The Contender is not a good film but it could have at least been a respectable film. But then, Rod Lurie had to have President Evans ask whether it was true or not.

Perhaps being a hypocrite was the idea that changed the world.

Trailer: Child 44

Posted on January 29, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

I’m looking forward to seeing this movie. The trailer looks intense and it’s got an amazing cast. Not only do we have Gary Oldman and Tom Hardy reunited for the first time since Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy but you’ve also got the original (and still the best, regardless of what the Fincherites say) Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Noomi Rapace!

Trash Film Guru Vs. The Summer Blockbusters : “Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes”

Posted on July 13, 2014 by Ryan C. (fourcolorapocalypse)

This is gonna be one easy review to write because it all boils down to this : you really can believe all the hype, Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes is flat-out fucking awesome, and you need to go out and see this flick immediately.

My job is done, I’m finished, goodnight.

But I guess I do have at least a little bit more to say —

I wasn’t a big fan of Cloverfield by any means, but I’m turning into a big fan of Matt Reeves. I know it’s heresy to some, but I thought that Let Me In was every bit as good as its Swedish progenitor, and with this latest — and, frankly, best — installment in the venerable Apes franchise, Reeves has shown himself to be a director who is fully hitting his stride. The bigger and bolder the project, the more he seems to rise to the occasion. I frankly don’t even know how you go about eliciting good performances from actors who are only there for the purpose of having a bunch of hair overlaid onto their faces via computer, but he did it here. Andy Serkis, as ape leader Caesar, and Toby Kebbell, as his primary (and creepily duplicitous) rival, Koba, both turn in Oscar-caliber work on the basis of their facial expressions alone. They’re gonna wow you, folks, no lie.

As for the human actors playing — well, human parts, Jason Clarke is solid as stand-up guy Malcolm, apparent real-life asshole in the extreme Gary Oldman does typically competent (if, to be perfectly fair, unspectacular) work as survivalist head honcho Dreyfus, and Kodi Smit-McPhee is extremely convincing as Malcolm’s teenage son, Alexander (plus, he can be seen reading Charles Burns’ Black Hole, so bonus points for that). About the only weak link comes by way of nominal love interest Keri Russell, whose “concerned as shit” look at all times begins to grate pretty early on. But when you consider the fact that all these people spent pretty much the entire time in front of a blue (or maybe it was green) screen, getting only one subpar performance from the bunch is pretty good. And who knows? Maybe Russell simply can’t help coming off as worried 24/7.

My only other minor quibble here is with the title — when a film called Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes is followed by one called Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes, you gotta wonder when the buildup is going to stop and we’re finally gonna get down to the shit. Or maybe we’re looking at a 20-part story here and we’ve still got plenty of stage-setting to go, in which case we’ll be treated to Prelude To The Planet Of The Apes and We’re Still Getting To The Planet Of The Apes next.

Hey, I did say it was a minor quibble, did I not?

Apart from that, this has everything you’d want in a big-budget summer blockbuster, and quite a bit more than you’d honestly expect : there’s pathos, melodrama, palace (if your palace is a tree) intrigue, cheap scares, high-octane thrills, elaborately-staged battle sequences, and a genuine sense of urgency to the proceedings. Events — and tension — gradually build to the point of inevitability, and the film’s third act actually delivers in terms of its promised payoff. And for those of you who are tired of James Franco’s ever-evolving shtick — whatever it is — rest assured that he doesn’t even pop up in a flashback sequence.

Ya know what? Let’s not even do Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes the disservice of comparing it to other summer popcorn flicks — this leaves typical blockbuster fare like The Avengers or Star Trek so far back in the dust it’s not even funny. What Reeves has made here is one of the very best films you’ll see all year, even if big-budget sci-fi grandiosity is not your thing. This is eloquent, spectacular, undeniably powerful drama of the highest order. It’s everything and the kitchen sink plus one of those nifty fancy programmable faucets all attached to a fancy-ass 300-pound granite countertop.

Okay, I’m finished with the italics, promise. If you don’t like this, you don’t like movies. My job here really is done.

‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ (dir. Matt Reeves)

Posted on July 11, 2014 by leonth3duke

(Poster by Matt Ferguson)

When ‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes’ came out, I wasn’t excited; I didn’t even see it in theaters. I am a fan of the original franchise (one and three mainly), and still had the bad taste of the terrible Burton remake in my mouth. So the idea of a prequel/reboot was one of the last things I wanted at the time. Still, I gave it a chance when it was released on home video, and it blew me away. I, like so many, was surprised by just how good it was. So good in fact, that I desperately wanted a sequel. Luckily the film was a success (both financially and critically) and that inevitable, albeit desired, sequel was made. Having now just seen it, the question now becomes whether it lives up to both that first film and the enormous expectations I had built up between films (especially more recently with the “prequel” shorts). The answer, thank god, is a resounding “Hell yes!”

It was so good in fact that I’d go so far as to say that this franchise has become my favorite since Nolan’s ‘Batman’ films. This is why the easiest way for me to describe how this compares to the first film is to say that ‘Dawn’ is to ‘Rise’ as ‘The Dark Knight’ was to ‘Batman Begins’. ‘Rise’, like ‘Begins’, was an exceptional origins tale; but it was a story that felt rushed or overshadowed in place for the development and establishment of only the central character. ‘Rise’ still had an emotional resonance, and the final twenty minutes are incredibly thrilling, but it ultimately felt incomplete. With ‘Dawn’, like with ‘The Dark Knight’, the film makers were free to use what was already established with their new hero to tell a much more complete, more complex and emotional story on a much grander scale.

‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ takes place ten years after the events of the first film. The world has been devastated by the Simian Flu. Humans have spent the last decade fighting the virus and themselves. They live in a post-apocalyptic world, struggling to survive, but are making progress. Caesar (Andy Serkis) and his troop on the other hand have built themselves a community, a tranquil home in the Muir Woods that is thriving according to their needs. That peace is interrupted when a group of humans enter their territory. They are led by Malcolm (Jason Clarke), who is trying to find and fix a hydroelectric plant that could help bring power back to San Francisco. The actions of one in that group lead Caesar and his family to have little trust in their intentions, but allows them to proceed because they are clearly desperate. Caesar is one of the few apes that has seen the good in human’s and also knows cooperation could keep the peace.

As the bond between human and ape grows there is still one among Caesar’s troop that does not believe that peace is possible. That ape is Koba (Toby Kebbell), who was beaten, tortured and used for medical testing his entire life. Koba’s distrust only grows when he learns that the humans, led by a man named Dreyfus (Gary Oldman), have access to military stock piles and are willing to take control of the area surrounding the dam by force if it were to become necessary. Thinking Caesar is weak and too loyal to humans, Koba decides to take it upon himself to protect the apes, and his actions set off a chain of events that could only lead to only one thing…war.

When the film ended and I walked out of the theater I felt completely satisfied with what I had just seen. My expectations for the film were already incredibly high, but I would be lying if I said this didn’t actually exceed them. What makes the film such a resounding success for me is the way in which the story puts everyone on equal grounds. There are no true villains here, and even those that assume that role do so for reasons that were easy for me to empathize with. Dreyfus may want to kill the apes, but he does so because he is a man who has lost everyone he ever loved and will do anything to protect the remaining humans that have put their trust in him. Koba, as selfish as some of his actions may be, is someone who was physically and mentally abused his entire life. His revenge might seem cruel, but one could hardly blame him for wanting it. Everyone is fighting for the survival of those that they love and the homes they established. I couldn’t help but want everyone to succeed. Unfortunately, as the story progresses, it becomes clear that the pain and damage under the surface of both man and ape make the idea of peace between the two impossible. Some differences are irreparable. There is definitely an allegory here of war that reflects current and past conflicts.

Luckily those themes of warfare, family and survival are all expressed effortlessly through the actions of its characters. It manages to be intelligent and complex without being thematically overbearing, while maintaing an intanacy. That is mainly because the film is handled with exceptional craftsmanship by Matt Reeves. The direction and cinematography, especially within Caesar’s settlement, is wonderful. It is never flashy, and is often much darker and moodier than one might expect. The editing and pacing is near perfect, which is rarely the case with these sorts of films. It only ever slows when it needs to, but the story is always moving forward. Every scene matters, even the quieter moments, for which there are many; again, something one might not expect, especially given the action heavy trailers. The score is perhaps the best Michael Giacchino has done since ‘Up’, adding to the moody atmosphere, and I LOVED his little nob to ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ in the opening sequence. Everything here is done with purpose and execution of it all is nearly flawless.

Lastly, I would be remiss to end this review without mentioning the performances, which were the soul of the film. Even with the way everything else was handled, I am not sure ‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ would have worked without these specific performances. The human cast of Clarke, Oldman and Russell were all fantastic. The film’s only real flaw was that there actually wasn’t enough focus on them. I understand that the heart of the story is Caesar and his apes, but the human characters could easily have been developed more. Still, what development and emotional connection we did get was due mainly because of the actors portraying them. They make us care for these people, making the inevitable conflict even harder to bear as the film approached its climax.

The motion capture for the apes was mind blowing. Andy Serkis is in a class of his own. The visuals and animation here are some of the best I think I have seen; but it is the emotion and talent of the actors behind all that CGI that makes those ape characters feel so real. Serkis plays Caesar as someone filled with grief and the weight of the responsibility of caring for his troop bleeds through. Toby Kebbell plays Koba with a ferociousness that is equally terrifying and mesmerizing; and I also really loved Nick Thurston, who played Caesar’s eldest son Blue Eyes, and how he managed to expressed so much in just his gaze. I mentioned early in this review how this film compares on some level to ‘The Dark Knight’ for me. That film was speculated to be in the run for an Oscar nomination for Best Picture but it never happened. The backlash was so strong that some think it was the reason the Academy increased the number of films that could be nominated. I truly hope that Serkis will receive some form of recognition for his work here; and if not, I hope all of us praising him so greatly now will be vocal enough when the time come that maybe the Academy will make another change to who and what it nominates.

I am not sure where I would place this film among others I have seen in 2014 but I know I’d put it somewhere near the top. This isn’t just another intelligent summer blockbuster; it is really an exceptionally crafted epic, a thrilling action-drama with an emotional and thematic resonance that future films should make a note of. And, as I felt when I first watched ‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes’, I eagerly await the next installment – which will thankfully be directed again by Matt Reeves.

‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ Prequel Shorts

Posted on July 4, 2014 by leonth3duke

(Above is an exclusive poster found on Collider.com)

I am having a hard time remembering the last time I made a post like this that wasn’t a review, so I think you can use this article as a measure of just how excited I am for ‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’. I, like a lot of people, was completely surprised by how good ‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes’ was. It rejuvenated a franchise (one I really enjoy) that was most recently tarnished by a really, really bad remake. It was so good that a sequel was not only inevitable, but desired.

Luckily Fox is fulfilling that desire next week with the release of the sequel, which has received universal praise from the few reviews that have already been released. The out-pour of this praise definitely has me more excited than I was beforehand…but it is not the true source of the hype that has me ready to buy a ticket for a Thursday night showing for the first time since ‘The Dark Knight Rises’. No, the source of that hype is a series of short films that act as a bridge between ‘Rise’ and ‘Dawn’, examining (quite artistically, surprisingly) the events that occurred after the outbreak of the Simian Flu at the end of ‘Rise’. These shorts are a collaboration of 20th Century Fox and Motherboard and can be viewed below:

‘Spread of Simian Flu: Before The Dawn of the Apes (Year 1)’ (dir. Isaiah Seret)

‘Struggling to Survive: Before The Dawn of the Apes (Year 5)’ (dir. Daniel Thron)

‘Story of the Gun: Before The Dawn of the Apes (Year 10)’ (dir. “thirtytwo”)

What I love most about these is how they are so unlike most “viral” shorts. These aren’t straight forward stories like you see with the Marvel One-Shots. These are actually artistic, emotional and thought provoking films, to the point in which I saw people commenting on them being pretentious…music to my ears to be honest with you. Each explore themes of their own while also wonderfully adding to the atmosphere and mythos of the new ‘Apes’ series. Furthermore, the very fact that the studio clearly gave the writers and directors of each liberty to not “play it safe” with a piece of marketing revolving around a multi-million dollar franchise just gives me a ton of confidence in the franchise on the whole. It is this, more than the reviews, that has me excited to see ‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ next week, and maybe they will do the same for you.

———————————————————————————————————————-

Along with the prequel shorts, which are directly related to the events of the film, they also released a documentary which can be seen below. It too is incredibly well made, and is a surprisingly poignant true story of apes and human interactions during and after the events of medical testing and human warfare.

‘The Real Planet of the Apes’

The Final Trailer: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Posted on June 19, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Here is the third and final trailer for Dawn of the Planet of the Apes! Judging from this trailer, it looks like the apes are basically kicking humanity’s ass and you know what?

GO APES!

Sadly, it appears that my beloved James Franco has failed to survive the apocalypse. However, Gary Oldman is still around and, if anyone can properly represent what’s left of humanity, it’s probably Gary Oldman.

(Incidentally, I’m pretty sure that I would survive the apocalypse. I have redhead survival skills, after all…)

Trailer: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (Official)

Posted on May 9, 2014 by Arleigh

One of my most-anticipated films this summer of 2014 has released it’s latest trailer and it shows the central conflict which will drive this sequel to 2011’s Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

It’s been many years since the pandemic from the “simian flu” tore through the planet as shown during the end credits of the first film. Now the surviving humans must now contend with the growing population of hyper-intelligent apes led by Caesar from the first film.

While the first film showed the rise of Caesar as a revolutionary leader it looks like this sequel will now put him in the role of war leader as his apes must now gear up for a war with the surviving humans that can’t seem to be avoided.

Plus, all I can say is this: Apes on horses with assault rifles.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is set for a July 11, 2014 release date.

Robocop 2014

Posted on February 13, 2014 by Semtex Skittle

Boom.

So, I did, in fact, see Robocop 2014. It was suggested that some of our readers might have heard about this one. I will tell you right now that my own take on the film is… largely unbiased. The original Robocop never entrenched itself in my lexicon as an ‘essential’ film. I generally considered it to be a fun film, very watchable, fairly standard 80’s action fare… and, really, with the fingerprints of noted Dutch filmmaker Paul Verhoeven all over it. I definitely remember it fondly, but I’m by no means a Robocop purist. The puzzling direction the series took after the original (Robocop 2, in particular, strikes me as one of the worst films I can recall seeing, and 3 is somehow less memorable. I’m sure that does not mean good things). One thing probably anyone would tell you about the original film is that it was violent. Controversially so. Or perhaps that it is infested with foul language? To the point where the f-bombs seem to become their own point. Well, to start with, 2014’s Robocop went for the path of least creativity, and stuck itself in a PG-13 body that is actually pretty teen-friendly. More on that in a minute. But between the absence of Verhoeven’s style, the infusion of 201X’s powerful visual effects, the over the top violence and language, and the absence of any 80s camp, this film bears very little resemblance to the original.

If you wish to appreciate this film at all, you will be forced to do so on its own merits. Looking at it through the prism of the original film will probably not satisfy you, though I may be mistaken. I suppose it depends on how much you loved the first iteration.

2014’s incarnation of Robocop is directed by José Padilha, directing his first English language film. He is best known for his work on the Elite Squad films. His background is in action, and his style is not one that we’ve been down that road before with. I suspect that if this film had been helmed by a Michael Bay, it might have been disastrous. Instead, the result is surprisingly gritty at times, especially during an early shootout between Detroit police detectives and a hit squad sent to eliminate them to cut off their investigation of a local gunrunner. Obviously, the film has plenty of antiseptically clean sets, and the sophisticated visual effects involved give us lots of clean lines and gleaming, metallic surfaces… so it was, in a way, grounding to see some sequences in an experienced hand. Sadly, this style does not hold true through the entire picture, which features some predictably infuriating shaky cam work where our ability to understand and process the action is limited by the way in which it is shot. Some would probably argue this is realistic, and that if I were actually in a gun battle, I could only understand a tiny part of it even afterward… but as an action film viewer, it turns me off like few other things do.

The ED-209 has certainly never looked better.

The plot is a significant variation on the 1987 original, though it does have some pieces of the framework still intact. The year is 2028, and the United States is now projecting its power worldwide through the use of formidable robotic drones provided by Omnicorp (a division, we learn, of the original film’s OCP. Unlike the original film, in which the ED-209 is clearly the shoddy work of a corporation trying to make money by sending to the lowest bidder, it seems that the ED-209 is an extremely efficient and deadly enforcer and peacekeeper. Its primary flaw, that it cannot reason like a human, and does not know right from wrong, is central to the questions that the film posits. To the extent that it posits anything, that is. As with the original 1987 film, 2014 is introduced to us by a nationwide news broadcast… except, this time, instead of a simple evening news program, we’re treated to an extremely high production news opinion show (something like The O’Reilly Factor, perhaps) starring Pat Novak, a highly opinionated right-wing security lobbyist (a well cast Samuel L. Jackson delivers an energetic performance). Pat Novak wants to know why these drones aren’t keeping America’s streets safe, too.

The answer, of course, is that Americans want their protectors to have a soul. The film does make it clear, incidentally, that the United States has not asked other parts of the world if they’d prefer this same consideration… and this is where the film’s satire lies… in pumping up world peacekeeper thinking until it explodes.

With the realization that public opinion has to change or Omnicorp will never be able to deploy its products to the American market, the company’s executives, Marketing Director Tom Pope (Jay Baruchel) and, Legal Department Chair Liz Kline (Jennifer Ehle) and the CEO Raymond Sellers (Michael Keaton) decide to try and create exactly what their market wants: a man inside of a machine. Using the revolutionary cybernetics developed by Dr. Dennett Norton (Gary Oldman, in a very wistful, emotional role) they scour the country’s cops debilitated in the line of duty in search of the perfect candidate – an emotionally balanced cop with the reason and the desire to get back in the game.

Enter Alex Murphy (Joel Kinaman, from AMC’s “The Killing”), grievously injured, with wife Clara (Abbie Cornish) and son David (John Paul Ruttan) desperate not to let him go. Using Dr. Norton’s technology, Omnicorp rebuilds him into the ultimate crime fighting machine… where things go from there is, frankly, fairly predictable. Throughout the narrative, Pat Novak’s show continues to break in, stitching the narrative exposition together with both more of Novak’s bluster and with interviews with other major players like CEO Sellers and the Senator who is leading the opposition to Omnicorp’s technology, Hubert Dreyfuss (Zach Grenier). You will no doubt anticipate the conclusion of the film well before it reaches those final moments, and so aside from a couple of exceptionally well crafted sequences, this film does not exactly break new ground.

What does stand out, and I apologize for stuffing those last couple paragraphs full of as many names as possible (and I still missed plenty!), is the casting, and the acting, that are on display in this film. Everyone involved stands more or less head and shoulders above what’s being asked of them. I particularly enjoyed Michael Keaton in the role of the film’s villainous CEO, who gives a very reserved performance. There is very little evil mania from Keaton, who instead comes off exactly as coldly off-putting as I would expect from a sociopath in his position, going from decision to decision with an eye for the company’s financial future. The more scenery chewing villainy is left up to Jackie Earl Haley as Omnicorp’s in-house military QC, Rick Mattox, and from some villains scattered about the mean streets of 2028’s Detroit.

The original Robocop had a kind of wry humour to it that is entirely absent this reproduction. Curiously, the film is also almost entirely without meaningful visual violence, and almost totally absent of profanity (the traditional single use of ‘fuck’ for a PG-13 film is, in fact, bleeped, since it’s delivered by Pat Novak on his live TV show), and instead feels more like playing a modern Call of Duty or Battlefield video game in its depiction of Robocop battling his foes. This film coasts by absolutely safely at a PG-13 level (seriously, this is not the film you need to be worried about protecting your kids from).

While elements of the film are certainly a visual feast, these sumptuous visuals are actually mostly confined to the laboratory in which Robocop is built and maintained, and in the sophisticated battle armor that the titular supercop wears. The sequences on the ground, so to speak, feel a little more real. I suppose it’s the same faint sense of grittiness that the director’s hand gives this movie, which only rarely becomes a victim of its own visual effects. This is largely a good thing, as I think we’ve all developed a little bit of special effects fatigue over several heaping courses of Michael Bay’s “Transformers”, “Star Wars” prequel films, and other overblown projects. This film struck a fair balance, I felt, between taking advantage of the visual effects available, and trying to substitute them for any kind of substance. There is something going on at the core of this film. Unfortunately, I ultimately felt that it was not enough to satisfy, but plenty to entertain. Your own mileage will, of course, vary.

For those purists out there who are decrying the necessity of this remake (there was none) and the wisdom of doing so anyway… in perfect honesty, this is a film that simply wouldn’t have been made this way in 1987. In saying that, please, let’s admit that the 1987 film would also never have been made that way today. People’s outlook has changed. They look for, fear, and hope for, different things out of the world. Robocop 2014 is by no means a perfect – or even great – film… but it is a much better film for the post 9/11 world than the original one is. It fits its era. Between that, and a slew of excellent performances, you may just find this film to be above your expectations. It certainly surpassed my own.