Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Wrath of The Titans.
Directed by Johnathan Liebsman
Written by Dan Mazeau & David Johnson
Screen Story by Greg Berlanti, Dan Mazeau & David Johnson
Review #155
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for intense sequences of fantasy violence and action.
Runtime: 99 min
Cast
Sam Worthington ... Perseus
Liam Neeson ... Zeus
Ralph Fiennes ... Hades
Édgar Ramírez ... Ares
Toby Kebbell ... Agenor
Rosamund Pike ... Andromeda
Bill Nighy ... Hephaestus
Danny Huston ... Poseidon
John Bell ... Helius
Over the years you all have read my incessant rants about the motion picture industry. Directed mostly at the utterly clueless people that run it. I can't seem to grasp why filmmakers insist on providing an audience with substandard products just because some money can be made. It sounds like I just cleared up my confusion. The almighty dollar reigns supreme in any business. Why should the movie business be any different? I'll tell you why.
Because the movie business has the ability to RECTIFY THEIR MISTAKES!!!! Most businesses can't or don't have that luxury.
When a film makes a lot of money but is ravaged by critics and the general public alike. An opportunity is given to them in the form of a sequel. Now conventional wisdom would dictate that if your crappy film made a ton of money. Wouldn't a better sequel do the same if not improve the till? That's the conventional wisdom approach. We all know when dealing with Tinseltown.
Conventional wisdom goes out the window the moment a sequel is greenlit.
Plot
Perseus braves the treacherous underworld to rescue his father, Zeus, captured by his son, Ares, and brother Hades who unleash the ancient Titans upon the world.
Oh man did this movie SUCK! I don't know where to begin. I'll start with the premise. Once again like in Clash of the Titans, the gods of Olympus require prayers from their followers in order to remain all powerful. This is by far the most absurd aspect of both films. I remember gods in other films being vengeful towards the people that failed or refused to worship them. Their power wasn't taken away. It was put on display to remind everyone that without them their lives would be meaningless. To emasculate a deity because someone stops praying to them is just ridiculous and lazy writing. This senseless plot device forces the humans to get back into action and that doesn't help the film either. This is caused by the very underdeveloped script.
If I had to describe Wrath of The Titans in one word it would probably be....lifeless.
The film just moves from scene to scene. Giving you no time to digest what just happened. The characters are all automatons just meandering along until the next beast needs to be slayed. The script gives none of these characters any depth or structure. Why is that you ask? Because you were expected to remember these people from the first film. Again just lazy. The greatest crime committed by this film is the very predictable and just idiotic switcheroo at the end. Zeus and Hades were and always have been bitter enemies. Clash of The Titans did a piss poor job representing that. It's even worse here. Then they fight along side each other in the hopes of stopping the titan Kronos.
WHAT????
This leads to another example of paycheck writing. All throughout this train wreck of a film, the gods constantly pontificate that they can't defeat Kronos at full strength. With their diminished capacities due to the "UGH" lack of prayer, they don't stand a chance. So what happens? Zeus and Hades both on the verge of death muster just enough juice to give dear old dad a slap or two. Just enough for Perseus to deal the final blow. Are you kidding me? You can't tell us that the gods are powerless against the titan in one breath. Then in the next breath show the gods getting their shots in against the titan.
For a while I was wondering if Michael Bay was involved with this project. Since he is the unbridled master of destroying popular franchises and making you hate what you used to love as a kid.
There were a couple of positives but I won't bother getting into them. Firstly, this film doesn't deserve any positive acclaim. No matter what form it comes in. Secondly, it won't help the score or my recommendation. I can't express into words my gigantic disappointment with this film. These guys screwed the pooch with Clash and didn't learn their lesson with Wrath. I'm sure most of you will see this film and I'm sure it will make enough money to make the powers that be happy. That's what makes me sad. When a group of people can't get a story right from source material that's already awesome enough as is. You're in for a world of hurt.
At least I was watching this. I'm going to watch the 1981 Clash of The Titans now and try to forget that this experience never happened.
On the 5 star scale. Wrath of The Titans gets the goose egg. 0 stars. With a "For The Love of God Stay Home!" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Project X
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Project X.
Directed by Nima Nourizadeh
Written by Matt Drake & Michael Bacall
Screen Story by Michael Bacall
Review #154
MPAA Rating: R for crude and sexual content throughout, nudity, drugs, drinking, pervasive language, reckless behavior and mayhem. All involving teens.
Runtime: 88 min
Cast
Thomas Mann ...Thomas
Oliver Cooper ...Costa
Jonathan Daniel Brown ...JB
Dax Flame ...Dax
Kirby Bliss Blanton ...Kirby
Brady Hender ...Everett - Security Guard
Nick Nervies ...Tyler
Alexis Knapp ...Alexis
I wonder what Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez must be thinking right now. If they have any idea what they've started.
For those of you who don't know who these guys are. They are the creators of The Blair Witch Project. Their fresh take on the horror/ghost story not only revolutionized the genre, it spawned several attempts to recapture their success. With films like Cloverfield and the Paranormal Activity series, the found footage genre has been flooding the cinema in recent years. Those are the successful ones. 2012 has given us 2 films applying the same presentation tactic but going a different route with genre. Chronicle gave us a take on what the found footage style would look like when dealing with superheroes and here with Project X we get the high school party scene. Right off the bat I'm going to say that employing the found footage style to a party film is just a stupid idea. Does that mean I didn't like the film?
Nope. Quite the contrary actually.
Plot
3 high school seniors throw a birthday party to make a name for themselves. As the night progresses, things spiral out of control as word of the party spreads.
At first glance the premise didn't seem possible or workable. The writers did a good job of proving me wrong for most of the film. When you are dealing with party films there are three aspects that must be part of the mix in order for it to work. Drinks, drugs and sex. Project X covers those bases extremely well. The problem with the film is that in certain spots the found footage style just doesn't fly and it feels forced. This is most evident when the guys are at school trying to promote the party. Then the film does something pretty smart. They change video sources. Since kids who don't have jobs have I Phones, the movie goes from the main camera to other sources of the party coverage. Camera phones, police cameras etc. This was a very clever way to switch things up and change the dynamic between the party and the main camera.
Of course none of this matters unless the cast pulls off the performances. Again, for the most part this was a success. Project X has no problem "borrowing" some ideas from a great party movie Superbad. This is obvious with the 3 main characters. Thomas, Costa and JB. They resemble their Superbad counterparts, Evan, Seth and McLovin respectably. It's not a carbon copy portrayal but you can get the feeling that the inspiration for these kids came from there. This was a good thing cause it helped the flow and tone of the movie with Costa being the star. He's got the funniest lines and played the wannabe gangsta with the right amount of balance to his regular high school kid. The film does a nice job giving each of the 3 amigos their due screen time and it plays well.
The only gripe I had was the film tried to inject some of the typical rom com crap that some of these party films have. This mostly revolves around Thomas and his quandary involving some women. These characters are always cookie cutter and for a movie like this with a premise like this, that storyline just didn't fit at all. Thankfully not a lot of time is spent on it otherwise we would be dealing with a major flaw. Otherwise, Project X does a nice job keeping things on an even keel. They promised craziness and it didn't disappoint. Trust me. You've never seen out of control like this. It was fun.
On the 5 star scale. Project X gets 3.5 stars with a "Go See It!" Recommendation.
I realize that this film is out already and possibly not playing anymore around you. But if you have a chance to check it out, give it a shot. If not wait for Netflix. You'll like it.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Wrath of The Titans.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Project X.
Directed by Nima Nourizadeh
Written by Matt Drake & Michael Bacall
Screen Story by Michael Bacall
Review #154
MPAA Rating: R for crude and sexual content throughout, nudity, drugs, drinking, pervasive language, reckless behavior and mayhem. All involving teens.
Runtime: 88 min
Cast
Thomas Mann ...Thomas
Oliver Cooper ...Costa
Jonathan Daniel Brown ...JB
Dax Flame ...Dax
Kirby Bliss Blanton ...Kirby
Brady Hender ...Everett - Security Guard
Nick Nervies ...Tyler
Alexis Knapp ...Alexis
I wonder what Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez must be thinking right now. If they have any idea what they've started.
For those of you who don't know who these guys are. They are the creators of The Blair Witch Project. Their fresh take on the horror/ghost story not only revolutionized the genre, it spawned several attempts to recapture their success. With films like Cloverfield and the Paranormal Activity series, the found footage genre has been flooding the cinema in recent years. Those are the successful ones. 2012 has given us 2 films applying the same presentation tactic but going a different route with genre. Chronicle gave us a take on what the found footage style would look like when dealing with superheroes and here with Project X we get the high school party scene. Right off the bat I'm going to say that employing the found footage style to a party film is just a stupid idea. Does that mean I didn't like the film?
Nope. Quite the contrary actually.
Plot
3 high school seniors throw a birthday party to make a name for themselves. As the night progresses, things spiral out of control as word of the party spreads.
At first glance the premise didn't seem possible or workable. The writers did a good job of proving me wrong for most of the film. When you are dealing with party films there are three aspects that must be part of the mix in order for it to work. Drinks, drugs and sex. Project X covers those bases extremely well. The problem with the film is that in certain spots the found footage style just doesn't fly and it feels forced. This is most evident when the guys are at school trying to promote the party. Then the film does something pretty smart. They change video sources. Since kids who don't have jobs have I Phones, the movie goes from the main camera to other sources of the party coverage. Camera phones, police cameras etc. This was a very clever way to switch things up and change the dynamic between the party and the main camera.
Of course none of this matters unless the cast pulls off the performances. Again, for the most part this was a success. Project X has no problem "borrowing" some ideas from a great party movie Superbad. This is obvious with the 3 main characters. Thomas, Costa and JB. They resemble their Superbad counterparts, Evan, Seth and McLovin respectably. It's not a carbon copy portrayal but you can get the feeling that the inspiration for these kids came from there. This was a good thing cause it helped the flow and tone of the movie with Costa being the star. He's got the funniest lines and played the wannabe gangsta with the right amount of balance to his regular high school kid. The film does a nice job giving each of the 3 amigos their due screen time and it plays well.
The only gripe I had was the film tried to inject some of the typical rom com crap that some of these party films have. This mostly revolves around Thomas and his quandary involving some women. These characters are always cookie cutter and for a movie like this with a premise like this, that storyline just didn't fit at all. Thankfully not a lot of time is spent on it otherwise we would be dealing with a major flaw. Otherwise, Project X does a nice job keeping things on an even keel. They promised craziness and it didn't disappoint. Trust me. You've never seen out of control like this. It was fun.
On the 5 star scale. Project X gets 3.5 stars with a "Go See It!" Recommendation.
I realize that this film is out already and possibly not playing anymore around you. But if you have a chance to check it out, give it a shot. If not wait for Netflix. You'll like it.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Wrath of The Titans.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
The Hunger Games
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is The Hunger Games.
Directed by Gary Ross.
Written by Gary Ross, Suzanne Collins & Billy Ray
Based on the novel The Hunger Games. Written by Suzanne Collins
Review #153
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for intense violent thematic material and disturbing images - all involving teens.
Runtime: 142 min
Cast
Stanley Tucci ...Caesar Flickerman
Wes Bentley ...Seneca Crane
Jennifer Lawrence ...Katniss Everdeen
Willow Shields ...Primrose Everdeen
Liam Hemsworth ...Gale Hawthorne
Elizabeth Banks ...Effie Trinket
Josh Hutcherson ...Peeta Mellark
Woody Harrelson ... Haymitch Abernathy
Lenny Kravitz ... Cinna
Donald Sutherland ... President Snow
May has been historically the month that kicks off the summer blockbuster season. Of course there are a few films that for whatever reason release one of their tent pole films earlier. Whether it's fear of competition. Which is a lame reason in my opinion. Or lack of competition. Some of these "big" movies come out and steal the show. The Hunger Games apparently banked on capitalizing on the lack of competition.
It paid off in more ways than one.
Plot
Set in a future where the Capitol selects a boy and girl from the twelve districts to fight to the death on live television, Katniss Everdeen volunteers to take her younger sister's place for the latest match.
Based on a VERY popular trilogy of young adult books. The Hunger Games tackles some very ADULT themes. The biggest being showcasing a sadistic society that sacrifices children for entertainment. The film does very little to give you a precursor to what you're about to see. I'm not sure if it's assumed that you read the books or know someone who did. You get the always popular opening monologue explaining as quickly as possible how the hunger games were formed as a way to keep the rebel districts in line after their rebellion against the capitol. That's about it. Normally that tactic doesn't work. In this case it does because there was so much more to get to that you don't want to waste time with unnecessary exposition.
Having not read the books I had no preconceived expectations. Early on I was getting the sense of another failed adaptation. Then after the children are picked and sent to the capitol for presentation and training. The Hunger Games takes off. The film forces you to identify and feel for these poor classes of people who are forced to relinquish their kids in order to maintain their existence. It becomes something that is just accepted. It makes you think what society would allow this. It makes you feel compassion towards the "tributes" as they are called while feeling disdain for the people responsible for sending them to their deaths for sport. This is what The Hunger Games displays very astutely when Katniss and Peeta are in the capitol. They experience first hand the instant change of life when they are pampered in every possible way while in the capitol. They get new clothing, eat lavish food, live in luxury and are presented as celebrities. Then in the blink of an eye it's all gone because it's time to fight.
Fight and die.
This is best captured masterfully by Jennifer Lawrence when the games are about to begin. Just before she's transported to the chute that will take her among the other competitors she has a moment with Cinna, one of her trainers. He gives her a few words of encouragement and sends her off. As this is happening you can hear a countdown in the background. When Katniss gets in the pod with about 10 seconds to go she turns and gives Cinna a blood curdling look of fear. The reality hits her hard in the face. This could very well be the last person she ever sees. This could be the last day of her life. That stare for some reason got to me. I can't explain why. It just did. That scene was crafted and performed very well. It captured the exact reaction and emotion intended.
After that it's game time and The Hunger Games pulls no punches in that department. The opening scramble after the final tick of the clock goes off plays like a kinetic ballet of violence. Some of the kids run for the woods, some head for the pile of weapons and supplies. In this mad dash, kids are getting picked off left and right. I was very curious how they were going to pull this off. This film clearly deals with the subject of children of various ages being forced to fend for themselves. With only 1 winner emerging victorious, how would the film present the death of these kids. It was presented with a very delicate but brutal balance. It was well done. Not too gratuitous but obvious enough to get the point across.
The Hunger Games really scores after the initial melee. The calm after the storm if you will. You get a chance to catch your breath and experience Katniss' adjustment to her new world and what it will take to survive. It's here where the film has it's heart. You feel for Katniss and her plight. Dealing with injury, starvation and avoiding the other district tributes. After some predictable character deaths the film reaches it's climax with a very satisfying spin towards the capitol and the hunger games themselves. As I was watching this I kept asking myself. "Why don't the people just rebel again against the capitol?" They are clearly against what the hunger games represent and the oppression the capitol can apply to the the districts. The answer is simple.
That's what sequels are for.
On the 5 star scale. The Hunger Games gets 4 stars with a "Worth Every Penny" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is The Hunger Games.
Directed by Gary Ross.
Written by Gary Ross, Suzanne Collins & Billy Ray
Based on the novel The Hunger Games. Written by Suzanne Collins
Review #153
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for intense violent thematic material and disturbing images - all involving teens.
Runtime: 142 min
Cast
Stanley Tucci ...Caesar Flickerman
Wes Bentley ...Seneca Crane
Jennifer Lawrence ...Katniss Everdeen
Willow Shields ...Primrose Everdeen
Liam Hemsworth ...Gale Hawthorne
Elizabeth Banks ...Effie Trinket
Josh Hutcherson ...Peeta Mellark
Woody Harrelson ... Haymitch Abernathy
Lenny Kravitz ... Cinna
Donald Sutherland ... President Snow
May has been historically the month that kicks off the summer blockbuster season. Of course there are a few films that for whatever reason release one of their tent pole films earlier. Whether it's fear of competition. Which is a lame reason in my opinion. Or lack of competition. Some of these "big" movies come out and steal the show. The Hunger Games apparently banked on capitalizing on the lack of competition.
It paid off in more ways than one.
Plot
Set in a future where the Capitol selects a boy and girl from the twelve districts to fight to the death on live television, Katniss Everdeen volunteers to take her younger sister's place for the latest match.
Based on a VERY popular trilogy of young adult books. The Hunger Games tackles some very ADULT themes. The biggest being showcasing a sadistic society that sacrifices children for entertainment. The film does very little to give you a precursor to what you're about to see. I'm not sure if it's assumed that you read the books or know someone who did. You get the always popular opening monologue explaining as quickly as possible how the hunger games were formed as a way to keep the rebel districts in line after their rebellion against the capitol. That's about it. Normally that tactic doesn't work. In this case it does because there was so much more to get to that you don't want to waste time with unnecessary exposition.
Having not read the books I had no preconceived expectations. Early on I was getting the sense of another failed adaptation. Then after the children are picked and sent to the capitol for presentation and training. The Hunger Games takes off. The film forces you to identify and feel for these poor classes of people who are forced to relinquish their kids in order to maintain their existence. It becomes something that is just accepted. It makes you think what society would allow this. It makes you feel compassion towards the "tributes" as they are called while feeling disdain for the people responsible for sending them to their deaths for sport. This is what The Hunger Games displays very astutely when Katniss and Peeta are in the capitol. They experience first hand the instant change of life when they are pampered in every possible way while in the capitol. They get new clothing, eat lavish food, live in luxury and are presented as celebrities. Then in the blink of an eye it's all gone because it's time to fight.
Fight and die.
This is best captured masterfully by Jennifer Lawrence when the games are about to begin. Just before she's transported to the chute that will take her among the other competitors she has a moment with Cinna, one of her trainers. He gives her a few words of encouragement and sends her off. As this is happening you can hear a countdown in the background. When Katniss gets in the pod with about 10 seconds to go she turns and gives Cinna a blood curdling look of fear. The reality hits her hard in the face. This could very well be the last person she ever sees. This could be the last day of her life. That stare for some reason got to me. I can't explain why. It just did. That scene was crafted and performed very well. It captured the exact reaction and emotion intended.
After that it's game time and The Hunger Games pulls no punches in that department. The opening scramble after the final tick of the clock goes off plays like a kinetic ballet of violence. Some of the kids run for the woods, some head for the pile of weapons and supplies. In this mad dash, kids are getting picked off left and right. I was very curious how they were going to pull this off. This film clearly deals with the subject of children of various ages being forced to fend for themselves. With only 1 winner emerging victorious, how would the film present the death of these kids. It was presented with a very delicate but brutal balance. It was well done. Not too gratuitous but obvious enough to get the point across.
The Hunger Games really scores after the initial melee. The calm after the storm if you will. You get a chance to catch your breath and experience Katniss' adjustment to her new world and what it will take to survive. It's here where the film has it's heart. You feel for Katniss and her plight. Dealing with injury, starvation and avoiding the other district tributes. After some predictable character deaths the film reaches it's climax with a very satisfying spin towards the capitol and the hunger games themselves. As I was watching this I kept asking myself. "Why don't the people just rebel again against the capitol?" They are clearly against what the hunger games represent and the oppression the capitol can apply to the the districts. The answer is simple.
That's what sequels are for.
On the 5 star scale. The Hunger Games gets 4 stars with a "Worth Every Penny" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Safe House
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Safe House.
Directed by Daniel Espinosa.
Written by David Guggenheim
Review #152
MPAA Rating: R for strong violence throughout and some language.
Runtime: 115 min
Cast
Denzel Washington ...Tobin Frost
Ryan Reynolds ...Matt Weston
Vera Farmiga ...Catherine Linklater
Brendan Gleeson ...David Barlow
Sam Shepard ...Harlan Whitford
Rubén Blades ...Carlos Villar
Nora Arnezeder ...Ana Moreau
Robert Patrick ...Daniel Kiefer
Liam Cunningham ...Alec Wade
Joel Kinnaman ...Keller
What's up everybody! I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaack! After 3 months laid up in hospital rooms and bedrest, I have returned to my passion. I have to say it's great to be back writing. I missed it and I hope you all missed me. Even if you haven't just lie to me. I could use the ego boost.
OK. On to the business at hand.
Spy films have always been an intriguing genre. The mystery and drama surrounding a well weaved tale of espionage can mystify and entertain like no other. There have been countless espionage films featuring iconic characters. We instantly refer to James Bond and his many characterizations. The newer films have jettisoned the campy version for a more darker realistic approach. This in my opinion was a direct response to the Jason Bourne franchise. Prior to the release of Casino Royale. The Bourne Identity and The Bourne Ultimatum were out in full view. Those films gave audiences a no nonsense look at what a spy film can and should be. My point is that since the Bourne films there hasn't been a spy film that has recaptured the rugged realism it gave us. Safe House tried it's hardest to be that next entry.
They needed to try harder.
Plot
A young CIA agent is tasked with looking after a fugitive in a safe house. But when the safe house is attacked, he finds himself on the run with his charge.
The movie starts off with some character development and introduction then just seems to drone on. My initial opinion of Safe House was pretty positive until I noticed the typical formula for films of this nature. There's some dialogue to move the story along. Then there's a chase or fight or both. Then there's the calm after the action beat.
Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Safe House was nothing more than a run of the mill action thriller which involved government agents and corruption. There's absolutely NOTHING new here. Guggenheim took the playbook from other substandard spy films and followed the blueprint to the letter of the law. The only difference here was the cast was filled with some impressive talent. I was surprised that a group of pretty good actors signed on for this retread type of action film.
And speaking of the action. It was probably the worst I've seen in a very very long time. Poorly constructed, shot, choreographed and edited. And this is the worst part....it was redundant. All the action scenes looked and felt like it's predecessor. That's never good when you're making an action film. It's beyond imperative that your action beats contain some form of variety or originality. I say this realizing that there's only so much you can so with car chases, gun fights and hand to hand combat. However, that doesn't mean that all of your scenes have to mimic the previous ones. There was no originality or freshness to the action. It was too whimsical and poorly executed.
You combine that with a paper thin, highly predictable plot and you get Safe House. The promise was there for this one to be pretty good. Sadly just like so many of it's kin. The film broke it's promise.
On the 5 star scale. Safe House gets 1 star. With a "Save The Loot" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is. The Hunger Games and The Raid: Redemption.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
Today's review is Safe House.
Directed by Daniel Espinosa.
Written by David Guggenheim
Review #152
MPAA Rating: R for strong violence throughout and some language.
Runtime: 115 min
Cast
Denzel Washington ...Tobin Frost
Ryan Reynolds ...Matt Weston
Vera Farmiga ...Catherine Linklater
Brendan Gleeson ...David Barlow
Sam Shepard ...Harlan Whitford
Rubén Blades ...Carlos Villar
Nora Arnezeder ...Ana Moreau
Robert Patrick ...Daniel Kiefer
Liam Cunningham ...Alec Wade
Joel Kinnaman ...Keller
What's up everybody! I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaack! After 3 months laid up in hospital rooms and bedrest, I have returned to my passion. I have to say it's great to be back writing. I missed it and I hope you all missed me. Even if you haven't just lie to me. I could use the ego boost.
OK. On to the business at hand.
Spy films have always been an intriguing genre. The mystery and drama surrounding a well weaved tale of espionage can mystify and entertain like no other. There have been countless espionage films featuring iconic characters. We instantly refer to James Bond and his many characterizations. The newer films have jettisoned the campy version for a more darker realistic approach. This in my opinion was a direct response to the Jason Bourne franchise. Prior to the release of Casino Royale. The Bourne Identity and The Bourne Ultimatum were out in full view. Those films gave audiences a no nonsense look at what a spy film can and should be. My point is that since the Bourne films there hasn't been a spy film that has recaptured the rugged realism it gave us. Safe House tried it's hardest to be that next entry.
They needed to try harder.
Plot
A young CIA agent is tasked with looking after a fugitive in a safe house. But when the safe house is attacked, he finds himself on the run with his charge.
The movie starts off with some character development and introduction then just seems to drone on. My initial opinion of Safe House was pretty positive until I noticed the typical formula for films of this nature. There's some dialogue to move the story along. Then there's a chase or fight or both. Then there's the calm after the action beat.
Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Safe House was nothing more than a run of the mill action thriller which involved government agents and corruption. There's absolutely NOTHING new here. Guggenheim took the playbook from other substandard spy films and followed the blueprint to the letter of the law. The only difference here was the cast was filled with some impressive talent. I was surprised that a group of pretty good actors signed on for this retread type of action film.
And speaking of the action. It was probably the worst I've seen in a very very long time. Poorly constructed, shot, choreographed and edited. And this is the worst part....it was redundant. All the action scenes looked and felt like it's predecessor. That's never good when you're making an action film. It's beyond imperative that your action beats contain some form of variety or originality. I say this realizing that there's only so much you can so with car chases, gun fights and hand to hand combat. However, that doesn't mean that all of your scenes have to mimic the previous ones. There was no originality or freshness to the action. It was too whimsical and poorly executed.
You combine that with a paper thin, highly predictable plot and you get Safe House. The promise was there for this one to be pretty good. Sadly just like so many of it's kin. The film broke it's promise.
On the 5 star scale. Safe House gets 1 star. With a "Save The Loot" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is. The Hunger Games and The Raid: Redemption.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)