We all knew this was coming. And we were all thrilled, yet horrified that the fourth film would suck. Really, it isn't so much that the fourth one was destined to fail; it's just that it had so much to live up to. So now, twenty years later, I can safely say that Indy 4 is not a miserable failure, but it will never receive the acclaim of the original trilogy.
I try not to spoil anything in my reviews, and sadly, I can't really say much about the plot at all in this case without giving anything away. I'll just repeat what you probably know already. In the Indy canon, Kingdom takes place roughly twenty years after the events of Last Crusade (go figure). So there are no more Nazis. The key villains happen to be Russians, and Indy is in his sixties. Aliens have some sort of involvement in the plot, although not like E.T.
Kingdom seems to poke fun at itself in some instances, which I think is a bit necessary given this twenty year gap between films. Like the original trilogy, this one is a bit ridiculous, and it's not afraid to admit it. And of course, it delves into the supernatural, which is nothing new to the franchise, but this one is by far the most off the wall. Even so, it still keeps an archaeological air about it and stays within the style of classic Indiana Jones.
The problem is that it's all a bit much. For one, Indiana Jones has always had a knack for solving riddles, but this time, he's the riddle master. Not to mention he now understands a handful of dead languages and interprets symbols in a matter of moments. That's all well and good, but in the original trilogy, such things became part of the story and just made it all the more intriguing. Who could forget the riddles in Last Crusade? This time, they are just a means of quickly moving the plot along. No sooner is a riddle revealed than it is solved: 'So that means we need to go here.' As far as the supernatural elements go, it doesn't all fit into place as well as it used to. In a story centered around the lost ark, the ark turned out to have a supernatural power that became significant to the story. Now, in a story centered around a crystal skull, aliens fit in there somewhere. Yeah.
But I've been comparing too much. On its own, this movie isn't so bad. One thing I love about it is that even now in a completely different film culture, it still manages to maintain the feeling of an Indiana Jones movie, for the most part. The only trouble there comes from the fact that it also tries to be a modern summer blockbuster. Some stuff was put in to appeal to a modern crowd, and although a lot of it is fun and funny, it does sometimes take away from the classic Indy flair. In the middle, particularly, I must have said "Oh, come on" a good five or ten times. On that note, Shia LaBeouf has no place in this movie. Sure, his character matters, but it's obvious that he was only put in to try to round up the younger viewers. I would probably respect this film more without him. More than anything, he's just a distraction, not only from Indiana Jones's character, but also from his style since LaBeouf's character is a modern contrast to Indy's classic form, and the two don't really mesh well.
The only other thing I really have an issue with is the ending. It's not a bad ending by any means, but a lot happens at once, and none of it really makes any sense. Granted, the trilogy rarely explained much either, but this time it just seems like too much and too random.
The action scenes are very entertaining for the most part. Like I said already, they maintain the classic Indy style, and it's a lot of fun. Sometimes, though, ridiculous things will happen, and eyes will roll.
Fans of the series, do yourself a favor and allow yourself to enjoy this movie. It's tempting to get wrapped up in all the things that are wrong with it, all the inconsistencies, and all the things the original trilogy did better. No one ever thought this movie could measure up to the original trilogy's legacy after all this time, and of course it doesn't, but I argue that it was impossible for it to do that, no matter what the makers had done with it. Taken for what it is, this is a fun adventure flick that's very well-made. I'm sure it will be underrated for years to come, but I think it was a worthwhile effort.
Caius's Rating: 3 stars
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Death Cab for Cutie: Narrow Stairs Review
Narrow Stairs is Death Cab's second release on a major label. 2005's Plans was a solid album that showed the strength of this atypical rock band. Narrow Stairs, on the other hand, seems to take the band a step backwards.
The album opens with "Bixby Canyon Bridge." This is a choice I'll never understand. I suppose it's just because they had no other place to put it, but I would have just bitten the bullet and opened with the single in this case. "Bixby" is one of the most lifeless tracks on the album, and in my opinion, not a suitable intro. Granted, it picks up and starts to sound more like a rock anthem in the absurdly long bridge section, but even that is pretty simple and not the best showcase of Death Cab's talent.
Next we have the single, "I Will Possess Your Heart." Although it doesn't represent the band's best songwriting, it displays the highest production values on this album. The radio edit is classic Death Cab. The album version was somehow stretched into eight and a half minutes, which is way too long for this structurally simple song, but the length doesn't kill it.
The next two songs, "No Sunlight" and "Cath" are probably the most similar to Death Cab's usual style. They are not among the band's best work, but they are solid in their own right.
That's where it starts to go downhill. The rest of the album feels sloppy and hastily thrown together. The songwriting becomes noticeably less creative, almost immediately. But we can all forgive a few "fillers." The problem is that so many of these songs made it onto the album. I would argue that only about five of the album's eleven songs really belong at all. A few, in fact, show a sharp contrast in style compared to the rest of the album, which makes it feel like they just came out of nowhere. The relatively mellow "Your New Twin Size Bed" is followed by a sudden transition to bright rock in "Long Division" (which, ironically, was probably this album's best candidate for a single. It just doesn't fit!). The closing song, "The Ice is Getting Thinner," is slow and simple, and it also feels like it was forced into place to fit with the rest of the album.
Taking Narrow Stairs as a whole, I don't think it's bad. Some of the songs are solid, and Death Cab for Cutie's overall style smacks generic rock in the face. That said, a lot of this album feels sloppy, and I think that fans will be disappointed when they compare this release to the band's other work, especially Plans.
Caius's Rating: 2.5 stars
The album opens with "Bixby Canyon Bridge." This is a choice I'll never understand. I suppose it's just because they had no other place to put it, but I would have just bitten the bullet and opened with the single in this case. "Bixby" is one of the most lifeless tracks on the album, and in my opinion, not a suitable intro. Granted, it picks up and starts to sound more like a rock anthem in the absurdly long bridge section, but even that is pretty simple and not the best showcase of Death Cab's talent.
Next we have the single, "I Will Possess Your Heart." Although it doesn't represent the band's best songwriting, it displays the highest production values on this album. The radio edit is classic Death Cab. The album version was somehow stretched into eight and a half minutes, which is way too long for this structurally simple song, but the length doesn't kill it.
The next two songs, "No Sunlight" and "Cath" are probably the most similar to Death Cab's usual style. They are not among the band's best work, but they are solid in their own right.
That's where it starts to go downhill. The rest of the album feels sloppy and hastily thrown together. The songwriting becomes noticeably less creative, almost immediately. But we can all forgive a few "fillers." The problem is that so many of these songs made it onto the album. I would argue that only about five of the album's eleven songs really belong at all. A few, in fact, show a sharp contrast in style compared to the rest of the album, which makes it feel like they just came out of nowhere. The relatively mellow "Your New Twin Size Bed" is followed by a sudden transition to bright rock in "Long Division" (which, ironically, was probably this album's best candidate for a single. It just doesn't fit!). The closing song, "The Ice is Getting Thinner," is slow and simple, and it also feels like it was forced into place to fit with the rest of the album.
Taking Narrow Stairs as a whole, I don't think it's bad. Some of the songs are solid, and Death Cab for Cutie's overall style smacks generic rock in the face. That said, a lot of this album feels sloppy, and I think that fans will be disappointed when they compare this release to the band's other work, especially Plans.
Caius's Rating: 2.5 stars
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Iron Man Review
It's been a while since I've gotten to do a movie review, but I doubt this will be my last in the near future with all the big movies coming out this summer. The first, of course, is Iron Man, yet another superhero flick based on the Marvel comics. It shares many similarities with - to be honest - all the other Marvel films that have been made in the last ten years, but fortunately, Iron Man manages to avoid many of the failures that have plagued so many of the others.
The plot follows Tony Stark, the head of a successful weapons manufacturing company. He ends up getting captured by terrorists who ask him to build missiles for them. Instead, he decides to build a giant kickass suit of armor. Somehow, they couldn't tell the difference. Once he gets free, he decides to stop dealing with weapons and use his new suit of armor to protect people.
The whole sequence when Stark is held captive is probably this movie's strongest point. Although it's thoroughly dramatized, it's probably the most real part of the movie, and it's a strong beginning for Stark's hero personality. The rest is extremely predictable, from the rise and fall of the key villain to Stark's love interest. Now don't get me wrong; none of this is badly done. If you have liked most of the recent Marvel movies, then you will undoubtedly like this one too, and it is one of the better ones. It's just that it contains all the same cliches and style choices as all the others, and sometimes, it can just be ridiculous. The best examples of all this come toward the end of the movie, so I won't spoil anything for the sake of giving examples.
Most of the depth of this movie is the result of the recurring theme of manipulation, which is a driving force in both character and plot development. It is also worth noting that this theme is well-presented throughout with some clever camera and editing tricks. Sadly, that's about it for the depth. It's a shame, because there really was some potential for depth, and a good start too. It just didn't turn into very much. The overall plot is shallow and predictable.
One of the specific problems is that the plot dwells too much on the creation of the suit. That is of course the focus of the action when Stark is held captive, but even when that's over, he spends about the middle third (that's a guess) of the movie building and testing new models of the suit. We get it, the suit is awesome; now let's see some deeper character development.
On that note, I have to give them credit for Stark's development. For a superhero, he actually has some depth and internal conflict, and it's kind of interesting to see his change from a wealthy asshole to a slightly more (but not overly) caring person. That said, every other character, however significant, is very shallow and underdeveloped. The acting from the other major characters is also not nearly as strong as Robert Downey, Jr.'s.
As far as the action goes, there are some explosions and such, but mostly, it's just scenes of Iron Man being a badass. And hey, that's cool, as long as you think a rich dude in a super high-tech suit is badass. I thought so.
As a whole, Iron Man is a solid superhero adventure. It's fun, it's funny, and if you take it for what it is, it works well. It's no Batman Begins, but it's also no Batman and Robin, and for fans of the genre, that's all that matters. For the rest of us, it's only as worthwhile as we're willing to make it. If you just want to see a fun summer movie, then you will be entertained. I just doubt that this will be one of the superhero movies that will be widely remembered and respected in 10 years.
Caius's Rating: 3 stars
The plot follows Tony Stark, the head of a successful weapons manufacturing company. He ends up getting captured by terrorists who ask him to build missiles for them. Instead, he decides to build a giant kickass suit of armor. Somehow, they couldn't tell the difference. Once he gets free, he decides to stop dealing with weapons and use his new suit of armor to protect people.
The whole sequence when Stark is held captive is probably this movie's strongest point. Although it's thoroughly dramatized, it's probably the most real part of the movie, and it's a strong beginning for Stark's hero personality. The rest is extremely predictable, from the rise and fall of the key villain to Stark's love interest. Now don't get me wrong; none of this is badly done. If you have liked most of the recent Marvel movies, then you will undoubtedly like this one too, and it is one of the better ones. It's just that it contains all the same cliches and style choices as all the others, and sometimes, it can just be ridiculous. The best examples of all this come toward the end of the movie, so I won't spoil anything for the sake of giving examples.
Most of the depth of this movie is the result of the recurring theme of manipulation, which is a driving force in both character and plot development. It is also worth noting that this theme is well-presented throughout with some clever camera and editing tricks. Sadly, that's about it for the depth. It's a shame, because there really was some potential for depth, and a good start too. It just didn't turn into very much. The overall plot is shallow and predictable.
One of the specific problems is that the plot dwells too much on the creation of the suit. That is of course the focus of the action when Stark is held captive, but even when that's over, he spends about the middle third (that's a guess) of the movie building and testing new models of the suit. We get it, the suit is awesome; now let's see some deeper character development.
On that note, I have to give them credit for Stark's development. For a superhero, he actually has some depth and internal conflict, and it's kind of interesting to see his change from a wealthy asshole to a slightly more (but not overly) caring person. That said, every other character, however significant, is very shallow and underdeveloped. The acting from the other major characters is also not nearly as strong as Robert Downey, Jr.'s.
As far as the action goes, there are some explosions and such, but mostly, it's just scenes of Iron Man being a badass. And hey, that's cool, as long as you think a rich dude in a super high-tech suit is badass. I thought so.
As a whole, Iron Man is a solid superhero adventure. It's fun, it's funny, and if you take it for what it is, it works well. It's no Batman Begins, but it's also no Batman and Robin, and for fans of the genre, that's all that matters. For the rest of us, it's only as worthwhile as we're willing to make it. If you just want to see a fun summer movie, then you will be entertained. I just doubt that this will be one of the superhero movies that will be widely remembered and respected in 10 years.
Caius's Rating: 3 stars
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)