Embrace your creed

Post number four and the final movie review for my new years post marathon! This is one of two science fiction films that I've invested my time on this year.  Unlike the other, Star Trek: Into Darkness, this film wasn't listed on my 'must watch' films list.  I've saved the best for last for this post marathon.  Elysium not only made me a definite fan of director Neill Blomkamp (As the poster suggests, the director of my Sy-fy favorite), it has made me reflect myself as a film student as well.

  

Upon learning the technicalities and arts of film making, I can't help but to reflect myself with infamous directors of the art cinema  Names such as Woody Allen and Jean-Luc Godard are often mentioned; to encourages us to make more artistic films.  Yes, I admit that I'm imagining these problems in my head; thinking that someone or the public is pushing me to be an artistic filmmaker.  I just can't help myself to think about these possibilities.  The best that I can make out of it is self discovery; learning what I want specifically.  What sort of filmmaker I want to be?  Well, the reason lies on two things.  I'm a geek and I'm a Muslim.  So, moving on the review of this epic Science fiction, this film helped me discover that inner geek within me.

The visuals

While I feel that this film tackles a theme that's dangerously close to being cliche, the visuals are definitely admirable efforts of taking the genre to the next level.  The feel of realism is elevated with handheld camera shots and I believe that's no easy task with massive amount of CGI.  Not to mention the action sequence that really puts you on the edge of your seat.  I'm no easy person to get hyped for action scene; the explosions and choreographed fights are just digested with almost no amount of enthusiasm.  No, I don't hate it.  It's just that I have a hard time to get excited about it.  But that's all different with the action sequence in Elysium.  I was especially excited during the kidnap scene.

The settings

It seems familiar; the whole dirty and corrupted world of Elysium and it doesn't helps when I'm now a fan of Dredd (Seeing much similarities with both film's settings).  While I have no problem of seeing the same theme being tackled, I sense that this one doesn't tries to go beyond the tropes that most Sy-fy films go for.  I can't deny that I have a big problem of engaging with Sy-fy films (Which is why I'm trying to dwell into it more) and perhaps this neglect is a major factor for my sense of dissatisfaction of Elysium's world.  Sadly, this does affect the rating of this film; that instant feel I had when I left the cinema. 

The dedication

Comes the part where self reflecting emerges out of me ever so strongly.  I know I'm a geek but yet I'm confident that telling stories for the sake of commercialization wouldn't be satisfying.  For a brief and scary moment, I see no solution.  It's either I'm a geek, telling commercialized superhero stories, or an 'artist' who tells incomprehensible personal views of life (Oh my god, so deep).  Seeing Blomkamp realizing his vision is definitely an eye opener and just plain awesome.  I can't help but to compare him with J.J Abrams and especially with his latest film.  I can see the dedication of Blomkamp using the genre of Sy-fy to express his views of the world.  While I appreciate Abram's respect to satisfy the Trekkies and the franchise's universe itself, I take Blomkamp's work more personally; reflecting and assuring myself that it is possible and better yet, appreciated.

The story uses the high possibilities of how races and language can diversify the people of earth; most Hispanics are victims of a dying earth while Caucasians are living with the best health care in a space station named Elysium.  In fact, this is a reflection of today's reality.  The themes of races, medical care and politics are developed very well.  I say, even more than the characters themselves.  I guess this is an example of a film that focuses more on the story's settings rather than the character developments.  Hmm, maybe that's another big reason why I couldn't indulge this film in full due to my taste of preferring characters.  However, the theme's developments here are highly appreciated.  The ending made me say to myself "This is Blomkamp's trademark" and if you've already seen District 9, I guess you can figure it out.  The ending is also a strong attempt of making the themes of this story more apparent which made all of my conclusion of commending this film not commercialize worthy diminish.  I knew then what sort film this is. 

The verdict

I had my doubts during most of the time while I was watching this film and I regret it.  It had cause me and I couldn't engage with the story to the max.  After a long time of thinking it over, Elysium is a movie that's admirable with its almost altruistic ambitions with the story.  This is a rating I gave after walking out of the cinema which differs from now (Which is higher).  So, I give Neill Blomkamp's Elysium a strong 3.5/5.

                  

This is post number 3 of my new year's post marathon! This film is the only animation in my 'must watch' film's list.  Yes, I've heard loads of other good animation titles this year including the surprisingly (At least, to me) successful Frozen but I lack the effort of searching for more film titles and, sadly, dedication to watch them.  Hmm, maybe that should be my new year's resolution. 

While some people might say Pixar's marketing strategy is preventing them from producing more high quality animations, I must say that I love it.  They release a sequel this year; catching the attention of old time fans (The 90's kids who are already grown up) and attracting new ones (The kids of the current generation) by releasing a new title in the following year.  It is understandable that the pressure of releasing a film annually can stunt the creative growth.  I also understand the lucrative side; of gaining more profits.  While capitalizing films purely for profit will ruin it's full potential, I see that the marketing strategy here is working pretty well.  With the exception of Cars, most Pixar films has succeed in capturing the hearts of the audience...and their cash. Haha.

The chemistry

  

At a first glance, it's obvious the Mike Wazowski takes the lead in this prequel.  This is a surprise since none of the trailers highlighted this.  Most of them suggest that the story purely revolves around the duo though Sully does have his fair share of emotional moments.  To not spoil most of the plot, let's just say that Mike is the lead, without a doubt, and Sully supports that development in the most beautifully written way.  

The engagement

I'm in University now so, of course, I had that small but effective moment of reflecting myself with Mike's first day of college.  This is where Pixar films shines very well and the engagement gets only stronger when the story highlights that head scratching formula of being successful.  In life, there's always the talented and the knowledgeable.  Since I've just experience this phenomenon, it just makes me feel..."Urgghh, I know how you feel, Mike Wazowski".  Sully, the talented, but ignorant Scarer was just so relatable, annoying and lovable!  Together with the chemistry of the characters, it made the story just more engaging and enjoyable!

The realization

I'll point out the potential in the film had that could make it better but as of late, I've realized that perhaps I'm just too old for Pixar films--What am I saying?!--haha.  It's hard not to notice the bashes that some cartoon or animation receives from adult critics.  The most constant I heard, especially this year with their new games being released, is Pokemon.  "The first generation was better!" or "The new designs suck!" are among the arguments.  Aside from maintaining the freshness of an ongoing franchise, a big factor that concludes me to disagree is that the show is for freaking kids!  It's meant to be colorful to catch their attention.  The story is suppose to be shallow or simple (As I prefer) to relate with them more.  While I agree that some shows has gone bad to a certain extent (Like how some Pokemon designs are silly), it's a teeth grinder to see or hear ridiculous arguments and even insults.  So, this new notion has lead me to a head scratcher as to what trope, theme and character development that wasn't enough (Or even too much) to make Monster's University an all time favorite.

Take note that this is an instant reaction after watching the film.  The opinion during that moment and after a decent amount of time are totally different.  To be honest, maybe the film would be another all time favorite if I'd watch it again now but as for that moment when the end credits roll, I had a different reaction.

So, here's the downside of the flick.  Because it was a prequel, the expectation that they'll be best friends and work at the Monster's Incorporation was more apparent and expected.  Admirably, there were efforts of making it unexpected.  I loved the climax.  It answered that small question I had of what the human world was like in this story's universe.  Again, because of the expectation, the ending couldn't be delivered in a more heart warming, tear jerking way.  Make no mistakes, it was good but that high level of story you expect from Pixar wasn't delivered.      

The conclusion 

It's a kid's film and even better, it's a great and smart one!  I'm starting to worry as there are other--not only bad--but uneducated movies for little children.  As always, this Pixar film is engaging, heart warming and inspirational.  It's also an admiration for the company's new bold move of trying out prequels.  I give Monster's University a grade of 3.5/5 for bringing back James P. Sullivan and Mike Wazowski; reminding me that dreams can come true in the most unexpected way.  The grade is also for the lack of the Pixar 'wow' factor due to it's firs time making a prequel film.    

      

  

New years is almost here and I'm doing a post marathon before 2013 ends! This is the second post and yet another movie review.  For your information, this film is not in my 'must watch' film's list and this is the first review of such titles for 2013! Wow! I need to update more! So, let's move on to the review!

Using the word hate is something I'd try to avoid when writing a review or even when I'm commenting on any films.  I try to remind myself that the filmmakers, the fans of the film and my opinion should be justified through constructive criticism.  After watching this film, I've tried my best for the past few months to find the proper words to express my feelings for this work of fiction.  Here's what I can come up with: 

Generalized  

I sense an ambition within the story that is trying to be build; an emotion is trying to be created.  Possibly, that same emotion when you're watching Christopher Nolan's Inception.  No, that's not fair; to compare and overshadow a film with another.  Perhaps, the right way to describe it is that they're trying to create that awesome feeling when you've been blown away with the plot twist.  Yes, that's it and that's what I sensed from the start to the end of the film.  The problem is that too much it was used and without much care of the emotional developments.  One amazing magic trick to the next and we don't see good character developments except for this very stressful Mark Ruffalo.  Not to mention that some of those 'illusions' were impossible.  I was confused.  Is this a movie about real magic or magic tricks?  The ambition of taking 'advantage' of mind blowing plot twist seriously overshadowed the possibility of a great story and I do sense a lot of great story opportunities.  

Like the word 'generalized' suggest, it's the sad and annoying notion that we must add more action and sassy to make it watchable for the whole audience.  Admitting that it works is one thing but seeing it being abused to a point where half baked films are produced is another.  This film, like Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, is a victim to the explosive box office generalization of brawn over brains. 

The possibilities 

This is the good part of the film but bear in mind that I'm pointing out what could have been and not the existing positive aspects of the film.  I love the cast but they were not used to the max.  For goodness's sake, it's  Morgan Freeman, Michael Cane, Mark Ruffalo and Melanie Laurent! I am a fan of Mark since he's been in one of  my all time favorite films.  I've seen Melanie Laurent from the Inglorious Bastards.  She's very stunning-hehehe-and it's good to see her being in mainstream films again.  Don't get me started on Freeman and Cane! They're legends; enough said.

     Cast aside, what bugs me the most is the ambitions of the main character and the movie title.  At first, I thought that Jesse Eisenberg was the main character but I don't see him being highlighted well--heck, maybe not at all! We kept seeing a very stressful and clumsy Mark Ruffalo; he hates the four horsemen and is now suddenly in love with Melanie Laurent.  Poof! Spoiler Alert! It turns out that he was the mastermind and in fact, he was the main character all along. 

....what the heck?!       

So, now I finally 'see' the main character/mastermind? This is just my assumption and if I'm wrong just--please, tell me.  So, uh, what is this? An attempt to break the basic plot structure? Make no mistakes, I have no problem with such attempts, it's intriguing and admirable but all efforts of exploring more with the concept just failed.  Why? Because of what I've stated before; being too generalized.  Breaking the plot structure is no easy task, folks.  And trying to make it box office worthy is another hard thing all together.  Upon writing this, maybe this is the main reason why I find it very hard for me to love this film.  It's frustrating that most of my friends loved it and bashed me for not having the same opinion.  Was I being too harsh with my comments? Yes, so that's why I'm trying to state my words constructively as to why I have such feelings for this film.    

Tricking the audience that the antagonist is actually the protagonist.  It sounds familiar but I'm not sure where I've seen it before.  So, this was the attempt I sensed in the film which was, sadly, not explored to the max.

The verdict

In all honesty, I did not had a good time watching this film.  A rating of three out of five is the number I'd usually go for any simple but not bombastic films.  In this case, I have to give it lower for being a victim of the typical box office formula and for not exploring the antagonist and protagonist concept very well.  Now you see me earns a 

2/5. 

2013 is almost at the end and in terms of my spoil's list, I'm not even done!

There's a total of 8 films in it (Not including the video games and CD's) and sadly, I didn't managed to watch all of them in theaters.  Heck, there's like two films that I haven't even watched yet! That's so frustrating! So, to make the geek side of my personality satisfied, I'm planning on making reviews for all of the films in my list (Thor 2 and Monster's University) and this year's films that were surprisingly awesome! This includes Elysium and Now you see me.  Let's just hope I can discipline myself to finish all of this before new years; considering that I am having so much fun playing Batman Arkham Origins and Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag!!!! SO AWESOME--Okay! Calm yourself now.

Yet another Marvel film for this year and I must admit the jealousy I have for Marvel Studios right now.  Ever since Disney bought the company, their movie marketing has been really crazy.  It's almost impossible not to miss it whenever your outside and especially when you're at the mall.  I've been keen on learning how to advertise artworks or films creatively; without the dependency of money.  So, seeing them making Thor or Iron man a trend really makes me feel that my efforts are almost pointless.  Thor is like everywhere and I can't accept the crazy advertising fondly because I don't think Thor is much of a big hype as compared to The Avengers.  I understand if a company would go crazy with a film with that much of a big gimmick but for a character who's still young in the cinematic universe; having only two films (Thor one and The Avengers) is not enough to make this one an all time favorite.  Yes, I do believe comic book characters need to age well in Cinematic universe.  It has more certainty because to understand the character's legacy and translating it into another medium really takes time in the creative and thinking aspect.  I mean, when it comes to Hollywood, anybody could make a big mindless explosive film.

Overall plot

On to the movie itself and to be frank, it didn't lived up to it's hype.  While watching, I had a good time.  I laughed and smiled.  By the end of the film, as I walk out of the cinema, I felt nothing.  There were no emotional engagement with the character or plot; none of those "I feel your pain *insert favorite fictional character here* ".  None of those self reflection or even deep analysis of the plot and character.  It is a fact that most commercial films has the same basic outline of the plot; hero has a problem, hero faces the problem and hero wins.  And to complain about this is nonsensical, if you don't like it then go watch those art house films.  The problem here is that there were no love for the characters; Thor, Jane Foster and the ever so shallow villain, Malekith.  

The bad

I didn't know who Malekith was in the comic book universe and I didn't want to.  I wanted to be surprised by the plot since knowing too much of the fictional history partially ruined my experience with The Dark Knight Rises.  Malekith was just very one dimensional; a basic summary of his portrayal in the story.  He wanted to conquer the 9 realms and that's it! No personal issues or self motivation; just a simple "Screw you, I'm evil!".  I was however shocked when Thor's mother died.  That was unexpected and it motivated me to love Thor but it was soon diminish when her death affected Loki's character development better. 

The good 

Ah, Loki.  Perhaps, the most loved villain in Marvel's cinematic universe.  I couldn't fathom this phenomenon at first.  I see Loki, at first, only as that typical sympathized bad boy characters.  He kills people with no mercy? It's okay because the love of his life was killed mercilessly. Haha.  It's not boring, it just take time for me to appreciate since I notice how writers tend to use this often only as a tool to gain sympathy from audiences.  I hate Kratos from God of War the most when it comes to these bad boy characters.  However, I'm glad that I was finally proven wrong with Loki through this film.  I felt him.  I felt his anger.  Like most audience would admit, he was the best thing of the film.  Not to mention his brief funny scene while shape shifting into The Avengers.  Sadly, that fire was almost ruined by an obvious 'there's a sequel' scene.  I love sequels but I'd prefer to have one story at a time; concluding the stories first then make a new one.   

The honesty 

While I try to be constructive as possible, I must admit that the biggest factor that influences me for this film is that I really just don't care about Thor; not being a fan for the comics and in films.  It's almost that same notion of Superman's dilemma; he's too strong and so you'd already expect that he would win unconditionally and effortlessly.  Like I said, there were no love for the character and the love story was just bland.  Loki is the star of the show and this is, sort of, sad because the effort was being put into Thor as the main character.  On a side note, Idris Elba was also awesome!  He was awesome in Pacific Rim too! He even get that brief epic moment as Heimdall! He even was also one of the few good things in Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance.  Okay, I'm repeating myself here. 

The conclusion 

This film is in the sequel's section of the list and it earns a solid 3/5 for a good time.  I had a good time watching it; releasing my stress and all.  That rating is also for convincing me to love Loki and, sadly, for the lack of love for Thor, Jane Foster and Malekith.