What do you do when you manage to create a comic-to-film adaptation that is able to eschew the inherent corniness that comes with the superhero genre and is actually equal parts clever, exciting, entertaining, action-packed, and culturally relevant in a way that doesn’t feel contrived or forced (okay, maybe it was a little contrived)? Well if Iron Man 2 is any indication you blow all the entertaining aspects from the original to such abrasive proportions that it loses the feel that made it so naturally entertaining rendering the final product into little more than a corny superhero flick. Disposable and forgettable.

It’s almost a tragedy really because Robert Downey Jr. still slips so comfortably back into the role of Tony Stark it’s frustrating to see everyone else stumble around him. My immediate issue is that every character is now attempting to be Tony Stark. Not as an intentional characteristic, just because the film is so enamored with making every character clever and witty. Tony’s ability to slip in a sly comment at just the right moment was on of the key elements that made the character and so endearing. Here everyone drops one-liners with the same exact intonation and delivery as Tony Stark. Except they’re not Tony Stark and they’re not being played by Robert Downey Jr. It just doesn’t work as well and the more characters I saw attempting to be little Tony Starks the more frustrated I got. The film is just one scene of witty banter that isn’t nearly as witty as it thinks it is after another. I was half expecting after every line that the delivering character would slowly turn their eyes toward the audience and send out a knowing wink.

In no way is this more apparent then in Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) a fellow arms magnate who, unlike the other characters who unintentionally become uninteresting versions of Tony, is clearly designed to be Tony, but uninteresting, unfunny, and abrasive. The issue is that any scene he’s in involves him talking at least four or five times longer than he needs to. When a character is meant to inspire audience hatred by being annoying it’s best to have him keep his mouth shut more often than not. Every time his well-barbered head filled the screen he’d just prattle on and on delivering one unfunny line after another. I don’t know if it’s possible to hate a character to death when you’re watching a film that’s already been edited and printed, but I clearly, and quite unfortunately, lack that particular skill. Oddly enough it’s almost upsetting that the main villain, Ivan Vanko, played by an misutilized Mickey Rourke, gets so little screen time. He’s not a particularly well done character (his ability to get rammed by a speeding car multiple times and walk away unscathed being particularly befuddling), but at least he’s doing his own thing. He feels like a unique snowflake next to the rest of the cookie cutter cast. Besides, in the Iron Man2’s defense he’s a hell of a lot better than the first movie’s, “Hey, I’m totally your buddy…Psyche! I was evil all along” villain played by Jeff Bridges.

So if everyone around Robert Downey Jr. is failing to deliver the goods is he able to carry the film on his capable shoulders? Well, yes and no. When the film is allowing Tony Stark to be Tony Stark the familiarity was warm and fuzzy like a pair of socks straight from the dryer, but the meandering plot keeps biting like a static shock. Clearly someone forgot to put a dryer sheet in with the load. The main driving force behind the film is that the world’s most pimped out pacemaker that is keeping Tony Stark alive is also slowly killing him because it’s leaking unobtainium into his body. So his reaction to this is to  be a reckless jackass in an attempt to squeeze as many good times into his remaining days while keeping it a secret from the few people he cares about. You’d think the guy who had no problem announcing that he was Iron Man (Duh-nuh-nu-nuh-nu-nuh-uh Naah-ah-ah) to the world would be cool with disclosing that his body’s got more terrible flash eroding particles in it than an Indian restaurant.

To be perfectly honest though it’s a capable way to advance the plot. I just wanted more since the first movie had such a great origin story. This is just meh, and gets pushed aside a lot. It’s there and then it gets solved. In the end nothing is lost and nothing was gained and we’re pretty much back where we started when the film set out, it was the safest possible way to go. Nothing was really offensive about it aside from a brief moment where Tony mourns that his father never really cared about him before almost immediately finding an old film that shows that the lovable old Walt Disney rip-off really did care all along. It’s almost insulting for that bit of plot to have made it in because it feels like the rebellious Tony being forced to explore the unresolved issues between him and a straight-laced and emotionless father would have been more intriguing way to forward the plot and develop the character

Oh and before I forget Scarlet Johannson is in the movie for no other reason than to remind you that Scarlet Johannson is painfully attractive. Enjoy it if you’ve got the requisite Y chromosome to appreciate such shameless pandering. It’s at the very least more arousing than Tony and Pepper Potts’ completely flat romance.

So what’s left is the boom-splosions that by law no movie staring a man in a robot suit should be without. The action sequences are appropriately loud, obnoxious, and filled with the required number of bright shiny explosions that causw millions of dollars in property damage and will make you just want to point out and go “ooooh” and “ahhhhh.” By the the finale came up though my investment in the film had already folded over and I just didn’t care. If you just want a popcorn flick I’m sure this will satisfy, but if you’re expecting something more from a sequel to a film that was something more than the average summer spectacle then you’re probably going to feel let down.

Several weeks ago, I received a package from the producer’s of “The Grover Complex” out of the blue. I read through the press kit they were kind enough to include, and have been meaning to watch and review it ever since. I finally had the opportunity to watch the movie and Monday, and was pleasantly surprised!

Initially reading through the press kit, I wasn’t sure what to expect. A film about a kid with a little insecurity regarding the size of his package, produced by a group of people as their very first feature – on an indie budget nonetheless. I figured it would be funny at parts, but most likely end up trying too hard to keep a few gags going.

What I found was a film where no efforts were spared, and few details overlooked. From a well planned and executed open with the perfect song and graphics, the filmmakers get right to the point. The laughs are generally well written throughout, and I didn’t find myself losing interest in the jokes at any point. By and large the acting by the main cast is great, though some parts seem overacted – possibly intentionally as part of the comedic effect, though some of that may have been lost on me. I thought the interactions between most of the characters worked well, something you don’t often see in the low budget arena – something to attribute both to a well written script, and well planned execution (putting the characters in relatively natural situations).

For me, the part that impressed me most was the technical prowess displayed in the visual component of the movie. The color scheme throughout was well saturated with a variety of colors, and the lighting really well done – again, something that’s often first to go in an indie film. Very few (if any) shots feel overlooked in terms of lighting, further demonstrating the meticulously planned work that went into each scene. Every once in a while I picked up on some very minimal sound recording issues, but by and large it was great – the music throughout compliments the film well; another demonstration of the work that went into planning.

And again – for a teen comedy, it’s important to point out that the story really holds together well. My general worry for this sort of movie is a string shoe storyline that doesn’t hold together – and that wasn’t at all the case here. I may have missed a joke here or there, or been confused about why some of the characters were seemingly over-acting at points – but on the whole, it really struck me as a well thought out story with plenty to offer in the entertainment department.

Regardless though – relatively bold choice to start out with the opening title sequence they did, and definitely one that I would say was the right choice!  I look forward to seeing this flick again, hopefully in a few weeks when I’ve got a little more time on my hands.

In the meantime, best of continued luck to the filmmakers in the always difficult search for distribution!  Check them out here:  http://www.thegrovercomplex.com/

-Matt

Kick-Ass

It’s true that British filmmaking needed a fillip and this may just be it.  The buzz around KICK-ASS has been unprecedented for a film funded and shot in the UK using a UK crew with a largely British cast.  We Brits just don’t normally do things this commercial on this kind of scale.

The trouble with “buzz” is that it’s far too easy to over-hype something based on giggles caused by an 11-year-old girl say “cunt” in the red-band trailer.  And that’s what KICK-ASS suffers from.

I caught the flick the week after release, so buzz – and controversy – had been swirling around it and building for months, hammered home by the ultimate in word-of-mouth kudos: the foaming-at-the-mouth anti-everything vitriol poured forth on any British film that’s not based on Jane Austin or starring Hugh Grant.

Kick-Ass is a fantastic, well-made, fun film – carefully constructed and with some brilliant performances, most notably Nic Cage channeling 60s-era Adam West when suited up.  And yes, Hit Girl rocks.

But I couldn’t help feeling that all the hype over Chloe Moretz’s performance and language (not to mention being by far the most violent character in the film) masks what is essentially a coming-of-age story wrapped inside a thinly-veiled Spider-man movie.

Director Matthew Vaughn is clearly a man who’s going places – and rightly so.  His visual flair and knack for canny casting stand him in great stead anyway, but couple that with an ability to make $30million look like $100million it must make him one of the hottest properties in the business right now.

It’s not the greatest movie ever made, but neither does it pretend to be.  It’s purely and simply part of too-small a club: the high-quality, high-concept, highly-commercially-minded Brit flick.  We need more of these, so let’s support Kick-Ass and tell the powers-that-be it’s what we want.

Whip It

The world is littered with actors who want to direct and it’s always a worrying moment watching a debut feature from a known actor.  More so when you see they’ve put themselves in it.  Eastwood may cope fine, but until you gain his skill and precision, concentrate on one at a time.

All of which is a preamble to saying I wasn’t expecting to like Whip It – both because it’s Drew Barrymore’s debut feature as actor/director and also because it’s about, well, girl’s roller derby.

And all of THAT just goes to prove how wrong I am about these things.  Whip It is a great movie – fast, funny, moving and more with a central performance from Ellen Page that is as note-perfect as everything else I’ve seen her in.  (Full disclosure: I may have a little bit of  crush on Ellen Page…)

What’s more, Barrymore pitches herself into the film in exactly the right way, playing the “comic relief” who doesn’t feel like a character designed to shoe-horn herself into the film, but to add some genuine humour and heart to the proceedings.  At no point does any of this detract from what she’s doing behind the camera, where she shows a grace and simplicity that fit the material perfectly.

Did I like this film more because I knew so little about it before hand and didn’t have huge anticipation going in?  Did Kick-Ass’s hype lead me down a road of out-sized expectations?  I don’t know, all I know is that Whip It is a cracking little film that you should all try to catch.  Right now.

Kick-Ass

•                Oli’s Raw Rating: 7/10
•                Bottom Line: Not as hot as the hype made it sound, but a solid, enjoyable action romp all the same.
•                Favorite Moment: Cage introducing Moretz to her bulletproof vest.
•                Favorite Quote: “So you wanna play?”

Whip It

•                Oli’s Raw Rating: 7/10
•                Bottom Line: Surprisingly endearing and lovable flick with a great emsemble cast lead by the ever-brilliant Page.
•                Favorite Moment: The off-kilter finale that leads you down all the right roads, but in a totally fresh way.
•                Favorite Quote: “Shoes are a gateway drug.”

There’s nothing quite like a well done Zombie flick paired with an equally good tag line.  In the case of the independently produced Norwegian film “Dead Snow” (“Eins, Zwei, DIE!”), we follow a group of 7 students on vacation into the mountains of Norway.  On the evening of their arrival a mysterious man appears at their door, stopping in for a warm drink and place to rest.  While sitting with the students, he spends a few moments telling them the history of the area in which they’re vacationing, taking special care to let them know they should “tread carefully”.  His story told and his coffee done, he heads back out and the horror begins.  (And by horror, I mean Zombie Nazi’s left frozen in the hills from WWII).

The story isn’t unusual, and the approach is relatively standard independent fare.  Take a bunch of kids to a house and chop them up – nothing we haven’t seen before.  It’s in the execution that Dead Snow steps above the crowd.  Visually, everything is crystal clear and well designed – the location, the makeup, the effects.  The characters are likable enough, and there are enough jokes and comedic moments to keep you cracking a smile throughout.  Regardless of the comedic hints though, the combination of highly selective lighting and well timed editing (along with a very nicely designed soundscape) make for an experience that will keep you on your toes.

I should note that some parts of the movie are a bit slower paced than you might normally expect in a 2009 release (though one might argue it’s in the name of suspense), and at times it seems like the creators are just trying to pass time so they can hit the coveted 90 minute mark – I can’t help but feel the time might have been better used, though I’ll admit I’m not quite sure how.  All said and done, for a zombie flick that rehashes a familiar story Dead Snow is quite gripping and enjoyably entertaining.  Also – I’d be remiss if I failed to mention that one of the teenage characters has a snowmobile equipped with a belt fed Maschinengewehr 34 (MG 34), or “Machine gun 34″ -  20% ridiculous, 80% awesome.

-Matt

Anyone familiar with the “Cube” series knows how the tale goes – a stranger wakes up in an empty square room, with a single door of sorts on each wall, floor, and ceiling.  With no memory or recollection of how they arrived, the individual moves from room to room discovering other prisoners.  Suspicious of everyone and trusting of no one, the individuals theorize and argue about how they came to be inside the “cube”, and more importantly, what the cube actually is.  Compounding their confusion, it becomes evidently very quickly that the rooms inside the cube are anything but fixed in position.  Close a door and reopen it only to find a different room than the one you saw just moments before.  If this is starting to sound like several of the currently popular “Saw” movies, in many ways it seems like an unrelated predecessor.  Not only are these strangers trapped, but with each room tends to come one or more deadly phenomenon that makes their situation all the more dire.

On it’s own, Hypercube is an intriguing movie.  With every room looking necessarily identical for the most part, your attention focuses on more interesting aspects of the story – character development, interaction, and generally trying to figure out the mystery behind the cube.  At 94 minutes of runtime, the amount of your attention the movie keeps focused is impressive.  There were a few moments where I faded out, but generally only for a few seconds during some of the “passing time” montage scenes.  The varied cast of characters is well put together, and the film has enough twists to keep you guessing.  There’s also a good surprise at the ending, and the unveiling of some information that sheds light not only on Hypercube, but the series as a whole.  Though some of the character’s inevitable death’s feel rushed, only one so much to the point that it seemed out of place.  Although the nature of the film means decent reliance on VFX, it’s the lack of spectacular visuals that let the low-budget effects hold up (for the most part; some effects are inevitably overtly ridiculous) today.  But how does it compare to the original hit, “Cube”?

*Possible Spoiler Alert*

Compared to the original, Hypercube loses a point or two in my book.  Cube was original, ingeniously shooting in a fashion that required minimal set pieces and therefore minimized the “low budget” impact on the movie.  With it’s (assumed) higher budget, Hypercube doesn’t bring in anything new.  Some fancy opening graphics and a geometric screensaver-type sequence perhaps, but otherwise nothing of note.  The cube itself is almost less intriguing than in “Cube”, the danger in each room seems minimal with a little common sense.  In fact, the biggest danger seems to be moving slowly – only one room really has a trap of any sort.  The characters on their own aren’t bad, but compared to the original seem repetitive and tired.  We have the person with a disability who is helped along by the protagonist – eventually becoming the key to escape.  We’ve also got the crazed guy in need of anger management classes, killing everyone he gets his hands on for no distinct reason.  Well, actually “he’s hungry”.  The other characters are relatively forgettable in terms of their importance, and the movie plays out accordingly.  A few changes keep the movie interesting, such as the idea of multiple worlds (“Sliders“, anyone?) and the difference in how the cubes rotate.  But in the end, though Hypercube stands alone as an interesting film, it doesn’t quite fill the shoes left for it by the original.  While “Cube” was new and innovative, Hypercube is just a repeat with little more to offer.

Are you a fan of the Cube series?  Have you seen any of the movies?  Which was the best?  Let us know in the comments!

*End Spoiler Alert*

-Matt