Prometheus: Sir Ridley Fails To Recapture The Flame

WARNING! SOME SPOILERS TO BE FOUND BELOW.

Prometheus marks Sir Ridley Scott’s return to the scifi genre after a thirty-year absence.

Prior to Prometheus Sir Rid made two sci fi movies – Alien and Blade Runner – both acknowledged classics of the genre and of film in general. Since then he’s been messing around with various other genres with varying degrees of success, his most successful venture creatively and financially being the awesome Gladiator, which single handidly reinvented the big screen historical epic. But post-Gladiator he hasn’t really hit the mark, except for perhaps the tense and brutal Black Hawk Down. His last effort was 2010’s Robin Hood - a dull misconceived bore. Legend has it that after seeing James Cameron at work on Avatar, Sir Rid asked his agent “Why am I not doing something like this?” Which led him directly to Prometheus.

Prometheus has a bit of a history. Originally it was conceived as a direct prequel to Alien, possibly to be two films made back to back. Talk was of James Cameron producing and Sir Rid directing. Ideas were exchanged, scripts written, but then budgets were deemed waaay too huge and risky for two adult-minded scifi horror films. Lets not forget, as great and as popular and Alien and Aliens were and remain, neither were huge box office money makers. They both did very well at the time but made nothing like the money of a Star Wars or even the best Star Trek. No Alien film has ever made more than $80m in the US. Plus Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection were both critical and commercial flops, which of course then led to the woeful Alien Vs Predator debacle. In short, Fox weren’t gonna spend huge money on two back-to-back prequels to what was only a modestly successful film franchise. But the idea wouldn’t go away. Sir Rid was eager to get back to scifi. Fox were eager to have him back doing scifi. And so new writers were brought in and the focus of the film (now just the one) was retooled in to what we now have, namely Prometheus. It is not an Alien prequel Fox and Sir Rid were telling us. It is a film that expands upon ideas set out in the Alien films but goes beyond them. It is a mystery, an intelligent and thrilling scifi exploration in to the secrets of humanities origins somewhere out there in deep space.

Nope.

Prometheus is most definitely an Alien prequel.

It is set in the same universe, has the same design aesthetic, has the same nasty corporation behind all the bad shit that goes down, and has icky monsters at least part inspired by the great HR Giger.

Sadly, what it doesn’t have is the same focus of narrative, strong core characters, tight editing, and downright pant wetting scares.

You see Prometheus really wants to be deeply intelligent and deeply profound, whereas Alien was simply a gorgeously made horror movie. A haunted house tale set in space. But Prometheus wants desperately to be more. It sorta wants to be 2001 or 2010…with added gloop, tentacles and gore. Unfortunately, though, it doesn’t have the focus or the deep and subtle intelligence of either 2001 or 2010. Yes, it has a big idea at its core (though one that has been done lots before) but it doesn’t do anything especially interesting with that idea. It poses lots of questions, touches on lots of themes around parenthood, creation of life, mortality, what is God, biological warfare, how far is too far for scientific experimentation etc. But the problem is, it doesn’t provide any answers. All it provides is more questions and lots of slime and some crazy tentacles and a big supposed ancient and massively intelligent alien/godlike being who in the end is only there to break necks and run around smashing things up. Yup, Arthur C Clarke sure missed a trick. Not! And what big revelations the movie does provide are pretty obvious early on to anyone who’s seen or read any scifi or who just has half a brain and is paying attention. Because Prometheus has some of the most unsubtle plot sign posting I’ve seen in ages. It almost screams at you, “LOOK, SEE THIS? THIS IS GONNA BE MASSIVELY IMPORTANT LATER ON.” So when the big revelations come near the end, they ain’t that revelatory. I was just thinking, “Yeah? And…?” But the “And” ends up being a standard run around corridors avoiding a hulking monster dude after escaping a big alien space ship that’s taking off (straight out of the end of the X-Files movie). Only with none of the tension and scares of, um, say, Alien.

Basically the script for Prometheus is a mess. There are too many questions posed with too few answers given. And there are too many characters, most of whom are paper thin and do nothing, serving no real purpose other than to do stupid things and get killed (No, don’t take the helmet off. No, don’t go off on your own just cuz you got grumpy…) Perhaps its biggest problem, though, is that there simply isn’t a strong narrative throughline to the story. No clear objective or obstacles to overcome, just the odd appearances of gloopy slime and weird tentacles, with no big, solid, tangible threat. People get infected with stuff and turn in to mutating sub-Thing-like creations who then have to be killed via flame throwers, while others get melted from acidic eel things or get impregnated with baby squids. To be fair, the DIY caesarean section sequence is by far the best and most successful part of the film. It’s intense and utterly gross. Shame it ends with the person then able to run around, jump craters and fight a ten foot tall albino dude despite having just had major abdominal surgery. Huh? I think not.

For the most part Ridley’s direction is good and fine. The film sure looks pretty. The photography, design, art direction and visual effects are all impeccable. The score is lushly sweeping too, with a lovely main theme and hints of Goldsmith’s classic Alien score popping up here and there. I’d recommend people see Prometheus for those reasons if no other. Sir Rid sure makes gorgeous looking and sounding films.

However he drops the ball in two major areas.

First, the film is sloppily edited. Characters appear and disappear for large amounts of time. You have no idea where they are or what they are doing. Several of them I still don’t know who they were or what their purpose was other than to die. When it comes to the big set pieces the editing is fine but never elevates the film to being overly exciting. There is a distinct lack of tension throughout. The most successful stuff (apart from the caesarean) is the smooth and elegantly put together sequences of Michael Fassbender’s David alone on the ship early on, going about his day to day business. Loved that.

Second, despite what some of the blurb might say, Prometheus just isn’t scary. There are a couple of mediocre jump moments (a radio squawk got me) but none of the ‘monster’ stuff is remotely scary or tense. Only the earlier mentioned caesarean sequence really makes you squirm and grip the seat. The rest is just cgi tentacles and oozing slime. Remember Harry Dean Stanton’s demise in Alien? Capt. Dallas in the air vents? Ripley vs. the Alien in the escape pod at the end? Nothing like any of that here. Not so much as a shiver raised.

So what about the cast?

In the lead role of Dr Shaw, Noomi Rapace with her amazing cheekbones is fine. She’s a very good actress and does the job selling her curiosity, her fear and her need to find out the truth of creation, to try and legitimise her own religious faith. She does lots of running and pleading, lots of pained expressions. And that’s fine. But there’s nothing here to rival her extraordinary work as Lisbeth Salander. Meanwhile Charlize Theron (looking awesome in shiny tight space clothes) is icy and coldly hostile as the dodgy rep from the company. Plus oh so sexy as always. Idris Elba is nicely laid back as the ship’s captain. And Logan Marshall-Green is, well, solid as Noomi’s co-scientist and boyfriend. But by far the standout performance comes from the always awesome Michael Fassbender as the ship’s android David. Oddly, as the non-human amongst them all, he’s the one with the most depth and the most interesting character. Fassbender plays him as a cross between Hal 9000, a curious innocent child, a fascinated fanboy (he geeks out for Lawrence of Arabia) and an unflustered wryly-observant butler. And he’s quite brilliant. To be honest, I was always wishing the movie would get back to him, not really caring what happened to anyone else. And then we have Guy Pearce. Ah, Guy Pearce. Love the dude. Great actor. But why the hell was he cast in this? He’s buried under a ton of some of the worst old age make-up seen for a long time. In HD you get to see every rubbery looking wrinkle. He looks like Johnny Knoxville’s old man in Jackass. I kept expecting his old man balls to start swinging. They should have cast an actor of the right age for the role. Should have been Peter O’Tool, which would have worked wonderfully with David’s Lawrence of Arabia obsession.

Now, all of this sounds like I didn’t like the movie. Like I have a major downer on it.

And I kinda do.

But despite all of its problems I did still enjoy Prometheus. Just nowhere near as much as I hoped I would. As I expected I would. It has great stuff in it. The look and design is worth the ticket price alone. As is Fassbender. And Noomi’s cheekbones. And Charlize’s shiny space ass. But it could and should have been so much better. The core idea is fine if unoriginal. It just needed a better writer to come in, hone the script, focus it down, and add some depth and concentrate more on a few less ideas. And it needed Sir Rid to tighten his editing and to inject a lot more tension and some real honest to god scares.

I was really hoping for something special from Prometheus. And the more I think about it, the more disappointed I feel. And I hate that. Alien and Aliens are peerless classics. With Prometheus Sir Ridley Scott had the chance to make a gorgeous looking, smart, rather profound film that made its audience think while also rocking them to the core in terror. He certainly achieved the first of those, skimmed the surface with the next two, and pretty much failed outright with the last.

But, hey, at least it’s a big budget space ship based scifi flick that looks amazing. Something we almost never get anymore. And for that, at least, I’m grateful. I just wish it had been so much more.

3.5 (out of 5)

Dark Shadows aka Depp Gets to be Weird Again

Trailer for Dark Shadows (2012)


Trailer for House of Dark Shadows (1970)

Dark Shadows is director Tim Burton and star Johnny Depp’s latest film collaboration. And while it’s not their best (Ed Wood) it certainly isn’t their worst (Alice in Wonderland anybody? No? Okay.)

Based on a US supernatural daytime soap from the 60’s, Dark Shadows follows Barnabas Collins, a cursed vampire imprisoned in a coffin for two hundred years, who is accidentally freed in the year 1972. Finally freed from his centuries old prison, Barnabas sets about helping his descendants in the small New England fishing town of Collinsport rebuild the once great Collins family name and business empire. Unfortunately for Barnabas the witch who cursed him back in the 1770’s is still around in the delectable form of Eva Green and is currently running the town through her own business empire, much of it poached from what the now faded Collins’ family once had. Cue goofy fish out of water fun as Barnabas negotiates his way around 1972 and its many strange social and technical advances while also scheming and plotting to get the family business back on top. Not to mention getting his revenge on nasty/sexy Eva Green. Amidst all these shenanigans the old world vamp also manages to fall for the Collins’ new governess Victoria Winters who bears an uncanny resemblance to the woman he loved long ago and who killed herself while under evil witch Eva’s spell.

If this all sounds like some bad soap opera, well, um, that’s cuz it is.

Now I’ve not seen the original Dark Shadows but I have seen the early 90’s revival and one of the two 70’s movies adapted from the show. And Burton and Depp’s movie sticks pretty close to the main storylines of both: the fading dysfunctional family, Barnabas falling for Victoria, Dr Hoffman’s devious actions, the nasty witch. All present and correct.

But does this new version work as a movie? Yes and no.

I enjoyed Tim Burton’s Dark Shadows. A fair bit. I enjoy Burton’s obvious affection for gothic melodrama. I can relate. I was brought up watching old Hammer horror films - a clear influence on Tim B, especially in Sleepy Hollow, The Corpse Bride, Sweeney Todd and now Dark Shadows (and why Christopher Lee cameos in most of ‘em). I enjoy the aesthetic. Also I’m pretty sure that if the original Dark Shadows had been on TV over here in the UK when I was a kid, then I, like Burton and Depp, would have been hooked too. But a movie is not a TV soap opera. Burton’s movie, like a TV soap opera, has many plot lines and subplots, all lifted from the series. Unlike a TV show, though, a movie is constrained by certain narrative needs and a running time. That’s not to say that multiple plot lines, character arcs etc. can’t be done well in a movie. They can. Look what Joss has just achieved with The Avengers: multiple story strands, character arcs, set ups and payoffs all perfectly balanced and effortlessly successful. Not a minute of screen time is wasted. Unfortunately the same can’t be said for Tim Burton’s Dark Shadows. Here various story elements feel short changed, rather pointless, lacking in weight.

Oddly, storywise Dan Curtis’ 1970 film House of Dark Shadows did a better job of it. Curtis’ film cut loose all the business stuff and witch revenge seen in Burton’s take. Instead it focussed on Barnabas’ escape from his two hundred year imprisonment, ingratiating himself in to the family by posing as a distant cousin from England while slowly sucking his way through the locals and trying to woo the family’s governess who reminds him of his long lost love. In Curtis’ film Barnabas is a tragic, reluctant monster. But a monster nonetheless who wilfully kills out of need, lust and anger, stopping at nothing to get the woman he thinks he loves. Original actor Jonathan Frid imbued his Barnabas with a cold, ruthless charm and noble theatrical viciousness. Quite effectively. In the new movie, Depp’s Barnabas is a funny, weird oddball who even though he does kill never really comes across as a dangerous monster. He isn’t selfish or cruel, which, from what I saw, Frid’s version most certainly was. Curtis’ 1970 film is far from perfect. It is cheesy (especially to our modern jaded eyes) and relentlessly old fashioned. But it does have atmosphere, a couple of ok scares, some cool Dick Smith make-up, and Frid being coldly creepy in the lead. It also has a more focussed narrative than Burton’s all-over-the-place remake.

In the end, Burton’s film might not hang together too well, but at least I was never bored and laughed a fair bit while loving the gorgeous photography and art direction. The entire cast were great too, especially oddball Depp, sexy Eva and the wonderfully sneering teen angst of Chloe Moretz. I also dug the overall 70's vibe (loved the opening credits to the Moody Blues while tracking Victoria's journey to Collinsport). And any film with Alice Cooper singing No More Mr Nice Guy scores at least some points in my book. But it is Depp who holds it all together. He might not have the cold menace of Frid but his Barnabas is a nicely oddball/weird/silly reluctant fish-out-of-water who's trying to do the right thing despite having to kill the odd hippie or ten.

Tim Burton’s Dark Shadows ain't perfect and is perhaps a little too slavish to its soap opera origins to make for a strong film in its own right, but I had a pretty good time with it. On the Burton scale it's perhaps one notch down from Sleepy Hollow, which to my mind is a movie that gets the weird/silly/creepy Burtonesque balance just about right. 3.5 (out of 5)

Awesomeness Assembled

I f*****g LOVED Marvel’s The Avengers!

Any worries that this might have ended up an epic and misjudged disaster or simply Iron Man and his Amazing Friends were pretty quickly dispelled. The Avengers is basically a SHEILD movie that features Iron Man, Captain America, Thor and Hulk in equal measure. They all get equal screen time and are served with full character arcs. If anything it can be argued that Avengers ends up more as Hulk’s movie as his is the character that pretty much destroys every scene he is in…in fabulous ways. Hulk is the one audiences will lose their shit for. He owns.

To be honest, I wasn’t overly worried about The Avengers not being great, at least not once I knew Marvel had hired my own personal god Joss Whedon to write/direct. I had faith. I just wondered what degree of great it would be? Because when allowed to pursue his own vision Joss has never let me down. Plus he’s a huge comic book geek having written comics for Marvel (as well as his own Buffyverse ones for Dark Horse) meaning that with The Avengers the guy was on home turf.

And Joss didn’t let me down.

I've been a Marvel fan (solid fan, not rabid) since I was a lil' kid and a massive (semi-rabid) Whedon fan since I saw the very first episode of Buffy waaay back in 1997. So, match made in heaven much?

Hell yeah!

What Joss has done is to make The Avengers a joyful, colourful, exciting, old fashioned, non-cynical, non-revisionist superhero adventure ripped right out of the pages of classic era Marvel. It is Fun with a capital F. But he’s also gone and added his own tropes making it smart, witty, laugh out loud funny and adding familiar Whedon themes of thrown together ‘families’, of troubled, flawed outsiders finding strength in each other and in a common purpose. Oh yeah, and kick ass women who struggle with the weight of the world on their shoulders.

Yes, the action is spectacular and a whole load of awesome but as always with Joss it is the dialogue, humour and wonderful character arcs/beats that you really take away with you. If nothing else, what he manages to do with Hulk makes this one damn great movie. And then when you add in Downey Jr, Evans et al then my tiny little geek brain goes and explodes all over the shop. But going back to the action, we of course get the promised hero on hero fights – all of which are great (love the early Thor/Iron Man tussle). But Joss being Joss all the fights and the action have emotional weight. The characters aren’t just fighting each other; they are fighting themselves and their own issues/demons. Also, I love how the end battle is huge yet expertly staged, easy to follow and strategically contained to a relatively small area – done so deliberately by Cap who steps up to be the team’s battle commander and does an awesome job of it. The scene where he barks out orders to a bunch of bemused NYC cops and convinces them pretty darn quick not to question their new Captain is fab. He then does the same to the rest of the Avengers. And they listen and obey. And why not? The man knows his shit. Captain America, f**k yeah!

The entire Avengers cast is fantastic. Downey Jr is full on egotistical but charmingly playful and razor sharp as Stark. Evans is nobly stoic and effortlessly commanding as Cap. Hemsworth is wonderfully sensitive yet also hugely powerful and charismatic as Thor. Sam Jackson is, well, Sam Jackson as Nick Fury. And Jeremy Renner is cool and nicely low key as Hawkeye. However the three standouts are Scarlett Johansson as a deeply troubled, guilt ridden Black Widow, Tom Hiddleston as a venomous and barkingly mad Loki, and the best of the bunch, Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner/Hulk. Ruffalo as Banner/Hulk pretty much steals the show. He gets the movie’s biggest cheer moments with ‘Thor Puncher’ and "Puny God" turning me in to a giggling idiot. What Joss has done here is to allow Hulk to be a fully formed character and to make Banner someone who is more or less at peace with who and what he is. Basically Joss has allowed Banner and Hulk to be heroes, and to have fun. And Ruffalo does great, great work in both human and big green form (he acted Hulk via mocap unlike what was done in the previous Hulks). This is by far the best treatment of the character yet seen on screen.

But what about the actual story?

Okay, so the basic story of The Avengers is nothing original or particularly special. It’s a pretty standard alien invasion job played out like a superhero Dirty Dozen. Dastardly Loki hooks up with an alien army to invade Earth, which he wants to have for himself. In exchange he’ll get the aliens the cosmic crystal which is currently in the hands of SHIELD. That’s your prologue. The rest of the film is then your classic three-act structure. Act one is introducing the threat of Loki to Earth and then SHIELD rounding up The Avengers with those super egos quickly butting heads…and everything else. Act 2 is the guys coming together, working out their differences and what to do about stopping Loki (mostly on the SHEILD helicarrier) before being beaten down by events and dividing. Act 3 is the heroes finding their inner resolve, coming back together and setting out to stop Loki’s army invading Earth is what turns out to be a huge battle on the streets and in the skies of New York. It’s pretty functional stuff. But what elevates it are its many constituent parts and how Joss fits them all together concentrating on set-ups and payoffs and keeping strong character arcs front and centre. He even gets to play with a regular Whedon theme – mistrust of authority/governments. SHIELD are the good guys…or are they? But above all, what Joss does with his movie is to always keep the tone fun. Even when things get heavy and bleak there’s always a witty line or a perfectly timed sight gag just around the corner. And Joss being Joss he loves to undercut things and/or subvert expectations. Loki’s final beating by a certain angry green dude being a prime and hilarious example of both.

In the end, The Avengers is quite the achievement. It’s not a perfect film. Not many films are. But considering the many genre and story/character constraints Whedon inherited and had to stick to, he’s done one helluva job. In anyone else’s hands this could easily have ended up a shallow, lopsided, godawful mess. But in Joss’s hands it’s a smartly written, well-paced, well-balanced and massively entertaining piece of pop culture blockbuster entertainment. The Dark Knight Rises will most likely end up as the year’s best superhero film and possibly its best film, period. But The Avengers will likely end up as the most out and out fun.

What with this and The Cabin in the Woods, 2012 is the year Joss Whedon let the rest of the world know what we, his long time loyal fans, have known for a long time: Joss is Boss.

Joss and Drew: Kicking Horror Square in the Balls

The Cabin in the Woods




A difficult film to talk about this, as it is imperative not to spoil any of its well-earned pleasures of which there are many. So no plot info or story details here – just some broad thoughts.

With The Cabin in the Woods, Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard (a Buffy alumni who went on to write Cloverfield) have written and Goddard directed a ridiculously clever, layered, funny, inventive deconstruction of the entire horror genre. And I mean the ENTIRE genre.

There are no real twists as such to this story as the entire story itself is the twist. The film hints pretty early on what it is doing with the genre. Where the fun comes is from seeing how far down in to the genre the movie drills and how it is going to subvert that genre before playing itself out in a third act where all bets are off and where intelligent, creative insanity rules.

Whedon and Goddard’s script works like an intricate machine operating on several levels. There's a lot going on here and multiple viewings will be needed to pick up on all the many ideas/concepts/gags being thrown at you. Whedon is a long time master of genre bending/subversion/undercutting. The entirety of Buffy the Vampire Slayer is built upon genre subversion. Turning clichés and expectations on their heads. You think something is going one way, then suddenly a complete left turn comes – be it an unexpected plot twist, a sight gag, or a pithy, witty well delivered piece of dialogue. And all those happen multiple times in The Cabin in the Woods. The script keeps you on your toes, keeps you thinking, keeps you looking, keeps you laughing. It keeps you ridiculously entertained. As a debut director Goddard does a good job. He keeps the story moving, keeping things visually and narratively compelling while managing to pull off some decent scares. He also handles the actors brilliantly.

And speaking of…

As to be expected from a Whedon ensemble project, the entire cast here is wonderful. From the athletic, heroic God of Thunder Chris Hemsworth, the sweet, brave and feisty Kristen Connelly, to the sly seen-it-all-before wit of Bradley Whitford and Richard Jenkins, to Whedon regulars Fran (Dollhouse) Kranz, Amy (Angel, Dollhouse) Acker and Tom (Buffy, Angel) Lenk. There's not a bum note between them. They all do great work, but especially Kranz as the witty stoner who works out pretty quickly that something is up.

It’s no secret that I’m a huge Whedon geek. I’m also a major horror geek. And by the time the final act of The Cabin in the Woods kicked in I was goggle eyed and giggling like an idiot. If you are a Whedon fan like me then you will pick up on little things throughout the film from his earlier work: stuff he likes, stuff he finds creepy. You’ll also notice call backs (big and small) to ideas previously seen in Buffy and Angel. One particular creepy dude from 1st season Buffy made an appearance that got me chuckling. All I can say is it’s good job Xander wasn’t there. And, I gotta say, just seeing the opening credit ‘A Mutant Enemy Production’ was enough to give me a major happy. Luckily everything else that followed was pure and utter genius.

For me, The Cabin in the Woods is easily the best film of the year so far by a long stretch. Bring on The Avengers.

In Joss we trust.


5 (out of 5)

Hungry for More of The Hunger Games

The Hunger Games...but not as you know it.

Okay, so The Hunger Games was very, very good indeed.

For those who don’t know, The Hunger Games is based on the first of a trilogy of highly successful young adult novels by Suzanne Collins and is set in a distant future where after a terrible war in North America a new nation called Panem now exists. Panem’s rich and decadent Capitol rules over 12 impoverished districts who every year are made to send one male and one female child to compete in an epic televised fight to the death: the titular Hunger Games. In the grim and grey District 12 sixteen-year-old Katniss Everdeen volunteers to take the place of her terrified little sister, joining Baker’s son Peeta as the District’s two contestants in the year's upcoming games. We then follow gifted hunter Katniss as she negotiates the bewildering (to her) decadence of the Capitol while also training for the games, appearing on live TV chat shows, trying to entice sponsors, before finally getting dropped in to the midst of the brutal and barbaric games themselves.

The Hunger Games has been talked about as the next Twilight/Harry Potter - the next huge YA book-to-movie series. But to my mind this is as far removed from Harry Potter and what little I've seen of the shallow and shoddy Twilight as you can get. For a start, it is sci fi and not magical/fantasy/supernatural shenanigans. Plus it's unashamedly old fashioned in the way it has been made, being non flashy, steadily paced and made with an indie/1970's feel that emphasis strong storytelling, strong relatable characters, inventive editing and plenty of smarts and depth. It has ideas, themes, questions to ask, points to make. It wants its audience to think. In short, The Hunger Games is actually about something.

But The Hunger Games’ greatest weapon is its star.

As Katniss, the movie and book’s young heroine, Jennifer Lawrence is fantastic. Jennifer was fab in X-Men: First Class as young Raven and was stunning in Winter's Bone (for which she was deservedly Oscar nominated). In fact, a lot of her work in THG is very similar to that of Winter's Bone. The entire first act of THG could almost be Winter's Bone 2 – a rural, poverty stricken and grim setting; a tough but sensitive teenage girl saddled with a useless parent and who has to effectively bring up her younger sibling and provide for her family under miserably harsh conditions. Even the score is similar being all low key and folksy. But when Katniss and her co-competitor, Peeta, get to the Capitol, this all changes. Things become rather flashy, gaudy and overblown in order to contrast the under-the-heel poverty of the outlying Districts with the decadence and shallowness of the Capitol, a place so ghastly that for entertainment it makes twenty four kids fight to the death each and every year.

At 2hrs 20mins The Hunger Games is a lengthy film. The pacing is slow and steady. But what it is showing us, what it is doing is always utterly engrossing, taking its time to build the world, the characters and the relationships. It never drags. Plus Woody Harrelson is in it and is pretty darn great, as is Elisabeth Banks as the wonderfully shallow Effie Trinket. But this movie belongs wholly to Jennifer Lawrence. As Katniss she manages to be caring, brave and cleverly resourceful while always staying angry, vulnerable and just plain terrified by the situation she finds herself in. I wouldn't be surprised if she gets a second Oscar nod for her work here. In my humble opinion Lawrence is possibly the finest talent of her generation currently working in movies. She’s an actor where you can see so much going on behind her eyes, on her face, in her body language. She sells the character and the situation utterly. This makes her a compelling presence to watch. She has grit and a palpable inner strength, which was so very obvious in Winter’s Bone. I predict a long and illustrious career for this young lady. I just hope she keeps picking varied and interesting projects.

And now to the actual games themselves.

Set in a huge forest arena with cameras hidden in trees, genetically modified wasps and killer dogs, the games are about as shocking and brutal as you can get in a 12A film. I have to say I winced a few times. I mean, they have little kids - not just teens - who kill and get killed! The initial melee when all of the kids are first released in to the game area is stunning. Shot with virtually no sound it’s lots and lots of panicky shaky camera work and quick edits of kids killing other kids with rocks, knives, swords, bare hands. There was one brief shot of what is a little blond girl - maybe 10/11 – lying on her back on the ground with a bigger teen boy standing over her about to start bludgeoning her to death. Luckily the camera cuts away before the first blow hits, but it still made me cringe. It’s shocking, affecting but thankfully not gratuitous. And it carries on like that for the rest of the film with the kids slowly being whittled down until the last two remain.

There’s lots going on here, lots of comment about reality television, about how the media glamorises violence, about how we send teenagers to war to get maimed and killed often for no good reason. And about how kids regularly killing other kids – be it in gangs or in school massacres - has become a horribly regular real life phenomena. Of course there’s nothing original in any of this. Battle Royale did the adults making kids kill each other thing ten years ago (though in BR it is all older teens and is so bloody and over the top to be kinda silly). And Robocop and The Running Man amongst others have done reality TV going too far. But the concept and its related themes and the questions raised are always worth repeating if done well. And they are done very well here. As I’ve said before, to my mind the very best genre books/films/TV are really all about people, about who we are and how we relate to each other. And about the world we are currently living in as well as the future world we are busy making for ourselves. The Hunger Games fits squarely in to that camp.

Major kudos then to director Gary (Pleasantville, Seabiscuit) Ross and to screenwriters Suzanne Collins and Billy Ray for making a grown up, intelligent, provocative movie.

Go see it.

And may the odds be ever in your favour.

John Carter (Or How I Got My Ass to Mars and Didn't Want to Come Back!)

Dejah Thoris - my favourite Martian.

I bloody loved Disney’s John Carter.

See, I was already a fan of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ original Barsoom books, starting with the classic A Princess of Mars on which Disney’s movie is based, albeit also drawing heavily from various other story elements from later in the series. So I've been excited for this movie for a while now. But also pretty wary too. I mean, the casting didn't click for me. The decision to be more 'realistic' in look and feel didn't either. And the trailers when they appeared weren't exactly great. In fact, the whole marketing effort by Disney has been atrocious. And that's being kind. But I was still excited, but also worried.

A bit of my history with JC.

I'm a late comer to the whole Barsoom series as I first picked up these books just a few years ago after reading an article about how Harry Knowles of Ain’t it Cool fame was involved in trying to get a JC movie made. At that point I was only vaguely aware of the character and his story, being far more familiar with Burroughs’ much more famous creation Tarzan. But finding out that John Carter and his adventures formed the inspiration and basis for much of the pulp sci fi/fantasy adventure I love (Flash Gordon, Buck Rogers, Star Wars, modern superhero stories amongst many others) I felt compelled to get the books and to give them a go.

And I was immediately hooked.

I mean, what red blooded ‘young’ man wouldn’t want to go to Barsoom and befriend the awesome Tars Tarkas and fight hordes of white apes and evil doers while also rescuing, romancing and then marrying the most beautiful woman in the universe?

Wow! Count me in.

For those who don’t know, the basic story of John Carter over the course of his book series goes something like this:

It’s the late 1880’s and Captain John Carter is an ex-confederate civil war hero who’s busy prospecting for gold, just wanting to be left alone to get rich or die trying. However events lead him to an isolated cave where somehow he gets transported to Mars (or Barsoom as the natives call it) from Earth (Jarsoom to the Martians) where he finds he now has super strength due to changes in gravity etc. and soon gets himself reluctantly involved with Martian tribal wars while also meeting, saving and falling in love with the most beautiful princess in the universe,. Eventually, through the course of his adventures and many battles, Carter works his way up the Martian hierarchy to become a great planetary leader.

The books are quick and exciting reads. They are swiftly paced swashbuckling romantic pulp sci-fi fantasies filled with epic fights, daring do, hissable villains and nasty monsters. The conceit of the stories is that they were actually written by Edgar Rice Burroughs after he listened to the wild tales told to him as a lad by his beloved uncle Jack – the heroic John Carter himself. So the tales are told as if being true with Burroughs having created his own personal mythology in to which he inserted himself. One can imagine ERB telling his little children and grandchildren spellbinding bedtime stories about his amazing Uncle Jack and his epic adventures on Barsoom, swearing to the goggle eyed kiddies that it was all absolutely true.

Now, a century after Burroughs first gave the world his epic tales of Barsoom comes Disney’s mega budget adaptation of the first novel A Princess of Mars, titled simply (and awfully) John Carter.

Disney’s John Carter, under the assured, stylish, wonderfully old fashioned direction of Andrew (Wall-e) Stanton, does an almost perfect job of adapting the source material while also changing it enough to make it work on screen. Stanton has also wisely toned down/removed certain elements that either wouldn’t have worked on film or would come across as anachronistic hangovers from a different time, likely making modern audiences a tad uncomfortable (there is a certain degree of old fashioned attitudes towards race and behaviour in the books. It isn’t especially bad or unpleasant, just kind of odd, though perfectly acceptable for its time period.) But for all the changes made, the core of the novel’s story, of the characters, of the feel for gloriously old fashioned epic widescreen daring do and swashbuckling romantic adventure remains intact. This movie feels like Errol Flynn’s Robin Hood crossed with the look and grandeur of Lawrence of Arabia played out on a beautifully designed and realised alien world.

And what a world it is.

Barsoom aka Mars looks incredible! The city of Helium is lavish and exotic; the Tharks' city is rough and rugged just as I imagined it. The air ships are elegantly beautiful. The costumes (though in the books most people are naked save for light armour and decoration) detailed and highly designed. Indeed, like the best sci-fi or fantasy, the filmmakers had to build everything for the film hence the huge budget. Everything from tables, chairs, cutlery to costumes, armour, weapons, vehicles had to be designed and built from scratch. That’s your $250m budget right there; that and all the gorgeous FX. It's all up on the screen.

But what about the characters and the actors playing them?

Taylor Kitsch plays John Carter. I’d only ever seen Kitsch before in the woeful X-Men: Origins: Wolverine as Gambit. And he was pretty poor. His casting as JC I just didn’t get. Likewise I’d only seen Lynn Collins in the very same terrible film. She was ok. Pretty, yes, but just ok. Again, when she was cast as Dejah Thoris, Princess of Helium, the most beautiful, desirable woman in creation, I didn’t get it.

But having now seen them both in action, together, I get it.

Kitsch is very good. He’s still not out and out great in the classic Harrison Ford sense (few are), but he cuts an impressive dash as Carter, balancing the heaviness on the characters soul and his reluctance to involve himself in others affairs with his ingrained heroic nobility. You can see the battle going on inside of him. Of course, in the end you know that John will do the right thing. He’ll be the hero. But it is fun watching him fight the inevitable.

And what of Collins?

Flat out awesome is what!

With her long raven black hair, skin made a copper shade and her piercing blue eyes, big screen Dejah Thoris is drop dead stunning to look at. But Collins is also a damn fine actress who brings tough intense intelligence and nobility as well as a fearful fragility to Dejah. She’s smart beyond words. She can kick ass with the best of them. She can make you fall in love with a wounded look. Perfect.

And the supporting cast are pretty much all round great too.

Willem Dafoe is Tars Tarkas, the heroic tough-but-fair Thark leader who befriends Carter early on, seeing in him potential to be a great force upon Barsoom. Tars is a nine foot tall four armed green dude with tusks created via motion capture. Dafoe and all the mocap actors were actually on set, on stilts, giving the performance using tiny cameras on their faces ala Avatar. And it shows. The performances come through the pixels. And the pixels look realistic too, not the cartoony look given to so many cgi creations nowadays (ILM I’m looking at you). Other great actors in the movie are Samantha Morton as Tars’ daughter Sola, Dominic West, Thomas Hayden Church, Ciaran Hinds, Mark Strong and the always fun James Purefoy. And a special mention goes to the animators who created Woolla, Carter’s super fast, super loyal Martian ‘dog’. It’s a character that shouldn’t work being far too silly, far too cute. But work it does. Woolla is fab. He steals almost every scene he’s in.

The film is a testament to the skill of its director and the care taken in crafting the fun and intricately plotted script. There is always something important going on be it plot machinations or epic battles or internal/external character work. And most of it is told visually. No walking/talking down endless corridors or sat around tables discussing things here (take note George Lucas.) No sir. Stanton makes his live action directing debut with John Carter after making Wall-E and Finding Nemo for Pixar. Coming from Pixar he knows that story, character and tone are king. You need to make the story interesting, compelling. You need to make rounded characters with arcs that people can invest in and care about. You need to strike an appropriate tone for your tale. Here he manages all three with almost complete success. Most successfully I’d say is the striking of tone. John Carter has its dark edges - especially John dealing with the death of his wife and child and his initial apathy in helping others. But the dark edges never eclipse the overriding sense of fun and high adventure that carries the movie to its thrilling and emotionally satisfying climax. By the time the film’s full title comes on screen at the end to Michael Giacchino’s soaring score (wonderfully ‘John Carter of Mars’ and not just ‘John Carter’) if you have the tiniest escapist/romantic /adventure loving bone in your body, then, like Arnie, you’re gonna want to get your ass back to Mars double quick.

So as a fan count me happy.

John Carter is a wonderful piece of escapist adventure and probably the best film adaptation of the source material I could have hoped for. It is also the first movie in a long while that I can’t wait to go back to the cinema and see again sharpish.

Yes, I liked it that much. I was swept away.

Plus, y’know, Dejah Thoris! Mmmmm.....



Reported faithfully by the Stoopid Monkey of Jarsoom