Author: bernardovillela

Rewind Review: The Nutcracker in 3D

Posted on by bernardovillela

The Nutcracker in 3D as conceptualized by Andrey Konchaloskiy is a rather strange beast indeed. It’s the kind of film that is impossible to stop watching because despite all that you might have to say against it there is some element of charm, ambition, and brashness that keeps your eyes glued to the screen. Perhaps it is a symptom of the era of filmmaking we are currently living in, there are far too many “play it safe” moves made in film today from sequels, to remakes and generic storytelling. Now granted The Nutcracker has been told over and over again, however, none of them ever quite like this and that’s what you end up taking away from this film, like it or not, is a bold attempt at doing something truly unique and different.

What makes this story, or this retelling thereof, so unique? It is the spin placed on everything in this tale. It becomes a historical mishmash in which suddenly Albert Einstein is the children’s uncle, there is talk of Freudian psychology and of course the Rat King and his Kingdom are none other than the Nazis. Yet flying in this face of this seemingly are exotic flying machines and other-worldly motorcycles. Just to have the audacity to go and mix things that ought not necessarily mix is one thing but it goes further.

To use Tchaikovsky’s music extensively is to be expected and nearly mandatory. Whether or not your interpretation involves any form of dance or not his music has become much more synonymous with this story than E.T.A. Hoffman’s writing ever was. However, to add lyrics to his music is a decision that is dubious at best. Hearing that it is Tim Rice writing those lyrics gives you some hope but sadly they are some of the poorest most trite I’ve heard him compose and furthermore they rarely really work. It’s difficult to shoehorn lyrics into a symphonic score and this proves it. What makes the musical experience of this film even more frustrating is that there are parts in which you see songs that do kind of work and you wonder why all can’t but what makes it more frustrating is it needn’t be. There’s just something about this story, told as it is, that doesn’t make it conducive to music.

nutcracker_in_3d01

The performances show the kind of inconsistency that marks this film. There are those who leave you scratching your head and those that make it worth it. Amongst the head-scratchers is Nathan Lane. Why he was needed to barely sing in in one of the worst accents I’ve ever heard is beyond me. In the middle of the road is Frances de la Tour as the Rat Queen, her over-the-top insanity does grow on you as the tone of this film makes itself known. Making the film stay afloat are Elle Fanning as Mary and Charlie Rowe as The Prince, who is all too frequently absent because as the Nutcracker he is replaced by the voice of Shirley Henderson, who is incapable of sounding like anything other than Moaning Myrtle frrom the Harry Potter films. Her inability to mimic a boy’s voice not only brings this casting decision in question but made those portions of the film hard to bear.

What must be pointed out is that in terms of practicality this film is fantastic meaning in as many places where it could get shot practically it is. The rat-people wore prosthetics, there were many sets built and extras. The only things which were computer generated was what absolutely had to be which was nice to see.
The CGI when used is very effective because it is given more of chance to thrive by being surrounded by mostly real elements, making blending easier. To continue the art direction theme the costuming was also great at being both historically accurate but creative where they were allowed to be which is a nice and rare mix.

timthumb.php__1

It is not only the technical that works in this film, that is merely the most consistent element. As odd as the story is, even being rife with Nazi-symbolism, it does find an odd consistency in symbols and narrative flow such that production concerns and decisions in casting can be temporarily ignored and the story can hit you.

Perhaps the best example of this a scene where Max (Aaron Michael Drozin), the younger brother, discovers that despite being recruited by the Rat King (John  Turturro) he doesn’t want to destroy toys anymore. He lets out one of the better and realistic cries you’re likely to hear. It’s like something out of Disney’s Robin Hood in its authenticity.

As for the 3D it falls this far down in the pecking order because it truly is one of the more ineffectual jobs I’ve seen since it came back in vogue. There is little to no value added due to the fact that it’s in 3D. The image is clearer and sharper than many but the trade off is that there isn’t a tremendous amount of depth outward or inward added.

nutcracker_in_3d13

It’s a film that always has a sense of humor about it despite that you can call some of its decisions into question. It is a film that absolutely screams to be seen because it refuses to conform and it is likely to leave very few on the fence and that’s the most we can ask for, and the best kind of movie whether you like it or not, and for that I thank the makers of The Nutcracker in 3D.

5/10

Rewind Review – Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel

Posted on by bernardovillela

2007’s Alvin and the Chipmunks was one of the more surprising films of that year. This one, however, falls miserably flat in many ways. The main reason is that the plot is overly contrived. Of course, this isn’t War and Peace, however, have a contest in which a school’s music program can be saved, altruistic intention aside, and a situation where Alvin has to be in two places at once then combine that with the Chipettes not liking them, due to lies, and it all became a bit much.

Plot aside most of the actors who appeared live didn’t do this film any favors. In this part Jason Lee is only serviceable for being thrashed and when he does get injured it is funny even if he isn’t. Lee, however, isn’t there a lot. Who is there a lot as the stay-at-home loser is Zachary Levi who is a spectacular failure at trying to be over-the-top funny. The only saving grace is Wendy Malick as the school principal who is a closet Chipmunk fan and David Cross as the devious producer. The voice talents are great and it’s a shame there is only so much they can do.

All the students at the high school also seemed terribly old. Which begs the question: It’s a kids movie so where are the kids? It’s just the Chipmunks kids can relate to. Wouldn’t a great story instead be of a kid being able to have them live with him/her? This way there is much more identification from the audiences instead of just watching them frolic about a world of adult doofuses.

12548735382411170big

It was surprising to learn through the credits that the Chipettes have their own creator, which is surprising since their personalities are analogous to their male counterparts. It would’ve been nice if the film worked to differentiate them a bit but alas no. To this film’s credit the Chipettes did catch on to the lies they are being fed quicker than expected but still a little bit too late. Yet their introduction was good and their participation in this sequel is by no means what held it back.

In a film where all the music is going to be covers need we hear jokes or lines from other movies ad nauseum? All this kind of dialogue just adds to the contrivances and detracts from what is original and decent in the film.

The song choices in this particular film were better and more appropriate for the entire family. Thankfully it was the original “You Spin Me Right Round (Like a Record)” which was chosen and not the Flo Rida cover, this song is one of the standouts. It also seemed like less singing for those who can’t stand the squeakiness but are dragged to see it.

banner_183

It was also good that Alvin did get his comeuppance something that didn’t seem to happen nearly enough or as effectively on TV. While the child in this critic did enjoy several parts of this film there were ultimately too many things holding it back.

4/10

Mini-Review: Christmas Star

Posted on by bernardovillela

 

Christmas Star (2013)

This may not have been the straw that broke the camel’s back in regards to my tolerance for Hallmark’s formula, but it was the low ebb prior to having to call one quits early. Essentially what you have in this film is an unrealistic and highly predictable scenario, inadequate performances save by one given by the youngest cast member (Kyle Harrison Breitkopf), uncomfortable staging and glacial plot movement and add to that, for the most part, really grating country music stylings. It just fails in nearly all aspects.

2/10

Mini-Review: Rare Exports

Posted on by bernardovillela

Rare Exports

There isn’t much in the way of originality coming out of American horror films these days. If you want something different you’re better off going international specifically to Europe. Rare Exports is a Finnish film that tackles the Santa Claus in horror subgenre with style, humor and intelligence much in the way the Norwiegian film Dead Snow took on the Nazi zombie subgenre.

There is a good bit of folklore re-interpreted and made to be a modern horror tale with a few intentional chuckles along the way. There is some good make-up work and some really good performances out of the cast both young and old.

The only thing that holds this film back is after a while it stops progressing its narrative and danger quotient and just sort of stagnates. It never becomes uninteresting and has a nice button at the end it just slips in the latter part of the second act into the third.

It is, however, a brisk and fun watch that you should look for on video when it comes out.

6/10

Rewind Review: A Christmas Carol

Posted on by bernardovillela

When starting out a review of A Christmas Carol, a compulsory beginning should likely read that Robert Zemeckis is incredibly talented and has made many great films that you will never be able to take away from him. Amongst this critics favorites are Back to the Future parts I and II, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Forrest Gump and Contact. Now that list stops before the turn of the century. In the latter part of this decade it seems he’s been on a crusade, as a director, to be at the forefront of motion-capture technology.

Three films into this phase and the animation it seems is still not ready for primetime. The animation is not the only thing that lets the film down but it is a starting point and an important one. The fluidity of motion is just not there in the dance scene and it seems like a jittery video game rendition. The appearance of the characters is inconsistent. Bob Cratchit looks simian through most of his first scene. The characters look good with pronounced highlights or in scenes with very high contrast. Otherwise the artifice of it falls into an odd no-man’s land between live action and animation that isn’t very appealing. The technology has come quite a ways from The Polar Express but it’s not yet in its most desirable state.

The story at times takes a backseat to the technology, otherwise, why would you represent the Ghost of Christmas Past as a flame? It seemed like an overly-contrived way to experiment with lighting techniques in the new technology. Also, the technology allows you to use fewer actors because once you have a reading of their face you can manipulate it in post and have them interpret numerous roles none of which look anything alike.

jc1

This, however, is a double-edged sword it can be incredibly liberating as an actor and the modern day equivalent of wearing a mask but it also means fewer actors were hired for this film to fill the roles. Another effect of the technology is that if you make a bad casting decision it could be amplified by many roles. Jim Carrey plays eight roles in this film and in two of them he was not a great fit. Unfortunately, those two were Ebenezer Scrooge, where he neither sounds all that British or all that curmudgeonly, and the Ghost of Christmas Present where he goes way over the top especially when he laughs which is almost all the time.

It seems like for every step forward this film took it took two back. For every new twist added cleverly because they could through the animation there was something extraneous like Scrooge being shot across the moonlit sky that just didn’t need to happen. I won’t even digress into his being shrunk and sliding down the rooftop except to mention it there.

All the charm, spirit and brilliance that does exist in this story can be directly attributed to Charles Dickens and is not really amplified in any way either by the production or the players, good as some of them were. It’s also a little disingenuous to see this branded as Disney’s a A Chrismas Carol in the opening credits when Disney in 1983 created a short called Mickey’s Christmas Carol that in 26 minutes managed to be ever so much more moving and effective than this film so much so that it was nominated for an Academy Award as Best Animated Short.

Disney's Eine Weihnachtsgeschichte

A case in point about the execution of this film: the effectiveness of the closing line of the tale is completely undercut because all of a sudden it was decided that it would be a good idea to have Cratchit talk to the audience and recite verbatim the closing paragraph and then have Tiny Tim say “God bless us everyone.” The film is not so long that you couldn’t have continued watching Scrooge going around doing his good deeds and allowing that to happen naturally and visually without the “cut to the chase” treatment. It kind of lets the wind out of the sails of an experience that wasn’t all that emotionally satisfying to begin with. Don’t change the nature of the tale and the tempo at the very end just because you don’t want to run anywhere near 100 minutes.

Those who are going to see the the story for the first time will likely enjoy it. I just stress that there are other better versions out there. The only serviceable thing this adaptation does is to reintroduce the tale and maybe it will be read by many for the first time- for as literature it is a masterpiece and this film is nowhere near close.

4/10

Mini-Review: District 9

Posted on by bernardovillela

This is a film which deserves praise in several regards and is the kind of breath of fresh air that demands our attention. With that being said the originality within the tale both as sci-fi epic and as social commentary does not, in and of itself, make this film bulletproof.

The lead, Sharlto Copley, is tremendous in probably the tour-de-force turn of the year. The special effects are immaculate and couldn’t be faulted for a second. In terms of furthering the genre it did so in having the hero become the enemy of the people and in how it accomplished that feat.

Its social commentary and partially documentary style were also effective in telling its apartheid tale. Sci-fi at its best is more about humanity than beings from another planet.

d9-guards

However, the partial documentary style is one of the small issues with the film, and with a piece so strong small things are magnified. The first act is very heavy with the documentary angle giving much needed backstory and even a slight MacGuffin, but it vanishes and takes a very narrative approach even losing timecode stamps and caring less about where is this footage coming from in the context of the story. It took a while for the narrative switch to be noticeable but the doc approach could’ve been brought back once or twice in Act II just to tighten things up as it did drag a little.

Slow narrative pace is even harder to stomach when the jerky-handheld cinematography is a constant. The handheld is the one documentarian aspect that remains and may be a bit much for those prone to motion sickness.

District_9_3

The change in character and how his friends become his enemies and he must align himself with the aliens make it very much worth watching. The protagonist’s metamorphosis is realistically and compellingly rendered.

It is a unique moralistic sci-fi tale with great performances, biting and true commentary about humanity, politics and multinational corporations. It is definitely a must-see but by no means a masterpiece.

8/10

Mini-Review: Ghosts of Ole Miss

Posted on by bernardovillela

 

Ghosts of Ole Miss

If it were in anyway possible, it’d be interesting to examine this 30 for 30 entry in a vaccuum. The reason I say that is: as a film about the integration of Ole Miss with a unique subplot about the undefeated football team that played and was overshadowed by sociopolitical unrest on campus during that year, it’s intriguing. However, the film purports to examine the team and be a testament to the team, to memorialize the forgotten squad. While there are plenty of interviews with players about on campus events and quick chronicles of game events and results, the team becomes a subplot in a film supposedly mainly about them. The struggles of integrating the school ought not be overlooked, but when there’s little overlap between the tales aside from time and place structural balance becomes hard to find.

The film does very well to examine the cultural morass that many face, southerners in this case, that exists when you’re trying to balance pride, heritage and also acknowledging past failings and dark moments. Some of the voice over is very well-written and poetic in a way that seems unique to the south, as much as the music is lyrical and local. However, this personal connection also fights for time with the football team’s tale and the exposition of the events surrounding the integration. Ultimately, the film succeeds by giving you barely enough to get by on each angle, but it would’ve been better served by restructuring and/or delving further into each aspect.

6/10

Rewind Review: A Single Man

Posted on by bernardovillela

A Single Man is a film that thrives on Colin Firth’s performance. He is the titular character and thus the fulcrum upon which the entire film rests. At many times he is alone, more often than not though he is one on one with another scene partner and thus the cast must be exemplary to match him. Firth’s performance is not one of tremendous fireworks but one where we are allowed to get the occasional glimpse beneath the surface. It’s brilliant and true and the finest performance of the year, and was honored as such in Venice.

Accompanying Firth in a few of his more pivotal scenes is Julianne Moore. Moore doesn’t have a lot of screen time in this film but she uses it to her full advantage playing her character remarkably and in so little time breathing life into Charley. In a fascinating bit of turnabout she put on a British accent and is hardly distinguishable from Firth in authenticity.

Conversely Nicholas Hoult, who is British, plays an American and much more convincingly so than when he co-starred in The Weather Man. His scene opposite Firth in the bar was quite memorable and he was perhaps the perfect casting choice as the young man who gives our protagonist a glimmer of hope.

colin-firth-a-single-man

The cast of the film overall is exceptional and because all the scenes were of an intimate nature, in terms of emotion if not subject matter, all actors in parts large and small had to connect and play up to Colin Firth and they did so tremendously.

The edit of this film is likely to go unrecognized and thus we shall call attention to it here. Both aesthetically and technically it is a job very well done. With ease it manipulates our perception of reality on one occasion but more often than not it combines with the cinematography to give the perfect launching point for a flashback. One of the flashbacks being shot in black and white was also a very welcome touch.

The greatest tool at the disposal of the cineast is the ability for him to manipulate time. This film manipulates time brilliantly as we see virtually the entire story of this man’s adult life unfold itself over the course of a day. So much is learned so simply and quickly.

A-Single-Man-030

Having all of the events take place over the course of one day is also a great benefit to the film as it lends immediacy and urgency to even the most mundane of actions. As the day starts we think we see how it will end and makes every moment have that much more surpassing beauty because of it.

This is a film which is a subtle tragedy. In as much as the audience experiences the tragedy of events much more so than the characters involved. The film also leaves you wanting more and leaves you wondering what happened to characters after it faded to black for the last time.

10/10

Mini-Review: Alvin & The Chipmunks: Chipwrecked

Posted on by bernardovillela

 

Now in the interest of full disclosure, which I believe in, I will say “Yes, I am a Chipmunks fan.” These characters without question are divisive. There is no middle ground it seems you love them or you hate them. Being a fan I was surprised to have liked the first film (just barely) and very sorely disappointed in the second installment. Where I feel things went wrong the second time around wasn’t in the introduction of the Chipettes but in doing so spreading itself too thin amid myriad conventional plot devices. That’s not to say that this installment breaks ground with some unconventional plot machinations, however, it does combine a few old hat techniques creatively and it focuses heavily on the Chipmunks and the Chipettes and on their character. Furthermore, while maybe having fewer musical cues than before it functions more like a musical than the prior two installments seeking emotional veracity in spotting songs rather than literal locales. By having the Chipmunks and Chipettes pushed to extremes and assuming different characteristics than expected this is the first tale of the three that feels fully realized especially since it restrains Dave, who was overly-involved in the first two. It’s also interesting that Cross’ somewhat listless turn is somewhat elevated by his recent ranting.

7/10

Mini-Review: Pete’s Christmas

Posted on by bernardovillela

This film does feature a Groundhog Day like tale that is unusually, in a good way, heavy in montage and features a good cast Bruce Dern, Zachary Gordon, Bailee Madison and Peter DaCunha. However, given its trappings it doesn’t do anything to special with the formula and does, sadly, meander a bit through the second act taking too long to figure out what its ultimate path was aside from trying to improve how setpieces and tropes are handled.

5/10