Last Passenger (2013) - FilmReview

---

Article author: Alwyn Ash

Train wreck or The Orient Express?

Alfred Hitchcock fans will likely find a delicious slice of drama in this suspenseful independent British thriller directed by Omid Nooshin - starring Dougray Scott ("The Day of the Triffids", "Doctor Who"), Kara Tointon ("Eastenders"), Iddo Goldberg ("Christopher and His Kind"), David Schofield ("Gladiator", "Pirates of the Caribbean"), Lindsay Duncan ("Rome", "Doctor Who") and Joshua Kaynama. And having discovered this thanks to an interest in Tointon after seeing her in an episode of "Bedlam" (2011), I just have to say that this is one train journey I will not forget in a hurry...

So what is it about? Well, put simply, six passengers are left onboard a London commuter train that has been hijacked by a sociopath, whose own motives are far from clear though his intention is to crash and kill himself and everyone on board. The use of a faceless enemy works well, as it has done in past movies such as "The Car" (1977) and "Joy Ride" (2001). The runaway train theme is not an original concept (I am reminded of Andrei Konchalovsky's 1985 action-thriller and aptly-named, yes, "Runaway Train") but the way in which this movie is executed gives it a rather intriguing and fresh approach whilst maintaining something familiar - the film's focus on characterisation benefits the plot, permitting us to care about the people whose very lives are placed in jeopardy.

And this certainly shows best in the on-screen relationship between eight-year-old Kaynama and Scott, who play young Max and his father Doctor Lewis Shaler. Add to this Tointon's beautiful performance as fellow passenger Sarah Barwell and you have the perfect family unit whose uncertain fate draws ever nearer...

Every actor works well to bring this drama firmly into the realms of enjoyable entertainment. If proof be needed that a small cast can make a satisying movie, then look no further than "Last Passenger", whose direction steers every moment with purpose - no scene is wasted as it becomes clear just who is in charge of the train. Director Nooshin described it as "being trapped in the Belly of the Whale", and there is no doubt that such a claustrophobic experience both brings dramatic actions and tests the humanity and bravery of others. Though there is much tension between Jan Klimowski (Goldberg) and Peter Carmichael (Schofield) at first, their mutual realisation that difference must be overcome if they are to survive does manage to win through! However, just how do you escape an out-of-control transport?

It is very satisfying to see that writers Nooshin and Andrew Love resisted any temptation to rely on blood and gore, instead giving us a much more intelligent and emotional tale: the casting strengthens what is already on paper. This is no slasher film, staying clear of any similarities to horror outings "Terror Train" (1980) or "Train" (2008). To be too critical of the movie or its plot is unwarranted, though some reviewers have criticised the lack of information regarding the "madman". I, however, applaud this direction, for a faceless enemy is a far more terrifying one, whose motives are, at the time of incident, unknown. And so, it is to the last passengers that we, the audience, turn and support, as they attempt to avoid almost certain death.

Nooshin had commented, "LAST PASSENGER began life as a daydream which absorbed me whilst sitting on a London 'slam door' train. The daydream revolved around the simplest premise: what happens if this train doesn't stop?" And with a budget of only £500, a trailer was produced, gaining interest from film studios. In the end, a "shoestring" budget of £1.5m was invested into the project. As the director added in an interview, "...the last movie set on a train was 'Unstoppable' which was $100m (£61m)."

No surprise then that Nooshin had been nominated for the Douglas Hickox Award (Directorial Debut) in The Moët British Independent Film Awards, though he finally lost out to Paul Wright, whose own drama "For Those in Peril" focused on Aaron, the sole survivor of a mysterious fishing accident. In all honesty, "Last Passenger" is the perfect directorial debut, tense with enough explosive charm to satisfy 97 minutes. Mention must also be given to Irish composer Liam Bates, whose score is truly powerful and gripping, evoking the feel of a golden era while echoing the growing tension in the feature - the perfect choice when you consider his other work on such films as "Ghostwood" (2006).

I am going to admit something now: though it was to be a predictable occurrence, the scene at the level crossing shocked me, I had not expected it to be as so well-realised and was glad that the victims remained faceless. But it did have my heart beating like a runaway train, I can tell you - a true cinematic moment! The last time I felt this way about a single scene was during a viewing of the passenger aircraft disaster in "Die hard 2" (1990), and the department store bombing in "Nighthawks" (1981).

I am not one for being too concerned over the use of clichés in film, for the overall voice is of far more importance in my opinion, what a plot has to say in terms of who the characters are and where they are in their lives at that point in time, and how they react to a given situation. For one hour and forty minutes we share the screen with six interesting characters, three of whom I have taken to my heart: Sarah (Tointon), Lewis (Scott) and Max (Kaynama).

Purchase Last Passenger from the Store:
DVD - Blu-ray - Running time: 100 minutes

---

Read More

After Earth (2013) - FilmReview

---

Article author: Alwyn Ash

"Fear is not real. The only place that fear can exist is in our thoughts of the future. It is a product of our imagination, causing us to fear things that do not at present and may not ever exist."

I can never quite understand Hollywood, or movie critics. So often we either have a spate of inventive and emotional films that receive poor reviews, or directors who go with the flow and hand us poorly-conceived reboots or sequels, which are given either mixed to positive reviews. Thankfully, "After Earth" is an inventive sentimental science fiction adventure focusing on father and son who crash on an earth abandoned for a millennium. Though not perhaps the most original premise - John Hillcoat's 2009 offering "The Road" succeeded in more dramatic fashion - there is still plenty of promise.

Following a worldwide cataclysmic event on Earth, mankind repopulated on a distant planet, Nova Prime. However, this new world became the target of an alien race known as the S'krell. Using blind predatory beasts called the Ursas as weapons, the S'krell intended to invade our new environment. The Ursas can sense fear, which allows them to hunt their prey. The Ranger Corps, led by General Cypher Raige (Will Smith) struggle to overcome their enemy. Defeat looks certain until one fateful day when Cypher overcomes his fear during a close-to-death moment, only to realise that without the scent of fear the Ursas are unable to track their intended victim. The Rangers are later trained in this "ghosting" technique, and the balance of power is firmly on their side, leading to victory over their invaders.

During the war, sadly, Cypher's daughter is killed, leaving only a son, Kitai (played by Jaden Smith, real life son to Will Smith) and Faia, Cypher's wife (portrayed by Sophie Okonedo). It is clear that Kitai feels guilt for not protecting his older sister, feelings reflected by his father, who is close to retirement from the service. What follows is one final mission for the general and a chance to bond with his son, who accompanies him off world. Hit by an asteroid shower, their ship is forced to take immediate action, resulting in both ship and crew crash-landing on a quarantined Earth. After one-thousand years the indigenous wildlife has evolved, including the landscape. To make matters worse, one of the Ursas was being transported on the spacecraft at the time of the crash, now on the planet with them but perhaps still contained in its cage in the tail section of the ship, which broke off during atmospheric reentry...

Unable to activate a damaged emergency beacon from their present location, and with both of Cypher's legs broken, it is up to young Kitai to trek across land and locate the tail where he will find a backup beacon. The journey will take much courage and instinct. Kitai, though, was rejected from becoming a Ranger due to his reckless behaviour, so just how will he cope in what is effectively an alien environment?

Whatever your thoughts on director M. Night Shyamalan, he has worked with great actors on some wonderful screenplays. "The Sixth Sense" (1999) will always be one of my favourites, starring Bruce Willis and Haley Joel Osment. Regardless of the controversial Scientology and Nepotism allogations, I like "After Earth" very much. As for the teachings of Scientology, I know of such things but have never taken an interest in such beliefs; and the accusation of Nepotism is remarkably pointless as I found Jaden Smith to deliver a finer performance than some actors I could mention, including those who have been in the business for years and have made astonishing success out of it. Jaden, of course, had worked with his father once before, in the 2006 American biographical drama "The Pursuit of Happyness", and has starred alongside actors such as Jennifer Connelly and Jackie Chan.

For a movie that was heavily panned by critics, being described as "dull, ploddingly paced exercise in sentimental sci-fi", I cannot help but disagree. Perhaps the sentiment is a little dulled by the performances of both Smith and Smith, but these are military-minded characters whose focus relies heavily on honour and discipline, with emotion taking a back seat. There is much morality to be found here, with the core being that fear is of our own making, especially that which is yet to meet an imagined scenario. Fear plays the "What if" game, allowing ourselves to be overcome by something that may not happen, or at least not occur in the way we originally perceived. "Ghosting" is a means of accepting this, and controlling unwanted emotions. It is something that Kitai needs to learn...

The production is certainly a family affair, with Jada Pinkett Smith (Will Smith's wife and mother to Jaden) and Caleeb Pinkett (Jada's brother) producing, but is it fair to describe the enterprise as a "vanity" exercise? And though I do not criticize Jaden heavily, it is true that the protagonist of the story (Kitai) does lack charisma - such charm had always been evident in Will Smith's performances, whether he portrays Captain Steven Hiller combating aliens in "Independence Day" (1996) or Del Spooner facing a robotic revolt in "I, Robot" (2004). That aside, the scenario is believable and well-paced enough to work.

It is also welcome to see a sci-fi movie that isn't overwhelmed by CGI, relying instead on plot rather than a landslide of visual migraine, which sadly appears to be the thing these days. The effects employed are decent enough, with the design of the Ursas well realised and effective. There is even an emotional couple of scenes that had this reviewer frowning with sadness, following a death scene involving a giant condor. By the end of his journey, taking him to a volcano where he must activate the backup emergency beacon, it is inevitable that young Kitai must face his greatest of fears - and both his life and that of his fathers are at stake. A confrontation with the escaped monster...

Perhaps not the best film of 2013, nor one that will make much impact, but a nice watch if you are prepared to give it a chance and not expect too much. It is recommended that you rent the film, rather than buy. Though my review is positive, it is not a feature that I will revisit again for quite some time. Or perhaps try the novelisation of the film instead, which has been described as "better than the movie".

Purchase After Earth from the Store:
DVD - Blu-ray - Running time: 100 minutes

---

Read More

Apocalypse Z (2013) - FilmReview

---

Article author: Alwyn Ash

Not to be confused with the vastly superior - and bigger budget - "World War Z".

Often, when I come across a low budget indie film, I keep a distance. The bad acting, dire special effects (if any), and the direction usually leave a very nasty taste in my mouth. That said, I am a fan of some Web Series that just seem to hit the right buttons in style and direction, acting and vision. Please don't misunderstand, I have great respect for the indie market, but even with a low budget there must always be a focus to make the best possible feature - if you have talent, it will show!

"Apocalypse Z" is one of those features that has some good, and plenty of bad. Its downfalls are quite clear to anyone who actually sits through a viewing. Directed by Luca Boni and Marco Ristori, there is so much inconsistency and weakly-executed scenes that the whole affair feels laughable. Even the characters and dialogue are cliches without an attempt at some originality. As for the "plot", the US government sends a group of mercenaries into a Romanian town after the local population is infected by a toxic chemical, turning them all into zombies. We discover that the deadly chemical is actually a US experiment gone wrong, or at least, it is from a scientist's point of view. However, the military has other ideas. The town wasn't meant to be overcome by the chemical's affects, but an explosion at the research facility leads to a rapid spread and infection.

Originally titled "Zombie Massacre", the creators of this feature had clearly been inspired by financial possibilities and renamed it "Apocalypse Z" to cash in on the success of Brad Pitt's far superior "World War Z". Sadly, the "Z" is really all they have in common, as there is no comparing the two. Of course, the latter has a far superior budget too, so perhaps a comparison is unfair.

So, to the positives. Well, many of the zombie makeup effects are actually quite good. And the female cast outshine their male colleagues in every way. The opening scenes of a Romanian woman returning from work to feed her father (or husband) actually sets the atmosphere well, with her stepping out onto her apartment balcony to investigate the source of a distant explosion, only to see smoke rising and feel droplets of dark liquid on her hand. Inside, the droplets contaminate her and she mutates.

What follows the opening title sequence is far too much tedious dialogue without any zombies at all. Instead, for example, there is a long scene featuring mercenaries John 'Mad Dog' McKellen (Mike Mitchell) and Dragan Ilic (Daniel Vivian) as they discuss absolutely nothing at all. There are too many moments such as this, where there is a lot of talk but nothing that matters or adds to the plot. Thankfully, fellow mercenary Eden Shizuka (played by Tara Cardinal, above) says little until it is needed.

One of the things that really stands out with this feature is, no matter their nationality, the actors just do not try to match an accent to their character - this unforgivably leads to the President of the United States ("portrayed" by controversial director and "actor" Ewe Boll) having a German accent! And then there are the supposed skills that the mercenaries possess: highly-trained soldiers who seem as inept at skillfully firing guns as an over-excited badger, a female whose sword-fighting skills seem to be deeply lacking in... skill (sorry, Tara, but more training was needed), and decisions that just didn't make any military sense. Speaking of military sense, why would the US government send in to a small Romanian town this ragged group with an atomic bomb and not, let's say, fire a missile instead?

I can see that there is much fun to be had (which I am sure includes Boll delivering a German-accented US President), but this is neither a zombie comedy nor a serious attempt at a decent movie, it lies somewhere in between, and that remains the problem - it is "The Expendables" meets "The Walking Dead" without the talent! When being advertised with its original title, "Zombie Massacre" had the tagline: "There is no hope". At times that is precisely how the making of this movie feels...

It is true that the zombie genre is being over-saturated by the movie market, but there is always room for more well written and crafted films. Even at his worst, master of horror George A. Romero still manages to deliver a decent feature film.

It is a shame, as "Apocalypse Z" could have been so much more. Its use of make-up effects and design is passionately approving. However, what we are given is a low-budget feature with no great expectations of its own success - why rename your project to mirror a major successful Hollywood film unless you are desperate for an audience? It is clear that writers/directors Boni and Ristori thought "Zombie Massacre" unable to succeed on its own merits. Their own lack of faith is telling in itself. Also, if Boll's inclusion wasn't bad enough, there is even the "Resident Evil" Nemesis-like creature to bring this adventure to a "sharp" climax. Honestly, I would rather watch "Resident Evil: Apocalypse" (2004) and enjoy the real thing.

For die-hard zombie fans only. Not to be confused with "Infection Z" (2013) or any other project that carries the same letter.

Purchase Apocalypse Z from the Store:
DVD - Running time: 90 minutes

---

Read More

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) - FilmReview

---

Article author: Alwyn Ash

"There will always be those who mean to do us harm. To stop them, we risk awakening the same evil within ourselves. Our first instinct is to seek revenge when those we love are taken from us. But that's not who we are."

The history of Khan Noonien Singh is an important one within the legacy of Star Trek, a genetically engineered superhuman whose ship, the SS Botany Bay, is discovered adrift by the USS Enterprise in deep space. Awakened from a cryogenic sleep, Khan and his people attempt to gain control of the Starfleet vessel. Thwarting this attempt at mutiny, Captain James T Kirk (William Shatner) shows leniency by allowing Khan and his followers to spend the rest of their days on an uncolonized planet, Ceti Alpha V. Though being exiled, Khan accepts the challenge.

Starring Ricardo Montalban as Khan, the episode "The Space Seed" aired in 1967, during the first season of "Star Trek: The Original Series". It was a plot that would be revisited years later in the feature film "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan". Montalban owned the role, and the actor's place in Star Trek history was most definitely assured, immortalised by a villain unmatched in anything since the 1982 motion picture.

Now there is no denying that the 2009 reboot of the Star Trek franchise, directed by J. J. Abrams, did wonders for a film series that had lost its momentum - the last big budget feature, "Star Trek: Nemesis" (released in 2002), was both a critical and financial disaster. Taking such a well-loved franchise and finding new ground was always going to be a risky... shall we say, enterprise? However, the gamble paid off. Set in an alternate timeline, we got to revisit Kirk during his early years, joined by all the original faces who shared his original voyages through space on the USS Enterprise.

It might seem a bit ironic to say "faces" when, clearly, the characters now belong to someone else, but the casting was simply wonderful and loyal to the show's origins. Chris Pine, for example, captures the essence of James T Kirk without even trying, whilst at the same time making the part his own; Karl Urban is unmistakable as Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy; and Zachary Quinto's Commander Spock is simply a joy to watch. Supporting cast include Zoe Saldana (Avatar, Colombiana) as Lieutenant Nyota Uhura, Simon Pegg (Shaun of the Dead) as Lieutenant Commander Montgomery "Scotty" Scott, John Cho as Lieutenant Hikaru Sulu, and Anton Yelchin (Terminator Salvation, Fright Night) as Ensign Pavel Chekov.

Though the plot for "Star Trek" (2009) wasn't the most original - Eric Bana's Romulan villain Nero didn't feel so inspired - the CGI was the best yet (even with those lens flares), each shot carefully constructed to make best use of character and script. The only problem I had with this first movie was the casting of Pegg as Scotty and that of his mascot, Keenser (played by Kenyan-born actor Keenser) - just why was the "Hot Fuzz" star cast in a role that quite clearly didn't suit his talents? Perhaps also, there should have been more screen time for Rachel Nichols as the Orion Starfleet cadet Gaila. However, overall there was much to enjoy about this new debut...

"Star Trek Into Darkness" works in similar fashion, injecting much life into an old tale. Once again the cast is excellent, each actor embracing their role and quite clearly enjoying the process. Like its predecessor, there is a visual mastery that embraces every scene, captures every bit of passion that is injected into the film by J. J. Abrams and his crew. The introduction of English actress Alice Eve as Lieutenant Dr. Carol Marcus is a welcome one. Even the new timeline - changed as a result of Nero's actions in the previous installment - works well. I find it amusing that some Star Trek fans seem to think their beloved franchise destroyed by J. J. Abrams' altered timeline, but isn't it just a case that the timeline featuring everything from the Original Series (plus "Star Trek: Enterprise") through to "Star Trek: Nemesis" simply continues to exist on its own path?

Though I had already learned via spoilers that Benedict Cumberbatch was to portray Khan Noonien Singh in this feature, I was prepared to watch it with an open mind. And, as terrorist Commander John Harrison, Cumberbatch works his skills well, bombing a secret installation Section 31 in London, a prelude to a far more cunning plot involving the deaths of senior Starfleet personnel. Given reason for revenge, Kirk commands the Enterprise and goes after Harrison, who has escaped to the Klingon homeworld. It is following these events that we learn of the terrorist's true identity...

Though expected, this simple revelation helped me to realise that Cumberbatch just isn't the Khan we deserved - it is perfectly understandable that following in Ricardo Montalban would be a difficult task for any actor, but casting should have reflected Montalban's physical appearance as well as his mannerisms as Khan. Considering the careful appointment of the main USS Enterprise cast to accurately emulate their predecessors, it is disappointing that the iconic character of Khan wasn't treated accordingly; though a good actor, Cumberbatch fails to be anything more than just another villain, unlike Montalban whose performance took the Star Trek film franchise to an altogether new level.

If some are wondering just what these films mean for Star Trek, it is this: J. J. Abrams has opened a door into an alternate reality, one where anything can change. If it had not been for actor Leonard Nimoy's appearance in both "Star Trek" and "Star Trek Into Darkness", one could easily consider that these movies are a full reboot and nothing more, able to be placed into a separate category from what has gone before. However, Nimoy's presence as the older Spock significantly recognises that Abrams has developed a sequel series, though veering in a different direction. Here lies the danger of complacency, the desire to recycle rather than to create original drama. Yes, Star Trek has a history, and exploring the original USS Enterprise's crew in a new light brings all kinds of exciting possibilities - so let this venture be completely brand new, subtle nods to yesterday, but a strong sense of "to boldly go where no man [or woman] has gone before..."

Purchase Star Trek Into Darkness from the Store:
DVD - Blu-Ray

---

Read More

World War Z (2013) - FilmReview

Article author: Alwyn Ash


"There will be no warning"... Taking a look at the blockbuster featuring Brad Pitt, zombies, and a ladder of Climbers.

Just when did the zombie culture become so successful as a film franchise? Perhaps in George A Romero's 1968 cult "Night of the Living Dead", or an earlier example with Hammer Horror's "The Plague of the Zombies" (1966)? Or just maybe Victor Halperin's 1932 independent offering "White Zombie" is the father of them all? And though it doesn't contain the romanticism of vampire lore, or the fascination of extra terrestrial beings regarding this earth with envious eyes, tales of the walking dead have kept theatre and television audiences entertained for over forty years. Even the gaming market has shared its own slice of terror with Capcom's survival series "Resident Evil". And comics have led to AMC's horror drama "The Walking Dead", developed by Frank Darabont ("The Shawshank Redemption", "The Green Mile")

If it is at all possible to forget Steve Miner's creatures in the 2008 reimagining of Romero's "Day of the Dead" (they can defy gravity - really?), there are two types of undead: "Generic Zombie", those that you can quite simply walk past (unless you are desperately out-numbered, as does happen from time to time); and "Fast Zombie", those whose speed brings an extra dimension to the fear factor, making it almost an impossibility to escape. The latter is where Marc Forster's feature film "World War Z" focuses...

Ironically, though based on the novel by horror author Max Brooks (son of Mel Brooks), the film adaptation chooses to speed up its zombies intentionally, and there is much difference from the printed version. "World War Z" is, however, one of the most ambitious zombie thrillers of all time, focusing on a worldwide epidemic with the best use of news reporting, CGI and regular action sequences. The confusion and panic of zombies in Philadelphia, for instance, really impresses as Former UN worker Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt), wife Karin (Mireille Enos) and their two daughters, Rachel (Abigail Hargrove) and Constance (Sterling Jerins) attempt to escape the chaos. Though they eventually seek refuge on a U.S. Navy vessel, Gerry is forced to return to active duty and help locate the origins of the virus.

During the course of 116 minutes approx., we are taken from Philadelphia and the coast off the New York City coast to a military base in South Korea, the walled city of Jerusalem, and finally a research facility in Cardiff, Wales. It is during the Jerusalem scenes that memories of Romero's "Land of the Dead" (2005) are resurrected, the defences of a protected city breached and finally overrun by zombies. It is indeed a chilling moment as we quickly learn that, no matter the precautions taken, no where is exactly a safe harbour against the flood of walking dead intent on attacking the living.

What I do admire about this take on the genre is that, instead of just being flesh-eaters, these zombies attack to infect, quickly moving on to their next victim. There is much about "28 Weeks Later" present too, a 2007 post-apocalyptic horror directed by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo that chronicled the outbreak of the highly contagious Rage Virus. In both, the infected move rapidly, as they also did in Zack Snyder's 2004 remake of "Dawn of the Dead". But what "World War Z" manages to serve up in addition is the extreme case of a world at war with its own, those who were unfortunate enough to be attacked, now single-minded in intent. The twist, however, as we learn later in the film, is that not everyone is at the mercy of the zombies - and not because they possess any special skill or fighting ability... We are safely in scientific territory now, and it is Gerry who must somehow find an answer to eradicate or slow the tide of the growing threat that is engulfing the world's population.

Though the majority of the cast is unknown to me, I was pleasantly surprised to see Scottish-born Peter Capaldi in the role of a World Health Organization (WHO) doctor. Fans of the popular BBC television series "Doctor Who" will understand the irony of the role he plays in this horror feature. Another welcome appearance comes in the form of Israeli soldier "Segen" (played by Israeli actress Daniella Kertesz), who remains with Gerry after his flight from the overrun Jerusalem. During one scene she is bitten and, in an attempt to prevent her from turning, the UN employee amputates her hand.

The scenes in which an airliner is overwhelmed by zombies really does everything to amplify the feelings of tension and desperate claustrophobia as you realise there is no place to escape. This is brief but much better handled than in the 2007 film "Flight of the Living Dead: Outbreak on a Plane". As more of the passengers are attacked, becoming infected, we are left wondering just how Gerry and Segan will survive this nightmare...

Being a zombie genre fan, this is undoubtedly now one of my favourites, alongside George Romero's "Day of the Dead" (1985). It is also nice to see a zombie feature with such large-scale storytelling. Copying the success of "The Walking Dead" in cinematic form is not an easy feat, but director Forster manages it with unforgiving expertise, as his undead go on the rampage in every corner of planet Earth.


Purchase World War Z from the Starfoyer Enterprise Store:
DVD Blu-ray - Running time: 114 minutes

---

Read More

Man of Steel (2013) - FilmReview

Article author: Alwyn Ash


Following a classic is the hardest task of all...

In 1978 director Richard Donner gave us the ultimate Superman experience, a perfect delivery of action and adventure, science fiction and character-led emotion. Cast in the role as Kal-El, aka Superman/Clark kent, Christopher Reeve delivered a unique performance, a part that would make him a household name and a hero to children all over the world. There was a haunting quality about Krypton, its inhabitants, and the way in which the world's end came about. The casting was superb, with names like Marlon Brando, Susannah York, Margot Kidder and Gene Hackman attached to a feature film that would forever remain in the hearts of all Superman fans.

Sadly, 35 years later and Zack Snyder (Dawn of the Dead, 300) produces a typical modern-day mess of a reimagining, where CGI overwhelms a story that could have been far more subtle and rewarding, and action that explodes far too carelessly and not in keeping with what Superman represents. Just how can the Man of Steel fight his enemies so deliberately and with such destruction that the well-being of the innocent is overlooked? Superman should want to protect the people of Earth and yet it is he who causes more carnage than should be allowed - Reeve's Man of Steel would always have been the first to protect a single individual than risk destruction on a greater level. And yet, even though it isn't shown, just how many might have died because of Henry Cavill's quest for justice?

As with many later Hollywood offerings, Man of Steel relies too much on special effects and little anything else, far less interested in storytelling on a deep personal level and leaning more towards those teachings at the George Lucas school. One cannot help but see Krypton as a set piece from one of the Star Wars prequels, with scenes that could have been cut down and simplified, instead allowing for better development of a world close to its final days, its people desperate but accepting of their fate. There was a strange beauty with Donner's imagining of this world, however Snyder's attempt simply leaves this reviewer waiting impatiently for Krypton to end so that the remainder of the film can be told. And that, sadly, is another problem...

Man of Steel is too inconsistent, with not enough attention paid to developing young Clark's life with his new parents. Yes, we are introduced to moments in his life, but the overall flavour leaves a sour taste. Although most of us know his life story by heart, Man of Steel should have been an epic tale of discovery and growth, a boy learning of his unusual gifts and developing them, guided by Jonathan and Martha Kent (Kevin Costner and Diane Lane). But there is a shift, and we see an older Clark involved in a dramatic oil rig rescue - yes, as Clark, not Superman!

Even his relationship with Lois Lane (played by Amy Adams) is rushed and clearly not given time to develop. Underdeveloped characters is a major issue with this feature, no time spent to really get to know anyone or care about them. Overall the casting is good, with Cavill an excellent choice for Superman. But where is the true essence and heart of this comic book character tale? It is simply no where to be found!

One of the delights of the 1978 vision had been the Fortress of Solitude, a gigantic crystalline structure and Superman's Krypton home on Earth, in the Arctic. This was the moment when Clark, via "memory crystals", would learn more about himself, his origins, and his purpose. The interactive holographic "ghosts" of his parents and other members of the Kryptonian race visually impressive. So sad, then, that Man of Steel 2013 fails to resurrect that same magic, instead producing a less visually-pleasing representation of a dead Jor-El (Russell Crowe) as Superman's guide. It was as if Zack Snyder's imagination had been banished to the Phantom Zone (prison dimension).

Final criticism lies with the fight sequences between Superman, General Zod (Michael Shannon) and Sub-Commander Faora (Antje Traue), many of which are overblown and too drawn-out; why do some Hollywood movies look like they have been integrated with computer games these days? Again, there are ways to develop action without overuse of CGI...

Whether a sequel to Superman Returns (2006) would have been the better option, who knows? But Man of Steel serves as just another Hollywood menu of CGI and action that compromises both plot and characterisation.

---

Read More

Oz: Great and Powerful (2013) - FilmReview

Article author: Alwyn Ash


Taking a look at one of the most eagerly-awaited movies since...

It is not often that a wondrous tale captures the heart so completely; for this reviewer George Lucas' original Star Wars trilogy, JK Rowling's Harry Potter book series, and John Christopher's Tripods tales are some that have been successful, as books/or as films. And, of course, writing something that is either a prequel or sequel to a masterpiece can be a far more risky business, not always claiming the rewards or positive praise expected.

Taking someone else's original vision and giving it your own stamp while at the same time being respectful to the work that gave it birth is difficult too. And when the source material is from the wonderful series of Oz books by American author L. Frank Baum - plus the reputation of a classic 1939 film adaptation - managing any production based on those works will always be an arduous task. However, this is precisely what director Sam Raimi achieves, with a screenplay written by David Lindsay-Abaire and Mitchell Kapner; Disney's "Oz: The Great and Powerful" takes us on a magical journey to discover how the famous Wizard happened to rule the land of Oz in the first place; how he even came to arrive there as, we discover, he was originally a resident of Kansas (just like Dorothy Gale) and went by the name of Oscar Diggs...

Even now, following its release, some of the criticisms surprise me. Justin Chang, of Variety, commenting, "In a real sense, Oz the Great and Powerful has a certain kinship with George Lucas' Star Wars prequels, in the way it presents a beautiful but borderline-sterile digital update of a world that was richer, purer and a lot more fun in lower-tech form. Here, too, the actors often look artificially superimposed against their CG backdrops..." Thankfully he adds, "...the intensity of the fakery generates its own visual fascination".

Mila Kunis as Theodora, a beautiful Good Witch

---

There has been much concern regarding the casting, and too-exact comparisons to the beautifully-filmed Judy Garland movie (to be expected, I guess), a musical that also starred Margaret Hamilton as the Wicked Witch of the West. You see why visualising a prequel or sequel has its problems? Had "Oz: The Great and Powerful" been released without the baggage, it would likely have been heralded a major success and unique in its development. Critics would have still circled the production like hungry vultures, I am sure, but its superior storytelling and cinematic greatness could not have been denied by the majority.

Additionally, due to legal issues, several iconic devices that featured in the MGM film could not be redeployed for this movie - specifically the ruby slippers (in the novel however they were described as "Silver Shoes" anyway, only introduced in the 1939 movie as "ruby" to take advantage of the new Technicolor film process), the shade of green for the Wicked Witch's skin, the chin mole that became so iconic of Margaret Hamilton's physical appearance...

Personally, I was mesmerized by the visuals in Sam Raimi's prequel as we came to explore Oz itself. As for the black and white opening sequences featuring Oscar Diggs (played by James Franco) working as a small-time magician in a traveling circus, what a wonderful and pleasing treatment with a firm nod to its 1939 counterpart. His flirtatious ways, which are responsible for him escaping the wrath of an angry husband in Kansas, resurface in Oz when he encounters both Theodora (Mila Kunis) and Evanora (Rachel Weisz) - a broken heart can be most painful, and Oscar's own lack of compassion leads to tragic consequences. Throughout the tale we accompany a man who lives through deceit, though his eventual heroism comes about thanks to this usually negative trait. Still, one cannot help but feel some sympathy for one of the Oz residents...

Further criticism has been targeted at Oz's companions Finley (the winged monkey voiced by the talented Zach Braff) and China Girl (voice provided by the beautiful Joey King), a living china doll who accompanies Oz after her home is attacked and laid to waste. The argument for this criticism: that these characters aren't as strongly developed as those who accompanied Dorothy in the original 1939 outing? However, aren't these critics aware that L. Frank Baum's land of Oz was not defined just by "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz", the book from which director Victor Fleming's motion picture was adapted? I am not a "fan" of the novels, so my knowledge isn't vast, but even I am aware that there were many characters invented and introduced during the book series. Besides, in my opinion Finley makes a nice light-hearted addition to the piece, and who cannot help but take China Girl to their heart?

I have had the pleasure of enjoying performances from both Rachel Weisz and James Franco in previous movies - "The Mummy" (1999) and "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" (2011) being my favourites - but I cannot praise Mila Kunis and Michelle Williams enough, whose acting I have never seen until now, for their pleasurable touches as Theodora and Glinda. Again, there have been negative reviews, especially regarding the former, but it was Kunis who had this reviewer smiling in the most positive way possible: a delightful magical lady portraying an equally magical character. I fell in love with Theodora's naivety and beauty, her caring nature, even her dress sense needed a world of its own. And those tears...

It is not often that I say this, regardless of the movie, but "Oz: The Great and Powerful" is one experience I wish to add to my blu-ray collection upon its release. Oz is quite simply one of the most bewitching lands in fiction.

---

Read More