review

“Taken”: the World’s Slowest Action-Adventure Flick

Tuesday, February 17th, 2009

taken

Despite Taken’s (2009) action-packed, hyped-up trailer featuring an angry, vengeful father who is on a fast-moving, butt-kicking warpath to find his daughter who is taken, this action flick actually begins at an agonizing snail’s pace. Not surprisingly, the most exciting moment of the film was actually experienced in the beginning of the flick—making viewers wait impatiently for the action to commence.

For an action flick, Taken begins slowly by showing father and ex-CIA operative, Bryan Mills, (Liam Neeson) reminiscing about his daughter’s childhood. The audience is led through a series of uneventful scenes that depict a somewhat pathetic Mills trying to make-up for lost times and rebuild his relationship with his daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace). He has even given up his career, which kept him away from his family, and moved to be closer to his precious Kimmie. Although it appears as though no love is lost between Mills and his daughter due to his absent years, he struggles with playing second fiddle to his ex-wife’s new husband and new money.

And just as the movie starts more closely resembling a drama, the foreshadowing begins as Mills is characterized as an overprotective and paranoid father who is extremely concerned about his 17-year-old daughter traveling abroad without parental supervision. Kimmie tells her father, “Mom said your job made you paranoid.” To which Mills blandly responds, “I was a “preventer” of bad things from happening.”

The pace (finally) begins to quicken as the viewer waits wearily for the daughter to be “taken.” Although the kidnapping was not a surprise, Mills’ timing and sideline involvement added an interesting flip on the standard abduction scene. It is only after poor Kimmie is captured that the viewer gets what they’ve been waiting for–the angry, taking-no-prisoners Mills who not only vows to get his daughter back but threatens her kidnappers. In the most memorable line of the movie, Mills says, “I don’t know who you are but if you don’t let my daughter go, I will find you and I will kill you.”

The rest of the movie unfolds at a slightly faster pace as Mills begins his strategic rampage to get his daughter back within a key 96-hour timeframe. In true ex-government operative style, Mills swiftly unravels several clues from the beginning of the kidnapping. He cleverly re-traces steps, obtains CSI (Crime Scene Investigation) level evidence and produces the best translation ever of barely audible words recorded digitally.

And although a bit unbelievable, Mills enlists minimal help to track down his daughter’s kidnappers. He calls a friend or two from his ex-CIA days to provide background information on the country of the abductors, which end up providing more harm than good.

Liam Neeson is at his most believable as an adoring father. In several action scenes, he single-handedly takes out seven and eight men by himself, which seems a bit unlikely for a 50 to 60 year old man, even one who is an ex-CIA agent. It’s like casting Jason Bourne of The Bourne Identity with a graying, middle-aged Matt Damon. It just doesn’t work.

Taken does provide some small plot twists and turns, but not enough for the viewer to forget what the next step in the story was going to be. The movie is predictable, but thankfully not embarrassingly so.

And Taken, like all good action and adventure flicks, has the foreseeable, fairy-tale ending in which the girl is rescued and brought to safety before any real harm is done. And any retribution or repayment of the harm and violence caused in the process is all but forgotten. Despite killing over 20 people, torturing others, stealing cars, destroying several homes and buildings, Mills manages to keep the audience rooting for him – after all he is the good guy.

In one of the major fight scenes between Mills and a leader of the kidnapping ring, the point of the movie is given. While pleading for his life, the bad guy says, “Please understand, it was all business. It wasn’t personal.”

Mills says blankly: “Well, it was all personal for me,” and then shoots and kills the guy.

Before his daughter’s abduction, killing and fighting bad guys was just his job. However, the kidnapping of his pride and joy made Mills life worth living as he risks it to save his daughter—because well after all, it is personal.

Waltz With Bashir: An Artful Dance With The Trauma of War

Tuesday, February 10th, 2009

waltz

When movies usually mix animation and wartime violence, they become action flicks (think GI-Joe cartoons), bloody horror shows or somewhere messy in-between. Yet, Waltz with Bashir (2008) —which is up for an Academy Award in the Best Foreign Language Film category—is surprisingly neither of these. Instead, the beautifully done animation makes the difficult issues in the documentary–such as death, torture, post-traumatic stress disorder, war and suffering— a bit easier to swallow, watch and understand. The cartoon images managed to soften the blow of the sad and troubling story of the first Lebanon War and the Palestinian massacres in Sabra and Shatila.

After hearing about his friend’s recurring dream of being chased by 26 vicious dogs, movie director Ari Folman and his friend connect this nightmare to their experience as soldiers during  the 1982 Lebanon War. It is at this point that Folman realizes that his mind is blank. He doesn’t remember his participation in the war, nor his witnessing of the Sabra and Shatila massacres of Palestinians. This conversation then sparks his first flashback into the times his mind helped him forget.

The movie unfolds beautifully as Folman attempts to bring back his memories of the war and the massacres by interviewing and speaking with others who were involved.

Although an interesting choice to use animation for a film with such deep themes, Folman’s decision turns out to be both extraordinary and appropriate for showing the depth of these issues. The use of animation and cartoons allowed the movie to artistically depict the tricks that the mind can play on people who survive wars and those that witness and commit countless acts of violence.

In this movie, flashbacks, dreams and moving in and out of the past and present are the name of the game. In fact, the memories create the story—they are the story. There is a naked blue woman who appears out of the sea to rescue a soldier, who then climbs upon her stomach and leaves his fellow soldiers back on a ship. This boat is then blown to pieces in an attack as the soldier wearily looks on. These types of flashbacks, or the mind’s attempts to move past traumatic events, are woven into the storyline, which addresses the wounds of soldiers and the pains of war.  The movie’s animation gives us, the viewer, an up-close-and-personal look at post-traumatic stress disorder, without the sharp vivid images of real pictures and images. However, Folman does choose to show a few minutes of the actual video footage of the Palestinian massacre. These powerful images will be painted into the minds of the audience, and serve to reinforce the very depths of horror and trauma endured.

Surprisingly, Bashir isn’t political.  It doesn’t make Israel or Palestine into a hero. Through the interviews with the war’s survivors, Folman paints an animated picture of the emotional and human realities of war as he recreates his own memory. The documentary doesn’t point political fingers. It explains the trauma of war and the Palestinian massacres of Sabra and Shatila by providing first-hand accounts from the people who witnessed it. On screen, Folman interviews a military leader whose soldiers say they saw Christian Phalangist soldiers murder innocent Palestinians by shooting them at gunpoint. No political blame—just animated images that mesmerize the viewer of the human accounts of these times.

And strangely, even without a prior understanding of the history of the Palestinian massacre or the first war of Lebanon , the movie is still able to achieve its goal—to transport the audience into the hearts and minds of people affected by the war.

This documentary could have easily been made today to depict the current Gaza battles because it transformed the viewer into a space of compassion for all of the people involved—Palestinians and Israelis alike. We understand. War is hell.

Unleashed: Satisfying the Modern Gamer

Tuesday, November 18th, 2008

Boy or girl, gamer or no, there are few who could deny having (in private) attempted to shift objects about their home using The Force. Just to see if it’s real and you can channel it. There is something universally kick-ass and visceral about a Jedi’s ability to choke from afar, send objects hurling towards enemies or shock people with the power of a storm. The Force is one of those daydream-inducing super powers that is almost impossible to resist (ever been caught trying to use The Force? It’s difficult to explain away…).

Finally, the couch-Jedi in us all can awaken, via Star Wars: The Force Unleashed, the latest video game from LucasArts, released in September. While it’s certainly not the first simulation of the full Jedi suite—BioWare’s Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic bears mention, as does LucasArts’ own Jedi Knight series—the game succeeds in describing The Force with a sort of unprecedented scholarly focus. To give you an idea, LucasArts’ actual mantra for the game during development, which they chanted together at meetings, was “kicking someone’s ass with The Force” (watch a video of that here).

It’s not hard to see why a game like this shattered sales records upon its release last month – 1.5 million copies in five days. The concept alone is enough to perk almost anyone’s interest. What is significant about the game’s fiscal success, though, is how its underlying concept rendered the game almost invincible to reviews. Critics mostly frowned on the title (73% on metacritic.com), citing its lackluster control, technical jitters and poorly designed action sequences. It seems to have defied critique by channeling the power of the couch-Jedi: that person in us all who wants to telepathically get a beer from the fridge, or choke the boss from down the hall. These are simple, basic powers we should have been born with, now fully realized with next-gen graphics and technology. It’s sloppy in a few areas, but The Force Unleashed succeeds as a wakeup call. It highlights just how epically other superhero games have failed to unleash our most ingrained, necessary desires in a realistic and brutal playground. Because the Jedi can be unleashed, it’s all the more embarrassing that Wolverine, Batman or even Harry Potter haven’t been.

In The Force Unleashed, you play as Starkiller, Darth Vader’s secret apprentice. Vader discovers you as a young boy on the planet Kashyyyk, (spoilers..) kills your Jedi father and then lovingly adopts and becomes a kind of Sith-grandpa. When this beginning cut-scene ends and you take control, you are a full grown bad-ass Sith alive right between Episode III and Episode IV (Princess Leia is about 16 years old for reference). Since you are Vader’s lapdog, he deploys you on a series of Jedi-assassination-missions. Through nine stages set in familiar Star Wars locales like Cloud City Bespin and the Death Star, you tear through droves of enemies—Stormtroopers and Rancors alike—and trounce them all with god-like ease. The story itself is surprisingly compelling – a rousing redemption story pushed along by great voice acting, nice cut-scene animations and some worthy side-characters like the droid Proxy and Starkiller’s pilot/girlfriend Juno. Like the films, the tension between the Dark and Light sides of the force drives the narrative, and presents Starkiller with difficult choices. One choice in particular will even allow the player to breach the “Star Wars canon,” rewriting the events before Episode IV, and is sure to keep fans of the series all a’flame on message boards for months.

The actual gameplay is quite obviously the showcase. It’s just immediately satisfying, even in the way the story sets up whom you are all allowed to hurt: everyone. Your identity as Vader’s apprentice must remain secret, even to The Emperor, so Rebel or Stormtrooper alike, they’re all dead. Between your nearly 30 Lightsaber combos and 10 Force Powers, the possibilities for violent Jedi playtime are satisfyingly varied. You can: shock people to death, throw your Lightsaber like a boomerang, throw enemies around like rag-dolls, smash open windows to suck debris and enemies into space, Force-push people absurdly far, discharge The Force in a single brutal shockwave, throw large hunks of wreckage at anything, generate a lightning shield around yourself, and of course, execute all manner of Lightsaber Kung Fu type combos. It could very well be the most violent Star Wars game ever made. My personal favorite? A combo titled “Arial Slam,” in which you slash your opponent several times, stomp the ground with The Force to delicately lift them upwards, then jump to meet them midair and throw them rather inconsiderately straight back down to the ground. You gradually gain powers over the course of the game, most of which you’ll actually need to incorporate into your repertoire to succeed, especially against some of the game’s more advanced bosses. All in all, it offers a pleasant and worthy challenge in terms of difficulty and reward.

Visually, the Star Wars universe is brought to life in vivid, exuberant detail thanks to skilled art direction. Two examples: on Raxus Prime you’ll be greeted with a huge junk yard lava pit with floating debris everywhere, and on Kashyyyk, you’ll venture down into the bowels of a Sarlacc (that pit-monster in Return of the Jedi that almost eats Han). All of this makes for impressive scenery, but the real workhorse of the game is the physics engine. It’s a new technology called Digital Molecular Matter (DMM), which is a fancy way of saying that objects shatter, dent, break and generally react as they would to real-world violence. When you throw a Stormtrooper headlong into a metal door, that door will dent according to how hard you threw him, and where you hit the door. All of this makes being a mean Jedi all the more real.

Of course, this honeymoon of Jedi bad’assery doesn’t last forever, as the game is definitely hampered with some problems. The issue most will notice immediately is the menu loading times. Every time you want to check your mission objectives, or refresh yourself on a certain button combo, you’ll be greeted by extraordinarily long load times. 90s-PlayStation-menu slow. Additionally, the frame rate can start chugging and sputtering, especially with lots of enemies on the screen at once. The game’s camera can also become something of an enemy, crowding behind you in hallways and making it tough to see opponents. Further hampering your ability to hurt enemies is the poor targeting system. When you’re facing an enemy or object, you’ll sort of auto-target them, but it’s imprecise and often misreads what you’re trying to do. You may find yourself spending way too long trying to precisely target a particular barrel, or enemy, and by the time you do you’ve been punished already. These foibles can sour the otherwise indulgent fun to be had.

In the end, though, the game is what it is: a chance to kick someone’s ass with The Force. It’s like LucasArts tried to make a video game with the mindset of an arena rock show. It itches a deep scratch that’s been in our imaginations for decades. However, the Jedi is not the only couch-hero. There are many: couch-Batman, couch-Superman, couch-Hulk, couch-Iron Man, couch-Wolverine, etc. Yes, there is an endless number superpowers we were lamentably not born with. So, why aren’t there great games representing these easy wins for game developers? In answer to that question—especially if you’re not a gamer—you might be saying, “Wait, there’s lots of great Batman video games, right?” You’re wrong. There isn’t. Superhero video games are, by and large, nauseating failures. Here are some examples. There is an argument to be made that the reason for this is that most superhero games—Harry Potter to Iron Man—are tied to big-budget films, and so the focus and the budget have been spent elsewhere. The Force Unleashed, though, suggests a simple solution: Unleash everything. Take a superhero, get a good development team together, and make them all say “kick someone’s ass with [enter superhero name],” and we might be on to something. To end this, I’ve included a few of examples of superheroes in dire need of unleashing. Enjoy.

WOLVERINE: UNLEASHED
Bad-ass takes-no-shit mutant with claws. Embarrassing this game does not exist.

Last attempt to Unleash:
X2: Wolverine’s Revenge (2003)

What it did:
X2: Wolverine’s Revenge turned an opportunity to unleash the gruff wolfman into a button-mashing yawn fest. The game never let you get good and mean, and reduced Wolverine’s most violent, satisfying combos into non-interactive animations.

What it should have done:
The player should be awarded the ability to impale-and-lift, then throw into a crowd. Slice-and-dice style kills. Dismemberment. When Wolverine gets out his claws, it needs to be loud and notable. He needs to be agile, flippy, incorporating twirling, circular crowd-control moves. He should yell a lot. The word “unleashed” keeps coming to mind.

BATMAN: UNLEASHED
Not a superhero, just a mean guy who works out a lot and has killer gadgets. Everyone’s favorite bad/good guy.

Last attempt to Unleash:
Batman Begins (2005)

What it did:
Made Batman look like a tool when he fights. A lumbering, kicky ogre. You could use smoke grenades and flash-bangs, and climb a lot, but it all felt rather drab. And the Batmobile allowed you to crash into things.

What it should have done:
Batman is a gadget-man. His utility belt needs to be an intricate, upgradeable, tricked out menu of joy. He needs to be able to swing from skyscrapers, cape all a’whip, throw Batman ninja stars, smoke bombs, the rebreather for underwater breathing, night vision, Bat-bolas which wrap up escapees: basically Splinter Cell, but Batman. And when he fights, if he didn’t look like a tool that would sweet.

GANDALF: UNLEASHED
He can beat the crap out of Balrogs, tear down Nazguls, and can come back from the dead. His powers are great, though their true depth and range is largely unknown.

Last attempt to Unleash:
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

What it did:
Though Gandalf is in fact a playable character in the game, and he appears to fight in a similar style to his filmic counterpart—sword and staff melee combos—he never really goes apeshit, and his magic abilities are reduced to a little ranged energy blast that looks like innocent fireworks.

What it should have done:
The root of the problem is that Gandalf was never properly unleashed in the films. From the books, we know that Gandalf is a master of fire. He can make things catch of fire like a bastard. Like he does with pine cones in The Hobbit. He also is a pyrotechnic expert. He can grow in size and strength during battle. He can magically lock doors. He can make himself all but invisible when he feels it’s necessary. There is a brutal game here, one that has not yet been made.

Movie Review: “The Secret Life of Bees” is Sticky Sweet

Tuesday, October 21st, 2008

A meaningful glimpse into the racism that haunted the prejudicial times of the 1960s manages to permeate the sticky sweet The Secret Life of Bees. Adapted from Sue Monk Kidd’s 2002 bestselling novel of the same name, the film transports the viewer to South Carolina in 1964, only days before the Civil Rights Act was passed.

The movie begins with 14-year-old Lily, played by Dakota Fanning, awakening from a flashback memory of accidentally shooting her mother. Lily’s life is pretty dismal. She lives with her abusive father, T. Ray (Paul Bettany), and her only real friend is the hired help (read: mammy), Rosaleen (Jennifer Hudson).

The Secret Life of Bees is a story about self-discovery and the complicated nature of love. Tired of being abused and seeking answers about her dead mother, Lily with mammy-in-tow, heads to Tiburon, South Carolina, to locate clues about her mother’s past.

In the small Southern town, Lily and Rosaleen uncover information about Lily’s mom and discover the world of three beekeeping sisters, August (Queen Latifah), May (Sophie Okonedo) and June (Alicia Keys) Boatwright. It’s a world that Rosaleen later described as where “the outside don’t come in.”

Safe from her abusive father, Lily finds comfort and love with August and the other Boatwright sisters. Lily says, “I feel like this is where I’m supposed to be.” The somewhat idealized matriarch, August, gives Lily her heart and a couple of lessons on life, love and beekeeping. She tells Lily: “Don’t be afraid. Don’t be an idiot. Don’t swat the bees. And to send the bees love because everything wants to be loved.”

The need to be loved and the power of self-discovery are strong themes throughout the movie and encapsulate Lily’s story. “After bringing the outside in,” several characters, even Rosaleen, undergo transformation through self-discovery and the love of others.

The honey-sweet plot  isn’t completely predictable and provides a look into the racism and prejudice of the 1960s. While many of the movie’s problematic racial incidents were solved a little too easily, Bees aptly showcases the complicated relationships between blacks and whites, the help and the helped.

Dakota Fanning’s performance as Lily is captivating—bringing to life a character that is simultaneously endearing, sad, hopeful, openhearted and a bit naïve. Fanning’s portrayal of Lily has the audience rooting for her character to solve the “mother puzzle” and get some love. Queen Latifah, as August, uses her best and most believable Southern accent.  Yet, as a matriarch, she’s almost too perfect. Alicia Keys, playing a stubborn woman who almost let love slip away, and Sophie Okonedo, portraying the most challenging sister, May, whose big heart causes her to suffers emotionally are both stellar.

As the title reveals, Lily discovers herself, love and life’s stings. And while uncovering the love of her dead birth mother, she gains the love of three mothers in the Boatwright sisters.

Although the movie is a little “honey” sweet at times, it outshined its sappiness with great acting, heartwarming scenes, memorable writing and an vantage point into the troubled times of the 1960s.

Geek Love: Chrome Gets ‘Em Google-Eyed

Tuesday, September 9th, 2008

Images Courtesty of Gizmodo.com

Image Courtesy of Gizmodo.com

I’m no software expert, but I thought I’d take Google Chrome for a spin and give a review in lay terms. My credentials? Software glitches and slow load times piss me off. And I’m a sucker for cool features.

First off, Chrome is still in beta, which means the folks at Google haven’t finished putting it together but they’re eager to let intrepid techies try it out—the feedback they get will help them smooth out any glitches for the final (actually, read “official,” as no software release is ever final) version. In anticipation of the initial release, Google released an online comic that described what makes Chrome different from the competition. It’s worth a read for the technologically curious, though it might seem condescending to some users.

I’ve been trying Chrome out for a few days, and I can say it’s discernibly faster than Internet Explorer much of the time. However, I just discovered version 3 of Mozilla Firefox. In a side-by-side comparison (without clocking them), Firefox seemed a bit faster. The pages popped, and when I visited the home page for Barnes & Noble, Firefox was napping at the finish line while Chrome was hung up waiting for a Flash graphic to load and start scrolling across the screen.

On the other hand, Chrome beat Firefox to the punch on a few other pages, so I can’t say for sure which is faster. I can say only that either one is a breath of fresh air after waiting on Internet Explorer for so many years. (As an aside, I do have to wonder why a company that sounds like baby talk and adorns itself in bright primary colors and Sesame Street letters would call its browser Chrome—the browser’s logo is, in fact, green, yellow, and red. For now, the interface is somewhat silvery, but if they give users the option to customize the colors, there won’t be any reason to call it Chrome, at all. But, then, I guess there’s no reason to call its competition Firefox.)

(more…)