Open Letters Monthly: Riddick

I always like a well-examined science fiction tale. Take the story of Richard B. Riddick, for example. He (played by actor Vin Diesel) was the star of the unexpected hit Pitch Black over a dozen years ago, gathering quite the cult following. Four years later he got a big budget sequel - The Chronicles of Riddick - that sadly wasn't as good or as popular as it could have been. Almost ten years later, and the popular anti-hero is back to small-scale productions with Riddick, a return to the formula that made Pitch Black so beloved.

Betrayed by his army and left for dead on a dangerous planet, Riddick has no choice but to rediscover his animal instinct. After doing so, there's just the matter of getting off that rock and getting home. But two groups of bounty hunters, seeking him for two separate reasons, stand between him and freedom. As the three groups begin fighting one another, it's quickly determined that the former convict and murderer is not the most dangerous thing they have to fear, and all parties must work together if they are to have any chance to survive.

Riddick is directed by David Twohy and stars Vin Diesel, Jordi Molla, Matt Nable, Katee Sackhoff, Dave Bautista, Bokeem Woodbine, and Karl Urban.

Click here for the full review at Open Letters Monthly.

Open Letters Monthly: Star Trek Into Darkness

It's been four years, millions of dollars and trillions of 3D applications, but we're finally getting our new Star Trek. Star Trek Into Darkness is the continuing story of J.J. Abrams' reboot of the Gene Rodenberry 1960's television show, replacing legends William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy with Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto. It shouldn't have worked, but thankfully 2009 saw tons of respect thrown towards Trekkies of all ages, and Abrams' vision proved amenable to moviegoers everywhere. Now he's back with BBC's 'Sherlock' as a villain, and the result is everything you would want from the director before he runs off and directs the new Star Wars sequel.

After a mission in which Captain Kirk betrays the sacred Prime Directive to save his friend, he finds himself stripped of his rank, his friendship, and his command of the starship Enterprise. But a second chance makes itself known when the terrorist known as John Harrison attacks Starfleet, igniting an epic manhunt when he flees deep into Klingon territory. Now it's up to Kirk and the Enterprise to capture one man and make him pay for the lives he has taken. But everything is not as it seems, and Kirk may learn that his brash actions have consequences affecting everybody under his command.

Star Trek Into Darkness is directed by J.J. Abrams and stars Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Benedict Cumberbatch, Karl Urban, Alice Eve, Peter Weller, Bruce Greenwood, Simon Pegg, John Cho and Anton Yelchin.

Click here for the full review at Open Letters Monthly.

Movie Monday: Dredd Life

How far can you possibly run from a Sylvester Stallone movie? Dredd has used excellent acting, a well-told story and major contributions from the character's creator in distancing itself from the horrible 1995 flick Judge Dredd. With screenwriter Alex Garland directly behind this reboot, we have a Dredd who doesn't enter romantic relations and never EVER removes his helmet. Thank you, Hollywood!

In the nuclear wasteland that is North America, one light of life is Mega-City One, stretching from Boston to Washington, populated by over 800 million people. With so much humanity crammed together, chaos and criminal activity run the streets, with innocents often trapped in their hellish nets. The city's response to the overwhelming violence? The Judges, granted the combined powers of judge, jury and - when necessary - executioner. Judge Dredd is one of the best, but even he knows that there's only so much the Judges can do in such a large city. While tasked with assessing the potential of psychic, rookie Judge Anderson, they find themselves on the bad side of drug kingpin Ma-Ma, who traps them in a slum complex and sends her men in to wipe them out. The only way out is up, and without backup Dredd and Anderson must scale 200 floors to shut down Ma-Ma's criminal enterprise if they want any chance at survival.

Dredd is written by Alex Garland and directed by Pete Travis and stars Karl Urban, Olivia Thirlby and Lena Headey.

Click here to read the full review at Open Letters Monthly.

Overdue for Confession

Last year, in Hello Mr. Anderson's (at the time still called The Latest Issue) first annual Worst Films competition, the ultimate winner was a small sci-fi horror film many won't remember since it was overshadowed by juggernaut Avatar. Legion came in second at the box office on its opening weekend in January, but was nowhere close to the quality of the film it failed to out-gross. Marred by a flimsy plot, lousy storytelling, poor camerawork and a complete mismanagement of a legitimate big-name cast, the film was a disaster in the making, and hardly a strong start to the directorial career of Scott Charles Stewart, a jack of all film trades who specialized in visual effects before creating this particular trash. Normally, when a film is this bad, no studio is clamoring for a director with this particular lack of talent to rush to make more movies, let along give him a little more rope with which to perhaps hang himself. But with a positive audience draw (who actually paid money to see this in the theater?), the film made enough money to confuse someone into paying him to adapt the relatively unknown Korean graphic novel Priest into a full-blown film. Endowed with an even bigger budget, Stewart proceeded to make a film that sure looked pretty in the trailers (and in ho-hum 3D, no less), but with the lingering taste of Legion on my tongue, I could hardly state that I was excited in the least when it came out this past weekend.

Bettany got tired of those "pull my finger" vampire jokes quickly

For untold centuries, there has been war between normal humans and the animalistic vampires, who are ruthless killing machines but thankfully are kept in check by the sun. That is, there WAS a war, until the human side somehow developed Priests, holy warriors, out of seemingly nowhere. Gifted with supernatural strength and skills, Priests turned the tide of the war and ended the vampire threat, supposedly once and for all. Years later, the vampires seem to have returned, and one unnamed Priest (Paul Bettany) has a personal vendetta when they attack his brother's farm and kidnap his niece Lucy (Lily Collins). Despite the ruling of the Church (who govern the few human cities left) that there is no real vampire menace, Priest gathers what few allies he has and gives chase to stop a new human/vampire war before it can begin anew.

That's a big gun; compensating for something, are we?

Of course, we see precious little of the actual war. What we do see, besides an early half-remembered dream of one Priest vs. Vamp mash-up, is displayed using terrible animation as a precursor history to the film's story. I can't help but wish they had come up with a better way, as the imagery is brutish and ugly; while that might have been what Stewart was going for, it doesn't paint a good first impression for those who paid for their tickets. Actually, none of the special effects are particularly effective; while some of the visuals are undeniably pretty, very little else looks remotely realistic. The supposedly-dangerous vampires LOOK like CGI entities instead of flesh-and-blood monsters, and many of the slow-motion camerawork meant to make the fight scenes more comprehensible instead draw the eyes to the film's faults. These are even more exacerbated by the producers' apparent insistence on converting the film to 3D, technology which had already become stale by the end of 2010. The worst thing about the 3D that I can think to say is that you don't even NOTICE it by the halfway mark, and there doesn't seem to be anything so special that it ever benefits from the "enhancement."

Attack of the one-legged she-wolves, anyone?

Of course, that half-assed approach to the visuals permeates into the rest of the filmmaking process as well. You'd never think Stewart knew what he was doing with all the storytelling foibles that are packed into a film that runs only an hour and a half. Scenes feel half-finished and don't blend into the next; it's almost as if the entire film was chopped down from an unbelievably longer cut; nothing seems to gel, and too much is in fact too little, with silly little things like "character development" and "plot" swept under a rug, never to be seen again. What results is film that instead of transporting us to a new universe does us the disservice of stranding us in the desert with only a broken compass and a thumbtack to survive.

The newest Disney ride has a few kinks to work out...

Paul Bettany returns as Stewart's leading man (he also headlined Legion), and while it's good to see him treated as the star he should be, I wish he could be cast as such in a good film. Rightfully praised for his support work in films like A Beautiful Mind and Master and Commander, Bettany definitely has the talent to be a star. But, Paul, I'm begging you: step away from the edge, man! It's fine if you want to do more action-oriented sci-fi films; I'm actually of the opinion that there aren't nearly enough of that genre made these days. But Stewart is simply mishandling Bettany's talents, wasting horrid dialogue on Bettany's voice, who had a deeper role as the artificial intelligence J.A.R.V.I.S. in the Iron Man films. The supporting cast is maligned as well, mostly talented performers delivering rote lines and grim humorless expressions. Probably the best is Collins, whose small role as Priest's niece has the broadest range of all the characters involved. Karl Urban is another underloved talent, like so many from the Earth's Oceanic region. It's a shame when your best-known role was made famous by another actor, and Urban's Dr. Bones McCoy will probably be long overshadowed by DeForest Kelley, even if his performance was well and truly spot-on. As the film's vampiric villain Urban does his best but is hamstrung by his character being one-dimensional and uninteresting. Cam Gigandet is okay as a small-town sheriff who joins Priest, but like everybody else plays a cliched role. I don't even know if I'm supposed to be impressed by Maggie Q; the closest thing the US has to a modern action starlet outside of Angelina Jolie does action okay but is again struck by a complete inability to show emotion. Stephen Moyer, Christopher Plummer and Brad Dourif are similarly unmotivated, playing typical roles meant for unknowns in need of a paycheck, not established actors. That's the problem with Priest, however, as one can't imagine what was presented to the actors to make them take these roles in the first place. You never get the impression that anyone is having FUN on the set, and that's a sobering experience.

Cheery fellow, isn't he?

And that's really what Priest is; a film that didn't need to be made. While Dylan Dog suffered through a lousy opening weekend, at least that could be blamed on lack of a push from the studios, as the similarly-supernatural title failed to make an impact because nobody heard about it. Priest got all kinds of attention, not to mention a shiny 3D conversion to drive up ticket sales, and will probably be remembered as a bust when it finally exits theaters. So why is this? The easy answer is that it's simply a bad movie, but to be fair, the sci-fi genre doesn't often get a big show of support from even die-hard fans, and the big hits are often descended from popular comics or books that developed followings from decades past. That still doesn't excuse Stewart from making yet another contender for the year's Worst Film list, and one has to wonder why he's being given another chance, adapting Cassandra Clare's popular Mortal Instruments book series into a scheduled 2012 release. He's already shown that he doesn't have what it takes, and if he continues to eek a career out of this level of shoddiness, I'm sure I can expect to hate his upcoming work for years to come.

Got Some Red on Me

So last week I took the opportunity to catch Red in the theater. Loosely based on the three-issue comic series by DC comics, the action/comedy proved to have an entertaining trailer, and with such a cast as Willis, Freeman, Mirren and Malkovich it seemed to be one of the "can't-miss" films of the year. But would seeing Red make you see red?

The story apparently has little to do with that of the original comic series (which is fine, since I never read it) but centers around a group of retired former wetworks operatives codenamed RED (Retired, Extremely Dangerous) who are temporarily brought out of their relatively listless lives due to C.I.A. hit squads suddenly try to take out retired operative Frank Moses (Bruce Willis), and not in the date sense. In questing to find out why he's being targeted for death, Willis is joined by his former mentor Joe (Morgan Freeman), madman Marvin (John Malkovich), successfully retired S.A.S. agent Victoria (Helen Mirren), and Sarah (Mary-Louise Parker), a benefits worker who Frank has taken a liking to and is therefore also being targeted. The mission takes them to locales around the United States and proves that these folks can still perform like spring chickens when they need to.

Season's greetings!

The story here is a slightly unrealistic one involving conspiracy theories, government cover-ups, unlikely coincidences and unlikely romances. So it has to be held together by a band of characters and actors who can center the attention of the audience on themselves and make the story more palatable than it is. To that effort, it's commendable that this is in fact an amazing cast who work well together, from the big name stars to the lower tiered yet no less talented performers. Willis is usually not known for his pleasant demeanor on-screen. In fact, he does get his "yippie-ki-yay" game face on for much of the film. I don't know if it stems from working with older actors, however, but Willis somehow in Red gains something I've not seen from him in many of his performances: an almost boy-like wonder, especially when he's in scenes with his character's crush, Sarah. For once, he's not the top dog, at least not in all things, and it makes his character and his acting all the better. Malkovich is a hoot as a partially-psychotic former agent first seen hiding out in the Louisiana bayou. The part of Marvin was originally to be played by John C. Reilly, and while I've liked Reilly and can see him being successful in this type of role, he's simply outclassed by Malkovich in all aspects. Playing Marvin as defiant, schizophrenic, and, of course, paranoid of any number of possible conspiracies, Malkovich puts on one of his more memorable performances, certainly a step up from his last major role in the seriously underperforming Changeling. Of course, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean people aren't out to get you, and so his character turns out to at times be more insightful than he would be otherwise. I simply can't imagine anyone but Malkovich in that role. Mirren is fantastic, with looks that could kill (sorry, I couldn't resist) and the demeanor you would expect from a true secret agent. She really takes to the somewhat humorous role with the same professionalism as she has in her multiple-nominated roles in the films The Queen and The Last Station, not to mention dozens of other similarly-lauded roles over the course of her career. Both the irony of seeing such a serious actress wielding high-caliber machine guns and the perfection of seeing the same thing lend a lot of credence to her ability as an actress. Of the main four, only Morgan Freeman disappoints, as there's simply not enough for him to do with his role, with all the best bits belonging to Willis, Malkovich and Mirren.

Not sure what to make of this scene

I was prepared to dislike Parker in this. Obviously most people know the actress as Nancy Botwin on Showtime's Weeds, but it's easy to forget that she has a long career in film and television preceding this, as I did. Frankly, the only film I've seen her in was Red Dragon, and her role was so small that I had completely forgotten about her not long after the fact. However, she shines here as an initially reluctant sidekick to Frank who gradually gets more and more excited as the terror and thrill of sneaking around and blowing stuff up puts a heavy emphasis on how dull and boring her regular life is. Parker is funny both physically and in her verbal delivery, a dual trait not many can claim to master. Also good though underutilized is Karl Urban as a C.I.A. agent tasked with taking out Frank. Urban has long been under-appreciated by Hollywood, with last year's Star Trek being his biggest and best opportunity to showcase his talents, and damned if he didn't make the best Doc McCoy since Deforest Kelly. Hopefully his role in Red is simply a gateway to bigger things and not a return to more of the same because he's far too talented to keep perpetually on the shelf. Brian Cox makes a surprise appearance as a former Russian agent who Frank goes to for help. I didn't even recognize Cox at first, his transformation so complete that it took me nearly half the film before it struck me who was uttering his lines, and his ability to meld into his part - as well as his charismatic interaction with the other characters, especially Mirren - makes for a great performance. Ernest Borgnine is simply wonderful as a records-keeper at the Agency, and Richard Dreyfus does a good if hammy job in a small but important role as a weapons' dealer and smuggler who is somehow involved with the conspiracy. These supporting performances, in conjunction with the larger star-held roles, mean that there are no weak moments with less-interesting characters pitted throughout the film, and the enjoyment level never dips because of that.

"He's dead, Jim. I killed him."

But great characters can't entirely keep together a plot secured by duct tape and staples. While interesting, the story is barely able to keep momentum throughout the film, and truly falters in the final act, when humor alone seems to be sustaining the plot threads, not suspense or drama, or even suspension of disbelief. We're never under the assumption that Frank and his team won't achieve their objective (though they never really GET an objective until near the end of the film) and that, unfortunately, makes the final payoff much less than it could have been. Also, the humor involving young upstarts calling members of the team "old man" or "grandpa" get old after a few turns, though the heroes' humorous (and often quite violent) responses make up for a lackluster effort by the screenwriters to get a cheap laugh at an older character's expense. It's a shame, but when your director's previous work was the same one who made The Time Traveler's Wife (Robert Schwentke), you have to expect that things won't be as good as you want them to be.

So THAT'S what John Malkovich looks like!

For it's sake, I wish Red had been released earlier this year. If it had, I would have grouped it with several action or comedic films I'd seen this year that rated favorably on my 2010 Top 10 List such as Alice in Wonderland, The Losers, and Date Night, all of which at one point dotted the list. However, all those titles were eventually knocked off the list by better films, and so Red, though it compares favorably with all those films, is denied a it's chance in the sun. It has great characters, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Malkovich get a Golden Globe nom for his performance (though I'd never expect him to win it), but the plot is simply too jumpy and the story poorly told and filled with extremely silly bits. Is it funny? Yes. Did I enjoy it? Indeed. Can I recommend it to people who want a cheap and silly film to see? Sure. Is it one of the best films of the year? A "can't miss"?

Sorry, machine-gun Mirren, no.