Showing posts with label Cliff Curtis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cliff Curtis. Show all posts

December 20, 2022

Avatar: The Way of Water.

Review #1942: Avatar: The Way of Water.

Cast: 
Sam Worthington (Jake Sully), Zoe Saldana (Neytiri), Sigourney Weaver (Kiri / Dr. Grace Augustine), Stephen Lang (Colonel Miles Quaritch), Kate Winslet (Ronal), Cliff Curtis (Tonowari), Joel David Moore (Norm), CCH Pounder (Mo'at), Edie Falco (General Ardmore), Brendan Cowell (Scoresby), Jemaine Clement (Dr. Garvin), Jamie Flatters (Neteyam), Britain Dalton (Lo'ak), Trinity Jo-Li Bliss (Tuk), Jack Champion (Spider), Bailey Bass (Tsireya), Filip Geljo (Aonung), Duane Evans Jr. (Rotxo), and Giovanni Ribisi (Selfridge) Directed by James Cameron (#001 - Terminator 2: Judgement Day, #063 - The Terminator, #388 - Avatar, #574 - Aliens, #606 - True Lies, #1515 - Titanic)

Review: 
 "It will be a natural extension of all the themes, and the characters, and the spiritual undercurrents. Basically, if you loved the first movie, you're gonna love these movies, and if you hated it, you're probably gonna hate these. If you loved it at the time, and you said later you hated it, you're probably gonna love these."

Honestly, I hadn't thought of Avatar (2009) too much since I saw it the one time in 2013. Aside for the countless jokes about it being a blue version of Dances with Wolves or being like Ferngully: The Last Rainforest, I didn't really anticipate a sequel coming out that would elevate what I felt was pretty average fare. It can be granted that it was a movie that succeeded on the goals of presenting an old-fashioned jungle adventure with some sort of environmental conscience that basically took inspiration from countless adventure and science fiction books that made a basic setup in order to show some really pretty special effects (if you saw it in 3D, well, that probably went double). Cameron initially stated that the success of Avatar would guarantee two sequels. In 2016 (two years after Cameron had stated there would be sequels released in 2014 and 2015), Cameron stated that there would be four sequels, all shot simultaneously (with this film being done for a budget over $350 million), for which the sequels would have sperate stories that "have an overall arc inclusive of the first film." Here is a fun writing listing: the story was done by Cameron, Rick Jaffa, and Amanda Silver, while the screenplay was done by Cameron, Jaffa, Silver, and Josh Friedman and Shane Salerno. Nine of the original cast members from the first film return for this film, which had started shooting in 2017. Trying to do performance capture underwater ended up taking over a year to do because a whole process had to be invented for it (keep in mind, actors had to undergo training to be able to breathe longer than what you might expect, and a record for longest breath held during filming of an underwater scene was set...at seven minutes).

I will give this much credit: the best way to see the film is the way all films should be seen...in a theater. Granted, as much as I don't particularly care for 3D, it was a pretty interesting experience to immerse oneself. So yes, if you want a film that has turned Avatar into a generational family saga that happens to dabble with themes of environmentalism and colonization with a runtime of 192 minutes, here you are. Would you be surprised to know that the movie is a great visual experience but only just an average epic besides that element? It manages to be both diverting and amusing in all of the weird ways that I had anticipated, one that plays off many interesting viewing moments to go along with dialogue that is either family cliche or flat-out odd cliche (hearing "cuz", for example). Yes, a movie made in 2022 looks pretty, big shock. It is pretty good, although I would hope for more when it comes to the next film. It lingers on said imagery at times, whether that involves certain moments of higher frame rate or images from the sea or...you get the idea. 192 minutes means one viewing will either prove fair for the theater experience or daunting. Eh, it was fine. Oh, right, there is acting in the film. Worthington technically does fine in the morph to "family man", albeit with voiceover lines that basically states the obvious. Saldana is the other side of the family coin of, well, doing things. Technically this is a case of the story moving over to the offspring, but I surely remember her having more to do in the first film. Lang is the highlight for me, one who is abrasive as ever but still engaging enough to see where one could at least see how people would rally behind him. Besides, him playing the exposition of just how he returns is at least interesting when coming from him (and yay, he gets to come back for more, so I can only hope he gets to do more cartoonish things - maybe he'll shoot a space whale and make it dignified). Winslet and Curtis make fairly decent new people to do the schtick of "welcome to the sea, fellow blue-ish people". I admire Weaver taking a role where she has to play a blue teenager - granted it is a decent performance, but hey, I guess it needed to be Weaver when acting with actual teens playing blue teenagers. Of course, Champion is meant to stick out like a sore thumb as the wild child among blue people, but yea, he did start to get on my nerves after time.

By the first hour, the film has established the change from pursuit of "unobtanium" to basically trying to make a new Earth for the humans while the on-screen "Na'vi Family Robinson" makes their trip to the sea (look, I know they are called "Na'vi", but forgive me if I end up saying blue people). At least you get to see the return of Lang as the villain, if only because nobody wants to see a whole trip to the deep blue sea without some sort of weirdo new blue villain. The middle hour is pretty eventful: you get to see Avatar's version of whales with the "tulkun", the spiritual blood brothers that was reminding me to wonder just how familiar it might be to something like Free Willy (1993). So yes, space whales. Take a guess what happens with the space whales when there is one outcast among them. At any rate, don't forget about the weird conflicts between the reef people (i.e. green people) and the blue folks. I'll be honest, I did find it amusingly tiresome to remember that there are three siblings to this Na'vi family alongside two adoptees. When it finally labors itself past the 120-minute mark, now you get to see a battle to save the space whales from having their stuff sucked out for anti-aging serum (yes) and being drawn out by the villain. At least the crab-mecha thing (the time for getting proper names for things is long past) is fun, because god knows the action in the last act is probably the most interesting the film gets beyond showing images in the water. At any rate, by the time you finish this mix of school movies, animal flicks, and possibly The Poseidon Adventure, you probably will be interested in just what the hell James Cameron wants to do in this "family saga", where it will continue to push the elements of where special effects can go to go alongside wondering just how self-serious this story will go. I dug the movie, but any good movie has clear elements that could have gone down with the ship with lesser hands, and this is most evident here. This was a movie about family being everything along with the message that the environment (specifically water) will kick your ass if you try to mess with it...I think. Will there be material present in the further sequels that make this even more of a true epic, or will it be something that you could lightly make fun of it (probably while doing certain substances beforehand) while looking at the pretty images? Time will tell for the third film, set for release in the late 2020s...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

September 7, 2020

Training Day.


Review #1529: Training Day.

Cast: 
Denzel Washington (Detective Sergeant Alonzo Harris), Ethan Hawke (Officer Jake Hoyt), Scott Glenn (Roger), Eva Mendes (Sara), Cliff Curtis (Smiley), Raymond Cruz (Sniper), Noel Gugliemi (Moreno), Dr. Dre (Paul), with Harris Yulin (Detective Doug Rosselli), Tom Berenger (Stan Gursky), Raymond J. Barry (Captain Lou Jacobs), Peter Greene (Jeff), Nick Chinlund (Tim), and Snoop Dogg (Blue) Directed by Antoine Fuqua.

Review: 
"Being a kid growing up with Kurosawa films and watching Sergio Leone movies just made me love what it could do to you, and how it could influence you - make you dream."

What we have here is a film comprised of two unifying visions in writing and directing when it comes to shades of gray in the streets and the people that live in it. Fuqua grew up in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and described himself as living a rough area that nevertheless found inspiration from films of his youth that affected him such as Seven Samurai and The Magnificent Seven in watching people struggle through their own fight for justice. He studied engineering and fine arts at West Virginia University with the intent to join the military before deciding to enter into filming with music video directing, which he started in 1992 for performers such as Chanté Moore and moved into film directing with The Replacement Killers (1998). The writer of this film was David Ayer, who while born in Champaign, Illinois lived with his cousin in South Central Los Angeles before serving in the United States Navy for two years as a Submarine Sonar Technician (with those experiences inspiring him to write his first published screenplay, U-571). The script for this film had been developed over the course of a few years by Ayer (who would later become a director in his own right) and he spent considerable time observing with people who resided in that area for their perspective on law enforcement, with the 24-hour setting coming through his fascination with seeing a person entirely transformed through one particular day. Fuqua would also do his part in maintaining a realistic atmosphere through shooting on location all around Los Angeles (whether that meant South Central or the Imperial Courts) that meant consultation with undercover cops and gang experts (which extended to the stars of the film).

Perhaps it shouldn't be surprising that Washington does a great job with this role, because it clearly is a challenging role well-suited for a great actor to show nuance with. The film seems to take its lead from films like The French Connection and Dog Day Afternoon in a gritted-teeth telling about police action how it pertains to the community at large with a pace that works itself to fair standards with a solid duo wrapped around a world of brutality involving crooked cops and gangsters that still seems relevant today (the C.R.A.S.H. scandal involving the Los Angeles Police Department occurred by 1998, which was after the development of the screenplay but still prescient by the time of filming). Washington does a great job in depicting the logical next step of trying to take on the pressure-cooker type streets in going over the line and becoming an intimidator of the neighborhood. With a lesser actor, it might have just been an opportunity to go over-the-top in the guise of street justice, but Washington reins in a captivating performance filled with aggressive precision that isn't easy to pin down scene-to-scene. Hawke holds his ground on the other side of authority in ambition choked by underlying darkness, one that does just as well in driving the material forward with patience and an electric rapport with Washington that makes for good drama. Others do just fine in filling the details of a grayish world, such as Glenn with slimy calm, or an unassuming Mendes, though of course the best scene with others is one involving Yulin, Berenger, and Barry as "wise men" in their understanding with Washington when it comes to what's on/off the table. On the whole, one will find a decent experience to be had here through 122 minutes, as it has a general patience and understanding of a time and place that still adheres to how might makes right, with credible pacing and buildup to go with a well-paired duo and capable support to deliver a good thriller.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

August 30, 2020

Three Kings.


Review #1521: Three Kings.

Cast: 
George Clooney (Major Archie Gates), Mark Wahlberg (Sergeant First Class Troy Barlow), Ice Cube (Staff Sergeant Chief Elgin), Spike Jonze (Private First Class Conrad Vig), Cliff Curtis (Amir Abdullah), Nora Dunn (Adriana Cruz), Jamie Kennedy (Specialist Walter Wogeman), Saïd Taghmaoui (Saïd), Mykelti Williamson (Colonel Ron Horn), Holt McCallany (Captain Doug Van Meter), and Judy Greer (Cathy Daitch) Directed by David O. Russell.

Review: 
"I just love real characters; they're not pretentious, and every emotion is on the surface, they're regular working people. Their likes, their dislikes, their loves, their hates, their passions; they're all right there on the surface."

Some people are cut out for writing and others are cut out for directing. David O. Russell found his way into both through filmmaking that elevated him to rising star in the 1990s. A graduate of English and political science from Amherst College, he had worked a variety of odd jobs after graduation that ranged from community work to teaching. He did some work with documentaries and shorts (having found inspiration from classics watched such as Chinatown), such as with Bingo Inferno: A Parody on American Obsessions (1987). He was given grants to do a feature involving fortune cookies and microphones in a Chinese restaurant that he would instead use to do Spanking The Monkey (1994), debuting in feature films at the age of 36. The film was originally written by John Ridley (a standup comedian who later turned to writing for television along with novels), who wanted to experiment in making and selling a script in very little time; the script was done in a week and it was bought eighteen days later. However, Russell (brought in for his first major studio film) would do his own writing changes to the draft, and Ridley had to go through arbitration to get a story credit.

There had been quite a share of war films over the 1990s, but this sticks out as one involving the Persian Gulf War (1990-91); a war film involving a heist has been done before with films such as Kelly's Heroes (1970, which involved AWOL soldiers getting gold bars out of a bank vault). Russell accomplishes a distinct war film with its look, involving vibrant color though Ektachrome transparency stock (noted for its distinct look used for photographers like National Geographic) and one-shot explosions that was shot in the desert of several states such as Arizona that featured Iraqi refugees as advisors and extras. It is a reckless film that makes the best out of touching upon the consequences and spoils of war with a balance of humor and humanity that makes for a fairly clever movie that benefits from a formidable main quartet that shows its disconnect between war and the reality that comes from its perceived end without becoming absorbed in cliché or lingering on the soapbox too long. Clooney got the part after actors of various age targets were thought of/approached (such as Clint Eastwood and Nicolas Cage). He does a commendable job here, curious in a burnt-out stage of cynicism and lost values that we gravitate to with smoothness in a journey that means most to filling in the layers the film seeks to show through heist and war. Wahlberg does fine with being the middle man, an observer of being done from war on both ends with a careful brow. Rapper-turned-film star Cube makes the most of his time in conviction in handling the tension presented in faith handily. In the same year that Jonze debuted as a feature film director with Being John Malkovich, this was his first (and so far only) prominent role as an actor, doing so in a part that was written for him as a way to shake things up from the established actors, which he does in adequate comic relief. Curtis does well with providing perspective for what we know (or think we know) about the people around a simple trek for gold, which applies just as well for Taghmaoui in his scenes against Wahlberg. Dunn provides hard-edged zeal as the eyes of a fleeting moment, while the others in the cast do fine when needed.

On the whole, the film pulls itself off well within 114 minutes in delivering a clever film on the other sides of war beyond just the battlefield through a game cast and well-timed movement in pace and timing that make it as bitingly endurable as fellow war film M*A*S*H (1970) with its own style and presence worthy for its time of 1999 that still sticks a punch now.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

December 16, 2016

A Thousand Words.


Review #886: A Thousand Words.

Cast:
Eddie Murphy (Jack McCall), Kerry Washington (Caroline McCall), Clark Duke (Aaron Wiseberger), Cliff Curtis (Dr. Sinja), Steve Little (Co-Worker), Allison Janney (Samantha Davis), John Witherspoon (Blind Old Man), Jack McBrayer (Starbucks Coffee Employee), Kayla Blake (Emily), Lennie Loftin (Robert Gilmore), and Ruby Dee (Annie McCall) Directed by Brian Robbins (#147 - Norbit and #221 - Good Burger)

Review:
Simply put, this movie is bad. Really, really bad. It is the kind of a movie that exists in a void of nothingness, a void of absolute garbage that isn't really worth getting angry over. There are movies that are blandly terrible (#236 - Mr. Popper's Penguins), movies that are insufferable (#772 - Four Christmases), and movies like this. It's not so much a comedy-drama as it is a movie lacking in any kind of enthusiasm. It is obvious to see the biggest flaw for the film right away: Taking away Eddie Murphy's voice. Granted, he still talks throughout the movie (along with a strange bit of voice-over that feels off-putting), but Murphy just isn't very good at miming. I wonder how this would have been as a silent film, actually. There is never a moment where you feel for anything that is going on, where anything really matters. It also doesn't help that the characters in the movie act like idiots, where simply gestures are interpreted wildly, and other ones are just weird. I fail to see how trying to order coffee (with gestures, of course) can lead to wanting Paul McCartney music (also, who sells that in a Starbucks shop?). Murphy and Washington have little to no chemistry, with no sort of spark of excitement or literally any sort of life. Duke isn't particularly funny (how many times have we seen dweeby characters like this), but I guess him putting duct tape on Murphy is interesting...in that it should have happened earlier in the film. The rest of the nondescript cast is about as bland as you expect, in a movie filled with cliches and dead ends. There's a scene where Murphy is telling a character about his condition (it's a dream sequence, naturally), with the two of them laughing...and he suddenly has leaves flying out of his mouth. Yup, leaves. That's probably the only surprising thing in this movie. Think about that.

Somehow, this movie's release was delayed numerous times. Apparently it was filmed in 2008, but it didn't get released until 2012 (remember those days?) due to being caught up in the split from Dreamworks and Paramount, with re-shoots occurring in 2011. You could've released this as a TV special, or literally any medium that isn't film, because this isn't something you put in theaters. So how does the plot work? Apparently getting a splinter from Bodhi Tree and some sort of handshake between Murphy and a guru (played quite blandly by Curtis), with the tree appearing outside his place that night. Okay, so leaves fall out every time he talks, I get that. But why does it happen when he write notes? Or when he gives it a certain gesture but not other gestures he uses? Why only a thousand? Do tree have so little leaves, or is it the universe giving him a raw deal? Heck, why not just write a note down and carry it with you? I doubt you could lose more words that way considering you're showing the same note around to people. Obviously this is a movie...but who needed this film? Who wanted this? What interested the people who made this into doing a film bereft of any kind of spirit? How did Murphy think this was a good idea? It isn't even a movie with an exploitative kind of spirituality or drama aspect, it's a movie that flat out stinks. When my mom asked about the movie, she wondered why he didn't just use sign language. My response (which pretty much epitomizes the film) was that I don't think any of these characters would even know what sign language is. This does have one benefit: it's a brilliant time waster.

I can't believe I actually wrote so many words about this pile of minutes compiled into a film that crashed and burned without any kind of fire to it. It's actually quite funny. I've done essays for college that had more words, but this is far more strange to do (plus this isn't up to the kind of quality junk I write). To reward you, let me present some things you can do around this holiday month (if there's more than one holiday in the month, it's a holiday month, okay) that are better than this movie. In the holiday spirit, here's twelve:

1. Write your own text show! (I hear you can make it a hobby)
2. Survey ideas for Christmas gifts (no, your social media posts to them count)
3. Try weird food combinations and show your friends (my personal favorite: ketchup on anything)
4. Play a bunch of music choices and literally never break out of the pattern for weeks (no joke)
5. Try wearing two ties (it'll really impress your friends)
6. Try passing a semester (or three) of college (done, without much fear by me)
7. Hang out with friends (who else would you hang out with, a date?)
8. Somehow write reviews for over 100 films in a calendar year for the first time in two years (yup)
9. Make references to cities you have a soft spot for (hello, Buffalo!)
10. Make lists in order to try and be funny (is it working?)
11. Use spell check more often, especially when trying to convey what movie to see
12. Run parallel to an 5K run (been there, done that. Why pay money to wear a Santa suit?)

Literally any of these things would be better than seeing this film. The final word count (including the rating listed after this count): 1000 words. Seriously.

Overall, I give it 2 out of 10 stars.

December 27, 2012

Movie Night: Live Free or Die Hard.


Review #320: Live Free or Die Hard.

Cast
Bruce Willis (John McClane), Justin Long (Matthew Farrell), Timothy Olyphant (Thomas Gabriel), Mary Elizabeth Winstead (Lucy Gennero-McClane), Maggie Q (Mai Linh), Kevin Smith (Frederick "Warlock" Kaludis), Cliff Curtis (Miguel Bowman), and Jonathan Sadowski (Trey) Directed by Len Wiseman.

Review
302 Reviews (#014, #016, #018) after the last Die Hard (With the two films having a twelve year gap) film, I wondered if this would be just as good as the last three. I was right. It's essentially a standalone installment, not carrying much from the other three (Save for McClane and his daughter), but the film still has a feel from the others, which is a good thing. And the best part? Willis does a great job once again, commanding over the film and delivering lines that actually made me laugh. His character goes trough a lot, with blood and wounds all through out him, much like the last three. It's a split decision over if Long's character is either annoying or slightly beneficial. I pick the middle. He's a bit grating, but he's not the Chris Tucker of partners. The two do have some good lines together (*After McClane jumps out a car that later hits a helicopter, which actually is one of the moments of awesome moments (for me anyway)* You just killed a helicopter with a car!" "I was out of bullets", *McClane is standing next to a Boba Fett cut out* "What, like, you a big fan of the Fett?" "No. I was always more of a Star Wars guy"), and while the partner thing has been done before in Die Hard with a Vengeance with Samuel L. Jackson, this doesn't feel very off. The action is good, keeping the entertainment value at good levels, and keeping itself in check. Olyphant is an alright villain, definitely not the best, but still a useful threat. (Strange fact: It was originally called Die Hard 4.0) Overall, it's a good film (for what it's worth), that satisfies anyone wanting more Die Hard (Fun fact: There's actually a fifth film coming out soon called A Good Day to Die Hard. Heh.), or some good fun. I will only say this once, and for the sake of the film it works, so here you go (for anyone wanting some more quotes): Yippee-Ki-Yay, Motherfucker.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.