Hard to imagine it’s been 9 years since the original Sin City hit the big screen. It was a comic book adaptation that many thought wouldn’t work, especially how Rodriguez envisioned it to be slavishly loyal to not just Miller’s dialogue but also his unique art style.
The original film’s success quickly ramped up rumors that a sequel was already being planned using the second graphic novel in the Sin City series. Rodriguez himself stated he wanted Angelina Jolie for the role of Ava Lord, the titular “Dame to Kill For”, but after years and years of delay the role finally landed on Eva Green‘s lap (not a bad choice and one I fully support).
So, we’re now going back to Basin City for more tales of booze, broads and bullets in this hyper-noir film that should be loved or hated in equal measures by those who have followed Frank Miller’s career. Once again the directing duties have been split between Rodriguez and Miller. Here’s to hoping that Miller has learned how to be a much better directer after his last film, The Spirit, tanked.
Sin City: A Dame to Kill For is set for an August 22, 2014 release date.
If there was ever an actor in the last twenty years who has suffered ridicule regarding his body of work it would be Ben Affleck. Nevermind the fact that he has actually done very good work as an actor. People tend to view his acting work through some very bad film projects which the online film bloggers (and trolls) have lambasted year after year. One such film which has gained a cult following for all the reasons is the 1998 horror film Phantoms which was adapted from the Dean Koontz horror novel of the same name. This was a film which came out of nowhere and which no one really saw when it first hit the theaters. There’s a reason for this and the main reason for this being that the film was really awful though not without some entertaining bits.
Phantoms starred Ben Affleck in a role that really seemed more suited for an older actor. His Sheriff Hammond in the novel was much older and fit the backstory told in both novel and film that never truly fit Affleck’s youthful appearance and mannerism. He’s joined in this Joe Chappelle production by classically-trained veteran actor Peter O’Toole (who must’ve really needed the money to sign up for this film) in the role of Dr. Exposition dump aka Timothy Flyte who ends up explaining to the surviving cast of characters the very danger facing them in the abandoned town of Snowfield. Rounding out the cast is Liev Schrieber as the creepy Deputy Stu Wargle who becomes a sort of plot device as the film moves forward. To add to this mix are Joanna Going and Rose McGowan as sisters who first discover that their town has just gone through a terrible event.
The novel this film was based on was pure scifi-horror pulp which stressed one’s suspension of disbelief, but was quite entertaining from beginning to end. Dean Koontz is like the generic fast-food version of Stephen King. This film adaptation borrows heavily from films such as Carpenter’s The Thing and the remake of The Blob. This wouldn’t have been a bad thing since the film’s story does bring into it an interesting concept of an ancient enemy which might or might not have been responsible for unexplained mass disappearances of people and animals throughout history going back to prehistoric times.
What Phantoms ends up doing which ruins the film as a whole was to rush through the narrative it was adapting it. The film pretty much goings through a checklist of all the major scenes in the novel, takes those scenes and truncates them to fit uncomfortably into a 90+ minute film. Some of these scenes could’ve been extended a few more minutes to add to a sense of grandiose to a film that needed it despite it’s B-movie foundation. One such scenes would be the arrival of a special Army unit designed to combat unexplained events, but the film treats this sequence from their arrival right up to their untimely demise in less than 15 minutes. I think in the hands of a much more capable filmmaker these scenes would’ve made the film much more entertaining.
Phantoms was a horror film that could’ve become a 90’s cult-classic if it had been given the proper time and effort from it’s producers, but seeing that it was the Weinsteins of Miramax and Dimension Films this final product was probably the best Joe Chappelle could’ve come up with. Weinsteins during the 1990’s were more concerned of pushing their Oscar-baiting film productions than actually giving time and effort to all their films. If there was any reason to see Phantoms it would be to see just why it kept being mentioned in Kevin Smith’s Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. Other than that there’s really no reason to see it unless there’s nothing else on.
I love films, all films, in general but if there’s one particular film genre that really floats my boat then it would be in the horror category. This summer will see the release of a title that I’ve been anticipating since I heard about it at last year’s San Diego Comic-Con. The film I speak of is the remake of the 1973 tv horror film of the same name: Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark.
While Troy Nixey takes the director’s chair for this film he’s working on a story written by Guillermo Del Toro who’s been known to dabble in the horror genre (Cronos, The Devil’s Backbone). Del Toro promised a horror film that would bring back horror the way it’s meant to be and that’s with genuine scares and not horror predicated on torture and extreme use of gore. Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark will be a throwback to the atmospheric, almost gothic horror, that reached it’s peak during the late 70’s before the slasher boom hit.
The film has been delayed several times as Miramax Films was sold by Disney and the restructuring of the studio after it’s owners finalized it’s purchase put the film on the backburner. It now has an official August 26, 2011 release and it looks like the film got an R-rating from the MPAA for “pervasive scariness”. While Del Toro, Nixey and the rest of the film crew were hoping for a PG-13 rating the one given by the MPAA who seemed to really enjoy said “pervasive scariness” recommended it go out as an R-rated horror (one with little to no gore).
So, we have an upcoming horror film by an upcoming filmmaker handpicked by Del Toro. A film written by Del Toro himself and one which just got an R-rating which made Del Toro as happy as a clam. Plus, it’s a horror film that relies on genuine scares and not gore. My answer to that is August 26, 2011 cannot come sooner.
If there was a film which deserved better when it first came out in 2003 it would be Peter Weir’s epic adaptation of the Patrick O’Brian seafaring novels starring the character of Capt. Jack Aubrey. It was just bad luck on the part of Weir’s film that it came out the same year and month as the juggernaut that would sweep through not just the box-office for the 2003 holiday season, but all through the award-season. If Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World had only come out a year later there’s a great chance it would’ve been the frontrunner for 2005 Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay and many more. But the juggernaut that was Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King would not be denied after two previous years when Jackson and his magnum opus were passed over.
To say that Peter Weir was at the top of his game with Master and Commander would be an understatement. Working from a script written by Weir himself and John Collee, the film would take several episodes from the Patrick O’Brian Aubrey-Maturin novels and combine them to make a coherent and thrilling period piece that rarely ever get made anymore. This was epic filmmaking at its finest with Weir’s direction keeping the long-running time of the film from becoming too tedious. Yet, he was also able to keep the film from becoming one battle setpiece following another. There was enough of a balance between the quiet storytelling, especially between the characters of Capt. “Lucky” Jack Aubrey (played by Russell Crowe in what had to be his best role ever) and his close friend and ship’s doctor Stephen Maturin (Paul Bettany matching Crowe scene for scene) to keep the film grounded in reality.
Master and Commander is set during the Napoleonic Wars when France and England battle it out on land and in the high seas. On one side is the HMS Surprize captained by Jack Aubrey which patrols the sea lanes from French privateers looking to attack and loot the rich English whaling ships to help fund Napoleon’s ambitions. The film is actually a cat-and-mouse thriller wrapped around a character piece as Aubrey’s ship and crew, outgunned and less armored than the French frigate Acheron it has come across during its patrol, must not just try and survive but find a way to beat it’s larger opponent. It’s during the quiter scenes in-between sea engagements that the film actually becomes stronger. We see life onboard the HMS Surprize as being quite harsh and primitive and not so glamourous as past films about sailing life would have audiences believe. The film shows how this harsh life for volunteers and press-ganged crew ratings creates a strong bond of fellowship amongst the crew members that when they believe someone is jeopardizing their lives they quickly turn on that individual. But it’s through the near-dictatorial handling of his crew which keeps both ship and crew from devolving into mutiny. Crowe does a great job of giving Jack Aubrey that balance of ruthless taskmaster whose word is law onboard, but also gives his captain that bon vivant flair which when used accordingly makes Aubrey a hero to the very men he has to lord over.
This benevolent dictator was balanced out by Bettany’s Dr. Maturin who acts not just as the scientific counter to Aubrey’s militaristic personality, but also as the conscience of the ship who looks first to the crew’s well-being. This dynamic between Crowe and Bettany kept the film anchored and stabilized as we see the long-standing friendship between these two get tested not just by the crisis they find themselves in but also the vast ideological differences between the military man and the scientist. Yet, despite all their problems and difference when things became rough the two would settle it amicably and concentrate on their shared task with their bond of friendship intact and much stronger after.
The film doesn’t shirk it’s thrills as Master and Commander provides audiences with some of the most thrilling and accurate portrayal of naval combat during the Napoleonic era. There are no steel-hulls or rapid-fire guns. The engagements between the HMS Surprize and the Acheron were all brutal affairs from the first time the latter ambushes Aubrey’s ship early in the film to the final battle which sees not just ship-to-ship fighting but boarding actions as the crew of the Surprize attempt a desperate gamble to take the fight to the bigger French privateer. It’s a testament to Weir’s direction that even through the chaotic nature of each battle he’s able to keep each scene easy to follow and allow for main characters to stand out for audiences to recognize.
It’s a shame that the film didn’t succeed in the box-office more than it did. Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World showed that there was still old-school epic filmmaking left in Hollywood with filmmakers willing to tell a grand story with bigger-than-life characters on a broad canvas. The fact that it took an even more epic film to surpass Peter Weir’s film shouldn’t detract from this film’s accomplishments.
Through the Shattered Lens 