Posts Tagged ‘sequel’

Prancer Returns

Prancer Returns

Tuesday, January 5th, 2010

As my mind boggles at how this installment has a higher score than the original on the IMDb and yet no one defending the ’89 movie anywhere, despite my pretty much zoning out after the point where they kill the eponymous reindeer here, this review becomes an easy one to write because I know exactly what I need to say. There is no way in hell that this is better than the original Prancer.

The original was about faith, childhood, and entirely put you in the best kind of Christmas spirit, that of a child. Its comedy came from truth: right from the off, for example, the little heroine’s loud singing which in itself reflected on the themes, she sang loud because she really believed in Christmas that much, it was an outward expression of her enthusiasm. The comedy in this movie is pure and simple slapstick. This story could be transplanted and displaced wherever and whenever you want it because it is nothing but a typical “kid brings something home they’re not supposed to and hilarity ensues” tale. You know: E.T., Fly Away Home, Pete’s Dragon. Oh wait, those were all fantastic because they weren’t piggybacking someone else’s legend. Prancer Returns‘ relationship with the first movie? It’s the same town, the kid in question expresses interest in the original story (which is quickly swept aside), and decides that a dead reindeer he finds is Prancer, thence naming the baby reindeer he finds close to the scene … also Prancer.

People speak of remakes and re-imaginings as “raping their childhood” and I always found that a ludicrously extreme response to the things I saw it said of but I understand the feeling here because this movie has no respect whatsoever for its namesake. It’s like one of the many sequels to Hellraiser which had nothing to do with Clive Barker’s universe but had the box and Pinhead shoehorned in somewhere, enough to warrant a title and coverart and nothing more. Only, this was worse. Consider it deleted from the Sky+ box and forgotten forever. Yes kids might like it but they deserve better, and let’s face it there’s plenty better.

(It needs to be said perhaps that I wrote most of the above long before the movie finished: I half hoped, half feared the movie would make a fool of me by maybe having the original Prancer actually “Return” hence the title at the end or something but not even that … seriously how anybody can feel good about this movie is beyond me.)



2010

2010

Monday, January 4th, 2010

“We have been given a new lease, and a warning, from the landlord…”

I figured for obvious reasons that this would make the perfect movie to start this year and decade with, especially on Blu-ray which I’m still a newcomer to, and especially since I’d never really watched it from start to finish if at all (I recognised a few parts but I’m not sure from when). Anybody who loves or at least knows cinema will know enough not to bring great expectations to this sequel to 2001 (which I’m not a personal fan of, but whose merits I fully appreciate), and approached this way, it’s not too bad at all.

What surprised me about the movie most was how much abstract remains regarding what’s revealed to us about the nature of the monolith etc. The movie begins with a computer readout of the “known unknowns” at the end of the first movie and what follows is futher exploration near Jupiter, the “resurrection” of HAL, and further developments leading to the creation of new worlds and a “new Eden” kind of set up that ends the movie with the line above. Watching at the start of a new year and decade, clearly we haven’t come quite so far as Arthur C. Clarke’s envisaged … but one can’t help but hope for events similar to this, something so cosmic and transformative we couldn’t all help but throw down our bullsh*t and look up together. [uhrm, /end corny mode]



S. Darko

S. Darko

Monday, May 18th, 2009

This was a lot better than I expected and reading other people’s reviews of it proved very interesting indeed. One of the first bad reviews I found said the following:

“To me this movie felt like someone watched Donnie a few times, wrote down some key elements from the movie in a notebook and then tried to incorporate it into a new movie.”

What can I say but I’m glad if this was the way they approached it. I have no time for those who think they can fathom the mystery of the original movie. Richard Kelly ruined it with his own director’s cut in my opinion. The mystery was key for me. For me, the things you need to fairly compare this straight to video sequel to are not the original theatrical cut of Donnie Darko (which it could never match) but other straight to video sequels, Richard Kelly’s demented director’s cut of the original, and Kelly’s own output since his ingenius debut. On all those counts, this for me easily comes out on top.

If you had any great love for the director’s cut of Donnie Darko over the original, clearly, this is not for you. You probably love the abundance of exposition in The Da Vinci Code and (I’m told) its sequel. I’m personally a fan of abstract cinema, believe it’s something that cinema does particularly well in fact, and to find that in a movie like this which on the surface at times looks as shallow as The OC or something is a huge relief. Like I said, it’s no Donnie, it couldn’t be. But it is beautifully produced, even the music being impressive; it has many parallels to the original story without being 100% rehash; and for a moment or two at least it even took my breath away a little. The ending kind of fizzles rather than blazes as it should and it’s an homage to the original too far that just doesn’t work, but otherwise, for what it is, I was very impressed with this movie.

(PS. Another of the reviews I just read said it was ‘worse than Grease 2 …’ which to my ears is really counter-productive, lol)



Star Trek

Star Trek

Thursday, May 7th, 2009

This one comes with such good spirit that reviewing it is entirely a waste of time … but I’ll do my best to recount my experience as always. I came to this, the first midnight screening available locally, not quite knowing if it’d be the biggest cinematic misstep I could make in 2009 or if, in fact, I might actually be the ideal audience for JJ Abrams’ approach to resurrecting the franchise. I’ve never been a huge Trekkie by any stretch, always citing the over-attentiveness to the details the show and movies seemed to have compared to more frivolous sci-fi outings like Star Wars, for example; I never really watched any of the TV series for any great amount of time, but I have seen all of the movies, even on the big screen, and with the possible exception of Final Frontier, I enjoyed them.

The biggest barrier for me here from what I’d seen in the small clips that had been released to the public seemed to the cast, in particular the two most important characters Spock and Kirk played by Zachary Quinto and Chris Pine. What I’d seen made the new crew look horribly fratboy-ish and to my mind horribly unbelievable in terms of their becoming the Enterprise crew of the original series. To make a wild comparison, like the Tinkerbell movie of last year, it looked like it wouldn’t matter how great the movie looked, no matter how they served it up, and even though like I say I was never even a fan, I would just never buy this crew as that crew.

How unwarranted could my worries have been? Though I still have my misgivings about Quinto in the Spock role (I don’t know, there’s something about his face like Casey Affleck that makes me feel like he’s constantly making private mockery of the material), the character here I found more “fascinating” than ever. The emotional content of this movie absolutely bowled me over and a lot of it centers around Spock of all creatures. Add to that of course (I’m sure you’ve heard) the presence of Leonard Nimoy who lends the movie an all-important sense of authenticity (I won’t touch on the what-where-how of why he’s there except to say sequel-prequel-wise this movie is insanely clever) and I can easily forgive this piece of casting. Chris Pine along with the rest of the main crew are another story entirely. Simon Pegg’s accent notwithstanding, I adjusted to them all almost immediately. Pine almost weirdly channels Shatner at some points, and like a lot of the could-be-awfully-cringeworthy-but-we-have-to-do-it-anyway moments, the balance struck is near perfect.

One of the things I always did love about Star Trek was the music and it was always gonna be interesting to see what happened after Jerry Goldsmith’s death. I was surprised to find nary a hint (at least until the glorious end) of Star Trek music past in Michael Giacchino’s score here and he dives in boldly creating the kind of score that overhypes the imagery that I’m usually averse to, yet he somehow gets away with it so much does the imagery live up to his hype. The visuals here are stunning – I was so afraid I would come away from it saying something along the lines of, “it’s good, but it’s nothing I haven’t seen before,” but I think I can say for sure that there were things here I really hadn’t seen before.

In short, it’s a stunning creation. It stands alone and it fits in with what came before. I don’t know if it fits in enough for some fans, but then I wouldn’t know that, but they do a valiant job of showing they care a little about those fans. Again, I won’t hint at the plot and how it ties in etc, but I want to point out again how incredible this movie is in terms of being a part of everything that came before it. It is not another reboot (god, how I hate that word applied to cinema), it’s much more than that, it’s almost dare I say genius. Just in purely objective terms this must be one of the cleverest and smoothest continuations of a long-running franchise that has ever hit our screens. The more I think about it the more impressed I am. The Nimoy factor is the icing on the cake. At the risk of being corny, may it live long and prosper.



Troll 2

Troll 2

Tuesday, March 3rd, 2009

So, apparently I’ve been infected. I wasn’t aware of just how large a cult following this dire, mindrottingly bad sequel had until I was searching for images and info after the end credits rolled. Trying to find some kind of explanation for what I’d just seen, you might say. This one is truly, truly bad. It’s the kind of movie that leaves me trying to remember the other movies right down the bottom of my bad list that it might be in contention with. Thing is, I can’t deny, the phrase touted by its fans – “best worst movie” – really is kind of fitting. I can’t put this right at the bottom of any list, for the simple reason that it kinda blew my mind so much by its badness.

At its centre for me is the girl pictured above, Deborah Reed as the witchy character Creedence Leonore Gielgud. Now, I know, I’m weird, but there is something about a hellish woman like this able and willing to transform people’s bodies in weird and wonderful ways that appeals to my strangest inner child – the one that would’ve gone to Ursula after watching The Little Mermaid even knowing that she’d ultimately turn me into one of those funny slime things just ‘cos she might turn me into something else beforehand, lol. And this character serves perfectly. Reed revels either knowingly or not in the trashiness of the movie and was surely an inspiration for Uma Thuman’s Poison Ivy in Batman and Robin. For her alone, the movie is more than worth watching. It’s worth watching without her though – you just come out of this thinking one word questions like “how?!” “why?!” … the effects and make-up are hysterically awful. Yet you just can’t keep your eyes off. I’m sure I’ll watch this again some time … but I have no idea why …



High School Musical 3: Senior Year

High School Musical 3: Senior Year

Thursday, February 12th, 2009

“You see what happens when you do a show? You become like five people.”
“What’s wrong with that? We used to come here when we were kids and we’d be ten people.”

I figured I best get this in before Mark Kermode gives it Best Picture at his Kermode Awards next week, hehe, and the good news is that I’m pretty much with him on this one. Here’s my High School Musical history – I was pleasantly surprised by the first one but I did feel rather like I’d been forced to watch it. I kinda loved the sequel in a completely non-cinematic way just for Sharpay’s sheer pinkness, lol. A third one, I could kinda take or leave it. As a result, I have to admit, I was kinda blown away even after Mark Kermode’s gushy review of it way back on its release.

I love the structure here – everything is much larger as you’d expect as the first installment to be made for the big screen … but at the same time, everything is oddly more compact. We’re thrown into what could easily be the last scene in the movie as the Wildcats play their last big game, and the songs cut into what look like full production numbers for the big musical they’re rehearsing. It’s weird how the movie feels like it’s playing with the timeline of the story even though it never really does. There’s barely a single scene outdoors let alone away from the school and that I love too. The thing to be aware of here is that the subtitle might just as well be “Reality Not Allowed” and though I’d usually be the person being cynical and negative about a picture of school life as presented here, I really have been shaking my head at the reviews that say that movies like this are to blame for anorexia and school shootings and the like. Not a single thought like that entered my head while watching this, even though it’s the most strangely equipped school I’ve ever seen, a strange fantasy land too where even the social misfits have some kind of worthwhile part to play, etc. Those thoughts never crossed my mind because the movie just doesn’t leave any room for them to occur. I surrendered to it within minutes and by the time Gabriella and Troy were singing in the rain on the rooftop, I was honestly dabbing my eyes and that wasn’t the end of the tearduct malfunction either. This is just a joyous experience and I just can’t say a bad thing about it.



Return to Sleepaway Camp

Return to Sleepaway Camp

Monday, November 3rd, 2008

Another I was very much looking forward to, even though I knew it couldn’t possibly be half-decent let alone live up to my favourite installment of the original trilogy which was the hilarious Unhappy Campers. But in most areas this surprised me. The look and style, first of all: this reminded me of Herschell Gordon Lewis’ Blood Feast 2 in that it’s gotta take some skill these days to make a movie so badly acted and shot as this really is. Like it’s not even 2000s bad acting here, it’s like 80s bad acting; if that makes sense … The “fat kid” is possibly the most annoying character ever to grace the genre and somehow even that adds something good to the movie, lol. Felissa Rose returns from the original to reprise Angela Baker (she was played by Pamela Springsteen in the other parts; I was disappointed to hear she wouldn’t return, but Rose is great though her role, not to mention the actress that plays it, isn’t that important here) This may make me sound stupid but I really didn’t figure out where Angela was for most of the movie, lol; though I finally did at least before the unmasking. In short, it’s a worthy new entry to the series if only for the fact that stylistically it blends in with them so well … it’d be almost a shame if it were slickly Bayified like so many new horrors are. The “broomstick in the floor” scene is the icing on the cake for me, really; I think if they’d looked down that hole just one more time I would’ve wet, ROFL



Diary of the Dead

Diary of the Dead

Sunday, May 4th, 2008

“If it’s not on camera, it’s like it never happened …. right?”

It sounded a little dodgy and I certainly didn’t want to be too hasty about being excited about this latest “official” installment in the Romero Dead series after Land (which I’ve watched most of again recently … in short, it really didn’t warrant a new review, it’s pretty unremarkable) … but at the same time I kind of couldn’t help myself. Even though this mockumentary horror thing has been done almost to death now since Blair Witch leading through to Cloverfield, bringing the technique to the Dead series sounded pretty fascinating, and any time Romero returns to this series it’s exciting, as they’re always among the most important horror movies, if not always quite the best.

Overall, it works. While it’s not quite the “zombies in a mall” of the masterful Dawn, the social commentary here (though perhaps a little obvious: just about anyone who documents the dreary details of their life in a blog or who has neglected to truly experience a vacation because they were behind a camera the whole time will understand what it’s saying well enough) is certainly more pointed than that in Land.

It gets a little dull towards the end, the whole thing just isn’t as awash with the message as Dawn was, and it frequently becomes “just another teen horror movie”. But the end (“Are we really worth saving? You tell me.”) sends you out with genuine chills running down your spine. It’s in your face and feels like a hammer on the head, but it does the job of “implicating the audience” a million times better than, for example, Funny Games U.S.. There is some humour to counter this depressing stuff, however: I don’t think I’ve laughed more this year than I did over the “Hello, I’m Samuel” sign :)