Film Review: Terror of Mechagodzilla (Mekagojira no Gyakushū)

In the original Godzilla series, the monstrous city-stomping lizard confronted a space-aged robotic version of himself in Godzilla vs Mechagodzilla. This sequel picks up where that film left off, with humans tampering with Mechagodzilla's remains at the bottom of the ocean. Naturally it doesn't go very well.

At this point, things in the Godzilla franchise has ventured into some extremely campy and far-out sci-fi B-movie territory. Not only does this film feature Godzilla and Mechagodzilla duking it out, but there are also dinosaurs and aliens hailing from the third planet of some black hole. Yep, dinosaurs, mutant radioactive lizards, a giant mecha, and space aliens all inhabit the screen together. Come to think of it, there was a cyborg in the mix too, wasn't there? It makes for a rather convoluted and mixed viewing experience.

When it comes to the actual mass destruction, it's all shoved toward the end of the movie, feeling a bit short, and with very little that stands out. The rest of the film is focused on the drama (including huge heapings of people in war rooms and command centers, aliens scheming, and some kind of romantic subplot), which is not inherently bad, but it drags at spots and never really gives the film much momentum.

As mentioned above, the story can be a bit nutty, but it has its moments. The characters have a few standout moments (thanks largely to the love story that's thrown in), but a lot of them take the back seat to all the conspiracy surrounding the monsters.

This film is made with good, but never great, photography and editing. Acting and writing are generally not bad. This production has some very cheap and gaudy-looking sets, props, costumes, and special effects. The model work, monsters, and compositing/projection effects have not aged well, and look pretty bad. Music is okay.

Terror of Mechagodzilla struck me as a pretty cheesy B-movie, offering a mish-mash of numerous crazy ideas. Despite the clash of aliens, robots, and monsters, the film didn't really engage me that much, and it felt dull overall. Fans might dig it though.

3/5 (Entertainment: Average | Story: Average | Film: Average)

Read More

Film Review: The Wolf of Wall Street

If you've seen The Goodfellas or Casino, then you'll know the story of The Wolf of Wall Street. This is another tale of a criminal whose ambitions sweep him away into a debauched world of dirty money, out-of-control substance abuse, endless lies, a troubled family life, and a downward spiral of corruption that inevitably leads to his own undoing. Only thing is, this is less about the gangsters and mafia, and more about white-collar crime. The guys wear suits, work in proper offices, and everything they do is just business; funnily enough, this whole movie still plays out like a kind of gangster film.

Based on the memoirs of Jordan Belfort - the real-life stock broker who made millions by selling shoddy stocks to average joes - the film showcases one seriously messed-up slimeball of a man. If his scheme sounds familiar, it's because it's been the inspiration behind the 2000 film Boiler Room, and this film covers much of the same concepts, albiet with better structure. The film maintains a close and intimate focus on the man as he rises to power, suckers thousands into his schemes, and then lives a life of extreme excess. And it is extreme: the whole film becomes laden with drugs, sex, superficial luxuries, material things, and characters who want nothing more than to take and consume everything. The sheer corruption becomes palpable on-screen, and I couldn't help but to shake my head at numerous scenes when I saw just how far these wolfish characters have gone in their unrestrained partying and debauchery. I have no clue as to how closely this film adapts the real-life events, but at times it's almost hard to believe that things could have gone this far. And yet, the excesses serve to underscore key themes and criticisms on the American dream; the pursuit of money and success, through any means, remains the main drive of the characters and the movie, and it leads to a fairly hard-hitting downfall.

This film features good-looking photography and editing. Acting is great: Leonardo DiCaprio is practically perfect as the titular character, and the rest of the cast pulls their weight really well (including Jonah Hill, who seems to fit into his character's archetype very comfortably). Writing is really sharp and good; the film is full of great lines and great speeches. There are some great-looking sets, props, and costumes on display in this film. Music has a varied mix of songs, and they're all used really well for their intended effect.

The Wolf of Wall Street is every bit as good as Martin Scorsese's previous work with The Goodfellas and Casino. All these films work with similar plots and themes, but TWOWS is like a gangster film masked by the thin veil of upper-class corporate swindling. It is a film that candidly shows the crimes and excesses in full, before proving that, even for the super-rich, crime still doesn't pay.

Recommended!

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Very Good | Film: Perfect)

Read More

Film Review: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

"It never ceases to amaze me, the courage of hobbits..." - Ken Scott

The journey of the 13 dwarves of Erebor and one hobbit from the Shire continues. An Unexpected Journey proved to be a disappointment for many, and chances are that The Desolation of Smaug will continue to disappoint, given that this is still a heavily-padded and overblown account of a short novel that was once a short cartoon. They've really tacked on a whole bunch of embellishments, including new characters and subplots, that simply aren't in Tolkein's The Hobbit. If it wasn't clear before, it should be clear now that the Hobbit films are more like a massive compilation of bonus adventures for film fans who adored the Lord of the Rings films.

As one of those viewers, I personally welcome the expanded narrative and universe, no matter how absurdly thin the plot is spread out. At the time of this writing, The Desolation of Smaug has got to be the most epic and action-packed film of all the Middle-Earth films to date (second only to The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King). The film wastes little time in getting the ball (or barrels) rolling; it picks right up with everybody being chased by orcs, giant spiders, and wood elves. I always thought that the barrel scene was clever in the book, but the film takes it to a whole new level. The wood elves (among which, one familiar face appears, and Turiel might be a new favorite heroine) pull off some insane fight moves, the likes of which I can only describe as some kind of crazy elfin kung-fu (elf-fu?). The film maintains tension throughout the Laketown and Erebor scenes, before finally bringing the heroes face-to-face with Smaug. This massive dragon is easily one of the most menacing villains of all time, and the last act of the film is a long and exhausting sequence in which all the characters slide down mounds of treasure, bash through walls, and careen through underground mines, while being pursued by this fire-breathing monstrosity. And that's not all either: while all this is happening, Gandalf comes face-to-face with another evil opponent, and his scenes are impressively epic as well.

Then...THEN...the film ends. Of all the excesses this film goes through, it's the sudden stop at the end that I find most bothersome; it's every bit as disappointing as cutting off a piece of music before its crescendo. On the inevitable home video release, this won't be much of a problem, since you'll probably just be able to pop in There and Back Again and continue the action. In the cinema, I sensed a collective disappointment in the knowledge that we'll have to wait one more year before seeing the actual battle of Laketown, in addition to wrapping up every other conflict that's left hanging (and a LOT is left hanging). The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers was able to stand on its own, with a full climax at the Battle of Helm's Deep; if that battle's conclusion was cut off and left for The Return of the King, then you can imagine how it is with The Desolation of Smaug.

There are other issues that might throw viewers off: there are quite a few scenes where deus ex machina are in full swing, with characters appearing as convenient. The film still plows through a bunch of subplots that might not really seem necessary (although, the whole Necromancer thing seems more tightly developed now).

Regardless, the film still adheres to the fundamental plot structure of The Hobbit novel. It's very much a one-thing-leads-to-another structure. What matters the most are the characters; Bilbo seems to be in the spotlight more, with more maturity and strength being explored. The dwarf characters show even more nuances of their own. Various other characters have their moments, and it is especially intriguing to see a lot more to the Bard and the Laketown drama. There are numerous connections drawn among all the different characters and tangents, and the larger structure of all six Middle-Earth films is much more apparent. At its core, the film still explores key themes involving the adventure of life, the corruption of greed, and the classic struggle of good-vs-evil.

As before, this film is made with exceptional skill. Photography and editing continue to be superb. Acting and writing are still top-notch; Martin Freeman proves to be quite impeccable as Bilbo, Richard Armitage still plays it tough as Thorin, Benedict Cumberbatch is truly menacing as the dragon's voice, Evangeline Lilly is both lovely and badass, and Luke Evans is alright. You also can't go wrong with Ian McKellen; the man really IS Gandalf the Grey. Writing is as good as ever. This production uses great-looking sets, props, costumes, and special effects. Music is still good too.

This is still quite a bloated saga, but I personally don't mind one bit. The spectacle is huge, the storytelling is still very tight and engaging, and the film is still very well-made. It's only a shame that the film ends the way it does. Regardless, if The Hobbit series follows in the same path as the Star Wars prequels, I have no doubt that There and Back Again will be the best of the lot, and one hell of a spectacle. This is still just the middle part of the saga; there's still more to take care of in the Middle Earth.

5/5 (Entertainment: Perfect | Story: Very Good | Film: Perfect)

Read More

Film Review: Mothra vs Godzilla (Mosura Tai Gojira)

Of all the monsters that have come along to challenge Godzilla, Mothra has got to be one of the most memorable and popular of the lot. After its debut in 1961, the massive lepidopteran has appeared and reappeared all over the place across seventeen films, including its own series (the god-awful Rebirth of Mothra films). It's a pretty cheesy thing, but there is something endearing about the giant fluffy moth and its itsy bitsy fairy counterparts. Pitted against the original King of the Monsters, this film represents one of the most original and most epic kaiju clashes.

The film moves along briskly, wasting little time to resurrect Godzilla and have him stomping on some buildings. The entire last half of the film is pretty much all mass destruction, with plenty of buildings and towns getting whacked by the giant lizard's tail and crunched under its feet. When Mothra and its kin show up, things get serious. Events leading up to the climactic battle cover just enough ground to set things up, but hardly ever drags.

The plot has been done before (and is repeated in later films), but in this film, there's enough to the story to keep it interesting. Characters have their standout moments, but are mostly flat, and are pretty much forgotten by the final act. The story has some interesting conflicts running through it; aside from the monster-vs-monster action, the film focuses a lot on corporate greed. Combined with the threat of nuclear supremacy (represented by Godzilla) and the sanctity of mother nature (protected by Mothra), the film underscores some key themes concerning unity and trust in the aftermath of the atomic age.

This film boasts some really nice and colorful photography. Editing is decent, with a few flashy transitions. Acting and writing are pretty decent. This production shows its age pretty badly with the model work and fake-looking monsters, but most other sets, props, and costumes are really nice. Some of the matte paintings and composites are pretty decent too. Music is good.

Mothra will reappear over and over again, but the formula won't vary much: the weird tiny fairy people will sing, the giant moth appears, flaps its wings to create a massive wind, it drags Godzilla around by the tail, then sheds some yellow stuff all over the place. It's a bit silly, but I can't help but to adore the gargantuan insect, and it's still pretty cool to see it in action in this old-school monster flick. If you like either monster, this film is certainly worth seeing, and it remains a solid and perennial addition to the series.

4/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Pretty Good | Film: Good)

Note: When this film was released in 1964, it was released in North America under the title of Godzilla vs The Thing.

Read More

Film Review: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

I never felt that the first Hunger Games movie was all that bad, but it's certainly not without its flaws. Chief among them were the issues that the threat was not present enough, and the pathos of the characters were not sufficiently developed. These were just a few of the nuances that seems to have translated better in writing than on-screen.

Fortunately, Catching Fire is not just a mere follow-up on the first film; it's an opportunity to rectify the first film's shortcomings and present a much more sublime adaptation of the second novel in the series. The film starts a little slow, taking the necessary time to cover some important ground with the background and characters, before the plot rockets ahead. I've always felt that the scenes in District 11 would be a pretty hard-hitting scene, and the film did not disappoint. From then on, the suspense builds systematically through a series of actions and reactions, based largely in the characters' predicaments. When the actual Quarter Quell starts, it is a pretty fast and intense match that not only involves a lot of bloodshed, but also some crazy environmental hazards and one ambitious endgame. It all culminates in a captivating series of twists and revelations that will inevitably lead into the full-blown revolution that will come in the Mockingjay films (and the film did a fine job of psyching me up for it). Once it got going, the film moved pretty fast, smooth, and with a perfect level of nuance and detail to fully emphasize the significance of the story and the pathos of the characters.

And that's what's really awesome about the film: the storytelling, which is probably as perfect of an adaptation to the book as it can get. It's not just a paint-by-the-numbers replication of the book's scenes; it seems as though the filmmakers took a deeper look at the source material to bring out the characters better (including all the minor characters, who seem to shine much more in this film), and craft a plot that makes better sense. A few minor details are cut out, but are not really missed; the film crams in so much from the book without feeling crowded, and it is pretty much exactly what I pictured it would be from reading the text. So overall, it is a fine story told really well.

Another great thing that's fixed is the camera work: all the crappy shakey-cam shots are gone, and the photography remains solid, steady, and good overall. Editing is equally decent. Acting is decent: Jennifer Lawrence IS Katniss Everdeen. All the other players felt pretty iffy before, but in this film, everybody feels much more natural and much more important than before; they all pull their weight for good effect. Writing is good. This production has some great-looking sets, props, costumes, and special effects (yes, even the SFX have improved), all of which match up with the first film well, but without appearing gaudy or anything. Music is pretty good too.

The Hunger Games films have finally caught on fire with this sequel. Following the book in both plot and spirit, the film is a successful adaptation. It's more competent, more hard-hitting, more consistently engaging, and it even had moments that I felt were brilliant or beautiful. Fans of the book should enjoy this tremendously, while casual audiences might be able to connect with it better than the first film. Recommended!

4/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Very Good | Film: Good)

Read More

Film Review: Seconds

At some point, everybody takes a good look at their lives and wants to change something about it.  Maybe you're unhappy with your job.  Maybe you wish you could have a hotter girlfriend.  Maybe you're worried that life is passing you by, and you want to be young again and live it up some more.  Maybe it's time to reinvent yourself.  In this film, a guy reinvents himself to rectify all of these things.  The big twist is, he does so with the help of an ominous and mysterious corporation.

This film has a pretty interesting premise.  Combined with its style, it comes off as a fairly gripping thriller; there is a sense of anxiety that permeates key scenes and keeps you wondering what will happen next.  The film drags in just a few spots (mostly in the middle), but it is interesting and sobering to watch this guy go through an artificial rebirth and live a second life.

The story is pretty well-structured.  The momentum sputters a bit in the middle, as the character wanders around in his new body and figures things out.  However, the set-up and conclusion are solid, and the characters overall are fairly well-developed.  Above all, this is a film that boldly holds a mirror up to the 1960s culture and shows a rather eerie reflection.  I could see it as the man's transformation mirroring the transformation of culture, moving from the conservative 50s to the radical free-loving 60s counter-culture movements, but the film makes it out to be a total nightmare.  As such, the film challenges the notion that people have to be young and successful to be happy.  It also puts a pretty ominous spin on corporations, using people like putty to shape them into whatever they determine, all for the sole purpose of making money.

The film is phenomenal, for it boasts some incredible photography.  There are a ton of wild and unusual camera angles, many of which seem less like what you'd find in the 60s and more like what you'd see in modern films (especially when the camera tracks a person's head or body, keeping it still while the background moves; that is very much the same kind of thing you get with webcams, which many modern movies use, and I think it's an awesome achievement for Seconds).  Camera moves are especially fluid and interesting.  Editing is really great, especially with some of the more surreal scenes.  Acting and writing are impeccable.  This production has some great-looking sets, props, and costumes.  The music score is pretty effective too.

Despite a few slow parts, Seconds is a bold film with a bold style and a ton of bold messages.  I'd gladly recommend it to anybody.

4.5/5 (Entertainment:  Good | Story:  Very Good | Film:  Perfect)

Read More

Book Review: The Great Train Robbery (Michael Crichton)

"Edward Pierce, on the other hand, was positively exuberant in his approach to crime.  Whatever his sources of income, whatever the truth of his background, one thing is certain:  he was a master cracksman, or burglar, who over the years had accumulated sufficient capital to finance large-scale criminal operations, thus becoming what he called a 'putter-up.' And toward the middle of 1854, he was already well into an elaborate plan to pull the greatest theft of his career, The Great Train Robbery." - Michael Crichton

Michael Crichton is one of my favorite authors, for the man knew how to make really entertaining and well-researched thrill rides.  Even though his third novel, The Great Train Robbery, doesn't deal with his usual fields of science and medicine, it is still every bit as thrilling and well-researched as his other works.

The whole book plays out as a heist story, focusing on how the characters methodically set up everything to pull off the great gold robbery of 1855.  This is an actual historic event, but Crichton uses different character names and takes a few small liberties, to free himself from the constraint of making everything perfectly accurate.  I don't even know how close to real events this book is.  He makes up for it, however, by often diverging into some incredible detail concerning the settings, the history, and the customs of Victorian England.  His research covers everything from the far-reaching stretch of the British Empire to the dirty underworld of London and all its nuances.  What makes the book so gripping is that the author manages to juggle everything in a well-structured manner, using the data first to support and give greater meaning to the action that unfolds.  The book is a fast and easy read, with enough good suspense, action, and thrills to keep it engaging.

The actual story is fun, showcasing an ambitious gold heist and all the detail behind its planning and execution.  Characters have their moments, but aren't really all that deep.  The main character is a cool, suave, high-class dude we love to root for, and his motivations are interesting, but there could have been more to the character.  Nearly everybody else is pretty one-dimensional.

Because of the way the book juggles fact and fiction, Crichton does have a penchant for lengthy essay-style scripts that explains a ton about Victorian England, often at the risk of cutting into the actual story and halting the action.  The funny thing is, the academic-style writing never really stalls the action, and it never feels as dry as it should.  I think, at its worse, it takes away from the narrative, diverting attention from the plot and characters for the sake of presentation.  Because of that, I'm inclined to say that the book is a bit half-and-half, for better or for worse.  Its prose is still pretty decent, especially in the way it masterfully wields the style, language, and mannerisms of old-fashioned Victorian English.

This book is a fun heist story, but so full of detail that it's hard not to appreciate it, even when Crichton breaks out with a full-blown essay on seemingly-random things.  It is the thing he does best though:  the fine blending of fact and fiction for entertaining effect.  And the book is certainly entertaining.

4/5 (Entertainment:  Perfect | Story:  Pretty Good | Book:  Good)

Read More