So Joss Whedon’s new show was disappointingly underwhelming – much weaker pilot than his previous series, it feels like he’s dialing it in (if even creatively involved at all). The story was all over the place and didn’t make sense, but most egregious, the characters were one dimensional and non-descript – what happened to the Scooby Gang, the dialog, the repartee? It also felt like you had to be deeply into the written comics – e.g. what’s so special or important about Agent Coulson, anyway – wasn’t he just a redshirt who Whedon killed off in one of the movies? And who cares about all this coy mention of Melinda May and other Marvel characters no one’s ever heard of? Meh … At least it was better than most recent superhero shows (e.g. Arrow, The Cape), but that’s not saying much. Perhaps it’ll get better from here? …
Category Archives: Passive Media
Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (2013- TV series by Joss Whedon): feels like Joss is dialing it in
Pacific Rim (2013, dir. Guillermo del Toro): fun, frenetic popcorn flick
Fun, frenetic popcorn movie, think of Transformers or Godzilla on steroids (lots more and bigger scale cool robots and monsters) plus a better-than-expected human dimension – a few likeable characters and back story vignettes squeezed into all the action. Reminded me of the recent Japanese live action version of Space Battleship Yamato (2010) – which I’d highly recommended for any BSG fans – though not as dark or emotional. Just don’t go expecting any layered story telling and thematic depth a la Neon Genesis Evangelion … perhaps Pacific Rim will now pave the way?
Man of Steel (2013, dir. Zack Snyder): disappointing product which doesn’t live up to its brilliant marketing
I can imagine the conversation Christopher Nolan (Dark Knight Trilogy) had with the studio execs:
Execs: We’d really like to reboot Superman the same way you did Batman. Like for example a dark, gritty, realistic take on Richard Donner’s classic Superman 1 and 2 from the 1970s. Can you do it?
Nolan: How droll; been there done that. But can I recommend my mate Zack Snyder (300), he’s not as good (if I do say so myself) but he’s looking for a gig
Execs: OK, but can you at least take a producer credit? We’ll pay you a gazillion?
Nolan: Sure, why not?
World War Z (2013, dir. Marc Foster): half-decent medical action thriller, just don’t expect any Walking Dead
Half-decent medical action thriller, mashing up the medical disaster genre (see Dustin Hoffman’s Outbreak (1995) or Steven Soderbergh’s Contagion (2011)) with the aggressive, fast zombies of I Am Legend (2007) plus some competently tense Brad Pitt horror action and grandiose CGI set pieces. Just don’t go in expecting Walking Dead-style depth of character study, or exploration of themes such as the depravity of humankind (the living being worse than the undead), the soullessness of materialistic society, American isolationism, or for that matter, any real fidelity to the critically acclaimed source material (Max Brooks’ novel). Director Marc Forster is clearly leaving all that on the table for a future visionary to craft the definitive next-gen apocalyptic zombie flick. Until then, World War Z is a fun, big budget diversion (sequel already on its way)
The Great Gatsby (2013, dir. Baz Luhrmann): energetic adaptation for modern audiences, though why the 3D?
Energetic adaptation which captures the essence of the Great American Novel, even if not a slavish period piece (in case you were wondering, no, there was no hip hop in the 1920s, but there was Gershwin, and mixing the two is classic Luhrmann). The verbatim passage readings by Tobey Maguire work surprisingly well, and remind us of F Scott Fitzgerald’s literary aplomb. Solid acting from Leonardo di Caprio (Gatsby) and Carey Mulligan (Daisy). Better than expected meditation on societal shallowness, selfishness, idealism, love, loss and the creative process (though I don’t know why it had to be in 3D).
Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013, dir. JJ Abrams): JJ’s ultimately lazy take on 1982’s classic Wrath of Khan
Finally got around to seeing it in IMAX 3D: a quality sci-fi action flick, and better than JJ Abrams’ 2009 reboot. For Trekkies ** spoiler alert ** yes, this is Abrams’ take on Wrath of Khan + copious lens flare + latest gen CGI + lots of action, but minus the Shakespearean/Dickensian references and not as tightly plotted, e.g. the foreshadowing in the film only comes from throwbacks to the 1982 movie, which seems kind of lazy. Though I really don’t get all of Abrams’ secrecy around the villian’s identity prior to the film’s release. Speaking of which, Cumberbatch is characteristically good.
If Abrams repeats this performance with Star Wars 7, it will be a hit, and certainly better than the prequels, but it won’t be a great classic – constant action and lens flare plus a few zippy one-liners does not make up for a lack of soul …
Oblivion (2013, dir. Joseph Kosinski): competent, but diet bland version of more powerful antecedent sci-fi
Competent sci-fi thriller, though plays as a diet bland version of more powerful sci-fi that has gone before, e.g. even Cruise’s prior Minority Report (2002). Like Inception (2010), there’s a twisty action mystery plot, however in Oblivion it is telegraphed a bit too much. Or just like Nolan’s opus, there’s also a potentially philosophical and romantic angle which never quite packs the lyrical or dramatic punch that it could. The graphics are great, especially in IMAX.
Speaking of CGI, this is sadly not the movie of the Elder Scrolls game (though Oblivion or Skyrim could make impressive films, Dovahkiin). And Oblivion’s ending seemed derivative of the controversial climax to the Mass Effect trilogy. Maybe it says something when computer games’ stories can now be more compelling than movies’?
Oscars 2013: a disappointing showering of love for Affleck’s Argo
Of the acting awards I can support all 4 (Jennifer Lawrence for SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK, Daniel Day Lewis for LINCOLN, Anne Hathaway for LES MISERABLES and Christoph Waltz for DJANGO UNCHAINED), plus Ang Lee for directing LIFE OF PI – but I was very disappointed with the Academy for showering Ben Affleck with love for ARGO (best picture).
It was a good movie, but simply not as a great as any of the others that were nominated – how about any of those 5 above + ZERO DARK THIRTY, for a start? We’ve seen the Academy dole out gongs ‘retroactively’ for snubs of prior superior work (e.g. Martin Scorcese finally winning for THE DEPARTED), but Ben Affleck’s previous movies don’t qualify there. Or maybe the insular delusion of “Hollywood saves the day” was just too tempting not to vote for (more cynically, maybe they thought that every extra viewer who sees the film because it won, and can be brainwashed as to Hollywood’s social value, is worth compromising the integrity of the award). Either way, badly played Academy voters, badly played.
Silver Linings Playbook (2012, dir. David O. Russell): an exceptionally good rom-com
Contrary to popular opinion, I will willingly watch and enjoy a rom-com if it’s exceptionally good; such a film only comes along once every 2-3 years, and happily this one’s fits the bill 🙂 … A fresh take on the rom-com formula, with sassy Juno or Little Miss Sunshine-like script and dialog, two very appealing leads, and great acting from the whole cast (including Robert De Niro in his best recent role, and Bradley Cooper going from strength to strength), but the standout has to be Jennifer Lawrence’s Oscar-worthy performance. Even included a meta reference to her Hunger Games alter ego via a speech about The Lord of the Flies. Though I have to say we particularly enjoyed Cooper’s diatribe about Ernest Hemingway which invited parallels to the recent disappointments of Julian Fellowes’ Downton Abbey.
Zero Dark Thirty (2012, dir. Kathryn Bigelow): complex, politically ambiguous, well executed, fictionalized account of the Bin Laden takedown
“We don’t know what we don’t know”
“What the f*ck does that mean?”
(Take that, Mr Rumsfeld)
Gripping yarn of CIA agent ‘Maya’ and her single-minded 12-year quest to hunt down Bin Laden. However, it will likely forfeit Best Picture at the Oscars due to the controversy around its alleged support for torture, e.g. the film doesn’t show all the false leads generated that wasted the CIA’s time. It does provide fascinating insight into how an intelligence officer operates, though on this count the movie has been criticized by CIA agents for over-egging the indiivdual hunches and contributions of ‘Maya’ (and underplaying teamwork and the reams of boring desk analysis).
WetWareGames 