Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World.

Review #1627: Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World.

Cast: 

Russell Crowe (Captain Jack Aubrey), Paul Bettany (Dr. Stephen Maturin, Surgeon), James D'Arcy (1st Lt. Tom Pullings), Edward Woodall (2nd Lt. William Mowett), Chris Larkin (Capt. Howard, Royal Marines), Max Pirkis (Blakeney, Midshipman), Jack Randall (Boyle, Midshipman), Max Benitz (Calamy, Midshipman), Lee Ingleby (Hollom, Midshipman), Richard Pates (Williamson, Midshipman), Robert Pugh (Mr. Allen, Master), Richard McCabe (Mr. Higgins, Surgeon's Mate), Ian Mercer (Mr. Hollar, Boatswain), Tony Dolan (Mr. Lamb, Carpenter), and David Threlfall (Preserved Killick, Captain's Steward) Directed by Peter Weir (#960 - The Year of Living Dangerously, #1185 - Witness, and #1519 - The Truman Show)

Review: 

"Peter Weir's film is brilliant. An exacting, detail oriented, epic tale of fidelity to Empire & service, regardless of the cost. Incredible cinematography by Russell Boyd & a majestic soundtrack. Definitely an adults movie." - Russell Crowe

The sea epic is a tough task to get right, when you think about it. This is a film that spends over 80% of its time on the water that is an interesting curiosity: a booming studio epic that received notice from audiences but stands on its own sealegs as a stand-alone adventure (in other words, a film that a studio liked in counting the profits but not like all the way to go back again into the well). It's a shame too, because it ended up overshadowed by a certain other film involving ships and spectacle in the same year that inspired a franchise despite being adapted from a theme park ride (Pirates of the Caribbean). With this one, it is a loose adaptation of the Aubrey-Maturin series (named for the two main focuses in a ship captain and naval surgeon/spy, respectively), a collection of works done by Patrick O'Brien (who reportedly wrote his works with ink and quill). The British author wrote twenty complete novels over the course of thirty years (with an incomplete work at the time of O'Brian's death in 2000 being released four years later). The script, written by Peter Weir and John Collee, takes elements from several novels of the series, ranging from the first novel in Master and Commander to The Far Side of the World. The series was noted for their attention to detail with naval jargon alongside the depiction of numerous events that occur in the 19th century (primarily with the Napoleonic Wars), with O'Brien drawing from the exploits of commanders such as Horatio Nelson alongside research of The Naval Chronicle that dealt with detail about the lives and battles involving members of the Royal Navy.

What can one expect for a film that starts with a opening text that describes the ocean as a battlefield? Quite a bit, actually. We have a film that took measures to recreate a man-of-war alongside having a replica mounted on gimbals in a large tank to go with digital rendering (most notably with the USS Constitution, turned into a French vessel - incidentally, The Fortune of War, O'Brien's sixth work in the series, depicts the ship in battle) that certainly compares relatively well with Weir's previous output of work that was quite eclectic (this was his 13th film, with his next one being seven years later). Weir (who also served as a producer) knows what he wants from his actors when it comes to trying to make an engaging spectacle of leadership and camaraderie come across without lingering on cliché or seeming dull with its 138 minute run-time. It certainly is easy to see why an actor like Crowe or anyone with his flair for adventure would enjoy this film, because it appeals to the curiosity that a youth or an adult can have about history or strategy in leadership (in that sense, one could think about Star Trek, since it took inspiration from another sea-faring novel series just as famous with C. S. Forester's Horatio Hornblower). Granted, it isn't the kind of film that can be digested for those lacking patience or perhaps something more than the sea (such as say a smart mouthed pirate), but it has a great look and sound that really will make one believe they are in a 19th century ship trying to do the impossible. I don't think it sells each and every breath-taking moment, but it certainly will prove enough for those with the disposition for it. Crowe certainly grabs the lead role with the confidence required to make the film his own without suffocating it with brutish cliché or being overwhelmed by the sense of being the man of the moment that could be thought of as having the aura of a performance from a war film (besides, one of the most famous lines about every man expected to their duty for England came from Nelson). Bettany follows along with useful enterprise, one with dutiful interest that goes with Crowe in interesting sync with each other in terms of friendship that makes for a few stirring moments of interest, with the operation sequence (involving surgery on oneself to the look of his friend) probably being the best highlight. The rest of the actors do well in filling the spirit of what is needed in a ship adventure: stories to tell besides being on the cannon or clutching a post in water, whether that means strong quiet types like D'Arcy or youthful presences like Benitz and Perkins or established elder presence with Innes to carry the tension and leave the film on fine shoulders. One gets to see a rousing sea battle without too much warning for its opening act alongside cat-and-mouse tactics of ship faring and even a bit of time spent in the Galapagos Islands, and it ultimately results in a messy (in the right way) climax between two ships that closes itself with a hint for continuing pursuits in the sea without having to shake your head for it. It proves to be one of the unsung heroes of entertaining epics - interesting for those who like to see details and respect play out in a film on its own terms that leaves it to imagination for adventure that makes a pretty good time for those who seek what it wants to show with good reason.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Firewall.

Review #1168: Firewall.

Cast: 
Harrison Ford (Jack Stanfield), Paul Bettany (Bill Cox), Virginia Madsen (Beth Stanfield), Mary Lynn Rajskub (Janet Stone), Jimmy Bennett (Andy Stanfield), Carly Schroeder (Sarah Stanfield), Robert Forster (Harry Romano), Robert Patrick (Gary Mitchell), Nikolaj Coster-Waldau (Liam), Kett Turton (Vel), Vince Vieluf (Pim), Vincent Gale (Willy), and Alan Arkin (Arlin Forester) Directed by Richard Loncraine.

Review: 
Sometimes the most frustrating films to write words about are the ones that are middling and uninspired in terms of execution and action, where they aren't so much terrible to watch as they are just ones that are neither films that are just fine or just awful - they are okay to watch when bored or without many choices on a weekend, but they aren't something that will fall as anyone's version of a classic to love or mock. Trying to rip into a film like this is basically like trying to be angry at an old dog who kinda messes with how the house looks by putting a bunch of hair on the couch. Firewall passes just as quickly, having nothing too particularly interesting to note besides some mediocre action and okay acting. Supposedly the film was originally going to be called "The Wrong Element", which is certainly a bit of a ridiculous title to say out-loud, but it also seems like a title cliche enough for a film in the 1970s.

Ford is okay, but he doesn't really give too much enthusiasm towards the role besides a slightly gruff frustration, but you would be better off with other Ford movies (as long as it isn't Hollywood Homicide (2003), anyway) at least. Bettany isn't too particularly threatening, playing the villain with a bare presence of menace, particularly since he harms more of his own henchmen than the actual family he's holding in their own house. Actually, the whole group of henchmen aren't really menacing to begin with, and the fact that the one moment where a family member is in danger is because of an allergic cookie makes this especially apparent. I imagine that an actor with a bit more menace (or an improved script that gives off more suspense) would've helped make this seem better. He and Ford don't really play off too greatly together, and their fight at the end isn't really anything too special. The cliches of the tough henchman and sympathetic henchman, along with the kids, are what you would expect. Madsen (playing an architect, which doesn't really have too much impact on the plot - surprised?) is okay, but she seems more annoyed at the presence of these henchmen than anything. The other actors are okay, but no one really stands out too interestingly. At 105 minutes, it isn't a painful chore, but there are certainly better ways to use your time up than this, particularly since the climax is just okay at best. The plot goes through the typical motions one would see coming for a heist film while having a few twists that come and go just as quickly. Strangely enough, the film was slightly edited upon release to DVD. One notable edit was different angles and shots for the ending, while adding two cop cars that arrive at the end of the film. I suppose this is to make the ending seem less abrupt, although it doesn't really change that fact too much. Once the final fight happens (and ends) between Ford and Bettany, that is pretty much it for the movie - I'm sure that would've been just fine in an older film, but it just feels amusing that the film kinda just ends. It isn't the kind of movie that will inspire long rants or long defenses of where it goes, being the kind of filler film or footnote in someone's career. On the whole, the film isn't too particularly exciting nor suspenseful, but it is at the very least tolerable enough to pass without torturing the senses too much.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Solo: A Star Wars Story.

Review #1095: Solo: A Star Wars Story.

Cast: 
Alden Ehrenreich (Han Solo), Woody Harrelson (Tobias Beckett), Emilia Clarke (Qi'ra), Donald Glover (Lando Calrissian), Thandie Newton (Val), Paul Bettany (Dryden Vos), Phoebe Waller-Bridge (L3-37), Joonas Suotamo (Chewbacca), Erin Kellyman (Enfys Nest), Jon Favreau (Rio Durant), and Linda Hunt (Lady Proxima) Directed by Ron Howard (#301 - How the Grinch Stole Christmas, #546 - Cinderella Man, and #1085 - Willow)

Review: 
Note: Gee, seems like I am a bit late to the party - if there ever was one for Solo. Honestly, timing issues was the reason for the delay in doing this film (which was also the case with Upgrade). Hopefully you will enjoy this review in any case.

Admittedly, the world of Star Wars is vast with the amount of worlds and characters it can show over the course of the numerous movies that have been released since the original in 1977, and I suppose it only makes sense to make a prequel, since this franchise loves to do that trend every so often, particularly in recent times. The fact that this is the fourth Star Wars film in the past three years does tend to inspire the idea that perhaps the franchise is suffering a bit of fatigue with storytelling. The debacle involving the replacing of Phil Lord and Christopher Miller midway into production with Ron Howard taking over directorial duties and having reshoots doesn't help matters, either. I am reminded of its prequel cousin Rogue One (#888), which mostly utilized characters we had no recollection of prior to its release, and it made the most of what it wanted to tell with a tinge of seriousness and a fair story.

With this film, there is a share of old and new characters, and the appeal of the movie depends on how much appeal they bring to something that generally hits more than it misses, but it also will depend on how you see Ehrenreich in the main role. There is no understating how Harrison Ford managed to make this charming rogue of a character come to life through the four films he appeared in, and it may not be something you can just have someone take over and have a smooth transition. Needless to say, Ehrenreich is a bit shaky at times in this role, particularly around the first half (and any sort of close scene with Clarke), but I feel that he does tend to seem a bit more comfortable around halfway through, and he manages to handle the climax fairly well. Perhaps a better actor would've served the film better, but the best thing that can be said for him is that at least the writing for the character tends to compliment him enough to where it isn't a terrible experience to see it played out. Harrelson plays his mentor role with some relish that make the part seem alive at times, sticking out fine in his time on screen. Clarke is okay, but I feel that she is slightly underdone by the writing on her character, which isn't always consistent to make her seem interesting to follow at times, with the chemistry between her and Ehrenreich not being particularly too great (although I won't say it kills the film's spirit at least). In a film about one charming rogue, it is the appearance of another charming rogue that steals the show, as Glover captures the character originally played by Billy Dee Williams without any sort of doubt, capturing the cool nature of why he is compelling to follow with from his first appearance in the movie. He's fun to watch interact with the others, and I suppose I really did need a scene with a room dedicated to all of his capes that he wears. Newton is okay in her brief time on screen, with Bettany proving to be a fair adversary. Waller-Bridge is fine, although some of her bits can prove to test one's patience with a droid with moxie - for better or worse. The rest of the cast prove just fine to watch. The action sequences and effects are finely done, as one might expect, and the movie tends to move at a fair pace, without becoming bogged by cliches or too much predictability. The writing by Jonathan and Lawrence Kasdan (who had served as writer for films involving the character in The Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi, and Star Wars: The Force Awakens) has a fair amount of focus to making sure that the characters do tend to have interactions with each other that prove fruitful and occasionally amusing, even if tends to tread familiar lines, although at least it doesn't plod too much through its 135 minute run-time. Is it an entirely necessary movie? I suppose it depends on if you really wanted (or needed) to see an adventure of a younger version of a character you (probably) liked. The film likely won't win any new converts into the Star Wars mythos, but it will prove to be satisfactory entertainment for people looking for a good adventure, and I think that is likely the best hope one can have when watching a film sometimes.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Captain America: Civil War.

Review #796: Captain America: Civil War.

Cast
Chris Evans (Steve Rogers / Captain America), Robert Downey, Jr. (Tony Stark / Iron Man), Scarlett Johansson (Natasha Romanoff / Black Widow), Sebastian Stan (Bucky Barnes / Winter Soldier), Anthony Mackie (Sam Wilson / Falcon), Don Cheadle (James "Rhodey" Rhodes / War Machine), Jeremy Renner (Clint Barton / Hawkeye), Chadwick Boseman (T'Challa / Black Panther), Paul Bettany (Vision), Elizabeth Olsen (Wanda Maximoff / Scarlet Witch), Paul Rudd (Scott Lang / Ant-Man), Emily VanCamp (Sharon Carter), Tom Holland (Peter Parker / Spider-Man), Frank Grillo (Brock Rumlow / Crossbones), William Hurt (Thaddeus "Thunderbolt" Ross), Daniel Brühl (Helmut Zemo), and Martin Freeman (Everett K. Ross) Directed by Anthony and Joe Russo (#571 - Captain America: The Winter Soldier)

Review
One could make the argument that you could make a guess as to what will happen in the movie given the seemingly never ending progression of the Marvel Cinematic Universe from phase to phase, year after year. But I always try to go into these movies with at least some sort of open mind and try to see if I will enjoy what are currently the best made movies of this generation. The case still stands true with Civil War. While I think that Winter Soldier was a slightly better movie in terms of plot, Civil War manages to keep the entertainment flow going with enough action, charm, and bits of interesting discussion. It is hard to not compare this with the other film (#788 - Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice) released earlier in the year about superheroes fighting against each other, but it is evident that this film did the better job in the departments that matter most: Setting up the conflict that leads to a fight and the actual fight itself. The progression of these films mean that one can see the layers of disagreement through the main two leads and actually emphasize with both sides (for the most part) and their viewpoints.

Sure, you can pick a side, but the movie marches on regardless, with expert juggling of all of these characters also being a key benefit. The villain this time around isn't easily apparent, but his motivations are least coherent enough, tying in well to the theme of the movie, involving the collateral damage that the Avengers leave in their battles (which while sounding like a no-brainer does make a bit of sense in the film). The usual castmates are excellent, with Evans and Downey being excellent main leads. Boseman and Holland are our new additions to the main cast, and they both make excellent impressions, with the latter (who is barely older than I am) especially standing out, with all the wise cracks one would expect from Spider-Man. Like the other Marvel movies before it, there is a certain level of fun amidst all of the mayhem, which makes up for a 2 and a half hour run time, although it certainly doesn't feel that long. Civil War manages to do its job effectively while not over-stuffing itself too much, and I certainly enjoyed it enough.

For reference, this is #23 in my (seemingly longrunning) Theater Saga, this time with friends, with this experience being pretty good.

Countdown: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Iron Man 3.

Review #396: Iron Man 3.

Cast
Robert Downey, Jr. (Tony Stark/Iron Man), Gwyneth Paltrow (Pepper Potts), Don Cheadle (James Rhodes/Iron Patriot), Guy Pearce (Aldrich Killian), Rebecca Hall (Maya Hansen), Ben Kingsley (Trevor Slattery), Stephanie Szostak (Ellen Brandt), James Badge Dale (Eric Savin), Jon Favreau (Happy Hogan), Ty Simpkins (Harley), Paul Bettany (J.A.R.V.I.S.), William Sadler (President Ellis) and Miguel Ferrer (Rodriguez) Directed by Shane Black.

Review
In Review #372, I reviewed 42, but this was never the original purpose. I went to the movie theater (big shock, I actually got out of the house), and because Iron Man 3 was sold out, so I picked 42 on the spot. 42 was a fine film, but it always bugged me that I missed Iron Man 3 on that day. 37 days later, I went to the movie theater to go see Iron Man 3, to complete the cycle of the Iron Man films I've reviewed (#135 - Iron Man, #334 - Iron Man 2) and to see if Shane Black could do a good job directing as he does writing (He screenwrote #355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, and #357 - The Last Boy Scout) for a film like this. So was it worth the wait? Yeah, pretty much. Robert Downey, Jr does a great job once again, evolving the character more, but still keeping just like we like Stark. Paltrow works well with Downey, given the amount of screen time, which is alright. Cheadle does well, consistant as always. Guy Pearce (Who I never had heard of until this film) does a fine job, not too bad a villain. As these films evolve, the villains get harder to beat, a bit more detailed after a while, which works well. I liked Ty Simpkins, not a bad child actor overall. Kingsley is allright, even if I think he's a bit underused for the film. The action works well, and the level of spectacle is at an all time high. The story flows allright, not doing too bad. This film is slightly better than Iron Man 2, not better than the first film, but still a good way to continue this film series. I do wonder if there will be a fourth one though. But at least now my..movie journey is complete. Countdown to 400 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4...

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Iron Man 2.

Review #334: Iron Man 2.

Cast
Robert Downey, Jr. (Tony Stark/Iron Man), Gwyneth Paltrow (Pepper Potts), Don Cheadle (James Rhodes), Scarlett Johansson (Natasha Romanoff), Sam Rockwell (Justin Hammer), Mickey Rourke (Ivan Vanko), Samuel L. Jackson (Nick Fury), Jon Favreau (Happy Hogan), Clark Gregg (Phil Coulson), John Slattery (Howard Stark), Garry Shandling (Stern), and Paul Bettany (J.A.R.V.I.S.) Directed by Jon Favreau (#135 - Iron Man)

Review
This is the tenth Marvel film reviewed here (X-Men, X2, X-Men: The Last Stand, Fantastic Four, Rise of the Silver Surfer, Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, The Avengers), the fifth in the Marvel film Universe that has been taking place the last few years. This is the sequel to Iron Man (Obviously), but does it hold up to its predecessor? In some ways, yes. Downey does a fine job once again, keeping that distinct, yet fun personality. Paltrow and Downey mesh well once again, and Cheadle (though not the same actor from the first film) works well into the film. And then there is the villain. Rourke is good, but I feel that the film doesn't focus on him enough. While the first film had a villain that gradually came to be only in the end, there was a feeling for that character. And yes there is another villain (sort of), but it's not exactly a feel of a villain. But oh well, the action is still entertaining and it doesn't really have other real big flaws. While it may not be as good as the first, it still is good enough to work out in the end.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Iron Man.

Review #135: Iron Man.

Cast
Robert Downey, Jr (Tony Stark/Iron Man), Terrence Howard (James "Rhodey" Rhodes), Jeff Bridges (Obadiah Stane), Shaun Toub (Yinsen), Gwyneth Paltrow (Virgina "Pepper" Potts), Faran Tahir (Raza), Paul Bettany (J.A.R.V.I.S.), Leslie Bibb (Christine Everhart), and Clark Gregg (Phil Coulson) Directed by Jon Favreau.

Review
Normally, I do not use some words to describe films here, because they don't feel right to use in that context. But I think this is an exception. In a word, this film is...Awesome. The acting is good, with Downey and Bridges doing the best jobs of this film. The action is good, with a story that changes from one act to another, along the style. The directing is good, with an alright climax that sets everything in motion, such as setting for the sequel, and setting up the arc that would lead to the Avengers, with two of which that already have been reviewed in Thor (#041) and Captain America: The First Avenger (#060).

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.