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. 

Exodus: Gods and Kings (5/10): A disappointing Biblical adaptation from the talented Ridley Scott

“Follow me and you will be free. Stay and you will perish.”

Ridley Scott is always a director to look forward to when it comes to films. I know he has had his series of misses as of late, but with films like Alien and Blade Runner under his belt, you know his next film could become a classic. Alien is one of my favorite sci-fi films of all time and I even enjoyed Scott’s recent prequel, Prometheus, more than most audiences did. Exodus isn’t the first time Scott has tried to make an epic film because it is similar in scope to what he did with Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven, and Robin Hood. Unfortunately, Exodus is the weakest of the four in my opinion. Scott has also experimented with different genres and last year’s The Counselor was proof of that. He’s even made some smaller films which I really enjoyed such as Matchstick Men which I was a huge fan of. I appreciate these smaller scale films more than when he tries to make these grandiose and epic ones. My major issue with this film revolves around the pacing because it felt so long and dull for most parts. It was as if Scott was aiming to direct an ambitious epic film and was trying to make it so grand that he got lost with the production and visuals of it and left out the actual narrative. There are several things I’d like to get out of the way before I actually review this film. First of all, if you are expecting a faithful adaptation to the Biblical story then Exodus isn’t a movie for you because Scott and the screenwriters took several liberties of their own (especially in the way Moses interacted with God and the Pharaoh). This is the second big budget film based on the Old Testament to come out last year, after Aronofsky directed Noah, which both took liberties from the original source material but in my opinion at least Aronofsky did something fresh and unique with the material, while Scott never manages to do so. Second, I don’t understand why we complaint so much about the casting of white actors and forget about the fact that the characters are all speaking in English. What is the point of casting all Egyptian and Hebrew actors and have them speak in English? At least Scott went all in and just cast famous actors without considering anything else.

It took me a while to get over the silliness of the opening sequences. On the one hand, Scott made a huge effort of recreating the Egyptian empire with huge production sets, but on the other the familiar faces of the actors kind of took me out of the film. Having John Turturro playing the Pharaoh and Sigourney Weaver his wife was difficult to visualize. I think Joel Edgerton is a great actor, but he wasn’t the right man for the role of Ramses. Christian Bale delivers as Moses and Ben Mendelssohn has the most campy scenes in the film but I think they helped to break the tedious tone of the film. Aaron Paul and Ben Kingsley are inexplicably underused. Despite the nice visuals (I don’t think they were groundbreaking), the story was poorly written and that is perhaps why some of these incredible actors didn’t have much to work with. There are some moments in the film where Moses is given some humanity, but whatever depth they tried to give the characters got lost in the visuals and the narrative. We know the story and have seen it played out several times in films before, so that is perhaps why I found some of the engaging scenes rather tedious because Scott doesn’t really do anything unique with the material. By the time the plagues take place we really don’t care for the characters and aren’t emotionally invested in them either. Yes, the scenes look great but there is nothing more there. I also expected a lot more from the parting of the Red Sea, but it simply was a forgettable scene. The only moment I felt some sort of emotion toward this dull film was with the dedication to his brother Tony during the end credits, but the film didn’t actually do anything for me. I was more emotionally engaged with the animated film The Prince of Egypt than I was with this. Skip the movie, read Exodus instead. 

My Review: Aliens (8/10)

¨We'd better get back, 'cause it'll be dark soon, and they mostly come at night¨

Many people consider Aliens to be better or at least at the same level as its predecessor, Alien, but I found it an inferior film in many ways. In my opinion Alien is a perfect film, while Aliens despite being very entertaining is not nearly as scary and has its flaws. This sequel was directed by James Cameron and his trademarks are all over this film. Ridley Scott had managed to direct a small psychological science fiction horror flick, while Cameron made a much larger film, with many aliens, more characters, and a lot more action. This is more of a blockbuster movie than anything else. I`ve always been a fan of much quieter films that focus on psychological scares than big budget action movies so that may be one of the reasons why I liked Alien much more than Aliens. There is no doubt about Cameron`s ability to direct these big budget movies and he always delivers spectacular visual effects, but story wise his films are sometimes lacking in quality. The characters are many times one dimensional and that is exactly the case in Aliens. The only character I really liked in this film and that has depth is Sigourney Weaver`s Ripley. Unlike in Alien where the main character seemed to be the alien despite not showing up much on screen; in Aliens we have plenty of screen time for the aliens, but I never felt like they were a main character. It`s as if so much overexposure to them made me care less about the aliens and more about Ripley. So in conclusion Alien was the creature`s movie, while Aliens is Weaver`s film. She has a very strong role and her presence is what has made this film so successful. She carries the film and in a way makes us forget about the rest of the one dimensional characters. 

The story continues right where the original left off with Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) in the Nostromo shuttle in hypersleep along with her cat. She is awaken by a salvage team that has found her vessel drifting through space. Burke (Paul Reiser), who works for the same company that the original crew members worked for, informs Ripley that she has been asleep for 57 years. The company briefs Ripley as to what happened with the ship and the rest of the members, and don’t believe her story. They say that if her story were true then the colony of over 60 families that has been living on the planet where she claims to have seen the derailed ship would have encountered the aliens by now. The colony has been there for over twenty years without experiencing difficulties, and Ripley is discharged as a space pilot. Some time later, when the company loses contact with the colony, Burke asks Ripley to come along with them as a consultant. The company sends a military team to find out what has happened to the colonists and Ripley is offered to come along with them reinstating her if she does so. This is just an excuse for Cameron to get the crew in the same planet as the aliens and have much more action. Ripley decides to travel with the team which consists of Lt. Gorman (William Hope), the android Bishop (Lance Henriksen), Cpl. Hicks (Michael Biehn), Pvt. Vasquez (Jenette Goldstein), Pvt. Hudson (Bill Paxton), Cpl. Ferro (Colette Hiller), among many other soldiers who are heavily armed and qualified. Once they reach the planet they find no sign of any colonists, except for a ten year old girl named Newt (Carrie Henn) who has managed to survive and tells them that monsters have killed the rest, and that they will come for them as well.

This film marked a breakthrough in action films, but isn’t really as scary as the original movie. The suspense and psychological horror is replaced with action packed shootouts and explosions. There are many more characters and a lot more aliens so there are a lot of things happening. This is what makes Aliens more entertaining for some people. Cameron had recently come from directing The Terminator so he was already making a name for himself and was able to work with a good budget. He is among the best when it comes to visuals and special effects and many of the visuals in this movie still look great today. Aliens won two Oscars for this reason. I`m not a huge fan of Cameron`s work, although I have to admit Terminator 2 is one of the best action movies ever and definitely my favorite James Cameron film. The screenplay was also written by Cameron along with the help of screenwriters David Giler and Walter Hill, and I had small issues with it, although the spectacular action sequences saved it. This is Sigourney Weaver`s film and she truly broke out as an A-list actress with this movie. She shines as a true female action hero who`s strong and emotional at the same time. Aliens is a good film, just not as perfect as Alien.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

My Review: Alien (10/10)

¨It's got a wonderful defense mechanism. You don't dare kill it.¨

Ridley Scott has had a great career and made several great films, but Alien, only his second film, may arguably be his best one. In my opinion this is the best horror film of all time due to the dark mood, the claustrophobic atmosphere, and several shocking scenes that continue to have an impact on the horror genre 33 years after its release. I have to admit that I just now got around watching this historic movie after having seen its prequel, Prometheus. I liked Prometheus so much that I knew I had to go back and watch the original film that got the franchise started. Despite having seen the aliens in the horrific AVP films, I still was shocked and surprised with the scenes and effects in Alien. The visual effects were excellent and it rightfully won an Oscar in that department. I can only imagine how shocking the chest bursting scene must have been for viewers in the late 70`s. The scene was masterfully directed by Ridley Scott and it has to be one of the most frightening ones in horror history. It may be the highlight of the movie, but there are also several other shocking moments that make this the perfect sci-fi horror film. I loved the way they managed to build the suspense without showing too much of the alien. The setting was just perfect and the sense of claustrophobia is all over the movie. You knew that at any moment the alien could pop out of nowhere and attack once again. That sense of dread was also built thanks to the suspenseful score. Thousands of horror films have tried to copy a similar format since the release of this perfect movie without reaching the same success.

The film takes place sometime in the future as a towing spaceship named Nostromo is on its way back to Earth. There are seven crew members who are in hypersleep and aren’t expected to wake up until they get home, but unexpectedly the smart computer running the ship, known as ¨Mother, ¨ receives a signal that seems like a distress call from a nearby planet. The crew members are awaken and are informed of the situation by Mother. Despite some initial arguments over them not being a rescue team, the Captain of the vessel, Dallas (Tom Skerritt), decides to land on the planet and once there they discover a wrecked spaceship nearby. Dallas along with his assistant Kane (John Hurt) and crew member Lambert (Veronica Cartwright) get off their ship and enter the wrecked one in search for clues as to who may have sent the distress call while Ripley (Sigourney Weaver), Brett (Harry Dean Stanton), Ash (Ian Holm), and Parker (Yaphet Kotto) remain on board of the Nostromo trying to fix some mechanical problems after the rough landing they experienced. Kane, Lambert and Dallas on the other hand discover the fossilized remains of the dead alien pilot on their expedition with a huge hole on his chest. Kane is sent further down the ship where he finds some sort of alien eggs surrounded by a blue mist which seems to be disturbed by his presence. This is where the horror begins as Ripley discovers that the distress call isn’t really an SOS call, but a warning.

The film has a perfect structure: the science fiction is beautiful taking us to a futuristic world that is well constructed, the visuals are excellent, the editing perfect, the performances are strong, the script is really well written by Dan O`Bannon and Ronald Shusett (who later collaborated together for another known sci-fi film: Total Recall), the thrills and scares are plentiful, and there are several shocking moments with a couple of twists. The true star of the film is the alien even though we do not see much of it. The reason he`s the star is because the claustrophobic mood of the film makes you dread it can show up at any given moment. These characters are stuck in the spaceship with this evil alien that`s killing them off one by one. Not even Sigourney Weaver is the star of this film as she practically gets equal screen time as the rest of the cast. She wasn’t a known star at the time, and it was actually this franchise that catapulted her to fame, so no one really knew which characters were really going to survive this horror story as the film had plenty of surprises throughout. I wish I would have been around in 1979 to see what kind of reaction I would of got considering I already have seen the aliens in recent versions, but the fear of the unknown is always much more frightening. I still had a great time with this movie and consider it mandatory viewing for everyone who loves film. Alien is as close to a perfect film as you will ever see.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

My Review: Cedar Rapids (7/10)

¨There`s a separation between religion and insurance. It`s in the constitution.¨

Who would`ve ever thought that a comedy could be made about a bunch of insurance people gathered at a Convention in a small city named Cedar Rapids? Miguel Arteta (Youth in Revolt and The Good Girl) certainly did, and he did a great job with directing this film putting the emphasis on the characters and not so much on the story. It`s a character driven comedy and the cast was really perfect for this sort of comedy; even the small city, Cedar Rapids, becomes an important character in the movie. Phil Johnston should also receive plenty of credit for writing an interesting and original script. He was able to create good characters and they are developed really well in the short 90 minutes the movie lasts. Cedar Rapids is an unconventional comedy, but it works nonetheless; there are very funny moments and great performances from Ed Helms, John C. Reilly, and Isiah Whitlock Jr. They all worked really well together and were able to deliver a very funny comedy which sort of mixes the buddy comedy with road trip with the classic fish out of the water scenario. Cedar Rapids is a very interesting and modest small film, just like the small city in Iowa is. It`s not a perfect comedy, but Cedar Rapids is much better than most comedies that I`ve seen recently, and it stands out from the rest.

The main character of the film is Tim Lippie (Ed Helms) who has dedicated his whole life to the insurance company he works for. He`s lived his entire existence in Brown Valley, Wisconsin and has a relationship with his seventh grade teacher, Macy Vanderhai (Sigourney Weaver), with whom he is ¨pre-engaged.¨ He believes to be living a good life, but things turn around for him when the star insurance man of Brown Valley passes away after a freak ¨accident.¨ Lippie`s boss, Bill (Stephen Root), asks him to replace his former co-worker and travel to the insurance convention in Cedar Rapids to represent the company and try to win the Two-Diamond Award for Excellence for the third year in a row.  It is the first time in his life that Lippie is going to travel on a plane and stay in a hotel, so things are very new for him. He will soon realize that not everything is as it seemed, and that life can get pretty wild in Cedar Rapids. Lippie has to share his hotel room with two other insurance men who have already been to dozens of these conventions: Ronald Wilkes (Isiah Whitlock Jr.) and Dean Ziegler (John C. Reilly). Ronald is a nice African American who makes Lippie feel at home. Dean is also a great guy, but he is very outspoken and behaves unethically at times. Lippie is shocked at first by his behavior and attitude, and tries to stay away from him because his sole mission is to win the award and impress the judge, Orin (Kurtwood Smith), who is a firm preacher of ethics. Lippie also befriends a female colleague named Joan (Anne Heche) with whom he gets romantically involved. Lippie`s life will change in Cedar Rapids, and he`s going to have the experience of his life.

The film works really well because of a couple of factors: First of all Ed Helms did a terrific job with his character and he proved that he can be a lead man in a comedy. His performance was truly hysterical as he played the typical naïve and innocent sort of guy, and it balanced out really well with John C. Reilly`s outspoken and know it all character. The chemistry between both actors was excellent, and Reilly played his role to perfection because he wasn’t the typical loud character; he had much more heart and was carrying at times. Anne Heche also delivered her role really well, but the funniest character in the film for me was Isiah Whitlock who really delivered the greatest laughs with his dry humor and The Wire personating. The scene where the guys interrupt a party in order to rescue Lippie is probably one of the best ones of the movie. The success of the film really relied on the performance of these actors, because Cedar Rapids was a character driven film. The characters were believable and true, and not simply characterizations and stereotypes; they had a lot of depth. I`ve got to give the credit to Ed Helms, John C. Reilly, and Isiah Whitlock who all played a big part in making this as funny as it was. This is not your typical comedy, but I still recommend it.

My Review: Avatar (6/10)

¨They`ve sent us a message...that they can take whatever they want. Well we will send them a message. That this...this is our land¨

(6/10) James Cameron`s Avatar is a film that took 15 years in the making. It was a project that was really close to Cameron and he waited for the right time to be able to release this movie. He payed close attention to every detail and perfected the way we see movies in 3D. The effort was not cheap as this film is reported to be the most expensive movie ever made. Avatar will mark a before and after in film history for special effects and 3D. All the critics agree that this film is visually stunning and there is no doubt it will win several awards for special effects and art direction. I don´t think it will win as much awards as Titanic (Cameron´s last film) did or even match it´s record breaking box office, but it will be remembered for all the technical and visual breakthroughs. One thing is for sure, it will not win any acting awards. James Cameron has proved in Hollywood that he is a great director and that he is on par with Spielberg when it comes to special effects. He has directed several blockbuster movies such as Aliens, Terminator, Titanic, and now Avatar is becoming a hit worldwide. Visually speaking this movie deserves ten stars, but the story is not up to par with the visuals. Moviegoers who enjoy great special effects and visuals will be blown away by this movie, but fans who enjoy good storytelling and writing will leave unimpressed by Cameron`s effort. I am more into the storytelling so for me this movie dragged for long periods of times and the plot was very predictable. I felt like I was at an art museum looking at all these famous masterpieces, but I wasn´t entertained throughout the two and a half hours. I felt good about the visuals and they were truely remarcable, but I didn´t walk out of the theater impressed. I remember when Speilberg´s Jurrasic Park came out and that experience was much more breathtaking than this one. I guess I wasn´t blown away by Avatar and I would find it dificult to sit through two and a half hours to watch this movie again.

As far as the story goes, Avatar takes place in the future (2154 to be exact) in a planet named Pandora. Pandora has a rich and extensive fauna and the natives that inhabit it (known as the Na`vis) are very connected to this nature and even worship the mother tree as their god. Humans have set a military base in the planet because it is rich in a new type of mineral or chemical element, a grey rock which happens to sell for 200 million a kilo. This mineral happens to be under the surface where the Na`vis live so a group of scientists have tried to fit in with the natives by creating avatars which are alien bodies controlled through human minds (an approach we have seen before similar to The Matrix or Surrogates). These avatars are controlled by Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver who has already worked with Cameron in Aliens), Jake Sully (Sam Worthington, the Australian actor who starred in this year`s Terminator film), and Norm Spellman (Joel Moore who is known for his comedic role in Dodgeball). Jake Sully, a paraplegic ex marine, is accepted by the tribe and begins to learn from their culture thanks in most part to the beautiful Neytiri (Zoe Saldana who had a role in this year´s Star Trek) the tribe chief`s daughter who teaches him how to connect with the environment and all he needs to know in order to survive in the jungle`s of Pandora. Jake begins to have mixed feelings towards the natives and towards his commanders, Col. Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang, Public Enemies) who has promised to give him the money for the spinal surgery for the exchange of information, and Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) the greedy corporate boss in charge of the mission. From this point on one cannot help but compare the plot to Pocahontas. It is just an alien version of the New World. Avatar becomes very predictable and we know what is going to happen, but fans are not into this for the plot, the audience is here for the visual spectacle.

The film might be disapointing plotwise, but the special effects make up for it. As I said before, those film buffs that are into movies for the storytelling will probably be a little unhappy with Avatar like I was, but those who are into the visuals and special effects will leave this film with a huge smile on their faces. There is no doubt James Cameron has spent the money wisely and created an entire new world with a beautiful scenary and some cool creatures. The first hour and a half dragged a little, but once we get to the last hour with the battle scenes the movie really picks up. The final battle is one of the greatest action sequences in film on par with the Star Wars saga, or The Lord of The Ring franchise, or even the Matrix trilogy. However, Avatar took a little too long to get to this point as it had to introduce us to this new planet. Don`t get me wrong, Avatar is a good movie, but I think there are other films that are much better than this one to be considered in my top 10 list of 2009. I was a little dissapointed because all of the hype this movie was receiving.