Looking for a specific film review? CLICK BELOW

0-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z / Trailers / DVD Store


July 13, 2010
Predators (2010)
Should I see it?
No.


Short Review: "I ain't got time to bleed...or sit through tedious movies."

Photobucket


When I first saw director Nimród Antal's 2003, Budapest-based, film Kontroll, I was thrilled. Here was a fresh, young director with a sharp eye, a strong voice and a talent for the odd. Then came is American debut Vacancy. I found it too harsh and bordering on torture porn. I figured it was a misstep as he entered into the world of Hollywood. Then came Armored. It had less violence, but it also had a lacking story. I began to wonder what happened to the guy who made that film all those years ago. Now, we have Predators. I can safely say that I was was wrong about Antal. Either his original flash of brilliance was youthful luck, or he extinguished it himself to get along in the corporate film world. Either way, I will no longer perk up when I see his name.

Predators is a reworking of the elements from the 1987 Arnold Schwarzenegger popcorn gun-fest, Predator. Like last summer's Terminator: Salvation, this film attempts to relaunch a dimming franchise. Like last summer's Terminator: Salvation, this film makes the fatal mistake of taking itself far too seriously.

The original Predator film is violent and stupid, but it works. It works because the broad concept of hunter aliens going up against some of Earth's best warriors is, at its heart, quite dumb. It shouldn't be taken seriously. This is why the presence of Jesse "The Body" Ventura adds to the proceedings. Heck, if he wore that stupid feather boa it would have made the movie that much better.

This reworking has the Earthly warriors dropped off on a distant planet which is actually a game reserve for the Predator aliens. For the first act of the film, the warriors stumble around, slowly discovering their situation. Antal quickly establishes a detailed, serious tone that promises a smarter version from their original.

Then the Predators show up and things get dumb.

If the screenwriters had simply saved their time and written the words "...and they all die one by one, like we've seen a thousand times before. Rinse. Repeat" in the script, we would still have the same movie.

The film drops its atmospheric tone and quickly stoops to being a by-the-numbers Pick-Off Movie. A Pick-Off Movie is one where a group of two-dimensional characters are introduced (the group of soldiers). A seemingly unstoppable force is then brought to bear (the Predators). The unstoppable force casually picks off the 2-D characters one by one until one or two are left.

Each of the doomed 2-D characters perform some act which leads to their demise. This acts as a moral barometer for the film - they sin, then they die. The "righteous" one or two people survive, thus showing the audience the proper way to live. This formula is the foundation for all horror movies.

Antal manages to touch on nearly every cliche available. He has the seething cracker, redneck, the crazy loner who talks to himself, the brooding hero who just wants to "work alone" and on and on. The deaths of the characters are all projected beforehand, so there is absolutely no surprises, no suspense. You know when someone will perish and when someone will miraculously be spared at the last minute. The whole affair is a tedious, predictable waste of your time.

If Antal and company had stayed with a thinking-man's version of the franchise, this could have been something interesting. If they had come to their senses and approached the subject with a smirk, even better. Instead they started off strong and then slowly realized they didn't have a story and fell back on the same old shtick. Your life is too short for shtick. Skip this one.


Worldview: The one element of the film that is of interest is a brief acknowledgment of Hell. The soldiers each wake up as they are parachuting onto the planet. They have been abducted and have no recollection of the their kidnapping. As they try to figure out what has happened, a couple of the soldiers decide they are dead and the team has found themselves in Hell.

This is interesting because they are in a version of Hell. Later in the film, this theme is touched upon by Royce as he explains each team member is a predator in their own right - soldiers, mercenaries, hit men, all people who excel at their profession and enjoy doing it. They have all sinned. For their sins, the aliens have selected them to be their prey.

The planet offers no hope, no survival. They will die and not pleasantly. God doesn't seem to exist in this world - only the demonic aliens rule.

Granted, Antal touches on this but fails to deliver anything meaningful. Instead he focuses on mundane fight sequences and shots of people wandering the jungle.


Cautions: It is called Predators - it is violent.


Photobucket


Related Reviews:
Laurence Fishburne movies
21 (2008)
Assault on Precinct 13 (2005)


Other Critic's Reviews:
DarkMatters
San Francisco Chronicle



Click here to buy your copy of Scott Nehring Good News Film Reviews
You Are What You See:
Watching Movies Through a Christian Lens

Labels: , , , , , , , ,



Share






May 27, 2010
Mission Impossible III (2006)
Should I see it?
No.


Short Review:
The media reports of Tom Cruise’s kid’s feces being bronzed may be in error. As it turns out, it may have actually been the shooting script for this film.


There are two big issues with this Tom Cruise movie:

1. Tom Cruise
2. The movie

My issue with Cruise is that he is Tom Cruise in nearly every movie he appears in. He is not an actor. He is a personality. I'm not a fan of personalities.

Looking beyond Cruise, which normally involves simply standing up, you will find
Alias and Lost creator JJ Abrams at the helm of this project. This was his first feature film. I enjoy Abrams’ television work. His shows are vacuous and embarrassingly simple. His characters are emotional single-line caricatures but are given enough clever flints of dialog to make them likable. His shows are what they intend to be, disposable yet addictive fluff.

This film is just as disposable as Abrams' TV work. The difference is that this film actually prompts you to throw it away.

Where Abrams’ Alias can get you to suspend your disbelief so you’ll buy that Jennifer Garner can smuggle a XM8 Lightweight Assault Rifle in her camisole, his big fat McMovie can’t get beyond its own bloated subplots. This whole film is one big Alias episode without the benefit of Garner’s charm or Kevin Weisman’s (Marhsall Finkman) humor. Abrams goes so far as to insert, for no reason, Greg Grunberg (Alias’ Eric Weiss) into the first act. This would be like Leonard Nimoy striking it out on his own back in the 70’s but refusing to take off his pointy ears.

Absent the distraction of Jennifer Garner in a body sock shooting a TM-203 Grenade Launcher, Abrams' adoration of cheesy scripting is made just that much more obvious.

If you haven’t seen the film you may want to stop reading, I’m about to spoil the works. Although now that I consider my warning, I'm not sure that's really possible. Can you spoil trash?

The central point of the film is that super-spy Ethan Hunt tries to prove to himself (and others) that he can have a normal life with a wife and the whole shebang. All of this is wrapped up in a muddled plot which pushes Hunt to obtain “The Rabbit’s Foot”. This is currently in the pudgy hands of bad guy arms dealer Owen Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman). Yes, the villain’s name is really Owen. Owen. " Oh, no here comes Owen." "I'm so scared of Owen!" Why not Karl, or perhaps Irwin?

“The Rabbit’s Foot” is a toxin Owen is looking to sell to bigger badder guys. Actually, we’re never told what “The Rabbit’s Foot” is and why we should care. For that matter, we’re not given the identity of the bigger badder guys and why they're so scary. Everything is nebulous, which means they are meaningless.

Owen, while performed well by Hoffman, is not an ominous figure. Since he and Ethan aren’t the focus and the conflict between the two is not clearly established, the climatic scenes lose their wind. Any momentum found in the first act is spent by halfway through the film because Abrams is too intent on wedging in a conspiracy subplot into the piece that the film simply can’t support.


Here is a heads up for all of the big time, huge budget Hollywood goofballs; If you have a big, fat McMovie and you need to reach a broad international audience, the recipe is easy:

One clearly defined hero
One clearly defined villain (with a better villain name than Owen)
Make the villain more powerful than the hero
Give them a like goal
Let them have at it

What this does is create a firm central plot from which you can hang subplots and any other nonsense you want.


If you’re a fan of JJ Abrams’ work, stick with his small screen products. This film, while offering a few well crafted moments, will ultimately waste your time. If you’re going to do that you may as well see Jennifer Garner kill a dozen guys with a flame-thrower while parachuting wearing nothing more than a teddy.


Related Reviews:
Tom Cruise movies
War of the Worlds (2005)
Vanilla Sky (2001)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Film School Rejects
Beyond Hollywood




Click here to buy your copy of Scott Nehring Good News Film Reviews
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch


Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,



Share






March 15, 2010
Movie Trailer: Predators
Since I've been reminded of it, its fair to say that if you took Quintin Tarantino and made him 1000 times less self-important and irritating, you'd end up with Robert Rodriguez.

I'm torn on this one. The original Predator is a fun but if fast-food cinema. Nimrod Antal is one of the directors I am willing to go out of my way to see. The cast in this production hints that there's more going on than a simple pick-off, gore-fest.

On the flip-side, do we really need another rehashing in theaters?




Return to the movie trailers page


Screenwriters: Michael Finch, Alex Litvak and Robert Rodriguez (Planet Terror)
Director: Nimród Antal (Kontroll)
Actors: Topher Grace (Spider-Man 3), Adrien Brody (Cadillac Records), Danny Trejo (The Devil's Rejects), Laurence Fishburne (Apocalypse Now) and Alice Braga (Redbelt)




Good News Film Reviews

Labels: , , , , , , ,



Share






May 23, 2009
Movie Trailer: Armored
This one has my attention. The premise is solid for a mass market movie. A young armored car guard gets wrapped up in a inside job to steal some money. Predictably, things go awry, but it does open itself for some good moral conflict. The fact that it is directed by Nimród Antal is icing on the cake.

The trailer gives far too much away however. I loathe trailers like this since it either means the advertising was handled by an inept crew or the film offers so little that they have to sell the whole thing to get people in the door. It would seem with this plot, the tease of the rookie locking himself in the truck would be enough to perk some interest.



Return to the movie trailers page


Screenwriter: James V. Simpson
Director: Nimród Antal (Kontroll)
Actors: Columbus Short (Cadillac Records), Matt Dillon (There's Something About Mary), Laurence Fishburne (The Matrix), Jean Reno (La Femme Nikita), Skeet Ulrich (As Good as it Gets), Amaury Nolasco (Mr. 3,000) and Fred Ward (Sweet Home Alabama)




Labels: , , , , , , , ,



Share






April 1, 2008
Movie Trailer: 21


Share