Welcome to Delos, an immersive Disney World for adults featuring three real-life role play worlds: Medieval, Roman and West World. Outfitted with robots, these era-inspired theme parks are there to serve your every desire. You can shoot people, you can have sex with them and you can take their world as seriously as you like for $1,000 a day. They’re a set of amusement parks and for all intents and purposes, amusement sums up the purpose of the film as well. Read the rest of this entry »
As a fan of science fiction allegory, social experiment, “The Twilight Zone” and the thriller genre –no less all those elements combined — Richard Kelly and his film “The Box” should’ve at least won me over, but it doesn’t. It can’t even decide if it wants to remain completely mysterious or explicitly tell us what’s going on and any film that has to contemplate that is too complex for its own good. Read the rest of this entry »
Vampirism seems like a disease in Hollywood these days, so “Daybreakers” will fall immediately go under the lens of skepticism. Believe it or not, however, Michael and Peter Spierig’s film separates itself through high concept futuristic science fiction. Although it ultimately spirals into an emotionless bloodbath, kudos to the film-making duo for taking the out-of-control vampire sub-genre somewhere it actually hasn’t indeed been before. Read the rest of this entry »
Filmmaker James Cameron’s constant yen to explore the unknown has taken us to the future, the depths of space and now the deepest caverns of the ocean. “The Abyss” is an underwater survival story with a science-fiction bend. It is a trip into the depths of what we know exists on this planet but can’t truly fathom. (I think that’s two unintended puns already, sorry.) Then it throws in an extra-terrestrial element, which to be honest, probably doesn’t need to be there. Read the rest of this entry »
After “Jaws” launched him toward eternal fame in 1975, Steven Spielberg’s follow-up film would tackle a bigger cultural phenomenon: UFOs. “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” was only the beginning of the director/producer’s love affair with the possibility of life on other planets and the first to capture the magnitude of what first contact would be like with aliens in the era of emerging special effects. Read the rest of this entry »
The best thing to say about “Terminator Salvation” is at least they tried. Between the homage paid to the original films, the non-stop action and a myriad of different writers brought in to make the script as strong as possible, the producers really aspired to reinvigorate the Terminator franchise. “Salvation” was not meant to be a cheap attempt to capitalize on the Terminator brand. But not everyone will see it that way because the results stop at “entertaining.” Despite the thematic cries of why humans will always be better than machines, there isn’t heart written into the characters. The new vision is uninspired and flat. Read the rest of this entry »
The problem with “Knowing” is that it goes too far. It’s a tough act to juggle so many overused story conventions such as decoding numbers, the apocalypse and the supernatural these days. Movies like “Knowing” have become almost a genre of their own thanks to Roland Emmerich and other disaster/end-of-the-world-predicting filmmakers. And with that comes expectations as well as a need for originality. What is supposed to set “Knowing” apart? Disaster shots? No; A protagonist trying to convince people he’s not crazy though he can see the future? No; Nicolas Cage? Ahaha. Read the rest of this entry »
No matter the premise, a film puts itself at a disadvantage when it calls for a one man show. Sam Rockwell, as talented as he is, cannot generate enough interesting conflict with nothing at his disposal but the skin-tingling monotone voice of Kevin Spacey. In other words, films like “Moon” have to work twice as hard to keep our attention and more importantly, capture our imagination. Creator Duncan Jones’ first feature-length film makes an ambitious attempt to pull off this challenge, but it doesn’t fully get there. Read the rest of this entry »
Very few films have been made with seniors as the main characters. It seems that Hollywood producers are convinced we prefer to see younger people on the screen — and they’re probably right. “Cocoon” is a rare elderly-focused take on the fountain of youth concept, an ancient motif that’s enough proof in itself that humans desire young age, whether in general or at the movies. Although science fiction, “Cocoon” is simple and mild-mannered like its lovable old protagonists. It might be light on drama but it’s big on heart. Read the rest of this entry »
Shane Acker’s Oscar-nominated animated short “9″ impressed on ingenuity and creative visuals. Its anthropomorphic googly-eyed burlap protagonist, 9, connectedly instant with the short’s viewers, and the wealth of imagination poured into his world and surroundings made it fascinating. With the help of numerous producers including “Wanted” director Timur Bekmambetov and legendary stop-motion filmmaker Tim Burton, Acker tries to expand his short — and 9′s universe — into a full-length feature. Read the rest of this entry »
Sure, the idea of the Star Trek crew going where several million men (and women) have gone before — 1980s San Francisco — is an amusing possibility. The futuristic technology and mindset of the Star Trek universe meeting current times is ripe with gag potential and in many cases, “Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home” lives up to that concept’s potential. At the same time, it might be one of the dumbest Star Trek, nay, movie plots, ever conceived. Read the rest of this entry »
Kurt Vonnegut Jr’s book “Slaughterhouse-Five” is a classic and the film version gets by on this fact alone. The rather faithful adaptation is enough to satisfy fans of the novel, but not even the great George Roy Hill can manage to turn Stephen Geller’s uninspired script into a more meaningful movie experience. Read the rest of this entry »
In a decade of reboots comes perhaps the most daring and challenging: the Star Trek franchise. With 40 years of history including a total of around 15 movies and/or TV spin- offs, a database of hardcore fans and a recent history of trailing off into oblivion, Star Trek has been on life support for about the last quarter of that time. Then came J.J. Abrams, a producer/director whose respect and credibility in the business had been entirely created in that 10-year span — and suddenly Star Trek is getting the makeover that Trekkies might have feared, but that it definitely deserved. The new “Star Trek” is a true 21st-Century Star Trek (how fitting): explosive, exciting, character-driven and a miraculous spectacle to behold. It is surely 2009s first critical and box office success. Read the rest of this entry »
If 1979′s “Alien” was the original hypothesis that the best science-fiction thrillers are psychological, then John Carpenter’s “The Thing” is the study that proves it true. A remake of John W. Campbell Jr.’s 1951 classic “The Thing from Another World,” Carpenter’s re- imagining is another brilliant execution of quiet suspense that gets quickly into your head and hooks into your brain. Read the rest of this entry »
If you read the plot summary for “Mad Max,” you’ve just ruined the first 1 hour and 10 minutes of the film. You’ve also found out that “Mad Max” takes place in post-apocalyptic Australia, which will be helpful because otherwise you won’t have any idea what’s going on. The film, made in 1979, tries really hard to be Stanley Kubrick’s “A Clockwork Orange” (1971) only that film, in all its strangeness, actually makes sense and leaves an impact. This film does neither and ends up being a car/bike stunt-filled romp that crashes like every vehicle in the film does.
The first thing wrong with “Mad Max” is that it tries to sell itself as a revenge tale when no vigilante appears to take revenge until the final 20 minutes. If the first hour were condensed to 20-30 minutes and then the final 20 added on and then another hour added after that, “Mad Max would be a cool action film with a great vigilante protagonist. Instead, Mel Gibson has to wait around and act like a sissy for 2/3 of the film and then have a sudden epiphany to seek revenge. I’ve yet to watch the sequel “Road Warrior” and I have to admit I’m excited for it only because I want to know what he does next. This first film was mostly a waste of time.
George Miller does some great action stuff here, but his over-the-top symbolism is absurd and the unbearable cheesy reaction sequences every time a character discovers something horrifying like a burnt hand or what have you completely ruins those moments. Its a terribly cliché B-movie technique.
There is absolutely no thematic value or subtle critique of society in this film no matter what you might think. A great action sci-fi movie at least makes a point, but the gratuitous violence done by random, weird bikers doesn’t say anything of value. Even the villain Toecutter feels modeled off Alex of “Clockwork” only uglier and completely unimposing. The PG violence just does not allow the violence of this gang to settle in and get a reaction from the viewer, it just cheeses it up if anything.
I’ll give credit for the amount of stuff the film crew blew up and crashed into things and Miller does a great job making you feel the intensity of the collisions. Everything else is mediocre at best and then after an hour of mediocrity, you get something good and the film ends 20 minutes later. I’m just crossing my fingers “Road Warrior” will fulfill the expectations of where this film ends, otherwise that’s more time wasted.
1.5/5 stars
Written by: George Miller, Byron Kennedy, James McCausland
Starring: Mel Gibson
