Summer Movies 2009
Somehow, I actually managed to see the first big four films of the Summer 09 movie season. I was only anticipating two of them but since I've seen all four... allow me to rant and rave about them.
First up, "Wolverine," or, more correctly: "X-Men Origins: Wolverine." I have been of the opinion that, aside from Wolverine, Hugh Jackman has yet to deliver on the "movie star" appeal. "Van Helsing" was a joke, the few romantic comedies of his did not do well, and don't even get me started on "Australia." Did anyone see this film? But, as the snarling, savage mutant Canadian, he shines. The main problem with this film is that Wolverine's origins, more or less, have already been covered by the first three X-Men films. This film glosses over the early years (decades) of Wolverine's life, telling much his pre-adamantium existence in the opening titles sequence of the film. The whole Weapon X mythos is intertwined with a convoluted love/revenge story and one gets the feeling that the entire purpose of the film is to justify spending so much time on Wolverine, something that didn't happen in the X-Men films. Yes, I'm being sarcastic. Hugh Jackman makes a good Wolverine. I'm not saying he doesn't. But I think it would've been interesting to watch a young James Howlett discovering not only his claws but also his incredible healing powers. But, if we did this, we wouldn't be seeing Hugh Jackman so, there goes that idea.
Honestly, the only reason I wanted to see this film is because Remy LeBeau was finally going to show up. The sexy Cajun mutant shows up as a piece to the puzzle of the "mystery" and saves the day. It was nice to see Gambit, however briefly it was. And, although I personally would've enjoyed Josh Holloway (Sawyer, "Lost") in the role, Taylor Kitsch did just fine.
Second, the return of "Star Trek." As I explained to a friend, my first love was Star Trek but I lost my heart to Star Wars. So, although I am a huge Star Wars fan, I will always have a soft spot for the crew of the USS Enterprise. It had been rather disappointing to watch the film franchise go down the tubes. The last two films were horrendous. (And people bash the Star Wars prequels? Please! Did anyone even see "Nemesis?" I did. It stank!) So, when J.J. Abrams announced he was retooling the original crew, I was excited. My only hope was that this film would not totally suck. I started to get excited when I saw the trailer, which I had to watch a couple of times because--that could not have been Winona Ryder! (It is... and yes, I did get a little misty-eyed... strange.)
"Star Trek" is a fantastic film. It's smart, funny, and down right fun! It's a fun film to watch, whether you are a Trekker or not. Chris Pine makes a decidedly sexy James Kirk. Karl Urban is brilliant as McCoy. But the truly sublime performance goes to Zachary Quinto. He is Spock. John Cho's Sulu is a delightful balance of first-time nerves and cocky self-confidence. Anton Yelchin plays Chekov with all the optimism of a seventeen-year-old. And Zoe Saldana makes for a smart, sexy Uhura. And yes, Nyota has always been Uhura's first name; it was never revealed on the original series but Nichelle Nichols often spoke of it at Star Trek cons. And whoever decided to go with Simon Pegg as Montgomery Scott is a genius. I love Pegg and I've always loved Scotty (Scotty and Spock being my Trek boys) and he's perfect. I've seen the film three times; it's just one of those fun films to watch, a definite Sunday afternoon flick.
Third, of course, is "Angels & Demons," based on Dan Brown's "prequel" to "The Da Vinci Code." (The book was written way before his megahit and I think it is actually superior to that one in terms of story and execution.) Retooled as a "sequel," Angels & Demons follows Professor Robert Langdon to Vatican City in search of the Path of Illumination. Dangerous Illuminati have kidnapped four cardinals on the eve of Conclave and have vowed to seek revenge on the Catholic Church in a final crushing blow. Can Langdon and the beautiful bio-physicist Vittoria Vetra find the clues and stop the murders in time?
I enjoyed the film version of "The Da Vinci Code" as much as I enjoyed the book. Anything about religion or history I have a hard time not enjoying. I think this film outshines TdVC just as the novel does. Perhaps the less controversial subject matter gave Brown more confidence and that translated to the filmmakers. Tom Hanks, though not my first or even second choice to play Langdon, does so effectively enough. He at least is approachable enough to be the well-liked professor of symbology and he did look quite good swimming those laps and no, I can't believe I just wrote that either. Ayelet Zurer is downright beautiful and plays Vittoria convincingly. If I didn't know she was actually Israeli, I would've assumed she was Italian. And, thankfully, the filmmakers dropped the romance subplot, which is the only weakness of the novel. The film takes us through Rome, through the inner workings and rituals of the Catholic Church and makes no judgments. It is merely telling a story, a thrilling tale of murder, ambition, and loyalty. And Ewan McGregor as the carmerlengo Patrick McKenna (a deviation from the novel's character, who is Italian) makes one want to re-enact some scenes from "The Thorn Birds," if you know what I mean. Ewan's a doll and he looks good in those priestly robes.
And, finally, there is "Terminator Salvation." I also had not planned on seeing this film until I learned that Linda Hamilton would be doing some voice-over work for the film and that Arnie would, somehow, be making an appearance. I did not see the third film until it showed up on HBO and I found it disappointing. This film is a much better film than that though it does lack the presence of Linda Hamilton's "Sarah Connor" character, the character that drove the first two films. Christian Bale is the adult John Connor, leading the resistance against the machines. However, his role is a supporting one to the main character, Marcus Wright, played by Sam Worthington. Marcus is a criminal who donates his body to science after he is put to death. He awakes after Judgment Day and makes his way to Los Angeles, where he sees the terminator machines up close and personal. Saved by a teenage Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin of "Star Trek"), Wright ends up in the hands of John Connor after Kyle and others are gathered up by the machines for "orderly disposal."
What saves this film is Christian Bale's authority, even when he struggles with doubt. A new infiltration unit has shocked him; it is something his mother never told him about. How can he fight it? Should he disobey orders from other resistance commanders to fire on the Skynet HQ even though he knows there are human prisoners inside? We follow him because he is John Connor and we know that it is John Connor who decided the fate of all humanity. He is the one who will defeat Skynet so even when he doubts, we do not. I won't give away any secrets but it is a satisfying climax and a surprising cameo from the current governor of California.
A couple of notes on these films: Ryan Reynolds needs to play more action heroes. He's just awesome. Moon Bloodgood is just a fabulous name and she has a fabulous look; she plays a pilot in Terminator. Anton Yelchin is competing with himself this weekend and though Terminator may make more money than Star Trek, I think Star Trek will win overall. Bryce Dallas Howard is competing with her father, Ron, but I think Angels & Demons is a better film, overall, than Terminator.
As far as scores go: loved Angels & Demons (listening to it as I write this) and Star Trek. Terminator was okay; occasionally weaving Brad Fiedel's classic Terminator themes into the new music. Wolverine's music was better than the film.
First up, "Wolverine," or, more correctly: "X-Men Origins: Wolverine." I have been of the opinion that, aside from Wolverine, Hugh Jackman has yet to deliver on the "movie star" appeal. "Van Helsing" was a joke, the few romantic comedies of his did not do well, and don't even get me started on "Australia." Did anyone see this film? But, as the snarling, savage mutant Canadian, he shines. The main problem with this film is that Wolverine's origins, more or less, have already been covered by the first three X-Men films. This film glosses over the early years (decades) of Wolverine's life, telling much his pre-adamantium existence in the opening titles sequence of the film. The whole Weapon X mythos is intertwined with a convoluted love/revenge story and one gets the feeling that the entire purpose of the film is to justify spending so much time on Wolverine, something that didn't happen in the X-Men films. Yes, I'm being sarcastic. Hugh Jackman makes a good Wolverine. I'm not saying he doesn't. But I think it would've been interesting to watch a young James Howlett discovering not only his claws but also his incredible healing powers. But, if we did this, we wouldn't be seeing Hugh Jackman so, there goes that idea.
Honestly, the only reason I wanted to see this film is because Remy LeBeau was finally going to show up. The sexy Cajun mutant shows up as a piece to the puzzle of the "mystery" and saves the day. It was nice to see Gambit, however briefly it was. And, although I personally would've enjoyed Josh Holloway (Sawyer, "Lost") in the role, Taylor Kitsch did just fine.
Second, the return of "Star Trek." As I explained to a friend, my first love was Star Trek but I lost my heart to Star Wars. So, although I am a huge Star Wars fan, I will always have a soft spot for the crew of the USS Enterprise. It had been rather disappointing to watch the film franchise go down the tubes. The last two films were horrendous. (And people bash the Star Wars prequels? Please! Did anyone even see "Nemesis?" I did. It stank!) So, when J.J. Abrams announced he was retooling the original crew, I was excited. My only hope was that this film would not totally suck. I started to get excited when I saw the trailer, which I had to watch a couple of times because--that could not have been Winona Ryder! (It is... and yes, I did get a little misty-eyed... strange.)
"Star Trek" is a fantastic film. It's smart, funny, and down right fun! It's a fun film to watch, whether you are a Trekker or not. Chris Pine makes a decidedly sexy James Kirk. Karl Urban is brilliant as McCoy. But the truly sublime performance goes to Zachary Quinto. He is Spock. John Cho's Sulu is a delightful balance of first-time nerves and cocky self-confidence. Anton Yelchin plays Chekov with all the optimism of a seventeen-year-old. And Zoe Saldana makes for a smart, sexy Uhura. And yes, Nyota has always been Uhura's first name; it was never revealed on the original series but Nichelle Nichols often spoke of it at Star Trek cons. And whoever decided to go with Simon Pegg as Montgomery Scott is a genius. I love Pegg and I've always loved Scotty (Scotty and Spock being my Trek boys) and he's perfect. I've seen the film three times; it's just one of those fun films to watch, a definite Sunday afternoon flick.
Third, of course, is "Angels & Demons," based on Dan Brown's "prequel" to "The Da Vinci Code." (The book was written way before his megahit and I think it is actually superior to that one in terms of story and execution.) Retooled as a "sequel," Angels & Demons follows Professor Robert Langdon to Vatican City in search of the Path of Illumination. Dangerous Illuminati have kidnapped four cardinals on the eve of Conclave and have vowed to seek revenge on the Catholic Church in a final crushing blow. Can Langdon and the beautiful bio-physicist Vittoria Vetra find the clues and stop the murders in time?
I enjoyed the film version of "The Da Vinci Code" as much as I enjoyed the book. Anything about religion or history I have a hard time not enjoying. I think this film outshines TdVC just as the novel does. Perhaps the less controversial subject matter gave Brown more confidence and that translated to the filmmakers. Tom Hanks, though not my first or even second choice to play Langdon, does so effectively enough. He at least is approachable enough to be the well-liked professor of symbology and he did look quite good swimming those laps and no, I can't believe I just wrote that either. Ayelet Zurer is downright beautiful and plays Vittoria convincingly. If I didn't know she was actually Israeli, I would've assumed she was Italian. And, thankfully, the filmmakers dropped the romance subplot, which is the only weakness of the novel. The film takes us through Rome, through the inner workings and rituals of the Catholic Church and makes no judgments. It is merely telling a story, a thrilling tale of murder, ambition, and loyalty. And Ewan McGregor as the carmerlengo Patrick McKenna (a deviation from the novel's character, who is Italian) makes one want to re-enact some scenes from "The Thorn Birds," if you know what I mean. Ewan's a doll and he looks good in those priestly robes.
And, finally, there is "Terminator Salvation." I also had not planned on seeing this film until I learned that Linda Hamilton would be doing some voice-over work for the film and that Arnie would, somehow, be making an appearance. I did not see the third film until it showed up on HBO and I found it disappointing. This film is a much better film than that though it does lack the presence of Linda Hamilton's "Sarah Connor" character, the character that drove the first two films. Christian Bale is the adult John Connor, leading the resistance against the machines. However, his role is a supporting one to the main character, Marcus Wright, played by Sam Worthington. Marcus is a criminal who donates his body to science after he is put to death. He awakes after Judgment Day and makes his way to Los Angeles, where he sees the terminator machines up close and personal. Saved by a teenage Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin of "Star Trek"), Wright ends up in the hands of John Connor after Kyle and others are gathered up by the machines for "orderly disposal."
What saves this film is Christian Bale's authority, even when he struggles with doubt. A new infiltration unit has shocked him; it is something his mother never told him about. How can he fight it? Should he disobey orders from other resistance commanders to fire on the Skynet HQ even though he knows there are human prisoners inside? We follow him because he is John Connor and we know that it is John Connor who decided the fate of all humanity. He is the one who will defeat Skynet so even when he doubts, we do not. I won't give away any secrets but it is a satisfying climax and a surprising cameo from the current governor of California.
A couple of notes on these films: Ryan Reynolds needs to play more action heroes. He's just awesome. Moon Bloodgood is just a fabulous name and she has a fabulous look; she plays a pilot in Terminator. Anton Yelchin is competing with himself this weekend and though Terminator may make more money than Star Trek, I think Star Trek will win overall. Bryce Dallas Howard is competing with her father, Ron, but I think Angels & Demons is a better film, overall, than Terminator.
As far as scores go: loved Angels & Demons (listening to it as I write this) and Star Trek. Terminator was okay; occasionally weaving Brad Fiedel's classic Terminator themes into the new music. Wolverine's music was better than the film.
Comments