Chappie (6/10): Closer to Elysium than District 9 but still manages to entertain despite its flaws.

“Don't let people take away your potential Chappie.”

Chappie is Neil Blomkamp’s highly anticipated follow up to Elysium and District 9. His first film has become a favorite for science fiction fans, but Elysium failed to connect with many audiences. Neil himself said that he felt he messed up with Elysium, but I still found it engaging despite its flaws. Chappie has a similar style and feeling to his other movies where he introduces us to a dystopian society and presents a rather gritty glimpse of the world. His films are always fun to look at, but his screenplays seem to have some flaws. The greatest problem with Chappie is that it doesn’t seem to establish its tone or target audience. At times it seems very cartoonish appealing to a younger audience and very reminiscent to the heart and cheesiness of Short Circuit and then during other moments it becomes dark and violent reminding us of scenes from Robocop. This tonal shift doesn’t work well, but the title character is so appealing that I was invested in the film despite not caring too much for the rest of the characters. 

Blomkamp creates these dystopian worlds and uses science fiction elements to make some sort of critique towards our society. His films tend to play out as metaphors and at times they are a bit too obvious like in Elysium where he criticizes the enormous gap between classes where the rich get the best medical aid and the poor are left out to dry. In District 9 his criticism was geared towards the division of classes as well as racism. Here, I felt like Chappie played out as a sort of metaphor on religion where you have this conscious robot created by mis maker, but when raised by the wrong people he drifts and wastes his potential. There are several themes scattered throughout the movie where Chappie questions the decisions of his creator that I found similar to the questions that religion raises at times about our humanity and purpose in life. There is also an underlying message of the dangers of militarization as you have Hugh Jackman’s character wanting to implement human controlled robots with heavy machinery in the police force. I may be looking too far into this movie, but those were my initial perceptions. 

Dev Patel plays Deon, one of the engineers responsible for creating these police droids who are replacing humans in the force. He develops a program that will give the robots a consciousness of their own, but when his boss (played by Sigourney Weaver) doesn’t give him permission to test the robots, he decides to program one on his own. Just when he does this, he is kidnapped by a group of gangsters (Ninja, Yo-Landi Visser, and Jose Pablo Cantillo) who want him to shut off the robots so they can execute a heist. Seeing that he doesn’t have the power to do so, they end up taking the robot, which Yolandi names Chappie  and raising it themselves so they can use it to their advantage. In the meantime, there is a former military named Vincent (Hugh Jackman) working for the same company as Deon who is trying to get his project approved which consists of a human controlled robot with far advanced weaponry.   

Chappie is voiced extremely well by Sharlto Copley who also does some of the robot’s movements and gestures. He is the highlight of the film, but as much as I enjoyed the character of Chappie and watching him learn and experience things like a child I found several flaws with the screenplay and the rest of the characters. The gangsters are portrayed as these sort of unlikable characters who we are later supposed to care about. They are actually in this film more than Patel, Jackman, and Weaver, and it does become a problem because the film begins to shift in tone. Poor decisions are made such as the idea of letting Deon go after being kidnapped knowing that he knows who these people are and where they live. Hugh Jackman’s character is very poorly developed and does some things in the company that no one else seems to mind, but I know wouldn’t be tolerated in a normal work setting. There are many decisions like this that don’t make much sense, but that only serve the purpose of moving the story from one point to the next which the film does rather quickly. Even the security measures in the company are very dubious and the more you think about the holes in the plot the less you will enjoy it, but as long as you are engaged with Chappie’s character and his development you might be entertained and forget the problems the film has. I still had a good time, but I can see why audiences might not care much for this. 

My Review: Maleficent (6/10)

"Listen well, you all! The princess will indeed grow in grace and beauty. But before the sunset on her sixteenth birthday, she will prick her finger on a spindle of a spinning wheel, and she will fall into a sleep like death!"

Maleficent isn't a masterpiece and it actually has several flaws, but it was much better than I had anticipated considering the latest failed attempts at bringing a beloved classic fairytale to the big screen through live action. Snow White, Jack the Giant Slayer, Cinderella, Hansel & Gretel, Beauty and the Beast, all failed in their adaptations so I didn't have high expectations for Maleficent. They all seem to share something in common which is that they always incorporate a spin on the classic tale, and Maleficent is no exception as there is a big twist to the familiar story. They played it safe with the twist in Maleficent, and it was rather cliche, but it worked nonetheless. Despite not being a huge fan of this genre I decided to give this film a shot because I was looking forward to Angelina Jolie's comeback (her previous starring role in a feature film was in 2010's The Tourist alongside Johnny Depp). Jolie doesn't disappoint and she carries the entire film giving a strong performance. Many complained that they wished the film would've centered more on her character as a villain than a hero, but I actually enjoyed the duality in her performance and the struggle she faces while dealing with her betrayal. She owns this movie, but it didn't hurt that the she had a strong cast to work with; I loved Elle Fanning in her role as Aurora, Sharlto Copley as the ambitious King (if there was ever a film in which he could go overboard with his character this was it, but strangely he played it safe here), and of course I can't leave out Sam Riley who was great as Diaval. Perhaps I enjoyed this film more than others because I went into it with fairly low expectations, but compared to other recent fairytale adaptations this film is superior and one I'm sure the new generation will appreciate.

Maleficent is a retelling of Disney's classic animated film, Sleeping Beauty, although this time the screenplay written by Linda Woolverton centers on the villain. The film begins by introducing us to the young fairy named Maleficent (Isobelle Molloy) living an ideal and peaceful life in the Moors, which is full of magical creatures. On the other side of the Moors lies the human kingdom which is ruled by an ambitious King. One day Maleficent is warned by the forest guards that they have caught a human trying to steal a jewel from the Moors. Maleficent discovers that the thief is actually a boy named Stefan (Michael Higgins), who she kindly asks to return the jewel. She then escorts him out of the Moors, but when he returns the two bond and become good friends. As time passes the two fall in love, but their relationship doesn't last long once he becomes ambitious. The film jumps forward many years and now we follow the adult Maleficent (Angelina Jolie) as she continues to protect the Moors from King Henry (Kenneth Cranham) and his army. The adult Stefan (Sharlto Copley) happens to be serving the King now, and he and his men are ordered to kill Maleficent. Whoever does so will become his successor to the throne. Stefan heads to the Moors to warn Maleficent of the king's intention, but blinded by his ambition to become king he betrays her. This turns Maleficent's once pure heart into one full of hate and a desire for revenge. When Stefan becomes King, Maleficent curses his newborn infant Aurora and claims she will fall into a sleep like death once she turns 16 and only a true love's kiss will be able to break the curse.

The best thing Maleficent has going for it apart from Angelina Jolie's lead performance and the strong ensemble cast, is the fact that it was directed by Robert Stromberg who has a strong record as a production designer. Despite the fact that this was Stromberg's first feature film he has a lot of experience in the art direction department (actually winning two Oscars for his work in Acatar and Alice in Wonderland). Maleficent looks great and the art direction may be it's best asset. The visual effects and the fantastical creatures of the Moors are stunning. The screenplay may have its flaws and the story may fall into a predictable and cliched final act, but it always looks great. This may be yet another case of style over substance, but the cast elevate the material and make this a much better film than it has any right to be. The weakest elements of the film for me involve the portrayal of the three fairies who are tasked with taking care of Aurora and raising her. Those comedic moments felt a bit forced and the characters didn't have much substance to them. However, the scenes that Maleficent and Aurora share together are solid as Jolie captures the inner struggle she faces when she's confronted by Aurora's innocence and beauty. Sam Riley also shares some great scenes alongside Jolie and those were the best moments of the film for me. The film does suffer from a slow introduction and a weak final act, but the middle act was really strong and that is why I actually enjoyed Maleficent.

My Review: Oldboy (5/10)

"-You might wanna think about what you're doing here!" "-I've been thinking about it for the last 20 years."

I could criticize the fact that this was yet another unnecessary remake considering Chan-wook Park's 2003 Oldboy has become a cult classic among worldwide audiences, but knowing this, I still decided to go ahead and watch Spike Lee's version, so I can't just claim it was unnecessary. I had curiosity as to what Lee could bring to the table and thought that the cast was pretty interesting as well. After seeing this film I can honestly see how difficult it must have been for Chan-wook Park to pull off such an ultra-stylish and violent movie, because Lee never manages to engage those of us that are already familiar with the revenge story. One of the things that the Korean film had going for it was the fantastic shocking ending, and Lee couldn't just rely on that surprise factor now. It would be like having someone remake The Sixth Sense; it would be an impossible feat to pull off considering how it relies heavily on that final twist. The other scene we all remember from the original film is the hallway hammer scene, and there was no way Lee could have left that scene out. He should have though because the scene felt completely out of tone with the rest of the film. The violence in this film never seems to have a purpose like it did in the Asian version. What this Oldboy lacked was the style and sense of purpose that Chan-wook Park's version had with some memorable characters and unforgettable scenes. The chemistry between Brolin and Olsen is nothing compared to the leads in the Asian film who really kept us engaged and interested in the story. This just proves how difficult it really is to capture that sense of style some of the Korean directors handle so masterfully. 

The general story is pretty similar to Chan-wook Park's film with some minor changes. The screenplay was actually adapted by Mark Protosevich from the Japanese manga, not the film. This time the anti-hero's name is, Joe Doucett (Josh Brolin); he's an advertising executive who is kidnapped and held captive in a small prison decorated as a hotel room for 20 years. During his mysterious abduction his wife is murdered and he is framed for the crime, while his 3 year old daughter, Mia, is adopted by another family. Not knowing who is holding him captive and for what reason, Joe's only window to the world is the television set he has in front of him. During his captivity Joe decides to get back in physical shape and stop drinking, hoping some day he can confront his captors and return to his daughter. Finally after 20 years he wakes up in a box a free man with no explanation as to why he was held captive all these years. He is given a cellphone, some cash, and the letters he has written for his daughter. The first thing Joe does is find his friend, Chucky (Michael Imperioli), who owns a nearby bar. Chucky helps Joe make a list of the people who might have done this to him. Joe also befriends a nurse named Marie (Elizabeth Olsen), who believes his story after seeing the poor conditions he's in. Together they search for answers as Joe plans his revenge, but the real question is why he was held captive for so many years and then all of a sudden released. 

Josh Brolin wasn't bad in the lead role, while Elizabeth Olsen also delivered a solid performance, but the film relied heavily on the chemistry between both characters and it wasn't really there. Samuel L. Jackson had a wacky supporting role, while Sharlto Copley played a convincing villain. His performance reminded me the most to the original character because he was more creepy than actually frightening. There were some minor changes to the ending which I thought weren't as effective, but perhaps it had to do with how shocking I found the original film. This film is much shorter than the original and perhaps it's not all Lee's fault considering the studio didn't allow him to release his original 140 minute cut which could have given the characters a better background story. This version felt rushed at times. If you have't seen either film skip this remake and watch the original instead.

My Review: Elysium (7/10)

"I promise you, one day I'll take you to Elysium."

Elysium is Neill Blomkamp's sophomore sci-fi film after his critically acclaimed debut with District 9. Expectations were high considering that film was a unique experience in that it blended some great sci-fi visuals with a social commentary about the apartheid movement in South Africa. District 9 worked as a modern day parable. Sadly Elysium doesn't live up to those high standards he set in his previous movie, but I still have to admit I had a fun time with this film. I think people would've enjoyed this film a little more if they didn't know it was directed by the same person who brought us the groundbreaking District 9. Elysium is far from being a great film because it is very predictable and generic. There were no twists or surprises here, but I enjoyed the CGI and the performances from some of the cast members (sorry Jodie Foster, I can't include you here). Elysium works as a blockbuster as long as you don't think too much about the plot. Unlike in District 9, the social commentary doesn't work too well here because the characterizations were extremely over the top (Jodie Foster could've toned it down a bit). Blomkamp was trying to criticize the immigration issue and the difference in privileges between the rich and poor. However, I felt that as an action sci-fi film it kept me entertained despite the predictability so I still had a good time with Elysium.

The film takes place in 2154 where the planet has suffered from overpopulation and the wealthy have decided to live off in a space station called Elysium. The wealthy have access to a very comfortable life and state of the art equipment such as these medical capsules that heal you in a matter of seconds. Max (Matt Damon) has been dreaming of living in Elysium but his social condition doesn't allow it. He's committed several crimes in the past, but now he's decided to clean up his act and work at a local armor factory. After an incident with some droids, he runs into his childhood friend, Frey (Alice Braga), who's working as a nurse. Max isn't the only one who dreams of being able to go to Elysium. Several thousands of people have searched for a way to get a ticket (especially the sick who want to get healed in those capsules), but Officer Delacourt Rhodes (Jodie Foster) enforces the anti-immigration laws with a stern hand and will stop at nothing to ensure the safety of the wealthy class. When illegal crafts try to enter Elysium she doesn't hesitate in using force to stop them. One of her best agents is Kruger (Sharlto Copley) who happens to be psychotic as well and loves to use violence. When Max suffers an accident at work he is forced to find a way to Elysium and will stop at nothing to get there. 

I enjoyed Matt Damon's lead performance here and it was good to see Copley teaming up with Blomkamp again. The face off between these two characters was probably my favorite scene in this film. Elysium isn't the best sci-fi film of the year, but it still is an enjoyable flick if you go into it with low expectations. The action is pretty fast paced and at times the slow motion action scenes look like a video game. Blomkamp is a young and talented writer/director who will probably continue having success in the genre. Again I think the main weakness of the film was its overselling of the social commentary, but the premise and the action scenes lift this film from other formulaix sci-fi action films. I guess that the wealthy habitants of Elysium would've been better off if they simply offered their employees a better healthcare system. The lovely Alice Braga should also go over her roles a little as to try not to come up with a same ending again because the closure was almost identical to I Am Legend.

My Review: Europa Report (6/10)

"I can't believe I'm here. This is incredible."

I enjoyed this science fiction film directed by Ecuadorian filmmaker, Sebastian Cordero. This is his first international film, having directed his previous films all in Ecuador. El Pescador is in my opinion his best film, but in Europa Report he has a bigger budget to work with and some recognizable actors. Now don't get me wrong, this is still a small budget film, but compared to Cordero's previous budgets he gets to play with some bigger toys here. The film has sort of the feel of other small sci-fi films like Moon or Sunshine, but lacks some of the character development that those movies had. What it lacks in that department, it makes up for it in the scientific department creating a credible and suspenseful plot. The film builds tension thanks to its claustrophobic atmosphere and builds expectations for the discovery of the unknown. The film could have been much better if it had stronger characters and if it were edited differently. The film has a documentary style to it with closed and steady camera angle shots with a lot of static going on. The footage is also shown in non-linear fashion despite not having a major reason to do so. I had high expectation for Cordero's film, and despite having enjoyed it I still felt a little disappointed. I would have preferred it to focus more on the character development which would've allowed me to get emotionally involved with the film. Since I didn't care much for the characters, I felt a little detached to the science exploration.

As the title suggests, the film works as a report given by the crew of an exploration team sent to Europa, one of Jupiter's moons, where scientists believe that uni-cellular life organisms may exist. The international exploration team consists of the pilot, Rosa Dasque (Anamaria Marinca from 4 Months 3 Weeks and 2 Days), the Chief Engineer Andrei Blok (Michael Nyqvist from the Millennium trilogy), Engineer James Corrigan (Sharlto Copley from District 9), Dr. Katya Petrovna (Karolina Wydra), Dr. Daniel Luxembourg (Christian Camargo), and William Xu (Daniel Wu). We follow their expedition through footage from the shuttle. It is done in documentary fashion like The Blair Witch Project which allows us to experience the claustrophobic atmosphere and tension, while at the same time marvel at the possible discoveries in deep space.

Cordero gets all the scientific elements right. The screenplay was written by Phillip Gelatt and it succeeds in creating an original and believable plot, but it fails at giving the characters any depth. The film is only about 95 minutes long and there is nothing we can say about the personalities of any of these characters except for the fact that they are willing to take risks in the name of science. They might as well have sent drones because none of these scientists seem to have personalities. It is a shame because the scientific elements work really well and Europa Report could've worked much better as a thriller if it took time to create more interesting characters.

My Review: The A-Team (8/10)

¨They are the best, and they specialize in the ridiculous.¨

This movie is ridiculous yes, but it is also ridiculously funny and entertaining because the characters are simply the best. The A-Team was my favorite TV series growing up as a kid and it was a fun time to see them on the big screen again; different actors but the same characters. I was really looking forward to this movie and I wasn`t disappointed. It took me awhile to get into the movie and get used to the new actors, but after the first 15 minutes I began to enjoy it more and more. The A-Team is not a smart film and the plot is very absurd, but it is a very entertaining film mixing comedy with action and sticking to the main characteristics which made the TV series such a hit. This is a movie which doesn`t take itself seriously and neither should the viewer, but it does promise a lot of action and comedy. If you never saw the series then you might not enjoy this movie as much as I did, but if you were a fan then this is a movie you won`t want to miss because it will bring back some good memories. Just being able to hear Hannibal saying his famous ¨I love it when a plan comes together¨ line while putting the Cuban cigar on his mouth, laughing at Baracus`s fear of flying, at Murdock`s impersonations, or at Face for getting into trouble with the ladies brought back so many fond memories of the series. The performances were also good and I am glad the writers stuck with the main idea of the series. Director Joe Carnahan (who also directed the very entertaining Smokin` Aces) did a very good job at making this a highly entertaining and light action comedy.

The movie serves as a sort of prequel to the TV series as we get to know how each member of the A-Team meets and how they are later betrayed and turned into fugitives. It picks off in Mexico where Col. John Hannibal Smith (Liam Neeson from Taken) is trying to save his partner Lt. Templeton Faceman Peck (Bradley Cooper from The Hangover) who seems to have got himself into trouble for sleeping with a criminal`s wife. While trying to save Face, Hannibal runs into Sgt. Bosco B.A. Baracus (Quinton Jackson) and after realizing they served in the same war together, Baracus decides to help him saving Face. Once they rescue Face, they search for a pilot who can take them back to the States and that is where they meet Capt. Howling Mad Murdock (Sharlto Copley from District 9). Together they form an elite team and are sent to the War in Iraq where they are betrayed and later imprisoned. With the help of a CIA agent named Lynch (Patrick Wilson) the A-Team escape and try to clear their name by finding the man who betrayed them: Pike (Brian Bloom).  Capt. Charisa Sosa (Jessica Biel) is in charge of bringing the fugitives back to prison although she has a past with Face. The plot is not the most attractive thing about this film, which takes itself very lightly.

I really loved the cast in this film. Bradley Cooper was great as Face, Jackson wasn´t bad either playing Baracus, Liam Neeson was great as always playing Hannibal, but the true star of this film in my opinion was District 9 star, Sharlto Copley, who once again nailed his role and got the most laughs out of me. He was just terrific. The movie doesn`t try to take itself seriously and it works because it serves as a sort of homage to the TV series. I was highly entertained and found this movie funnier than what I expected. I recommend this movie, although I don`t know if you will enjoy it as much if you weren`t familiar with the television series, but fans will definitely have a good time at the movies. 

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: District 9 (8/10)

¨When dealing with aliens, try to be polite, but firm. And always remember that a smile is cheaper than a bullet¨

(8/10) District 9 was the suprise Summer hit and it was also a great film debut for director Neill Blomkamp who was able to make one of the best sci-fi movies of the last decade. This movie had it all: great special effects, good action scenes, character development (not just of the humans but of the aliens as well), and most importantly an original plot which served as a socio-political satire on descrimination, genocide, and corporate greed. I think almost anyone could understand the message that the director was trying to get across with this sci-fi movie. He criticised how humans treat others as inferior to them and how that hatred develops amongst the different groups simply because of cultural differences. The aliens were just an excellent way to get this message across without being too preachy and at the same time making us realize how fragile we are towards others who we cant relate too. Even the hero of this movie was depicted as a person with several flaws who made very unethical decisions, but changed once he was able to relate too and identify with the aliens. I was waiting a long time to get the chance to see this movie because of the excellent word of mouth it was receiving and I wasn`t disapointed once I finally got to see it.

The movie was filmed in a documentary style (like The Blair Witch Project or Cloverfield) and that was a great addition to the film because it only gave it a more realistic and interesting take of the aliens and their lifestyle. The protagonist was Wikus, played by Sharlto Copley, who worked for a big corporation in charge of evicting the aliens and forcing them to live in concentration-like camps. These camps soon became slums where the aliens lived in very precaurious situations and were looked down upon by the humans. Wikus is not your typical action hero, he is very unethical and treats these aliens very poorly and tries to manipulate them because he sees them as dumb and inferior beings. It is not untill he accidently splatters some bio-hazard material all over his face that we see him go through a Kafka like transformation and he also begins to see the aliens differently now and relate to them. Comparisons to the 80s movie The Fly cant be missed here as we see Wikus change not only in form, but in character as well and even becomes likeable by the end of the film. He forms an unlikely duo with one of the aliens, Cristopher and in this relationship we get to see the aliens in a different light as well.

You have to give Peter Jackson a lot of credit for producing a movie like this with a first time director like Blomkamp, but the result was great. The director counted with Jackson`s blessing and was able to put into use all the resources he was given delivering a great combination of special effects and fun action scenes that lived up to the standards of Summer movies with good performances from the cast and an original plot. If this was Blomkamp`s first movie as a director I cannot wait to see what he has in store for us as he continues to mature in his profession. His name will definitely be one I will be looking forward to in movies to come. A lot of credit has to be given to Sharlto Copley`s performance as well because this movie couldn`t have worked without him. He did an excellent job at depicting such an unorthodox and complex heroe who went through a range of mood changes and made the audience hate him during some points of the movie and love him at others. This is a must see film that is more than just an action sci-fi movie, it is also a smart social-political satire that will be remebered for years to come.