Showing posts with label Djimon Hounsou. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Djimon Hounsou. Show all posts

May 28, 2021

A Quiet Place Part II.

Review #1683: A Quiet Place Part II.

Cast: 
Emily Blunt (Evelyn Abbott), Cillian Murphy (Emmett), Millicent Simmonds (Regan Abbott), Noah Jupe (Marcus Abbott), Djimon Hounsou (Man On Island), John Krasinski (Lee Abbott), and Scoot McNairy (Marina Man) Directed by John Krasinski (#1073 - A Quiet Place)

Review: 
Honestly, I don't really think much about a sequel to a modern movie. Really, think about this for a second here from a guy who still likes to look upon what interesting movie can sit on the shelf for the next time being. I had to wonder just how weird that might seem from looking in my archives about the ratio of original to "adaptation" in the films I saw in the last big year for movies in the theater: 2019. That year saw 31 movies seen mostly in theater-form but ended up having just half that was actually based on original material. Ah but one really wants to think about the year before that with 2018, and that is how we get to A Quiet Place, which was one of the few original ideas to really sit on my "conventional" radar, and it might have actually been the best horror flick I saw that year (with a year for Hereditary and Halloween, the argument could be a tough one for each). It shouldn't be forgotten that the original script had been done by Bryan Woods and Scott Beck, for which John Krasinski (who had two comedy-dramas to his credit with Brief Interviews with Hideous Men (2009) and The Hollars (2016), incidentally) had read that script and found it appealing; he would end up enlisted by Paramount Pictures to re-write the script and direct the movie. A Quiet Place ended up as an interesting movie because it wasn't quite a gimmick movie that one might think of it (besides, there are quite a few movies that don't have much dialogue if one wants to spur their memory, such as All is Lost (2013)). Sure, the creatures are ones that rely on sound to stalk their prey (with a loud bustling modern world, good luck), but it was also a deep family movie. With the success of the film, rumblings for a sequel did not take too long to bubble to the surface, for which Krasinski would write and direct that had its premiere on March 8 of 2020 that was meant to be released into theaters twelve days after that, two years after the original release (the reason for this recap is mostly for my memory, but also because I can re-iterate my one pet peeve for any horror movie that is released in the spring. Simply put, get your horror priorities in the fall where it belongs, but 2020 has some stretching grounds). Fourteen months later, here we are with a sequel.

Did I mention my surprise about a sequel? Honestly, does every horror movie need a follow-up movie? I remember the ending of the first movie just fine, one that had a character with a weapon ready to aim at the creature, having figured out what one figures out in a time of silence and hearing aids. It might be a good omen or a mild harbinger that the opening scene involves a brief glimpse into what the world was before the noise-monsters came, and Krasinski certainly does well with setting the stage for what was and what is to come within the family angle and the key addition of Murphy to the cast. It reminds me of the dubious question one has when it comes to seeing it in a big theater or not, in that a movie depending on folks getting away unheard is best seen in a big screen but without paying too much attention to too much crowd noise (such as...popcorn?). But hey, one can watch movies with subtitles from around the world, so why stop now? I think most of this paragraph is trying to hide the easiest point: it just isn't as good as the first film. It is not so much that it isn't scarier than before, or even so much because the acting isn't as good, because on a technical level it works pretty good. But really, think hard about this: it has the same problem in rhythm of continuation that seems comparable to Halloween II (1981). Roll with me on this for a moment. Both movies take off right from where the last one ended with the bare hint of a follow-up, and both find themselves with a narrative that splits the characters up, and both probably try to one-up the level of terror from before a bit too much (sure, one movie has a needle jabbed into a sensitive spot, but this movie has someone get their foot into a bear trap, so am I really pulling your goat too much?). Ah, but here's the problem: At least Halloween II didn't feel like it was begging for more at the end, and it seemed to have more stakes involved with its climax for the characters left at the end (I doubt that A Quiet Place will turn into a movieblob of a franchise like Halloween, but apparently a spin-off is in development). Weird twists may reign true with the older movie, but at least I appreciate its schlock factor more so than a movie that could be thought of as half-hearted with actually being a sequel. With a run-time of 97 minutes, one can wonder exactly how A Quiet Place Part II will do with the passage of time, or at least when considered in the context of the wait that befell it when really the best way to describe it is just "okay". It's an okay movie, filled with a decent cast and some level of terror within the idea of monsters that will just charge and destroy your world like that...and maybe there is still some room for folks to eke out a living. But hey, let's start with the cast and go from there. Murphy certainly plays it exactly to the bone for what is needed in a bleary movie that hints at cynicism, and it is refreshing to see him there and be paired with Simmons. In that regard, Simmons continues well with her performance (done mostly in American Sign Language, as one remembers from before), which serves for a fairly useful time, showing a bit more maturity that is expected - the dynamic between them is almost engaging enough to carry the film. Alas, one doesn't find as much engaging balance on the other side, because Blunt manages an okay performance that can't quite react to the terror as well this time around. Let me put it this way: monsters seem to lose a bit of their effectiveness the more you see them in a sequel, so one has to find a way to make the stakes and drama count, or they will end up seeming as concerned as being in Jaws 2 (1978). Jupe's best scene involves him having a visceral scream after being bear-trapped, really. Hounsou and McNairy make momentary impressions on the coin of societies made after the disaster that relates to water (get it, because the creatures not only are blind but can't swim). They are okay, but inevitability always seems to strike at the points you think will happen but not as many times as possible. Think about it: each movie has six actors (Krasinski is technically seven, but can you count a flashback?), and this doesn't even count the baby (don't get me started on babies in horror movies). I feel that the first film did a better job in handling the bleakness of trying to hold together as a family in a nightmare better than a film that doesn't do much with the idea of trying to expand beyond that, and the climax only seems to serve as a hard nudge for another movie (sure, it closes the narratives similarly, but...), and in general I feel that the movie only has moved narrowly in trying to maintain the scares of creatures that rely on you not talking. It might not fall into the realm of gimmick-making, that is for sure. Inevitability is a tough thing to accept, but the film ultimately proves that it can be okay to be average enough if the attention is built enough to hold it for the masses, for better or worse. If you really want to know what happens when you pull the covers all the way through the bed for the monster, you could do okay here, but just don't be disappointed at where that goes from there.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

September 2, 2020

Gladiator (2000).


Review #1524: Gladiator.

Cast: 
Russell Crowe (Maximus Decimus Meridius), Joaquin Phoenix (Commodus), Connie Nielsen (Lucilla), Oliver Reed (Antonius Proximo), Derek Jacobi (Senator Gracchus), Djimon Hounsou (Juba), Richard Harris (Marcus Aurelius), Ralf Möller (Hagen), Tommy Flanagan (Cicero), David Schofield (Senator Falco), John Shrapnel (Senator Gaius), Tomas Arana (General Quintus), Spencer Treat Clark (Lucius Verus), and David Hemmings (Cassius) Directed by Ridley Scott (#100 - Blade Runner, #530 - Alien, #739 - The Martian, and #1076 - Thelma & Louise)

Review: 
"I'm a yarnteller. My job is to engage you as much as I can and as often as I can. I love the process and still continue to adore the process, actually. I don't get attached to anything. I'm like a good antique dealer. I'm prepared to sell my most valuable table."

A director of many trades in genre can be a valuable voice worth seeing their vision. In the case of Ridley Scott, he has managed to do a variety of interesting films within science fiction, adventure, and drama. After all, Scott started with a historical drama in The Duellists (1977), a culmination of having spent years making television commercials in his native United Kingdom and graduation from the Royal College of Art (where he made his only short in 1965 in Boy and Bicycle). One surely must hope to find inspiration in paintings when it comes to creating something of their own. In this case, it was the painting Pollice Verso (Gérôme) by Jean-Léon Gérôme that was shown by producers to Scott that inspired him to do the film before they even handed him a script, as he felt that image spoke to him of the glory and evil of the Roman Empire that interested him in its duality of grace and savagery. There were three writers credited for the film, with David Franzoni having the initial pitch that became the first draft of the script done in 1998, which was inspired by Daniel P. Mannix's 1958 novel Those About to Die alongside reading history about Roman emperors while doing travelling across the world. Scott and Franzoni looked into films besides the traditional "sword and sandal" movies of the past, such as All Quiet on the Western Front (1930) while citing Ben-Hur (1959) and Spartacus (1960) as influences on his youth Numerous re-writes would be done during the production, with even cast members providing input. A second writer was brought in with John Logan that dealt mostly with the first act and increasing Maximus' motivation through the death of his family. William Nicholson was brought in a little later on in order to make the main character more diplomatic.

There is a mix of history and fiction as one could expect from an epic that wants to stick out from previous films of its kind like The Fall of the Roman Empire (1964). For example, Maximus is fictional but is inspired by several figures of history. Commodus really was a loon who actually fought in the arena, although his end was strangulation by Narcissus (which was the name the first draft used for its lead). Of course it still quibbled enough with clothing and weaponry that one historical consultant hired for the film quit. I guess for me it is like Titanic (1997), with its attempts at sweeping away quibbles of history with intensity and ambition, which may work better or worse depending on one's preference for sword combat over romance (which is the case for me). The Colosseum is shown here as a mix of fragmented reconstruction of the first tier of the famed building for filming in Malta while using CGI (as done by The Mill) to finish the rest. Other effects to note involve composited tigers on bluescreen, mixing real and CGI for crowds, and a digital body double for Reed after his death in May of 1999 (at the age of 61) before his scenes were all finished.

Sure, Crowe (known previously for rising roles in Australia and abroad) may have had his trials and tribulations with handling a main role that requires brooding intensity and a tough hand without an immediately satisfactory script to start. But he manages to do well here, hefting the film along with dignity that commands our curiosity in resonating stature that handles a sword and others quite well as a noble warrior. Phoenix delivers a great intensity on the other side of things, one hungry for power and love with the talent required to make his presence quite convincing in all that is needed, particularly when it comes to the final battle between the two of them. Nielsen accompanies the proceedings with decent results in what is needed when doing a double act of protector and advocate with care. Reed does well with a crucial segmented role, capturing gravitas with appropriate gruffness required. Jacobi and Hounsou each lend a bit of measured interest to the proceedings within bureaucracy and combat, while Harris lends momentary experience suited for the first quarter of the film.

Undeniably, this could have been a long slog at 155 minutes with a lesser director (while also perhaps being thought of as a worse Braveheart (1995), as opposed to just being thought of as at least close to its level). But with Scott here, he manages to cultivate a tale of vengeance and what it means to be a man of the people in the time of mob rule that generally hits the mark fine. What we have is a film that blazes through brutality and spectacle without too many stumbles in plot detailing, where the experience of believing one to be entertained or wincing in feeling like one is in Rome is likely enough to win over a few narrative stumbles. On the whole, I quite enjoyed the film for what it aspired to do in a sword-and-sandal epic with capturing excitement and the terror that could come from making a mythic tale of Rome. Scott and the cast do well enough with capable effects and music to back them up enough to inspire further films in the decade. If it doesn't quite reach the peaks of the great sword films of the past, it at least does its part in setting a new century on a good start for film with worthwhile ambition.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Here we are again, the ninth edition of Tribute to the Decades. We welcome the 21st century with 30 films for the month, which I hope you will enjoy.

April 11, 2019

Shazam!


Review #1207: Shazam!

Cast: 
Asher Angel (Billy Batson), Zachary Levi (Shazam), Mark Strong (Dr. Thaddeus Sivana), Jack Dylan Grazer (Freddy Freeman), Djimon Hounsou (Wizard), Faithe Herman (Darla Dudley), Grace Fulton (Mary Bromfield), Ian Chen (Eugene Choi), Jovan Armand (Pedro Peña), Marta Milans (Rosa Vasquez), Cooper Andrews (Victor Vasquez), and John Glover (Mr. Sivana), with Adam Brody (Super Hero Freddy), Meagan Good (Super Hero Darla), Michelle Borth (Super Hero Mary), Ross Butler (Super Hero Eugene), and D. J. Cotrona (Super Hero Pedro) Directed by David F. Sandberg.

Review: 
Time for a bit of story time, since I felt it seemed interesting enough in regards to Shazam and his history.

Shazam! certainly had a unique path to entering the worlds of comic books and film. The success of heroes such as Superman and Batman in their respective line of comics inspired Fawcett Comics to try and make their own respective hero, with Captain Marvel being created in 1939. Creators Bill Parker and C. C. Beck wanted to deliver a hero that would rely on folk-tales and myths more than pulp - Shazam after all is an acronym for the six figures who gave power to the hero originally known as Captain Marvel: Solomon, Hercules, Atlas, Zeus, Achilles, and Mercury. In 1941, Republic Pictures released the film serial Adventures of Captain Marvel (1941), becoming the first film depiction of a superhero. While future films did not follow in the next seven decades, a television series was done in 1974 involving Filmation. It should be noted that DC Comics did not find the hero to be particularly original, filing lawsuits against both Fawcett Comics and Republic Pictures for copyright infringement in 1941 due to what they saw as similarities between Superman and Captain Marvel. There were verdicts and appeals that followed over the next decade, but Fawcett eventually gave up publishing the hero in 1953, fourteen years after the character's birth. In 1972, DC brought back the property; by this point, Marvel had acquired the trademark and started their own series of Captain Marvel comic books. The origin that the film utilizes for Batson is from more recent publications (as opposed to the newsboy sleeping in a subway station of the original) while also having inspiration from Big (1988). In any case, it is obvious fairly quickly that this is aiming for light charm in a year surrounded by heroes and occasional origin stories.

The obvious thing to say is that this is a wonderful hero film. It doesn't fall into the trap of needing high stakes or overwrought drama but instead relies on charm and humor along with a mostly effective story headlined by Angel, Levi, and Strong. Angel is worthy enough for us to want to follow along with on his path of discovery, never seeming too distant or out-of-touch for us to care about - in essence, he's a kid we can watch grow just as the movie does. Levi has the task of acting as a kid in an adult's body (complete with a whole suit and such), and he rolls with it with ease, having as much fun as one probably would have when trying to find who they are beneath a flashy suit and self promotion. Strong is just as adept in serving as the arch nemesis in part because he seems quite creepy enough to pull his scheme to completion.  He plays the bitter yet brilliant foe with relish that makes one yearn for more from him. Grazer works just fine, serving as the one to play a bit of second fiddle "manager" to Angel that helps deliver some chuckles, such as when he and Levi both realize his immunity to bullets and proceed to want to get the would-be robbers to do it again on camera, but now targeted on the face. Hounsou does just fine with his purpose of crackling the plot along with some magic with a voice fit for a wise tiring wizard. The other members of the cast aren't given too much to really do until the climax, but nobody sticks out as a deterrent to the enjoyment, occasionally serving for a chuckle. The film spends the chunk of its first half to try and give story to both its lead character and villain. Both have a key choice they had to make as children and where they go from there. It carefully balances its act to try and not tire patience prior to the arrival of its main card of its title hero. It achieves the goals it sets out to do by not stretching itself too thin with too many subplots or characters and keeps things on a routine if not comfortable level. The scenes involving Shazam finding his powers can certainly give a jolt of astonishment. I also found the Sins to be pretty interesting to look at, and they do seem creepy enough without making the movie seem completely confused on where it is going. Watching enough of these type of films makes some of the film's turns for its resolutions come off as more familiar and expected than probably imagined, but at least there isn't anything here that tries to do a take off of ill-advised narrative decisions. The climax serves the film decently in getting some thrills and chuckles without becoming too weighted down in trying to linger for too long, although a 132 minute run-time perhaps could have been trimmed a bit. In any case, the best that can be said for this film is that it is a wildly entertaining superhero film, just as well to watch alongside other features such as Wonder Woman (2017) or Aquaman (2018) that sticks out for its abundance of light charm and energy. I certainly look forward to any future installments involving this character, that is for sure.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

March 18, 2019

Captain Marvel.



Review #1200: Captain Marvel.

Cast: 
Brie Larson (Carol Danvers / Vers / Captain Marvel), Samuel L. Jackson (Nick Fury), Ben Mendelsohn (Talos / Keller), Djimon Hounsou (Korath), Lee Pace (Ronan the Accuser), Lashana Lynch (Maria Rambeau), Gemma Chan (Minn-Erva), Annette Bening (Supreme Intelligence / Mar-Vell / Dr. Wendy Lawson), Clark Gregg (Phil Coulson), and Jude Law (Yon-Rogg) Directed by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck.

Review: 
There have now been 21 films produced by Marvel Studios that is part of their cinematic universe, for which they have managed to set stages for the rise of numerous heroes for the past decade. Just as the era seems to possibly reach its peak with the final Avengers film comes another hero to join the fray, barely a month before said release. The film has certainly taken its time to get to the finish line, moving from an initial script done in 2013 to eventually enlisting a director/writer duo in Fleck and Boden in 2017, who had previously done films such as Mississippi Grind (2015) along with work on television programs. How many times can one make a superhero origin movie full of effects and action held together through a formula that seems as familiar as ever? I find myself liking these type of films just fine, but there is likely a point where the product doesn't resonate as entertainment, and it will likely be when the story and themes can't be held up from its main hero, when one just doesn't care about the stakes. I don't usually re-watch films often, and I can't particularly say that I really go back to these comic book films too much either (regardless of what brand is behind it). Perhaps it would be best to say that while I did find the film to be just fine, I would hope that a future installment manages to give its lead character a bit more conflict, particularly with its main threat.

Granted, there is plenty of galactic action to go around, but it doesn't have as many compelling levels as it probably should. There isn't a bad performance in the bunch, with Larson, Jackson, and Mendelsohn being keys to giving the film a steady balance. Larson does seem at first to be like a blank slate to fill details in gradually, which goes okay. As is the case with most heroes, it is nice to see her put a suit on and beat some enemies, even if the story that surrounds her is just alright for the course. It is nice to see Jackson (albeit with some digitally de-ageing that takes some time to get used to) deliver some enjoyment and a few laughs in a part that feels just fine for a buddy cop movie. Mendelsohn is also fairly amusing to stick around with, particularly when in his human disguise. The other members of the cast are okay, although they don't feel too particularly developed with much to do, such as Law or Bening. At least the 90s references are amusing without being obnoxiously self-aware. Comparing the film to more recent films of its ilk (such as Wonder Woman or Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, for example) does tend to make the film seem a bit average. It is surprising to see how many films can persist on in showing people with their newly found heroic powers and the responsibility that comes with it - some do better with showing conflict and adventure than others. The film takes its 124 minute run-time and runs just fine with showing spectacle while trying to make sure its story has a few connections for its audiences without gasping for relevance, which delivers decent results. It may not be unique with its motivations (or its character types), but it sure pushes itself amiably. This one will check the boxes for people already in line for these kind of movies, and while it may not be as interesting as it could have been (in terms of its story and pace), it is at least something you can take without many regrets.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

August 11, 2014

Movie Night: Guardians of the Galaxy.


Review #626: Guardians of the Galaxy.

Cast
Chris Pratt (Peter Quill/Star-Lord), Zoe Saldana (Gamora), Dave Bautista (Drax the Destroyer), Vin Diesel (Groot), Bradley Cooper (Rocket), Lee Pace (Ronan the Accuser), Michael Rooker (Yondu Udonta), Karen Gillan (Nebula), Djimon Hounsou (Korath), John C. Reilly (Corpsman Rhomann Dey), Glenn Close (Nova Prime), and Benicio del Toro (The Collector) Directed by James Gunn.

Review
When it comes to having a good time at the movie theater, picking a Marvel movie is usually a safe bet. And that rings true once again with this film, which is a real treat. Does it feel like a pastiche of other films? Maybe, maybe not, but I don't care, this...is just a fun movie to watch. The main heroes all work so well because they're not just a team of heroes, they're a team of rouges who are all different, weird, and yet so fun to watch. It surprised that of all the heroes in this film, it's Groot that is just so delightful to watch. Even if he's in the background he still manages to leave an impression. And Vin Diesel has just a few lines to convey his character in voice...and it works. Diesel manages to convey emotion with those lines, though the effects on Groot also help that, and Groot smiling is just fun to watch. The villain is alright, Pace at least does manage to do a good job under all that makeup, and I liked seeing Karen Gillian, she did a pretty good job in a minor role. The effects are really impressive, for both the characters and the action, it's a movie that is amusing but also thrilling as well. The ending credit scene is pretty amusing, movies don't usually end on Howard the Duck, but it sums how zany this movie is, and how enjoyable it is, from it's retro music (that has a purpose) to its characters to its willingness to just have fun. Go see it, you'll most definitely have a good time.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

April 24, 2012

Movie Night: The Island.

Review #129: The Island.

Cast
Ewan McGregor (Lincoln Six Echo/Tom Lincoln), Scarlett Johansson (Jordan Six Delta), Sean Bean (Dr. Merrick), Djimon Hounsou (Albert Laurent), Steve Buscemi (James McCord), and Michael Clarke Duncan (Starkweather Two Delta). Directed by Michael Bay (#057 - Transformers and #058: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen)

Review
This film has Michael Bay directing, so...Minus three points already (I kid, ratings don't go like that). Anyway, the film is an mix of science-fiction films such as Logan's Run and Fahrenheit 451, with a reasonable plot. The acting is good, especially from McGregor, Johansson, Buscemi, and Duncan (being important in the beginning) The beginning is interesting, making you feel invested not for the action (which comes in the second part), but for the actual plot for once. However, the action starts to seep in, and it is mediocre, as we've seen this before and before (and later and later from Bay...), with the plot unraveling a bit, yet the film still works to be an alright film.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.