ALIEN: COVENANT Review

As a human male who wasn't born until 1987, the year after James Cameron's seven-year-later sequel to Ridley Scott's 1979 masterpiece debuted, I was never overly inclined to invest much of my adolescence in Xenomophs or the lore of the talented Ms. Ripley. As someone who would unknowingly be lumped in with the millennial generation I didn't grow up with a fondness for those original films and thus they never became a critical part of the cultural landscape for me until much later in life. It might even be difficult for viewers with older tastes and dated perspectives to understand how such a film as restrained and measured as Alien might play for today's ADD audiences, but despite the fact I didn't end up seeing Scott's original film until a college scriptwriting class doesn't mean I didn't understand the how and why of its effectiveness. Still, because of the life experiences that shaped who I was up until the point when I saw Prometheus in the summer of 2012 I didn't mind that it felt completely different from what Scott had established as his Alien universe in the past. Like with music and most things in life if something works and people crave more of it the artist must find a way to strike a balance between what has come before while also reinventing themselves so as not to repeat the same old shtick over and over again. While many complained about Prometheus for being too heady and not so reliant on thrills or action Scott, along with screenwriters John Logan and Dante Harper, have seemingly course corrected for the sake of the fans with Alien: Covenant as the film more or less meshes what Prometheus started and what fans seemingly wanted in a new Alien movie. That isn't to say it all melds seamlessly or that Covenant is all the better for attempting to strike such a balance, but rather that it wants to have its cake and eat it too. As an individual who has no vested interest in continuing the Alien franchise as it once was, but who dug the hell out of Prometheus, I was slightly disappointed the more philosophical aspects of the film were traded in for more formulaic action beats and scares, but while Covenant may be a safer movie than Prometheus as well as a less effective film than Alien it is still very much an entertaining one that does enough good to earn its place among the ranks of a series that seems to be more well regarded out of nostalgia and a couple strong entries than a consistent quality in the films overall.

Full Trailer for ALIEN : COVENANT

I am among those of the mind that consider Prometheus an astonishing achievement. A careful consideration of some very big questions that is as self-serious as could be, but with valid reasoning. Also, those visuals. The look of Prometheus is one that has stayed with me and has been hard to compete with even in the five plus years since its debut. With this new, full trailer though, we finally get a much better, more immersive look at Alien: Covenant in which Scott seems to be more interested in reprogramming Alien than the continuing adventures of Noomi Rapace’s Elizabeth and Michael Fassbender’s David. Given Covenant finds Fassbender reprising his role as the android and the fact the script comes from John Logan who adapted Hugo and had a hand in writing Skyfall and The Last Samurai I am optimistic there could be enough here to sustain and interest me in this new chapter of the franchise. All of that said, I've never been into the Alien mythos enough to be truly excited for this film, but the casting is intriguing and the reveal of the premise of the mission certainly raises some questions I look forward to finding out the answers to. It definitely seems as if Scott is going more for the horror genre than that of pure science fiction, but while that may reassure most I preferred the direction Prometheus was going rather than the isolated story Alien presented. In the trailer we see the crew of the titular Covenant discover what seems to be an “uncharted paradise” whose only inhabitant is Fassbender's David. As is also made clear, it doesn't seem it takes too long after the crew encounters David that things begin to go horribly wrong and they're forced to find daring ways in which to escape. Still, those visuals. I'll give the trailer that even if I'm still not convinced this will match the hype. Alien: Covenant also stars Katherine Waterston, Billy Crudup, Demián Bichir, Carmen Ejogo, Jussie Smollet, Amy Seimetz, James Franco, Danny McBride, and opens on May 19th, 2017.

First Trailer for ALIEN: COVENANT Starring Michael Fassbender

I am among those of the mind that consider Prometheus an astonishing achievement. A careful consideration of some very big questions that is as self-serious as could be, but with valid reasoning. Also, those visuals. The look of Prometheus is one that has stayed with me and has been hard to compete with even in the four plus years since its debut. And so, while I'm somewhat disheartened by the fact director Ridley Scott decided to go more with a direct prequel to his beloved 1979 film, Alien, rather than more of a sequel to that aforementioned 2012 hit with the follow-up I assume I'll get over it. With Alien: Covenant Scott seems to be more interested in reprogramming that film that started all of this rather than the continuing adventures of Noomi Rapace’s Elizabeth and Michael Fassbender’s David, but given Covenant finds Fassbender reprising his role as the android and the script comes from John Logan who adapted Hugo and had a hand in writing Skyfall and The Last Samurai I am optimistic that there could be enough story here to sustain this new chapter in the franchise. All of that said, I can't say that I'm overly excited for what this first look trailer promises. Sure, it looks like it might be more in the horror genre than that of the pure science fiction one, but while that may reassure most I preferred the direction Prometheus was going rather than the isolated story Alien presented. As far as story is concerned though, it seems we encounter David who is now the sole inhabitant of an “uncharted paradise” which is visited by the crew of the colony ship Covenant. Of course, once the crew arrives on this supposed "uncharted paradise" I'm sure it doesn't take long before things begin to go wrong and the (remaining) crew have to find daring ways in which they might escape. I'm not saying this can't be accomplished in an exciting manner, but I am saying this trailer doesn't do much for me by way of getting me excited for the film. Alien: Covenant also stars Katherine Waterston, Billy Crudup, Demián Bichir, Carmen Ejogo, Jussie Smollet, Amy Seimetz, James Franco, Danny McBride, and opens on May 19th, 2017. 

EQUALS Review

Note: This is a reprint of my review for Equals, which originally ran on September 15, 2015 after seeing it at the Toronto Film Festival. I am publishing it again today as it hits select theaters this weekend.

Man, that Nicholas Hoult really likes himself some Romeo & Juliet stories, doesn't he? If you recall, he made a little subversion of the zombie genre back in 2013 that also borrowed from Shakespeare's doomed story of young lovers. While Warm Bodies at least had the sense to have a sense of humor about itself Equals is not that kind of movie, but instead plays it completely straight allowing it to end up completely boring. From the outset of the film it all feels familiar. One can see where this thing is going from a mile away and I'm not even sure how anyone read Nathan Parker's (Moon) script and thought it was a good idea to make this movie again. Again you ask? Yeah, do you recall a little 2005 Michael Bay film by the name of The Island? Remember how that film was accused of ripping off another movie? Well, I'm sure the makers of the 1979 film, Parts: The Clonus Horror, found inspiration from another source (George Lucas?) and their source before that (George Orwell?). This happens all the time. I'm not saying Equals has done anything wrong as far as copyright infringement goes, but I am saying it feels like they took out the clone aspect of The Island, added in some aspects of The Giver and threw in a third act R & J twist and called it a day. Director Drake Doremus made a nice little examination of young love with his breakout hit in 2011, Like Crazy, but this utopian set version of that story yields nothing fresh or interesting.

First Trailer for EQUALS Starring Kristen Stewart

The first trailer has arrived for director Drake Doremus' (Like Crazy) new science fiction film, Equals, starring Kristen Stewart and Nicholas Hoult. A futuristic love story set in a world where emotions have been eradicated the film is indeed as rote as that description makes it sound with only the aesthetic standing to set it apart. We've seen this story countless times before and trust me when I say Dormeus' take unfortunately offers nothing new on the subject and resorts to a clichéd visual style to relay this age old cautionary tale. I saw the film in Toronto last year and while I like both lead performers the final product felt as if, "they took out the clone aspect of The Island, added in some aspects of The Giver, threw in a third act Romeo & Juliet twist and called it a day. Director Drake Doremus made a nice little examination of young love with his breakout hit in 2011, Like Crazy, but this utopian set version of that story yields nothing fresh or interesting." Needless to say, I wasn't enthralled with the premise nor its execution, but the visual style is at least something genuinely attractive to distract us from the standard story. Reservations aside concerning the actual product, this trailer does an incredibly effective job of selling the love story and the style of it all with hardly any dialogue until the last possible moment. I only wish the actual film might have been been as, well, emotional. Equals also stars Guy Pearce, Bel Powley, Jacki Weaver, Kate Lyn Sheil, Toby Huss with distributor A24 scheduling it for a summer release. You can read my full review from TIFF here.

TIFF 2015: EQUALS Review

Man, that Nicholas Hoult really likes himself some Romeo & Juliet stories, doesn't he? If you recall, he made a little subversion of the zombie genre back in 2013 that also borrowed from Shakespeare's doomed story of young lovers. While Warm Bodies at least had the sense to have a sense of humor about itself Equals is not that kind of movie, but instead plays it completely straight allowing it to end up completely boring. From the outset of the film it all feels familiar. One can see where this thing is going from a mile away and I'm not even sure how anyone read Nathan Parker's (Moon) script and thought it was a good idea to make this movie again. Again you ask? Yeah, do you recall a little 2005 Michael Bay film by the name of The Island? Remember how that film was accused of ripping off another movie? Well, I'm sure the makers of the 1979 film, Parts: The Clonus Horror, found inspiration from another source (George Lucas?) and there source before that (George Orwell?). This happens all the time. I'm not saying Equals has done anything wrong as far as copyright infringement goes, but I am saying it feels like they took out the clone aspect of The Island, added in some aspects of The Giver and threw in a third act R & J twist and called it a day. Director Drake Doremus made a nice little examination of young love with his breakout hit in 2011, Like Crazy, but this utopian set version of that story yields nothing fresh or interesting.

TOP 10 OF 2014

For me, 2014 has been something of a transitional year. A year where my tastes have shifted and my ideas of what makes a lasting film have changed. I wouldn't say I'm necessarily more cynical, but obviously the fact I continue to see more and more films and build a larger pool of knowledge makes it tougher for each individual film to impress me more. That being said, I actually found it easier to craft a top ten list this year than ever before. I've pretty much seen everything I imagine might have a shot at making my list except for maybe Selma (which I won't see until January 7th), but at this point the only year-end awards bait films I'd even consider including in a top fifteen are the likes of Foxcatcher and American Sniper. After repeat viewings one of them might even crack the top ten, but as of right now I feel strongly about the films I've selected. What I've done differently this year is to begin to leverage expectations; I thought this might help the films be more impressive if I didn't go in expecting too much, but even with that state of mind many of them simply met expectations or felt more insignificant than substantial. I don't believe this has made me a snob or prude in any sense as I would still boldly place The Amazing Spider-Man 2 in my top fifteen of the year when it is clearly nothing more than a pure popcorn flick and on top of that, one most critics absolutely hated. For me, Marc Webb's super hero sequel was one of the most entertaining experiences I had at the movies this past year and one I can watch at any time without fearing boredom. My final top ten will likely come off a little more pedigreed given that introduction, but while me liking something such as Spider-Man may make you question my taste just know that I went into every film this year really wanting to like it and the ones that follow are the ones that surprised me with their quality or surpassed every expectation I held for it. Enjoy!

Favorite Films of 2014 So Far...

There have been plenty of solid films come out this year already and we are only halfway through it. I say solid, but in no way does that mean many have been exceptional. It's funny really because in terms of quality this has been one of the better summer movie seasons in recent history. From the straight up, brisk nature of Neighbors to the full on-lampooning of sequels in 22 Jump Street this summers comedies have delivered while both Captain America: The Winter Soldier and X-Men: Days of Future Past have proved to be fine diversions in the super hero genre that seem to be breaking away from the formula that has become standard in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (here's lookin' at you, Thor). We've of course had smaller films that I have garnered a good appreciation for including Jon Favreau's return to small-scale movie-making in Chef and Nicolas Cage's return to actual acting in Joe, but the real surprise has been the typical (Godzilla, Edge of Tomorrow) and atypical (The Fault in Our Stars) summer fare that has really made this year a breeze so far. The two major animated releases have both come extremely close to that exceptional mark as The LEGO Movie is downright hilarious and has a unique take on what could have been a giant commercial while How to Train Your Dragon 2 is a beautifully realized continuation of Hiccup and Toothless' story that deserves to be seen on the big screen. I rather enjoyed Noah as well and look forward to re-visiting that film when it hits home video much in the way I enjoyed Snowpiercer which I saw and reviewed yesterday and you can read about here. Don't get me wrong there have still been plenty of mediocre to less than stellar films this year both in mainstream and arthouse releases (Pompeii and Under the Skin could crawl away and die for all I care), but the following five films are what struck me as either fascinating, substantial or flat-out awesome as I left the theater. Hit the jump to check out my top 5 of 2014 so far...

THE ROVER Review

The definition of rover is a person who spends their time wandering. This interesting, edgy, somewhat vague word that has garnered several interpretations is used here to define a wandering, drifting society. There is one man in particular with whom writer/director David Michôd (Animal Kingdom) is taken with in this transient existence and it is through this hardened and disconnected perspective we come to know the world ten years after it has seemingly collapsed. Everything about the world that Michôd has built through his imagery and his characters keep the outside world unclear and of little concern. This isn't a movie necessarily about anything as much as it is an analysis of what might happen were the structure we've always lived within to fall apart. All systems fail eventually, it is inevitable, but usually when something is perceived as failing it is because something better, more efficient has come along-it will have been superseded. This, unfortunately, is not the case in post-apocalyptic thrillers and while I am hesitant to use that genre classification at all I suppose it fits. The idea of society as we know it failing has always been an interesting idea because the reason something fails typically ties into the reason it was created in the first place. So, when we look at a world without any civilizing influences we begin to wonder what the point of it all was and why we allowed it to mean so much and determine such a portion of our lives, our happiness. Civility is cause for order and without either of them what we have is infrequent chaos and it is within one of these small pockets of havoc that Michôd introduces us to a protagonist, but not necessarily a hero, and sets us out on a journey with no urgent motivation. It isn't the trying to decode this incentive that pulls one into the film though, but instead the characters themselves and why they are who they are, how they have come to be this way and their own realizations of why they feel the need to take the actions they do. The Rover is an unnerving experience in many ways as it is slow, but never tedious. The actions that take place feel as random and authentic as the settings and physicality of the characters that the camera captures while all adding up to a beautifully depressing conclusion about what this life means to us and what our lives mean to others.

HATESHIP LOVESHIP Review

Last summer I watched a film already forgotten by most called Girl Most Likely in which Kristen Wiig essentially portrayed the same person she did in 2011's Bridesmaids. One hates to keep bringing up old news and as much as I and surely many others appreciate Wiig not easily folding and returning to do a Bridesmaids sequel for little more than financial reasons I'd at least hoped she might take another shot at a big studio flick that let her have a good portion of creative control, but since her starring break-out Wiig has done little to further her star in the mainstream save for a few supporting roles and voice work, but mainly she has stuck to the indie/festival circuit scene; a move that can be easily admired, but may force Wiig's leading lady career to run its course quicker than anyone would have anticipated three years ago (and maybe that's not what she wants, fair enough). My point being that even though Wiig could have done as many before her and quickly found her niche through a series of hits and misses she has instead opted for the relatively newer, more credible route of starring in smaller films that not many will see, but for one reason or another will make Wiig feel better about what she is contributing to the arts at the end of the day. And though I may have personally preferred to see Wiig go the big, mainstream route and create a filmography all her own of giant successes and notable titles she has instead amassed a resume of TV show appearances and movies such as Hateship Loveship that show the broad comedian of Saturday Night Live has more to offer than simply being the most ridiculous or outlandish person in the room. In the case of this latest film what we have is a rather droll experience. It is both engaging yet unappealingly odd in the way that we want to become invested in the story because we feel a compassion for Wiig's character, Johanna, but she remains so distant from everyone, never really opening up despite the arc of the narrative focusing on her finding a slight bit of happiness in what feels like an overwhelming world to her fragile self. It is these characteristics that allow Wiig to play a different kind of person than we've seen her as before. There are many things to enjoy, to smile at about the film while also being unusual to the point it seemed I should be cautious about it, keeping my own distance, which ultimately left me feeling somewhere in the middle about the experience as a whole.

IRON MAN 3 Review

When Iron Man 3 opens and Eiffel 65's hit "Blue" from 1999 begins to play as we see the Marvel and Paramount logos flash up on the screen it was clear we were in for a little something different this time around. I haven't read many comic books and out of the ones I have, none of them have ever been an Iron Man comic, but at the end of the day it feels like that if there were a film that was able to get as close to the spirit of its source material (or even the artistic medium originally used for that matter) that it might be this one. Granted, I have nothing to base that on, but it is simply a gut instinct in that the tone of this film is very light in its banter, very quick in its wit, and also more personal at the same time than I ever expected it to be, especially considering the obvious point that it's a massive summer blockbuster. While Iron Man 3 doesn't exactly live up to the expectations I was holding for it, it instead reroutes them and delivers a story that was more on the opposite side of the standard super hero flick spectrum while still containing enough explosions and fight scenes to appease those that go to these kinds of movies expecting nothing more than that. Director Shane Black (Kiss Kiss Bang Bang) takes over for Jon Favreau (who still shows up to play Happy Hogan) and took on writing duties as well and has delivered a very Shane Black-esque script with plenty of self-referential dialogue and a large scale action set piece every twenty minutes or so. I enjoyed the film immensely and found Robert Downey Jr. as good as ever as Tony Stark, but despite all the flash and bang it still felt like there was something missing, or maybe that's just because Captain America, Thor, and The Hulk didn't bother to show up.

LAWLESS Review

There is a line in the film where Tom Hardy's Forrest Bondurant tells his youngest brother Jack (Shia LaBeouf) that they are survivors and that they control the fear and without the fear they are all as good as dead. It is a powerful statement and one that keeps a looming feeling of dread over the entire film. There is something eerily familiar about all the going on's in Lawless but there is a distinctive feeling it is also cutting edge stuff. Walking into the film I expected something a bit more out of the norm than maybe the final film delivered but that is not to say I was not intrigued by the tale of the Bondurant boys and their moonshining business. It is, in itself, a very serious film that has been based on true events documented by Jack Bondurant's grandson Matt in a 2008 novel titled The Wettest County in the World. While the era the film takes place in, prime prohibition 1931, is ripe for all kinds of interesting and exciting storytelling; like its characters Lawless skirts the outside of that world. They do not touch the city where the big name gangsters of the day do their business and create their legends. They instead keep to themselves in small Franklin, Virginia where their name means authority and as Forrest implies they intend to keep it that way, not allowing for folks to see what they truly are. For me, this is where Lawless struck a chord and broke away from the conventional storytelling that otherwise brings the film down a few notches. It is a story of mortality and how, no matter the cause, it will forever effect one's satisfaction with life if they decide to not face that mortality and accept the outcome it has to offer.

Jack Bondurant (Shia Labeouf) tries to impress the
preachers daughter Bertha (Mia Wasikowska).

What at first sucks you into the film though is not these characters who only abide by their own law, but it is instead that setting and the authentic way in which director John Hillcoat's team have evoked the period in which their story takes place. Everything about the documentation of the time period feels nothing short of exactly how it was in that day and age. In ways it is amazing to see how far we have come from the most backwoods of environments but in many ways if you go visit the rural areas of the southern states you can still feel the mentality of that time creeping in through the broken boards and tall trees. It is that type of recognition that lets you know they are doing something right in a film. I love the time period anyway and think anything given such care to depict it honestly deserves my attention thus the reasons I was so anxious to see the film besides its impressive roster of talent. Lawless begins with a scene of the brothers much younger than when we eventually catch up to them but it conveys the dynamic between them so that we may understand the way they will eventually work and how their rank informs their role. Howard (Jason Clarke) is the oldest, he is the enforcer but he is also the one who consumes more than his fair share of the brothers product . While Forrest is plenty able to handle himself in a fight he is also the clear cut leader and manager of the businesses that not only include making and shipping the moonshine but also the small diner and gas station that houses the siblings. On the lower end is Jack who is naturalistic in his runt of the litter status. Jack aspires to be like his brothers, he wants to have as important a hand in their business, he just doesn't seem to have acquired as much of a taste for the brutal.

Jack sets out to take revenge on the new deputy in town
after he strikes out against he and his brothers.

As the brothers are followed around town by folklore and regarded as immortal they are for the most part left alone by the law to do business as they please and everyone seems to have made peace with that. It is in the midst of our nations most notorious crime wave that special deputy Charley Rakes (an almost unrecognizable Guy Pearce) is sent in from the big city of Chicago to cut the Bondurant's and others with similar ways of making a livings profits. Leave it to Forrest to not accept the deal and strike an ongoing fued with the deputy. This mixed with young brother Jack's desire to feel more a part of his brothers gang can only lead to more trouble than any case of moonshine is worth. Throw in a couple of women as love interests for Forrest and Jack and you have yourself a whole melting pot of standard melodrama that you understand the consequences they will face and how it will likely all play out. While it is understood that the plot points Lawless hits are nothing if not typical, as I said earlier it is not necessarily this that mattered to me. What caught me off guard, what took me into the film was that theme of believing in their own legend and the task connected to living up to it. Director Hillcoat who is likely best known for his 2006 film The Proposition (which I haven't seen but I did like his 2009 Cormac McCarthy adaptation of The Road) sets a tone here that carries over the film a sense of purpose that is sometimes needed when the film begins to drag. There is this overlying sense of that fear Forrest talks about that is not only in the townspeople the Bondurant's defy but in themselves. The film allows us to see through what created the brothers persona in the first place. We see them unsure of what to do, we see them fight amongst each other and we see them knocked down, countless times only to regain their footing and do their best to restore the faith in those expectations their reputation has set for them.

The silent, brooding Forrest (Tom Hardy) is able to show
a little more emotion when Maggie (Jessica Chastain) shows up.

For the most part, this inside look into the truth of folklore is due to the caliber of the performances the film has going for it. Not only do both Shia Labeouf and Tom Hardy give commanding turns even if Shia never really feels like he fits in neither with his brothers or the time period (or that accent). Still, he has to be given some kind of appreciation for trying his best to develop a range and become more than a studio wonderboy who bounces from franchise to franchise. He may be miscast as the youngest Bondurant but by the films conclusion we have accepted him in this world and he has our attention. Hardy, for the most part is a brooding, silent beast that only says what needs to be said and leaves the rest up to everyone else to fill out. What matters though in both the character and the performance is the presence that Hardy makes you feel. Forrest does the least amount of anything in the script but he also leaves the biggest impression, he is the one you want to see the camera land on. Gary Oldman also shows up in a few scenes as successful gangster Floyd Banner who serves as a summary for how the outside world operates and allows an important plot point to be realized but little more. He is more or less a cameo in the film than a supporting player. The same could almost be said for Jessica Chastain and Mia Wasikowska who are limited to underdeveloped roles as love interests to Forrest and Jack. The flashiest role in the whole piece goes to Guy Pearce though, a character so over the top he is almost a caricature the time period. Pearce is a more than capable actor though and knows what he's doing and how to play up certain parts and when to bring it down to ground level. The same can be said for the film overall as for the most part it is nothing more than a great looking historical drama, but when it gets brutally down and dirty it sets itself apart and confronts what it really is. If only it did this more consistently it might have lived up to the expectations I had for it the same way the brothers lived up to theirs.

LAWLESS Review

There is a line in the film where Tom Hardy's Forrest Bondurant tells his youngest brother Jack (Shia LaBeouf) that they are survivors and that they control the fear and without the fear they are all as good as dead. It is a powerful statement and one that keeps a looming feeling of dread over the entire film. There is something eerily familiar about all the going on's in Lawless but there is a distinctive feeling it is also cutting edge stuff. Walking into the film I expected something a bit more out of the norm than maybe the final film delivered but that is not to say I was not intrigued by the tale of the Bondurant boys and their moonshining business. It is, in itself, a very serious film that has been based on true events documented by Jack Bondurant's grandson Matt in a 2008 novel titled The Wettest County in the World. While the era the film takes place in, prime prohibition 1931, is ripe for all kinds of interesting and exciting storytelling; like its characters Lawless skirts the outside of that world. They do not touch the city where the big name gangsters of the day do their business and create their legends. They instead keep to themselves in small Franklin, Virginia where their name means authority and as Forrest implies they intend to keep it that way, not allowing for folks to see what they truly are. For me, this is where Lawless struck a chord and broke away from the conventional storytelling that otherwise brings the film down a few notches. It is a story of mortality and how, no matter the cause, it will forever effect one's satisfaction with life if they decide to not face that mortality and accept the outcome it has to offer.

PROMETHEUS Review

To be fair, I may show a bit of favoritism in writing about Prometheus. This is my kind of movie and I was hooked from the beautiful opening shots of the soaring landscapes of a distant, alien planet. Also, to be fair, I should state that I may be one of the few cinema lovers who does not have Ridley Scott's Alien ingrained into my mind as a film I grew up on, I never even considered it one of my favorites. Before refreshing my mind just before screening Prometheus I had only seen the movie that made Sigourney Weaver a star once. So, while many reviews you might read about this film will contain a high level of discussion about how this new film contains DNA of the directors genre-defining sci-fi flick, mine will not. In essence though this aspect feels like nothing more than an afterthought and so the knowledge of those previous films is unnecessary only offering a bit tacked on to appease those who have waited 30 years for the director to re-visit the genre he so generously made contributions to. Prometheus is a monster all its own, with a strand of thinking that goes after what Alien only hinted at. Alien was a minimal sci-fi film, it was elegant in its execution and a slow burn in its pace. Prometheus, on the other hand, while sharing the fine eye for the pacing of its predecessor, also goes beyond the walls of the ship to explore the existential longings of two scientists who believe they may have just solved the mystery of human existence. With such a big question premise there was bound to be some disappointing aspects to the revelations but Scott has concocted a film that is nothing short of an accomplishment in visual wizardry despite fumbling the ball in the final act.

Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron) and Janek (Idris Elba)
watch from the ship as they discover the unthinkable.

We, as human beings, develop belief systems based on basic human needs. We do this to protect ourselves and function in the world. People strive to have happy events occur in their lives while feeling as if we are connected to the world in which we live. We create these systems though in an attempt to understand the world we live in, it provides structure and it helps us understand information so that all of this makes sense. Prometheus asks the question of what if these are all nothing more than self fulfilling prophecies? Are they nothing more than tools to interpret events in a way that fit into those belief systems? That is what I found not only the most engaging about the film, but also the most pleasing. That this large scale film that looks like a summer blockbuster has the balls to meditate on big philosophical questions. It is visually stunning and intellectually stimulating much in the vein of something like The Tree of Life while maintaining a demand that is something closer to that of a Marvel movie. Prometheus approaches these questions with the fact that there is biology somewhere else in our universe, that Earth is not the only planet able to sustain life, even if only in the smallest of organisms. The way in which it chooses to explore these themes is by pondering the questions of the origins of mankind.  The thesis is that life came from another race of extraterrestrials. It is kept strictly scientific throughout only upping the credibility of what we are witnessing. That is not to discourage beliefs in a higher power, but is instead something that quenches every single persons need to see to believe. At times, we can feel the strain of the script being unable to meet the epic expectations the dialogue reaches for. Still, for the most part this satisfies our sense of wonder and mystery with the awe-inspiring visuals that also carry a good amount of dread.

Dr. Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green), Dr. Shaw (Noomi
Rapace) and android David (Michael Fassbender)
investigate ancient ruins on a distant planet.

These thoughts and musings are played out through the story of two doctors, Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace the original Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) and Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green) who have discovered markings in caves that span thousands of years but share a common characteristic. These drawings lead them to a specific set of stars and planets where they believe the secrets to the origins of mankind will be found. The two scientists are on board the ship appropriately titled Prometheus after the God who is credited with the creation of man from clay and the theft of fire for human use, an act that is said to have enabled progress and civilization in mythology. Shaw and Holloway are funded by Peter Weyland (Guy Pearce in tons of make-up) an aging corporate tycoon who believes in their theories. They are joined on board by Captain Janek (a scene stealing Idris Elba) as well as corporate manager for Weyland Industries Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron playing the baddie for a second week in a row). And then there is David, the android who looks, talks, and for the most part acts like a human being. There is always one robot in these kinds of movies, but Michael Fassbender makes David one for the record books. While David is neither good or bad, he clearly has his own agenda and he will stop at nothing to accomplish his personal goals. While there are plenty of scares to be expected from the slimy alien life forms to the several creative ways crew members are dispensed, nothing comes close to the frightening realization of what David is and how much he is capable of. Fassbender makes the most out of this already stand out character by creepily yearning to be a human himself yet taking full advantage of the perks that come with existing without a soul and bottomless database.

David gets to the heart of the truth the explorers hoped
to find on their expedition.

While the first hour or so of the film is completely compelling with non-stop discussion of the possibilities that lie ahead and the talk of what they already know and what they hope to discover; the conclusion does see the script slightly crumble. It is all very fascinating and is both in word and scope genuinely epic. I don't know that I have ever seen more clear, pristine visuals coated with such looming nuances of fear. Each of the actors bring a fine performance to the table and Rapace should certainly be commended for anchoring this huge film with such humility and confidence. Though her Dr. Shaw is unlikely to become as iconic a character as Weaver's Ripley, that role was of a different time and social landscape where now a woman protagonist is not as unheard of. What is most important is that Rapace proves herself up to the challenge and I am excited to see where her career in the U.S. will go from here. The only disheartening bit about the film and the only reason it ranks a four-star rather than a full five in my books is because of the questions it leaves unanswered. While this could of course be left to the explanation that Scott wants viewers to discuss and draw their own conclusions the truth feels closer to the fact that the screenwriters were unable to create an end result that matches the hype the early discussions build. The entire running time the audience is looking forward to answers to continuous questions being asked. When we finally reach the climax of the film we receive no concrete explanation (which I can live with) but we are not really given anything to draw from either. We see a set of actions take place with no justification. It's as if the writers hope the crowd will be so distracted by the loop around to the Alien connection that we will forget about the meat of why we are here. Not true, and I held such high hopes for what revelation might come. I can only hope that those unanswered questions were left open for a sequel that might offer insight rather than a discussion that will only ever consist of speculation.

  

PROMETHEUS Review

To be fair, I may show a bit of favoritism in writing about Prometheus. This is my kind of movie and I was hooked from the beautiful opening shots of the soaring landscapes of a distant, alien planet. Also, to be fair, I should state that I may be one of the few cinema lovers who does not have Ridley Scott's Alien ingrained into my mind as a film I grew up on, I never even considered it one of my favorites. Before refreshing my mind just before screening Prometheus I had only seen the movie that made Sigourney Weaver a star once. So, while many reviews you might read about this film will contain a high level of discussion about how this new film contains DNA of the directors genre-defining sci-fi flick, mine will not. In essence though this aspect feels like nothing more than an afterthought and so the knowledge of those previous films is unnecessary only offering a bit tacked on to appease those who have waited 30 years for the director to re-visit the genre he so generously made contributions to. Prometheus is a monster all its own, with a strand of thinking that goes after what Alien only hinted at. Alien was a minimal sci-fi film, it was elegant in its execution and a slow burn in its pace. Prometheus, on the other hand, while sharing the fine eye for the pacing of its predecessor, also goes beyond the walls of the ship to explore the existential longings of two scientists who believe they may have just solved the mystery of human existence. With such a big question premise there was bound to be some disappointing aspects to the revelations but Scott has concocted a film that is nothing short of an accomplishment in visual wizardry despite fumbling the ball in the final act.

LOCKOUT Review

It was clear from the first trailer and all of the marketing tools that were being used that the folks behind "Lockout" were trying to position it as their next surprise hit in the vein of "Taken". This is not going to happen. They found a charismatic leading man not known for doing such commercial films and somehow managed to cast him in the lead. Insert Guy Pearce for Liam Neeson and instead of saving his daughter he will save, hmmm...let's see, I know, how about...the president's daughter! It's genius right? Not really, heck they even have Maggie Grace (the girl playing Neeson's kidnapped daughter in "Taken") to once again play the damsel in distress. Then they throw the concept at you and you become slightly intrigued in the project: space prison. Yea, I can admit I was engaged by the premise of a locking rapists and murderers in a prison not existing on earth. Why couldn't it actually be a possibility? Not a bad idea and apparently producer Luc Besson imagined it had the good grounds for a movie. Unfortunately, the engaging concept is the only good thing the film has going for it besides a few good quips from Pearce's Snow. While Snow is a guy who as you might have heard in the trailer is a "loose cannon" he gives off the vibe as too much of a caricature, someone that could only exist in the movies, and while it is apparent that Pearce knows this and plays it to the hilt what doesn't work is that the movie in itself is so campy this is layering camp on top of more camp. I can understand intentionally making a B-movie, but "Lockout" turns out more of a parody of the genre.

Agent Snow (Guy Pearce) gives the President's
daughter Emilie (Maggie Grace) some supplement.

If you are one of the lucky ones to not get a bad impression from the trailers for this film and have no idea what it is about, first off: good for you. If by any chance it still sounds like something you might want to check out you should know the remainder of the plot is filled in by making Snow a wrongly convicted federal agent of conspiracy and espionage against the U.S. He has supposedly killed a senior member of the department who was one of his friends, so why would he do that right? This friend left him a package that he gave to his partner to hide as he was captured and taken in for questioning. His friend hides the package but of course gets caught and ends up where? You guessed it, the space station prison. So, Snow is lucky when the opportunity arrives for him to gain his freedom by taking on the mission of rescuing the presidents daughter on that same space station after a massive break out occurs and she is taken hostage. While you will likely be laughing at many things throughout the film, I can at least recognize a few good things and commend first time feature directors James Mather and Stephen St. Leger for bringing a consistent frenetic pace and grungy tone to the experience. While this could also be credited to the editor and set design team, the directors at least seem competent in the story they are telling and move it along nicely as everything falls into place in expert fashion. It is certainly run of the mill, but Pearce elevates the whole thing a few notches by just appearing here and when he slyly spits out his sarcastic quips they will once in a while land just perfectly and make you smile back, knowing everyone involved here realizes the ridiculousness of the whole thing.

Despite what the trailer tells you, Hydell (Joseph Gilgun)
is the real loose cannon in "Lockout".

Now, I am usually one to enjoy a good piece of sci-fi, but I prefer the type where the tone is more self-serious and on a massive scale that allows the audience to also realize the gravitas of the situation. I didn't fully expect this going into "Lockout" but I did at least expect a few major set-ups that would warrant a point of amazement that would stick with me, but in the most elaborate of these on "Lockout" I found myself laughing at the implausibility of it. I also found myself laughing at the fact the year is supposed to be 2079 and Snow (who probably would have been born around 2039) is making remarks about global warming as if that trend would have not been forgotten. There are several things like this that have to be taken into consideration when changing the time frame considerably. I mean, at the very least could we not have something a little cooler than regular ole bullets by that time. C'mon guys, if you're gonna serve the audience play by play action movie cliches then at least get a little inventive with the details. The one aspect of the film that really made it fun for me though were the inmates who are put to sleep while they are imprisoned on this space station and so when they wake up a few of them can seem a bit off. The one who starts this whole riot is a manic, glass-eyed and gold capped druggie that looks like something out of a Guy Ritchie movie and as played by Joseph Gilgun is really the "loose cannon" here as he has no problem killing someone off, and the movie has no regard for human life. His brother happens to be he ringleader of this whole circus and with their thick Irish accents we can see the glee in their expressions as they do whatever they please to manipulate the negotiations. Vincent Regan plays older brother Alex and while you'll probably recognize him from a number of sword and sandal epics he does his best here to ham it up as the "smart convict". Their actions may be shameless but at least they add a little spice to the mix.

Emilie and Snow prepare to exit the space prison in a
last ditch effort to survive.

While the conclusion wraps everything up neatly for this adventure it is clear that the makers are setting things up for a sequel just in case this makes enough money. You get the feeling we won't be seeing more adventures of Agent Snow though as this doesn't have the charm or the appeal that "Taken" had when it appeared out of nowhere in 2008. What made that film such a surprise, so engaging was the very limited glimpse of what was to come in the marketing campaign. It was genius and whoever had the idea to put the emphasis on Neeson's deep and intimidating Irish voice was right on the money. None of that could be said to save "Lockout". This is more an attempt in a new direction where the high-concept overrides the need for anything else, even logic. There are sparks of fun and glimpses of what might have been a franchise starter, but when it comes down to it this is very basic filmmaking and as much as I appreciate Pearce's effort, he just didn't come off as the John McClane of the future that I expected him to be. Oh well, another shot at something that might have been kind of spectacular had it been done with more ambition and better special effects (some of these are as cheesy as the dialogue) but fails to live up to the promise of an underrated actor in a take off on some kind of 80's-riddled adventure flick flounders and becomes something the studio didn't even want to spend money on in post to convert to 3D. they knew the conversion price wouldn't be warranted by the box office returns so why even bother seeing it? If you still want to, go ahead, but don't say I didn't warn you.

LOCKOUT Review

It was clear from the first trailer and all of the marketing tools that were being used that the folks behind "Lockout" were trying to position it as their next surprise hit in the vein of "Taken". This is not going to happen. They found a charismatic leading man not known for doing such commercial films and somehow managed to cast him in the lead. Insert Guy Pearce for Liam Neeson and instead of saving his daughter he will save, hmmm...let's see, I know, how about...the president's daughter! It's genius right? Not really, heck they even have Maggie Grace (the girl playing Neeson's kidnapped daughter in "Taken") to once again play the damsel in distress. Then they throw the concept at you and you become slightly intrigued in the project: space prison. Yea, I can admit I was engaged by the premise of a locking rapists and murderers in a prison not existing on earth. Why couldn't it actually be a possibility? Not a bad idea and apparently producer Luc Besson imagined it had the good grounds for a movie. Unfortunately, the engaging concept is the only good thing the film has going for it besides a few good quips from Pearce's Snow. While Snow is a guy who as you might have heard in the trailer is a "loose cannon" he gives off the vibe as too much of a caricature, someone that could only exist in the movies, and while it is apparent that Pearce knows this and plays it to the hilt what doesn't work is that the movie in itself is so campy this is layering camp on top of more camp. I can understand intentionally making a B-movie, but "Lockout" turns out more of a parody of the genre.