Altered Spaces

It’s been a long long time since I wrote a movie review of any kind on my Space, but I feel compelled to tonight, because I’ve just seen Beowulf and it was one of the best cinematic experiences of my life!

 

I should start by saying it’s not the best movie I’ve ever seen, but it is probably going to be one of the most enjoyable experiences you’ll have had watching a film for a long time (as long as you watch it at the cinema). I have no idea what’s planned for the DVD release, but at the cinema it’s in 3D and because it’s in 3D you’re not going to see a pirated version until it hits DVD because without the funky glasses below, the film is a blurry unwatchable mess.

 

 

Anyway, about the movie. Well it’s based on an old folktale (think Lord Of The Rings style), it’s all rendered in the most realistic CGI you’ll see (this year at least), it features the vocal talents of amongst others, Ray Winstone and Angelina Jolie. The plot is tight and is held together with a nice script and some excellent action sequences. The 3D isn’t overdone and really takes the movie to another level. It’s not played as a gimmick and you’ll get a sense of depth in this movie that is unsurpassed. The sound quality in the film is also top notch, with a nice accompanying score.

 

The only downside to the movie is that you often wonder if it would have been better to have been filmed with real actors, rather than CGI representations, as there are plenty of times where the CGI is just not quite up to scratch. However, on the flipside, there are times where the CGI is so good you have to pinch yourself. It’s a bit of a mixed bag and I’m guessing budget and rendering time had something to do with how much could be of the highest detail.

 

The film has been released as a 12A in the UK and I have to say that some of the lines in the script are quite blatantly sexual and quite possibly at a level you wouldn’t be happy with your 12 year old hearing, so it’s probably got the correct rating and as a parent you should certainly want to be aware of that. It also features a reasonable amount of nakedness, both male and female (naked 3D CGI Angelina Jolie!), and I swear this will probably be the first time many people get excited looking at CGI nakedness.

 

As a guy, it’s almost worth seeing for the Angelina Jolie segment, but throw in great action, 3D funkyness and an all round polished finish to all aspects of the movie and it becomes a must see for guys and girls of all ages.

 

 

 

After seeing WTC yesterday, my first thought was, how on Earth do I review that? I hadn’t expected to see a film as tasteful as it is, as respectful as it is or indeed how powerful as it is. However, the real problem for me, is how do you review a film that may be getting it’s power from the event it’s based upon rather than it’s constituent artistic parts.

 

In the end, I decided that any numerical rating I chose to give WTC couldn’t possibly reflect the experience of watching the film, because you cannot divorce this movie from the real world event. A lot of people I know won’t even watch this film (or indeed Flight 93), simply because they’re seen to be cashing in on tragedy and telling stories that just don’t need to recounted. Prior to seeing the film, I was sort of in agreement, but I was curious, just not curious enough to actually buy a ticket (mine were free).

 

WTC should, if you’re not an emotional retard, make you seriously think about your life and those you love. Specifically it should make you realise how valuable those relationships are and that you should be grateful for them every second of every day. It should also stand as true testament to the human ability to survive against all odds and to highlight the extremes to which the human race can push itself. In this regard, the film accurately reflects the feelings felt by many people worldwide after the actual event took place.

 

The story does it’s best to avoid making any political gestures, staying away from the bigger picture and instead, focusses on the disappearance and subsequent survival of two port authority policemen who are buried when the towers collapse. Screen time is split between the men’s fight for survival and their families struggle to get any kind of news about their loved ones. In addition, we’re introduced to the man who plays a major part in locating the survivors and how he comes to be in New York.(*)

 

From beginning to end, I was heartened by the performances of the main cast, which are very genuine and heartfelt. This might seem to be expected when working with source material like this, but these actors still had a job to do and they did it commendably well. My only complaint however, is that there are a large number of recognisable faces in the movie and each big name that appears on screen merely helps to distract you from the events going on around them.

 

In terms of effects and cinematography, everything is handled brilliantly. The start of the movie is filled with some beautifully haunting shots of New York’s skyline prior to the attack and the recreation of ground zero after the attack is indescribable. No doubt many of these shots make significant use of computer effects, but all of them are totally seemless. It’s worth noting that you never see the planes hit either tower, but you certainly see and feel the effect those strikes have, both physically and emotionally.

 

One of the things that struck me about WTC, that I wasn’t expecting, was the sheer lack of Hollywood America. Sure, this is a film based in America, that deals with a primarily American tragedy, but it manages to avoid doing the things that these types of films often do. There are no schmaltzy "we’re America we’re great" speeches and there’s no flag waving. I don’t actually recall seeing the stars and stripes once throughout the film and I think the film benefits from it, by allowing audiences to empathise more with the characters who aren’t portrayed as American’s, just everyday people like you and I.

 

So would I recommend you go and see WTC? Well I think the previous paragraphs say it all. Personally, I think watching movies like this are good for the soul, but then I’m an emotional guy. I’m sure it won’t be for everyone, but that certainly won’t be down to the quality of the film.

 

(*) Since watching the movie, I’ve been looking into how true the film really is and it’s worth mentioning that not everything in the movie is 100% accurate. Details have been left out, some important names are missing and there are some minor flaws, but overall it’s very faithful to the events as documented.

 

Before I begin, let me put my review in context. I am not a religious man, but I do take an interest in religion. I loved the movie Stigmata and it in turn led me to seek out the Gospel of St Thomas. Even now I’m currently in the process of watching a documentary about the Gospel of Judas. I also love Tom Hanks as an actor, I don’t recall ever seeing a movie he starred in that I didn’t like. So my reaction to this fillm suprised even me.

 

I probably can’t be completely fair to this movie as I dozed off numerous times throughout the film, but everything I did see was awful. Actaully it wasn’t even awful, it was just nothing. Films are mean’t to entertain, to effect you on some level, whether that’s on an emotional, visceral or intellectual level, but the Da Vinci Code successfully failed to effect me on any level.

 

You’re probably thinking that I’m just upset that it’s not as good as the book, which films never are, but I haven’t even read the book. In fact, if Dan Brown was hoping to add my name to the millions of people who have already read the book, he really shouldn’t have let it be turned into a film, especially not one directed by Ron Howard. The pacing is yawnsome, the dialog is delivered like a bad university lecturer, the number of flashbacks annoying and camera work irritating.

 

It can’t all be bad though, surely? Well, I’m in a agreement with most people that Ian McKellen’s performance is the highlight and Paul Bettany does well as the menacing Catholic assassin, but Tom Hanks is terrible in the lead role and Audrey Tautou get’s dragged down by his performance. The two of them have no chemistry at all and even though I had no idea who Robert Langdon was prior to the movie, Tom Hanks was obviously a bad choice to play him.

 

If you’re interested in watching people sit around talking boring drivel for two and a half hours while Tom Hanks gets a constipated look on his face as he unwravels the mysteries of the universe, you’ll love The Da Vinci Code. As for me, watching paint dry is more exciting! I wouldn’t even bother renting this one on DVD!