Destiny in Love - A Quick Review of Slumdog Millionaire

What's it about?
Slightly over-hyped, but a good film nonetheless.

Slumdog Millionaire tells the tale of how a youth (Jamal) made it through the slums of India, and why he got on 'Who Wants to be a Millionaire?' where every answer to every question has a story to tell.

Destiny here is livened in the name of love.

Why the hype?
Tagged as the Feel-Good Film of the Decade, Slumdog Millionaire has bagged four Golden Globes in Motion Picture, Director, Screenplay and Music.

Who stars?
Dev Patel as Jamal
Anil Kapoor as Prem
Frieda Pinto as Latika

Who directed?
Danny Boyle (Trainspotting, 28 Days Later)

Notable crew
Simon Beaufoy, the writer behind Slumdog Millionaire who adapted the story from Vikas Swarup's novel, Q & A.
Christopher Dickens, the editor who stylishly brought the story to live by linking every scene brilliantly.
A R Rahman, the composer of the film's sound tracks, for without him the emotions of the film cannot be felt passionately.

Return to Innocence - A Review of Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea

Said to be inspired from Disney’s The Little Mermaid, Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea is Japanese animation master, Hayao Miyazaki’s next big work after the well-received Spirited Away in 2001 and Howl’s Moving Castle in 2004.
In Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea, his signature style of animating fantasy realms and children characters are on display once again.

Sosuke (Hiroki Doi), the boy lead in the film discovers a ‘goldfish’ trapped in a glass jar while playing by the seaside below the cliff.
He stays with his mum, Lisa (Tomoko Yamaguchi) above and atop it.
Sosuke shakes the jar forcefully to try and get the ‘goldfish’ out but the little ‘goldfish’ is stuck.
He then tries to pull it out but it just cannot come loose.
Sosuke then place the jar on the ground before smashing a small rock onto it, breaking it into pieces instantly while suffering a small cut on the finger.
He then checks inquisitively to see if the ‘goldfish’ is still alive.
As he observes it, the ‘goldfish’ reacts by licking the blood off his finger suddenly.
Excited, Sosuke quickly rushes back to the house and put the ‘goldfish’ in a small bucket of water in hope that it will survive.
It did and he named it ‘Ponyo’(Yuria Nara).

The above scene would signify what is to come for the remainder of the film.
It is of the interactions between Sosuke and Ponyo.
And it is one that Hayao Miyazaki did meticulously well in portraying.
He must have a keen sense of observation and understanding of how children behave before he depicts this chemistry of communication between the two main characters.
The behavior of the children would also extend into the rest of the film in their further encounters.

The affection between Sosuke and Ponyo grew as the film progresses from the moment Sosuke brought Ponyo to school in Lisa’s car.
The best moment came when the two were reunited after a brief separation when Ponyo’s father, Fujimoto (George Tokoro), a magical sea dweller recaptures the errant Ponyo before encapsulating her in a magic bubble with kind intention.

Fujimoto who was once human has grown to refer humans with disgust for polluting the sea and stealing its life.
But all Ponyo wants is to be human and be with Sosuke so for a second time she escapes, accidentally emptying his father’s precious store of magical elixir into the sea, creating a storm of tidal waves and engulfing the small town in the process.

What follows are the adventures of Sosuke and Ponyo in the flooded town.

Is there a happily ever after in this one?
Would true love prevail?
You find out.

Looking at the art in Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea, there appears to be a deviation from Miyazaki’s past works in terms of rendering.
It looks unfamiliar because the environment apart from the characters at play in every scene is not colored in the usual fashion as in Spirited Away (2001) and Howl’s Moving Castle (2004).
The aesthetical appeal is discounted from what appears to be color penciled drawings.
The objects and characters are also not as detailed as before.

This is peculiar if taken on face value but from the way the story is written and told, the possible explanation is that Miyazaki is allowing the audience to view the film with a child’s tint, yet allowing the adults to reminisce on a Japan when they were younger.
This move could have prevented prospective moviegoers, new to Miyazaki’s work to see it.
The trailer did nothing to promote Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea as well.
Taking the case to Japan however would be a different story as Miyazaki’s credential far than exceed any marketing technique.

In summary though, the whole did not equal to its parts.
Aside from Miyazaki’s ability to cast vivacious and animated characters, the film lacks elements of thrill and wonder when measured against previous works, resulting in a deficit of big screen presence.

The sparks of Ponyo and Sosuke failed to light up the film in a big way but moments of warmth, kindness, and love can still be found in recognizing the film as one that is not made for the kids, but of the kids who everyone is or once was.


Official sites:
Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea (Japanese)
Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea (English)

The Point of War - A Review of Red Cliff II

Red Cliff, the film by John Woo based on the epic battle of Romance of the Three Kingdoms is divided into two parts.
While the first was engaging in its depiction of such historical characters in Cao Cao, Zhuge Liang and Zhou Yu, the second is all about war itself, which can be a little daunting to some.
But that is just how war is.

You see, war is not about a spontaneous fight between two opposing parties.
It has nothing to do with sword wielding ‘cling clang’ or battle cries and fistfights.
The distinction has to be made since war is by far a larger context than a battle, although war itself consists many.
In Red Cliff II we will see what is at play when war is raged.
It cannot be pretty can it?
But it can as this is the romanticized version of history and on screen John Woo made it even prettier.

The cast is strong with Tony Leung Chiu-wai as viceroy Zhou Yu, Takeshi Kaneshiro as advisor Zhuge Liang and Zhang Fengyi as Cao Cao, to name just a few. The list is long.
A good cast will more often than not up the aesthetical appeal to a movie.
For the female audience, Tony Leung charms with his manly portrayal of Zhou Yu, and Takeshi Kaneshiro is always a pleasure to watch as he liven every scene with wit and humour.
For the male audience, it is the childlike yet seriousness of Zhao Wei as Sun Shangxiang, and Lin Chi-ling’s poise and compassion as Xiao Qiao that allures.

But can war really be pretty?
If you think that killing each other is a good way to express beauty then perhaps you can be on the same page as the tyranny Cao Cao.
In part 1, where the emphasis of battle was on land with a very elaborate tactic devised by Zhuge Liang, here in part 2 we witness the battle at sea, physically and psychologically.

Back to the main topic of war, it is crucial that victory must be sorted as numerous lives are heavily at stake, whether or not these lives are valued or not, be they as added numbers or as friends.
In war the emphasis is on strategies and tactics to win.
And on strategies and tactics, I guess we no doubt have to consult Sun Tzu’s The Art of War and also take reference to The 36 Stratagems.

I can refer that the epic battle of Red Cliff has two points that stood out when referenced to The Art of War and that is The Attack By Fire and The Use Of Spies.
The Art of War states that in every army, the five developments connected with fire must be known, the movements of the stars calculated, and a watch kept for the proper days.
In the movie, we see the wise advisor Zhuge Liang demonstrate this knowledge flawlessly.

Another decisive strategy in war is also the use of spies.
The reason is simple. In war neither of each side knows what the other is thinking, the numbers of men, and the formation of the army, exactly, so to gain intelligence to these knowledge gives those who have them the upper hand. Sun Shangxiang did so with the most risky and yet tricky tactic by infiltrating Cao Cao’s camp.
She did more than gathered military intelligence.
She also uncovered what is precious to humanity.

Recorded in the 36 stratagems is the use of the enemy’s own spy to sow discord in the enemy’s camp by Zhou Yu.
This famous move is of correlation to The Art of War where it is stated as having converted spies, getting hold of the enemy’s spies and using them for our own purposes.
In war all can be done, there can be no holds barred because any weakness can be exploited by the enemy.
Zhou Yu can be said to have brilliantly disposed off of Cao Cao’s main strategic threat because Cao Cao slain both his most dependable generals who are most versed in sea battles.

When 50,000 has to fight 200,000, who could blame Zhou Yu for such tactics, especially when Cao Cao first provoked by sending dead soldiers across to Zhou Yu’s side on wooden rafts, knowing that disease spread through this mean can greatly weaken his enemy.

The other account decisive of the battle of Red Cliff is the Chain Strategem, although modified by John Woo in its depiction, with the key in Lin Chi-ling’s character, Xiao Qiao.

It is interesting to sit through 141 minutes witnessing a romanticized version of John Woo’s Red Cliff.
Personally I didn’t feel that it was long, however to some who wanted to see a Lord of the Ring’s type battle on screen could be disappointed.

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War states that the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple before the war is fought.
The general who loses a battle makes but a few calculations before hand.
Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all!
It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.

The point of war however is that in war everybody loses.
This should be what John Woo’s Red Cliff is trying to tell us.
I agree wholeheartedly with water in my eyes.


Official website:
http://yule.sohu.com/s2007/chibi_22/

The Martial of Virtuosity - A Review of Ip Man

Foshan of Guangdong province, China, is famous for its martial arts, thanks in part to martial artist, Wong Fei Hung (1847-1924).
There are many movies made in the name of Wong Fei Hung, but on the mention of Ip Man (pronounced Eep Mun), our mind would no doubt draw a blank.
Who then is Ip Man and why would it be of interest for a movie to be made in his name then?

For a start, Ip Man (1893-1972) is the expert in the Wushu fighting style of Wing Chun, and is the master of the famous Bruce Lee.
As there has never been any previous film record of Ip Man, this film produced by Raymond Wong and directed by Wilson Yip will be the very first.

The movie opens and dates back to 1935 Foshan, with the city bustling with activities and various schools of martial arts are seen busy with the practice of their craft.
In the people’s mind however there would be only one martial artist who is the best.
He however would have no interest in opening a school to teach his art.
He is Ip Man, played by Hong Kong action star Donnie Yen.

Our introduction to Ip Man began on the day when Master Liu (Chen Zhi-Hui) visits Ip Man at his residence when the latter is having dinner with his wife and son.
Being the typical martial arts enthusiast that Master Liu is, he declined to leave when advised by Ip Man to come back at another time, choosing instead to stay and wait until Ip Man have finished his dinner.
He is eager to test his skills against Master Ip Man.
The mood here is not of hostility but of a light hearted and humorous fashion.
Ip Man even invited Master Liu to sit and have dinner with his family when he spots him restlessly waiting by the living room.
We see here the humble and modest character of the protagonist.

When the sparring finally got underway, it ended as swiftly as Ip Man’s strokes suggest.
Because in three strokes and a set of quick fists, he had Master Liu at his peril, well defeated yet without injury, as this was all but a friendly exchange in the spirit of martial arts.
The essence of Ip Man’s fighting style, Wing Chun, is characterized by its tall narrow stance with effectiveness demonstrated through speed and power.
It reminds of the time when Bruce Lee had to slow his punches down during filming, as they were just too fast for the cameras back then to capture.

In the world of martial arts, with all its attractiveness, it also brings with it the competitive nature of those who practice them.
With competitiveness taken the wrong way, things can go awfully wrong when all one wants to achieve is to have the other beaten so as to prove who the superior fighter is.
A thug in Kam Shan-chau (Fan Sui-Wong) later arrives and challenges the various schools, defeating their masters ruthlessly, until he came face to face with Ip Man.
Kam lost to Ip Man with a lesson he ought to have learn, only that he did not and left Foshan with only disgrace in his mind.
The people celebrate as they hail Ip Man the savior who brought glory to Foshan by sending the thug away.

The fight ends but the story have only just began, and with it a change of mood from lightness to heavy because war has broken.
The Japanese have seized Foshan.

What follows will be Ip Man’s struggles and challenges as he has to make ends meet for his family in the dreadful time of adversity.
It is here we see the true character of Ip Man, who has captured the hearts of the people of Foshan and their respect.
This is most notable among his friends in Chow Ching-chuen (Simon Yam), his son Chow Kong-yiu (Calvin Cheng), and Crazy Lam (Xing Yu).

To mistake this film, as one of just good versus evil is easy because in a movie that has a hero, there must be a villain.
There are a few characters here befitting of the role.
We have the Japanese general, Miura (Hiroyuki Ikeuchi).
We have the aforementioned thug, Kam Shan-chau.
We also have police officer turned interpreter, Li Chiu (Lam Ka-tung) who appears to be a traitor.
The film here however should not to be seen as a fight against evil but rather of the depiction of humanistic values that Ip Man himself would possess.

There are many meaningful messages encrypted in the various plots and subplots in this wonderful film that really is about virtues more than anything else.
As producer Raymond Wong would suggest on why the production team had chosen to make this film, it is that of really making a kung fu movie that is authentic and real, moving away from past attempts at glorifying and stylizing violence on screen.
The intention is to make a film that would reflect the spirit of Chinese kung fu, and what better than to portray it through the virtuous character of Master Ip Man.

I would have like to compare this film to Fearless aka Huo Yuan Jia (2006), starring Jet Li, which strings from a similar root, but at the very core, the approach is different.
While Fearless is written in a more dramatic nature, with a more compelling story and edited with a creative dimension, Ip Man is honest and direct because that is who our protagonist is.

What stood out for me in Ip Man is when he ponders in introspection about what use his training and expertise in Wing Chun all his years would come to.
It would appear that there is destiny waiting to be fulfilled.
And he would also influence those around him with what he has and even lead those who have been wrong to do right despite the pressure of circumstances, because to the very basis, it is the right thing to do in humanity.

History means nothing if its lessons are not learned.

The film also stars the stunning Xiong Dai Lin as Cheung Wing-sing, Ip Man’s wife, and I must also not forget to mention that the acclaimed Sammo Hung directs the action.


Official website:
www.ipman-movie.com

Miedy likes Wall-E

*I'm very happy to have Miedy writing the very first guest review here. We've been fighting to see who gets to watch Wall-E first and she won. LOL*

Whenever Pixar released a great movie, I always wonder whether the next one will be a disappointment. I've been asking the question since Finding Nemo (2003), but I found myself enjoying The Incredibles(2004) so much that I've been watching it over and over for God knows how many times. Perhaps Cars (2006) was not as entertaining but you got to admit that it is beautiful to watch so I will not consider it a disappointment as well.

Ratatouille (2007) however, brought back the Pixar we know. It is funny, adorable, smart and original so this time I decided to stop asking the same old question about whether the next film would fail. I don't want them to fail but I'm afraid now that I am so attached to their works that I would not be able to handle it if they do.

That is then when I first saw the trailer of their upcoming movie, Wall-E and felt a sense of excitement about it. It looked so promising. The trailer featured a robot that reminded me a little of ET (maybe it was because of its size and voice). The narrator said that Wall-E is the only one left on Earth. His duty is to clean up the Earth and I could imagine how lonely he must have felt. I felt sympathy and maybe a little sad towards him right away and from that day on I just couldn’t wait to see Wall-E in the theater. I even prayed that it would not be a disappointment. It has to be great.

When it finally hit the theaters I didn't get the chance to see it right away but I kept hearing people say positive things about it. Some of them mentioned that it is a movie that kids will find hard to follow and that had me a little worried because Pixar movies are usually kids friendly. Why is it different now?

But there I was sitting in front of the big screen, feeling excited, nervous and anxiously waiting to see the little robot that had captured my heart for months. I finally got to see Wall-E (Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-Class). He looks even smaller now as compared to the big abandoned city. Wall-E wakes up everyday to do his regular job without complaining. He cleans the garbage that the humans leave behind after they departed from Earth, with his own unique way. He appears like a kid at heart beaming with curiosity with the things around him. Later we learned that he was not actually alone as there was a little bug that kept following him.
The bug however appears more like a pet to him. It is something like the relationship between a man and his dog. But what Wall-E really wanted was a real friend.

At night, he would watch the video of the 1969 musical film Hello, Dolly! The video probably belongs to some of the garbage that he is supposed to "recycle" but had kept it as one of his personal collection among some of the other “valuable” things. We become aware that these are the activities he do everyday and every night for a very long time and to have a real friend is just like a fantasy that probably would never come true.

That was probably what life is to Wall-E until the day he discovered a seedling plant. He didn't know what it was but he decided not to destroy it. In fact, it even became part of his valuable collection.

But how was Wall-E to know that something would happen later that would change everything he ever knew…

A huge spaceship arrived and surprised Wall-E when it landed on Earth one day. Wall-E was terrified but being the curious little robot he is, he couldn't help but want to find out what was going on.
Then he saw EVE (Extraterrestrial Vegetation Evaluator), a female (there was no mention about EVE’s gender but judging from the voice and the way she moves we could tell right away) robot.

As compared to the old and rusty Wall-E, EVE looks so modern and high tech. Instead of walking, she flies around and even shoot laser. How cool is that?

Wall-E felt afraid and admiration towards her at the same time. Maybe it was too cheesy to imagine a love story between robots but the Pixar team knew how to do it the right way. Yes, they are robots but somehow you know you just want them to be together.

When Wall-E presented EVE with the plant he found, EVE took it and stores it inside her. But something went terribly wrong and she stopped moving. Wall-E got into a state of panic so when the spaceship came back to pick EVE up, he followed.

The ship brought them to Axiom, the place where the humans are living after abandoning Earth. Here is a place where the humans need not go to work because robots are doing everything for them. It was like as if the humans are vacationing on a cruise of eternity.
The humans here are extremely fat but why? Was it because all they ever do is eat and sleep all day long?

That is not the only mystery because you would also want to know why EVE went to Earth. What else will Wall-E discover from his trip?

This movie is directed by Andrew Stanton who also brought us Finding Nemo, and just like Nemo, Wall-E is charming and adorable. The difference is the lack of real dialogue in Wall-E. It makes sense because the story is created in a robot’s point of view. Having a robot that talks too much would ruin what I felt gave Wall-E its character. To me it is good enough knowing that they (the robots) can feel and have emotions. I wouldn’t have like it if Pixar characterized them too humanly. It would be like seeing a dog acting like a dog only that they can be portrayed as smart, but once dogs start to make coffee for their owner then that would be too much. I am glad Wall-E, EVE and all the robots are still robots.

After watching the movie I now understand why young kids (under 5 years old) may not enjoy Wall-E. This is because there is a lack of really funny jokes and slapstick scenes. The movie is better suited for older kids, teenagers and even adults. I didn’t mind the lack of dialogue. In fact it made me realize that a great story do not need well-written dialogue. Wall-E may only voice things like "Wow" or whistles when he sees something amazing, but Pixar did a wonderful job in having the audience understand his language. He's only a robot but Pixar was able to express emotions into his eyes. I could almost feel how he felt.

Wall-E is a movie that is great in every way. The characters, the scenes and the animation are perfect to me. I am 100% confident that the Oscar for best-animated picture will be going to Pixar. And to be honest I lost the interest to watch Kung Fu Panda or Space Chimps and maybe any other animation movies that are not by Pixar after watching Wall-E.

People kept saying that The Dark Knight should be nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Award but I felt that Wall-E deserves it more. I think this is the one time where the highest acclaim should go to an animated movie.
I mean, who other than Pixar deserves better? This is a company that brought us Toy Story (1995), Finding Nemo (2003), Monsters, Inc. (2001) and The Incredibles (2004).

You be your own judge.

Movie Review: The Incredible Hulk

Which is worse, turning into a monster in a state of anger or being separated with the love of your life?
When it comes to the Superheroes of the Marvel world, there really isn’t a choice.
In the case of The Incredible Hulk, his nightmare doesn’t stop with an altered physique or a broken heart, and it doesn’t end with finding that ideal pair of pants either.

Edward Norton plays Bruce Banner, a doctor working with the U.S Army researching gamma technology when things went terribly wrong in an experiment performed on himself.
After an over-exposure to the gamma rays, he turns into a destructive green monster with superhuman strength.
Destroying everything in an uncontrollable rage, he left his girlfriend Betty Ross (Liv Tyler) injured and fled to Brazil.
Now a fugitive, Banner is escaping the capture from General Ross (William Hurt) who wants him back under the pretence to avenge his daughter.
What the General really wants is to manifest Banner’s newfound powers into creating the ultimate weapon, the Super Soldier.

Following the hugely successful Iron Man played by the charismatic Robert Downey Jr, and the flop of Ang Lee’s 2003 version of Hulk, all eyes are on this film to revive the franchise.
Was it credible? This is The Incredible Hulk and it is indeed incredible.
It is two hours of continuous intense story telling right from the opening credits, which is well done with a sequence of flashbacks that leads us straight into the story.
I used the word “intense” because unlike the witty and humorous Iron Man, this is a film dealing with emotions of anger, despair and violence, hence the PG-13 (MPAA) rating.
It is a darker story compared to Iron Man or Spiderman, which feature a lot more light-hearted humour and fun.
If you’re familiar to the Batman franchise or the more recent Batman Begins (2005) and the up-coming July release of The Dark Knight (2008) then you will know what to expect.

The Incredible Hulk is brilliant in four parts with all of them distributed nicely in every quarter of total screen time.
In the first part we are re-introduced to Dr. Banner and the Hulk, and we see him seeking refuge in Brazil practicing meditative breathing to control his emotions that causes the undesirable monstrous transformation.
To keep alive, he works at a drink bottling plant doing the odd jobs while at the same time trying to find a cure to his gamma poisoned fate.
He was doing so with some help from a mysterious online friend.
To stay anonymous they use the names Mr Green and Mr Blue (guess who is which).
For a good period of about 6 months he had kept to his routine until he accidentally cut his fingers when fixing a switch at the bottling plant.
Unknowing to him, his blood dripped into one of the bottles that were later shipped into the United States.
That was how General Ross got the clue to his whereabouts and all hell breaks lose once again.

The next three parts will see Banner back in the states continuing his search for a cure, his encounters with his love and his enemies, and of course the finale battle with another equally strong but uglier monster known as The Abomination.
Hulk’s nemesis in this film is Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth), a veteran soldier with an unquenchable thirst for a good fight.
Like an arcade fighting game, Hulk will pitch himself against Blonsky in three rounds with the latter getting angrier and stronger with each fight.

What captivates in The Incredible Hulk is the way it is filmed.
Director Louis Leterrier from The Transporter (2002 & 2005) franchise and Unleashed (2005) did a fantastic job with the pacing of the film.
He kept the intensity of the film in check with emotional and fast paced action sequences that are certain to raise your heart rate and give you an adrenaline rush.
Luckily none of us are gamma poisoned.
The exchanges between Banner and Betty Ross are also equally heart felt.

The film also depicted the bad personalities of society.
General Ross is a classic example of those who make bad judgments and decisions in life one after the other and in the process hurting the one he loves the most.
Emil Blonsky is another who is just spoiling for a good fight for no good reason at all.

On a last note, the good thing is our green hero is someone who understands the fact that we cannot get rid of our temper by losing it.
That is my kind of hero, someone guided by conscience and good moral.
Maybe that is destiny for Dr. Banner who is given the power to turn into the Incredible Hulk who is described by the Dr. Stern (Tim Blake Nelson) in the film as perfect and god-like.

“Maybe you can control it,” says Betty Ross.
“But I don’t want to control it. I want to get rid of it,” says Banner.
But he cannot get rid of it and there can be no running from destiny.
A part of me says there is a Hulk in each of us.

Movie link: incrediblehulk.marvel.com

Movie Review: Kung Fu Panda

What do you get when you mix a panda with Chinese kung fu and animate it?
An animated panda that kicks butt you say?
Only that you wouldn’t expect it to be awesome! And that is what Dreamworks Animation SKG produced this summer of 2008, a movie so awesome you’ll be kicking yourself if you miss it.

Voiced by Jack Black from The School of Rock (2004) and Nacho Libre (2006) fame, Po the panda is the son of a noodle selling duck that loves nothing more than kung fu, but is stuck in a moment of pre-conceived reality.
It doesn’t make sense does it?
A panda and a duck are selling noodles?
The panda is the son of a what? Yes, son of a duck. Let’s put it this way, a panda is just a panda right?
Wrong. It is just like you are not you in a world governed by standards of what is to be and not to be.

Po loves kung fu and idolizes the Furious Five, Tigress (Angelina Jolie), Monkey (Jackie Chan), Mantis (Seth Rogen), Viper (Lucy Liu) and Crane (David Cross).
These five are the most well trained students of Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) and time came that a Dragon Warrior is to be chosen among them. To Shifu’s biggest disappointment, Oogway (Randall Duk Kim) did not choose any of the five and elected instead to believe in “accident”.
Po fell into the path of Oogway’s pointed finger, as he was about to pick the Dragon Warrior.
“There is no accident”, he tries to convince Shifu that it is destiny that Po shall be the Dragon Warrior.

No one believes that a fat, sloppy panda is going to be the one who will save the Valley of Peace from the evil Tai Lung (Ian McShane) of course, not even Po himself.
We’ll see how that changes when events unfold but not first without difficulty.
Shifu would discover that all is not what it seems and if it is not working, it probably is because he is not looking in the right direction.
This is just one of the messages that can be found in this wonderful film.
The filmmakers really want both the kids and the adults to take something meaningful from Kung Fu Panda.

As serious as they are in this aspect, the great thing they were able to create is really not to be too serious.
That’s how life is and the essence of a good life lies in happiness and to be happy is laughter.
There will be plenty and in all an hour and a half of screen time, I can safely say that you’ll laugh at least ninety times which is once every minute if not more.
Credit must go to Jack Black and the screenwriters for pulling this off.
You can just sense how much thought and effort they put in to make sure Kung Fu Panda turns out the way they want it to be in one simple word: AWESOME.

Toward the end of the film, there is one big important message for all of us.
The answer lies in the forbidden scroll that Tai Lung wants so much that he is willing to destroy everything in his way to get it.
It is also something that Shifu fought so hard to protect even without realizing what it is, and it will eventually lead to how Po becomes the real Dragon Warrior.

No idea what I’m talking about?
Fear not for you can go to www.kungfupanda.com, look in the Production section and under HEROIC LAST WORDS to understand it.

Don’t everybody just love kung fu fighting?

Movie Review: The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian is the sequel to The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.
The four children who discovered the magical world of Narnia in the first film find themselves magically transported back to the world they had left behind a year ago.
All has changed however as 1300 years in Narnia has passed.
What used to be a magical land is now a ruin.
Narnians are thought to be extinct and the land is ruled by a human race known as the Telmarines.
What purpose has Peter (William Moseley), Susan (Anna Popplewell), Edmund (Skandar Keynes) and Lucy (Georgie Henley) then?

The movie began with the telling of Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) escaping death from a murder attempt from his uncle, Miraz (Sergio Castellitto) who wants only the throne for his newly born son.
Fleeing into the woods with the possession of a magical horn in hand, Prince Caspian was forced to blow the horn in desperation as his perpetrators closed down on him.
It is this summoning by the horn that brought the four children back to Narnia, the land where they were Kings and Queens.
Their adventure this time would be to help Prince Caspian regain his rightful throne from Miraz and to return the Narnians their land.

Not having watched the first film and without any knowledge of the characters, it was a little confusing at the start to piece out what was happening.
Prior to stepping into the cinema I had also lowered my expectation of what I was going to see.
This is because the trailer did not leave much to be desired from it and it didn’t prove me wrong.
The story itself has moved away from magic and wonder.
The Narnians were forced away by the Telmarines.
Talking animals and dancing trees are no longer found in a Telmarine ruled land.
And this is what the film is about, to bring back the magic of Narnia.

Going at almost two and a half hours long, the first half of the film was quite slow in pace.
There wasn’t any screen magic and much action to liven things up as the characters was literally just warming up to each other.
Prince Caspian discovered the Narnians, the Narnians were reuniting and the four children acquaint with Prince Caspian and the Narnians.
It was not until the battle scenes that things looked up and time flew quickly by.

Despite some tolerable blandness in the film, there were two characters that really stood out.
The sword wielding mouse knight, Reepicheep (voiced by Eddie Izzard) is all so cute as Lucy the other outstanding one so enthusiastically pointed out.
Reepicheep is as charming as he is adorable with his skillful swordsmanship and bravery stealing every scene he appears in.
He is proof that greatness can come in small packages.
Lucy on the other hand wins hearts with her innocence and belief.
Her faith in finding Aslan (voiced by Liam Neeson) is an inspiration to all who has lost hope.

Towards the end of the film, Peter and Susan would also learn their lessons of ego and love as Aslan puts it.
But it is an aspect that you’ll need to observe closely to see the underlying message.

All in all The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian is a watchable film both for the younger audience as well as the adults.
I’ll be looking forward to see more of Reepicheep and Lucy when I get summoned back to Narnia in 2010 for The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyager of the Dawn Treader.

Movie Link: http://disney.go.com/disneypictures/narnia/

Movie Review: Disturbia

*Andy got free Coke, free popcorns and free Twisties at a free viewing.
You know... the best things in life are free.
My freedom is very important to me, but at the same time it doesn't always comes free.
The irony of life.

For a movie titled “Disturbia”, it is not really disturbing, or should I say it is disturbingly undisturbed.
When the tagline reads, “Every killer lives next door to someone”, I am thinking toward a film that is suspenseful and thrilling.

So is Disturbia the movie starring Shia Labeouf a movie of such?
It is disturbingly not, at least for the most part.

Kale (Shia Labeouf) is a typical teenager in a growing up phase.
He is carefree, fun loving and shows a keen interest in the opposite sex, but all that is about to change.
That change came when he loses his father in a car accident one vacation.

All that enthusiastic energy is depleted and things got worse when he lands himself 3 months of house arrest for punching his Spanish teacher.

What can a teenager do when he cannot even leave his house?
He spends all his time playing video games and watching loads of entertainment on television of course.
Great you’ll think but only until his mum (Carrie-Anne Moss) decides that enough is enough because Kale is neglecting everything else.
She cancels his Xbox, iTune and best of all cut off the wire to the television when Kale snaps at her sensitivity.

The boy will have to look for other things for entertainment and so he invents his own reality channel; he spies on his neighbours.
One of whom is a hot and sexy girl, Ashley (Sarah Roemer), who has just moved in next door while the other is boring Robert Turner (David Morse) who mows his lawn twice a day.
The focus of the movie will revolve around Kale’s interest in the two, one with sexual curiosity and the other with suspicious animosity.

Kale suspects Mr. Turner to be a serial killer when a report hits the news that the suspect drives a blue Ford Mustang similar to that of his neighbour.
With the help of best friend Ronnie (Aaron Yoo) and along with love interest Ashley, the trio will attempt to uncover the mystery behind Robert Turner.

The pace of the film is rather slow to begin with.
I find myself questioning what kind of a movie am I really watching.
Is this a comedy or a thriller?
Director D. J. Caruso probably wanted it to be both.
It felt like a swing most of the time, teasing with the possibility of suspense and thrill then suddenly shifting the momentum to comedic exposition.
Disturbing, very disturbing.

The thing behind the suspicious Mr. Turner lacked depth.
Many questions were left unanswered.
It appears that the storywriters, Carl Ellsworth and Christopher B. Landon are more interested in making the romance work between Kale and Ashley rather than having the “who really is Mr. Turner?” work out.
At least there was a climatic scene at the end to save it even if I thought it as being too convenient a plot to drop the curtains with.
The murderer just messed up.

So “Every killer lives next door to someone”?

Try “Every hot girl lives next door to someone”.
That sounds more like it.

Movie Link:
http://www.disturbia.com/

Movie Review: Captivity

*Andy thought Captivity was going to be like House of Wax that also stars the beautiful Elisha Cuthbert. You know the type of movie that has good looking people running away from some weird psychos. I was so so wrong.

It baffles me.
Captivity, the movie starring Elisha Cuthbert, directed by two times Oscar nominee, Roland Joffé and written by Larry Cohen of Cellular (2004) and Phone Booth (2002) really baffles me.

First up, the marketing really killed it.
I learned a new term for the sub-genre of horror films known as “torture porn”.
Torture porn refers to movies that feature nudity, torture, mutilation and sadism.
Although Hostel (2005) was the first film to be given this label, the classification is also relevant to the Saw franchise and movie like the more recent Turista (2006).
You’ll be surprised that even The Passion of Christ (2004) falls under this category.
The selling point of such films is the gore factor.
Most of the time the story is lame and poor thus the term porn.
Porn is sex without a story.

That is where the marketing for Captivity went awfully wrong.
The controversy that surrounds it in the United States before its release on July Friday the 13th is over hyped.
No doubt its bad publicity that drew complaints for its “horrific” billboard posters was considered a success, but to market Captivity as a “torture porn” movie is still a big mistake.

I found out that Captivity was actually completed two years ago.
Director Roland Joffé had envisioned it as a psychological thriller type movie that is about the public’s obsession on celebrities.
It was even said that Paris Hilton was part of the inspiration.
It will only make sense if viewed upon from this angle.
An Oscar quality director and a rated film writer stooping low to make a “torture porn” movie would be a great story for a horror movie by itself.

There wasn’t meant to be plenty of gore in Captivity.
It was meant to be a story about the abduction of a celebrity model, Jennifer Tree (Elisha Cuthbert), how she had to suffer the mental tortures of her captor and how she ended up in the end.

It asks the questions about who her captor was, what are his intentions and why another man, Gary (Daniel Gillies), was also held confined.

Since 2004 with the introduction of Saw, a movie produced at just $1.2m that grossed over $100m worldwide, there suddenly grew a huge interest for such films.
It was highly profitable and the public loved it.

So Roland Joffé’s Captivity was re-edited.
In comes the gore, Jennifer Tree was made to drink a horrible concoction of body parts, made to choose the fate of her beloved pet dog and strapped to a dentist chair for further physical torture.
Almost a third of the film was re-shot and edited by the production company’s CEO, Courtney Solomon.
It was also rumoured that another writer, Joseph Tura roped in for the re-write.

So there you go, a film that does not know what it wanted to be.
A psychological thriller remade as a “torture porn” wannabe.

It may appear that I am defending this film.
I certainly am not.
I just felt it should be given a much fairer justification.
I do not even think Elisha Cuthbert did a good job in the role but she sure is a looker.
The poster of her behind a fence with a mascara-smeared teardrop rolling down the cheek is a very good piece of graphic design imagery.
That attracted much of my attention to this movie.

I can say the same for the cinematography in Captivity but when it comes to the full product, it is nowhere near greatness.
Not that it was intended to be but a movie that is lost in its true essence is a nuisance.
This is one film I thought was poor on first sight but afterthoughts and background research made it clearer that it was a film that did not lived up to its potential.

The idea was a good one but in the wrong hands…
You know the rest.
The wrong expectation played up by marketing can ruin a moviegoer’s experience.

It really is just Cs for Captivity; Controversy, Cuthbert and Courtney Solomon.

Movie Link:
http://captivitythemovie.com/

Related Article:
Captivity: What director Roland Joffé wanted it to be

Trailer of Captivity

Get More Terror at TerrorFeed.com

Movie Review: Vacancy

*Andy enjoyed this flick in good company.
Perhaps that's why I'm laughing instead of being scared.
Neh... I don't think so.
Vacancy works by being unbelievably entertaining rather than entertaining by being believably real.

I think it bogs down to your level of threshold for “thrill”, “scare” and “experience” for this one.
Vacancy, the film starring Kate Beckinsale and Luke Wilson is very much textbook stuff when we talk about the genre of horror and thriller.

Although nothing really new, the idea remains interesting.
David (Luke Wilson) and Amy (Kate Beckinsale) are driving home one night when the car breaks down in the middle of nowhere.

Almost conveniently there is a gas station and motel nearby where help can be found.
It'll be futile to think the two of them are going elsewhere.
That is not going to happen.
They will stay at the motel and they will be trapped.
If not then where is the story?

So then the two quarrelsome duos will discover in their creepy “Honeymoon Suite” that a collection of videos featuring gruesome images of violent murder are filmed exactly where they are.
Imagine yourself in their shoes.
I bet you’ll be freaked out too.

The thrill in Vacancy is how David and Amy tries their best to outsmart their captors who are watching from every possible hidden camera if to escape the fate of those seen in the videos.

The scare in Vacancy is how director Nimród Antal uses the textbook stuff of leaving spaces in between scenes for your imagination to enter.

Literally that is what the word “Vacancy” means, a vacant spot for you to fill in.
It is also no wonder that the three psychos, led by motel manager Mason (Frank Whaley) are obsessed about their game.
This out of place motel in the middle of nowhere is awfully lonely.

The scene where the mechanic played by Ethan Embry saying to the couple, “I should pay you for giving me something to do,” tells it best.
The idle mind really is the devil’s workshop.

Vacancy the movie however cannot be described as believable.
Again here is one those films that can be enjoyable only if we take logic away from it.
As I’ve mentioned earlier, how much this movie works is largely dependant on your threshold for “thrill”, “scare” and “experience”.
To me Vacancy is not very scary or thrilling.
Due to it being unbelievable, and based on my experience with the thriller and horror genre, the plot is pretty much laid out for me.
I knew what was going to happen, but it did not stop me from having fun watching the film.

Ever wondered why some people could laugh at the sight of horror on screen?
I found the answer in Vacancy.
It being unreal and sometimes silly is laughable.
I wanted to question its authenticity but gave up because it is not documentary or comparable to the Saw or Hostel franchise.
There’s nothing gruesome in Vacancy, just a simple game of cat and mouse played within an isolated vicinity of a creepy motel.
It is at the very least an entertaining getaway into the darkroom with a big screen.

Those with a higher threshold might beg to differ but I sure had fun watching Luke Wilson and Kate Beckinsale playing the victims.

Vacancy is not the best of its kind but definitely not the worst.
Have you got time to kill?
Why not fill your vacancy with Vacancy?



Movie Link:
http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/vacancy/index.html

Movie Review: Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

*Andy hasn't read any Harry Potter books.
As with everyone, I heard of the darkening of the stories from friends who knew.
What a change, Harry and friends have all grown up.
No longer innocent school kids, they now face the reality of life.

Chris Columbus did the first and the second, Alfonso Cuaron did the third, the fourth was done by Mike Newell and the fifth, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is by David Yates.
Who are these people whose names I’ve mentioned?
They are the directors of course.

Oh… you didn’t think they matter do you?
I cannot deny the fact that what matter the most is Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe).
He is after all the main character of the series.
You might even care for his two best friends, Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson), and even Dumbledore (Michael Gambon), but seriously if there is no director then there is no character.
It would be like reading a Harry Potter book only not written by author J.K. Rowling.

Are you getting me yet?

If you do please read on… If not please take another moment to think about what I’ve said.

The adventure or plot of the Harry Potter series is only going to get darker.
If you are to be still stuck in the realms of innocence and magic of what Chris Columbus has created on screen with the first two Harry Potter films, namely “the Sorcerer’s Stone” and “Chamber of Secrets” then you’re hereby warned.

If you are to be in the mood to argue that Alfonso Cuaron’s “Prisoner of Azkaban” or Mike Newell’s “Goblet of Fire” is the best you’ve seen, then you are warned as well.

With a different director at the helm at “Order of the Phoenix” and the continuation of a darkening story, you should be able to feel the differencing treatment as early as when the movie opens.
It feels like a horror movie rather than a children fantasy adventure.

Harry is seen sitting on a swing in the middle of a playground.
His cousin Dudley and gang came and started antagonizing him.
In anger, Harry whipped out his wand and pointed it straight up Dudley’s throat.
All of a sudden dark clouds formed and everybody started running.
Harry and Dudley found shelter beneath a tunnel but two ghostly Dementors located them and started sucking the souls out of the poor boys.

Harry managed to fight off the Dementors with a Patronus spell but was later informed of his expulsion from Hogwart.
He had violated the rules by using magic in the presence of a muggle (or beings without magical powers).

But he was later rescued by Dumbledore’s Order of the Phoenix, a secret society formed in the times of Harry’s father as a resistance against the evil Voldemort.

The story will move away from an atmosphere of magic and wonder from the previous films and into a more grown-up stressful fashion.
Before even fighting the evil of an advancing Voldemort, Harry and friends will have their hands full with a new teacher who would slowly gain control of Hogwart.
She is Delores Umbridge, played in truly self-absorbing fashion by actress Imelda Staunton.
Here is one character that gives all who loves pink an evil sense of deportment.
All of what will happen is due to Minister of Magic, Cornelius Fudge’s refusal to acknowledge the fact that Voldemort is back.

The ignorance of those in positions of leadership can be so frustrating to those who truly knew better.

It will fall to Harry and his friends to take matters to their own hands.
As the tagline suggest: “The Rebellion Begins”.
On the suggestion by Ron and Hermione, Harry will gather like-minded schoolmates and friends to form “Dumbledore’s Army”.

Like in all Harry Potter’s film, the evil Voldemort will surface right toward the end with a climatic battle between good and evil ensuing.

Good and evil will be very trying for Harry.
This is the darker theme that will follow our poor wizard hero.
The film will be very much focus on Harry’s internal battle.
Just what is Voldemort’s relation with Harry, and why is Voldemort unable to kill Harry is what the Order of the Phoenix will set you in ponder.

The prophecy says, "Neither can live while the other survives".

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is very well produced.
There is a beauty in the cinematography seen from the capture of every scene.
They were well thought and well edited.
The details on the set of the Ministry of Magic, with its glossy black look is chilling yet cool.

Look out for new character, Luna Lovegood, played by the wonderful Evanna Lynch.
She is the character that Harry will be relating to the most.
They share the common perception of the word, death.

Although the movie is at 2 hours and 18 minutes long, it is the shortest among all five in the Harry Potter series so far.
A lack of action and cinematic wonder made it felt long though.
“Order of the Phoenix” is more inclined to the thinkers than those who are watching for the visual adjuration of the active kind.
Maybe it is due to the lack of Quidditch in this one.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix will leave you with anticipation to the next one, which is Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.

All shall be revealed, soon, only two more to go.

Movie Link:
http://www.harrypotterorderofthephoenix.com/

Movie Review: Die Hard 4.0

*Andy thought he'll never get to see a great summer movie.
Is it so hard? And then there's DIE HARD 4.0.

Die Hard (1988), Die Hard 2: Die Harder (1990), Die Hard 3: Die Hard With a Vengeance (1995) and now after twelve years, Bruce Willis is back as NYPD detective, John McClane in Die Hard 4.0 a.k.a Live Free or Die Hard.

The first Die Hard was considered the best action movie of its era and was also responsible for creating the “action star” archetype.
No prizes for guessing who shot to fame.

The question however should be whether a 52 year old Bruce Willis can reprise his role as detective John McClane.
There’s also the query upon the movie title with its numeric four decimal zero.

As the film opened, I immediately knew why.
The movie title flickered and Mai Linh (Maggie Q) was seen chatting up a hacker, Matthew Farrell (Justin Long) with an exchange of payment and information.
Moments later another hacker’s home was blown up as he presses the Delete button on his keyboard.
Something is definitely up and it has got to do with hackers but I still do not know what is really going on.
Suspense is created by curiosity.

But where is detective McClane?
He’s introduced in the movie spying on his daughter, Lucy (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) at a college car park making out with a boy.
In this scene we are reminded of the relationship strain between our courageous hero and his daughter.
The screenplay here will set the tone of McClane’s communication style.
There is a sense of authority, wit and involuntary charm about McClane’s character that is compelling.

The other character you’ll be made much aware of is Matthew Farrell, the hacker who McClane is specifically assigned by the higher ups to escort to the Federal Bureau soon after the argument with Lucy.
That would signal the start of 2 hours of non-stop action.
The first explosive sequence will see McClane and Farrell fighting and escaping five gun-welding assassins decorating Farrell’s apartment with bullet holes.
Just at a time when I thought stunts and bullet dodging was a lost art in Hollywood, the production crew here sure showed me.
The breath-taking actions never stop until the bad guy is.

The bad guy is Thomas Gabriel (Timothy Olyphant), the mastermind behind a very elaborate virtual terrorists attack to shut down and take over the United States.
The story gets interesting when we know whom the bad guy is but we do not know what he is up to.
That is where the suspense, thrills and actions become Die Hard 4.0.
The atmosphere is intense to a fault.
I was hoping for a break in all the drama to give me some space to breathe and thankfully it came around the hour mark.

Here is the light hearted moment where McClane and Farrell gets to know each other a little bit better when they converse about their lives to each other.

Right after the break came the kick-ass fight scene between McClane and Mai Linh or the sexy and seductive Maggie Q.
When I mean kick-ass I do mean kick-ass.
Whoa!!!

We all knew McClane die hard so it became no surprise that Gabriel wanted to take things more personally with the kidnapping of Lucy which sets up a fight to the end.

“I'm gonna go kill this guy and get my daughter. Or go get my daughter and kill this guy. Or kill all of 'em!”

Die Hard 4.0 is the movie to describe the word “adrenaline”.

I must commend director Len Wiseman and his crew for giving me the rush.
(To get a taste of the rush I felt, go to the official website and soak in to the soundtrack)
There is another name on the crew list that I must mention.
He is Patrick Tatopoulos, the production designer.
His artistry as seen in movies like I, Robot, Underworld: Evolution, Silent Hill and Pitch Black gave Die Hard 4.0 a rich visual style.
All that and in combining with the vision of Len Wiseman and cinematographer Simon Duggan is a captivating Die Hard film.
I especially like the way the camera catches the details of surveillance objects throughout and the use of cool and warm lens filter to set the mood.

The cast is excellent, Bruce Willis is great, Justin Long is convincing in his role as the geeky yet irritably funny hacker, and so is Cliff Curtis who I almost fail to mention, in his role as the F.B.I top man.
My only complaint is not having seen enough of Maggie Q.
I feel she is really maturing into the niche of the female action star genre having last seen her in Mission: Impossible III.

The story by Mark Bomback and David Marconi really tells of the possible terrorist threat in a computerized environment and possibly inspired by the subject of security breach after the events of nine eleven.
Having such a heavy dependency on high technology, computers and the Internet in this modern era of ours, it would be terrifying to know they can easily become the means for a terrorist attack.
When the title reads 4.0, it says something about computer programming or a serial version of a software.
It serves to remind us of the hardware that we have so taken for granted in everyday living, namely the people around us who we often forget to care.
On the other hand, Live Free or Die Hard would be saying that we must remain vigilant to prevent our freedom from being compromised.

“All you gotta do is go pick up a kid in New Jersey, and drive him down to D.C. How hard can that be, huh?”
John McClane was lamenting about his job shortly before launching a police car into a pursuing helicopter.

All you gotta do now is go see how he did it. How hard can that be?
Show your appreciation, It’ll be well worth it.

Movie link:
http://www.diehard4movie.com/

Movie Review: Transformers

*Andy wanted this not to be a Transformers movie.
I mean just who are these robots in disguise as the Transformers?
(This review has been partially edited on 9th July 2007. Andy felt a need to review his review.)

Transformers is a movie about alien robots divided into good (Autobots) and evil (Decepticons) raging a war between each other while searching for a cube known as the Allspark which is a source of life for them that has found its way into earth.

From the cartoons in its 80s days and a movie version in two-dimensional rendering, it has found a new source of life when DreamWorks, Paramount and Hasbro decided to make a blockbuster movie franchise out of it.
This 2007 summer movie will be the first of a trilogy with two sequels already confirmed.

But after watching it, I felt an amount of disgust about it.
I’m not saying that it is a bad film but I cannot say that it is good either.
Despite the fact that I understand Transformers would undoubtedly become a hit among the masses for many factors…
I still could not like it.

I raised a question.
Why do they make movies like this?

I stared at this question long and hard.
This is a commercial film for the mass market.
A large population on earth knew what the Transformers are.
It will generate lots of money for the companies involved.
I shall repeat it; this is a commercial film for the mass market.

Talk about the number of toys a movie like Transformers can sell.
Hasbro is going to be rich.
Talk about product placements in a movie like Transformers with the names of Panasonic, Nokia, Chevrolet, GMC and the likes showing up.
Product marketing cannot be more obvious.
It’s all in the money.

Money makes the world goes round.
So this is earth and the human race, the world that Optimus Prime and his Autobots are trying to save?

What a sorry state the movie industry has transformed into.

With a budget of $147million, the moviemakers totally changed the Transformers.
The Autobots and the Decepticons no longer resemble the Transformers of the 80s.
Instead of transforming, the robots actually morphed themselves into auto-vehicles, helicopters and jet-planes.
That is uncool to me because transformation and morphing are two different elements altogether.

The good about this film fell solely on the CGI and special effects.
The film looked cool owing much to the efforts put in by the CGI and special effects team.

The action however left lots to be desired.
The sequences were unimaginative.
It is boring to see things happening the same way again and again.
Things were just either blowing up or crashing down.
The actions felt like a collection of videos from “Amazing Car Chases” or “Amazing Plane Crashes” put together.
There were no definition and aesthetics so to speak.

The talk on aesthetics would lead me to the thought on the robot's design.
Over elaboration and complexity marred the originality of the Transformers.
Director Michael Bay made most of the “Big” decisions in creating this movie.
Namely he changed Bumblebee from a Volkswagen Beetle into a Chevrolet Camaro and he also influenced the design of the robots by suggesting that the classic “boxy” style would look fake in a three-dimensional environment and thus introduced a complex mechanical look with thousands of visible pieces instead.
It was questionable why executive producer Steven Spielberg wanted him to direct this film.
Michael Bay did have the thought about Transformers being a “stupid toy movie” for a start.

It is really OK to change things around by giving them a more recent and modern feel but origin still has to be respected.
I find that missing from this movie.

What I found was a real jumble of things instead.
Let me first make a list of other movies.
Batman, Short Circuit, Robocop, Terminator, Gremlins, Armageddon and M.I.B all seem to appear in Transformers sparking me to think toward a lack of creativity on the side of the moviemakers.

Take for instance a scene where Bumblebee beamed a symbol of the Autobots into the night sky.
Isn’t that Batman?

And how about having the Decepticon’s spy, Frenzy, looking and behaving like an evil Gremlin while demonstrating an ability to retrieve data from a computer mainframe by stabbing into it like what Robocop did.

Now tell me why the only way alien life forms can arrive on earth is through a meteor crashing down and then being bare-naked needed to find clothing to disguise themselves among humans?
Terminator?

Sector 7, a top-secret government agency dealing with the topic of extra-terrestrial is just M.I.B aren’t they?

Transformers just cannot be Sci-Fi and be happy about it; they have to pull in a military angle of the Iraq war to make this into a war film.

And if that is not enough why not have a teenager become a hero for holding the key to victory against the Decepticons and then reward his heroism with a hot and sexy female in Megan Fox.
This should be so appealing to the teenage audience.

Besides the jumble, Transformers also malfunction in way of pacing.
It is one action after another without consideration for character development and story building.
One moment there’s a war going on, next moment there’s a car chase and next robots will pitch against one another like a wrestling match.

The lack of considerations does not end with the script.
Cinematography for the movie lack a sense of dynamism and beauty.
I couldn't make out the purpose of the camera movements.
I could only think that the director was creating an experience of chaos with the camera shakes going along with the sound effects of mainly the bass of "boom", "boom" and "boom" to give us a truly cinematic experience.
It was a headache.

I know most people will enjoy a movie like Transformers because of the CGI and actions.
I too am someone who enjoys movie of that sort if they were well done.
Michael Bay's attempt on a Transformers movie that was filled with explosions, crashes and cheap humor however was not.

There really should be more than meets the eye in terms of better values unseen here in Transformers.

(What I found after reading close to a thousand comments on other movie sites about the Transformers is that most people who didn't like the film really wanted the film to be good. Many of those who liked the film however just didn't really cared much because they felt that it was just a movie about robots fighting robots with awesome effects that looked cool.)

Movie Link:
http://www.transformersmovie.com/

Related articles (Updated 5th July 2007):
This is NOT a real Transformers movie
Transformers - Then & Now
Why the original Transformers is better than Michael Bay's.

Movie Review: Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer

*Lacking energy from an uninspiring and unmotivated week, Andy's attention was drawn to the chrome of the cool Silver Surfer and dreamed of a vacation.
He needs a getaway but he knows he can't.
At least not yet.
There's much left to be done.

When the trailer is better than the movie, what does it says about the movie?
That is how Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer turns out to be.
I’m going to be wicked.
The filmmakers should rename the sequel to 2005’s Fantastic Four to Plastic Flaw: Fall of the Silver Surfer.

The hardest review to write is having nothing good to write about.
So if you, the reader expect any good here then you may be disappointed.
There could be a couple of things good but mostly there are more, I shouldn’t say bad, but just not good.

I really liked how the Silver Surfer looks in the movie but it is just that for a film based on the comic-book genre, it is awfully thin.
(Comic books may be thin in physical appearance but they are usually big on ideas and graphics)
When I say thin, I’m thinking three things, the script, the CGI (except the Silver Surfer) and Jessica Alba.

I liked 2005’s Fantastic Four despite it being critically bombarded by many reviewers.
It is at least entertaining and I could relate to the feelings of each Fantastic Four characters.
This sequel however gave nothing valuable for the price of an entry ticket.

What happened? I needed some answers.
Let us check what shuffling was done in the production shall we?

A check on the crew list reflected a change in the personnel that did the screenplay.
Mark Frost and Michael France who did the screenplay in the first film were no longer there.
Actually it was only Michael France who was missing.
The two of them gave Fantastic Four some very interesting and fun dialogues that a comic-book genre movie needs.
That part is not apparent in Rise of the Silver Surfer.
The screenplay turned out to be bland, uninspiring and mostly uninteresting.
It was hardly moving and nobody’s even laughing at the funnier scenes.

Mark Frost and Don Payne did the screenplay instead.
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer is loosely adapted from the stories in the original comic book.
And according to Don Payne, the story in the film is based on Fantastic Four #48, where Galactus makes an appearance and #57-60 where Doctor Doom steals the Silver Surfer’s powers.

Mark Frost was also the one who wrote the story and it was OK.
Why does the film need a storywriter?
Isn’t it based on the Marvel comic book?
Lest you forget, a film still needs to be written so it can be played out on the big screen.

If you’re not a comic book fan or if you had not read Fantastic Four then you should be as clueless as I am.
As good as the Silver Surfer looks with that chrome body of his that is all so cool, the movie did not tell us who he really is except that he was once named Norrin Radd and he works for something or someone known as Galactus, who or what looks like a cosmic storm cloud and is said to be a devourer of planets.

I cannot imagine what the fans will think of this film.
I can only guess they will be disappointed.

If you had read this far then I think you are interested to find out more so here goes and I’ll lead you into the film.

The movie begins with the Silver Surfer flying away from an exploding planet and into earth.
Bursting through the air space in various parts of earth, he caused a climatic shift that sees snow fall in Egypt.
Large craters then appears and it was found that every planet that the Silver Surfer goes, it dies in eight days.

Meanwhile the Fantastic Four has gotten used to their extraordinary lives with the Human Torch (Chris Evans) seemingly enjoying much of the limelight.
The Thing (Michael Chiklis) having found love with the blind Alicia Masters (Kerry Washington) after his wife left him because of his hideous looks is looking OK.
Mr. Fantastic (Ioan Gruffuld) and Invisible Woman (Jessica Alba) are getting married.
Everything is looking all right until the Silver Surfer arrives and mess up their lives again.

Quarreling and fighting, the team of four with their diverse persona will come clashing with one another.
Underneath their appearance is another layer of skin that cannot be seen with the eyes.
That part needs to be understood by those who care.
Who are they?

With the earth’s existence threatened, the team of four needs to work out their differences to save the world.
Things are not helped by the return of power hungry Victor or Doctor Doom (Julian McMahon), the villain from the first film who has escaped his captivity in Latveria.
Evil as he is, he has a different agenda although first appearing to be helpful.

How can the Fantastic Four save earth from a force so powerful that devours cosmic planets?
Look to the title of this film for the answer.

The plot is interesting isn’t it?
I thought so too.
But if you refer to the top, I changed the name of the movie.
Plastic Flaw because even as a film that relies on CGI and special effects as its selling points, it is flawed in appearance.
Everything except for the Silver Surfer looks only superficial and adds nothing new to what we had already seen before.
And Fall of the Silver Surfer because the Silver Surfer fell off his board quite literally just as the movie did.

Watch if you’re a fan because surely you will.
And watch if you’ve got 90 minutes to kill.
But if it is an entertaining, inspiring and fantastic movie you’re looking for then you’ll need to look elsewhere.

Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer is not fantastic, just ordinary.

Movie link: http://www.fantasticfourmovie.com/

Movie Review: Ocean's Thirteen

*One of the rare occasions that Andy bought popcorns (not a big fan of the yellow crunchy stuff).
I was deciding between popcorns and the “Jumbo Dog”.
A coupon settled my decision with a free Coke to go with.
And I really outdid myself this time, popping those sweet little gold trinkets into my mouth continuously for 30 minutes non-stop, emptying the entire package right to the bottom.
Oh all right… that was a little exaggerated.
I actually took 35 minutes.
Ocean’s Thirteen took 3 minutes.
Oh OK… 3 and a half minutes. *Duh*

So they’re back, for a third time, after Ocean’s Eleven in 2001 and Ocean’s Twelve in 2004.
First they took out three of Terry Benedict’s (Andy Garcia) Las Vegas casinos at one go with a smart and clever plan in Eleven, then they had to pay it all back with interest to Benedict in Twelve by staging a different theft, now in Thirteen the team of eleven are back to casino stealing with a little help from again, Benedict.

The unlucky guy is Willy Banks (Al Pacino) who owns a series of highly rated “5 Diamonds” hotels.
The team is not in for the money this round but for revenge because Banks had done the disfavour of first knocking Reuben Tishkoff (Elliott Gould), one of the Eleven, from a hotel deal causing the man a heart-attack and a sudden lost in zest for life.
You could say old Willy Banks had it coming for him because his ego was too big for himself.
He had without any regards dismissed the Eleven’s attempt for him to reinstate Reuben’s share of the hotel.

As it reads, “What are the odds of getting even? 13 to 1.”
It’s time to place your bet.

Good guys versus bad guys.
I cannot really call thieves good guys can I?
How about nice guys then?
These guys are nice. They have a sentimental heart. They watch Oprah.
These guys are nice. They have a heart of gold. They will do anything for a friend.
And these guys are cool, handsome and funny too.

Danny Ocean (George Clooney), Rusty Ryan (Brad Pitt), Linus Caldwell (Matt Damon), Frank Catton (Bernie Mac), Virgil Malloy (Casey Affleck), Turk Malloy (Scott Caan), Saul Bloom (Carl Reiner), Basher Tarr (Don Cheadle), “The Amazing” Yen (Shaobo Qin), Livingston Dell (Eddie Jemison) and Reuben Tishkoff (Elliott Gould) make up the Eleven.
Strong cast and strong performance is to describe the ensemble.

Let me re-familiarize you to the team.
Danny and Rusty are the mastermind and deputy.
Linus is the rookie turned master thief.
Frank is the professional dealer.
Virgil and Turk are brothers who are experts in everything (they kind of do everything and run everywhere).
Saul is the old and characteristic actor con-artiste.
Basher is the demolition and machinery expert.
“The Amazing” Yen is the well… the amazing Yen who is skilled in acrobatic.
Livingston is the guru in surveillance and an electronic geek.
And of course lastly we have Reuben who is the old man with the money and Danny’s mentor.

No worries if you can’t remember their roles.
You can’t be blamed for that.
There are after all eleven of them.
Just remember them as master of disguises.
Lots of that will appear in the film.

What make a film like Ocean’s Thirteen worth watching is watching all the characters.
It is fun to see all of them coming together in their own way to give the story its life.
The acting is in one word, superb.
And the actor who plays the bad guy, Willy Banks, Al Pacino is great.
The facial expression whenever the veteran actor appears on screen is beyond words.
Those eyes and that look, brilliant.
Banks right hand man, or woman, and the only mentionable actress in Ocean’s Thirteen is Abigail Sponder (Ellen Barkin), and she’s foxy.

The story is not that complicated and I can’t spoil it by telling.
It is basically the eleven taking revenge on Banks with a little help from Benedict.
There’ll be the usual witty dialogues, the underlying funny relationship among the team members and of course the all-important ploy of how to breach into ego Willy’s hotel casino on its opening night.
For a film of such fashion, the most interesting part will always be how smart the plan to steal is being done.
In Ocean’s Thirteen it is not bad and quite exaggerated.
For the audience I advise taking the consideration of logic out of the equation and just enjoy all the action on screen as they are.
There is no need to be too hard or too smart about it.
The main point to this film is to enjoy the humour.

The chill-out, atmospheric and ambient music by composer David Holmes is one of the factors that give this movie series its slick aesthetics.
Ocean’s Thirteen bettered its last effort of Twelve though not quite as clever, smart and interesting as Eleven.
A first tough act was always hard to follow but director Steven Soderbergh gave this one a decent account.

It is easier to enjoy the movie than to dislike it.
I like the small part about the hotel reviewer and the jackpot and felt it was a nice touch.
If I were to put the film more critically though, I would say that it is not as smooth and the flavour not as strong.
Sounds like I’m describing an ice-cream?
It is like ice-cream with all the actors and actress in this one.
Now who doesn’t like ice-cream right?

Any flavour will do as long as it’s sweet, cool and topped with some crunch.

Movie link: http://oceans13.warnerbros.com/