All posts by James Humphreys

Star Trek Into Darkness – Review

 

STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Four years ago, the Star Trek franchise boldly went in a different direction by doing something unexpected; going all the way back to the beginning.  In the plainly titled Star Trek (2009), audiences were treated to a surprisingly effective reboot of the series featuring the original, iconic characters.  The reboot was a huge risk, given the backlash that could have come from the hardcore Trekkie fanbase, but the end result proved to be a resounding success, becoming the highest grossing Trek film ever.  I believe that a large part of the film’s success came from the unconventional choice of a director; in this case, famed TV Writer/Producer J.J. Abrams.  Abrams had only directed one film prior (the underwhelming Mission: Impossible 3) and had stated that he was never much of a Trek fan before taking the job.  This proved to be a good thing for the making of Star Trek, because Abrams set out to make a film that he would want to watch, broadening the appeal of the series beyond its fanbase.
This is why I liked the reboot so much because like Abrams, I was never much of a Trek fan myself.  Star Trek was a movie that finally helped me to understand why this series has been a fanboys’ and girls’ dream all these years, and I was incredibly pleased to finally see a big budget movie that put emphasis back on the characters and plot rather than in the special effects.  I particularly loved the casting in the film, as far as finding actors who could embody these characters without trying to mimic the original actors’ performances.  Of course, given the movie’s enormous success, a sequel had to happen.  After a long wait, the much-anticipated follow-up has come.  Star Trek Into Darkness, picks things up right where the previous film left off and returns the entire cast and crew, along with J.J. Abrams back in the directors chair.  A lot of hype has surrounded this film, given the strong reception of its predecessor, and I was certainly among those hoping to see a great follow up.  Thankfully, this sequel is no let-down.
I can’t really go far into detail in the plot without revealing a few spoilers.  Basically it follows Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) and the crew of the Starship Enterprise as they track down a mysterious terrorist named John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch), who has struck the very heart of Starfleet, murdering many high-command officers in the process.  Kirk is given charge to hunt Harrison down and kill him without mercy, an order the vengeful captain gladly accepts.  Despite protests from his crew, including Spock (Zachary Quinto) and Scotty (Simon Pegg), Kirk finds Harrison hiding out on Kronos, the Klingon home planet, which is un-friendly ground for defenders of the Federation.  After a confrontation, in which Harrison single-handedly takes on a whole army of Klingons, he and Kirk finally meet, and this is where the mystery starts to unfold.  The remainder of the story is full of revealed secrets that both pay homage to past Trek lore, while at the same building a solid mystery at the center of the film’s plot.
Without spoiling a lot, suffice to say, the story holds up very well.  This is an excellent follow up to the previous film; staying true to what’s been done before, while at the same time taking big risks and pushing the series further.  One big difference is the size and scope of the movie.  J.J. Abrams gives Into Darkness a much more epic feel than the previous film.  The action set pieces are incredibly ambitious and will have most audiences on the edge of their seats.  At the same time, the film still manages to keep its focus on the characters in the story, another excellent carry-over from the previous installment.  I’m still very impressed with the actors playing the crew of the Enterprise.  Zachary Quinto manages to hold his own as Spock, even when sharing the screen with the original Spock himself, Leonard Nimoy.  Chris Pine still pulls off any amazing feat of playing James T. Kirk without ever slipping into any Shatner-isms.  The film also features a lot more of Simon Pegg as Scotty, which is always a good thing.  In fact, every iconic character gets a good moment in this movie; even Chekov (just watch his reaction when he’s told to put on a red shirt).
However, the standout here is definitely the villain.  Benedict Cumberbatch delivers an astounding performance as John Harrison; a man who is much more than he seems.  There is a big reveal half-way through the film about his character that could’ve easily been done poorly if played by the wrong actor.  Thankfully Cumberbatch sells it perfectly and is able to make the character work well enough as the film’s antagonist, even setting aside where he fits within the Trek universe.  The performance is so nuanced and memorable, that it really doesn’t matter who John Harrison really is in the end.  He could be named anybody else, and the character as he is in the film would’ve still made a memorable villain.  I’m hoping that this movie gives Benedict Cumberbatch a good career boost.  If you haven’t seen his work on the BBC’s Sherlock, I highly recommend you do.  He’s a very talented actor, and I’m happy to see him utilized so well in this film.
Unfortunately, the movie is not without some flaws.  In particular, it has a very lackluster final act.  Without going into too much detail, I will only say that the film oddly loses some of its focus in the last 30 minutes or so and starts to rely too heavily on plot conveniences and action film cliches.  One of the things that these movies have done so well is pay homage to the original Trek films and series with several well placed references.  For the most part, the references are well handled here, until the later part of the movie, when they start to become very heavy-handed.  One scene in particular is almost lifted entirely from an previous film, and it will probably rub some die-hard Trekkies the wrong way.  Not only that, but the final confrontation with the villain is kind of a letdown, given how the rest of the film has been leading up to it.  The especially problematic part is that it leads to some out-of-character decisions made by the good guys, many of which don’t make that much sense.  All of this creates a remarkably messy finale, which is not made better by a very rushed ending.
This doesn’t mean that it ruins the movie as a whole.  I very much liked 2/3 of it, and I would still strongly recommend it to everyone.  Most things are done right and I definitely think it’s a worthy follow-up to the previous film.  The last 30 minutes of the movie does make it a lesser film, however, and I’m puzzled as to why J.J. Abrams and his writers decided to go in the direction that they did in the final act.  They had done such a nice job with the previous 90 minutes, so what happened?  It seemed that either Abrams was under a lot of pressure to fulfill audience expectations or he just didn’t know how to make old familiar tropes feel authentically in place in his story-line.  Whatever happened, the movie still works.  He may have stumbled over the line, but Abrams was still able to finish the race.
This also marks J.J. Abrams final outing as the standard-bearer of the Star Trek franchise.  In 2015, Abrams will take over the reigns of the Star Wars franchise, crossing a bridge between two beloved galaxies that no one ever thought could be crossed.  Into Darkness does end with the promise of more adventures to come, and I definitely would love to see more, especially if they keep this cast intact.  That ultimately is the best thing about this particular film; it left me wanting more in the end.  Despite its flaws, Star Trek Into Darkness is an enormous crowdpleaser, and it should be embraced by all audiences, Trekkie or no.  I look forward to seeing more adventures with the crew of the Enterprise in the future, because after seeing how well the door’s been opened to new possibilities by Mr. Abrams, the sky really is the limit.
Rating: 8/10

Pencils to Pixels – The End of Hand-Drawn Animation?

I have been a fan of animation for as long as I can remember.  My friends growing up would always refer to me as the “Disney” kid, and that’s mainly because I was an unashamed fanboy at an early age.  I made an effort to soak up as much as I could from the Disney company’s output during my formative years, and now I am an expert in all things Disney.  Nowadays, I’ve moved beyond just animation and have come to love films of all kinds.  I still do share a special fondness for Disney animation all these years later, however.  To me, it was my gateway drug into the world of cinema.  Unfortunately, as I’ve gotten older, the state of animation has moved away from the stories and the styles that I grew up.  Today, computers have replaced the artist’s sketch pad and hand drawn animation is almost non-existent.  What troubles me most is that Disney, the studio that set the standard for quality animation, has also been forced to catch up with the current trends and they’ve gone on and replaced 2D with 3D.  As a student of film, I understand that the market dictates what goes into production and right now hand-drawn animation is not as commercially viable as computer animation, and it makes me concerned that that style is now truly gone.
As far as the history goes, animation has been as big a part a of cinema as anything else.  In the early days, cartoons were mainly experimental in nature, and were usually thrown in-between feature films at the local cinemas as time-fillers.  But in the 30’s, pioneering filmmakers like Walt Disney proved that animation wasn’t just entertainment, it was art as well.  With films like Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and Fantasia, Disney animation proved to be just as popular a draw as a John Wayne western or a James Cagney gangster pic.  Other studios also added to the mix, with Warner Bros. hilarious Looney Tunes series and UPA’s experimental use of limited animation.  In the 60’s and 70’s, animation started to fall back into relying on a niche audience, mainly dismissed as kid stuff.  Disney still made features, but they were few and far between, and usually done with limited budgets.  This led to the departure of many artists who felt that animation was not being taken seriously enough, like famed independent animation producer Don Bluth (The Secret of NIMH).  In the late 80’s Disney considered ending all animated productions, after their film The Black Cauldron (1985) lost a lot of money at the box office, but new talent and management decided on a wait and see policy and that led to the production and release of The Little Mermaid (1989).
The years following the release of The Little Mermaid are what is commonly known as the Disney Renaissance, and this occurred just at the right time for a fan like me.  Mermaid arrived when Disney was starting to release their catalog of films on home video, and I had already seen a bunch of them already at this point.  I had developed a sense of what a Disney film was and what it can be, and The Little Mermaid showed me that the Disney style was not only still around, but thriving.  In the years that followed, I eagerly awaited every new Disney feature; from Beauty and the Beast (1991) to Aladdin (1992) to The Lion King (1994), each a bigger success than the one before it.  These films were my childhood and to this day, I am still an avid fan, as I am collecting each of these films on blu-ray.  This success also spawned a great revival of animation throughout Hollywood.  There were numerous attempts by other studios to make feature animation at the same level as Disney and they range from brilliant (The Iron Giant) to admirable (The Prince of Egypt), to mediocre (Rock a Doodle) to un-watchable (Quest for Camelot).
Unfortunately, The Lion King was such a colossal hit, that it ultimately set the bar too high to match.  Even Disney struggled to follow that success, as the budgets got higher and the returns got lower.  By the time I was in high school, hand-drawn animation had once again started to recede into the background.  At this same time, we began to see the rise of Pixar and the success they achieved with the new advances in computer animation.  The turn-of-the-millennium brought about a big sea-change in not just what animated films were being made, but a change in the perception of what an animated film was.  Today, children are growing up believing that an animated film should look more like Shrek and less like Sleeping Beauty.  Which makes me worried that the end truly has come for hand-drawn animation; to where not even a mermaid princess can save it now.
There are other people out there, like me, who still hold hand-drawn animation close to their hearts.  In 2009, after Disney’s acquisition of Pixar, there was a noble attempt to bring back the traditional hand-drawn animated musical with The Princess and the Frog.  Unfortunately, the film under-performed and the revival turned out to be only a momentary reprieve.  Princess is a good film, and it did okay business; just not Pixar-sized business.  Audiences did say they were nostalgic for the Disney films of the past, but recreating that same kind of success is something that you can’t manufacture.  The Little Mermaid was the right film at the right time, and the success that followed was built upon the goodwill that the film delivered.  Princess had too much riding on its shoulders and that caused the film to suffer in the story department.
One thing that hand-drawn animation needs is a genuine and honest surprise.  One of the last big hits Disney had at the box office was Lilo and Stitch (2002), a film that many of the studio brass brushed off initially until it found a big audience.  It showed that animation doesn’t need to be a fairy tale to be considered a Disney classic.  Really, if you look at all the Disney films overall, there are only 7 or 8 fairy tales among them.  Also, the reason why Pixar’s films are so successful is not because of the quality of the computer animation (though it does help), but because they put so much emphasis on getting the story right.  That’s something that you find lacking in most animated features.
Overall, the reason why I prefer hand-drawn animation, even over the best Pixar films, is because of the human touch.  When you watch traditional animation, you are seeing something that was drawn out by actual people.  Not that computer animation is easy; and I know a lot of computer animators who put a lot of work into what they do.  But, when you watch a CG-animated film, you are watching something that was put through a computerized intermediate before it’s put on film.  Some of it looks nice, but I find most of it artificial in movement and texture.  With traditional animation, everything is exaggerated and less bound to reality, which helps to makes the drawings look more interesting.  There is subtlety in character movement that you just can’t get in computer animation.  Would the Genie from Aladdin have been better if he was animated in a computer?  There is a clear fundamental difference between these styles, and neither should replace the other.  Unfortunately, computer animation has claimed victory in the feature department.
Hand-drawn animation has however survived in unlikely places, such as television.  There are only a hand-full of fully computer animated shows out there, as many of them are still 2D.  The Simpsons and Family Guy are still animated by hand, as are many shows on Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon.  Even shows entirely animated in the computer, like South Park or the Flash-animated Archer, create a hand-made look in their presentation.  Also, hand-drawn animation is still going strong overseas, with the success of Anime.  Asian artists seem to have found that perfect medium of embracing the mechanics of computer effects, without abandoning the hand-drawn style altogether.  Hayao Miyazaki’s films in particular represent what modern Disney films could be with the tools that are available today.
 
But, as things stand, animation now belongs to the digital world.  I hope to someday see another revival of hand-drawn animation, but that seems less likely as the concept of an animated film changes over time.  Seeing this sea change has made me feel more like an adult than anything, as I find my childhood ideals transforming into nostalgia.  I am grateful that Disney still treats their film canon with a great amount of reverence, and my hope is that future generations are able to accept the animated classics of the past as something equal to the films of the present.  It may be a drought right now, but good art always manages to stay timeless.
  

Iron Man 3 – Review

 

iron_man_3
Another summer, another Marvel blockbuster.  Marvel has been on a roll lately with their franchise characters.  Now under the big Disney tent, the publisher is able to benefit from a large studio backing, as well as a high-profile marketing campaign.  This worked spectacularly well with The Avengers, a record shattering blockbuster that not only reached a diverse audience, but was also pleasing to the fans of the comics who hold these superheros in high regard.  The Avengers was also the culmination of a multi-film strategy to build a franchise around characters who exist within the same universe, apart from their own respective movies.  This was know as the “Avengers Initiative” Phase 1, which kicked off with the first Iron Man (2008), and continued on through films like Thor (2011) and Captain America (2011).  Each film did the job of establishing each character’s own story lines, while at the same time, alluding to their eventual team-up in The Avengers.   But now that the first Avengers has come and gone, Marvel is gearing up Phase 2, which will lead to the eventual sequel to last year’s film, and once again, Iron Man is the one who’ll set things in motion.  Is it a worthy successor to what’s come before, or does it collapse underneath it’s high expectations?  Unfortunately it’s a little more of the latter.
Iron Man 3 takes place post-Avengers, rather than following up the plot of Iron Man 2, so this might cause some confusion for those who haven’t seen The Avengers; which I’m sure is very few.  Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) deals in this film with some of the post traumatic anxiety that he developed after his near death experience in The Avengers, as well as the current threat he faces when a new terrorist threat named The Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) shows up.  The Mandarin sets off a bomb in Hollywood, leaving Tony’s chauffeur and friend Happy Hogan (former Iron Man director Jon Favreau) in a coma.  This leads to Tony making a personal threat towards the terrorist, who then goes after Mr. Stark and destroys his home, while Tony and his assistant/lover (Gwyneth Paltrow) are still in there.  Tony looses almost all of his armor, and escapes with only what he’s got on his back.
The rest of the film involves Tony tracking down The Mandarin’s base of operations, where he finds the group experimenting in a new scientific breakthrough called Extremis, which makes its human subjects gain healing powers that turn them invincible, as well as super heat-conductive.  The scientist behind the Extremis procedure, Dr. Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce) is creating an army for the Mandarin with the intent of attacking the president and taking over the government.  As Tony delves deeper into the mystery, he discovers that there is more to the proceedings than meets the eye, and that he’ll have to rely on his intelligence even more than his metal suit in order to survive.
One thing that I did like in this film overall was Robert Downey Jr.’s performance.  The guy is Tony Stark.  Nobody owns a character like he does, and he doesn’t disappoint here.  There are plenty of one-liners that will have everyone chuckling in the theaters; including probably the best A Christmas Story reference ever.  He also works well with his co-stars in the movie, particularly with Paltrow and Don Cheadle (as the Iron Patriot).  One other thing that makes Downey’s performance so good is how he deals with the addition of a child sidekick in the movie.  In the middle of the film, Tony Stark has to rely upon the help of a pre-teen boy mechanic to get back on his feet.  Adding a child character is usually the kiss of death for an action movie like this, as it could turn the film cute and sentimental, but here it’s handled well with clever writing and unsentimental performances.  It’s to Downey’s credit that he can make something like that work, and his best lines in the movie comes from his interactions with the kid.
The main problem that I had with this movie is the fact that it lacks the kind of focus that the other Iron Man films have had.  Iron Man 3 suffers from the same problem found in Spiderman 3.  In that film, the filmmakers tried to please too many of the audience’s expectations by cramming things together into one movie that don’t belong together at all, and would’ve worked better if given separate narratives.  In Spiderman 3, we were promised the inclusion of fan favorite villain Venom, only to see his inclusion shuffled to the final 20 minutes, with a watered-down and corny characterization that just ruined the character.  In Iron Man 3, the film does better at mixing it’s elements together, but it’s still awkward and disappointing.
First of all, the thing that disappointed me the most and will probably anger a lot of fans as well is how the Mandarin is used in the movie.  I haven’t read the comics, but I’ve come to understand that overall, The Mandarin is Iron Man’s arch-nemesis; much like what Lex Luthor is to Superman.  In the early scenes, Sir Ben Kingsley does an effective job of portraying the Mandarin as a sadistic, Bin Laden-esque super-terrorist; playing the role both menacingly and with charisma.  I was hoping to see what would happen once the hero would meet his ultimate foe later in the film; and then the movie suddenly throws a twist at us that changes everything.  I’m not going to spoil what happens, but suffice to say this is where audiences are going to break apart on this film.   The audience I was with had that kind of reaction; half enjoyed the change and loved Sir Ben’s performance, while the other half started hanging their heads low and tried not to watch.  For me, it took a character with a lot of potential and ruined it in almost an instant.  I don’t blame the actor so much as the writer/director Shane Black, who seemed to want to shake things up when he didn’t really need to, and the result unfortunately messed up what was starting to be a good thing.
The other problem I had was the use of the Extremis plot in the film.  This is another element from the comics that they wanted to bring to the screen, but it just doesn’t feel like it fits as well as it should have.  For one thing, we the audience are supposed to eat up a lot of information on what Extremis is, which the movie doesn’t really give us a chance to.  Exposition is dumped pretty clumsily, as if director Black got bored with it while writing it into a scene.  We get a basic understanding of what Extremis does, but the science behind it remains fuzzy, which makes it feel more like a plot gimmick rather than an actual threat to the characters.  By the end, I didn’t know whether or not any of the Extremis-enhanced characters were vulnerable, or could be killed, which made the climax a little confusing.  Again, this could have been done better if they had devoted an entire film’s plot to the Extremis storyline, and not try to combine it awkwardly with the Mandarin storyline.
To me it seemed like the filmmakers wanted to have their cake and eat it too.  But the cake is only sweet if the ingredients are mixed well together.  Unfortunately, Iron Man 3 undelivered on what it promised and that’s a shame.  I like Shane Black’s work; from the Lethal Weapon scripts to his first film Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang (2005).  But unfortunately, I can only see this film as a missed opportunity, especially when it comes to The Mandarin; a character who could have become one of the all time great villains if given the focus he needed.  That being said, Iron Man 3 is not a complete failure; just a disappointment.  I did like Robert Downey Jr., as well as a lot of the clever and funny dialogue.  Some of the action scenes are also very well executed, like when Iron Man has to save a bunch of people falling out of the sky from a crippled airplane.  I’m sure that many people are going to like the movie regardless of my reservations, and I’ll say that watching Robert Downey in his element is worth the price of admission.  I just wish this film could have delivered better on what it promised and didn’t try to be too many things all at once.  The other Iron Man films managed to do that, as well as The Avengers.  I just hope that “Avengers” Phase 2 is able to pick up from its shaky start.
Rating: 6/10

The Movies of Summer 2013

 

amc burbank
For those of us who love going to the movies, Summer begins in early May and not mid-June.  The first week of May has become the big start off point for big summer releases over the last few years.  Before it was Memorial Day weekend, but because of some major releases like Spiderman, Iron Man and last year’s record breaking Avengers, we’ve seen that it doesn’t hurt to get a head start on the summer season.  I always like this time of year, mainly because going to a movie starts to become an event rather than just a night out.  This is when the studios release the films that we wait years to see and sometimes even longer.  The rise and fall of some of these behemoths also become fascinating stories on their own.  Last year, we saw the assembling of Marvel’s finest; a welcome return to sci-fi for Ridley Scott; Batman and Bane dueling it out; the everyday life of a foul-mouthed teddy bear; and also proof that a movie based on a board game will be a massive failure.
The summer of 2013 looks to be a very different animal, featuring a surprising amount of new franchises, though there are still plenty of sequels to be found.  Today, I would like to share my outlook on this summer with all of you and tell you which movies I am most looking forward to, the ones I’m concerned about, and also the one’s I’m likely to skip because I know they will suck.
Must Sees:

STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS (MAY 17)




This is the movie that I am most looking forward to this summer, and I’m not even a Trekkie.  My enthusiasm for this sequel is entirely based on my appreciation of the previous installment in the series.  J.J. Abrams Star Trek (2009) was a perfect example of how to do a summer blockbuster right; by putting emphasis on the characters and story, rather than the special effects.  Abrams himself is not a Trekkie and he said that he wanted to make a Star Trek film that anyone could watch, while still adhering to what made the franchise work in the first place.  My hope is that this sequel delivers on what the first promised, and prove that it wasn’t just a lucky fluke four years ago.  The trailer gives me a lot of hope, mainly because of the emphasis it places on the new villain, played by rising star Benedict Cumberbatch.  I hope that his performance lives up to what we see in the trailer, because he already looks terrifying.  Hopefully J.J. Abrams leaves the series on a high note and delivers yet another solid Trek film behind before he travels off to that other space-based franchise in a galaxy far, far away.
IRON MAN 3 ( MAY 3)




It’s obvious that I’m excited for this film, since I’ve already purchased my advance ticket before writing this.  Like many others, I enjoy the Iron Man films.  I even thoroughly enjoyed Iron Man 2 (2010), even though a lot of people didn’t.  This entry has the distinction of being the first directed by someone other than Jon Favreau.  Marvel couldn’t have found a better person to fill the director’s chair than Shane Black; best known for writing the Lethal Weapon films.  Mr. Black has also worked with star Robert Downey, Jr. before.  Check out the movie Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang (2005) to see the kind of sweet music these two are capable of doing together.  I’m also excited to see what Sir Ben Kingsley manages to do in the role of Iron Man’s arch-nemesis, The Mandarin.  All in all, it looks like a lot of fun, which is what an Iron Man film should be.
THE LONE RANGER (July 3)




This film may turn off some people; some may think it’s an overstuffed Western, while others may think it’s Pirates of the Caribbean in the wild west.  Sure, director Gore Verbinski may be drawing upon some familiar tricks here that he used in the Pirates films, including having Johnny Depp on board.  It could be just the excellent marketing, but I think that this may end up being a great action film in the end.  Depp’s casting as Tonto is an odd one, but I think he brings enough creativity and humor to the role to where it will avoid feeling mundane or worse, offensive.  Also, Social Network’s Armie Hammer looks right for the part of the Lone Ranger himself, and it could be a good star-making part for him.  In addition, the cast is made up of some great actors like Helena Bonham Carter, William Ficthner, Barry Pepper, and Tom Wilkinson; all chewing up the scenery in a good way.  We’ll know whether or not it works when it releases in July, but I’m willing to give it a shot.
THIS IS THE END ( JUNE 12) & THE WORLD’S END ( AUGUST 23)




worlds_end510x317

This summer bring us not one, but two comedies set around the apocalypse.  The first one comes from Seth Rogen and the rest of the usual Judd Apatow stable.  For the most part, I haven’t been impressed by much the comedic work these actors have done in recent years, so I’m quite surprised as to why I’m excited to see this movie.  I think it’s because of the unique gimmick of having these guys play themselves instead of characters, which opens up a lot of comedic possibilities.  Danny McBride looks especially hilarious as he picks apart each of his co-stars.  Also, the trailer gets points for the line, “Hermione just stole all our shit.”  Later in the summer, we also get another apocalyptic comedy in The World’s End, the long awaited follow-up from the team that brought us Shaun of the Dead (2004) and Hot Fuzz (2007).  Both are classic comedies, so hopefully Edgar Wright, Simon Pegg, and Nick Frost are able to deliver a third time around.  Another plus is the inclusion of The Hobbit’s Martin Freeman.  Less is known about the plot of this movie, so I’m eagerly awaiting the trailer once its out.
Movies that Have Me Worried:

MAN OF STEEL ( JUNE 14 )




Maybe it’s because I’m more of a Batman fan or maybe it’s because I hated the previous Superman film, but so far I haven’t been moved by anything I’ve seen from this upcoming film.  I hope that Zack Snyder is able to breath new life into this franchise, but even he’s a question mark, given how bad Sucker Punch (2011) was.  The trailer seems too somber for my taste, which makes me worried that the film is going to be too ponderous and self-important for it’s own good.  Russell Crowe looks like a pale imitation of Brando’s Jor-El and Henry Cavill doesn’t look right as son of Krypton in my opinion.  Again, it could just be the marketing and my own biases, but so far I’m not as enthused for this film as it seems everyone else is.  I could be wrong, and I hope I am.  That being said, I do think Michael Shannon looks awesome as General Zod.
PACIFIC RIM (JULY 12) & ELYSIUM (AUGUST 9)




High concept science fiction films are often hard to get right.  You usually have to spend several minutes of the movie’s running time just to set up the world that the story takes place in, and that can drag down the whole thing if done poorly.  Here we have two movies from acclaimed directors that are trying to do new things in the sci-fi genre, and it mainly involves a lot of CGI trickery to tell the story.  I do have a lot of faith in Guillermo del Toro, who has an incredible visual style.  With Pacific Rim, he’s working with his biggest budget to date, which means the pressure to deliver is even bigger.  I’m interested in seeing what he does with the material, but so far I can’t help but see this as nothing more than a darker version of Power Rangers, based on the trailer.  That could be a big misreading, but it’s what came to my mind.  Likewise, Neill Blomkamp is going bigger with his sophomore film Elysium.  The visuals are amazing, but the trailer left me a little cold.  Possibly because it sticks so stylistically close to the director’s first film, District 9.  I’m hoping that Neill Blomkamp isn’t a one trick pony and is able to do some great things in his second effort, but there’s a lot more I need to see before I’m convinced.
MONSTERS UNIVERSITY (JUNE 21)




It’s hard to make a sequel work 12 years after the original, but Pixar has done it before.  However, Monsters Inc. is no Toy Story.  Also, Pixar seems to be loosing some of it’s footing lately in the animation world after a couple of underwhelming entries: Cars 2 (2011) and Brave (2012).  So, I’m a little apprehensive about this new film, despite the fact that I think it has one of the more clever ad campaigns in recent memory.  Monsters Inc. was a wonderfully told and self-contained story on its own.  A sequel would’ve made sense, so it’s surprising that the filmmakers chose to go backwards and do a prequel instead.  My hope is that Monsters University is able to reclaim some of that missing Pixar magic, but that’s a tall order that I’m not sure it can pull off.
Movies To Skip:
WORLD WAR Z ( JUNE 21)

More than any other movie this summer, this one has “dog” written all over it.  I haven’t read the book it’s based on, but from talking to people who have, they say the movie is nothing close to what they’ve read.  Apparently the book World War Z is told through vignettes, depicting a zombie infestation from many different points of view.  In this film, it appears that this idea was dropped in favor of making the whole thing a starring vehicle for Brad Pitt.  The movie is already being plagued by bad buzz and unfavorable press due to rumors of numerous re-shoots.  To me, the whole thing looks like a promising project that got watered down by studio interference and the resulting film is what I think will be the big flop of the summer.  Funny how we’re now looking to TV shows like Walking Dead and Game of Thrones to see zombies done right.
THE INTERNSHIP (JUNE 7)
 
Once upon a time, Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson were comedy’s golden boys after their smashing success with Wedding Crashers (2005).  Unfortunately the two actors have put out some duds in the years since, especially in Vince’s case.  Need I bring up The Dilemma (2011).
Now the two of them have reunited in what unfortunately looks like a 100 minute commercial for Google.  It’s shameful and disappointing.  I want to see something original, and not a shallow example of blatant product placement in place of comedy.
AFTER EARTH (MAY 31)
 
I was once a believer in M. Night Shaymalan a long time ago.  I still see the film Unbreakable (2000) as a minor masterpiece.  But after being disappointed time and time again, I’ve lost all faith in the director.  His latest, After Earth, looks like more of the same melancholy and self-indulgent BS that we’ve been getting from M. Night for the last decade.  I’ve given up on the once promising filmmaker and I’ll probably pass this one up as well.  It doesn’t even look entertainingly bad like The Happening was.  Also, a word to Will Smith; stop pushing your untalented kids on all of us.  We know you love your son.  It doesn’t make the movies any better.
Well, those are some of my thoughts on this summer’s big releases.  There are many others coming as well, but these were the ones that were on my mind.  In the months ahead, I plan on reviewing a few.  Hopefully there are more surprises than disappointments.  That’s all for now.  Time to ramble off.

Welcome to CineRamble.com, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Movie Blog

Hello Everyone.  My name is James Humphreys.  I am the author and creator of this humble blog.  It may look amateurish now, but this is my first foray into internet literature, so I hope to get better as time goes along.  In any case, this will the first post that I’ll ever write on this site, so I better make it count.  (Sits alone at the computer)…………(time passes)………. Is it time for work already?  Shoot.  That was a waste of time.
Okay, seriously, I do have a plan for what I’m going to write here at CineRamble.com.  In case it’s not obvious already from the title and picture I put up, this will be a blog about movies.  I’m very opinionated when it comes to films and filmmaking, and I enjoy sharing my thoughts with anyone; friends, family, and sometimes just the person I’m sitting next to in the movie theater.  Yeah I’m that guy.  I always try to stay informed and keep up with all the current trends in the media, as hard as that sometimes can be, and I always try to keep an open-mind and look for new and exciting things that are developing in Hollywood.  Until now, I’ve had a lot of things to say, but no place to say it, hence my decision to start a blog.
My mission on this site is to present my views on a variety of subjects within the movie realm, through an entertaining and often informative personal perspective.  My posts will mostly be opinion pieces, where I will share my own two cents on what’s currently happening.  But, I also plan on writing movie reviews for this site, both for current releases and movies already out on video.  I will also write reports about my experiences in the film world itself.  I live in Los Angeles, just over the hill from Hollywood itself, so there are plenty of potential things for me to report on, such as special screenings, premieres, or exhibitions at the local museums.  I also plan on doing top ten lists and retrospectives for this site; whatever I think would be worth writing about, I will bring it here.
In any case, I’m not looking for agreement on everything I say on this blog; in fact, if you disagree with me on something, I welcome it.  I’m always looking to inspire discussions about movies everywhere I go and I hope that this website is able to do the same.  If I can inspire a passionate rebuke that is able to change my perspective on things, it will be incredibly worthwhile.  My hope is that I can bring people’s attention to movies and ideas that have sometimes fallen through the cracks, and help shed new light on them.  I welcome feedback, because frankly, I’ll need it if I am ever going to get the hang of this.
So, having said all this, I’m going to formally welcome everyone to CineRamble.com and I look forward to actually getting this thing off the ground.  Expect my first official post in the next week, or so.  Hopefully it expands from here into something special.  So, it’s time to take that first step down this rabbit hole and see where it goes. “LOOK, MEIN VIEWERS, I CAN WALK.”