Sequels. Sometimes they suck (Men in Black II; Spiderman 3; Transformers 2; The Matrix: Revelations). Sometimes they rock (The Empire Strikes Back; Aliens; Terminator 2, Hellboy 2). Sometimes they're just enjoyable enough to justify their existence (The Whole Ten Yards; 2 Fast 2 Furious).
I thought Iron Man 2 was somewhere on the continuum of 'worthy sequel' to 'it rocked'. On the plus side it had a decent baddy played by Mickey Rourke, an enigmatic goodie played by Scarlett Johansen in a catsuit, the ever-lovely Robert Downey Jr (man-crush fodder), a good dose of humour, and enough going on at any one time to keep me watching. Fast cars, explosions, comedy. What's not to like?
Plus a cameo from Samual L Jackson.
The only downsides were feeling like an outsider because I'm not an avid reader of the Iron Man comic, and also the sense that it wasn't that new. Comic book movies follow a very similar plot. Superhero somehow has wronged super-villain. Super-villain, often in league with power-hungry industrialists/military or other representatives of big business/government threaten superhero. Superhero wins out in climactic battle wherein members of the public scream a lot and run for their lives.
At least the CGI was good in this one though and didn't distract from the story too much (unlike GI Joe: Rise of Cobra, or X-Men Origins: Wolverine). They retained enough humanity by allowing the human characters to walk around and be human. That's what gives a film like this its soul. When the CGI takes over films are soulless as a result.
Jongudmund's rating: 8/10. Worth a watch.
Showing posts with label Robert Downey Jr. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Robert Downey Jr. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Thursday, December 31, 2009
My favourite films of 2009
This hasn't been a vintage year for me in terms of seeing new films. A combination of extreme busyness and Cath not being well has conspired to prevent me from going to the cinema as often as I'd like. But still I've see a few good films and as it's New Year's Eve, I thought I'd select my favourites, and disappointments, for 2009.
First up, my absolute favourite:
Up
From the opening few minutes where an entire life of love and loss is told with very few words, but tremendous emotional impact, I knew this was going to be a slightly different 'kid's film'. True, it got a bit silly at times after that, but there were enough subplots and funny moments to laugh at, and above all, it did emotion without lapsing into sentimentality too much. Of course, there was some, because it's a movie. But overall the film was positive and life-affirming. (And I loved Doug the Dog.)
What next? Well, there have been some strong animations out this year. I really enjoyed Monsters versus Aliens, which was very funny and a bit more than your average cartoon. I also thought Coraline was very well made: a genuinely creepy storyline for kids that made me feel slightly scared at times (I don't do horror films as a rule). Surrogates was an interesting science fiction film that posed some good questions and ended at the right point in the story rather than tacking on another half an hour of meaningless explosions and stunts that some films have (The Island, anyone?). And Slumdog Millionaire lived up to the hype for me and was worthy of its Oscar successes.
But my Runner Up Film of the Year would be a tie between the franchise reboot of Star Trek and one I saw just a couple of days ago: Sherlock Holmes, starring Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law.
I admit, after Johnny Depp, Robert Downey Jr is my male eye candy of choice. Combined with Jude Law as bickering buddies, in a silly, but excellently well put together adventure yarn, what's not to like? I felt the film captured the spirit of the Sherlock Holmes stories that I've read, if not the letter. And as my Mum said, it was so nice to see an adaptation that turned Watson into a character, rather than a dullard to enable Holmes to explain the plot to the audience.
As for Star Trek, well, I was just bowled over by it really. I raved about it earlier in the year, and will probably get it on DVD at some point. All the points I made about it in the earlier review still stand - I liked the humour, the nods to the classic series, the acting. Just about everything worked.
So, I was surprised by how much I liked Sherlock Holmes and Star Trek, but for me the title of Most Surprising Film of the Year would have to be 17 Again, featuring teen heart throb Zac Efron. I watched this DVD with no expectations and enjoyed it a lot. There are plenty of funny jokes, Efron can act, the actors around him were very good too, and the plot was corny but the right kind of corny. Definitely better than I expected and I've even been tempted to watch it again.
On to the disappointments. Well, a few sequels fell flat for me. Fast and Furious was, bizarrely, quite slow-paced, and I don't see the point of a stunt film that uses CGI to make the stunts happen. Also to bill it as a reunion of the original cast and then kill off Michelle Rodriguez five minutes in was a bit crap. Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen simply couldn't live up to the brilliance of the original, and didn't. Ironically too many robots and not enough humans did for it.
But my worst film of the year promised much and delivered nothing. Tropic Thunder was a sprawling mess of a movie. The concept could have worked, but it just seemed the director wanted to make too many in-jokes about people in Hollywood. And the problem with in-jokes is that if you're not in on them then they just aren't funny. After about ten minutes I was done, but the movie dragged on far longer, and considering who was in it (Jack Black, Ben Stiller and Robert Downey Jr) has got to be a contender for worst utilisation of filmic talent ever.
First up, my absolute favourite:
Up
From the opening few minutes where an entire life of love and loss is told with very few words, but tremendous emotional impact, I knew this was going to be a slightly different 'kid's film'. True, it got a bit silly at times after that, but there were enough subplots and funny moments to laugh at, and above all, it did emotion without lapsing into sentimentality too much. Of course, there was some, because it's a movie. But overall the film was positive and life-affirming. (And I loved Doug the Dog.)
What next? Well, there have been some strong animations out this year. I really enjoyed Monsters versus Aliens, which was very funny and a bit more than your average cartoon. I also thought Coraline was very well made: a genuinely creepy storyline for kids that made me feel slightly scared at times (I don't do horror films as a rule). Surrogates was an interesting science fiction film that posed some good questions and ended at the right point in the story rather than tacking on another half an hour of meaningless explosions and stunts that some films have (The Island, anyone?). And Slumdog Millionaire lived up to the hype for me and was worthy of its Oscar successes.
But my Runner Up Film of the Year would be a tie between the franchise reboot of Star Trek and one I saw just a couple of days ago: Sherlock Holmes, starring Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law.
I admit, after Johnny Depp, Robert Downey Jr is my male eye candy of choice. Combined with Jude Law as bickering buddies, in a silly, but excellently well put together adventure yarn, what's not to like? I felt the film captured the spirit of the Sherlock Holmes stories that I've read, if not the letter. And as my Mum said, it was so nice to see an adaptation that turned Watson into a character, rather than a dullard to enable Holmes to explain the plot to the audience.
As for Star Trek, well, I was just bowled over by it really. I raved about it earlier in the year, and will probably get it on DVD at some point. All the points I made about it in the earlier review still stand - I liked the humour, the nods to the classic series, the acting. Just about everything worked.
So, I was surprised by how much I liked Sherlock Holmes and Star Trek, but for me the title of Most Surprising Film of the Year would have to be 17 Again, featuring teen heart throb Zac Efron. I watched this DVD with no expectations and enjoyed it a lot. There are plenty of funny jokes, Efron can act, the actors around him were very good too, and the plot was corny but the right kind of corny. Definitely better than I expected and I've even been tempted to watch it again.
On to the disappointments. Well, a few sequels fell flat for me. Fast and Furious was, bizarrely, quite slow-paced, and I don't see the point of a stunt film that uses CGI to make the stunts happen. Also to bill it as a reunion of the original cast and then kill off Michelle Rodriguez five minutes in was a bit crap. Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen simply couldn't live up to the brilliance of the original, and didn't. Ironically too many robots and not enough humans did for it.
But my worst film of the year promised much and delivered nothing. Tropic Thunder was a sprawling mess of a movie. The concept could have worked, but it just seemed the director wanted to make too many in-jokes about people in Hollywood. And the problem with in-jokes is that if you're not in on them then they just aren't funny. After about ten minutes I was done, but the movie dragged on far longer, and considering who was in it (Jack Black, Ben Stiller and Robert Downey Jr) has got to be a contender for worst utilisation of filmic talent ever.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Films beginning with I
I borrowed I Am Legend on DVD the other day, as it was one of those films I wanted to see but never quite got to the cinema while it was out. Having read the book previously, I kind of knew they would have changed the ending, and the reviews I’d read had confirmed that suspicion.
So it was refreshing to find the ending is a bit downbeat. The biggest change isn’t vampires into ‘dark-seekers’, or locating an actual source of the plague in a manufactured viral cancer cure. The biggest change is turning the ‘legendary status’ of the main protagonist into that of a hero. In the book he becomes a legend in that by the end of the book, he is now the monster.
One thing which was weird is that I watched it with Irony Boy who had no clue that there were monsters in it, until the first ones showed up. Obviously he’d missed that aspect of the plot amid all the hype.
Anyway, and on to a second film seen with Irony Boy which begins with I - and that is Iron Man. Clare had previously stuck her neck out to claim this was better than Transformers, and it’s a worthy claim. Certainly, it’s the first film since Transformers which I’d pay money to watch again in the cinema.
Although there isn’t too much new in the plot - friend and mentor betrays hero, life-changing event, superhero has to fight former friend at the end - the scripting is good, with enough humour to keep the movie going. I always find Robert Downey Jr incredibly watchable, and he can easily carry a film like this, so there are no worries on the acting part. Gwyneth Paltrow does a good job as his assistant and Jeff Bridges manages to play the part of chief antagonist without hamming it up too much.
There’s a teasing clip after the credits introducing the rest of the Marvel SHIELD franchise too. And as long as they can keep Downey Jr in the suit, there’s no reason why the Iron Man franchise can’t run and run. It’s certainly the best superhero film since Batman Begins, and raises the bar for The Dark Knight due out later this year.
Meanwhile we got a trailer for another film beginning with I - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, which looks like it’s going to be plenty of fun, and also Prince Caspian, which kicks on the Narnia franchise this summer as well (and looks very good from the trailer).
But one movie I’m really looking forward to is Kung Fu Panda. We had a teaser spot last night in amongst the trailers and it looks hilarious! And it’s not a sequel or a comic book adaptation! Originality in Hollywood - what’s going on?
Jongudmund’s ratings
I Am Legend - worth a watch, 7/10
Iron Man - a definite must-see, 9/10
So it was refreshing to find the ending is a bit downbeat. The biggest change isn’t vampires into ‘dark-seekers’, or locating an actual source of the plague in a manufactured viral cancer cure. The biggest change is turning the ‘legendary status’ of the main protagonist into that of a hero. In the book he becomes a legend in that by the end of the book, he is now the monster.
One thing which was weird is that I watched it with Irony Boy who had no clue that there were monsters in it, until the first ones showed up. Obviously he’d missed that aspect of the plot amid all the hype.
Anyway, and on to a second film seen with Irony Boy which begins with I - and that is Iron Man. Clare had previously stuck her neck out to claim this was better than Transformers, and it’s a worthy claim. Certainly, it’s the first film since Transformers which I’d pay money to watch again in the cinema.
Although there isn’t too much new in the plot - friend and mentor betrays hero, life-changing event, superhero has to fight former friend at the end - the scripting is good, with enough humour to keep the movie going. I always find Robert Downey Jr incredibly watchable, and he can easily carry a film like this, so there are no worries on the acting part. Gwyneth Paltrow does a good job as his assistant and Jeff Bridges manages to play the part of chief antagonist without hamming it up too much.
There’s a teasing clip after the credits introducing the rest of the Marvel SHIELD franchise too. And as long as they can keep Downey Jr in the suit, there’s no reason why the Iron Man franchise can’t run and run. It’s certainly the best superhero film since Batman Begins, and raises the bar for The Dark Knight due out later this year.
Meanwhile we got a trailer for another film beginning with I - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, which looks like it’s going to be plenty of fun, and also Prince Caspian, which kicks on the Narnia franchise this summer as well (and looks very good from the trailer).
But one movie I’m really looking forward to is Kung Fu Panda. We had a teaser spot last night in amongst the trailers and it looks hilarious! And it’s not a sequel or a comic book adaptation! Originality in Hollywood - what’s going on?
Jongudmund’s ratings
I Am Legend - worth a watch, 7/10
Iron Man - a definite must-see, 9/10
Monday, May 14, 2007
Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang
Bit of an odd film this one, halfway between thriller, comedy and satire on Hollywood. That’s three halves, which is a bit much to cram into any movie and this does suffer as a result. As a comedy it works because Robert Downey Jr and Val Kilmer are very watchable; as a thriller it passes but it’s complicated and a tad contrived; and as a satire, it’s very clever, but it loses its bite halfway through.
The thing that makes this movie stand out though, is that is finally debunks the myth that Americans don’t understand sarcasm. Not only is the sarcastic interplay between the two main characters well-scripted, obviously with an understanding of how wit actually works, but it’s excellently delivered, especially by Kilmer. One of the elements you need to make sarcasm work is a rapid, understated delivery which fools someone into thinking you’re telling him the truth. Kilmer has it and uses it well.
The only downside to the film is Downey Jr’s frequently tiresome narration. It’s hackneyed. Yes, the self-referential stuff is funny (“I’ve seen Lord of the Rings – we aren’t going to have seventeen different endings”), but it frequently interrupts the smooth flow of the story. There’s also quite a bit of swearing and some nudity, so depending on whether you rate or slate a film based on that, this might not be your cup of tea.
Watch it for: the Russian roulette scene – shocking but hilarious (“What? There was only an eight per cent chance…” “You idiot, who taught you math?”).
Skip it if: you don’t like Robert Downey Jr, or hearing the F word.
Jongudmund’s rating 7.5/10
The thing that makes this movie stand out though, is that is finally debunks the myth that Americans don’t understand sarcasm. Not only is the sarcastic interplay between the two main characters well-scripted, obviously with an understanding of how wit actually works, but it’s excellently delivered, especially by Kilmer. One of the elements you need to make sarcasm work is a rapid, understated delivery which fools someone into thinking you’re telling him the truth. Kilmer has it and uses it well.
The only downside to the film is Downey Jr’s frequently tiresome narration. It’s hackneyed. Yes, the self-referential stuff is funny (“I’ve seen Lord of the Rings – we aren’t going to have seventeen different endings”), but it frequently interrupts the smooth flow of the story. There’s also quite a bit of swearing and some nudity, so depending on whether you rate or slate a film based on that, this might not be your cup of tea.
Watch it for: the Russian roulette scene – shocking but hilarious (“What? There was only an eight per cent chance…” “You idiot, who taught you math?”).
Skip it if: you don’t like Robert Downey Jr, or hearing the F word.
Jongudmund’s rating 7.5/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)