Annihilation: Film Review

Alex Garland continues to be one to the more interesting directors out there.  The fact that he seems to focus on the sci-fi genre makes it all the better for me.  While only his third directing position after Dredd, and Ex Machina, his screenplays for 28 Days Later, Sunshine, Never Let Me Go, and The Beach were also worthy mentions to his resume.

Annihilation is likely the most difficult of these to get through.  At points quiet and deliberately paced, it won't find interest among Snapchat aficionados.  This was recognized by Paramount and producer David Ellison who both wanted to change significant portions of the film in order to market it better to gain more commercial success.  Luckily Garland got his way and the film remained unaltered.  This has doomed the film to financial losses however as it appears to be headed for replacement in theaters in short order.  In fact, in markets other than the US, the film is headed straight for Netflix.

So what are most modern viewers missing?  A creepy, bloody, sometimes violent two hours of relatively unexplained weirdness.  Diverging heavily from the Jeff VanderMeer's trilogy, the film contains a complete beginning, middle and end and leaves nothing hanging for sequels.  In fact, beyond just a very basic scaffolding, the film contains little plot or events that are recognizable to the reader.  Ignore any mention of white-washing in the film...I've read the novels and attributing Asian or any other racial identities to the characters is virtually nonexistent and the fact that Garland used Portman as the lead shouldn't bother anyone except the SJW class of dimwits.

In the end our own film experiences are often derived from the histories we bring with ourselves to the theater.  For me, it boils down to a parable about a couple's attempt at recovery from infidelity seen through the prism of a sci-fi quest to discern the reasons behind an alien "shimmer" that spreads from a single point and mutates all it touches.  What comes out the other side are a husband and a wife completely different, down to their very genetic material than what they were before--the film seeming to say that through the prism of infidelity, all that you thought, were and did in the past is to meet a state of tabula rasa in order to function on the other side.

Along the way people are turned to plants, men are cut open and seen to contain giant worms on their insides, albino alligator-shark hybrids hunt the all female scientific team, a bear-something creature howls in a human voice before tearing apart one team member who has gone insane, and a near mirror finish alien-humanoid performs a mimicry dance in imitating Portman's every gesture.

I have a few quibbles...Like if the military was sending in a team to explore this anomaly, could they possibly have equipped this team worse?  No helmets?  No body armor?  And their overall gear looks more like they are out for a girl scout camping trip than a serious expedition.  Additionally...there isn't a single one of the female characters who looks comfortable with a gun...they all look like their skin might be allergic to the feel of metal on their skin and are stiff in their mannerisms in holding the weapons...someone needs some better training to at least LOOK like they know what they are doing...

I enjoyed it far better than the books from which the film came from as it does contain a resolution of its original questions and Garland's artistic voice is stronger and clearer than VanderMeer's who created an thrilling but ultimately empty world.  It took Garland to fill it with a reason to be.

Film Review: American Sniper

As is usually the case, I don't get out to see many films in the theater and only end up seeing the ones that both my wife and I both have an overwhelming desire to see.  American Sniper was one such film.  Having read the biography about two years ago I was well familiar with the background and though some of the film was fictionalized to create a narrative that would provide an arc it was largely in line with the details from Chris Kyle's book.

The film itself was excellent with Bradley Cooper's portrayal of Chris Kyle being spot on.  From Kyle's Texas accent to his physical build, Cooper does a masterful job in imitating his real life model.   In story and direction there isn't much new.  We get Kyle's reasons for entering the SEALs, his time in BUDs, his meeting with Taya (his future wife), his deployments, his actions in Iraq as both a sniper and in more close quarter battles, the deaths of close friends, marital problems, etc.  All of it is well portrayed and Eastwood provides enough context to understand where Kyle comes from and why he views the world the way he does.  Yup, some of it may seem too simplistic for modern audiences but based on his own words, it rings true.

American Sniper is not a "great" film.  It doesn't belong up there with any pantheon of Buzzfeed lists of the best films of all time.  Its a very good film that is exceedingly enjoyable but it isn't Earthshattering in its delivery.  Unforgiven remains Eastwood's high-water mark and by a large margin and Mystic River is also better...

It may, however, be a more important film than any of these for what it brings out of its viewers.  Becoming one of the largest grossing "R" rated movies of all time and already the highest grossing "war" film of all time, American Sniper becomes a Rorschach test for any viewer.  Those on the left see it as gringoism at its worst, transforming the Iraqis into mere meat to be mown down by the hands of an avenging American.  Those on the right see it as an expression of American Patriotism and Texas individualism.  As always with these things, its neither.

As Eastwood has actually stated himself, its more of an anti-war film than either the Right or Left want to portray.  By the end of the film Kyle has been broken down both physically and mentally by the tasks required of him.  We've watched his friends die, his justified but difficult shooting of a boy and his mother, marital difficulties, absence from his children's life, the questioning of the war's purpose by his brother and others around him, watched him piss himself as he stands overwatch, and finally, his own destruction at the hands of someone he had hoped to help.  To view the aforementioned and find that the film is either a white-washing of the American effort there or a purely Patriotic retelling  of a Christian, Texas, good old boy is to ignore what one has just seen.

American Sniper is an honest retelling of an exceedingly brave and capable soldier who served his country to the limits of his existence.  It deserves to be told and seen and understood--properly.

Film Review: Prometheus

As is typical of me, I'm a sucker for a Ridley Scott film.  And a return to the franchise that he began near 40 years ago with one of the best sci-fi/horror films ever done?  Yup, double the sucker...

Its unfortunate then that Prometheus is yet another Scott shortfall.

Prometheus LOOKS like a Scott film--beautifully shot, inky blacks, crisp frames, powerful female characters, etc.  In this case I find less fault with Scott the director than Scott the producer.  Using Damon Lindelof to rewrite a script by Jon Spaits, Scott seemingly failed to actually READ the story before turning it into a film.

PERHAPS someone who hadn't seen the original Alien films would find the material new but anyone who has even a cursory knowledge of the Alien canon would find Prometheus shockingly repetitive and derivative.  We return to the same world we've seen in the original Alien and Aliens and where again we watch a diverse crew of mismatched individuals explore with flashlights a dark and slimy interior with evil things moving around in the dark.  We have something bursting from a female character's belly.  We have something jumping on a characters facemask.  We have acidic blood.  We have flamethrowers.  We have an evil corporation behind the mission.  We have an android with questionable motivations.  Really this is an complete retread of the same elements that made up prior Alien films just thrown up in the air and filmed in their new arrangement as they fell to the floor.

There is nothing here worth viewing and trying to integrate into the existing Alien storyline.  In fact it even ruins part of prior Alien films as (spoiler alert!) it reveals that the giant Elephantine pilots from the first film (who were MUCH larger as presented there than they are here) are merely photo-humans wearing elephant-like space suits.

If you are a Scott fan or Alien fan I suppose you must view this film...and unfortunately, seeing as how they are actually making a Prometheus sequel (really??) I'll have to see further deconstruction of a series I once loved...but otherwise, it neither scares nor wows a viewer and isn't worth supporting.

Film Review: Cronos

Watched this film as I've been interested in director  Guillermo del Toro since watching Pan's Labyrinth a while back.  Cronos is del Toro's first film and is mostly narrated in Spanish though there are significant portions spoken in English from Ron Perlman's character.

The film itself is a twist on your traditional vampire tale.  Here vampirism is caused by an ancient alchemist's device in which he trapped an insect of some kind that has the ability to impart extended life upon an individual through its bite.

The twist here is not only from the basis of your typical vampire tale but in its presentation too.  There is more here to laugh at than there is to be horrified of.  The main characters are not young and beautiful as is the case in most vampire films.  Instead they are old and aging.  They aren't placed in any particularly horrifying situations despite Ron Pearlman's character being tasked with chasing down the elderly Jesus Gris (yes, we have a vampire named Jesus who also rose from the dead) and taking the mechanism that will hopfully extend the life of Pearlman's dying uncle.

Separately but just as distinct from most vampire films is the setting.  We aren't in any sort of aged or gothic landscape.  We're in a modern city and amongst just normal everyday people.

Del Toro shows off some of his later penchant for blood and body horror as the main character transforms and suffers from his new state of living.  Peeling skin, needle piercings, licking of blood off a bathroom floor, mouths sewn shut, etc.  It all works here and it leads the story forward so there's no complaint about any gratuitous nature of any of it but there isn't anything groundbraking like the filmmaker's later work.

I marginally enjoyed the film.  It was an interesting look at a very creative director's early work.  Unfortunately whether due to its foreign language nature (which typically doesn't present any issue for me) or some other factor I was never really hooked.  There is no real item to grab your interest.  Yes its a bit of a novel twist on your usual vampire tale but its not so different to carry the entire film.  Nor are the performances or characters anything that I could latch on to.  If you're a del Toro fan its worth seeing just to compare his early storytelling with where he is now.  Otherwise??  feel free to pass, its not in what I would consider a "canon" of film of any kind.

Film Review: The Maltese Falcon

This is the third Humphrey Bogart film I've watched over the last year, following Casablanca and Treasure of the Sierra Madre.  I've enjoyed all and while Falcon was a solidly entertaining film, it doesn't carry near the weight of the other two.

Its your standard private detective caper with a number of twists and turns as Bogart's Sam Spade is crossed and double crossed in his search for the jewel encrusted statue.  And, yup, there's a woman (women actually) involved in Spade's ongoing troubles and some themes that seem a tad bit ahead of their time--Spade's philandering with the wife of his partner, an antagonists apparent homosexuality, etc....But none of it is as "heavy" as the issues presented in the two aforementioned films.

The greatest enjoyment I had here was in watching Peter Lorre portray Joel Cairo who has been tasked with getting the Falcon back from either Spade or the female lead of Mary Astor as Brigid O'Shaughnessy.  Lorre is brilliant here and I found myself wishing for his character to receive more screentime.  Unfortunately it is O'Shaughnessy and her "relationship" with Spade that receives the attention instead.

It is here that the film pivots and fails.  By the end of the film when Spade reveals his belief that it is in fact O'Shaughnessy who has killed his partner and proceeds to turn her over to the police the audience is SUPPOSED to care, it is SUPPOSED to feel the same way about their forced separation and Spade's decision as we do about Rick and Ilsa in Casablanca.  The story tries to hit us over the head with the fact that these two are "in love" but we've received none of the benefit of history or context for these characters to exist within as we do in Casablanca.  Instead we are supposed to believe that they have somehow fallen in love at first sight--despite the fact that O'Shaugnessy has been lying and trying to manipulate Spade from the word go.  Not believable.  Not one bit.

So while John Huston's film is good and entertaining...and likely a classic due to its cast and direction (Huston does use the camera with great effect with low, Orson Wells-like camera angles and use of shadows) but it comes off feeling more summer blockbuster than a heavyweight of filmmaking.