Invasion of the Body Snatchers (7/10): The Original Remake.

“Well why not a space flower? Why do we always expect metal ships?”

Since its publication in 1955, Jack Finney’s Sci-Fi novel has been adapted many times for the big screen. The first adaptation was directed an year later by Don Siegel starring Kevin McCarthy and Dana Wynter. The story took place entirely in a small Alabama town where some of the locals began mysteriously behaving in strange and detached manners, but more than twenty years later Philip Kaufman decided to remake this film and relocate the story in the populated city of San Francisco instead. The circumstances were different and the underlying political themes weren’t necessary so this film focused entirely on the growing sense of paranoia behind the invasion. The mystery element is gone here, because from the very first scene we witness how this strange organic life form, similar to gel spores, begins drifting from a far away planet through space until it reaches our atmosphere and is washed down by rain in San Francisco. Here the spores develop into plants with pink flowers and the people who come into contact with them begin behaving in strange ways, which is of course a result of this life form taking over the bodies. The first to notice the change is Elizabeth Driscoll (Brooke Adams) who shares her concern with co-worker, Matthew Bennell (Donald Sutherland), a public health inspector. She tells him that her husband has begun to act in a very mysterious manner and that he seems detached from any emotion. Matthew recommends she talk with his friend, David Kibner (Leonard Nimoy), a renown psychiatrist. When Elizabeth goes to speak with him, David mentions that other people have come up to him with similar concerns. Their fears are confirmed when Matthew’s friends, Jack (Jeff Goldblum) and Nancy (Veronica Cartwright) discover a strange corpse that is being formed by the plant to duplicate one of them. By this time the invasion is in full force in the city and they must find a way to escape before it’s too late. 

The original film was already considered to be quite good, but this remake is probably the most referred to when mentioning Finney’s novel. All the other adaptations after this one haven’t met the same reception. The way in which cinematographer, Michael Chapman, shot the film gave it a much more disturbing atmosphere with the skewed angles, deep compositions, and dark shadows which only adds to the bizarre qualities of the film. It is an eerie sci-fi movie with some memorable sequences (who can forget the moment that mutant dog with a human face suddenly shows up on screen?) and you never know what direction the story is going to go. Unfortunately the film is a bit outdated and the effects don’t look as great. The performances are solid, but sometimes they were over sold. Invasion of the Body Snatchers wasn’t as fun as I had anticipated it to be, and the pacing began to drag at times. I probably would’ve enjoyed this film more if I had seen it several years ago, but by now the plot is overly familiar so the suspense and the scares don’t work as well.   

Donald Sutherland and Brooke Adams play the two lead characters and they manage to engage the audience and allow us to sympathize with their cause. Adams is especially cute here and she can move her eyes like no one else. Nimoy gets a very conventional role and his character doesn’t do much for the film. We’ve seen Goldblum play very similar roles as well and he did manage to get on my nerves during some of his freak out scenes. The cast delivers, but they were all far from being memorable. I can imagine the story freaked audiences out during the 70’s and 80’s, but for today’s standards it isn’t as effective.   

The Calling (5/10): Its greatest crime is that it doesn't offer anything new to the genre.

“I’ve never seen anything like this.”

With so many great TV shows about serial killers and police procedurals, it’s hard to find The Calling appealing. It’s getting more difficult to direct an engaging and suspenseful film in just a two hour period because these series have more time to explore the characters and allow us to engage with them. If directors want to have success with this genre it’s necessary to come up with either an intriguing and original story or give the film a unique artistic style. The Calling does neither of the two. This is director Jason Stone’s first full feature length film, and despite having Susan Sarandon in the star role there is very little about this procedural that feels authentic or new. Everything about this film feels recycled from other better movies or series and even the fact that the story centers on a strong female lead isn’t new anymore (Fargo is a film that easily comes to mind) and neither is its sombre tone. 

The film was adapted by Scott Abramovitch from Inger Ash Wolfe’s novel and it centers around a local small town detective named Hazel Micallef (Susan Sarandon) who really hasn’t had much to do during her years of service. She drinks a lot of alcohol to fight her depression and she continues to live with her mother, Emily (Ellen Burstyn) with whom she doesn’t seem to get along too well. One day she discovers a gruesome murder of one of the town’s old ladies and as she investigates the case she is convinced it’s the work of a serial killer. Hazel and her partner, Detective Ray (Gil Bellows), welcome a new and young officer, Ben Wingate (Topher Grace), who has transferred from a big city and is eager to help on the case. They discover that there have been a number of unrelated murders in nearby towns and that these killings all seem to be spiritual so they consult on the case with Father Price (Donald Sutherland). But as they get closer to the killer the more exposed they are. 

To be honest the film does do a decent job at building the suspense and keeping the audience interested in what is going on during the first half of the movie. Unfortunately the film loses its appeal during the second part and the resolution is far from being memorable. It’s unfortunate because the cast is rather strong and Sarandon delivers a solid performance, but her character is a walking cliche and one we’ve seen represented in movies many times before. The talented Donald Sutherland and Ellen Burstyn are completely wasted in this film and they could’ve been given much more to do with their roles instead of simply showing up a couple of times on screen. There simply isn’t anything here that makes The Calling stand out from other films in the genre, and that is its greatest crime.  

My Review: The Best Offer (8/10)

"Emotions are like a work of art. They can be forged they seem just like the original but they are forgery."

The Best Offer is Giuseppe Tornatore's latest film which also happens to be his first one in English. The Italian director will forever be known for his love letter to cinema in 1988 when he directed Cinema Paradiso, a true homage to film. He is a talented filmmaker who seems to always be in control of his craft. The Best Offer may not be a masterpiece, and will probably be forgotten amongst his filmography, but it is a very good thriller with a strong performance from Geoffrey Rush in the lead role. Somehow despite knowing exactly where the film was heading halfway through the movie, it still kept me interested and the 131 minutes went by really fast thanks to great pacing. The story is rather predictable and the film is far from being groundbreaking, but the art direction is so beautiful that it is simply a film to admire. Just like the many art paintings we see in this movie, you don't get tired of watching the story unravel. It's an elegant film and the score by Ennio Morricone just make the experience a more pleasant one. Tornatore delivers a good thriller which thanks to his craft allows you to enjoy it despite all the flaws.

Virgil Oldman (Geoffrey Rush) is an art auctioneer who lives on his own and has gathered quite a large collection of portraits. He tries to stay away from human relationships and keeps to himself. He also happens to be an antiques expert so he knows the value these things have. One day he receives a phone call from a strange woman named Claire (Sylvia Hoeks) who wants him to oversee the valuation of her family's art collection. Hesitant at first due to the fact that Claire never shows up to the meetings, he decides to go along with it when he discovers some pieces from a valuable antique. He takes the pieces to a mechanic named Robert (Jim Sturgess) who tells him he can rebuild the robot  if he continues to bring him more pieces. Virgil becomes attached to Claire when he discovers she's even more emotionally damaged than he is. She doesn't allow anyone to see her and hasn't left her house for years. Virgil's life changes when he finally allows himself to become attached to Claire and help her overcome her fear.

Halfway through the film there is a conversation between Rush and Donald Sutherland's characters that gives away the ending, but thanks to Rush's strong performance we are still drawn to the film. The rest of the cast isn't as strong as he is, but the movie works nonetheless. If the film had been made a few decades ago then I might have enjoyed the twist, but by now we have come to expect these sort of surprise endings. The Best Offer reminded me a lot of Matchstick Men, but perhaps nearly not as good. The film is still worth a watch thanks to Tornatore's elegant direction. I enjoyed it quite a bit.

My Review: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (9/10)

"Remember who the real enemy is."

Francis Lawrence (I Am Legend) takes over director duty from Gary Ross in the sequel to The Hunger Games franchise which results in a much darker and better film. I know I gave the original Hunger Games film the same rating as this one, but I think I was a little too generous with the first film. Francis clearly sets the right mood and tone for this franchise by giving us a better picture of the world outside of the games. The districts and the Capitol are better portrayed here and we get a sense of who the real enemy is now. In the first film I felt like the enemies were some of the kids from the first districts, while in this sequel you get more of a sense as to why the Capitol and President Snow are the true enemies. The film takes more time to set up this world and it does so with a great sense of pacing and storytelling. The actual Hunger Games don't begin until the second half of the film, but I was ok with the buildup since it was absolutely necessary. Catching Fire gives us glimpses of what we are going to get in the next two films as sparks of a revolution begin to develop, and it also gives us new characters that are certain to play a key role in the upcoming films. These new characters are far better developed than the ones in the first film and the entire film sets things up perfectly for the grand finale. Jennifer Lawrence carries this film and she truly is a girl on fire showing both sides of her persona: her courage and her vulnerability. She balances these elements and the struggles she's going through perfectly and allows the audience to identify with her character. I don't think that two and a half hours have gone by so quickly for me as it did during this movie (I've seen 90 minute films that seemed to be longer than this) because it was just so exciting and engaging. The action during the actual games were also much better developed (no more shaky cams). Catching Fire is probably along with Star Trek Into Darkness the best blockbuster of the year.

Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrece) and Peeta (Josh Hutcherson), the winners of the 74th Annual Hunger Games, have returned home. Katniss has turned into a symbol of hope for the people who are beginning to rebel against the totalitarian government of the Capitol under President Snow (Donald Sutherland). Katniss and Peeta's return home is short lived as they embark on a Victor's Tour around all the districts paying their respects to the falling tributes. Despite Katniss's love for Gale (Liam Hemsworth), she is forced to continue with the farce surrounding the media coverage of her relationship with Peeta. Effie (Elizabeth Banks) and Haymitch (Woody Harrelson) join Katniss and Peeta as advisors during the tour. President Snow recognizes that Katniss has become a symbol of hope for the people outside of the Capitol and therefore has a surprise for the upcoming Quarter Quell (the 75th Annual Hunger Games). He announces that for this special event a male and female tribute winner from every district will have to compete against each other in this tournament of champions. Katniss and Peeta are the chosen tributes from District 12 who will face other tributes in a special arena designed by the new Head Gamemaker, Plutarch Heavensbee (Phillip Seymour Hoffman). Other tributes include Finnick Odair (Sam Claflin) and Johanna Mason (Jena Malone) who form an alliance with them. President Snow is planning on crushing Panem's new symbol of hope, but Katniss will do what it takes to survive and protect her loved ones.

Francis Lawrence does a much better job here at exploring the different themes that the film is trying to get across. Catching Fire is more than a simple survival tale as other themes such as government oppression, heavily marked social classes, and society's obsession with celebrities are all explored very well. The characters are better developed as well. Take Katniss for example, as she's forced to live a double life feeling hypocritical and imprisoned at times as she has to hide her true feelings for Gale. She doesn't feel like a hero and doesn't want to be that symbol of hope that's she become. She has to come to grips with her new identity and the responsibility that has come with it. Jennifer Lawrence delivers a strong performance as she shows these inner struggles she's facing while at the same time proving she can be lethal. The film is also very well adapted by Simon Beaufoy (Slumdog Millionaire) and Michael Arndt (Toy Story 3) from Suzanne Collins' novel. The returning supporting actors like Lenny Kravitz and Stanley Tucci are phenomenal once again, while the new characters played by Jenna Malone, Sam Claflin, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, and Jeffrey Wright have sparked my interest as to what they can bring to this franchise. They were all very well developed and add so much to a first part which in my opinion was dependent entirely on Jennifer Lawrence. She carries this film once again, but has an even more impressive supporting cast to leave us even more hooked with the cliffhanger ending. This film was great and I haven't even mentioned the amazing sets and awesome costume designs that went up a notch from last year's Hunger Games. Catching Fire is an upgrade over the original film and one you should definitely give a chance.

My Review: The Eagle (4/10)

¨How can a piece of metal mean so much to you? -The eagle is not a piece of metal. The eagle is Rome.¨

The Eagle is based on a historical novel written by Rosemary Sutcliff called The Eagle of the Ninth (1954). It`s a fiction adventure novel, but it is based on some true facts (The Ninth Legion really did disappear around the 2<sup>nd</sup> Century and the Wall of Hadrian was built to protect the Romans from the Scottish tribes). Director Kevin Macdonald brings this novel to the big screen, and in my opinion it is one of his weakest films to date. I really enjoyed his previous two films: State of Play and The Last King of Scotland, but this one really disappointed me with its slow pace and lack of a good leading performance. One of the main issues in my opinion is that in his previous movies Macdonald got the casting right, but in The Eagle he was lacking that charismatic lead performance that say Forrest Whitaker gave in The Last King of Scotland. Jeremy Brock, who also worked with Macdonald in the past, adapted the screenplay for The Eagle and since I never read The Eagle of the Ninth I can`t say how faithful this film is to the novel. My main critique of The Eagle relies on the fact that I never really connected with the movie; the pace was really slow and I was waiting for the film to pick up at some point, but it never really did until the very end and by that time I wanted the movie to be over. I kept on dozing off while watching this film and was hugely disappointed with the pace. I wanted the film to end right after I had seen the first 15 minutes.

The story takes place around 140 AD when Britain was being ruled by the Roman Empire. It`s been twenty years since the Ninth Legion has disappeared in the Scottish highlands and lost the Golden Eagle, which was an emblem of honor for Rome. The loss of the emblem has been a disgrace for the Roman Empire. As a result of the defeat they had to build the Hadrian Wall in order to keep the barbarian tribes away. Now a young centurion named Marcus Aquila (Channing Tatum) has been sent to one of the lasts forts in Britain. He happens to be the son of the defeated Commander of the Ninth Legion, and dreams of someday restoring his father`s name. In order to do so, he will need to head north past the walls and into the uncharted highlands. The Romans are scared of passing the walls because they know these savages are dangerous. After experiencing an injury in battle and retreating to his uncle´s villa, Marcus is convinced he has to try to bring the Eagle back to the Romans. His Uncle Aquila (Donald Sutherland) tries to convince him not to, but Marcus is decided to take the risk. His only companion is a Briton slave who he has just saved named Esca (Jamie Bell). Esca despises the Romans, but he owes his life to Marcus and is forever indebted to him as his slave. Esca is Marcus`s only hope because he knows the world outside of the walls and can communicate with some of the tribes. Together they set out on an impossible mission to retrieve the golden Eagle and restore his father`s honor.

The story is actually pretty interesting, but I actually failed to connect with the characters in the movie. The pace is really slow and the performance from the cast was just average. I don’t think this was the right role for Tatum; at least I didn’t see him as a Roman centurion. The savages were also a bit over characterized. Mark Strong plays a villain once again and he is pretty convincing as Guern, one of the leaders of a savage tribe. The scenery is really beautiful, but as I said before I kept on dozing off due to the pace and lack of action. The chemistry between the two lead characters was ok, but I felt there could have been more done with their relationship. These two guys come from totally different backgrounds, they have opposing views of the world, but somehow they manage to get over their differences and we see how these two men who should be enemies end up becoming friends. Jamie Bell was pretty convincing in his portrayal of the Briton slave. He`s come a long way from his Billy Elliot days. There is not much more I can say about this movie, it just drags for long periods of times. The action scenes are well choreographed, but they are too few and far spread apart. It is more of a road trip between two different individuals who come together along the journey. The problem is that it`s a journey I wouldn’t want to be taking again.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: The Mechanic (6/10)

¨Victory comes with preparation.¨

The Mechanic is a remake of a 1972 film of the same name staring Charles Bronson in another of his infamous revenge movies. Bronson made at least a dozen of those flicks. I never saw the original one, but I didn`t have to because I`ve seen several films like The Mechanic, action packed and dealing with revenge. Jason Statham was the right choice to play the role Bronson once played in the 70`s since in a way he is becoming the Bronson of our generation. Statham has made several films like The Mechanic in the past, The Transporter being perhaps one of his best roles to date. Statham might not be one of the most talented actors in the industry, but he is good at action. He seems to be playing pretty much the same role in all his movies (the tough guy act), but given the right script his films can be entertaining. The script was originally written by Lewis John Carlino for the original Mechanic, and it was adapted by Richard Wenk (16 Blocks) for this newer version. The Mechanic is directed by Simon West, the guy who brought us Con Air, and he`s been around action films for a while. This probably won`t rank among his best works, but The Mechanic still manages to entertain with all its twist (some more predictable than others), and nonstop action scenes. The Mechanic is a very violent film; it has a lot of blood and raw scenes. The problem with the film is that we`ve seen this sort of action movie in the past, but Statham still makes it worthwhile.

Jason Statham is Arthur Bishop, a ¨mechanic¨, in other words a hitman, or an elite assassin (whichever you prefer to call it), and he`s one of the best in his field. He`s quiet, professional, and remains unattached to his victims. He receives his targets via an internet add sent to him by his boss Dean (Tony Goldwyn) and prepares for each job in his quiet bayou, which serves as his hideout. Arthur is a perfectionist, he studies every detail about his victims and if he can he carries the job out as silently as possible. Sometimes you never even know he was there, making the murders appear as natural deaths. Arthur is troubled when he receives his next target because it is Harry McKenna (Donald Sutherland), his friend and the man who taught him everything about being a mechanic. Apparently Harry has betrayed the company and sold out some of the other mechanics. Arthur follows through with his assignment, but when Harry`s son, Steve (Ben Foster), wants Arthur to teach him everything he knows about being a hitman the situation becomes complicated. Arthur has a strict code, he`s a perfectionist, and likes to eliminate his targets as clean as possible, but Steve is more volatile and likes to get dirty. Arthur tries to teach Steve how to remain detached from his victims, but things begin to get messy. The situation gets worse when Arthur discovers that he was set up and that Harry never had betrayed the company, it was the other way around. It`s time for Arthur to send his company a message for fooling with him.

I really liked the opening scene of the film, I thought Arthur`s first assignment was well thought out and it helped establish his character. He did his job quietly and clean, and then he headed to his hideout, turned on some classical music and got rid of all the evidence like if nothing had ever happened. The Mechanic begins with clean kills, but then it becomes increasingly more violent as the film progresses. Then the twists begin showing up and several plot holes can be found, but they are numbed down by all the violence. As long as the viewer remains detached to the plot, like Arthur is detached to his victims, then they will have a good time with this action packed film, but if they sit down and analyze it scene by scene then it probably won`t be very entertaining at all. The Mechanic isn`t a great film, but it still is entertaining thanks to Statham and Foster who are great in the action scenes. It’s far from being memorable and I probably won’t be seeing it anytime soon, but it`s still worth a onetime viewing. This isn’t among Statham best films (like Bank Job, or his collaborations with Guy Ritchie), but it is still better than most of his recent movies. Foster and Statham form a deadly partnership and make this movie worth the while. In summary, The Mechanic is a forgettable, but entertaining film.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/