SanitariumLXIX Reviews

Metallica Through the Never (2013)

A mixed bag.

[6/10 · 28 September 2013]

First, I'll go on record as saying that I'm very much a Metallica fan (look at my screen handle). That being said, I was on one level enthralled with this movie, and disappointed on another.

The movie begins with its protagonist, a young roadie played by Dane DeHaan, arriving at an arena where the band is preparing for a show. Each band member is given a ridiculous introduction (although I laughed out loud at Lars Ulrich's first appearance), but thankfully we are quickly thrown into the only real entertaining part of the movie; the concert.

During the band's opening song, the roadie is given an assignment that will carry him across town to retrieve an important package that is somehow vital to the band.

The band plays on, and in between songs (sometimes during) we see the roadie's quest take one bizarre and surreal turn after another in an effort to locate this essential item.

Here's what works; the entire concert portion of the movie is beautifully shot, sounds incredible, and is edited so perfectly that if this were just a concert movie it would rank among the best.

But, it's not just a concert movie, and that isn't a good thing. The fictional surreal quest of this roadie is such a dull and boring mess that you're longing for the action to shift back to the arena to see more of the band. I applaud the effort of trying to blend a movie with a live concert, but this just doesn't work the way it's presented. More about this package; it's a borrowed plot device from Pulp Fiction, and it got groans from the group of fans I saw this with. No imagination here at all.

For Metallica fans, it's a must see for the concert part alone. But I cannot in good conscience recommend it to regular movie-goers as the fictional story comes across as pretentiously laughable. "Who are these musicians trying to be film makers?" is the kind of response I would expect from the average Joe. If you do decide to take the plunge, I implore you; don't see it for a movie. See it for the music, which is what Metallica should just be about anyway.

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

Good, But.......

[7/10 · 18 May 2013]

I enthusiastically loved the first J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie, even with all of the whining naysayers and fanboys claiming that he ruined Trek forever. While I still think those naysayers have been drinking too much Romulan Ale, I must say that after seeing this movie I'm starting to see what they meant...just a little.

Don't get me wrong here; I really liked most of this movie. So much so that I will see it a few more times in the theater as I did with the last one. But, I do have some gripes about it, and I'm still trying to figure out if they're major or minor.

Let's start with what I did like: First, I love how the new cast (Pine, Quinto, Saldana, Urban, Pegg, Cho, Yelchin) have settled into these old characters. They're portrayals are fresh, yet familiar. And their interactions are very reminiscent of their predecessors. Second, the plot is much easier do absorb. Unlike the last movie, where everything was shown to us at almost breakneck speed, this story is slowed down just a tad, allowing for a more organic flow and more screen time for the "minor" main cast characters (Sulu, Chekov, Scott). Also, less lens flares! Abrams really listened to the fans on this.

Now, for my gripes, and here's where the spoilers come in: The story starts with a bang, but slowly starts becoming predictable, and at times really silly. Unless you've gone into this completely spoiler free, you've figured out by now that Benedict Cumberbatch is really Khan Noonien Singh. I didn't mind this. In fact, I loved the almost Hannibal Lecter way he played Star Trek's signature villain. What I didn't like was the lack of originality in the third act. A key scene from The Wrath of Khan is almost photocopied into the climax, and while it was going for an emotional punch, it wound up being almost laughable. In fact, it's painfully obvious how it becomes resolved. Also, I audibly groaned when the writers brought back **** (I won't say who. This review has enough spoilers) to explain how Khan operates to the understandably ignorant crew.

All in all, this movie is bordering on solid. Just an average Trek. But, I think it will be enjoyed by fans and non fans alike. I haven't seen it in IMAX 3D yet, so that's something to look forward to.

A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)

Swing and a miss

[6/10 · 15 February 2013]

I wanted to like this movie. I really did. Yeah, it has non-stop action, explosions, and the famous Yippie kay yay, motherrrrr...you get it line.

But what is painfully missed is the witty dialogue of its predecessors, a compelling villain like two of the previous four films had, and character development.

The dialogue was painfully dull. It lacked any of the soul of the prior films, and when it tried to throw you a bone with a lame attempt at a signature one-liner, it missed and hit the cat.

If you thought the villain in Live Free or Die Hard was lame, he's Hans Gruber compared to any of the baddies in this go-round. There are several twists that attempt to keep you guessing as to who the real bad guys are, but they leave you feeling insulted rather than shocked.

Surely we know who John McClane is by now, but if you're going to throw his son into the mix, at least give HIM some depth. Especially if you're going to throw some clichéd "Daddy abandoned me" issues in. There is no depth in the relationship between John and Jack other than Jack's resentment about "John"'s leaving him behind to jump off buildings, blow up airplanes, or destroy New York subways. And when they finally make amends, it's obviously forced.

What sank this movie ultimately is its run-time. At 97 minutes it is the shortest of the franchise. Had the makers gone the full 120, there would have been golden opportunites to expand the story, gone further in depth with Jack, and a few more explosions to boot. If you just want action, this movie gives just enough of that. But if you want the real Die Hard feel, sorry folks, it didn't show up this time.

Mad Max Renegade (2011)

Faithful and quite good.

[8/10 · 28 December 2012]

Fan films are often filled with corny gags and campy copies of the source material. Not the case here.

This brief look into the dystopian world created by Miller and Kennedy is probably the most faithful fan nod to source material seen yet.

There are budgetary drawbacks that are evident; some subtle, one not so subtle (hint: right side). But it is very easy to forgive those when you have a good (albeit brief) story, camera-work that is a nice homage to both David Eggby's and Dean Semler's styles, and an action sequence that proves you don't need a lot of cash to deliver the goods.

This has all the hallmarks of the originals, and fits perfectly between the first and second films. You'll want to see more.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

Not quite up to par, but I'll take it....

[7/10 · 23 May 2008]

I liked it, but did not love it. And here's why...

First the positive : First being that it had MOST of the hallmarks of an Indiana Jones movie. Why only most? More on that later. Starting with the Paramount mountain opening, which has a subtle message from Spielberg concerning the movie you are about to see. What message? More on that later. Next, the signature opening where Indy gets himself in trouble and escapes by the skin of this teeth. All very well done, which has a brief reference to the Ark (which was also referenced in Crudsade). The movie also has the gross out scene (ants), the map sequence twice, and several vehicle chase sequences.

Second, the acting. Harrison Ford plays an aged Indy with great charm, and even channels a bit of John Wayne this time around. In fact, we find out that Indy was indeed a war hero between films. An even bigger surprise is Shia LaBeouf; he can act! And very well. The chemistry between these characters is brilliant. John Hurt was delightful and funny as Oxley.

Third, the cinematography. Spielberg made DP Janusz Kaminski study the work of the other three film's DP Douglas Slocombe. And it paid off.

Fourth, and most important, the action. There is tons of it. No punches pulled here, in fact probably more punches than any other Indy movie. And Harrison Ford ain't afraid to get dirty in this one either.

Now the negative : The one I'm most upset about, the score. I love John Williams. My favorite movie composer, but I will have to give him a D+. Why? Each Indiana Jones movie has not only the Indy theme, but it's own individual theme to anchor the rest of the score. Unless I totally missed the boat, this film has no theme of its own. Sure it has some musical pieces not heard in the other films, and some echos of Raiders and Crusade (particularly in the warehouse, and when Indy is dwelling on his father), but no theme of its own **Please correct me if I'm wrong**

Second, the aliens. Let's call them aliens, please. They really avoided calling them aliens in the movie, Oxley calling them "beings from another dimension" (cop out), but the're aliens. The secret is out. I will concede it makes sense given that the film takes place in the '50s, and the Myans are believed to have worshiped aliens, but this really has no place in an Indiana Jones movie, sorry. An object with mystical power from a deity has an aura of mystery and suspense. An object with mystical powers given by aliens takes the fun out of it.

Third, the villains weren't very interesting. Cate Blanchette did a good job with what she had, but I found Spalko very boring. No depth. Ray Winstone's character Mac was unnecessary and very poorly conceived.

Fourth, no foreign location shooting hurt the movie. I was afraid of this when I found out, and I was right. It really made the movie seem less organic than the others. The CGI didn't help matters. Granted it was needed for the climax, and the ants, but they should have stuck with matte painting for much of the rest.

Finally, the script was good until the last 30 to 45 minutes. After which the tempo was way off, and the story started getting very hokey.

All in all, an OK movie. I will accept it into the Indiana Jones family. Some will say that Lucas and Spielberg killed the franchise. I personally think that argument is childish. What can this movie possibly take away from Raiders or Crusade? Nothing. Not very many movies hold a candle to those films, this one especially. Spielberg knew this from the start, that is why he gave us a subtle message mentioned earlier with the Paramount mountain fading into a mole hill, then having said mole hill run over by a car full of fun loving teenagers. Message: don't make too much out of this, just enjoy the ride.

Flash Gordon (2007–2008)

Flash Failure

[1/10 · 17 August 2007]

High hopes turn into groaning frustration and confusion upon seeing the first (and unfortunately not the last) episode of the latest attempt to resurrect the popular hero.

One can forgive the poor acting given the see-and-say dialogue and poorly thought out story elements. However, if your expecting dazzling special effects and quality action to save the day, your better off watching a power point presentation at the office.

One more thing; Can Ming be any less intimidating? This version of Flash Gordon's nemesis has all the villainous charm of Bill Lumbergh from Office Space!