Search This Blog

Showing posts with label andy serkis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label andy serkis. Show all posts

Friday, March 30, 2018

Black Panther (5/5 Stars)




I would hesitate to say this next thing if it hadn’t been for multitudes of people saying it before me. In fact, before seeing Black Panther I would have argued against it. I would have pointed to about thirty years of movies starting with Spike Lee and John Singleton to argue that black representation in film has been around for awhile. Important movies about the black experience in America have been made by distinguished filmmakers (say Amistad and 12 Years a Slave). There have even been black super-hero movies (Blade and Hancock). But Black Panther is a special movie. Never before has a very large studio thrown so much money and effort in such an unadulterated way towards making an arguably “African” movie. Black people have always been with us but not really like this. Like India in Slumdog Millionaire and China in the opening ceremony of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, Black Panther can be categorized as a “coming out” party. And what a party it is.

For one thing, black people are being represented from a position of strength. The Black Panther, as a Marvel Superhero, is the crown-prince of the fictional kingdom of Wakaanda. Wakaanda is based on the old European myths of utopic cities such as El Dorado and Shangrila that stayed in static idyllic peace while the outside world suffered through the hell of progress. Wakaanda is situated on top of large deposits of Vibranium, a mineral that seems to literally do everything from providing energy, making airplanes, and cloaking entire cities from view of the outside world. As far as the country’s wealth in concerned, Wakaanda is a production designer’s magnum opus of contradictory elements. Wakaanda is essentially a science fiction version of Africa, traditional elements intertwined with technology several decades ahead of the rest of the world. The same can be said of the costumes and makeup of the movie, all three of which should run away with Oscars next year. Black Panther is a gorgeous movie in all its respects. Wakaanda is also an Enlightened country. Even though Wakaanda’s political model is based on fights to the death for dominance (this is a comic book movie after all), women apparently have equal status as men and actually form the most prestigious parts of the army as well as, as far as I could tell, the one and only scientific post in the whole country.

(For reasons that could fill several books, the idea of an isolated highly technological egalitarian utopia is stupidly wrong. The apparent location of Wakaanda, northeast Congo, also known as the world capital of anarchy, poverty, and rape, is the perfect location for the manifestation of a stupidly wrong idea. However, as this is a comic book movie, I will try to refrain from lecturing on the subject of economics.)

The main theme of the movie is whether or not Wakaanda should use its wealth and technology to help the rest of the world or to conquer it in revenge for the oppression of black people. In an interesting twist, the rest of the world is mainly represented by the projects of Oakland, California (where it should be noted, Director Ryan Coogler is from and where he made his first great movie Fruitvale Station). The movie handles this subject the way Nelson Mandela would handle it, with great maturity.

I’m not exactly sure what the black panther legend means in Africa or where exactly it comes from. Here, in America, the Black Panthers were a militant vigilante group that took it upon themselves to police the police, sometimes coming in direct conflict with them (I am also told they did community service). The Marvel superhero actually precedes the militant group by several years and simply does not have the same philosophy. Actually, the philosophy of the militant group is more closely aligned in Black Panther by the main bad guy, a man named Killmonger, played by Michael B. Jordan. This is a black panther in the American sense. Fueled by resentment and hatred, he is bent on using Wakaanda’s wealth and technology to burn everything down. Coogler’s treatment of Killmonger is empathatic but not sympathetic. He develops the character well and explains his actions, but ultimately does not agree with him.

There is one particular scene that stood out to me. When the Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman) is first made a King, he goes through an ancient ritual in which he visits his ancestors in an ethereal version of the Serengeti. Later on in the movie, Killmonger goes through the same ritual. However, as his father was an exile from Wakaanda, Killmonger visits him where he ended up dying, a project in Oakland, California. It is a scene of great gravity and incongruity and one of the best manifestations of cultural displacement I have ever seen in a movie. It perhaps can be said that a King of a wealthy country like Wakaanda is privileged and can afford then to take a Nelson Mandela (also of royal blood) view of the world whereas Killmonger grew up poor and excluded and is entitled to his resentment. But no matter, the point I believe is that black people want to have the decision to choose to be included in the world. Given the choice, it seems that Black Panther is stating that they would choose inclusion. That’s fine with me. If that is where the words "black panther" lead now, I will follow.

So much of black culture seems to be simply reactionary to white culture (a dumb generalization but I don’t want to spend the space to get any more specific). By positioning Black Panther’s arguments and themes in a place outside of white influence, it allows the “peace and inclusion” choice to avoid the Uncle Tom label of appeasement. In recent years, I have been continually annoyed by other black movies (“black movies” another gross generalization but I won’t spend forever writing this) from the incompetent Selma to the insult-to-history which was Birth of a Nation to the multitudinous iterations of "untold stories" of the "first black ___ to do ___” like Hidden Figures that arrive in theaters in a ever-reliant stream. If the complete absence of white people in Black Panther indeed enabled its philosophical maturity and creativity, then we should start producing more "black movies" set entirely in Africa and/or space (having said that, the performance of Andy Serkis and Martin Freeman were fantastic in Black Panther). I also hope that Ryan Coogler can make some more personal movies. Chistopher Nolan got to switch between regular movies and blockbusters. Hopefully Coogler gets a similar deal.

Sunday, January 28, 2018

The Last Jedi (4/5 Stars)


The merit of “The Last Jedi” will be reassessed when the third movie of the new trinity comes out. There are several interesting developments in this movie. The question is whether they are going to lead anywhere. I feel like I have been in this place before. I am reminded of the middle seasons of LOST and “the Girl who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest.” These were incomplete but intriguing stories. However the later installments could not fill in the holes. This might be the sad fate of “the Last Jedi” too.

For those who have seen “The Empire Strikes Back” many times, the structure of “The Last Jedi” should seem very familiar. Like “The Empire Strikes Back” most of the characters are fleeing the bad guys while one person is engaged in Jedi training. This happens in “The Last Jedi”. Poe, Finn, and the last of the rebellion are fleeing General Hux’s large battle fleet while Rey seek Jedi training with Luke Skywalker. There is a difference however that renders uneven the first half of the movie. Unlike “The Empire Strikes Back” the fleeing characters have no respite from the pursuing forces, like say hiding out in an asteroid field. Thus, it seems like the time period in which the movie takes place is much shorter than the previous film. Although technically this may seem like it would make the movie more exciting, it also makes less sense. After all, Rey’s Jedi training seems to be a week or a month long at the most, whereas it seemed like Luke Skywalker had at least a year in “The Empire Strikes Back.” The movie then would seem to be wielding a rather liberal view of how a person with force abilities would be able to attain the abilities of a Jedi master. There is a decent if not completely satisfying explanation to this and it is one of the more interesting features of this installment.

Like “The Empire Strikes Back”, “The Last Jedi” expands the audience’s understanding of the Force (this is bound to create seas of unrest amongst fans who like religious zealots already believe they know all there is to know about the Force). As Luke Skywalker seems to be explaining it, the Force is not something individuals attain. It is a force that exists within the very fabric of the universe. It has two sides, dark and light, but neither are its natural state, which is a balance. If a Jedi or Sith were to use the Force, the Force would create an opposite to render balance to the universe. A person who wants to use the Force for good, may end up making things worse because to use the light side of the Force is to create a Sith who uses the dark side. Perhaps then the wise thing to do is to not use the Force at all, which is why Luke Skywalker closed himself off from it and exiled himself to the furthest part of the galaxy. Because the only ones using the Force in the world at the time of “The Last Jedi” are the Dark Sith Lord Snoke and the Sith Lord Kylo Ren, a very strong opposite has emerged in Rey, which may be the reason why her training is so very brief. Maybe.

It is hard to tell where a more nuanced understanding of the Force will lead a franchise that is so ingrained in the notion of a fight between good and evil. This episode seems to be deliberately muddying the waters of such a black and white vision. The most interesting and confusing character is Kylo Ren (played by Adam Driver) who seems to be oscillating somewhere between the light and dark side of the force, not exactly sure of which path to follow. Where he ends up and whether it makes sense will decide whether this trilogy is a good one.

The least interesting person in the first film, Rey (played by Daisy Ridley) also became more nuanced and interesting in this one. As I mentioned in my review of “The Force Awakens” the Star Wars movies are generally guilty of blockbuster narcissism in which large events are dictated by a few familial connections. However, it is revealed in this movie that Rey does not have a connection with anyone. If Kylo Ren is to be believed, she is a nobody from nowhere. I love that. That is great. It unties Rey from any kind of pre-ordained fate. Kylo Ren seems to feel like he should be a Sith because his grandfather was Darth Vader. However, Rey could probably be whatever she ultimately decides to be. It is impossible for me to tell how her arc in the last film will go.

The “Star Wars” franchise still propels its weird relationship with violence. “The Last Jedi” in particular seems to consider the futility of violence while showing as much of it as possible. The majority of characters introduced in the “The Force Awakens” met violent deaths by the end of “The Last Jedi”. For those looking between the lines, this has the tendency to render the lighthearted moments of these movies in a rude light. Some of the battles feel like World War I suicide missions. At one point Poe Dameron (played by Oscar Isaac) decides that it is best to retreat than keep moving forward. He does this after most of his comrades in arms have been blown to smithereens. A decent leader would probably have made the retreat decision before sending most of the army to its death. Furthermore, because there is no policy discussion that would enable the viewer to tell the difference between the good guys and the bad guys, the war may as well be about the colors of their uniforms. In any case, I felt several times in this movie that the good guys should have probably just given up. That may have been the point of this movie, which will be expanded further in the last one. Or the last of the trilogy may simply feature a battle in which the good guys win (like “The Return of the Jedi”). That would be the obvious thing to do, but it would also render stupid all the interesting points that were made in “The Last Jedi.” Like I said before, much is hinging on how all of this is resolved.

Thursday, December 29, 2011

The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn (5/5 Stars)


Billions of Blistering Blue Barnacles!

When Steven Spielberg’s action-adventure classic “Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark,” opened in France way back in 1981, plenty of the reviews kept on repeating an obscure word, Tintin. Curious as to what the French word meant, Spielberg asked for a translator to find out. It turns out the French critics were consistently comparing Indiana Jones with a long cherished French series of comic books by Herge named “The Adventures of Tintin.” Indiana and Tintin had plenty in common. They were both intrepid adventurers (Indiana an archeologist and Tintin a journalist) whose exploits brought them to exotic locales in search of mysterious artifacts or ancient treasure. Both stories employed a break neck pace of action adventure and situational humor, not to mention some classic colorful characters met along the way.  So it is no wonder that Spielberg (with much help from Peter Jackson) would be the perfect choice to adapt Tintin into a movie and apparently has been working on this one off and on for more than twenty five years. As one who has read almost every single Tintin comic book (they are great!) I can say that this movie could not have been done better. It is Tintin and everything that was great about it. I hope they make many sequels. If you were one of those that were disappointed by the last Indiana Jones movie, than you must go and see this one. It is exactly what you want from that type of movie.

The plotline of this movie takes elements from several great Tintin books, most noticeably “The Crab with the Golden Claws,” “Red Rackham’s Treasure,” and especially “The Secret of the Unicorn.” Tintin notices a model ship of the pirate Red Rackham’s 17th century galleon at a flea market and pays a pound for it. Almost immediately other interested parties ask to buy the ship from him. They give him dire warnings. Tintin takes the boat home with his journalistic curiosity fired up. He does research on Red Rackham at the library and comes home to find his apartment ransacked. There is something about that boat that people want! Could it hold the secret to Red Rackham’s lost treasure! What follows is a series of holdups, secret messages, code-breaking, marvelous coincidences that lead to strange far off adventures, espionage, intrigue, and the like. Tintin (voiced by Jamie Bell) is accompanied by his faithful dog Snowy. Along the way he meets an alcoholic skipper named Archibald Haddock who has a tendency for swearing colorful phrases like “Billions of Blistering Blue Barnacles!” and happens to be one of the two last descendants of an age old feud between two pirates, Captain Haddock and Red Rackham. Captain Haddock is played by Andy Serkis, the best motion capture actor in the business (he also did Gollum, King Kong, and the Ape in “Rise of the Planet of the Apes”). The last descendant of Red Rackham is played by Daniel Craig. There are also plenty of thugs with guns that like to capture and kidnap Tintin and to be outwitted by an escaping Tintin. We are also treated to two bumbling police officers named Thomson and Thompson. They are identical twins that wear the same black suits and bowler hats so try not to get them mixed up. They are voiced by the comedic duo of Nick Frost and Simon Pegg (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz), an inspired choice of casting if there ever was one.

The Adventures of Tintin employs the best use of animated motion capture that I have ever seen. This is a particular type of animation that was pioneered by Peter Jackson for the character of Gollum in LOTR and made into entire movies by Robert Zemeckis. It is a poor substitute for live action in that the humans never quite escape the uncanny valley (this was one of my main dislikes with a movie such as Beowulf), but since Tintin is a comic strip, the characters make more sense inhabiting the uncanny valley than they would in the real live action world. The Tintin drawings themselves were rather simplistic. To search for an actor that looked exactly like Tintin would have resulted in finding a pretty weird looking actor. It is better this way.

Not to mention the control that animation gives the makers in constructing some ridiculously intricate action sequences. Take a look at the climatic chase scene that starts at a palatial villa and goes all the way down to the Oceanside through winding streetscapes while a tidal wave of water from the local dam gushes down right behind them. It is shown almost entirely in one shot without any edits or changes in camera angles. This is something that would be impossible to shoot in live action, but since it is animation we get to view a ridiculously intricate sequence that never cheats or confuses. The planning that must have gone into it was obviously extensive and the result is very good. Of course a movie that is live action like “Mission Impossible” will always be more effective thrills wise (you won’t get vertigo watching an animated film) but that doesn’t mean animation can’t be exciting or fun and Tintin is all of that.

The Adventures of Tintin should be a lock for the Oscar for Best Animated Picture. This should be the first time in many years that Pixar (Cars 2) does not come home with the trophy. 


Sunday, October 24, 2010

The Prestige 01/10/07

:fresh: Christopher Nolan's film about dueling magicians hit it right on the spot. It is a very clean and complete film. Very beautiful, well acted, and choreagraphed editing wise to a tee. The story is an aptly told one as it is filmed in the present, the past, and the very past, with flashbacks and flashforwards that constantly shift this way and that but never seem forced and seem inseperable from the what the story is. As a constant shifting between who is ahead and who is behind, who we like and who we despise, who has the upper hand? We never know. 

Like I said before this is a very good and decent film. Not once does Nolan misstep. But it is not a great film. Perhaps this is because I saw the twists before they became apparent. (Nolan failed in tricking me with his magic but succeeded in making me enjoy the movie anyway.) I feel that he gave one too many hints as too what lay ahead. But what really made the movie anti-climatic was also one of the main points in the film. In this way I felt dissapointed but enlightened at the same time. It is what Christian Bale says at one point in the film. He refuses to give the secret of a magic trick to his wife for the bullet catching trick saying that if given the magician no longer means anything to the audience. Then at the end of the movie we are given the secret of the magic trick and then suddenly the movie no longer seems so special. And we exit the theatre with the knowledge that an obsession for simple truth and the finding of it is no match for the marvels of one's own imagination. 

King Kong 12/19/05

I watched most of this movie with an open mouth and a wide grin on my face. To say that this movie was three hours of the most amazing sights I have ever seen is an understatement. I officially crown this movie as the best remake ever. I hope other action remakes will take note of this movie. It is not only an upgrade on visuals but also the storyline. There actually is a certain plausible romance between the ape (the beloved Andy Serkis) and the girl (Played by Naomi Watts with a beautiful scream) and other casting choices such as Jack Black as the insane director and Adrian Brody as the playwright are spot on. There are action sequences that build and build, One especially starting with a giant gila lizard, then a giant centipede, then a tyrannosaur, then two tyrannosaurs, escalates and escalates further and farther on then you would think possible. It is truly heart-pounding. The dinosaurs and other creatures in this movie are not typical. They have oversized teeth and truly frightening faces. One scene especially in a dark valley is especially chilling. The city of New York, shown first as Depression era, changes overnight with the arrival of Kong into a metropolis full of bright lights and dizzying colors. The amazing spectacular, popcorn eating grandness of this movie I have never seen before, but for one thing to point out. There are so many special effects in this movie. Not for once did I think any of them were gratuitous. Everything had a purpose to the story, and that my friends is indeed rare. I would not be surprised if this film shatters box office records. A grand tip of the hat to Peter Jackson. This is a film I will surely see again, and I have already planned on buying the DVD. Wow, Wow, Wowza.