Dogville

December 18th, 2007 by admin

Moreso than any woman making movies today, Lars von Trier is the consummate woman’s director. But then, that’s usually the case in cinema–especially GREAT cinema. Like George Cukor, Douglas Sirk, and Rainer Werner Fassbinder before him, the experimental, profound, bizarre, and sometimes genius-like Dane creates female characters of Joan of Arc proportions—Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark are the most prominent examples. His women, or martyrs, as many would contest, live in confused, harsh places peopled with individuals who harbor little concern for the goodness they supply. In turn, these heroines’ responses, those of martyrs, are controversial to many viewers and critics. They are maddening and victimized and glorious and, in the end, good (or not?). And master von Trier adds to it all a sardonic touch, spicing up what’s essentially experimental melodrama.

Which is what makes von Trier one of the most fascinating filmmakers in current (and, for that matter, past) cinema. Like the great painters proving their skill in finely worked still lifes or portraiture, von Trier knows how to film a movie (watch Zentropa for some truly gorgeous misc en scene); he knows how to properly tweak the medium. His Dogme 95 manifesto of hand-held digital video, no music, available light only, and raw emotional veracity proved that he’s entered something like a blue or cubist period, a period he’s sticking to (though he has only made one “official” Dogme picture, the brilliant The Idiots).

Others may think they can slop around on DV, but von Trier understands the canvas he’s working with, creating gorgeous compositions in a supposed slap-dash style that is really one of deep substance. Still, it’s enough to enrage viewers and, even, other filmmakers. But, as von Trier confesses, he only makes movies that he would want to watch. Audience be damned.

His newest film, , is most certainly a movie he would like to watch, representing yet another contribution to this director’s eminent oeuvre. It’s the kick-off for his third trilogy series: “USA—Land of Opportunities” (the first was the “Europa Trilogy”: The Element of Crime, Epidemic, Europa [Zentropa] and the second his “Golden Heart Trilogy”: Breaking the Waves, The Idiots, Dancer in the Dark). And it reveals the director both questioning the outcome of his “Golden Heart” gals and satiating his (our) desires for a woman’s revenge.

’s dame isn’t necessarily a victim. Additionally, she’s one of the most compelling females captured on celluloid. And this film is, so far, the most interesting picture of the year. For not only does von Trier question the trials and tribulations of the “good” woman, but also the “good” community.

Nicole Kidman (in her greatest performance to date) plays Grace, a mysterious and beautiful woman on the lam from a group of gangsters. We’re not sure what she’s done or how she’s associated with the mob, but clearly something negative is afoot. It’s the Depression-era, and Grace stumbles into the small Rocky Mountain town of , which appears to be one of those nice, folksy enclaves that promises warmth, humility, and virtue. It’s there that she meets scientist Tom (Paul Bettany) who, smitten by her beauty and beguiling ways, agrees to hide her in the sleepy little town. Taking up the matter with the residents of , it is agreed that Grace may be allowed to stay for two weeks and, if they trust her, she may be able to stay permanently.

To earn their trust, Grace goes to work aiding the townspeople in various duties, from babysitting to taking care of a blind man (Ben Gazzara) to working in the orchard with the gruff Chuck (Stellan Skarsgard). Grace proves a hard worker and prodigiously kind—what could this young woman possibly have done?

But that kindness becomes her undoing, most notably after Chuck rapes her. Grace tells no one, but when the womenfolk find out, they turn on her, and the dastardly deed is seen as her fault. She is then suspect, making her stay in so unpleasant that she attempts to escape, and nearly does, until her chance is detroyed by a brutal deception. Following that, she is chained up like a dog, and the town goes from Thornton Wilder’s “Our Town” to the horrid little hamlet in Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery.”

Grace is forced to submit to ’s evil (or human?) impulses, but she is a forgiving soul, making her even more detested. This is where von Trier takes the movie into another philosophical realm, one in which even the viewer questions just why Grace is so gracious. In a terrific exchange with a gangster (played by James Caan), Grace’s forgiveness is discussed not as an act of morality but as an act of arrogance. The fact that the film allows us to ponder that question about a character we grow to love marks the experience as even more subversive—von Trier isn’t offering any easy answers.

Inspired mostly by the Bertolt Brecht and Kurt Veil song “Pirate Jenny” and the Royal Shakespeare’s production of Nicholas Nickleby von Trier made the inspired choice to craft a film entirely on a soundstage with exposed sets and door-less houses. When knocking on an abode, the characters knock the air. We can see inside each home, examining everything from the humdrum acts of cleaning to the savage acts that will befall Grace. The camerawork is fluid and the story so absorbing that you almost forget you’re watching what is essentially a filmed play (though the obvious stagey quality makes the movie’s points even more cogent). Narrated by John Hurt, the picture takes on a storybook quality that’s at once comforting, creepy, and cynical. And the cast, many of whom are American, is made up of all-star talent (Lauren Bacall, Blair Brown, Patricia Clarkson, Jeremy Davies, Chloe Sevigny, and Philip Baker Hall among them). Though some have decried an anti-American stance by von Trier (and so what if he has one?), ’s themes and questions are universal. Such things could take place in any community. But it is rare that you will find them depicted in quite this manner. The film will stick to you, almost uncomfortably, and you will not get the thing out of your head. You’ll yearn to see it again, wishing to cycle through it’s themes both complicated and simplistic. Not that there is a single point to the film–truly, the only thing simple you can say about Dogville is: masterpiece.

Read More Kim Morgan at her blog







American Splendor

December 18th, 2007 by admin

When I first saw Ghost World, another indie darling based on a comic book, I loved it so much. I told everyone I knew to see it. One friend of mine I expected to love Ghost World just as much as did, but she was just lukewarm on it. She said, “The filmmaking was good, but I just didn’t like those girls. They were mean and unsympathetic, and I just didn’t like watching characters who were only good at hating other people.”

I still don’t agree with her, but after watching I understand what she means. is an outstanding piece of filmmaking. As entertainment, though, it’s only so-so. The characters are unlikable and the story is kind of a bummer. It reminded me of the books I had to read in high school. I could respect why they were worth my time to read, but I didn’t enjoy them very much.

Originally produced for HBO, and directed by a pair of documentarians, is part movie, part “behind-the-music.” Like other comic-book-to-big-screen films, uses mixed-media to remind the audience of its comic book roots. The technique works well and serves to support the story (ala Dangerous Life of Altar Boys) rather than cause a distraction (ala The Hulk). The other good thing is, you don’t have to know anything about the Cult of Crumb or even comic books to understand and appreciate this film.

Our story begins in 1975 in Cleveland. The real Harvey Pekar (pee-car) narrates because the 1975 Pekar has lost his voice. Pekar is stuck in a dead-end job as a file clerk and his second wife has just left him. He is an angst-ridden, mopey guy living in a grey, depressing city in a country that’s about to be taken over by Yuppies.

Lucky for Pekar, he meets and befriends one Robert Crumb. They have many common interests including: comics, record collecting, and ending sentences in “…Man.” It is this friendship, and Pekar’s pessimistic, counter-cultural view of the world that will eventually become the underground comic .

Pekar only writes the comic, he doesn’t draw; and since he writes about himself, his image is subject to variations by the artist. In one particularly excellent scene, Pekar’s date steps off the train to meet him and is met with three different animated versions of Pekar. But this brings up an interesting question: which Pekar are we seeing in the film?

The real Pekar makes a number of appearances: both in documentary-style interviews and in subtle editing moves. Actor Paul Giamatti’s Pekar seems spot-on until the film gets to Pekar’s appearance on Late Night with David Letterman. Up until this point, Pekar is portrayed as loveable grump both in his real-life interviews and by actor Giamatti. But when the archival footage from Letterman is shown, there appears a third Pekar: wholly unlikable and bizarre. This is the Pekar that time and the well-penned word have not glossed over. I felt a little bit betrayed as a viewer: as though the filmmakers had pulled the wool over my eyes and fooled me into liking a character who was, in actuality, a total jerk.

After the Letterman footage I completely lost sympathy for the character. Pekar’s hypochondriac wife isn’t particularly likeable either, and all would have ended badly if the film wasn’t so well-crafted.

The filmmakers do an excellent job of re-creating Pekar’s world. Their limited use of locations and lack of sunlight really gives the audience a feel for Pekar’s dark, isolated, mindset. Paul Giamatti is fantastic as Pekar, he truly seems to embody the character and on the chance this will rack your mind as much as it did mine, I’ll just remind you where you’ve seen him before: Giamatti was Bob Zmuda/ Tony Clifton in Man on the Moon, and he was also the documentary filmmaker in the “non-fiction” section of Storytelling.

More bio-pics should be made like . The blending of real-life interviews with archival footage and traditional filmmaking is fantastic. For example: Toby Radloff is both a character in Pekar’s comic and, one of Pekar’s real-life co-workers. His presence in the film provides some excellent comic relief; but the humor goes to a whole other level when the real Toby Radloff appears for an interview and is exactly like his on-screen portrayal. In addition, the filmmakers add a nice cinematic element to the documentary footage by having Pekar and Radloff interviewed while their corresponding actors wait in the background.

American Splendor is worth seeing like Great Expectations is worth reading. The craft is excellent and supports the dark mood and somewhat unlikable characters. I am recommending this film as a rental not because it is unworthy of a theatrical recommendation, but because the supplemental materials of a DVD will no doubt provide even more I insight into the real Harvey Pekar.

-Megan A. Denny






War and Peace

December 17th, 2007 by admin

Reviewed by Glenn Erickson

A gargantuan version of Tolstoy’s national epic, approached as a priority as important as the Soviet
space program, is surely the biggest production
ever put on film, with entire armies filling the screen and covering vast landscapes. The recreation
of the Napoleonic era in St. Petersburg and Moscow is a wonderment. Director Sergei Bondarchuk
makes the story work even better at the intimate level. The romantic adventures and heartbreaks
of the story’s central trio, Pierre, Natasha and Andrei lead to at least 4 or 5 devastatingly
emotional highpoints.

Previously, there was the 1956
. Except for
some awkward casting, it wasn’t half bad, but it pales beside the opulence and scope of this colossus.
Ruscico’s version is both longer and better-presented than previous releases, and Image has packaged
it with helpful extras and easily-navigated menus. More on that below.


Synopsis (spoiler-laden):

Film 1: Andrei Bolkonsky, parts one and two (140 minutes): The sweeping story of
Russian nobility during the Napoleonic wars starts in 1805. At the Moscow Rostovs, young Natasha
(Lyudmila Savelyeva) is a child dreaming of romantic affairs. Frequent guest Pierre Bezukhov
(Sergei Bondarchuk, the director) takes a serious liking to her. Russia allies with Austria against
Napoleon, and Prince Andrei Bolkonsky (Vyacheslav Tikhonov) parks his pregnant wife in the country
with his father and sister, while he goes to fight. For Natasha’s brother Nikolai it is a first
battle. Back in Moscow,
Pierre is easily pressured into marriage with the beautiful but decadent Hélène,
who is soon rumored to be taking lovers. Pierre challenges one of them to a duel, and has
a crisis of conscience after wounding the man severely. Andrei returns to his country home just in
time to see his wife die in childbirth. He determines that life is worthless
until Spring comes and
the world seems to be reborn.

Film 2: Natasha Rostova (93 minutes): At a glorious ball, Natasha is a wallflower until
the meek Pierre encourages Andrei to dance with her, whereupon both fall gloriously in love. Andrei
carefully proposes through her family, electing to wait a year before marriage. A year seems like
forever to the still-immature Natasha. She goes on a wolf hunt and to the opera,
where, with the connivance of Hélène, young wastrel Kuraghin catches
her eye. Falling in love, and not realizing what will happen, Natasha agrees to elope with
the scoundrel, a fate barely avoided by the intervention of her sister and Pierre. Andrei breaks off
their engagement,
and Natasha believes her life to be over at age 17.

Film 3: 1812 (78 minutes): A new invasion of Russia is undertaken by Napoleon, and Andrei
once again takes up his sword. His father remains in denial as the French advance steadily
across Western Russia.
Pierre takes leave of Natasha to go observe the big battle at Borodino, and speaks to Andrei the night before.
The battle is an enormous clash of thousands of troops, and at the end the French prevail. Andrei
is
seriously wounded.

Film 4: Pierre Bezukhov (92 minutes) The main Russian general realizes he can’t stop
the French, and so elects to abandon Moscow without a fight, burning all useful resources on the way.
Millions become refugees, and the rich of Moscow flee East. Pierre disguises himself as a common
citizen with the vain idea of taking personal revenge on the invaders, but instead makes friends with
a French
officer who moves into his apartment. The Russians refuse to parlay with Napoleon, and leave him in
a dead city with the poor. His soldiers loot tons of booty they can’t possibly carry
home. Pierre is arrested as an arsonist but is spared the death penalty. He witnesses a mass execution
and is sent on a march by the French. On the
refugee trail East, the Rostovs take in the mortally wounded Andrei, and he and Natasha spend time
together declaring their love. When Napoleon quits the city, the Russian winter closes in to decimate
his army as they withdraw. Pierre and Natasha are reunited.

Savant was excited to see this pricey-but-exceptional DVD release; Ruscico has a reputation for
quality releases of hard-to-see Soviet pictures, and is certainly the prize
title, at least for Western audiences unfamiliar with the majority of Mosfilm’s output. I saw the
American release when 16 years old, serialized over two weeks in a fancy theater in San Bernardino.
I can’t say I followed the story well, and mostly remember the grainy, washed out picture and
the distracting English dubbing - Natasha’s voice squeaked like Minnie Mouse. But the eye-popping
visuals stayed burned into my memory, especially a God’s eye view, receding into the heavens, of the
Austerlitz battlefield spread out below. It looked as if it took in miles of smoke and fighting.

In Russian with subs in a number of languages, the new Ruscico / Image DVD is a completely different viewing
experience.  

The Russian voices are beautiful, and it’s easy to catch cultural things we had only
read about, such as the St. Petersburg elite opting to speak French for many conversational details.
It’s not 70mm, but on a big widescreen television, the scope of the visuals can be almost
overwhelming.

Director Bondarchuk makes a brooding, introverted Pierre, too shy to dance at a ball and easily
convinced of his insignificance, even as he’s inheriting a massive estate. His adoration of
Natasha is matched only by his belief that he’s unworthy of her. He makes an excellent foil for the
dashing, closed-minded Prince Andrei, a traditionalist who chides Pierre for his scandalous
associations, But Andrei boorishly persecutes his own loving wife because he feels tied down by
family obligations. Both men evolve very interestingly through the story, experiencing the tumultuous
events and their mutual love of Natasha from different perspectives.

Lyudmila Savelyeva is radiant as Natasha, starting as a pixie dreaming girlish dreams and bursting
with childish enthusiasm. Her miniature features and expressive eyes are a depthless
repository of feminine romanticism. Besides the big ball, she performs a show-stopping
folk dance at her Uncle’s place in the country. Clearly meant to be the soul of everything precious
in Russia, the character is a big success.

Bondarchuk had resources to dwarf American epics, but all of is
sublimated to a cinematic vision, even the large battle scenes. If there’s any doubt this is a
classic Russian movie, it goes away with the entrance of Natasha, bursting through some doors in
three Potemkinish cascading short cuts that end on her beaming face. The camera stays put
when it’s proper to do so, but when the director has something to express, it trucks and pans and
cranes and tilts, and seemingly flies through the air. The big ballroom dance dissolves into West
Side Story
- like blurs and soft colors, and then the camera whips around in dizzying waltz
circles, or flies down the hall
watching the dancers from on high. Bondarchuk introduces little choreographed cuts by flashing a
fan in front of the camera, a device that is unusually successful. The only ’showoff’ trick that
didn’t work for Savant was a later tense scene where the director inserts subliminal flash frames at
every cut point … it just seemed distracting.

When the story is taken over by author Tolstoy’s abstract thoughts, the characters often look for
answers in the sky, and Bondarchuk will often accompany disembodied speeches with aerial shots of
clouds and vast landscapes, such as seen in the main titles. These provide an endistancing break
from the melodrama on the ground. The high aerial shots are always at a conceptual
remove from the narrative, so that we don’t get the feeling that the 1812 era is being hyped with
visuals alien to the historical experience.

Bondarchuk was criticized by some reviewers in 1967 for his eclecticism; in one scene he might have
split screens that seem to come from Pillow Talk, and multi-imaged superimpositions that
evoke Metropolis. There is an Abel Gance tendency toward camera gymnastics, but most of the
film is visually straightforward. Bondarchuk is a classicist who makes the camera do some of the
acting, and the result is by and large a big success.

I mentioned the 4 or 5 emotional high-points of the picture, most of which are heavy-duty dramatic
scenes - Natasha’s hysteria at having her elopement foiled, Pierre’s witnessing of the firing
squads, the death of Andrei’s young wife. In a Western film, we might expect the music to play a
larger role in dictating the tone of the drama; most Hollywood epics lean heavily on their scores for
their emotional telegraphy. builds its emotional climaxes mostly through
unadorned theatrics, and giant closeups. But its battle scenes, the extended battle of Borodino,
especially, have an impact that I don’t think I’ve seen in any other epic.

Savant loves giant battle scenes and always admires the huge organizational patterns of masses of
people moving in concert for the camera. Knowing how difficult it is to get just one actor to open
one door and not look false, the moving panoramas of soldiers and organized mayhem in shows
like Zulu Dawn are impressive displays of movies as a giant engine of movement.
outdoes them all for sheer vastness of
scale and precision of effect. The gigantic computer-animated battles in The Two Towers are
impressive, but this is 100% real - and there’s no substitute for the suspension of disbelief
provided by real armies clashing on a real battlefield.

What we get is a poetic representation of the chaos of warfare, not a layout of strategies we
can read or follow as a story. The overall image is of total insanity, the energies and lives
of tens of thousands of men destroyed in armed conflict. A master shot
might have a crane or a dolly or start with a wide shot and end up on a detail. In many masters it
looks as though tens of thousands of soldiers and horses are rushing every which way, marching in
set patterns. There are some shots of massed diamond-shape formations moving across the landscape,
like a carpet of men. The longer it goes on, the more elaborate it gets.

Bondarchuk’s experts use smoke as a choreographed element. As plumes of cannon-hits are seen erupting
from the foreground to what might be a mile away, the wind carries clouds of black and white smoke
across the screen in patterns that accentuate the blind chaos of what it must meant to be in this
kind of a fight. Bright sunshine turns to dark shadow and back again as the smoke ebbs and flows.

Nobody has the big picture of this struggle, not even the commanders, who sit helplessly while their
rigid battle plans collapse around them. The rules of combat put ceremony before the lives of the
soldiers; Andrei’s company waits in reserve, but loses a third of its men to shelling, as they stand
in their formal lines.

When Bondarchuk decides to move his camera through the melee, we get perhaps ten unbroken minutes of
continuous amazement. Hundreds of cavalrymen charge a small hill. A long line of horsemen on that
hill disperse to reveal cannon that all fire at once - the camera whips left to see the entire
wave of enemy horses tumble to the ground. Cameras on rails truck past men climbing ladders and
stairs, and race down trenches as dozens of horses leap overhead. It’s like a battle for the end of the
world, and the pacing and emphasis is flawless. One overhead wide angle view, rushing downward over
the heads of soldiers fighting hand-to-hand makes the viewer feel like a cannonball crashing to Earth.


Ruscico’s DVD of is handsomely presented on 4 discs in a thankfully
easy-to-understand
package. The transfer image isn’t going to be able to compete with restorations done here, however.
was shot in a Soviet color system in 70mm, and the colors are a muted set of
pastels we aren’t used to. Either the age of the elements, or the reduction printing, or
bad storage has given many scenes a dupey look, with slightly fluctuating contrast. The image
is stable and intact, but there are occasional scratches and slight damage.

The encoding is also not top-end. Battle scenes with the choreographed smoke usually look fine, but
occasional images have artifacting, the kind of image popping when details don’t update with every
frame. When Andrei is wounded, the camera swoops up to give a view of the whole valley, and the
artifacting makes a mess of the foliage as it pans by.

Either that one bad shot was an isolated instance, or most of the time we’re too caught up in the story to
notice such things. I should
point out that I viewed the discs on a 65″ monitor that magnifies these kinds of flaws, so many
viewers will probably be completely unaware of them.

The DVD producers have included a generous allotment of extras, listed below. A fifth disc contains
a couple of Soviet docus on Tolstoy and an elaborate commemorative behind-the-scenes piece. It
starts with the stars at a Moscow premiere, and then backtracks to show how many scenes were filmed.
The cameraman is on roller skates in the ballroom scene, and a trucking scene through the battlefield
shows exactly how some of the more amazing shots were captured. The cameramen use portable 70mm
cameras of a kind I’ve never seen, that look every bit as sophisticated as ours.

The docus from the 60s show how far apart Russia and America were at the height of the Cold War
competition.
A Tolstoy piece ends with one of the author’s statements about freedom, and the Russian editors
show anti-war riots in the West, as if the only suppression of human rights were happening on
our side of the Iron Curtain. A shot of a protester’s American flag with a skull on it is
prominently displayed. The narration stresses collective action, with ‘comrade’ this, and ‘comrade’ that
heard; the stars’ names go mostly unmentioned.

In one of the interviews, the President of the Mosfilm studio says that after the years of filming,
War and Peace wasn’t unanimously praised in the Soviet Union. Everybody saw it, but not
everyone thought it was a masterpiece. Audiences are audiences, Russian or American, and after
those 4 or 5 transcendant moments in the picture, the ending does seem rather downplayed and
anti-climactic. But seeing the show now after 35 more years of film history, this enormous epic seems
more of an accomplishment than ever.




On a scale of Excellent, Good, Fair, and Poor,
War and Peace rates:

Movie: Excellent

Video: Good

Sound: Very good

Supplements: 5-disc set, Behind-the-scenes featurette, Interviews with actors Irina
Skobtseva and Vassily Lanovoy, cinematographer Anatoly Petritsky, composer Vycheslav
Ovchinnikov, and Mosfilm Studios president Karen Shakhnazarov, Leo Tolstoy documentary,
Art direction and set design studies, Cast and crew filmographies

Packaging: double folding plastic and paper cases in card sleeve.

Reviewed: April 27, 2003



Footnote:

1. There’s an English
dubbed track as well, but I’m told that it reverts to un-subtitled Russian here and there. This
makes sense
if the information is true that the movie was cut by 45 minutes for Western release: the
un-dubbed scenes are probably the ones cut upon export. Hopefully those who care enough to seek out
this disc will listen to it in its fascinating original Russian track anyway.


DVD Savant Text © Copyright 2003 Glenn Erickson

Go BACK to the






Elf

December 17th, 2007 by admin

Review:

Many have complained over the years about movies being adapted from video games. While some have been relatively good, others have been disasters. However, what all of these movies shared was that the video games they were based on often (with a few exceptions) had stories. ” Bowling”, on the other hand, is based upon a simple video game that offers the player the chance to play Santa and bowl down elfs (sorry, elves) standing in for the pins.

So, as you can see, not exactly a whole lot to work with. However, that hasn’t stopped Dave Kim (production coordinator on “The Simpsons Movie” and digital effects artist on…”Wild Things 2″), co-director Rex Piano (former director of…um, “Silk Stalkings̶ ;) and writer Martin Olson (the 2nd, 3rd and 4th “Screen Actors Guild Awards” writer) from trying. The movie starts with Santa (Joe Alaskey providing the voice) and his brother Dingle (Tom Kenny, voice of Spongebob) as pirates.

The two find themselves frozen in ice, eventually thawed out by a group of kindly elves. The elves believe that Santa is their new leader, and he agrees, especially after they offer him free cable (I mean, have you seen how much cable is lately? I’d take the deal, too.) While Santa turns good under the deal with the elves, Dingle still has thoughts of pirating. Determined to show up his brother, Dingle challenges Santa to an elf bowl-off, where Santa wins due to Dingle’s cheating. While you’d think that would be the end of the movie, you’re sadly mistaken: Dingle tricks Santa and sends him `out` into the icy waters, taking over Santa’s whole operation (he tricks the elves into thinking that Santa doesn’t like them anymore by posting a letter from Santa saying that “Elves stink”, which the elves believe, apparently because they are morons) and moving it to Fiji. Will Santa return to save the day? Will the elves offer him a basic cable package or the premier program with TIVO?

Given the thin story, ” Bowling” would likely be one of those direct-to-video titles one would think would run about 45 minutes, maybe 60 at most (and even then, it would be pretty darn thin.) Unfortunately for me, the picture runs 82 minutes and, quite honestly, the picture’s corny jokes, awful filler song sequences and poop jokes (Santa responds with, “Fire on the poopdeck!” when the elves accidentally light his rear on fire; elves constantly let loose a series of underarm farts), ” Bowling” turned into a painfully long sit. The film was reportedly retooled recently, and if that’s true, it doesn’t seem to have made much difference.

With a thin plot, primitive animation and some of the most cringe-worthy jokes I’ve heard in a while, ” Bowling” ranks as one of the worst (and certainly the most unnecessary) movies from video games ever.

The DVD

Bowling” is presented by Screen Media Films in 1.78:1 anamorphic widescreen. My copy occasionally had “Screening Copy Only” show up as a subtitle in the lower half of the screen, but otherwise looked like about what I’d imagine the final copy would look like. Sharpness and detail were perfectly adequate, showing off the film’s limited CG animation about as well as one could expect. A few traces of artifacting were spotted, but the picture was otherwise clean and clear, with bright, well-saturated colors. While not the same as final copy, this screening copy did look fine.

Bowling” is an unfunny mess of bad jokes and a dull, thin story. Skip it.








So, as you can see, not exactly a whole lot to work with. However, that hasn’t stopped Dave Kim (production coordinator on “The Simpsons Movie” and digital effects artist on…”Wild Things 2″), co-director Rex Piano (former director of…um, “Silk Stalkings̶ ;) and writer Martin Olson (the 2nd, 3rd and 4th “Screen Actors Guild Awards” writer) from trying. The movie starts with Santa (Joe Alaskey providing the voice) and his brother Dingle (Tom Kenny, voice of Spongebob) as pirates.

The two find themselves frozen in ice, eventually thawed out by a group of kindly elves. The elves believe that Santa is their new leader, and he agrees, especially after they offer him free cable (I mean, have you seen how much cable is lately? I’d take the deal, too.) While Santa turns good under the deal with the elves, Dingle still has thoughts of pirating. Determined to show up his brother, Dingle challenges Santa to an elf bowl-off, where Santa wins due to Dingle’s cheating. While you’d think that would be the end of the movie, you’re sadly mistaken: Dingle tricks Santa and sends him out into the icy waters, taking over Santa’s whole operation (he tricks the elves into thinking that Santa doesn’t like them anymore by posting a letter from Santa saying that “Elves stink”, which the elves believe, apparently because they are morons) and moving it to Fiji. Will Santa return to save the day? Will the elves offer him a basic cable package or the premier program with TIVO?

Given the thin story, ” Bowling” would likely be one of those direct-to-video titles one would think would run about 45 minutes, maybe 60 at most (and even then, it would be pretty darn thin.) Unfortunately for me, the picture runs 82 minutes and, quite honestly, the picture’s corny jokes, awful filler song sequences and poop jokes (Santa responds with, “Fire on the poopdeck!” when the elves accidentally light his rear on fire; elves constantly let loose a series of underarm farts), ” Bowling” turned into a painfully long sit. The film was reportedly retooled recently, and if that’s true, it doesn’t seem to have made much difference.

With a thin plot, primitive animation and some of the most cringe-worthy jokes I’ve heard in a while, ” Bowling” ranks as one of the worst (and certainly the most unnecessary) movies from video games ever.

The DVD

Bowling” is presented by Screen Media Films in 1.78:1 anamorphic widescreen. My copy occasionally had “Screening Copy Only” show up as a subtitle in the lower half of the screen, but otherwise looked like about what I’d imagine the final copy would look like. Sharpness and detail were perfectly adequate, showing off the film’s limited CG animation about as well as one could expect. A few traces of artifacting were spotted, but the picture was otherwise clean and clear, with bright, well-saturated colors. While not the same as final copy, this screening copy did look fine.

SOUND: Crisp, clear stereo soundtrack.

Bowling” is an unfunny mess of bad jokes and a dull, thin story. Skip it.

English movie download
Movie archive
English movie download
Film download
Movie download
Movie download
Download a movie

So, as you can see, not exactly a whole lot to work with. However, that hasn’t stopped Dave Kim (production coordinator on “The Simpsons Movie” and digital effects artist on…”Wild Things 2″), co-director Rex Piano (former director of…um, “Silk Stalkings̶ ;) and writer Martin Olson (the 2nd, 3rd and 4th “Screen Actors Guild Awards” writer) from trying. The movie starts with Santa (Joe Alaskey providing the voice) and his brother Dingle (Tom Kenny, voice of Spongebob) as pirates.

The two find themselves frozen in ice, eventually thawed out by a group of kindly elves. The elves believe that Santa is their new leader, and he agrees, especially after they offer him free cable (I mean, have you seen how much cable is lately? I’d take the deal, too.) While Santa turns good under the deal with the elves, Dingle still has thoughts of pirating. Determined to show up his brother, Dingle challenges Santa to an elf bowl-off, where Santa wins due to Dingle’s cheating. While you’d think that would be the end of the movie, you’re sadly mistaken: Dingle tricks Santa and sends him out into the icy waters, taking over Santa’s whole operation (he tricks the elves into thinking that Santa doesn’t like them anymore by posting a letter from Santa saying that “Elves stink”, which the elves believe, apparently because they are morons) and moving it to Fiji. Will Santa return to save the day? Will the elves offer him a basic cable package or the premier program with TIVO?

Given the thin story, ” Bowling” would likely be one of those direct-to-video titles one would think would run about 45 minutes, maybe 60 at most (and even then, it would be pretty darn thin.) Unfortunately for me, the picture runs 82 minutes and, quite honestly, the picture’s corny jokes, awful filler song sequences and poop jokes (Santa responds with, “Fire on the poopdeck!” when the elves accidentally light his rear on fire; elves constantly let loose a series of underarm farts), ” Bowling” turned into a painfully long sit. The film was reportedly retooled recently, and if that’s true, it doesn’t seem to have made much difference.

With a thin plot, primitive animation and some of the most cringe-worthy jokes I’ve heard in a while, ” Bowling” ranks as one of the worst (and certainly the most unnecessary) movies from video games ever.

The DVD

Bowling” is presented by Screen Media Films in 1.78:1 anamorphic widescreen. My copy occasionally had “Screening Copy Only” show up as a subtitle in the lower half of the screen, but otherwise looked like about what I’d imagine the final copy would look like. Sharpness and detail were perfectly adequate, showing off the film’s limited CG animation about as well as one could expect. A few traces of artifacting were spotted, but the picture was otherwise clean and clear, with bright, well-saturated colors. While not the same as final copy, this screening copy did look fine.

Bowling” is an unfunny mess of bad jokes and a dull, thin story. Skip it.

English movie download
Movie archive
English movie download
Film download
Movie download
Movie download
Download a movie

So, as you can see, not exactly a whole lot to work with. However, that hasn’t stopped Dave Kim (production coordinator on “The Simpsons Movie” and digital effects artist on…”Wild Things 2″), co-director Rex Piano (former director of…um, “Silk Stalkings̶ ;) and writer Martin Olson (the 2nd, 3rd and 4th “Screen Actors Guild Awards” writer) from trying. The movie starts with Santa (Joe Alaskey providing the voice) and his brother Dingle (Tom Kenny, voice of Spongebob) as pirates.

The two find themselves frozen in ice, eventually thawed out by a group of kindly elves. The elves believe that Santa is their new leader, and he agrees, especially after they offer him free cable (I mean, have you seen how much cable is lately? I’d take the deal, too.) While Santa turns good under the deal with the elves, Dingle still has thoughts of pirating. Determined to show up his brother, Dingle challenges Santa to an elf bowl-off, where Santa wins due to Dingle’s cheating. While you’d think that would be the end of the movie, you’re sadly mistaken: Dingle tricks Santa and sends him out into the icy waters, taking over Santa’s whole operation (he tricks the elves into thinking that Santa doesn’t like them anymore by posting a letter from Santa saying that “Elves stink”, which the elves believe, apparently because they are morons) and moving it to Fiji. Will Santa return to save the day? Will the elves offer him a basic cable package or the premier program with TIVO?

Given the thin story, ” Bowling” would likely be one of those direct-to-video titles one would think would run about 45 minutes, maybe 60 at most (and even then, it would be pretty darn thin.) Unfortunately for me, the picture runs 82 minutes and, quite honestly, the picture’s corny jokes, awful filler song sequences and poop jokes (Santa responds with, “Fire on the poopdeck!” when the elves accidentally light his rear on fire; elves constantly let loose a series of underarm farts), ” Bowling” turned into a painfully long sit. The film was reportedly retooled recently, and if that’s true, it doesn’t seem to have made much difference.

With a thin plot, primitive animation and some of the most cringe-worthy jokes I’ve heard in a while, ” Bowling” ranks as one of the worst (and certainly the most unnecessary) movies from video games ever.

The DVD

Bowling” is presented by Screen Media Films in 1.78:1 anamorphic widescreen. My copy occasionally had “Screening Copy Only” show up as a subtitle in the lower half of the screen, but otherwise looked like about what I’d imagine the final copy would look like. Sharpness and detail were perfectly adequate, showing off the film’s limited CG animation about as well as one could expect. A few traces of artifacting were spotted, but the picture was otherwise clean and clear, with bright, well-saturated colors. While not the same as final copy, this screening copy did look fine.

SOUND: Crisp, clear stereo soundtrack.

Bowling” is an unfunny mess of bad jokes and a dull, thin story. Skip it.

English movie download
Movie archive
English movie download
Film download
Movie download
Movie download
Download a movie

Lloyd

December 16th, 2007 by admin

Facets Video has released Magnificent Obsession: Frank Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan, a fascinating yet moribund documentary on the legendary architect, and the influence he had on modern Japanese architecture. Running over two hours, Magnificent Obsession: Frank Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan sheds light on a critical time in Wright’s career, when he visited Japan and designed what many say was his finest creation: The Imperial Hotel in Tokyo. And while I found the doc nicely dense in details about Wright’s work, the slow, plodding presentation works against the excitement of the subject matter.


Magnificent Obsession: Frank Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan chronicles Wright’s early fascination with Japanese woodblocks (where their perspective, abstraction, geometric shapes and over-all simplicity led to Wright’s admiration for the “gospel of the elimination of the insignificant”), and his eventual visit to Japan - the only foreign country the American Wright had buildings erected - when his career lay in tatters. Having left his wife and many children to have an unapologetic affair, the American public disowned him, and work became scarce. An initial offer to work in Japan soon turned into designing the fabulous Imperial Hotel, along with other smaller commissions, many of which never went past the design and drawing stages.

As Wright gained first-hand appreciation of the native Japanese architecture he had always admired - elements of which started to seep into his designs - his committment to his art also influenced a succession of Japanese apprentices who carried on his style (some even slavishly). Those buildings, as well as Wright’s own work in the country, had a ripple effect, bringing Wright concepts of buildings harmoniously co-existing with their natural surroundings, and his love of natural, indigenous materials, right in line with traditional Japanese building practices. Prior to Wright’s arrival in Japan, native architects were abandoning traditional Japanese designs and motifs in favor of Western styles, in an effort to continue Japan’s quest to “modernize” and emulate the West. After Wright’s success, and after he put his mark on his young apprentices and on the many students who later flocked to study his buildings, it can be said (according to the documentary) that a rebirth occurred within Japanese architecture, with an emphasis on retaining the form and spirit of ancient Japanese techniques and forms

Magnificent Obsession: Frank Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan is filled to the brim with drawings, photos, and models of not only Wright’s work, but also his acolytes and apprentices; indeed, the second hour of Magnificent Obsession: Frank Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan largely abandons Wright (he lived in Japan from 1917-1922) to focus on Arata Endo (the only architect to ever share credit on a building or drawing with Wright), Kameki and Nobu Tsuchiura, Yoshiya Tanoue, Takehiro Okami, Eizo Sugawara, Muraji Shimomoto, and Taro Amano. For an architecture student or buff, it’s a dream doc about the legendary architect, and his influence on Japanese architecture.

However, Magnificent Obsession: Frank Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan, directed by Karen Severns and Koichi Mori, in no way captures the excitement of its subject within its own execution, falling back on staid documentary clichés including the scanned photo, the extreme close-up head shot for interviews, and the chintzy recreation of historic events (done most disastrously here by shooting them almost completely out of focus). Even more harmful to Magnificent Obsession: Frank Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan is the grinding, almost monotone narration that overlays every minute of the two hour-plus running time. Particularly since this is a celebration of Wright’s Japanese-influenced (and Japanese-influencing) architecture, couldn’t there have been just one segment or moment where the viewer could have contemplated a design or building, in Zen-like silence? Or perhaps to the accompaniment of indigenous music? Unfortunately, the talking just continues, and the beauty of Wright’s and his apprentices’ work gets buried under the exposition.

The DVD:

The Video:
The full screen transfer for Magnificent Obsession: Frank Lloyd Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan is fine, with subtle coloring and a sharp picture. Compression issues did crop up occasionally (when some photos were laterally scanned), but it wasn’t obtrusive.

The Audio:
The Dolby Digital English 2.0 stereo mix was more than adequate for the narration-soaked soundtrack. Close-captions were not available.

The Extras:
There’s a nice 12-page booklet included, a Facets Cine-Notes, that gives some further background on the film.

Final Thoughts:
A must-have for architecture students and buffs, Magnificent Obsession: Frank Lloyd Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan may overload the casual viewer with quite a bit of detail, and an unrelenting narration. If you follow Wright, I suggest you buy Magnificent Obsession: Frank Lloyd Wright’s Buildings and Legacy in Japan, but a rental would be more suited to the casual viewer.


Paul Mavis is an internationally published film and television historian, a member of the Online Film Critics Society, and the author of







King Kong

December 16th, 2007 by admin

Chances are that you’ve caught Peter Jackson’s sprawling $200 million remake of at least once, and the last thing you want to suffer through is another dweeby, self-important Internet reviewer rambling at length about a movie you’ve already seen. I’m kind of honor-bound to go forward with the whole rambling routine, but if you want to spare yourself a few whacks of the Page Down key, you can go ahead and .

Peter Jackson divides his glossy remake of into three distinct acts, each running around an hour in length. The film opens with an ironic smirk in New York as Al Jolson’s bouncy “I’m Sitting On Top Of the World” plays in stark contrast to the gloomy desperation of the Great Depression. Jackson lavishes each of his characters with much more detailed backstories, although it still boils down to a desperately impoverished girl convinced by a smug film director into taking a lead role in his mysterious overseas shoot. Naomi Watts’ Ann Darrow is a gifted but down on her luck comedienne, while Jack Black’s update of Carl Denham is an underhanded, blustering filmmaker ready, willing, and able to exploit everyone in earshot if that’s what it takes to get his vision on film. I appreciate strong characterization, but I don’t feel like I was all that better acquainted with the characters in Jackson’s version of than their much more economically introduced counterparts from the 1933 original. Even when they eventually do step foot on the S.S. Venture, the parade of bloated character development marches on with the wasted subplot of young shiprat Jimmy and his surrogate father, Mr. Hayes. Their clunky, faux-sentimental banter seems as if it had been yanked out of a rejected My Three Sons script, and there’s no payoff to their subplot whatsoever. It’s as if the editors got an unusually early copy of the DVD and started haphazardly reinserting deleted scenes back into the movie just to make sure it broke the three hour mark.

The uneven pacing eases as the crew of the Venture inadvertently stumbles upon Skull Island. The island’s natives bear more of a resemblance to the Orcs of Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy than the whooping dancers in Merian Cooper’s film, and these feral remnants of a once-proud civilization are genuinely unsettling. Jackson bounces back and forth between horror and high-octane adventure, and from the moment the twenty-five foot Kong snatches Ann from her binds, the rest of the time spent on Skull Island is a dizzying rollercoaster ride. Many of the setpieces from the original film have clawed their way into the remake, only with Jackson preferring to triple the ante whenever possible. The brontosaurus chase becomes a frenzied stampede with the crew trying desperately to avoid getting caught underfoot while also fending off carnivorous beasties along the way. Kong dukes it out against three T-Rexes in this remake, tossing Ann from hand to hand (and sometimes to foot) in a battle that culminates in all of them getting ensnared in a tangle of vines high above the ground.

Many of these sequences suffer from some sort of glaring flaw: the poorly composited effects in the dino stampede look more like digital Colorforms than a $200 million blockbuster, and as thrilling as the T-Rex brawl is, it builds to such a calculatedly over-the-top crescendo that it’s almost exhausting. Perhaps worst off is Jackson’s version of the spider pit, a sequence excised from the 1933 original. The rescue party is assaulted by innumerable creepy crawlies and slimy sea creatures, but as initially disturbing and effective as it is, Jackson just doesn’t have the restraint to stop while he’s ahead. It drags on far too long, and by the time Jimmy whips out a machine gun and starts blasting bulky bugs off the back of bookish playwright Jack Driscoll, I was halfway tempted to leap into the line of fire myself. Jackson overuses last minute rescues by Captain Englehorn, a lazy plot device that’s almost as grating as the generous dishing out of choppy slow-motion on the island.

As clumsy and unconvincing as quite a few of the effects are throughout the movie, it’s clearly the result of so much attention being lavished on Kong himself. In all but a handful of unforgivingly tight shots, Kong is thoroughly convincing as a breathing, tactile creature, complete with thoughts and emotions. Much of that emotional weight can be traced to Andy Serkis, who provided the voice and movements for Gollum in Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy, but Kong also owes a great deal to Naomi Watts. There’s never a glimmer of doubt that the mesmerizingly beautiful actress is interacting with a twenty-five foot gorilla, not gabbing with a couple of golf balls on a rod to keep her eyeline accurate. To ensure that the audience’s sympathies are with Kong, he’s neutered in the remake, rarely shown attacking anything that wasn’t created on a bank of computers in Wellington. He doesn’t stomp on any villagers, and when one of the seamen of the Venture winds up in his mouth, Kong yanks him out like an unwelcome piece of gristle.

The remainder of the movie is spent in wintery New York with a chained Kong in bright lights on Broadway. Jackson’s cacklingly dark sense of humor comes out to play after Kong’s escape, as the beast picks up every blonde he encounters on the street and casually tosses them aside with a dull, squishy thud following a moment later. One of the movie’s most frequently criticized stretches is among my favorite; in the middle of all the chaos, Kong and Ann wind up on a frozen lake in Central Park. Their unbridled joy as Kong careens around the ice with the audience’s knowledge of the horror that’s soon to follow is both incredibly sweet and exceptionally tense. It packs the greatest emotional wallop of all of their scenes together, and that goodwill would be squandered as Kong mounts the Empire State Building. Jackson drags the climax out at least twice as long as he should’ve, unrelentingly repeating the same general formula of Longing Glance from Ann, Biplanes Zip by for Another Barrage, and Kong Almost Falls. Wash. Rinse. Repeat. By the time the assault reaches its inevitable conclusion, there’s no emotional impact so much as a sigh of relief that Jackson finally got to the point.

Peter Jackson has produced a tremendous two hour remake of , but unfortunately, it’s mired in an hour of ill-conceived excess. I was baffled when I first heard that an extended edition was in the works as the last thing Kong needs is to be longer. I can understand the need to flesh out the Lord of the Rings novels to epic-length films — the books are each the size of a small sedan, after all — but the 1933 incarnation of was a lean, brilliantly paced film. Lose the overture and you could watch the original twice in the time it takes to wade through Jackson’s bloated, overindulgent remake. Honestly, I think that’s exactly what I’d prefer to do.


Video: To no one’s great surprise, boasts one of the most exceptional presentations on HD DVD to date. Its 2.39:1 visuals are remarkably crisp and clear, and from the bleak, ashen tones of Depression-era New York to Skull Island’s lush, green hues, the film’s palette is rendered flawlessly. There are a few scattered moments where the image takes on a diffused, ever-so-slightly soft appearance, particularly when Naomi Watts’ mussed locks are in front of a composited background, but I’ve little doubt that this dates back to the original work in the digital domain. Film grain remains unintrusive throughout its three hour runtime, and no print flaws or noteworthy authoring hiccups are to be found. exhibits such a rich amount of fine detail that it can almost be too revealing, highlighting some of the shoddier effects work that a standard definition DVD would likely mask. That’s a desperate grab for something to complain about; even at a casual glance, it’s instantly apparent why Microsoft and Universal would choose this disc to pack in with the Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on. Of the more than sixty titles I’ve watched since the format’s launch, King Kong easily ranks among the three most thoroughly impressive and showcases why these next-generation formats have attracted such a fiercely loyal following.

Audio: Gripes about Universal not including a lossless TrueHD track are unavoidable, but when I’m offered Dolby Digital Plus audio this outstanding, it quickly become irrelevant which codec I happen to select from a Setup menu. King Kong took home two Oscars for its sound work and deservedly so; this is an incomparably aggressive soundtrack, teeming with ambiance and colorful subtleties, sporting innumerable pans and some of the most robust imaging I’ve ever experienced, and summoning devastatingly low frequencies from the subwoofer. Despite the unending waves of sonic thunder, the film’s dialogue never once felt overwhelmed, deftly balanced amidst all of the chaos. Lossy soundtrack or not, this is reference quality audio.

King Kong also offers dubs and subtitles in French and Spanish as well as a subtitle stream in English for the hard of hearing.

Supplements: This HD DVD release of King Kong not only lacks the hours upon hours of extras from the new extended DVD set, but Universal hasn’t even bothered to port over the bonus material from the theatrical edition. Apparently the bloated $40 MSRP isn’t quite enough to cover the costs of including a second disc.

This HD DVD of King Kong does make use of Universal’s “U Control” system, although it’s hardly a suitable substitute. If you’re not familiar, a U Control menu bar will appear at certain points in the movie, listing icons for picture-in-picture video and/or ‘art gallery’ thumbnails. Select the icon you’re interested in with your remote, mash the center button, and you can view conceptual art, interviews, making-of footage, and candid shots from the set. What makes U Control such a headache is that there really isn’t that much material (if it amounts to much more than a third of the movie’s three hour-plus runtime, I’d be surprised), there’s so little advanced notice that the picture-in-picture footage will appear that I usually wound up missing the first few seconds of each clip, and when the current snippet of material has ended, the system forgets your selection. Even if you were watching some picture-in-picture footage a couple of minutes earlier, you’ll have to select it again from the menu bar the next time it pops up. This means viewers have to keep a constant eye on the lower-right hand part of the screen — and the icon bar spills over into the 2.39:1 letterboxing, for those select few with scope projection setups — and the remote has to remain handy for the duration of the three hour movie. King Kong also doesn’t let viewers adjust the volume of the picture-in-picture segments, and it can be a struggle to make out what’s being said over the movie’s soundtrack.

U Control is near-worthless as it’s currently implemented, but it shouldn’t be that tough to fix. Give viewers a menu screen where they can select the features they want in advance. Let them add or drop features as they watch the movie, but don’t require them to click and click and click and click every few minutes. In cases like King Kong and The Break-Up where there are so few bells and whistles, maybe ditch the U Control system outright and just show everything, similar to what Warner has done with their In Movie Experiences. As it stands now, King Kong’s implementation of U Control is not worth the hassle.

Conclusion: King Kong showcases some of the most outstanding video and audio that HD DVD has to offer, but the compromised extras don’t come close to justifying its $39.99 sticker price, especially considering that a lavish special edition with an extended cut of the movie is such an inevitability. Rent It.






Pitch Black

December 15th, 2007 by admin

The Movie:
With its big-budget sequel an overwrought bomb, some may forget that David Twohy’s is a genuinely effective sci-fi horror thriller that hits just about all the right notes. Tightly scripted and directed, the picture is a model of B-movie efficiency with interesting characters, a fairly smart plot, and precisely measured chills and thrills. It’s not necessarily a masterpiece of the genre, nor does it ever pretend to be, but unlike its sequel the original delivers exactly what it promises and leaves the audience satisfied. It’s a shame that the Hollywood studio mentality wants us to believe that every modestly successful movie needs to be turned into a franchise. Some movies deserve to stand on their own.

Before he became the annoying star of so many crappy action movies, Vin Diesel was a terrific badass anti-hero as hardened criminal Richard Riddick. Chained up and muzzled like an animal, when the ship transporting him to a penal colony crash lands on a harsh desert planet, Riddick breaks lose and begins a taunting cat-and-mouse game with the bounty hunter who originally captured him and the remaining civilian passengers who survived. Little do they all know that soon Riddick will be the least of their problems. The planet orbiting three suns seems to exist in perpetual daylight, until a rare celestial eclipse casts them into total darkness, and on this planet darkness brings new dangers. Nocturnal predators who’ve destroyed all other life on the rock can smell the fresh meat and want a taste of it. The survivors will need to band together to stay alive, and the feral Riddick may actually be their best chance of making it through the night.

To be sure, treads some genre clichés. The story is basically Flight of the Phoenix (the Jimmy Stewart version, not the lousy remake) crossed with Aliens. What it lacks in originality it makes up in style and raw urgency. The script is smartly written and has been honed down to its bare essentials, without all that bloated backstory and mythology that sunk is follow-up, The Chronicles of Riddick. What we have here are exactly the right ingredients for a sharp, scary, thrilling little monster picture with nothing extraneous weighing it down. Riddick in this film is a pretty fascinating character: heartless, dangerous, and rather mysterious, all traits that were watered down or lost in the sequel. His fellow survivors are also better than the usual dim-witted stock horror movie characters. The film was made for only $23 million, but packs in a lot of production value. Most of the visual effects are quite impressive considering the budget, though some of the CGI monsters are a little iffy.

The movie holds up remarkably well to repeat viewings, even when you know who lives and who dies. It’s certainly better than many similar exercises in the genre (Doom comes to mind). It doesn’t have to be high art to be great entertainment, and on that mark definitely qualifies.

The HD DVD:
debuts on the HD DVD format courtesy of Universal Studios Home Entertainment two months after they’d already released its sequel. That’s marketing logic for you. Technically, the packaging identifies the movie as The Chronicles of Riddick: , an obnoxious attempt to retroactively rebrand the film as part of a franchise. The on-screen title remains just , fortunately.

The version presented on disc is the “Unrated Director’s Cut” previously available on DVD, which runs approximately three minutes longer than the original theatrical cut.

HD DVD discs are only playable in a compatible HD DVD player. They will not function in a standard DVD player or in a Blu-Ray player. Please note that the star rating scales for video and audio are relative to other High Definition disc content, not to traditional DVD.

Video:
The HD DVD is encoded on disc in High Definition 1080p format using VC-1 compression. The movie is presented in its theatrical aspect ratio of approximately 2.35:1 with letterbox bars at the top and bottom of the 16:9 frame.

Wow, this disc looks great! In fact, I’d say it’s one of the best releases so far on the HD DVD format. The picture is razor sharp with astounding clarity of fine object detail. You can frequently make out every pore in the actors’ skins and every bit of stubble on Diesel’s shaved head, even in medium and wide shots. The movie has a stylized appearance with intentionally blown out contrasts during the desert daylight scenes and deep blacks during the nighttime scenes, and the entire contrast range is flawlessly rendered. Dark sequences have rich, inky blacks with very good shadow detail (when they’re supposed to). Colors look vibrant and terrific. The DVD edition looked pretty good itself, but the HD DVD just blows it out of the water. Unlike some discs on either HD disc format, this is excellent High Definition and could never be mistaken for an upconverted DVD.

The movie was produced on a relatively low budget and does occasionally have a grainy scene or two. For the most part, these scenes are well compressed to retain the appearance of real film grain rather than video noise, but in a small handful of places the image looks like it may be artificially sharpened with the grain looking just a little noisy. However, the disc does not exhibit any typical edge enhancement halos that I could see, which is an improvement over the DVD. Any problems noticed here are minor and I didn’t find them objectionable.

The Pitch Black HD DVD is not flagged with an Image Constraint Token and will play in full High Definition quality over an HD DVD player’s analog Component Video outputs.

The photo images used in this article were taken from the DVD edition for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to demonstrate HD DVD picture quality.

Audio:
The movie’s soundtrack is provided in Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 format. The film has a great sound mix that smartly balances periods of quiet with those of aggressive loudness. Unlike many sci-fi action pictures, it’s not just bombast from start to finish. Sound effects are crisply recorded and the movie delivers no shortage of bass when the time comes for it. The opening crash landing gets things off to a rocking start. The monster scenes are also particularly impressive, with pinpoint surround directionality and the fascinating sonar sound that the creatures emit.

Dialogue seems to be buried a little low in this DD+ track, unfortunately, and at times the fidelity of the soundtrack comes across a little harsh. The DVD had a DTS audio option that has not been carried over here (unlike the Chronicles of Riddick HD DVD which offers either DD+ or standard DTS), but I wish it had been. The DD+ is very good but just a bit veiled in some scenes, so I can’t rate it reference quality.

Subs & Dubs:
Optional subtitles – English captions for the hearing impaired, French, or Spanish.
Alternate language tracks - None.

Extras:
All of the bonus features on this HD DVD title are recycled from the DVD edition and are presented in Standard Definition video with MPEG2 compression. The interactive menus are accompanied by annoying clicking sound effects for every selection that can be turned off if you desire (and I recommend it). Oddly, unlike most other Universal titles the main menu screen here displays just a generic studio logo without any clips from the movie.

Most of the major supplements from both the original theatrical cut DVD and the later Unrated Director’s Cut DVD have carried over.

  • Audio Commentary by Vin Diesel, Cole Hauser, and David Twohy - A disappointing track where the participants spend too much time just watching the movie. Obviously, none of them did any preparation beforehand or had any topics they particularly wanted to discuss.
  • Audio Commentary by director David Twohy, producer Tom Engelman, and visual effects supervisor Peter Chang - A little bit better, this track is more technical but generally informative. Main points of discussion include the visual effects and the bleach bypass process used to give the movie its contrasty look.
  • Introduction by David Twohy (2 min.) – A pretty worthless intro that spends more time plugging the sequel than telling us anything about Pitch Black, though in it Twohy does admit that he never had any plans for a franchise when he made the first film.
  • Johns’ Chase Log (7 min.) – Identical in format to the similar feature on the Chronicles of Riddick disc, this is a cheesy and annoying in-character diary narrated by the bounty hunter who pursued Riddick prior to the movie’s events. Cole Hauser reprises his character for the voiceover.
  • The Chronicles of Riddick Visual Encyclopedia (2 min.) – Likewise continued from its similar feature on the sequel disc, this contains a few very short explanations of the film’s mythology narrated by Cole Hauser speaking in character. The feature seems to be designed for children and is also very cheesy and annoying.
  • The Making of Pitch Black (5 min.) – Pure EPK fluff, this looks very much like it may have been an HBO First Look promo. Directory Twohy sure likes to toot his own horn.
  • Dark Fury: Advancing the Arc (2 min.) – A shameless plug for the animated “between-quel” available separately on DVD.
  • The Game is On (2 min.) – A shameless plug for the tie-in video game.
  • A View into the Dark (3 min.) – A shameless plug for the sequel.
  • Raveworld Pitch Black Event (20 min.) – Truly one of the most tedious and worthless bonus features I’ve ever seen, this is 20 minutes of lame video watching raver kids dancing to throbbing techno music while clips from the movie play in the background.

No interactive features have been included. Missing from the first DVD edition are the movie’s trailer, production notes, and cast bios. The trailer is sorely missed, but the text features aren’t much of a loss.

Final Thoughts:
A hugely entertaining B-movie that holds up much better than its overly-ambitious sequel, Pitch Black comes to HD DVD with a just plain amazing video transfer. The audio is pretty good though not great, and the bonus features are mostly junk, but the disc still easily rates a high recommendation.

Related Articles:







Mystic River

December 15th, 2007 by admin

The race for Oscar is over.

At the risk of raising the ire of thousands of Lord of the Rings fans hoping Peter Jackson’s final chapter in the trilogy will claim Oscar gold, or the fury of horse fans hoping that Seabiscuit will enter the winner’s circle, let me be perfectly clear: is the best movie of 2003, Sean Penn is the top choice for Best Actor and our ol’ pal Dirty Harry…yes, Mr. Clint Eastwood himself… is about to win his second Oscar for Best Director.

Sure, it may not happen that way, but it should happen, as Eastwood has given us the shining jewel in his directorial career – a movie that explores friendships that are thicker than blood, with secrets that are deeper than the river from which the movie takes its name.

opens in the past, as three young boys – Jimmy, Sean and Dave – who, like most young boys their ages, are looking to get into a little trouble on an overcast afternoon in Boston. Jimmy gets the idea of stealing a car, but the boys are soon distracted by some fresh cement drying on the sidewalk and decide to write their names in it. Sure enough, a pair of men claiming to be the police start yelling at the boys and make Dave get in their car, saying they’re taking him back home to tell his mother what he has done. But the two guys aren’t cops…and they kidnap Dave and sexually abuse him for four days, before Dave is finally able to make his escape.

Flash forward to the present day, and we find that the three boys all still live in the neighborhood, although they are no longer as close as they once were. Jimmy (Sean Penn) runs a local convenience store, but also has a criminal past and connections with local thugs; Dave (Tim Robbins) now has a wife (Marcia Gay Harden) and son, but has never gotten over what happened to him as a boy; and Sean (Kevin Bacon) has become a police detective, but finds himself in a broken marriage, with a wife who calls him on the phone but doesn’t speak, and a new daughter whom he has never seen.

The three men suddenly find their lives thrown back together when Jimmy’s oldest daughter disappears one night. Sean is called in on the case and is the one who discovers the body of Jimmy’s girl. The mystery thickens, because Dave was one of the last people to see Jimmy’s daughter alive, and he came home that night injured, with blood all over his hands.

What’s great about is that it’s such an involving character study of these three men. Most movies would just revolve around the murder-mystery, but Eastwood takes his characters deeper – having them ask themselves questions like if, as boys, another one of them had gotten in the car with those child molesters, would their lives have been totally different?

Penn plays his father figure role with such genuine compassion and grief that the audience is stunned to find out he has a darker side when it’s revealed early in the film. Robbins is so good at playing a haunted man, that we never quite know until the end whether his character is guilty, emotionally scarred, or both. Even Bacon is superb – a man who handles his police work almost flawlessly, but has a personal life that is in shambles.

About 20 minutes into , I realized I was watching much more than the best movie I’ve seen this year…I was watching a classic. This is a film that not only stays with you long after you leave the theater, but should be staying with us for a long time as one of the best films of the new century.

Oscars or no Oscars, sweeps you up in its powerful current and carries you into a story you’ll never forget.






Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Underworld: Evolution

December 14th, 2007 by admin

The Movie

There’s nothing I love more than being able to sincerely “champion” a good ol’ mindless popcorn flick. And while I was wasn’t all that impressed with the original Underworld upon first viewing, I’ve slowly grown a small affection for the flick. So when I sat down to visit with for a second spin, I found myself actively trying to find good things to say. I looked over at the flick’s anemic approval rating at Rotten Tomatoes and thought, “Hey, I’d really like to add a positive review to the mix, because I love popcorn movies and I think I’m a pretty good judge on what makes a good one.”

Despite my best efforts, I found only a few small nuggets of pleasure in . I don’t think it’s an outright crap-heap, as far as action sequels go, but it’s just too darn dour, convoluted, and redundant to rally much enthusiasm.


We open with a “long-ago” prologue before picking up precisely where Underworld left off: Death Dealer Vampiress Selene and her purple-yet-hunky vampire/werewolf cross-breed of a boyfriend have thwarted their numerous foes and finally have a moment to make out when…

Whoops, someone went and woke up Markus, a very unpleasant Daddy Vampire who’d really like to know why his family is completely dead and one of his sexy underlings is making out with a purple semi-Lycan. There are three or four other plot-threads, but they’re all very gnarled and twisted and basically unimportant. All you need to know is that the amazingly hot chick in the skin-tight pleather jumpsuit is the hero, and everyone else is grist for the gore mill.

Series creator Len Wiseman is really stuck in a “damned if you do / damned if you don’t” situation here. Focus exclusively on the action scenes and the thing becomes a cacophonous orgy of pointless mayhem — but focus too heavily on the “character stuff” and the audience begins to realize how goofy all the goings-on actually are. (I mean, points for trying, but does anyone think the romance between Selene and Michael is more interesting than, say, a vampire being pulverized by some helicopter blades?)

So while it’s certainly admirable that is trying to deliver some actual emotion and/or character beneath all the chaotic stabbings and slick beheadings, the simple truth is this: When the Underworld flicks deviate from the action stuff, they’re both pretty dry, dumb, and frequently kinda laughable. The original flick gets a semi-pass because we were new to the whole concept, but by the time a Part 2 rolls around, you’d hope your filmmakers would accentuate the positives and minimize the negatives.

suffers the same fate as many sequels: It was banged together rather expeditiously after the first one become a surprise hit, and as you wade through the sequel’s myriad plot turns and overbaked back-stories, you just might find yourself thinking … just get to the action already. Not even seasoned pros like Bill Nighy and Derek Jacobi can manage to cut through the tediously over-plotted shenanigans, while (again) Ms. Beckinsale is asked to do little besides pose, punch, and jam knives into screaming beasties.

Stuffed with slick production design, fantastic special effects, and a few satisfying action scenes, is still a pretty big disappointment; the thing takes itself way too seriously and relies way too heavily on its “multi-generational gothic soap opera” exposition volleys that crop up whenever someone’s ass is not being kicked.

Even now I feel I’m being perhaps a bit too kind to the flick, but it’ll still earn a place on my Guilty Pleasures shelf, right next to a half-dozen mindless action thrillers that involve vampires, werewolves, zombies, and the mega-sexy women who love to kill them.

The DVD

Video: The anamorphic widescreen (2.40:1) transfer is quite excellent, what with all the splattering arteries and dank drippy caverns.

Audio: Dolby Digital 5.1 (English or French) with optional subtitles in the same two languages. Audio quality is expectedly strong, considering we’re talking about a fancy action flick that was made about nine months ago.

Extras

There’s an audio commentary with writer/director Len Wiseman, production designer Patrick Tatopoulos, 2nd unit director Brad Martin, and editor Nicolas de Toth. Early on, the guys seem intent on delivering production information and they keep the comments flowing smoothly. Wiseman mentions how much he hates the “narration” style of commentating, so he leads his team through the chat-track with success. The guys (who share a bottle of wine to keep the chatter flowing) love to focus on “where this was shot” and “ok, now THIS is a miniature and THAT is digital,” but if you’re a fan of the series, the commentary’s not half bad.

A half-dozen featurettes are also included, the standard sort of extra material that’s not exactly EPK-style self-love, but gives only a cursory look at the behind-the-scenes activities.

Participating in the featurette interviews are: Writer/director Len Wiseman, leading lady Kate Beckinsale, producer Gary Lucchesi, executive producers James McQuaide & David Coatsworth, production designer Patrick Tatopoulos, creature designer Guy Himber, FX supervisor Payam Shohadai, sound designer Scott Gershin, prosthetics creator Kevin Mohlman, fangmaker David Beneke, 2nd unit director Brad Martin, stuntman Kurt Carley, composer Marco Beltrami, and actors Scott Speedman, Tony Curran, Bill Nighy, Derek Jacobi, and Steven Mackintosh.

Bloodlines: From Script to Screen (13:25) covers the creation of the second story and the lead actors’ impressions of the sequel

The Hybrid Theory (12:59) looks at the FX work, both practical and computer-generated.

Making Monsters Roar (11:56) deals with the creature creations, from the new-fangled werewolves to the mega-fanged bloodsuckers.

The War Rages On (9:52) focuses on the extensive stuntwork in the flick.

Building a Saga (12:54) is all about the production design and locations.

Music and Mayhem (11:49) covers the sound design and music.

In addition to the commentary and the featurettes you’ll also get a music video for “Her Portrait in Black,” by Atreyu, which I find amusing because the band’s all dark and angry despite being named after a character from The Neverending Story, and a bunch of previews for When a Stranger Calls, Ultraviolet, London, Click, Underworld, Hostel, The Boondocks, Marie Antoinette, The Exorcism of Emily Rose, The Benchwarmers, Silent Hill, The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada, and The James Bond Ultimate Collection.

I suppose those trailers are being reserved for the inevitable Underworld: Fully Evolved, Uncut and Unrated edition.

Final Thoughts

I guess it’s just that an action/horror combo really speaks to the geeky little 12-year-old in me, and I get a little more forgiving where bad writing, confusing editing, and ass-backwards storytelling are concerned. If you dug the first Underworld, I suspect you’ll like this one too, only not as much. And if you hated the first one and you’re hoping the sequel’s an improvement, I suggest you go ahead and rent something else.






Sniper 3

December 14th, 2007 by admin

The Movie

In the third installment in the Sniper series, Tom Berenger (Platoon) returns as Thomas Beckett, a now aging Master Gunnery Sergeant. I found that the movie was fairly entertaining, but unless you enjoy the occasional bad action flick, this one probably won’t appeal to you. The plot isn’t very good, the action sometimes seems a bit too cheesy, there’s limited character development, and even worse, some of the characters are pretty awful. In other words, this really isn’t a very good movie. However, I did find that I enjoyed it, but before we dive into that we’ll cover a little bit about what makes this a bad movie.

The story of this movie is pretty weak, hollow, and not surprisingly, slightly hard to stomach. Beckett is given a mission that turns out to be more than he bargained for. He is sent to Vietnam to remove a former-CIA-operative-turned-drug-lord-and-former-friend from the world on what will most likely be his last mission. With the aid of a Vietnamese police officer -slash- undercover NSA agent Quan (Byron Mann Street Fighter), they track down Beckett’s former friend, only to find out “the disturbing truth”. The reason that this plot isn’t very good is that it’s all introduced in the early stages of the film-the first ten minutes. After that, there really isn’t a lot of development in the story. Of course, there are some slight advancements in plot. For instance, “the disturbing truth” is revealed, but it’s really not that disturbing, but rather ridiculous in its lack of realism.

Furthermore, the character roles are not all necessarily convincing. John Doman plays Finnegan, who is the corrupt CIA operative turned drug lord. The role is almost laughable. He is very unconvincing as a villain. But I wouldn’t pinpoint the blame on Doman’s acting skills, but rather his scripted role. The role was just not developed very well. In addition, the other characters were not developed a great deal. Even the main character Beckett gets very little focus and when there is some development, it doesn’t always fit in well. I think that this film assumes you are already familiar with Beckett from the earlier films. Having not seen either of them, I knew nothing of Beckett. Quite frankly, I still really don’t.

However, this brings me to the one thing I liked about this film. While the story, the characters (in general), and the dialogue weren’t very good, I really did like Beckett’s role. He’s your average tired of life, fed up with authority, I’ll do it my own way kind of guy. In some respects he’s a very likeable guy. For that reason alone, I found that I was greatly intrigued by Beckett and wanted to see more, only to get to know his character. Unfortunately to do so, you’ll probably have to associate yourself with the earlier films, because won’t give you a great insight to who Beckett is.

Overall, this movie has its shortcomings and for that reason it won’t appeal to the masses. So unless you find yourself watching a lot of Arnold Schwarzenegger or Sylvester Stallone films, you’ll probably want to skip out on this one.

The DVD

Video:
The video in this release is given in 1.85:1 ratio anamorphic widescreen color. The picture quality is pretty good, with a very sharp and clean picture. There are some traces of grain, which are apparent during the darker scenes of the movie.

Audio:
The audio in this release is given in two formats, English 5.1 Dolby digital surround sound and French 2.0 Dolby digital stereo sound. The audio tracks provide a clean sound, which is very audible. The dialogue is fairly flat, but sound effects are fairly rich and vibrant. There is some pretty good distinction between audio channels, but the majority comes from the forward channels. There are also subtitles in English, French, Chinese, Korean, and Thai.

Extras:
There are no extras with this release.

Final Thoughts:
isn’t a really great movie. It has far too many shortcomings that will cause most people to quickly dismiss it. However, I found that it was remotely enjoyable, enough for a rental. However, this was mainly because I was intrigued by the main role of Master Gunnery Sergeant Beckett. While his role was not clearly developed in this film, there’s enough to make him an attractive character to want to get to know more. Unfortunately, you’ll probably need to see the earlier Sniper films to do so and gauging the quality of this film, that’s probably not something everyone will want to do. The bottom line is that if you enjoy bad action movies, this one should appeal to you.