Archive for Daniel Craig

SKYFALL (2012)

Posted in 2012, Action Movies, Bond Girls, Cinema Knife Fights, Espionage, Fast Cars, Femme Fatales, Gimmicks, James Bond, Michael Arruda Reviews, Nick Cato Reviews, Secrets, Spy Films with tags , , , , , , , on November 12, 2012 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: SKYFALL (2012)
By Michael Arruda & Nick Cato

(The Scene: On top of a moving train, MICHAEL ARRUDA is fighting with a thug.  On a hill in the distance, NICK CATO aims a high powered rifle at them.)

NICK CATO (speaking into a headset):  I don’t have a clear shot.

L.L. SOARES’ voice on other end of the headset:  Take the shot.

NC:  But I might hit Michael!

LS:  So???

MICHAEL ARRUDA (hearing conversation on his headset):  So??? Gee, thanks a lot!  You want a clear shot?  Here, you’ve got one!  (MA stops fighting, pastes a large bull’s-eye on the thug’s chest and steps away from him.)  There you go.  He’s all yours.

(Thug drops to his stomach.)

MA:  What the—?

(Train enters tunnel, and a standing MA hits the top of the tunnel, which knocks him off train into the water below.)

NC:  Oops!  That’s not good.

LS:  What happened?  Did you shoot anyone?

NC:  Nope.

LS:  Any blood and gore involved?

NC:  Nope.

LS:  Then it’s all too tame for me.  I’m leaving.  Catch you guys later.

(NC takes off his headset, just as MA appears in dry clothing.)

NC:  Weren’t you just in the water?

MA:  It’s amazing how quickly one dries off in Cinema Knife Fight land.  It’s like being in a movie with bad continuity.  Ready to review today’s movie?

NC:  Sure. And I apologize for shooting you, but I was just following L.L.’s orders.

MA: No problem.  Today we’re reviewing SKYFALL (2012) the latest James Bond movie and the third one featuring Daniel Craig as Agent 007.

SKYFALL opens with James Bond (Daniel Craig) chasing a bad guy who has in his possession a computer drive of extreme value.  They end up fighting on top of a train, while another agent, Eve (Naomie Harris), tries to shoot the villain, but hesitates because she doesn’t have a clear shot and worries she might hit Bond.  M (Judi Dench) orders her to take the shot, and she does, hitting Bond in the process, and he plunges into the water below, presumed dead.

NC: At first I thought a train-top fight was a bit cliché to open a Bond film with, but director Mendes really made this one work.

MA: Yeah, it’s a pretty intense scene.

Anyway, since this is a James Bond movie, he’s not dead, and after lying low for a while, he returns to MI6 to help his boss deal with the latest threat to national security.  The stolen computer drive contained the names of agents working in some very dangerous places, and so now their identities have been compromised.  It’s Bond’s job to locate the computer drive and also find out who’s responsible for stealing it.

It turns out the villain is a man named Silva (Javier Bardem), a former agent of M’s who wants nothing more than to get back at her, because he feels her ruthlessness left him for dead, similar to what we saw happen with Bond in the movie’s opening segment.  So, Silva releases the names of several of the agents to the public, and promises to continue to do this on a regular basis, putting them in harm’s way, all in an effort to humiliate M.

Silva also plans an elaborate scheme to kill M, and of course, it’s up to James Bond to stop him.

NC: I thought Bardem did a fine job as Silva, and his homoerotic taunting of 007 gave him a dimension we haven’t seen in a Bond film before.

MA:  Yep, that was an excellent scene!  Some people squirmed, others laughed out loud.  Very effective.

NC:  But, at the same time, I think early reviews painting him as one of the best Bond villains ever is a bit of a stretch.

MA:  That’s definitely a stretch.

NC:  Silva’s on a personal vendetta against, M, not so much on a mission to destroy the globe like a classic Bond enemy. (That said, the sequence of MI6 headquarters being blown up was quite intense). He’s off his rocker, that’s for sure, but to me he wasn’t half as threatening as most of the goons Bond has gone up against over the years.

MA:  Agreed.

SKYFALL is being touted in some circles as “the best Bond movie ever,” and while I liked this movie, it’s certainly not the best Bond ever.  I wouldn’t even call it my favorite Daniel Craig Bond film.  While I liked it, I also had some problems with it.

NC: I can’t stand early reviews that label things the “best ever.” Regardless, I still went in with an open mind and was surprised at just how much of the film I found myself…bored with.

MA: One thing I’ve always liked about the Daniel Craig Bond movies is the way they’ve reinvented the franchise. Since Daniel Craig has come on board, the films have showcased a darker, more realistic Bond, and the results have been similar to what Christopher Nolan did for Batman in THE DARK KNIGHT trilogy.

Speaking of which, I was reminded a few times of THE DARK KNIGHT while watching SKYFALL.  We learn more about Bond’s past, how he’s an orphan and how he lost his parents at a young age, a la Bruce Wayne, and when he returns home he even finds a faithful servant Kincade (Albert Finney) still living there.  Can anyone say “Alfred”?

NC: I have a love/hate relationship with what little we’ve learned about Bond this time, from his parents’ early death to his alcoholism. They’ve made Bond a more “real” character since Craig has taken the lead, and while it has been refreshing at times, I still find myself yearning for that suave, in-control, “man-up” Bond of yesteryear.

MA: Also, at times, the villain Silva reminded me of the Joker in THE DARK KNIGHT as it seemed to be his plan to cause utter chaos, and in fact, one of his ploys, to get captured on purpose, comes right out of the Joker’s playbook.  But Silva’s nowhere near as interesting as the Joker, and I have to say, SKYFALL, as good as it is, is no DARK KNIGHT.

The cast is solid, and on paper, it’s an excellent cast.  Daniel Craig is a natural as James Bond, and I liked him immediately in the role in CASINO ROYALE (2006).  That being said, he seems to have aged here, which is part of the plot, I guess.   CASINO ROYALE opens with him making his first professional kills, hence beginning his 00 status, meaning he now has a license to kill.  Here, in SKYFALL, he’s close to retirement, and his abilities constantly come into question.  Again, there were shadows of THE DARK KNIGHT series here, which went on to feature an older, beat up Batman.  With that in mind, I found Craig’s performance less satisfying here.  It seemed to be lacking that efficient edge he held the first two times around, when he came off like a killing machine.  Here, he’s like a killing machine in need of an oil change.  He seems to be missing a step.

NC: Agreed. And while I’m a big fan of M as played by Judi Dench (who, by the way, is absolutely fantastic here), Bond seems to be a bit too close to her this time, following her around like a lost puppy. Of course, her life is in danger and Bond gives his all to protect her (especially during the way too long finale), but that little bit of rebellion 007 always had going on is lost in the shuffle here. He comes off as just another agent within MI6’s arsenal, but if the ending is any indication, things look like he may be getting back to business in the next film.

MA: Yes, once again, Judi Dench is great as M, and she seems to have more screen time in each successive Bond movie.  She first played M back in GOLDENEYE (1995), Pierce Brosnan’s first foray into the series.  Her M is certainly more integral to the plots of these movies than the original M, Bernard Lee, who simply showed up to give Sean Connery and Roger Moore their assignments.  That being said, if you go back to those original Connery Bonds, you’ll see some very memorable scenes between Connery’s Bond and Lee’s M where M was continually frustrated with how much Bond seemed to know about every subject on the planet.  It was a running gag in that series.

NC: And part of my problem with the Craig series is M doesn’t seem to see that in Bond. Perhaps they want us to understand that 007 is only human (hence the “realism” of the latest films)? Either way it’s little nuances like this that seem to be making Bond less of a super spy and more of a typical agent. Some are enjoying it. I’m still on the fence and hoping we’ll again see the fine balance that was displayed in CASINO ROYALE (2006).

Bond gets his Aston Martin back in SKYFALL.

MA: Javier Bardem as Silva makes for a very colorful villain, but he’s nowhere near as memorable as he was in his Oscar winning performance as the hit man in NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (2007).  And while I liked Silva as a villain, he seems a little out of place here.  Again, these Daniel Craig Bond films are a gritty, realistic lot, and the villains in the first two movies were also dark and realistic.  Silva is two steps shy of the Joker, missing only some facial make-up.  Not exactly the most realistic fellow for Bond to lock horns with.

NC: Silva’s mission to destroy MI6 and M herself is surely a different thing for Bond to deal with. But when Bond villains aim their sights low, the films lose their epic feel. Look at 1989’s LICENSE TO KILL, where Bond (played for the second and last time by Timothy Dalton) goes after drug kingpin Sanchez (Robert Davi) after he kills two of his personal friends. While the film wasn’t as bad as many claim, Davi wasn’t after anything other than making money with a new way to transport cocaine, hence making him one of the more forgettable Bond villains. I feel Silva’s personal mission to wipe out MI6 (in years to come) won’t be as memorable as many are giving it credit for. As goofy as Hugo Drax (from 1979’s MOONRAKER) appeared, his hell-bent goal to attack the world’s cities with chemical bombs from space isn’t something one easily forgets. Silva has a creepy laugh (and a nifty, hidden facial disfiguration), but he left me quite underwhelmed.

MA (cringing):  Not Hugo Drax!  But you’re right, at least he had an ambitious goal, worthy of a supervillain.

NC: Muhahahahahahahaha!

MA: Naomie Harris is okay as the latest Bond girl Eve, and I really enjoyed Ben Whishaw (most recently in CLOUD ATLAS) as a new young Q.  Rory Kinnear also reprises his role as Tanner, M’s assistant from the last movie, and does a nice job.  Kinnear is the son of late actor Roy Kinnear, who appeared in so many British movies over the years before his untimely death on the set of THE RETURN OF THE MUSKETEERS (1989) in 1988.

Ralph Fiennes is also on hand as Gareth Mallory, the man who’s put in the position of telling M her days on job are numbered and she should retire, and he makes the most of his scenes.  Rounding out the cast is veteran Albert Finney who does a nice job as Alfred—er, Kincade.

NC: I enjoyed Bérénice Lim Marlohe as Severine, who gives the film that classic touch of Bond-girl mystique and sophistication. She’s a real treat for the eyes, although her screen time here is a bit limited.  I thought Ben Whishaw was good as the new Q, too, but I’m hoping future films will contain more classic “gadget” segments. Q tells Bond (after handing him a gun and a small radio), “Were you expecting an exploding pen? We don’t do that anymore.” I hope the kid was just joking.

(Q appears and approaches them.)

Q:  I never joke about my work.

NC:  Bring back the cool gadgets!

Q:  You’ll have to talk to the screenwriters about that one.  (Exits).

NC:  As a tease, when Bond manages to get M away from danger, he takes her to a hidden MI6 garage and pulls out in the classic Aston Martin DB5, first seen in GOLDFINGER (1964), which caused 007 geeks like myself to squeal aloud in super-nerd glee.

MA: SKYFALL was directed by Sam Mendes.  This one looks great with some very impressive foreign locales, but I thought it was short on action.  I liked the film’s opening pre-credit chase scene, which culminates on the top of the moving train, as I thought it was amazing and intense, but other than this, the actions scenes were few and far between.

NC: Most Bond films are sprinkled with sections of non-action, but usually they’re interesting. After SKYFALL’s spectacular opening train fight, the film goes to sleep for far too long, and the ending shoot-out (that reminded me of a typical Western, only with better firepower) became way too tedious.

MA: I did like the chase in the subway, and the attack on M in London was very suspenseful, but like you, I thought the finale, the armed assault on Bond’s family home, was anticlimactic.

The screenplay was written by Bond veterans Neal Purvis and Robert Wade.  This is the fifth Bond film they’ve written, the first being the Pierce Brosnan film THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH (1999).  They’ve written every one since.  The third writer in the credits is John Logan, who has written a wide variety of movies, including HUGO (2011).

I was hot and cold on the script.  The story itself—a crazed former agent out to kill M— I thought was just OK.  At times it works, but more often than not it wasn’t all that exciting.  I wanted more of a threat to the world, not just M.

NC: Exactly.

MA: One scene I did like was M’s speech, where she talks about the changing threats the world faces today, how today’s threats aren’t on a map.  They’re in the shadows, and you don’t always know who your enemies are.  Too bad in this one they knew exactly who their enemy was.

NC: M’s speech reminded me a bit of President Bush’s speech shortly after 9/11, which I guess the screenwriters figured would give the series modern relevance.

MA: Thomas Newman’s music score was very effective.  I thought I would miss the music of David Arnold, who’s been doing a phenomenal job scoring these films since TOMORROW NEVER DIES (1997), but I didn’t.

NC: It was great to hear the classic Bond theme when the Aston Martin came into play, though. And while I’m not a fan of the title song, I have to admit Adele nails that classic 60s-style Bond feel with her opening track.

MA:  Yes, that opening track, which I also heard from folks as the best James Bond theme song ever!  What is up with all this “best of” stuff?  I think fans were really in need of their James Bond fix this time around!  For the record, I wasn’t that impressed with the song.

There were also some good uses of humor, such as one scene involving Bond, M, and the ejector seat.

In general, I like how the Daniel Craig films are more modern, fit in better with current times, and are nowhere near as unbelievable as the Pierce Brosnan films ultimately became.

NC: Hey! The Brosnan films did get a bit silly, but man was GOLDENEYE (1995) great!

MA: But somehow, SKYFALL has less of an edge than the previous two Daniel Craig Bond movies. The plot’s not as good or as tight, and the majority of the scenes simply aren’t as intense.  I definitely wanted the villain Silva to do more.  I mean, all this planning—years of planning, they say in the movie— just to get back at M?  Why not just shoot her and be done with it?  If you’re going to concoct this elaborate scheme, why not come up with something more ambitious?

NC: And this is exactly what Mike Myers made fun of in his AUSTIN POWERS films: if you’re going to make the series more “modern,” knock it off with the bad guys’ intricate planning and just get down to business.

(AUSTIN POWERS zips by in a motor boat.)

AUSTIN POWERS:  Oh, be-have, baby!  Be-have!

MA: And this ultimately is what SKYFALL is missing:  something grand and ambitious.  Silva should have been planning the ultimate terrorist attack, and it should have been up to 007 to thwart him.

NC: Silva reminded me a bit of Jonathan Price’s far more threatening cyber terrorist Elliot Carver, from 1997’s TOMORROW NEVER DIES, only working on a much smaller scale.

MA: I liked SKYFALL, but it’s not the best Bond ever, not by a long shot.  I give it three knives.

NC: SKYFALL has its moments, but overall I was disappointed. The scenery (especially during a silhouetted fight on the top floor of a Shanghai tower) is often excellent, and much of the cinematography is very well done (such as the aforementioned train-attack scene). Regardless, I found this to be the slowest moving Bond caper since 1985’s A VIEW TO A KILL and far from the best film in the series. CASINO ROYALE (2006) is still easily Craig’s best turn as 007.

I give it two knives.

MA:  Well, I guess you were more disappointed with it than I was.  In spite of its shortcomings, I still enjoyed seeing Daniel Craig as James Bond on the big screen.  It’s just that after all the hype, I expected it to be even better.

Well, that about wraps things up here.  Want a ride back to town?

NC:  Sure.

(MA & NC approach a parked Aston Martin.  MA tosses NC the keys.)

MA:  Why don’t you drive?

NC:  Cool.

(They drive away in the Aston Martin as James Bond theme plays.)

NC:  Hey, what’s this button?

MA:  That’s the— (screams)  Ejector seat!!!  (flies into the sky.)

NC:  Sorry.

(MA lands back in the water.)

NC:  There’s something symmetrical about all this.

—END—

© Copyright 2012 by Michael Arruda and Nick Cato

Michael Arruda gives SKYFALL ~ three knives!

Nick Cato gives SKYFALL ~two knives.

3 Comments »

Cinema Knife Fight Presents: THE WORST MOVIES OF 2011

Posted in 2011, Cinema Knife Fights, Ghosts!, LL Soares Reviews, Michael Arruda Reviews, Vampires, Werewolves, Worst-Of lists with tags , , , , , , on January 3, 2012 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT:  WORST OF 2011
By MICHAEL ARRUDA & L.L. SOARES

(THE SCENE:  A majestic movie theater, filled with well-dressed guests.  MICHAEL ARRUDA & L.L. SOARES sit on the stage in front of the movie screen.)

MICHAEL ARRUDA:  Welcome back to the second half of our end of the year column.  Last time out, L.L. and I gave you our picks for the TOP 5 BEST FILMS of 2011.  Now it’s time for us to unleash our picks for the WORST 5 MOVIES OF 2011.

L.L. SOARES:  For the BEST OF column, our audience was filled with personalities from the movies we saw, all hoping for a chance to be selected as one of the year’s best.  Let’s see how many brave souls have stuck with us now that we’re uncovering the stinkers of the year.

(Camera pans over audience, which is still filled to capacity, and includes superheroes, apes, aliens, vampires, cowboys, assassins, and Daniel Craig, busy having a 3-way conversation with a Goth girl with a tattoo, some cowboys and aliens, and some ghosts.)

LS:  Still packed?  These guys are braver than I thought.

MA:  I think that giant cannon you have aimed at the exit has something to do with it.

LS:  You think?

MA:  Let’s get this party started.  You went first last time, so I’ll go first this time.  Again, tonight we’re looking at our picks for the TOP 5 WORST MOVIES OF 2011.  My pick for Number 5 is—(reaches into his jacket and begins to pull out an envelope.  An arrow flies by his head, piercing the screen behind him.  MA  puts the envelope back into his jacket.)

DYLAN DOG:  DEAD OF NIGHT.  This was one weird movie, an attempt to bring horror and comedy together that just didn’t work.  Based on an Italian comic book, this bizarre tale of a private detective, played by Brandon Routh, who makes it his business to keep the peace among the city’s warring population of vampires and werewolves, wasn’t funny enough to be a successful comedy, not quirky enough to be campy, and it wasn’t scary at all.  Plus it told a far-fetched story that was hard to swallow.

I also hated the title, as it makes the movie sound like a kid’s cartoon.  Coming up next:  DYLAN DOG AND SCOOBY DOO MEET THE SPACE GHOST!  Gag!

Granted, I didn’t hate this movie, but it was so mediocre, mild, and underwhelming, there’s no way I could keep it off this list.

LS:  Well, I can’t chime in here, because I didn’t see this one. Although I did hear it was pretty bad. Thanks for confirming that – so I don’t have to see it.

My Number 5 pick for Worst Movie of 2011 is PRIEST. I had to sit through the trailer like 14 times (I think the movie’s release date was delayed a few times). The trailer showed us the entire story. So, by the time I saw the movie, I already felt like I’d seen it 15 times already!  And every single time —it sucked. In a future where the Vatican has taken over the world, vampires are the big threat that church-trained assassins have to take down. Based on an anime. Sponsored by Ambien. I can’t tell you how excruciating this was to sit through. Easily one of the most boring movies of 2011. I just didn’t care about any of the characters at all.

MA:  I’m with you.  In fact, I think I disliked PRIEST  more than you did, since it’s a little closer to Stinker Number 1 on my list.  So, I’ll comment more on this one in a bit.

LS:  My Number 4 pick is THE ROOMMATE. Take Barbette Schroeder’s SINGLE WHITE FEMALE, cast it with younger girls and have it take place on a college campus—oh yeah, and make it as dumb as possible—stir briskly, and you have this awful, cliché attempt at a horror movie, starring TV actresses Leighton Meester from GOSSIP GIRL and Minka Kelly from the short-lived CHARLIE’S ANGELS reboot. I heard that director Christian E. Christiansen was deported back to Denmark after he made this one. (just kidding). But man, it was awful.

MA:  This one didn’t bug me as much as it bugged you.  I remember it being more mediocre than awful.  I also remember liking the acting in this one, especially the two leads, Meester and Kelly.  While you hated THE ROOMMATE, I just found it VERY average.

It narrowly missed the cut for my TOP 10 Worst Movies of 2011.

My pick for Number 4 is DREAM HOUSE starring Daniel Craig.  Craig has had a notable year.  We saw him in three movies this year, and all of them made our lists.  COWBOYS AND ALIENS made my Top 5 Best Movies List, and THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO made your Top 5 Best Movies List.  But with DREAM HOUSE, he hits rock bottom.  To be fair, Craig is fine in this movie, so it’s not him.  It’s everything else.

LS: Yeah, right.

MA: Of course, the most notorious thing about DREAM HOUSE was its trailer, which gave away a major plot twist!  This twist takes place about half-way through the movie, and since I knew about it beforehand, the first half of this movie was a complete waste of time.  Nice going guys!  Way to go!  Give away the film’s major plot twist before the audience sees the movie!

But even without this spoiler, the film is pretty lame.   Craig plays a writer who quits his position at a publishing house to write a novel and in so doing spend more time with his family.  Of course, family time becomes spooky time as they seem to be visited by ghosts, but there’s a twist (which those of us who saw the trailer already knew), and what Craig learns horrifies him and changes the plot’s direction, as he seeks out not a ghost but a murderer who’s very much alive.

DREAM HOUSE is supposed to be a haunted house/ghost story, but the ghostly elements are all peripheral at best.  It eventually becomes more of a psychological thriller, but it fails here too because it’s not very thrilling.  David Loucka’s weak screenplay is eventually done in by an even more ridiculous and extremely convoluted ending.

DREAM HOUSE is a complete fail.  I didn’t like it at all.

LS:  Well, I have to agree with you there, except I hated it even more than you did. DREAM HOUSE was Number 2 on my list. So I’ll get to it later.

MA:  Number  3 on my list for Worst Movies of 2011 is the awful thriller PRIEST, which you already talked about, since it was Number  5 on your list.

I can sum up what’s wrong with this one just by reviewing its plot.  PRIEST takes place in an alternate world where vampires and humans have battled for centuries, but the humans have finally won the battle because they have a secret weapon: warrior priests.   Nuff said.  Actually, the story goes on as the vampires kidnap the niece of the most famous priest warrior, and he of course must rescue her.  Blah, blah, blah.

PRIEST has a horrible story, unexciting visuals, no character development, and the icing on the cake?  It was in 3D.

PRIEST was one of the more forgettable movies of the year.  In fact, I’ve already forgotten about it.  You should too.

LS:   Dammit, I forgot that PRIEST was in 3D, so we had to even pay extra money to be bored to death!! Yeah, this one smelled so bad the projectionist had to wear a gas mask.

My Number 3 pick is a movie I was excited to see beforehand. And it was a complete letdown. I’m talking about PAUL. I was actually looking forward to this one. It stars Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, the stars of such great indie comedies as SHAUN OF THE DEAD and HOT FUZZ. Unfortunately Pegg’s co-writer and director on those movies, Edgar Wright, has nothing to do with PAUL. Maybe that’s why it’s so damn awful. This time around, the director is Greg Mottola (who actually directed SUPERBAD and ADVENTURELAND, so he’s not that bad!), and this one is a big mis-step for everyone involved. Pegg and Frost play two sci-fi nerds who pick up an escaped alien in their RV in the middle of the desert. The creature, named Paul, has the voice of Seth Rogan and looks like your typical gray, big-headed Roswell extraterrestrial. In theory, this sounds pretty good, but the movie itself has almost zero laughs, except for Kristen Wiig as a fundamentalist’s daughter who has a hard time accepting that there’s other intelligent life in the universe. But otherwise, you can hear the crickets. Some movies just should never have been made.

MA:  I didn’t see PAUL.  I forget the reason I wasn’t available to review it that weekend, but after reading your negative review, I decided to skip it altogether, or at least save it for a rental.

LS:  My Number 2 pick is a movie you’ve already talked about – DREAM HOUSE. Daniel Craig lives in a house with the ghosts of his wife and daughters. Daniel Craig finds out that he used to be in a sanitarium, but he doesn’t remember it. Daniel Craig finds out everyone thinks that he killed his family. Daniel Craig solves the mystery. Meanwhile—I struggle not to nod off. This movie had a lot of twists and turns, but in the end it all amounted to a big pile of stupid. Easily the worst movie Daniel Craig has made so far.

MA:  I can’t argue with you there.

My pick for the Second Worst Film of 2011, A VERY HAROLD AND KUMAR 3D CHRISTMAS.

As much as I’ve really enjoyed the recent slate of raunchy Rated R comedies to hit the big screen in the past few years, I didn’t like this one.  I have no problem with raunchiness as long as it’s funny, and that was the major problem I had with this movie:  it wasn’t funny.  The gags were vulgar and raunchy, but they weren’t making me laugh, and I guess the point I’m making is it wasn’t because they were vulgar and raunchy; it was because the comedy just wasn’t sharp.

I know they were going for the Cheech and Chong-style humor here, but there were far too many drug references.  Again, it’s not the fact that it was a drug reference.  It was that it wasn’t funny.  They did the same thing with male genitalia.  Every joke either ended as a drug reference or a male genitalia reference.  Can’t make this joke work?  Hmm.  Let’s just end it with a line about getting high, or have someone say something like “Hey, is that your dick?”  Lowest common denominator, bottom of the barrel writing.

And it was in 3D no less.  Ugh!  A VERY HAROLD AND KUMAR 3D CHRISTMAS makes coal in a stocking look pretty good!

LS:  I liked the very first HAROLD AND KUMAR movie. I didn’t see the second one. And I’m sorry I saw this one. I actually like the characters, but you’re right, this one was not funny. I think I laughed twice. And the preachy “these stoners need to grow up and be responsible adults” storyline just bored the hell out of me. I don’t see a HAROLD AND KUMAR movie to see responsible adults. I see it because I want to laugh. But their 3D CHRISTMAS movie didn’t make me laugh enough.

Well, on to my Number 1 pick. And it is THE TWILIGHT SAGA: BREAKING DAWN PART 1.  I know this is an obvious choice—but it really was the worst movie I saw in 2011. With no real plot (except Bella gets married, Bella gets pregnant, Bella has a baby) to speak of. Boring doesn’t begin to describe this one. And it’s so bad they had to cut it into two parts, so we’re not even done with the TWILIGHT series yet. NOOOOOOO! I was just surprised it wasn’t in 3D.

MA:  My pick for the WORST MOVIE of 2011?  No surprise, it’s also THE TWILIGHT  SAGA– BREAKING DAWN- PART 1.

If I could just shriek right now, that would just about cover my feelings, both towards this movie and the entire series.  And as you said, it’s not done yet!  We have one more of these turkeys due out in 2012!  Someone stop the madness! 

I haven’t liked any of the TWILIGHT movies, but I may have hated this one most of all.  First off, what an awful title! It takes longer to say the title than to summarize its plot!  Moody girl marries bland vampire, pregnancy troubles follow.  There you go folks. Let’s move on to Part 2 and hope we can add the tag line, “and everybody dies.”  That would be a satisfactory ending.

LS: The ONLY satisfactory ending. Except, since most of the characters are vampires, dying wouldn’t get rid of them.

MA: THE TWILIGHT  SAGA– BREAKING DAWN- PART 1 was yet another awful entry in probably the most boring movie series I’ve ever watched in my life.  The first third of this movie is simply a wedding.  Then it moves on to Bella’s and Edward’s honeymoon—can you stand all this excitement? —and then it finishes with Bella’s life being in danger due to complications arising from her supernatural pregnancy.

There are too many things wrong with this movie (and this series) to talk about here, but I’ll just summarize them all by saying none of the other movies on my list today even come close to the dread inspired by this horrid waste of film.  I know these movies appeal to a very specific niche, and that’s fine, but would it be too much to ask to offer  something— some spark of creativity, humor, horror, anything!— to make it palatable to those of us outside this niche?  Because as these movies stand now, they offer nothing to the general audience of moviegoers, other than an-after viewing headache due to overwhelming boredom.

I’d rather sit through Breaking Wind than BREAKING DAWN.

LS:  Well, at least we agreed on the Worst Movie of 2011. You know there are a lot of bad movies in a year when SCREAM 4 comes out, and it doesn’t make my Top 5 of the worst movies.

MA:  How true that is!  I really thought I’d see SCREAM 4 on your Top 5 list.  It was Number 7 on my list.

LS: It was Number 6 on mine.

MA: Well, that wraps up another year of movies here at CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT.  With the exception of the movies we discussed today, I’d say that, all in all, 2011 was a very good year for movies.

LS:  Well, as usual, I had a Top 10 of Worst films, rather than a Top 5. So there were a lot more bad movies than just these. But I’ll list the rest of mine in a separate column .

MA:  Yeah, I had more than five on my WORST list too, but I also had a whole bunch of movies that I really liked, close to 20, on my BEST OF list.  That’s more than usual for me, which is why I said it was a good year for movies.

MA: Thanks everybody for joining us.  We’ll see you in 2012!

(The cannon explodes, blowing a huge hole through the exit doors.)

MA (to LS):  What did you do that for?

LS:  I just wanted to get the New Year started with a bang!

MA:  Okie-dokie.  Well, folks, there you have it.  Another explosive ending to a CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT column.

(Everyone in the room runs screaming through the hole to get away)

—END—

© Copyright 2011 by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

1 Comment »

THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (2011)

Posted in 2011, Cinema Knife Fights, Murder!, Mystery, Remakes with tags , , , , , , on December 26, 2011 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (2011)
By Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

(THE SCENE: The interior of a cabin on a tiny island in Sweden. It has recently snowed outside. L.L. SOARES is sitting in front of a roaring fire when MICHAEL ARRUDA comes in from outside)

MA:  Finally!

LS: You made it!

MA:  Barely!  What a friggin drive I just had!  There was a turned-over gasoline truck on the bridge back there, and the roads were icy.  Jeesh!

LS:  Now that you’re here, we can review THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO.

MA: And the heat in the car wasn’t working.  I’m freezing!

LS: Take a seat, pal. I’ve got a steaming hot mug of cocoa waiting for you, with four marshmallows on top, just the way you like it.

MA: Errr… thanks.

LS: So shall I begin this one?

MA: If you don’t mind, I sure would like to warm up— you’re being awfully nice.  Too nice.  But since I need to thaw out, I’ll have to deal with that later.  Sure, start the review.

LS: For the three people out there who have never heard of THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, it began as the first book of a trilogy by Swedish author Stieg Larsson. The books became a huge sensation throughout Europe and bestsellers in America as well.  There is a trilogy of films based on the books as well—all made in Sweden in 2009.

When I walked in to the new version of GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, I have to admit, I wasn’t completely sold on the idea. The original Swedish film is really good, and I couldn’t see the point of remaking it. Much like the remake of another Swedish film, LET THE RIGHT ONE IN (2008—it was the remade in English as 2010’s LET ME IN), it seemed unnecessary to me. Could that many Americans be so averse to foreign films and subtitles that they would avoid the Swedish films? The answer, it seems, is yes. Which is why an American version was rushed into production.

MA:  I don’t think it’s just a matter of Americans being averse to foreign films.  I think it’s also because American theaters choose not to show foreign movies, and so those of us who don’t live in big cities don’t get the opportunities to see these movies on the big screen.

LS:  In another director’s hands, DRAGON TATTOO could have been a big letdown, or at most a by-the-numbers copy of the Swedish version (directed by Niels Arden Oplev). But the new version is directed by David Fincher. This is the same guy who burst onto the scene back in 1995 with SEVEN, after a career directing music videos, and who gave us such great flicks as FIGHT CLUB (1999 – and still my favorite of his films), ZODIAC (2007) and the Oscar-nominated THE SOCIAL NETWORK (2010). Fincher is a filmmaker at the top of his game, and he isn’t afraid to take on risky material.

And that’s the part that intrigues me. DRAGON TATTOO is some very dark stuff. It’s not breezy, light mainstream storytelling. There is a lot of nudity and violence in this story. And Fincher doesn’t shy away from that in his version, thankfully. But it’s so dark, I’m still puzzled why it became such a big hit with readers and filmgoers.

MA:  Strangely, in spite of the dark subject matter and a couple of disturbing scenes, as a whole, I didn’t find this movie as dark as I expected.

(There is a knock at the door, and LS answers it. It’s FROSTY THE SNOWMAN)

FROSTY : Happy Birthday!

LS: It’s not my birthday. What do you want?

FROSTY: Um…sorry….I don’t have a clue. I’m a complete moron.

(LS closes the door)

LS:  As DRAGON TATTOO begins, we are introduced to the two main characters via separate storylines. Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) is a journalist and the co-editor of the magazine Millenium, and he has just been convicted of libel against the corrupt head of a corporation named Wennerstrom. One of his sources turned out to be unreliable (maybe it was even a set-up) and, without proper proof of his claims, Blomkvist is found guilty and given an exorbitant fine to pay (that eats up most of his life savings). Humiliated and with a damaged journalistic reputation, Blumquist takes a leave of absence from Millenium (which is in bad shape financially), to take on an unexpected job for another rich businessman, Henrick Vanger (Christopher Plummer), who wants him to use his exceptional research skills to solve the decades-old mystery of what happened to his niece, Harriett Vanger, who disappeared many years before and is believed to have been murdered. Vanger thinks the killer is someone in his family. He gives Blomkvist access to documents and photographs and asks him to crack the case. This involves staying in a cabin on the island the Vangers own in Sweden, on the grounds of their vast estate, within walking distance of the houses of several other family members, including Martin (Stellan Skarsgard), the new head of the Vanger Corporation now that family patricarch Henrik has retired, and Vanger’s brother Harald, a reclusive,  avowed Nazi, to name just two.

In fact, there are several Nazis in the Vanger family history. Vanger gives Blomkvist the cover that he is writing the old man’s memoirs, in case the family members get too suspicious, while he is really trying to determine what happened to Harriett.

Meanwhile, Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara) is a tattooed and pierced goth girl who happens to be an expert hacker and investigator. She’s the one who did an extensive (and somewhat illegal) background check on Blomkvist before Vanger decided to hire him. Lisbeth is also a ward of the state, due to a history of violence and arrests dating back to her childhood, and has to deal with state-appointed guardians to get access to the money she inherited from her family. Her most recent guardian has had a stroke, and her new one, Bjurman (Yorick van Wageninen, in a great performance) is a vile and brutal bully who is not above rape to get what he wants. Of course, since he controls the purse strings to Lisbeth’s finances, he assumes she has to do whatever he demands. He’s wrong.

Lisbeth gets her revenge on him in quite an elaborate way, letting us know early on that this skinny, quiet punk rock chick is someone you don’t want to cross. She’s as tough as nails and has a strong desire to put the monsters of the world in their place.

Blomkvist finds out about Lisbeth when he decides he needs a research assistant to help investigate the Vangers, and he finds out about the file she originally collected on him. She found out things no one else knew, and Blomkvist is both impressed and horrified by Lisbeth’s investigative abilities. But he realizes this is exactly the person he needs on the case.

The two storylines intersect as Lisbeth and Blumquist team-up to find out who is the sadistic murderer of several women throughout the years—this goes far beyond Harriett—and put an end to the mystery of the Vanger family. In fact that’s how Blomkvist gets Lisbeth to work with him, telling her they are tracking down “a killer of women.” As soon as she hears that, Lisbeth is on board.

The rest of the movie involves a lot of interviews with family members and other possible witnesses (conducted by Blomkvist) and lots of digging through files and photographs (mostly done by Lisbeth). This doesn’t sound exciting—a big chunk of the film is about these two people researching the crimes—and yet, if anyone can make such things exciting, it’s Fincher. Don’t forget, this is the same man who made the story of Facebook—a seemingly unfilmable task—dynamic, in THE SOCIAL NETWORK.

MA:  This is part of what I was talking about, regarding the movie not being as dark as I expected.  I didn’t find these scenes of research and investigation all that exciting.  I thought they detracted from the dark tone of the movie.  I would have rather the film spent more time on Henrik Vanger’s despised family.

LS:  By the time we get to the last half hour, and the discovery of the killer, the movie has built up quite a head of steam and we’ll follow Fincher anywhere at that point.

MA: I guess.  I thought it went on too long.  I was ready to follow Fincher to the exits.

(There’s another knock at the door. MA gets up this time and finds SANTA CLAUS standing in the doorway)

SANTA: HoHoHo. Have you been a good little boy?

MA: It’s the day after Christmas. Aren’t you supposed to be home? And I’m not a little boy, I ‘m a grown man.

SANTA: Oh yeah! I guess I had a little too much egg nog last night after my rounds.

(ELVES appear and pull SANTA away)

ELF: Come with us, Santa. Time to go sober up.

SANTA: I don’t want to! You little boys are going to get coal in your stockings!

ELF: We’re not little boys, we’re elves.

(MA closes the door)

LS:  The writing (Steven Zaillian wrote the screenplay) and direction are terrific here. Since it covers most of the same events as the Swedish film, I was concerned I’d find the remake boring, but, for the most part, it wasn’t. Fincher is able to take material already portrayed by another director and other actors, and make it his own.

MA:  Here, I agree with you.  THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO isn’t boring.  It’s just slow in parts, and a movie with as many interesting characters as this one has, shouldn’t be slow at all.

LS:  The acting is top-notch as well.  Daniel Craig is believable and determined as Blomkvist, Rooney Mara is intense and cobra-like (and at times, vulnerable) as Lisbeth, and even actors in smaller roles like Christopher Plummer, Stellan Skarsgard, Joely Richardson (as Anita Vanger—who lives in London) and Robin Wright as Blomkvist’s co-editor of Millenium (and lover), are exceptionally good here.

But my biggest praise has to go to Rooney Mara. As Lisbeth, she is a force of nature here, just as good in her way as Noomi Rapace was in the Swedish film versions. This is a difficult role, involving lots of nudity, some humiliation, and violence, and Mara doesn’t flinch once. She’s more than up to the task at hand and becomes Lisbeth Salander. In fact, she’s almost too good.

MA:  I agree.  It’s a courageous performance by Mara, by far the best one in the movie.  And you’re right about her becoming Lisbeth Salander. Not once did I think “here’s an actress really acting.”  I believed Lisbeth was a real person.  It’s an extremely convincing performance.

As a fan of Daniel Craig, he does his job well, and so yes, he delivers another good performance.  He’s easy to watch.  It’s been a busy year for Craig, as we’ve seen him in COWBOYS AND ALIENS and DREAM HOUSE, and while I might have enjoyed his role better in COWBOYS, I think his best performance of the three was right here in this movie.

I also enjoyed Christopher Plummer, as I thought he delivered a strong performance, much more enjoyable than his forgettable turn earlier this year in the dreadful PRIEST.  And of course you can always count on Stellan Skarsgard, and he doesn’t disappoint here.

LS:  I was saying Mara’s almost too good as Lisbeth because, you see, one problem I had with the original film, as well as this version, is that Blomkvist is a much less interesting character than Lisbeth.

MA:  I definitely agree with that.

LS:  In the Swedish films, Blomkvist is played by Michael Nyqvist, and while his character is crucial to the storyline, and more or less the main character of the trilogy, his story is pretty much second-rate compared to Lisbeth’s. Here, it’s not much different. Daniel Craig is fine as Blomkvist, and makes him as interesting as he can be. But I thought some of his scenes were a little slow.

MA:  Yeah, they were a bit slow.  I wasn’t at all interested in his relationship with his publisher or with his daughter, and I’m not sure why, except that juxtaposed with scenes of Lisbeth’s life, they didn’t compare.  His scenes were ordinary.  Hers were adrenaline-charged.

LS:  Right.  Every time Rooney Mara is onscreen, she’s electric. In both versions of the story, I wanted the movies to be more about Lisbeth Salander and less about Blomkvist. Her character is the reason to see these movies, and Mara is excellent.

MA:  Again, I agree.

LS:  The score is very effective as well. By Trent Reznor (Mr. Nine Inch Nails himself) and Atticus Finch (the two also did the score for THE SOCIAL NETWORK), the music accentuates the darkness of it all and sets the tone. The opening credits, featuring their music and nightmarish imagery, felt like a Nine Inch Nails music video, but it also grabbed me from the get-go. I was hooked before Fincher’s name even came onscreen.

So, for a remake, DRAGON TATTOO is above-average. The direction, writing, music and acting are all high quality, and if you’re a fan of the books or even the Swedish films, you’ll enjoy this version a lot.

I give it three and a half knives.

What did you think, Michael?

MA:  I liked it, but not quite as much as you.

Unlike you, I didn’t see the Swedish version, but I did see the trailer for this one, and so I felt like I’d seen an entire movie.  Yep, it’s another example of a trailer giving too much away.  Thankfully, it didn’t include any spoilers, but it did tell me an awful lot about where this story was going, plot points I would have enjoyed discovering on my own as I watched the movie.  Long before Blomkvist and Lisbeth partner up and work together, I knew this would happen.  So, when it happens in the movie, it’s “Ho hum, I knew this already.”  The initial trailer, which gave absolutely nothing away in terms of story but piqued my interest anyway, is the way I wish all trailers were.

But back to the movie.  I liked all of Rooney Mara’s scenes as Lisbeth, and these scenes were as dark and edgy as I expected.  The trouble is, a bulk of this movie isn’t about Lisbeth, and those parts just aren’t anywhere near as interesting.

LS: Agreed.

MA: Still, I did enjoy Daniel Craig as Blomkvist.  His scenes aren’t boring or awful by any means.  They’re just not as compelling as Mara’s scenes, and it’s noticeable.  Also, the family that Blomkvist is investigating is full of dark and disturbing characters, yet we don’t get to know them enough.  I would have preferred the story spend more time on them and less on scenes of Blomkvist researching files and pictures.

You can tell this is based on a novel, because the story is full of interesting characters, but unfortunately, with the exception of Lisbeth, these characters aren’t fleshed out as well as they would be in a novel.  We never really get inside the heads of these characters, and for me, this was a flaw in this movie.

I liked that this was a very adult thriller, with dark adult themes that weren’t watered down in the least.  The film goes to some very dark places, both with Lisbeth’s personal story and the main mystery.  However, that being said, the film stops short of really traversing into the demonic depths of human depravity.  I thought it could have gone further.  Most of Vanger’s pain over the disappearance of his niece, and his family’s feelings about this event is left unexamined, and the climactic confrontation at the end I thought fell short and didn’t quite hit the mark.  I expected to be extremely disturbed by this ending but was not.

Short of a couple of scenes, I never felt truly uncomfortable.

I also thought it went on a bit too long, clocking in at almost 2 hours and 40 minutes.  Still, it held my interest and I certainly wasn’t bored, but in all honesty, it never truly blew me out of the water.

THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO is a stylish adult thriller, a movie that does have a disturbing story to tell, but is never as completely edgy as it needs to be.  I still liked it though, and I give it three knives.

(Yawns)  I feel kind of sleepy. I think I figured out why you were being so nice.  You put something in my cocoa, didn’t y–?

(LS laughs as MA loses consciousness)

(MA wakes up to find himself handcuffed to the bathroom sink. LS is using a tattoo gun on him)

MA: What are you doing?

LS: Hold still. I’ve never done this before.

(The tattoo reads: I AM A BAD CRITIC)

MA:  Excuse me, but you left out a word.

LS:  Huh?

(MA whispers.)

LS (frowns):  This will cost you extra.  (LS returns to work with the tattoo gun.)

(The tattoo now reads I AM A BAD-ASS CRITIC.)

—END—

© Copyright 2011 by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

Michael Arruda gives THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (2011) ~ three knives!

LL Soares gives THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATOOO (2011)~three and a half knives.

2 Comments »

DREAM HOUSE

Posted in 2011, Cinema Knife Fights, Family Secrets, Ghost Movies, Haunted Houses, Paranormal, Plot Twists with tags , , , , , on October 3, 2011 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: DREAM HOUSE (2011)
By Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

 

(THE SCENE: A house in suburban Connecticut —suddenly explodes, igniting into a giant fireball. Cameramen and film crew members flee the scene, while the DIRECTOR jumps up and down, swearing.)

DIRECTOR: ARE YOU GUYS CRAZY???

MICHAEL ARRUDA: No.

L.L. SOARES: Yes.

DIRECTOR: What the hell is wrong with you? What did you do that for? (Pointing to fireball.) Do you realize how expensive—? We were supposed to shoot this week’s review here.

MA: There’s been a change in plans.

LS: Yeah, we wanted to blow this whole haunted house genre out of the water. Ka-boom!

MA: Especially since today’s movie DREAM HOUSE (2011) doesn’t come close to blowing anything out of the water.

DIRECTOR: I’m sick of you guys!

MA: Well, you’re in the minority. You should see our readership numbers.

DIRECTOR: I’m never working with you again!

MA: That’s what you said last week.

LS: And the week before that. And the week before that. Why don’t you just man up and show some backbone and quit for real!

DIRECTOR (in obvious frustration): But I like CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT! It’s just you two guys! You’re so— so—!

MA: Unpredictable?

LS: Nuts?

(MA hands LS a crossbow, and LS fits it with a toilet plunger which he fires at the director. The plunger engulfs the DIRECTOR’s face, and the man runs off screaming.)

MA (shaking his head): I’m not really sure why he doesn’t like working with us.

LS: We pay him as well as we pay ourselves.

(MA grimaces)

LS: Anyway, shall we review DREAM HOUSE?

MA: Certainly. Hey, that fireball back there is glowing red hot. Maybe we should switch locations.

LS (standing in front of the flickering red flames) : Nah. I like it right here.

MA: Reminds you of home, does it?

(Flashback to LS holding a pitchfork and wearing horns and a tail and asking,” Where are my slippers?”)

(LS smiles)

MA: DREAM HOUSE is a new “ghost story” thriller starring James Bond himself, Daniel Craig. I say “ghost story” in quotes, because as ghost stories go, DREAM HOUSE is pretty lame. It’s more of a psychological “thriller” than a supernatural haunted house tale, and, to be honest, it’s not much of a thriller either.

LS: C’mon! You didn’t find this movie thrilling?

MA: No.

LS: Me, either.

MA: Anyway, as the movie begins, Will Atenton (Daniel Craig) is seen happily leaving his job for good at a publishing house in order to work at home writing his novel, which will allow him to spend quality time with his wife, Libby (Rachel Weisz) and their two young daughters in their new home in suburban Connecticut.

Hmm, spending quality time with his family while writing a novel. I guess he’ll be writing his novel in his sleep! I thought this was a funny plot point, since it implies that staying home writing a novel will give this guy lots of free time to spend with his wife and kids, as if writing a novel isn’t a full time job itself!

LS: You’d think screenwriters would have some clue what it’s like to be a writer. What’s up with that?

MA: No clue.

LS: Yeah, they’ve got no clue, either.

MA: They soon learn that a family was murdered in their house five years before, and for some reason, this really creeps them out.

LS: They’re creeped out because Will discovers a group of teenagers in their basement writing graffiti all over the walls about the murders, and having some kind of ritual with candles or something. I’m not really sure what the hell they were doing in the basement. Trying to commune with the dead? But I guess that would be kind of creepy.

MA: Yeah, I guess that’s upsetting.

When Will tries to find out more about these murders, he learns that the father survived the shooting, and, in fact, was the prime suspect in the murders. He also learns that the father has recently been released from an institution, and since there’s been a man lurking about outside their home, they assume it’s the father, and suddenly the family is in panic mode.

It’s at this time that the movie reveals its first plot twist, given away completely in the film’s trailers, and once this happens, the movie switches to Will’s dealing with this horrific revelation, and ultimately, his solving the mystery behind it.

(SHERLOCK HOLMES is hovering in the background, smoking a pipe)

LS: Hey, it’s not a spoiler in this case, because the damned TRAILER spells it out for us in big letters before we even see the movie. Will is shocked to find out that he is the father of the murdered family, and that his name is really Peter Ward.

If anyone has gone to the movies during the last month, and been subjected to the trailer, or checked the trailer out on the Internet, then they know this already. I’m not the bad guy here. The bad guy is the idiot who put that TRAILER together. The audience should feel cheated. I know I did. I felt like I’d already seen this stupid movie before I even bought a ticket. Just more proof that Hollywood is a bunch of morons. Why give away a major plot point in a trailer?!!

MA: It’s absolutely ridiculous! Can you imagine if the same folks who put this trailer together—and most of the other trailers around these days— had been in charge of putting together trailers for these classics: PSYCHO—the trailer would have revealed Norman Bates dressed as his mother. KING KONG —Kong is shown falling from the Empire State Building. THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK—Darth Vader saying the immortal words, “Luke, I am your father.”

Thanks a lot, morons!!!

LS: We could have reviewed this movie based on the trailer alone and not even bothered to see the movie itself.

MA: I wish we had.

(SHERLOCK HOLMES suddenly moves forward)

HOLMES: I have used my keen powers of deductive reasoning to determine that Will Aterton is in truth Peter Ward!

LS: We’re way ahead of you lame-brain! It doesn’t take a detective to figure this one out.

MA: Did you see the trailer, Mr. Holmes?

HOLMES: Yes I did. That is how I was able to deduce this without ever seeing the actual movie.

LS: Oh go away, you wind-bag.

(HOLMES leaves in a huff)

MA: I’m not going to beat around the bush. I didn’t like DREAM HOUSE at all, and one of the main reasons I didn’t like it was the film’s major plot twist is given away in the previews. This twist takes place about half way through the movie, and since I knew about it beforehand, the first half of this movie was a complete waste of time. The story is supposed to build up suspense about the situation this family finds themselves in, but it’s false suspense since we, the audience, already know where the story is going. The movie should have begun with the twist. Why waste our time? I’m sick and tired of movie trailers giving away too much information about the movies their advertising. This crap has to stop!

LS: I hope someone who is involved in making trailers reads this and passes the word on. This policy is incredibly stupid. Audiences are tired of it. STOP IT ALREADY!

MA: On the other hand, even without this giveaway, the film is still rather lame. The first half, when Will and his family are supposedly being spooked in their new home, is hardly spooky at all. And later, after the revelation, and the story switches gears and becomes a murder mystery, the film doesn’t become scarier or even more interesting. It simply becomes sadder, as what happened to Will is tragic, but that’s about it.

LS: The only thing this movie made me feel sad about was the money I’d wasted on a damn ticket!

MA: DREAM HOUSE is a very sad movie, and in that regard it reminded me of the Nicole Kidman film THE OTHERS (2001), which also involved ghosts and the deaths of young children, but that movie was much more atmospheric, eerie and unsettling than DREAM HOUSE.

LS: It was also another movie with a hokey twist. You obviously enjoyed THE OTHERS more than I did.

MA: Well, I liked it more than DREAM HOUSE, which, I guess, isn’t saying much.

LS: I found that movie, and DREAM HOUSE, to both be sick patients with the disease I call SHYAMALAN SYNDROME, because this whole “twist” thing was fresh when M. Night Shyamalan directed THE SIXTH SENSE in 1999, and then it got really tired soon afterwards, even in the movies of M. Night himself.

MA: Especially in the movies of M.Night.

LS: This incessant need to give us one lame plot twist after another in an attempt to shock us. The thing is, lame twists don’t shock anyone. They just annoy the hell out of us. THE OTHERS was a lot better than this movie, but they both had the same intent. And, in my opinion, they both failed. Except DREAM HOUSE is an epic fail.

MA: In terms of tone, DREAM HOUSE reminded me more of the sanitized Harrison Ford/Michelle Pfeiffer thriller WHAT LIES BENEATH (2000), a film I didn’t like at all. I didn’t like DREAM HOUSE either.

LS: I despised this stupid movie.

MA: The worst part of DREAM HOUSE is its screenplay by David Loucka. The story is very disappointing. It’s not really a ghost story—the ghost elements are just on the fringe of the story and don’t really come into play until the end—and it’s not a very good thriller or mystery, either. There aren’t any decent thrills anywhere, and the mystery is undone by the film’s trailers, which give away the main twist in the film. The latter half of DREAM HOUSE involves Will/Peter trying to piece together what really happened on that awful night, and this is only somewhat interesting. The story is ultimately done in by a ridiculously contrived ending that I found even more disappointing than the twist giveaway in the trailer! So, simply put, I thought the story told in DREAM HOUSE was horrible.

LS: I thought the ending actually explained some things—except I thought the things it explained were stupid. And what was with Peter Ward’s amnesia? How friggin convenient. And how completely contrived and unbelievable.

(Suddenly, a GHOST appears beside them)

GHOST: Boo!

LS: Oh, go haunt a house, you moron!

GHOST: Awww, don’t be mad. I was just playing. My name is Casper. Would you two guys like to be my friends?

MA: We’re trying to review a movie here. Go away!

LS: Yeah, get lost!

GHOST (crying): You guys are so mean.

LS: Beat it, you crybaby!

MA: Director Jim Sheridan simply goes through the motions and adds nothing of note to this movie. It has the look and feel of a bad TV-movie— bland and unimaginative.

LS: I’m surprised, because Sheriden is normally a good director. I mean, he gave us award-winning films like MY LEFT FOOT (1989) and IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER (1993). But he really seems to have been asleep at the wheel when he directed DREAM HOUSE.

I actually found myself squirming during parts of this movie. Not out of suspense, but because I didn’t want to be sitting in the damn movie theater watching this crap.

MA: The best part of DREAM HOUSE is Daniel Craig. I’m a Daniel Craig fan, so I always enjoy watching him, and I can’t say that I’ve ever seen him deliver a poor performance. Craig doesn’t disappoint here. He’s excellent as Will Atenton. Once he finds out the truth about his past, Craig’s Will becomes a tortured soul who looks and acts exactly the way a man in his predicament should look and act.

LS: No, the best part of DREAM HOUSE was when the end credits rolled and it was over! What is it with you and Daniel Craig, anyway? The guy’s a good actor, but he’s hardly infallible. To say he’s excellent as Will Atenton is a laugh, because it’s a horrible role. He can try to make it a little better, but if it’s complete crap, how can he deliver an excellent performance? You’re just screwy.

MA: I’m not screwy. It’s simply this: he’s good, but the role isn’t.

It’s one of the reasons I didn’t like this movie more, in spite of Craig’s solid performance. The role itself of Will Atenton stinks. True, Atenton is horrified and sad when he learns the truth about what happened to his family, and we feel for him, as we should, but when the story becomes all about Atenton’s solving the mystery, he doesn’t have to work hard to find answers. They fall right into his lap, which does not make for high drama.

LS: I still say it’s a valiant attempt at portraying an incredibly dumb character. But it’s hardly “solid” or “excellent.” It’s a failure. But it’s not his fault, because the material Craig is given to work with is awful.

MA: The rest of the acting is decent. I enjoyed Rachel Weisz as Atenton’s wife, Libby. She did a good job creating a strong character, so that what happens in the film’s conclusion in terms of her character comes off as believable.

LS: Really? I like Weisz, but I found her incredibly irritating here, because she perpetuates what is wrong with this movie. Every scene she’s in just aggravated me more and more, especially after the big twist in the middle. It’s like—wake the hell up, Daniel Craig! And their scenes at the end are just plain sappy. Rachel Weisz deserved a lot better role than this!

MA: Naomi Watts has less success as Atenton’s friend and neighbor, Ann Patterson. Watts is fine, but the role is small, and although she does play a key part in the film’s ridiculous conclusion, it’s not a very active one. She’s nothing more than another victim.

LS: I like Naomi Watts a lot. In fact, she’s probably my favorite actor in the movie – even more so than Craig—but you’re right; her role is pretty thankless. I guess that’s another big problem for me. It’s a good cast—and they are all completely wasted here. Why did such smart people agree to be in such a lousy movie? Did they even bother to read the script? Or were they just so eager to work with director Jim Sheriden than they agreed to be in it, sight unseen?

MA: And Elias Koteas, an actor I like a lot, is completely wasted in a small but key role as a creep named Boyce.

LS: My man, Elias, who I will always remember as Vaughn in the classic CRASH (1996) by David Cronenberg. No matter how many bad movies this guy is in, I still forgive him. The thing is, there is a scene very early in the movie where Daniel Craig is taking the commuter train back to Connecticut and he bumps into Koteas on the train. There’s something menacing about him right off the bat. Anybody would have seen what was coming with his character a mile away!

MA: Ultimately, DREAM HOUSE fails as a drama, mystery, thriller and ghost story, because first and foremost, it fails to thrill, but it also struggles unsuccessfully to tell a decent story that makes sense. And its ending is stupid and insulting.

If you’re a Daniel Craig fan, you might like this movie, but if you’re not a fan, I can’t imagine any other reason to see DREAM HOUSE. So, if you need a Daniel Craig fix before THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO comes out in December, you might want to see this one, because Craig is indeed very good here. Otherwise, stay away.

LS: How dare you suggest anyone subject themselves to this garbage! Even Daniel Craig fans need to stay away. Why would you want to see a good actor in such a lousy movie? Instead, go rent one of his Bond movies or, better yet, 2004’s LAYER CAKE. Watch him in a good movie instead!

MA: I knew you were going to say that, but the thing is, when you’re a fan of an actor’s work, you like to see everything they do, or at least I do, which is why to Craig’s fans, I still say they might like this one. I know I enjoy seeing my favorite actors even in films that aren’t so hot. Look at Bela Lugosi! Most of his films suck, yet I still watched them.

Anyway, I give DREAM HOUSE one and half knives, and I only give it this high a rating because of the presence of Daniel Craig.

LS: I still don’t understand your crush on Daniel Craig, but I think you are being way too generous here.

MA: Whoa, whoa, whoa! There’s no man crush going on here! I just think Craig is a phenomenal actor, and just because he plays James Bond, shouldn’t detract from his talents.

LS: I give DREAM HOUSE just half of a knife. And that’s despite the strong cast. The material they have to work with is beneath their talents, and an insult to our intelligence as movie-goers. When I saw this movie, someone leaving the theater afterwards shouted, “Boy, that really sucked,” and I bursted out laughing, because he was completely right. No one should have to sit through this dumb-ass movie. We saw it so you don’t have to, dear readers.

Aside from giving a few good actors a paycheck, there is no reason why this movie should have been made.

MA: Let’s get out of here before the fire trucks show up.

LS: Yeah, I don’t want to get yelled at again.

(They leave, to reveal CASPER and SLIMER from the GHOSTBUSTERS movies, sitting on a rock, smoking cigarettes and toasting marshmallows on the fire as the house blazes on. )

-END-

© Copyright 2011 by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

Michael Arruda gives DREAM HOUSE ~ one and a half knives.

 

 

 

.

L.L. Soares gives DREAM HOUSE ~ half a knife.

3 Comments »

Cinema Knife Fight COMING ATTRACTIONS for SEPTEMBER 2011

Posted in 2011, Action Movies, Cinema Knife Fights, Coming Attractions, Horror, Remakes with tags , , , , , , , on September 2, 2011 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT
COMING ATTRACTIONS: September 2011
by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

(The Scene: The stark surface of the moon. An astronaut slowly makes his way through zero gravity.)

ASTRONAUT (crackly audio): Mission Control? You’re not going to believe this. They’re back again!

MISSION CONTROL: Who’s back?

ASTRONAUT: Those Cinema Knife Fight guys. You know, the guys who don’t need helmets to breathe up here.

(MICHAEL ARRUDA & L.L. SOARES are practicing their golf swings. MA launches a golf ball that hits the astronaut square in the helmet. The astronaut screams as he’s propelled off the lunar surface.)

MA: Oops! Sorry about that!

LS: Sorry? Look what you did! You just sent that guy into outer space!

MA: Shouldn’t we throw him a line or something?

LS: We don’t have time. We have to start this month’s COMING ATTRACTIONS column.

ASTRONAUT (flying off into space): Help me out guys! Last time you were here you told me you could do anything because you were writers, and that’s why you could breathe up here!
MA: He has a point. Okay, we’ll write you back down.

(ASTRONAUT suddenly finds himself back on the moon): Cool! Thanks, guys! Can I take my helmet off too?

LS: Don’t push it. Now, please leave us alone. We’ve got a job to do.

MA: That’s right. We’re back here on the moon—the last time we were here was back in July because of the latest TRANSFORMERS movie—because the first movie we’re reviewing in September is the long awaited and much anticipated APOLLO 18.

APOLLO 18 is the film that’s had a zillion different release dates. Seriously, its release date has been changed five times, but it looks like it’s really going to be released this time on September 2.

There really aren’t any known names associated with APOLLO 18. It’s directed by Gonzalo Lopez-Gallego, with a screenplay by Brian Miller and Cory Goodman, not exactly household names, although Goodman was one of the writers who worked on PRIEST (2011). Uh-oh.

LS: I hated that movie!

MA: But the trailer for APOLLO 18 looks really cool, and based on that, and that alone, I’m actually looking forward to this one and hope it’ll be a surprise hit.

LS: Yeah, it looks like yet another BLAIR WITCH-type horror flick that is filmed like a fake documentary. This time it involves a secret moon launch where things go horribly wrong. I’m looking forward to this one as well.

MA: And there’s also another horror movie opening on September 2nd, SHARK NIGHT 3D.

LS: The premise for this one sounds good—we finally get to see some 3D sharks coming at ya! Let’s hope it’s better than the last one, JAWS 3-D back in 1983. That movie totally wasted the gimmick. My only worry is that this movie is rated PG-13. How can you show realistic shark bites and carnage with a PG-13 rating? I’m guessing that this won’t be half as good as last year’s 3D killer fish bonanza, PIRAHNA 3D!

MA: I hated that movie!

LS: Of course you did. You have no taste.

MA: I know very little about SHARK NIGHT 3D. But I was shocked as well to learn that it’s rated PG-13 since all the trailers make it look like it’s an R-rated thriller. I’m not expecting much from this one.

On September 9, its CONTAGION in 3D, and I’m already getting nauseous about this one. It’s one of those movies where they show you everything in the trailer. I can’t imagine there’s much left in the movie that I don’t know about.

LS: We could probably review the movie based on just seeing the trailer.

MA: As you can tell by the title, it’s about a disease that threatens to wipe out civilization as we know it. Blah, blah, blah. It boasts strong star power, with a cast that includes Matt Damon, Kate Winslet, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jude Law, and Laurence Fishburne.

LS: Too bad it looks boring as hell.

MA: And it’s directed by Steven Soderbergh who burst onto the scene back in 1989 with SEX, LIES, AND VIDEOTAPE.

LS: I liked that movie!

MA: He’s made a bunch of movies since then, including the George Clooney OCEANS 11 movies, but none with as much critical acclaim as his debut picture.

LS: I don’t know about that. Didn’t he direct ERIN BROCKOVICH in 2000? That one got an Oscar for Julia Roberts (even though Ellen Burnstyn turned in a better fperformance that year for Darren Aronofksy’s REQUIEM FOR A DREAM).

MA: Yeah, okay, he did direct ERIN BROCKOVICH.  Gee, I wonder how I forgot that one?

LS: Because it sucked. Soderbergh made two really great crime movies in the 90s, though—OUT OF SIGHT (1998), based on a book by Elmore Leonard and 1999’s hitman drama THE LIMEY, starring the terrific Terence Stamp.

MA: CONTAGION was written by Scott Z. Burns, who was one of the writers responsible for THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM (2007). In spite of the talent involved with this one, I’m not really looking forward to it.

LS: Me neither. In fact, I’m dreading it so much I’m not even going to see it!

MA: That’s right. I’ll be reviewing this one without you.

LS: Sucker! Well, I deserve a break once in awhile. And CONTAGION seemed like a great excuse to take a weekend off.

MA: Most likely we’ll have a guest reviewer filling in for you.

LS: On September 16 we’ll be covering two movies, DRIVE and STRAW DOGS.

DRIVE is based on the crime novel by James Sallis and features Ryan Gosling as a getaway car driver. It sounds pretty cool, and has a cast that includes Bryan Cranston (from the excellent AMC series, BREAKING BAD), Ron Perlman, and Albert Brooks, playing against type as a sadistic crime boss.

STRAW DOGS is a remake of the Sam Peckinpah classic from 1971, starring Dustin Hoffman. It’s about a guy who moves into a quaint cabin in rural England with his new wife (it’s where she grew up) and how some hostile locals decide to make their lives a living hell. In the original, Hoffman played a meek guy who is forced to become violent to protect his wife and home. James Marsden has the Hoffman role here, and Alexander Skarsgard (he plays Eric Northman in the HBO series TRUE BLOOD) as the leader of the bad guys. While I don’t think this movie needed a remake – I am a huge Peckinpah fan and the original film is just fine – I am a little curious about this one.

MA: I’m looking forward to DRIVE. I always enjoy Ron Perlman, and in the trailers Albert Brooks looks like he’s having a field day playing a real bad-ass villain, so this could be fun.

And based on the trailers I’ve seen, STRAW DOGS looks pretty intense.

On September 23 we’ll be reviewing THE KILLER ELITE, a hit-man movie starring Jason Stratham, Robert DeNiro and Clive Owen. This one looks like it’ll be fun, and I always enjoy DeNiro, so I’m looking forward to it.

LS: To tell you the truth, I haven’t enjoyed DeNiro in a movie in a long time, so I’m really hoping he’s good in this one.

MA:  I liked him in MACHETE (2010), and he was good in LIMITLESS (2011).

LS:  Clive Owen is pretty reliable to turn in a good performance, and Jason Stratham is one of the few action heroes I actually enjoy watching in these kinds of movies. So it looks pretty good to me, too. It shares a name with a 1975 spy drama called THE KILLER ELITE, starring James Caan and Robert Duvall, but I’m not sure if it’s an actual remake.

This same weekend, we might also review ABDUCTION, starring Taylor Lautner—the shirtless werewolf guy from the TWILIGHT movies.

MA: Say it ain’t so!!!

Not good looking. Can't act. How did he get a movie career?

LS: It really depends on if we’re in the mood to do two movies that weekend. The way I see it, ABDUCTION might be an unintentional laugh-fest, because Lautner is a horrible actor, or just plain unwatchable. If it’s one of those “so-bad-it’s-good” movies, I’d be interested in seeing it. If it’s just plain bad, I hope we decide to skip it.

MA: I’ll barf now (barfs into barf bag) and that’s really all I have to say about Taylor Lautner and ABDUCTION.

We finish the very busy month of September with DREAM HOUSE, a haunted house movie starring Daniel Craig, which opens on September 30. Not that I’m a big fan of haunted house movies, but I am a big fan of Daniel Craig, and this movie looks somewhat interesting, so I’m looking forward to it.

It also has Naomi Watts and Rachel Weisz in the cast, so it has some star power. It’s directed by Jim Sheridan, who directed MY LEFT FOOT (1999) and IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER (1993), two excellent films featuring Daniel Day-Lewis, so it has an experienced director at the helm.

LS: I don’t know a lot about this one. I guess it sounds okay. But what I have seen of the trailer, this one could go either way.

MA: All right then. That wraps things up from here. We can leave the moon and go home now.

LS: I dunno. I kinda like it here. With no one here to distract me, I could really make some headway with my novels.

MA: Yeah, but what are you going to do when you get hungry? Order take-out?

LS: Everyone knows the moon is made of cheese. (Reaches down and plucks up a succulent slice of Swiss cheese, which he promptly eats.)

ASTRONAUT: Are you kidding me? All this time I’ve been sucking down that awful liquefied astronaut food, and I could have been feasting on cheese? Let me have some! (begins to remove his helmet).

MA: No, wait—!

(Without his helmet, astronaut gasps for air. MA helps him put his helmet back on.)

ASTRONAUT: It’s not fair!

LS: Quit your whining! At least you get paid!

ASTRONAUT: Well, if you put it that way—but that moon cheese looks awfully good.

LS: You can buy all the cheese you want when you go back home.

MA: Speaking of which, I’m heading there now. (to LS) Are you coming or staying?

LS: I guess I’ll head back. Something tells me I wouldn’t get much writing done here anyway. (ASTRONAUT chops at the moon’s surface with a golf club, looking for cheese.)

MA: Okay, folks, we’re heading back to Earth, and we’ll see you in September with reviews of lots of new movies!

LS: See you then!

—END—

Leave A Comment »

COWBOYS & ALIENS

Posted in 2011, Aliens, Blockbusters, Cinema Knife Fights, Monsters, Westerns with tags , , , , , , , on August 1, 2011 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: COWBOYS & ALIENS (2011)
By Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

(THE SCENE: A saloon in the old West. Cowboys sit at tables, playing cards and drinking. On the small stage at one end of the room is the cantina band from STAR WARS, playing bizarre-looking instruments and other-worldly tunes. L.L. SOARES enters through the swinging doors and sidles up to the bar. He’s wearing a black cowboy hat and has a toothpick between his teeth).

LS: Gimme that drink that Yosemite Sam used to have in the old Warner Brothers cartoons.

BARTENDER: Coming right up, sir.

(Bartender puts on a welder’s mask and mixes up a bunch of liquids that culminate in a small explosion, then hands the glass over with tongs. LS takes a sip)

LS: Ahhh! Perfect.

(The doors swing open again and MICHAEL ARRUDA saunters in, wearing a white cowboy hat and a bright green vest. He also goes to the bar).

MA: I’ll have your biggest, coldest glass of  milk.

BARTENDER: Yes, of course, sir.

MA: And don’t bother pasteurizing it or homogenizing it. I want mine STRAIGHT UP.

BARTENDER (shaking a little): Certainly.

(BARTENDER brings tall glass and puts it in front of MA, who takes a sip)

MA: Ahhh!

LS: Unpasteurized did you say? You sure do live dangerously, pardner!

MA: You can say that again.

LS: You sure do live dangerously, pardner!

MA: What is there, an echo in here?

LS: Well, since we’re here to review the new movie COWBOYS & ALIENS, I suppose we should get to it.

MA: You start. I’m enjoying this milk too much. (Belches loudly). (To Bartender): Hey, you got any cookies to go with this?

BARTENDER: Right away, sir.

LS: Yeah, so this week’s movie is COWBOYS & ALIENS. I have to admit, I wasn’t too excited about seeing this one. The trailer didn’t look all that great. Of course, the fact that I’ve seen the trailer like 75 times and have it ingrained in my brain doesn’t help. But this one surprised me a little. As for what it’s about – well the title says it pretty succinctly.

MA: Kind of like SNAKES ON A PLANE (2006).

LS: Yeah, except this one didn’t suck. Well, not completely.

MA: I didn’t think this one sucked at all .

LS: Shhh. I don’t want to give away my verdict in the first page!

MA: Whatever. Continue, pardner.

LS: Right off the bat, we’re thrust into the action as cowboy Daniel Craig—the latest James Bond 007 himself—wakes up to find himself in the middle of the desert with no memory of who he is or where he came from. He doesn’t even have any shoes! He does, however, have some weird-looking manacle-like contraptions on his left arm, and a gaping wound in his side. Even with these handicaps, he makes quick work of some grimy looking bounty hunters who ride by and decide there might be a price on his head.

MA: I liked this opening scene. It was a fine way to start the movie.

LS: Yeah, right in the middle of the action. I liked it, too.

So this cowboy takes his pick of the dead bounty hunters’ clothes and horses while they’re pushing up daisies, and rides into the nearest town, where everyone seems to be afraid of a punk kid who likes to shoot his gun to scare people, Percy Dolarhyde (Paul Dano), who gets away with his behavior because his daddy is the big cattle baron in those parts and pretty much keeps the town running with his prosperous business. Of course, being new to town, Mr. Craig doesn’t know he’s supposed to run cowering from this annoying kid, and kicks him in the jewels. The sheriff (the great Keith Carradine, who’s been in everything from Robert Altman movies to DEADWOOD, and a whole lot more), brings them both in and locks them up in the jailhouse. Percy for being a nuisance (and accidentally shooting a deputy) and Craig because he looks an awful lot like a guy he saw on a “Wanted” poster.

It’s about this time that the kid’s daddy, Woodrow Dolarhyde (Harrison Ford) rides into town, intent on springing his troublesome son, when some other visitors decide to show up. Except these ain’t riding horses. They’re flying in on brightly lit aircraft that look like giant metal dragonflies. Oh, and they like to shoot out hooked wires and abduct whoever they can get ahold of.

Mr. No Name (we later learn his name is Jake) finally figures out what that thing on his arm is when it suddenly springs to life and blasts one of the spaceships to kingdom come, which just makes him all the more mysterious. Who is the feller and what’s his story, anyway?

The rest of the film involves Craig, Ford, and a bunch of other townspeople going on a trek to find where the spaceships took their loved ones. And along the way they meet up with hostile bandits, hostile Native Americans, and even more hostile alien monsters.

This movie actually turned out to be better than I was expecting, and a big part of that is the fact that it was directed by Jon Favreau. Who knew that the whiny guy who starred in and wrote the indie comedy SWINGERS (1996) and directed and starred in the gangster comedy MADE (2001), with his buddy Vince Vaughn, would later go on to become an A-list director of summer blockbusters? But that’s exactly where his career has gone, and he’s pretty good at it. I mean, this is the same guy who gave us the IRON MAN movies (okay, the second one wasn’t so great, but the first one rocked!), and he replicates some of the same magic here.

MA: Yes, I agree about Favreau . I loved IRON MAN (2008), and in spite of certain aspects of this movie I didn’t find so hot, I loved COWBOYS & ALIENS as well.

LS: Another big plus is the cast.

MA: I agree . The cast is terrific.

LS: Daniel Craig, he of the rugged features and piercing blue eyes, makes a pretty decent cowboy and an effortless leading man. The guy is perfect for this kind of role, and it’s nice to see him do the occasional non-James Bond movie now and then. He’s much too good an actor to be tied to one franchise.

MA: I liked Craig too . He’s one of my favorite actors right now, and he’s very good again here . However, I’ve seen him better . I like him better as Bond, and his performance here is not as strong as the riveting one he delivered in DEFIANCE (2008).

LS: Personally, I prefer some his earlier films like when he played artist Francis Bacon’s lover in LOVE IS THE DEVIL (1998) and as a gangster in movies like ROAD TO PERDITION (2002) and LAYER CAKE (2004). I’m just not a big Bond guy, although I think Craig is one of the best two actors to tackle the role (the other being Sean Connery). It’s funny, I didn’t realize I was a Craig fan from so long ago – there’s something about him that feels current and new.

MA: And while he makes a solid tough guy, based on his performance in this western, he’s no John Wayne or Clint Eastwood . Wayne and Eastwood, in addition to being tough, infused tremendous personality into their roles, and Craig doesn’t do this here. Even Jeff Bridge’s recent performance in TRUE GRIT (2010) was more on target than Craig’s in this movie . Craig was good, but he could have been better.

LS: A lot of people were excited to see Craig paired with Harrison Ford here, but I guess I wasn’t one of them. I’ve never been a big Ford fan, even though I thought his Han Solo was one of the better characters in the STAR WARS series, and he starred in one of my all-time favorite sci-fi flicks, BLADE RUNNER (1982). But I’ve also found him to be kind of wooden and unexciting in a lot of roles, and the INDIANA JONES series never really wowed me (I know, I know, I’m the only one who doesn’t love Indie!).

MA: Well, hold onto your hat, pardner, but I’m not a big INDIANA JONES fan either! I liked RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (1981) a lot, but the rest of the films I could take or leave . Your take on Harrison Ford is interesting . I would agree with everything you said….

LS: We agree on something? Do wonders never cease?

MA: ….except, in spite of the numerous wooden and unexciting roles, I’ve somehow always liked Ford, and I think it’s because he’s good at creating likeable characters . He doesn’t tend to blow you away with deep tremendous performances, but he does act like a favorite uncle who you can’t help but like . So, I was one of those people who was looking forward to the pairing of Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford.

LS: Here, in COWBOYS & ALIENS, Ford is pretty good as a grizzled former soldier who starts out looking like the town bully and all-around bad guy, but eventually turns out to be one of the white hats. He and Craig do have some onscreen chemistry, but I thought Craig dominated every scene he was in with ease.

MA: Yeah, Harrison Ford is cast against type . Curiously, I liked Ford better early on in the movie when his character was more of a bully . Later, when he softens and becomes more of a good guy, I thought he fell back into the more traditional Harrison Ford role, only older and grumpier . I wish he had stayed villainous . It was more refreshing to watch.

LS: I completely agree. I would have preferred if he’d stayed a bad guy throughout, just for something different.

MA: I don’t know about the onscreen chemistry between Craig and Ford, though. I thought that was one of the areas where the film lagged. I didn’t find much chemistry between them at all . A buddy movie, this ain’t!

LS: Really, there are some scenes at the end where they seem to have become buddies!

MA:  I disagree.  To me it looked like Craig was just tolerating Ford and would have kicked him in the ass if he had the chance.

But you’re right about Craig dominating every scene he’s in. This is definitely Daniel Craig’s movie . He would have carried this movie even without Ford.

LS: Easily. Hey, I thought you said Craig wasn’t as good here as he was in some of his other movies? Now it’s his movie? Make up your mind.

MA: It is his movie . I’ve just seen him better in other movies . He’s that good of an actor, in my book.

LS: Also, Ford’s character is named Dolarhyde, an unusual enough name that made me think instantly of Francis Dolarhyde, Tom Noonan’s sinister character in MANHUNTER (1986) and Ralph Fiennes played the same character in the remake RED DRAGON (2002).

MA: I thought there were some curious names in this movie . Dolarhyde made me think of dollars, and when the film begins, Dolarhyde is quite the greedy character .

LS: Makes sense. He’s definitely greedy, and I don’t see any clues that he’s a serial killer like Francis Dolarhyde. (Laughs)  It’s just an unusual name that stuck out for me.

MA: Craig’s character is named Jake Lonergan—he’s a loner, the solitary mysterious man with no name who rides into town a la Clint Eastwood in the Sergio Leone westerns.

LS: Yep, the fact that he couldn’t remember his name throughout most of the movie definitely made me think of Eastwood’s iconic Man With No Name. Except Eastwood’s character was more self-assured and didn’t have memory problems.

MA: Adam Beach plays a character named Nat Colorado . Colorado is the name of the Ricky Nelson character in the classic Howard Hawks/John Wayne western RIO BRAVO (1959) .

LS: Fascinating. It’s also the name of a state. (Laughs)

The rest of the cast is pretty good too, chock full of seasoned character actors from Sam Rockwell (who’s been in everything from the Chuck Barris biopic CONFESSIONS OF A DANGEROUS MIND in 2002 to MOON from 2009) to Walton Goggins (from the FX Channel TV-series THE SHIELD and the new FX series JUSTIFIED) to Clancy Brown as a preacher named Meacham (you might remember him as another preacher, Brother Justin Crowe, in the HBO series CARNIVALE). We’ve also got Olivia Wilde as the main lady here (a lot of people might recognize her as “Thirteen” from the FOX series HOUSE), and a perty one she is, even if I did burst out laughing when they first showed her in a pretty cotton dress and a big ol’ gunbelt strapped across it. She’s just as mysterious as Craig’s character, and we eventually find out why.

MA: I also liked Keith Carradine as the sheriff, and Noah Ringer as the little boy who “grows up” (translation: he learns to kill! Ahhh, rites of passage in the old west!) was also very good .

LS: I’m a huge Carradine fan from way back, and this isn’t his first western role. He was excellent as Wild Bill Hickock in the HBO show DEADWOOD (which I mentioned earlier), played Buffalo Bill Cody in a movie called WILD BILL in 1995 and his first film role was in Robert Altman’s revisionist western, MCCABE AND MRS. MILLER, way back in 1971, when he was more famous for being the brother of actor David Carradine and son of the horror legend, actor John Carradine.

As for the kid, he’s good, but I didn’t think he was anything special. It seems like he’s there more to mellow out Harrison Ford’s character, whose son in the movie is a disappointment, so Ford is drawn to this kid who’s more of a clean slate, and takes him under his wing.

MA: And I thought Paul Dano stood out early on as Percy Dolarhyde, the pain-in-the-ass son of Ford’s character.

LS: He’s great at playing pains-in-the-ass! He was also the annoying preacher in THERE WILL BE BLOOD (2007).

MA: My favorite performance though, of the supporting players, belonged to Sam Rockwell as Doc . He was excellent.

LS: I think Rockwell is a very underrated actor who deserves more attention. But I don’t think Doc was one of his better roles. It was good, but he’s had a lot better.

As for the monsters, well, CGI remains a very imperfect tool. So there are scenes where the alien monsters look pretty damn cool, and other times where they look clunky and hurky-jerky, but overall I was pretty impressed with them. I even thought they were just as formidable as the otherworldly critter we saw earlier this summer in JJ Abrams’ SUPER 8, in a few scenes.

MA: I would agree that the aliens ran hot and cold in this movie . They didn’t blow me away by any means . Will there ever be an alien or aliens as frightening as the alien in ALIEN (1979) and its first sequel, ALIENS (1986)? These new CGI aliens just don’t cut it . They’re too cartoonish, and cartoons just aren’t scary!

LS: I agree. The monsters from the ALIEN movies are still the gold standard for extraterrestrial creatures. Thank you, H.R. Giger.

MA: However, like you said, there are times when these aliens are pretty cool-looking . I thought they were better than what we saw in BATTLE: LOS ANGELES (2011) and SKYLINE (2010), but not quite as good as the aliens in DISTRICT 9 (2009).

LS: Yeah, the aliens in DISTRICT 9 were something completely different and original. But I think Favreau’s monsters in COWBOYS & ALIENS are pretty effective for the most part.

MA: I liked the hands coming out of the alien’s chest to grab people . I thought this was cool . They were also kinda menacing, in a PG-13 sort of way, mostly because they abducted humans and performed painful experiments on them . So, yeah, they were kind of disturbing when they weren’t looking like expensive cartoons.

LS: Yep, those crazy hands were an interesting feature. It looks like they were situated right next to the creatures’ lungs in their chest cavities. Weird—and cool.

MA: I thought the alien ships were just OK . They were better when they weren’t seen . When they were shown as lights in the sky, they were creepy . When we see the actual ships, again—cartoon.

LS: Gotta agree with you there.

(GREEDO from the original STAR WARS (1977) —we refuse to call it “A New Hope” —and Boba Fett from THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK (1980) get up from their table and approach the bar. GREEDO says something in some incomprehensible alien language)

LS: What did he say?

BOBA FETT: He said he likes your friend’s vest.

(LS looks up and down at MA’s bright green vest)

LS: He’s no friend of mine.

MA (looks at LS): Likewise, you sidewinder.

LS: Come on, give the weirdo alien your vest.

MA: That’ll be the day.

LS: Sorry guys, I think we have a guy here who doesn’t like to share.

(GREEDO bursts into tears and runs out of the saloon. BOBA FETT shakes his helmeted head and goes after him)

LS: Meanie!

MA: And proud of it!

LS: With its attention to detail, great pacing, and even some scares, COWBOYS & ALIENS is a lot more fun than I was expecting, and it was certainly as good as the superhero films we’ve been seeing this summer (COWBOYS & ALIENS is also based on a comic book –er, sorry, “graphic novel” —by Scott Mitchell Rosenberg and Platinum Studios). It’s no IRON MAN (2008), because nobody here is as entertaining as Robert Downey Jr. was in that movie, but Daniel Craig is close in his intense own way, and it’s easily as good as two other recent summer blockbusters, THOR and CAPTAIN AMERICA.

MA: I actually liked it a little bit better than THOR and CAPTAIN AMERICA.

LS: Another thing I liked about it was the way the movie didn’t immediately become a science fiction film once the aliens were introduced. This movie is as much a western as it is a sci-fi flick, with some storylines deeply entrenched in the time period, and others leading up to the big finale as the bandits, cowboys and Indians all “bury the hatchet” and team up to battle the greater evil from another world.

MA: I agree . I liked the western aspects of this movie a lot . In fact, there were times I almost wished it had been a straight western.

As a whole, I found COWBOYS & ALIENS to be one curious movie, and I’ve used that word several times here during this column on purpose because I found this to be an odd movie that works exceptionally well, in spite of its flaws.

I won’t beat around the bush . I REALLY liked COWBOYS & ALIENS, and I found it to be a very entertaining movie . I saw it in a packed theater (by far, the most crowded theater I’ve been in this summer) and the audience was really into it.

What makes this movie so curious? For starters, it takes two standard formulas that aren’t really all that original, puts them together, and presto! It creates something original . The western plot is as old as the gold rush . A mysterious bad man rides into town, and he beats up on the town bully, only to have the bully’s father, a powerful greedy son of a bitch, ride into town to rescue his son and give this stranger his comeuppance . We’ve seen shades of this plot in countless westerns, from A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS (1964) to RIO BRAVO (1959) and EL DORADO (1966).

The plot of aliens invading the earth to experiment on humans—it goes without saying, there’s nothing original about this plot, either . However, put this story in the old west, and suddenly, you’re onto something.

I’m not sure if I buy the whole thing, the whole gimmick, but I have to say, I think it works because I sat there as entertained and satisfied by this movie as I’ve been by any movie this summer.

LS: There were a few times when it seemed a bit “gimmicky” to me, but for the most part, the genres blended well, and this is a clever concept. But this certainly isn’t the first time that anyone has thought to combine genres this way. We’ve seen several horror/westerns hybrids over the years from the vampire movie, CURSE OF THE UNDEAD (1959) to the dinosaurs in THE VALLEY OF GWANGI (1969), and more recently, the burrowing monsters in J.T. Petty’s THE BURROWERS (2008), which also starred Clancy Brown who was the preacher in COWBOYS & ALIENS!

And don’t forget Z-movie gems like director William Beaudine’s one-two-punch of JESSE JAMES MEETS FRANKENSTEIN’S DAUGHTER and BILLY THE KID VS. DRACULA, both from 1966.

MA: True, but none of these western/horror hybrids involved aliens from outer space.

I also liked the plot point where the cowboys and the Native Americans have to team up to battle the aliens . Sure, we’ve seen this before too, (the enemy of my enemy is my friend) but how many times have we seen these two particular warring groups join forces against a common foe in the movies? Not many.

There’s also a rousing music score by Harry Gregson-Williams, a composer who has a ton of movie soundtrack credits . To name just a few, he wrote the music scores for UNSTOPPABLE (2010), X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE (2009) and the SHREK movies.

All in all, COWBOYS & ALIENS provides grand summer movie entertainment . It’s anchored by a solid performance by Daniel Craig, it has a great cast of supporting actors led by Harrison Ford, it enjoys a decent plot, and its aliens are rather menacing for a summer blockbuster-type movie.

It’s my favorite of the summer movies so far, and I give COWBOYS & ALIENS - three and a half knives.

LS: I liked it, too, but I don’t think as much as you did. It was a great popcorn movie, and while I was watching it, I really enjoyed it, but afterwards, it was kind of forgettable. But this is exactly the kind of movie a lot of people are looking for in the summertime. I liked it at least as much as THOR, my favorite superhero blockbuster of the summer so far, so I’ll give it three knives. Although, I’ll admit, it almost nudged me into giving it that extra half-knife, too, but I think I was a little too generous with CAPTAIN AMERICA, so I’m gonna be a little stingy this time, to balance it out.

(A group of COWBOYS are having a discussion at one of the tables, and the biggest, meanest one of them gets up and approaches the bar).

MEAN COWBOY: You fellers are clearly not from around here.

LS: Yeah, so?

MEAN COWBOY: We don’t like strangers coming into our saloon.

MA: That’s funny, considering your house band is from Alpha Centauri.

MEAN COWBOY: Enough with the jokes. You two better skedaddle if you know what’s good for you.

LS: Or else what? You gonna shoot us?

MEAN COWBOY (takes a menacing pause and then says): Maybe.

(LS takes out a weird black box and looks at it)

MEAN COWBOY: Now, what might that be?

LS: It’s called a Taser.

(He shoots it at the COWBOY, who drops to the ground and starts screaming. The rest of the cowboys cower to the edges of the room)

LS: You see, Michael, this is why I love time traveling. We can always introduce ornery types like this guy to new technologies and learn them something.

MA: Yeah, and completely mess up the space/time continuum in the process.

LS: Oh well, that’s life.

MA: We probably should get going, after all. We’ve got another movie to review next week, and time travel isn’t an exact science.

LS: True enough. (to bar patrons) Later, gators.

(MA and LS leave the saloon to the strains of menacing Ennio Morricone music)

-THE END-

© Copyright 2011 by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

Michael Arruda gives COWBOYS & ALIENS ~ three and a half knives.

L.L. Soares gives COWBOYS & ALIENS ~ three knives.

Leave A Comment »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 80 other followers