Kids Picks

I often get recommendations for good kids movies. For very young children, you’re on your own, but for kids above about age 6 these should do fine…

Holes



The problem with most kids movies is they feel they have to talk down to kids. Everyone thinks their child is smart and exceptional. But everyone tolerates kids movies that insult the intelligence of even preschoolers.

This is not the case with Holes. Holes is an intelligent, complex story for kids that has a nice easy flow. Yes, the characters are slight caricatures, but they are believable ones. Yes, like so many kids films, there is a “message” here, but it doesn’t beat you over the head with it, it’s deftly interwoven into the story.

Based on an award winning children’s book, the story deals with Stanley, a city boy who is wrongly convicted of a crime and sent to a juvenile labor camp where he and the other boys are forced to dig holes in the desert “to build character”. But is there really another reason behind this seemingly mindless exercise?

Highly recommended for kids and adults alike.

Bernard and the Genie



Bernard and the Genie isn’t really the most original film ever made. Average guy, Bernard, has the worst day of his life – loses his job, loses his girlfriend, etc. – but happens to rub a magic lamp producing a genie who grants him anything he wishes for. What follows is the standard wishes for money, revenge against the ex-boss, etc. We’ve seen this storyline a million times before – mostly on sitcoms. Still, the film is handled well; its a lightweight romp with an unpretentious charm.

Lenny Henry steals the show in his over-the-top performance as the genie (possibly the inspiration for Robin Williams’ genie in Aladin). Also watch for cameos by Bob Geldof and one of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

2000s in review: superheroes

Continuing our look back at the first decade of the 2000s on screen, probably the biggest development for action movies was superheroes. After decades of trying to get their superheroes to the big screen the comic book giants Marvel Comics and D.C. Comics finally succeeded in sustainable box office franchises.

In 2006, director Bryan Singer left the X-Men franchise to do a big budget Superman reboot, while Brett Ratner, the director who had been tapped for Superman took his place and for X-Men 3. How did they fare?

X-Men: The Last Stand



I must admit I approached this one with some trepidation. After all, I think a lot of what makes a good film is a good director, and Bryan Singer has proven himself time and again, a great helmsman, while Singer's replacement this time out, Brett Ratner, has proven himself time and time again as... well, an adequate one.

I won't bother summarizing the plot, as you can find enough about that in the trailers and other published material inundating the web.

Though there are more characters than ever, there is less characterization this time out - which is not necessarily a bad thing - we already know about Rogue's angst over not being able to touch anyone, and Magneto's belief that humanity can never be trusted. We need little more than gentle reminders. While this leads to occasional ambiguities in the characters' behaviors, this is after all a climax for the series, so it's time for action. And action plays to Ratner's strengths.

While it is disappointing that some things had to fall by the wayside (Wolverine's search for his past for one) and other things are a little glossed over (I've always thought Storm should easily be able to go toe-to-toe with any of the mutants in the Marvel Universe - at least on Earth) for the most part what we have is a worthy sequel.

I do think that it is disappointing that in the interest of trying to keep the number of characters down to a few score, they plain omitted some (Nightcrawler is nowhere to be seen) and merged others; Callisto of the Morlocks becomes a combined version of Callisto, Quicksilver & Caliban(?!?) which allows the movie to bring her rivalry with Storm to the screen without having to engineer a way for them to fight sans powers, but also makes Callisto a far cry from her comic roots - especially since she is portrayed by bombshell Dania Ramirez instead of a wiry one-eyed street fighter (think Chrissie Hynde with an eye patch) like she should have been. I mean, come on, don't you think at least one adult female mutant would fail to be blessed with superpowers *and* supermodel looks?

But aside from that casting disappointment, overall the movie is well cast. Particularly Kelsey Grammer as new-old-X-Man "Beast".

So, with great writing, a good cast, and an adequate director, we have a pretty good movie. Maybe not one that soars to the heights of the first two, but certainly worth seeing, and indeed a satisfying final chapter.

I'm glad the X series is being put aside for awhile instead of being flogged to death as was done in the comics, but there is talk of spin-offs, so who knows we might still get the silver screen versions of a million other "X" books.

Superman Returns (spoilers)



I had high hopes for this one. The director, Bryan Singer has had a great track record up till now making great films full of excitement and depth. Since the Batman franchise, began with two good movies, was followed by two terrible ones, and was ultimately redeemed in the new millennium by a visionary young director, I hoped the same would be true of the Superman franchise.

Unfortunately this was not the case.

The movie was a mixed bag, and there's no way I can explain myself without going into the details - so spoiler alert - I am breaking my tradition of spoiler free reviews in order to make a post for those who have already seen the film.

As I mentioned, Bryan Singer has shown himself to be a great director, and my opinion of him has remained unchanged especially given that he stepped into a project which had a revolving door of directors attached to it, and was definitely suffering from "too many cooks" syndrome.

(Brainiac was going to be the villain who went to the Fortress of Solitude and learned Superman's secrets. If you haven't heard that story, rent An Evening With Kevin Smith, Smith was an early writer on the project - it is a hilarious look at how Hollywood still doesn't get the comics.)

No, it is not the direction that I found faulty here - it is the writing (which has also suffered at the hands of at least a half dozen writers). To begin with, there are several instances where the behavior of the principals is out of character. Lex Luthor, the evil super-genius attains his vast wealth by bilking a little old lady. Luthor is many things, evil certainly and cunning too, but one thing he has never been is a common con artist. Lex Luthor would find a grand scheme to make money, not some simple grift. Soon thereafter, we have Superman, the most moral and upright of all superheroes, spying on ex beau Lois Lane. With super hearing, it is inevitable that the big guy is going to accidentally catch a snippet of conversation here or there - and that I wouldn't mind - but here, in a creepy-voyeur stalker type scene, he plain listens in (and watches with X-Ray vision) for several minutes!

Then there’s the annoying characters: Luthor's girlfriend, Kitty though not as annoying as her predecessor, Ms. Teschmacher, is still sufficiently bimboish, and worse, Lois Lane's kid, who thankfully doesn't say much, but still takes the movie into more of an Annakin Skywalker direction than I'm comfortable with.

But my biggest problem with the movie is the plot itself. Once upon a time, Superman built the fortress of solitude, with the help of Supergirl. He built a giant door with an immense key that you had to be, well, Superman to lift and use. Then came 1978's Superman: The Movie - a pretty good film, all things considered, except one thing - the introduction of the Kryptonian crystal of Jor-El, which Superman takes to the NORTH pole, and throws, whereupon it grows a large doorless crystal cavern, complete with a super crystal TV set which allowed Superman to talk to his dead father. This opened the door (pun intended) for Lex Luthor to walk in, and learn how the Kryptonian technology works (more than the audience is told - we just have to be satisfied with an old Arthur C. Clark quote) and use it to create a vast new crystal continent where the Atlantic ocean and most of North America is. In the past, I was able to overlook the Kryptonian crystals/Fortress of Solitude stuff, as it played a relatively minor role in the films (except in II where it stripped him of his powers, a fairly major plot device, also annoying, but nevertheless, able to be mostly overlooked), however, here this pseudoscience is so integral to the storyline, that it just cannot be ignored.

This is not to say the movie is all bad. Far from it. The casting is mostly pretty good. Brandon Routh does an excellent job filling the enormous red boots of both Superman and Christoper Reeve. Kevin Spacey is also an excellent successor to Gene Hackman as Luthor. And, Frank Langella and Sam Huntington are great as Perry White and Jimmy Olsen, respectively. Luthor's thugs are all pretty forgettable, but that's O.K. they are in the comics too. Perhaps the only disappointment is Kate Bosworth who is too passive as Lois Lane - even the Lois Lane of the Max Fleischer cartoons in the 1940's was more proactive!

All in all, the movie is essentially a remake of Superman: The Movie with Luthor's plan to destroy even more of the U.S. to create his utopia. And as a remake, it ended up being O.K., even stunning at times, but ultimately, "nothing new here", much like Peter Jackson's King Kong. A fresh story would have gone a long way. If there is a bright side to all this, its that they now have the celluloid broth of all those cooks out of the kitchen, and the counter can be cleaned for a true reboot ala Batman Begins in the sequel to this. I'll be watching the skies, I'm looking forward to it.

Science Fiction Double Feature

Avatar (Real D 3-D)



The plot is ridiculously simple, almost to the point of campiness. There are some wonderful aliens that live in peace and harmony with nature on their home world. We want their natural resources. We send in crippled ex-soldier undercover in one of their alien bodies to try to convince them to leave peacefully or we will destroy them. Crippled ex-soldier likes new body, new alien girlfriend and goes over to the other side. There is a big Ewok style battle of primitives vs. army. The End.

Let’s face it, this whole thing is just a big special effects showcase. But, that said, wow are the special effects good. The alien forest looks kind of like it was ripped off of the night elves forest from World of Warcraft, complete with giant trees and bioluminescent flora.

But the real kick here is the 3-D technology. With the ‘Real D’ process, they’ve finally gotten this technology working really good. Because it (for the moment) can’t be replicated in the home (unless you’re Bill Gates), this could be the Great White Hope the ailing movie industry has been looking for. Only time will tell.

So, if you want mindless science fiction, check out Avatar. If you are willing to live with less revolutionary special effects, but want a better science fiction film, let’s turn the clock back a few years…

Serenity




One of the biggest coups Joss Whedon has ever pulled off, was getting FOX to put up the money for him to make a big budget film of his aborted TV series Firefly before the sets were scrapped and the cast scattered to the winds.

The film was mostly made as a sort of series finale, but it was written in such a way that it could stand alone, even for those who had never seen the TV show. The story concerns a telepath named River who was a secret government weapon who, along with her surgeon brother, is hiding out with a bunch of outlaws aboard a spaceship. River knows many things the government wants to keep quiet, so they send their most ruthless killer to eliminate River and anyone who stands in his way.

Unlike Avatar (which has grossed more money than we can keep track of), Serenity didn't even make its money back. I guess that’s the price of making a movie that appeals to the brain more than the senses. Multi-award winning science fiction writer Orson Scott Card called it “the best science fiction movie ever made”. While that may be a bit of a stretch, it’s certainly a very good one, and very worth your time.

Military Science Fiction

Terminator: Salvation



The Terminator movies follow a basic formula – robot from the future is sent back to the past (our present) to murder a human to ensure robots will be victorious in the coming robot vs. human war.

This premise was fresh and exciting with the original film, The Terminator. It was as good or even better when it was done with a twist as the big budget sequel, Terminator 2: Judgement Day. But it became completely a retread by the third film, Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines.

Fortunately Terminator: Salvation does away with the formula. No longer are we in the present, being visited by robots from the future, but we are actually transported to the future, where the war has already begun.

The story concerns Marcus, a man on death row who agrees to donate his body to Skynet’s medical research as a final act of contrition for his crimes. He wakes up years later, after the war with the machines has started, as the sole survivor of a human attack on the Skynet facility where he has been stored.

Marcus eventually meets up with John Connor and the resistance movement, but who is Marcus really working for, does he even know himself?

The film has a great cast, including Christian Bale as the adult John Connor, and Sam Worthington as Marcus, but it also some good supporting cast members like Helena Bonham Carter and Michael Ironside who thrives in these kinds of roles.

Terminator: Salvation is not a thriller like the first Terminator, not an action film like the second two; it’s a war film, plain and simple. A science fiction war film to be precise, but a war film nonetheless, and whether or not you like that genre, will probably determine whether or not you like this film.

But, it’s also more than that. The ‘Salvation’ in the title not only refers to Marcus’ efforts to save humanity, but also his own redemption. The heart (literally and figuratively) at the center of this story is what makes it a cut above the forgettable Terminator 3, and may just be the Salvation of this series.

Soldier




Military SF isn’t done very often. In fact it’s hard to think of many films that have made it to the big screen that can truly be said to fit in this subgenre – Aliens, and the much maligned Starship Troopers are the first (and perhaps only) examples that readily spring to mind. There are probably just as many reasons a serious film fan might want to avoid this genre as there are reasons to seek it out. But, if military SF is your bag, I’d like to draw your attention to a film you might have missed (or like me, deliberately avoided) in the past.

Soldier got very mixed reviews in its initial release, but like so many other Kurt Russell sci-fi films (Escape From New York, The Thing, Stargate, etc.) it slowly grew in popularity on DVD as word of mouth spread that it was a vastly underrated film.

The story concerns Todd 3465, a man trained since birth to be the ultimate soldier, who is eventually discarded when Caine 607 and a new crop of genetically engineered super soldiers are deployed.

Roaming the junkyard planet Arcadia, he befriends some lost colonists, and is thrust into the role as their protector when Arcadia becomes the testing ground of Caine 607’s unit. It’s admittedly a simple, campy plot, but it’s significantly more complex than say, James Cameron’s Avatar.

One of the big complaints critics had with this film was the lack of dialog, especially on the part of the hero (Russell speaks less than 80 lines in the whole film). But, this is actually one of the movie’s strengths. Todd 3465 was supposed to be a tool, not a man, and was raised apart from normal human interaction – the awkward lack of dialog actually reflects this well. Furthermore, laconic dialog is often an advantage with action stars who are rarely known for their acting (e.g. Mad Max, The Terminator, etc.)

Most people may find it typical, or mindless, but genre hounds who actually seek it out will be rewarded with the sci-fi equivalent of Shane.

Two Great Animated Films from Japan

We’ve talked about Hayao Miyazaki, and Studio Ghibli a few times. It’s no secret that I think Spirited Away is one of the greatest fantasy films of all time. But that was released in 2001 – just what have Miyazaki and the Ghibli crew been up to in the past decade?

Today we’ll look at the first two films they released following Spirited Away.

Cat Returns
(Neko no Ogaeshi)



Miyazaki came up with the concept (allegedly on request from a theme park) and produced this Studio Ghibli production, but turned the directing reigns over to Hiroyuki Morita. The Cat Returns is definitely skewed toward a younger audience than Spirited Away, more like the films Studio Ghibli produced in the pre- Princess Mononoke days, which is not surprising since it’s essentially a sequel of sorts to Miyazaki’s earlier film Whisper of the Heart.

The story involves a young girl who rescues a cat from being run over in traffic. It turns out that he is the Prince of Cats, and she soon finds herself the object of all sorts of unwanted attention from felines, including becoming engaged to be married to a cat.

While it’s far from the best Studio Ghibli has done so far, the story is fun and charming in a Wizard of Oz kind of way, and this is one anime that was so carefully handled in the English dubbing that I can definitely recommend the English language version.


Howl's Moving Castle




Miyazaki’s feature length directorial follow up to Spirited Away, is Howl’s Moving Castle, based on the book of the same name. This is another fantasy film with complex plots along the lines of Princess Mononoke, and Spirited Away, and while not as good as Spirited Away, it’s still among Miyazaki’s best.

The story concerns a young girl afflicted by a curse, whose sole salvation lies in the hands of a self-absorbed wizard named Howl, but just finding howl is a challenge as his castle doesn’t stay in one place for long.

In addition to a pretty strong storyline, Howl’s Moving Castle features some of the best cell animation ever filmed – the artwork and landscapes are breathtaking. With this one I recommend the subtitled version (although you will miss out on Billy Crystal as the fire elemental ‘Calcifer’ – one of the few really good comic relief characters in English dubbed anime) which is a much better translation.

Two Classic Musicals

The Sound of Music



Recently I went back and re-watched this Rodgers and Hammerstein musical. It’s been a perennial classic, and it seems likely to stay that way. Everything about it was calculated to appeal to the widest audience possible. While I can’t say I’ll ever be a fan, it does have it’s own corny charm, and yes, it’s still corny after all these years.

China Town



Another classic musical made just a few years earlier is China Town. Not to be confused with the Roman Polanski neo-noir film Chinatown, China Town is a musical that has been near and dear to the hearts of many Indians the way The Sound of Music has been to many Americans.

This Hindi film is a black and white film worth seeing for the music if nothing else. It contains a wonderfully diverse mix of Jazz, traditional Chinese and traditional Indian music as well as early Rock and Roll, and even classical music in the score - 'Night on Bald Mountain' appears during a chase sequence.

Shammi Kapoor stars as Shekhar, a hotel lounge singer who agrees to impersonate a gangster named Mike for a police sting as a way to prove himself to his sweethearts father and get his approval to marry her. Shekhar is a dead-ringer for Mike, one of the key members of an opium ring in Calcutta’s China Town.

Yes, there are racist overtones, but no moreso than in Hollywood films of the time - despite a long common border, it's clear that the Chinese were perceived just as mysterious and inscrutable to the Indians as they were in the west.

It's proto-Bollywood, so you have to be able to accept that people break into song at random times with full instrumentation springing forth from nowhere. There is a fair amount of buffoonery here, but it’s worth putting up with to see stuff like Pompadoured Shekar's Indian Elvis moves – the film seems to be India’s answer to King Creole.

Unfortunately, like most Indian films of that vintage, the preservation isn’t great – the print is very rough in some parts - there are some breaks and gaps where footage has been lost, but very few, not enough to really detract from the story.
The fact that it has survived at all is cause for celebration because at the time of it’s release, it was never more than a minor hit, peaking at #9 in the Indian the box office.

Hearts, Minds and Votes

Hearts and Minds



A lot has been written about this film. It won both the Academy Award and Golden Globe for Best Documentary in 1975. Entertainment Weekly named it one of the Top 50 Documentaries of all time. And while it is distinctly not unbiased, it is very thorough, including footage and interviews with heads of state, military leaders, Vietnamese peasants, current and former soldiers, draft dodgers and even random people off the street.

Made in more than a year before the fall of Saigon, the Vietnam War was still ongoing at the time, Hearts and Minds is a document of the times, but given many of the events of the 2000s, it’s one that’s still relevant today.

The final 15 minutes of the film contains the still shocking images of child napalm victims running down the road, which unless you’ve been living under a rock for the last 35 years you’ve probably seen dozens of times, but which still packs an emotional wallop.

Which brings me to a documentary of an entirely different sort…

Please Vote For Me



Please Vote For Me documents the class election of a “class monitor” in a 3rd grade class in Wuhan, China, supposedly the first such election anywhere in China for this position. The position is a bit of a cross between class president, and the kind of “informant” that the Chinese Communist Party has relied on since the very early days of the Communist Revolution there. The students did not demand a class election, they were just told they were going to have one, and were given no background in democracy or the democratic process by seemingly equally oblivious teachers, and all sorts of bribery and corruption work it’s way into the system, aided and abetted by the children’s own parents.

Democracy is something that must be embraced by those who want it, and whether it was the filmmakers’ intention to or not, Please Vote For Me accurately illustrates why democracy can never be imposed on people and efforts to do so are ultimately doomed to failure.