Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005)

Tim Burton remaking the lovely and wicked children's story by Roald Dahl? What a treat! Or at least you would think so.

The narrator immediately makes me miss Patrick Stewart's epic epilogue to "The Nightmare before Christmas". This guy sounds like the American troll-version of Augustus Gloop while eating warm caramel by the handful. But I digress.

Let's start with a bit of good news. The actors are mostly well picked and Freddy Highmore is very good as Charlie Bucket. First barrier past. I've seen Depp better than here, but it's still hard to picture how they could have made Willy Wonka without him. Special mention to the outstanding David Kelly and Christopher Lee that makes an absolute nothing of a part into something most memorable. I will truly miss the latter when he passes. One of the true legends of his craft, with an almost omnipotent presence. I do wish Burton would stop casting his wife in every single film he makes though. She's not bad but has nowhere near the versatility of Depp and should leave room for better choices.

Burton is very good at creating the atmosphere of the little room with the Bucket-family in, an example being the tremendous suspense and disappointment over the opening of a simple candy-bar. A most beautiful scene altogether. Unfortunately, it's when the factory and Depp is supposed to take it away for the win that it all falls a bit to pieces. Granted, Burton's cinematography is stunning and there are some fun puns. But the story gets a bit lost and interest fades as the characters roam around in the Wonka's factory. Oh, and the Oompa Loompas suck. If you want a funny Oompa Loompa, try "Family guy". They had better lyrics too.

As always, it's Danny Elfman that scores when Burton directs. Elfman's intro-theme starts out well, but ends in a cascade of annoying sounds with some predictable drums and choral arrangements. It's "Planet of the Apes" mixed with the later installment "Alice in Wonderland". The songs are so far from the quality from "A Nightmare before Christmas" and the fine "Corpse Bride" that it's plain and simply sad. His best pieces are the sentimental ones in the first half, but they're not particularly creative, just effective.

As they leave the factory, the actors are allowed room to breathe and Elfman can stop the incessant drums and theremins. So it picks up again but the damage has been done. What should have been a triumph for Burton, turns into a bit of an overload where he at times forgets what has made this story a classic to begin with.

6/10

Mystery Men (1999)

In the midst of the rejuvenation of the superhero-genre comes... a parody. Hm. It sounds like easy money for them and a stupid film for us. But hey! They put the effort in to make it decent!

There are actually some good ideas here, like the Superhero being dependent on sponsors and genuinely seeing his occupation as a job more than a call. Not to mention the fact that he's willing to get a supervillain released in order to win some of those sponsors back. And the evil 70's discovillains, complete with soundtrack from "Saturday Night Fever". Fun!

The real winner here though is the job they've done with the characters. Most of them are delightful and quite creative... Apart from Stiller of course. He rarely is creative or funny. This is not at all bad for him though, kudos to the rest of the cast for dragging him and Garofalo out of the mire. Geoffrey Rush is his usual outstanding self, and with Azaria playing it up and Macy down , good cameos by Greg Kinnear, Tom Waits and Wes Studi are a pure bonus. Add to that some fine comedic lines i.e. "I can only become invisible when no one is looking" and we're well on our way.

There are a lot of characters, though and not all of them are funny and as a comedy this film suffers greatly when the unfunny characters take the scene. Another poor choice is the romance-story. It adds nothing to anything, apart from more nuisance from Stiller.

Director Usher finds a nice pace for his flick, and remembers to insert comedy in the action as well to hit his genre well and not fall into the "stinky second half" trap. Though at times the references to other films are aplenty this isn't simply a stupid spoof like the Wayans would make. It has its own plan and plenty of its own ideas.

This film is funny and quite clever, never forgetting that it is a comedy. There is no morale, no greater point, just a nice script, with a bunch of good (and some bad) characters. It's worthy of many laughs, and a couple of hours well spent.

7/10

The Day after Tomorrow (2004)

Some CGI is good (the opening in this film isn't) and some is bad. Since this film has no other merits (nor goals it would appear) it's shocking to see it can't adhere to only good CGI.

The opening is as dull and predictable as all disaster-movies: Bad omen, short introduction of theme and characters (including smart but underrated scientist's ignored efforts at warning politicians), then disaster strikes naturally with a very known landmark (in this case the Hollywood-sign) being destroyed and they set up a simple story of a parent looking for their child.

Why would Denis Quaid take this part? It's the same shit as every big movie that doesn't bother to get a decent script. Busy, obsessive father that naturally is a good dad deep down (and the really smart and accomplished mother that still needs the dad to fix things), always too important things to do, and, in the end, right (after having briefed the president directly). The list of clichés go on: The pile-ups of cars (with the honking of course) both before and during their destruction, the smart youngsters that find quite simple solutions no one else has thought of, the dog, the arduous low-tech travel, the expendable friends dying to show that death isn't only about numbers (brave, self-sacrificing deaths of course), the couple finally admitting their love. Add to that some simple, untested, Al Gore-like truths and an oversimplified morale and this flick is dumb as doornails.

Toss in a cancer-ridden child (probably a tip from Steven Spielberg) without any relevance what so ever and weep for humanity. Not because the environment is killing us, but because this is what Hollywood is capable of.

The writing credits should have gone to Alan Smithee. Emmerich took them himself. Example: People are drowning in a taxi because the water is rising, and the cop stands there looking at them dumbly because "he doesn't speak French"? I hate the French as much as any, but seriously...? And in the end, the joy of the one (or perhaps three) is so great that we can all forget about the death of the millions... Yawn. And it ends with a morale so politically correct (and factually wrong) it just makes my mind crawl into a safespot and refusing to come out until this film is over.

There is a little suspense, and some good effects. The fact that Emmerich had enough left in his budgets to add some decent actors (that all should have known better) also makes the film suck a little less.

It would appear as if they made a two-hour film because someone had an idea for some cool shots of waves crushing New York... Much like the meteors in "Armageddon", just more.. Hmmm. Wet. Roland Emmerich has said he wants to continue only making big-budget disaster-films. Too bad he isn't any good at it.

3/10

Batman Begins (2005)

After Joel Schumacher had put his stinking, dirty paws on the Batman-franchise, it needed something spectacular to find its way back into the light. Cue Cristopher Nolan.

Nolan starts the trilogy off by skipping about in time. Quite nicely, keeping it informative and relevant without boring the viewer and without introducing too many characters in the process. Nolan's introduction clearly displays how Bruce Wayne has been scarred by the death of his parents, and although he more or less copies half the shooting scene from Tim Burton's "Batman", this is forgivable.

It's easy to see that the is a labor of love. They have put thought into most details here instead of just Bay'ing it (stupid, illogical explanation or explanation left out all together) and when separating a fine film from a brilliant one, that is important.

As for the actors, Bale and Neeson are very good but Gary Oldman is fantastic. All the more impressive then, that Michael Caine still is a step above the rest. Whether angry, disappointed, scared or simply a British butler, Caine steals every single scene he's in from an already outstanding cast. Even Katie Holmes is good here, although a bit lightweight. Cillian Murphy is most unpleasant and brings that eerie little discomfort with him. Tom Wilkinson perhaps not as interesting but not bad. In particular Nolan gets a credible inner conflict out of Wayne as he clearly struggles to portray himself as a shallow playboy in order to keep his secret, portrayed best in a scene with Katie Holmes.

Nolan allows for drama and his actors subtleties, as can be seen on the amount of facial close-ups and with his brilliant cast he is handsomely rewarded. It's almost amazing how many characters he manages to portray with some depth here, and how gritty realistic he manages to make a movie about a man in a batsuit. Good drama is most rare for a superhero-flick. The tone however is very dark and without depth in the characters, you can't really get a good, dark tone. Without simply turning the lights off.

Even the City of Gotham's fall from grace is made believable through small nuances and little hints here and there, in what is an exceptionally thorough script. The paranoia that has Gotham shaking is tense, without overdoing it. And of course... there is action, violence and outstanding set-pieces. All in galore.

You know that brilliant jaw-dropping scene that fills you with awe? Where the soundtrack and the film meet the script in a brilliantly filmed twist? Very few films have this. "Batman Begins" does. At 1:53:00. Enjoy.

Nolan even dares to avoid the happy ending, leaving Bruce with difficult truths to handle and an uncertain future.

As a film, this is brilliant. As the first installment in a trilogy, it's so good even Peter Jackson should be taking notes.

9/10

Prometheus (2012)

Every sci-fi fan on Earth was looking forward to another dark Ridley Scott sci-fi from the instant this project was launched. Did he deliver on those expectations? Sadly, no.

A tiny annoyance first. It would have been easy to name Rapace's character Dr. Berget or something similar. She is a world famous cave-digger-look-around-for-stuff-people, so naturally she could have taken any nationality. By naming her Dr. Elizabeth Shaw, there is little doubt she is meant to be British, leaving her feeble attempts at hiding her Scandinavian accent an unnecessary nuisance. Furthermore, she lacks a bit of depth in many of her scenes and is not helped by having a much more charismatic Theron showing up regularly. And Theron has been better. The best cast performances come from Idris Elba and Michael Fassbender. The latter nicely combining HAL and C3PO with just of hint of Bishop.

Apart from the cast, the storytelling lacks panache. It feels uninspired at times, as if Scott just needed to fill a few minutes of film before he can chuck some effects in there again. Like bad porn. With some real stupid twists, dull choices and serious logical flaws, Scott really could have tried harder. The cinematography is most impressive though, and there are some cool future gadgets.

What Scott still does very well is suspense in the correct sense of the word. The eerie quiet. That sneaking feeling that something horrible is about to happen where you catch yourself forgetting to breathe. He also still has a knack for coming up with cool ways to die in space.

This is a film that will entertain you for a lot of it's duration, with the exception of the very tedious last 20 minutes. However, it will rarely challenge you and it adds little of anything of real value. Nowhere near a classic, and most unworthy of the hype.

6/10

The Way of the Gun (2000)

There have been far too many movies made where people are in over their heads, and things get more screwed up as they go about their lives making countless stupid mistakes. The Law of Murphy is anything but original in Hollywood. But since our protagonists are neither stupid nor amateurs, this is above average intriguing.

Del Toro and Ryan Phillipe, though hardly an instant classic, is a rather dynamic duo. Juliette Lewis will always deliver and a silver star is also awarded to Taye Diggs. James Caan could do his part blindfolded, but thankfully doesn't and struts his stuff in several scenes. Add to that a brilliant Geoffrey Lewis and the casting here is well above average.

This flick offers regular little surprises and some classic lines, such as "Shut that cunt up, or I'll f***-start her head". It tries a bit too hard at times, though, adding twists that add little and interferes with an ideal flow. There are simply too many angles, and too many little stories. The best, such as Caan vs Del Toro are real good, but some of them just take up unnecessary space.

It picks up towards the end when people start dying (and with them unnecessary angles) and director Christopher McQuarrie is able to focus on the end game with fewer distractions. All in all the film lacks a bit focus from time to time, which is peculiar considering McQuarrie wrote the absolutely magnificent "The Usual Suspects" for which he won an Academy Award. It's still nowhere near bad, and at times outright good.

6/10

Bad Santa (2003)

If there ever was a Christmas-movie meant for Bill-Bob Thornton, this is so definitely it. Usually, voice-overs are annoying and adds little. Not here. The introduction is ripe with loathing and contempt for absolutely everything. My kind of start.

And let's make it clear immediately: A Santa that drinks heavily, swears like a sailor and has a huge thing for asses and anal sex... It's funny. With Thornton and Tony Cox... it's very funny.

Cox is a wonderful addition to Thornton's self-destructing Santa. A great balance of frustration, anger and disappointment as he tries to hold it together for the both of them. Brett Kelly and Lauren Kelly also shine in Thornton's presence, almost making me think he can make anyone good. Then I remember "Love actually". But seriously. How many films has interaction between an adult and a dumb child that has you hollering in laughter? And if you're thinking about "America's stupidest Homevideos" now, grinning to yourself... take a dive off a 60 foot ledge. Besides, the boxing-scene in this film is better than anything Stallone could muster in a dozen films.

Bernie Mac and John Ritter (this was to be Ritter's final full-length feature) both died rather shortly after this film, and they will both be missed. They're very nicely cast here, playing right at their strengths.

It's great fun to see that someone still manages to put a bit of thought and originality into a heist. Seeing Tony Cox slide down an escalator in a snowman-costume... Priceless.

It falls a bit to pieces towards the end in usual comedy fashion. It's hard to be funny when you're trying to add both moral and a happy ending. The kid manages to squeeze out more sympathy than you'd think but the humour suffers.

Oh, and the musical choices are mostly brilliant throughout. Shostakovich's Jazz Suite was never more fitting.

This film will in no way raise any Christmas spirit, but it might just raise the roof with laughs. And that is much, much better.

7/10

I Love Trouble (1994)

A film about a young and ambitious female journalist and her older, more experienced, world famous male counterpart. Oh, I wonder where this will take us? Competing on a big case you say? Both desperately trying to up the other and, if at all possible, poke fun. And, what? Really? There will be lots of sexual tension that will come to the surface WHEN, you say? After they through strange coincidences have to share a room? Who could have thunk it? Actually, anyone could. And considering it was written by Nancy Meyers and Charles Shyer... anyone did.

On the bright side the director manages to make the tedious and lame script keep a decent pace. And with pace comes a minimum of suspense and entertainment. Not bad, but 122 minutes is definitely more than pushing it. Though I still wonder; why is it that every hitman apart from Jean Reno in "The Professional" is unable to hit even the easiest of targets?

So the script is awful and the pace is decent. I suppose it's up to the stars to decide whether this film makes or breaks. It breaks with the sound of the someone cracking a rib-cage open. Badly marred by the astonishing lack of chemistry between Julia Roberts and Nick Nolte. None of them manage to get out of their regular comfort zones, and since their comfort zones don't naturally blend they just seem like two people from a different film that got lost. It really is that bad. Nolte actually admitted in hindsight that this movie was terrible and that everyone had a miserable time. I won't go as far as to say it shows, but the whole movie seems very forced throughout.

Another little bonus for the casting. Robbert Loggia is his old barking self, Paul Gleason and James Rebhorn always deliver. Add to that a delightful Charles Martin Smith, Saul Rubinek and Olympia Dukakis and the movie doesn't lack in acting talent... in other places than the obvious.

As entertainment it's about like going to a restaurant and being served fish-sticks. You'll be full, but quite disappointed. Other than that, it's an insult to intelligence. "Conspiracy Theory" would be a much better way to spend two hours".

3/10

The Cannonball Run (1981)

The cars and the stars...

Lamborghini, Ferrari, Chevrolet, Rolls Royce, Aston Martin, hell even the police drive Trans-Am's. Oh, and for some reason that stupid little Subaru is there.

Roger Moore, Burt Reynolds, Farrah Fawcett, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis jr., Jackie Chan, Jack Elam, Adrienne Barbeau, Peter Fonda.

If analyzed the jokes are a bit far apart, and many aren't really that funny either, so as a comedy it's not really that good. The threat of "Him" and when "Him" actually appears is the main course (and the blooper reel). DeLuise is entertaining at times and Reynolds making fun of him is also slightly amusing. The pop-cultural references are a-plenty and half the characters are parodying themselves.

Though it lacks the charm from "Smokey and the Bandit" it makes up for some of it in an absolute mass of fantastic cars and some of the finest stunt-driving of the decade. Besides, it's a delight not having Jackie Chan speak any English. And the sound of those engines... God, it makes me hate modern cars so very, very much.

Not too mention the exceptionally gorgeous women in attire that makes you absolutely certain no straight female was supposed to like this film. Some interesting set-pieces and a, for its time, gigantic fight scene makes for decent entertainment at times, but this really is about the cars. If you don't like those, there is little reason to see this film, other than the massive amount of stars making a mockery of themselves (apart from Chan, he still kicks everyones ass... in style).

Oh, and it is naturally a cult movie, though that is not necessarily equivalent with quality.

5/10

Cowboys & Aliens (2011)

Combining western and sci-fi? Without Nathan Fillion? Sounds like a stretch...

A promising start has some action scenes, remembering that cowboys don't regularly use martial arts. Fists meet faces, some are happier and some are most dead. You do get am early and distinct general idea that they've been better at re-using story-parts than finding any of their own. Perhaps they felt that putting cowboys and aliens in the same movie was enough. Wrong they were.

This is further confirmed when two actors from Carnivale is recast with most of the traits they had in that show. Only Clancy Brown brings anything to the table (despite his lines), but then again, he is a mighty presence wherever he is. Keith Carradine is another modern western-man. Though better in Deadwood, he is decent here as well.

Pretty women always seem to be clean and waltz in straight from the hairdresser in westerns that don't really know what they are. That pisses me off to no end. Olivia Wilde's first dialogue is so bad it begs belief, and it never gets much better from there. Her lines are ridiculous and contains most of the many logical flaws. She doesn't improve either. A miscast of epic proportions. And I like her...

I'll give Harrison Ford a point for playing a genuinely evil man. Unfortunately he thinks sneering, barking and not shaving is all it takes. Besides, the character falls apart in a crappy translation scene anyway, with more shite on its way.

Thankfully, Daniel Craig is good, and the minor parts are mostly well cast.

As a western, it's bad. Unless you really like seeing poorer versions of scenes from earlier westerns. There is undoubtedly entertainment here, and lots of action, thus making you irritated at the lack of quality rather than bored. Which, I suppose when all comes down to it, is a good thing.

And the moral is that if we all work together we can overcome a lot. That sucks... But it fits this flick, as there is very little originality here. If you really like western combined with science fiction, the only real choice is to re-visit Joss Whedon's "Firefly".

4/10