Archive for February, 2008
February 24, 2008 - 10:28 pm - Posted by Administrator
The sequel to 1985’s Cocoon, Cocoon: The Return is a worthy–if somewhat thin–continuation to the story. To recap, our geriatrics from the original film discover the fountain of youth. They decide to accompany some aliens to their home planet of Antares where they’re promised eternal life. And in Cocoon: The Return… well, you know, they return. Damn, now that I’ve written that, it sounds ridiculous. Did I give this movie three stars?
Jack Gilford brings his supporting role of Bernie Lefkowitz two steps forward into a starring role, now a widower after the passing of his beloved Rose. Not surprisingly, he is still reluctant to embrace the fountain-of-youth lifestyle of his friends.
The primary story arc of Cocoon: The Return involves the rescue of a cocoon which has been recovered from the ocean by the St. Petersburg Oceanographic Institute. In reality this movie is more about the fragility of life, the importance of family, and having a healthy sense of adventure, all as experienced by Art [Don Ameche], Ben [Wilford Brimley], and Joe [Hume Cronyn] and their wives. Eventually when they begin to experience the aches and pains of being back on Earth, they are forced to make hard decisions–whether to return to Antares and live forever, or stay home on Earth and let nature run it’s course.
Steve Guttenberg and Tahnee Welch (daughter of Raquel) reprise their roles from the first movie, and a young Courteney Cox makes an appearance as Sara, a scientist. Overall, I would say it’s better than most sequels but not exactly must-watch material.
*** Three Stars ***
Posted in 1988, Alien Contact, Atlantis, Suspended Animation, Three Star Rating | No Comments »
February 24, 2008 - 8:31 pm - Posted by Administrator
1984 to 1985 was a very good time for Ron Howard as a Director. On the heels of mainstream success with 1984’s ‘Splash‘ starring Daryl Hannah and Tom Hanks, 1985’s Cocoon became Ron Howard’s first massive smash, catapulting him to new levels as a Director who could write his own ticket in Hollywood.
Cocoon is a science-fiction film of the family-oriented variety, straight out of the Spielberg/Lucas school of movie-making. It boasts an all-star cast including Wilford Brimley, Jessica Tandy, Don Ameche, Brian Dennehy, and that staple of 1980’s movies–Steve Guttenberg. Even MTV Movie Award Lifetime Achievement winner Clint Howard has a role in Cocoon.
A group of St. Petersburg retirees has been trespassing, swimming in the pool at the vacant estate next to their assisted-living center. When a group of out-of-towners rent the estate, they think their swimming days are over. But soon they begin sneaking into the swimming pool and sharing the waters with strange egg-like artifacts collected from the ocean via Jack Bonner’s [Guttenberg] boat. In short fashion, they begin to notice youthful, energizing side effects from their swimming parties. And thus they are drawn into an amazing adventure about aliens and the fountain of youth.
Much as the bleak science fiction movies of the seventies reflected apprehension about the times, Cocoon seems to mirror the optimism of the early eighties with it’s uplifting attitude and fun-for-all-generations angle. Hardcore science fiction fans will probably find it all too vanilla but I enjoy this movie in much the same way I enjoyed Back to the Future or E.T. the Extraterrestrial. If you can handle your movies about Aliens, Immortality, and Atlantis all wrapped up in a shuffleboard and geriatrics storyline, then Cocoon is highly recommended.
**** Four Stars ****
Posted in 1985, Alien Contact, Atlantis, Four Star Rating, Suspended Animation | No Comments »
February 24, 2008 - 4:32 pm - Posted by Administrator
Children of Men is a rare example of a science fiction concept that’s so intriguing and unique, I decided I had to see it just because it was different. It’s 2027 and the scourge of mankind is none of the usual suspects… not cancer, not HIV, but unexplained infertility. It’s been 19 years since a human was born on planet Earth.
As with most of the science fiction films of the George W. Bush era, the post-apocalyptic storyline neccessitates the incorporation of concepts from the headlines, including homeland security, the erosion of civil liberties, and citizen internment. Many scenes were reminiscent of the imprisonment of the Jews as widely depicted in the war films of the last several decades. Children of Men is a virtual study of our society’s deepest darkest fears at a time when western ideas are reviled, technology is suspect, and religious fundamentalism is at an all time high.
Theo Faron [Clive Owen] works for the Government and his ex-wife Julian [Julianne Moore] is a member of a radical anti-government insurgency. Together they find themselves transporting a young British girl with one remarkable attribute–she’s pregnant. And hence my dislike for the movie. Like most of the grey science fiction concepts of late, nothing much happens other than “let’s go here, now we have to run away“. Repeat twelve times.
Director Alfonso Cuaron [Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban] did a great job of building the universe and filling the back story through the incorporation of background elements like billboards, media reports, and even graffiti. Britain is the last bastion of civilization (and only modestly civilized at that) and the government has implemented mandatory fertility testing. Non-compliance is a crime. Citizens are urged to report suspicious activity. Believing infertility is a punishment from God, religious groups urge repentance. All are introduced in the background.
Unfortunately, all that heavy symbolism (and the stunning sobriety of Clive Owen as hero Theo Faron) didn’t do much for my viewing experience. I must be the rare exception to the rule, because nearly every science fiction fan I’ve talked to thought Children of Men was the second coming of cinema. I didn’t care for it.
Children of Men is bleak and beautiful, well-crafted and thought-provoking. That said, I still thought it was boring and below-average. That unique and intriguing concept I mentioned at the beginning is all this movie really has at the end. An interesting situation filled with cardboard characters.
** Two Stars **
Posted in 2006, Environmental Disaster, Pandemic, Post-Apocalypse, The Future, Two Star Rating | No Comments »
February 23, 2008 - 9:42 pm - Posted by Administrator
Alright, I’ve fucking had it OK? I give. Please stop making Resident Evil movies. It’s massively fucked up when you can turn this into an economically-successful movie franschise.
I’ll admit, when the original came out to respectable praise, it did bring an aura of legitimacy to movies that began as a concept for a video game. And the sequel was pretty okay too. But this is too much. Seriously.
First, at the beginning of the movie when Milla Jovovich does a voiceover explanation of events thus far, she explains how the human race has come nearly to extinction and the continents are now barren deserts. The very next sequence is an aerial shot of the desert. And I wonder immediately if the story has been modified on a whim by a screenwriter or director who thinks post-apocalypse pictures have to look like a Mad Max movie (or a Tupac Shakur video if you prefer). No green stuff allowed please! OK, me being anal. I’ll grant you.
In the first minutes of the movie our primary heroine Alice [Milla Jovovich] is killed (to my great puzzlement). Then we’re informed she was merely one clone of dozens… presumably so we won’t be surprised when a character who should be dead shows up alive later in the movie. I think it’s always good for a character to be made disposable, don’t you? Who cares if she lives? They’ll just poop out another copy of Alice and we can try again. Maybe somebody could have asked Sigourney Weaver how that worked out for Ripley’s box office receipts.
But, when we get to the first major action sequence–I say ‘major’ because there’s no shortage of action, major, minor, necessary or unnecessary–it’s Alice versus a redneck family who lured her to a radio station with a phony distress broadcast. They’ve trained the now-familiar Resident Evil hellhounds to attack like doberman junkies on t-virus dope, and Alice’s first battle is a protracted one with multiple slimy red mutts. Once she escapes from the mutts–and the rednecks–the real movie can begin.
The t-virus has destroyed the world. To survive, humans must stay mobile and ready to confront any number of viral villains, including the aforementioned doggies, infected birds, and of course a plethora of zombies.
It only took forty-nine minutes before I saw a scene that was so derivative, so cheesy, so poorly done that I wanted to press ‘Stop’ soooo bad… a scene where the scientist–Dr. Isaacs [Iain Glen]–has a conversation with a holographic character in a black suit and black shades. The actor whose name I have been unable to track down appears to be overtly trying to emulate the appearance and tight-mouthed speech pattern of Hugo Weaving’s Agent Smith from the Matrix movies. And the special effect used when the holograph disappears is so cheap, it reminded me of my days grazing episodes of Star Trek: Voyager on UPN–cheap special effects to make up for bad storylines–it’ll work great! Once I saw this scene, I couldn’t stop thinking about how some movie studio head saw the first cut of Extinction and said
“You know I don’t see any hipness to this cut… couldn’t you add some of those snazzy suits and Ray-Ban sunglasses like the Matrix? All the kids seem to love that stuff these days.”
And some studious little movie rat went and wrote it into the movie as an afterthought.
Ali Larter is too hot and feminine for a badass chick in a post-apocalyptic world, not to mention too clean–rub some dirt on her face will you? The cowboy character is annoying. The science storyline is a waste of time. The blood is excessive and unnecessary and has lost it’s power to shock. And something about the Resident Evil franchise taking a post-apocalyptic turn–with earthtone textures and cloudless blue skies–in a story that began as a tale about zombies in a gothic mansion… it just doesn’t seem right. I almost wonder if they went too-far to the science fiction end of the scale when maybe they should have stayed to the left end of the suspense/horror scale.
The original is worth seeing, the sequel if you’re desperate, but this third installment blows. Forget it.
Anal Probe Rating: It’s two hours of discomfort and you won’t remember it tomorrow.
Posted in 2007, Anal Probe Rating, Environmental Disaster, Pandemic, Post-Apocalypse | No Comments »
February 23, 2008 - 8:06 pm - Posted by Administrator
Fifty years from now, when we look back on the movies of this first decade of the millenium, we will compare them to the science fiction of the seventies. Bleak. Downbeat. Realistic.
28 Weeks Later is a stylistically brilliant example; aesthetically beautiful from lighting to editing. As a sequel, it remains visually and cinematically true to the original, 28 Days Later (2002) in it’s desperate depiction of survival in a post-apocalyptic London which has been virtually wiped out. There is no joy, no future, no hope.
The storyline picks up right where the original left off, but with a new set of characters. Great Britain has been destroyed by the infection, but the infected who wander the streets eventually starve to death. Under the direction of a U.S. led NATO force, the reconstruction of London begins. But it seems the claims the infection had run it’s course were far too optimistic.
This movie will make you squirm in your seat. The main characters, a family trying to survive and stay together, take you on a kind of emotional roller-coaster to a very sensitive place, which in turn makes the gory scenes of unbelievable violence all the harder to take. When Don (Robert Carlyle) is infected, transforms into a zombie, and then proceeds to gouge out the eyeballs of his wife Alice (Catherine McCormack) with his thumbs, I almost gave up. Fortunately, I was watching with a group of friends and couldn’t just turn it off. I was glad to see it got better, although it is violent and gory.
28 Weeks Later does have it’s shortcomings. First and foremost, no Cillian Murphy. His role in the original pulled you in and kept you for the duration. The sequel suffers from it’s own serial-killing… all of our heroes end up dead in a relentless parade of uber-violent death scenes, including the aforementioned thumbs-in-eyes bit, the obligatory throat-tearing and limb-eating scenes we’ve come to expect from Zombie movies, and the immolation of an American Soldier with a flame-thrower. And just in case you’re not grossed-out enough, we also get countless head and chest explosions from high-caliber firearms, and the topper–the killing of dozens of infected with the blades of a helicopter. And at it’s core, the zombie premise limits the movie to the standard zombie-film mold–it’s a chase flick.
Like the original, 28 Weeks Later is loaded with societal parallels and ponderings, including homeland security, illegal immigration, and civil liberties. Like the movies of the seventies, this story mirrors reality in a difficult time–the implication being the thinking citizen has disappeared and has been replaced by blood-thirsty autmomatons. Where are the powers of good? Where are the voices of the righteous? But perhaps I’m over-thinking it.
*** Three Stars ***
Posted in 2007, Environmental Disaster, Pandemic, Post-Apocalypse, Three Star Rating | No Comments »
February 17, 2008 - 7:33 pm - Posted by Administrator
Runaway is another of a litany of Michael Crichton concepts that were done about twenty years too early.
Tom Selleck stars as a police officer–an expert in robotics–in a near-future where Amercian life is saturated with domestic robots. Although they perform all the menial tasks that nobody wants to do, they occasionally go haywire and require intervention from Sgt. Jack Ramsay [Selleck]. When Ramsay discovers robots which appear to have been programmed to kill, he goes on a search for Dr. Charles Luther [Gene Simmons], a madman in possession of computerized mini-shells the size of a bullet that function like a guided-missile. Kirstie Alley appears in a supporting role as a pawn in Luther’s evil plan.
Runaway falls short in so many areas… I remember seeing it as a kid and being plugged into the movie until about twenty minutes in. I was transfixed by the images of a near-future where everybody has their own robot. But once the story begins to pursue Luther and his ‘heat-seeking’ bullets, I somehow lost interest. Re-watching as a grown man, I still feel the same way. The story is told in a super-realistic method which is a movie-making technique I’ve always loved. Unfortunately, Runaway was made in 1984 in a pre-cell phone, pre-internet time, so watching today… the movie doesn’t stand up. From Ramsay’s laser weapon in the beginning of the movie, to the refrigerator-sized computers, everything that’s meant to look futuristic now looks dated.
The special effects crew on Runaway used existing technology (presumably for budgetary reasons) to depict the robotic action and the shortcomings are obvious. The arachnid-style six-legged robot minions that so many are familiar with from this movie are literally dropped onto some of the actors to nearly laughable effect. Although they look cool, the robots can’t really do anything else and their most dramatic tactic–attacking in swarms–is brought into the movie too late. The soundtrack couldn’t be more stereotypical eighties either–cheesy synth.
For all it’s defects, the concept for Runaway–a cop who has to fight rebellious robots–is one that could be re-done well.
** Two Stars
Posted in 1984, Artificial Intelligence, Robots/Cyborgs, The Future, Two Star Rating | 1 Comment »
The sequel to 1985’s Cocoon, Cocoon: The Return is a worthy–if somewhat thin–continuation to the story. To recap, our geriatrics from the original film discover the fountain of youth. They decide to accompany some aliens to their home planet of Antares where they’re promised eternal life. And in Cocoon: The Return… well, you know, they return. Damn, now that I’ve written that, it sounds ridiculous. Did I give this movie three stars?
