A prince and a fellowship of companions set out to rescue his bride from a fortress of alien invaders who have arrived on their home planet.
Star Wars meets Lord of the Rings in this fantasy medieval space mash up. The story follows the typical fantasy archetype: long awaited prophecy involving a future king and his bride finally comes to pass, as the prince must rescue the princess before the evil consumes the land. Only for some reason the evil in this film is a giant Alien looking creature who controls a nasty set of beetles inside Darth Vader-like stormtrooper suits that shoot lasers.
Literally everything in this film is an amalgamation of LOTR & Star Wars, from the epic landscape shots, complete with a snowy mountain trek and wild horse rides through forests and plains, to the pew! pew! laser shootouts in close quarters. There are giant spiders, a cyclops, bumbling magicians, elaborate sets, natural sets. It's even got Liam Neeson.
For some reason, despite the film's lengthy expositions, I couldn't quite grasp the main character's name, or the name of his shiny sharp boomerang. But thankfully, the title of the film is enough to describe all people, places, and objects within it. "Did Krull get his Krull back?", "Oh shit, he's gonna toss the Krull!", etc. I laughed a whole lot while watching this but unless you're a serious fan of early 80's fantasy epics (Dark Crystal, Labyrinth, Beastmaster, etc.), you probably won't want to watch this. It's too cheap and slow for modern audiences, and too silly to take seriously.
Peter Yates, by the way, directed the supremely awesome Steve McQueen vehicle Bullitt. He was nominated for two Oscars the year this film was released -- both for his follow up, The Dresser, with Albert Finney.
When an ex-superhero is murdered, a vigilante named Rorschach begins an investigation into the murder, which begins to lead to a much more terrifying conclusion.
Long considered 'unfilmable', Watchmen is one of the most celebrated graphic novels of all time, and often credited for ushering in an era of more serious, cerebral, adult-themed comic books. Hollywood took stabs at bringing Alan Moore & Dave Gibbon's time-altering, mind-bending grit fest to the screen for nearly 3 decades, with everyone from Paul Greengrass to Terry Gilliam to Michael Bay set to direct. Zack Snyder finally succeeded in producing the film, which finally hit theaters this week after much fanboy anticipation.
Fanboys like myself, who fell in the love with the graphic novel's sharp thematic and formal critique of the medium, as well as it's intense philosophical and political exploration, engrossing characters and wonderfully rich universe. Watchmen the novel is as complete a package as one could ever expect or want; a vast and detailed world with no stone unturned tenderly committed to the page.
Which begs the question -- why make it into a movie at all? Particularly one that adheres so faithfully to it's source?
Of course, that's the question I asked myself before the movie was released, and after having seen it, I'm not sure I have a full answer. From a business standpoint, I could understand why the movie was made -- large built-in fan base, a film that paves the way for grittier, more difficult graphic novel adaptations, and lots of fanboy cred for the distributors. But artistically, what are the merits? It seems there are some, but mainly the film exists as a celebration of Moore & Gibbon's work.
To their credit, Warner Brothers and Mr. Snyder have delivered one balls to the walls, full-force, hard R, uncompromising vision of Watchmen. Like the comic's creators, they left no stone unturned in bringing this epic to the big screen, inserting as much possible detail with extra care. For those unfamiliar with Watchmen's source, the film must be a dizzying experience with many WTF? moments, but fanboys rejoice: never has there been such a detailed adaptation in the history of the medium.
Snyder's visual flair and special effects prowess certainly help bring the panels to exacting life. Some sequences, particularly the Dr. Manhattan chapter, the back-peddling opening credits and almost anything involving Rorschach, are undeniably brilliant. Others, such as the Silk Spectre father reveal and the tweaked ending, lack some of the emotional punch delivered in the novel, but are nonetheless visually arresting.
Perhaps my biggest problem with the film is that it could never replicate all that the novel contains. Much of the climate of the Watchmen universe -- the nuclear war paranoia, the aggression towards authority figures, the degrading of social moral -- is reduced to blanket statements and quick set ups. The majority of the second and third tier characters present in the novel, many of which establish and elaborate these themes to flesh out the temporal backdrop, are absent here. Likewise, many details surrounding the characters origins are trimmed down, making their screen counterparts feel somewhat incomplete.
The music, too, felt jarring to me. The film deserves it's own original score, not some smattering of pop songs that vaguely adhere thematically to the action. I think Warner Brothers were a tad afraid of mainstream audience reactions, and figured if they put some huge pop hits behind some of the more audacious sequences it would make them more palatable. Maybe -- but it also severely undermined the tone. I highly doubt Hendrix would be blasting while Rorcshach and Nite Owl scourge Antarctica for Ozymandias's hideaway.
But with that said, it's amazing how much Synder and his team managed to cram into this two and a half hour epic, and it's even more amazing that Warner Brothers was willing to see through on his vision. This is one bloody disgusting, gut-wrenching, depressing, dark as hell film. It's views on humanity and social decency make Dark Knight look like kiddie play time. As does the on-screen sex and violence.
Watching the origins of Dr. Manhattan unfold on screen will remain one of my favorite cinematic moments for a long time. Billy Crudup does an amazing job and really nails the character to the T. But seeing it come alive, watching it unfold in real time -- nothing will ever compare. It's breathtaking. And that alone makes Watchmen worthy of repeat viewings.
And I definitely think I need to see it again, now that the fanboy giddiness is out of my system. It's hard to really critically assess Snyder's formal elements in that malaise. There is too much immediate beauty in the imagery to really look deep into what Snyder uses to shape the story. Regardless, Watchmen remains a unique ride, one that will (probably) never be duplicated.
On a faraway planet where giants rule, tiny humanoids must fight for their lives and their equality.
This surreal animated film was winner of the Special Grand Prix at Cannes in 1973. Decades later it still reigns as one of the premier surrealist animated features. The film lives up to it's title; artist Ronald Topor populates the story with a host of strange creatures and bizarre landscapes. A beauty to behold, the animation and artistry of images is what makes the film work. Without it, it's a bland tale about learning to live in peace with mutual benefit. But do check it out if you're an animation junkie.
A young girl walks through a secret door in her new home and discovers an alternate version of her life.
I've seen Coraline twice now and I can't seem to get it out of my head. The mix of intense artistry and chilling children's fantasy is infectious, and incredibly beautiful. As of right now it's my top film of 2009 and sure to be on my top ten list come the end of the year.
There are two major reasons why I love this film. Number one: Henry Selick's incredibly detailed, labor of love animation. This is as good as it gets people -- a fully realized, amazingly in depth 3D world made entirely of miniature puppets and set pieces. A lot of heart and soul went into the making of this film, and every ounce of it shows on screen. Everything from the soundtrack to the V.O. to the little hairs on Coraline's head are pitch perfect. It's truly a wonder to behold, and infinitely more impressive than any computer generated image. It's a shame more filmmakers don't follow in his footsteps.
Number two: Neil Gaiman's beautiful story. A take on the classic Alice in Wonderland, down the rabbit hole type tale, the story of Coraline is as breathtakingly imaginative as the animation that brings it to life. Despite being a fantasy, it doesn't pander to overprotective parents and has some real scares that are sure to upset younger viewers. But no matter -- Gaiman knows that kids are braver than we give them credit, and it's refreshing to see a children's film that isn't all cute animals and silly colors.
The film does have its flaws. Some scenes drag on a tad too long and overall the screen story isn't as streamlined as the novel. But those are some small grievances that were easily overlooked on my first viewing. I may be biased as this film has a lot of elements that tickle my fancy, but seriously -- I don't think I could be friends with anyone who didn't like this film. Selick and Gaiman have done children (and adults) everywhere a service, creating a masterful and resonating work that should be cherished for generations.
On another planet in the distant past, a Gelfling embarks on a quest to find the missing shard of a magical crystal, and so restore order to his world.
I miss Jim Henson. The man was an incredibly vibrant creative force who's energy and creative philosophy you can feel pulsating through each of the film's he touched. The Dark Crystal, in particular, is brimming with Henson's personal touch -- from the bevy of creatures they created to populate the world, to the spot on characterizations of each Muppet, you can feel his presence hovering over the film throughout.
Dark Crystal is your typical fantasy fare: a strange land is in peril, and a young hero has been chosen to save the day. But what separates Dark Crystal from other fantasy epics is the amount of visual detail, flair, and attention paid to the most minute of characters. The Muppet performers are delightful, wringing personality and life out of every little piece of cloth. Particularly impressive are the vile Skeksis, who look like vultures mixed with Victorian era-elitists. A dinner scene featuring these disgusting creature is particularly hilarious, and like something straight out of Bunuel. The film is just as well shot too -- a beautiful landscape sequence shows thousands of Henson's Muppet creations marching through the desert, almost blending into the background as they slowly walk past.
If you like fantasy, Muppets, or just plain old cool special effects, Dark Crystal is a must see. The sheer magnitude of the production -- thousands of tiny little puppets and effects -- is almost unbelievable. They simply don't make movies like this any more.
Written by Wolfgang Petersen & Herman Weigel Based on the novel by Michael Ende
A troubled boy dives into a wonderous fantasy world through the pages of a mysterious book.
This effects-ridden fantasy film by German filmmaker Wolfgang Peterson, best known for action set pieces like Air Force One and Das Boot, was a failure at the box office when it was released, but quickly garnered a large cult following, and in turn a bevy of sequels, as well as an animated series. Based (somewhat) on the book of the same name, it follows the usual fantasy epic trajectory -- a vague evil is plaguing the land, and some young buck hero is fabled to stop it. The effects aren't quite as impressive as The Dark Crystal, nor is the land littered with as many quirks and quips to really bring it to life. But the story is simple and engaging enough that I could see why children would enjoy it.
This Family Guy spoofs sums up the best parts of the film pretty well:
