Hello everyone, and welcome to another edition of Din's Geek Reviews.
Video games have been a major factor in geekdom for well over thirty years now. Older generations will remember the glory of Pong, the rise of the arcade, the crash of the 80s, and the revival of the genre under the home consoles.
A much darker chapter in our history comes from the disturbingly long line of video-game-based movies. Ever since the get-go people have been adapting popular game licenses into films, and not a single bloody one has been worth half a damn. From 80s crap like Super Mario Brothers all the way to the continued franchise-slaughter of the Resident Evil quadrilogy, video-game movies have never, ever worked, due in large part to an innate lack of understanding of the material by those attempting to adapt it.
Imagine my dread when I heard that one of my favorite games, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, was being adapted to the big screen. “Well,” I said, “here’ll be something else to despise.”
Well, did this film break all expectations, becoming the first good video-game movie ever, or did it rather continue the stigma, proving that games do not good movies make?
Well, it’s time to rejoice people: this movie doesn’t suck. It’s certainly not great either, but that’s beside the point.
Set in (of course) Persia, the movie follows the exploits of young Prince Destan (Jake Gyllenhaal) on a *~QUEST OF DESTINY~*.
Having nearly-single-handedly conquered the holy city of Alamut, Destan is then framed for the murder of his father. With the aid of the Princess/priestess Tamina (Gemma Arterton), he is able to escape, taking with him (purely by accident, mind you) the Dagger of Time – and ancient artifact with the power to reverse the flow of time up to one minute.
The plot is sadly linear from there. They try to get help, and are betrayed. It turns out the Nazim, Destan’s uncle (Ben Kingsly) is the actual villain (not a spoiler – for one, it’s in the trailer, and secondly his name has a “z” in it). They team up with a band of theives, try to return the dagger to its palce of origin, yaddayadda, and more fighting.
There’s some action and some questing, all culminating in a special-effects-laced climax of the ilk to make George Lucas drool with envy. All-in-all, a pretty predictable plot.
Fortunately, the acting is passable. All of the leads pull their weight well, with Gyllenhaal and Arterton both doing quite well. Their roles aren’t perfectly written, but they do well with them, giving an air of life to fairly flat, stock-ish characters. One performance I will applaud is Kingsly, who actually manages to do the near-impossible: he plays a convincing actor. It’s fairly easy to be given a character and play him. It takes massive, massive skill, however, to play a character playing another character. Nazim’s sly, conniving, murderous nature is concealed perfectly behind a mask of good-will, contentedness and love. If you want to see good acting in this film, Kingsly is really the only place you will find it. Everyone else does well, but not wonderfully.
But let’s face it – you’re not here for good acting. You’re here for action, swashbuckling, magical powers, and blood on the sand. Well, PoP gives you that. Tons of sword-fighting of various kinds, one or two explosions, and a fairly good mix of practical action and special effects. For every big, CGI-laced wide-shot you’ve got a fair number of actual hand-to-hand fights, which is good. Much better than Clash of the Titans at any rate.
Pace is good, visuals are nice, one weird scene with some ostriches, but hey, ya gotta deal, right? Over all, a passable action flick. Not great, not terrible, but solidly good.
…
Yep. That’s it… Pretty standard action movie.
Okay, fine, you knew it was coming.
I LOVE The Sands of Time game. That is one of only two games in my life where, while playing, I said to myself “Alright. This is art. No question – this is an artistic medium.” (the other, by the by, was Eternal Darkness)
So how does this film live up, not to Hollywood standards, but to the game? How’s it handle the source material?
Not well. If you’ve played the Sands of Time Trilogy, you will not be recognizing a ton, at least not directly. Okay, the Prince is there, and the Dagger of Time, but shy of that, you’re largely dealing with a whole new animal. Oddly, that animal isn’t a bad one, just utterly different. It’s almost as if they took the key elements of the Prince of Persia games, and then proceeded shuffle them, paint them different colors, and then put them back together. It’s not even remotely an adaptation of The Sands of Time, but you can see where they got a lot of things.
Biggest objections? No Hourglass of Time. Muslim context removed. Pagan context inserted (you don’t need “the gods” to have made the Sands, we will accept that “magic did it”).
My largest disappointment was the style of the action. Too much fighting, nowhere NEAR enough runny-jumpy-climby. I was expecting a movie full of freerunning, wall-walks, acrobatics and vertical wall scaling. Sadly, this was not to be.
So, final thoughts: as a reviewer, I encourage you to go see this film. Support the one good video-game based movie. You’ll have fun, stay enthralled, and enjoy it. As a fan, I was disappointed. I wanted more.
I suppose that’s my whole problem. I know this movie didn’t have to settle for “good” – this is one of the few titles that could have been really, really great. In the games, the dialogue was snappy, the characters enjoyable, the action killer, and the villain sinister. Here, you get a watered-down remix. Not bad on its own, but weaker than the original.
So go see it. It won’t wow you, but maybe, if Prince of Persia does well enough, a Metroid, Zelda, or Eternal Darkness movie will someday.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Din's Geek Reviews #7 - Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Echoes of Time
Hey all, and welcome to another installment of Geek Reviews. I apologize that this entry is so short and lackluster, but hey, better than nothing, right?
When you hear the words “Final Fantasy” what images come to your mind? Are you bombarded with thoughts of 8-bit sprites, Dragons, knights, and magery? Maybe your head fills with insane hairstyles, physically impossible weapons, cyberpunk dystopias, and the chants of Latin choirs. Perhaps you think of turn-based mechanics, collection quests, and words like “Ultima,” “Materia,” and “Magicite.”
Whatever your thoughts, if you’re a gamer, you have heard of Final Fantasy. With thirteen games spanning over two decades, the FF series is hands down the best known set of Role Playing Games ever to put paint to pixel. We all have some impression of the series.
Now please forget that impression, as the main, turn-based series is going to be left far behind as we discuss today’s title, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Echoes of Time.
First, a bit of background. The Crystal Chronicles sub-series of Final Fantasy began in 2003 with the Japanese release of Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles on the Nintendo GameCube. Though praised for its graphics, musical score, control, and story-telling, many fans were disappointed with the game. A basic hack-n-slash dungeon-crawler, FF:CC alienated those who were craving a new, turn-based title on a Nintendo consol after the series left for the Playstation for FFVII.
Sadly, the game didn’t sell particularly well as a result, which is a shame, because it was really a solid title. Fortunately, it was successful enough to spawn a prequel on the Nintendo DS, Ring of Fates, in 2007. This, in turn, led to the creation of Echoes of Time, released in 2009.
If you’ve played the original FF:CC, Echoes of Time will feel familiar to you. Controls are basic – D-pad to move, A to attack, B to jump, X to grab, Y to cast magic – and the four “tribes” that serve as the character classes for this world remain largely unchanged:
You have Calvats, the standard “beginner’s choice” human-surrogate,
Selkies, who can double-jump and run slightly faster,
Yukes, who are better at magic,
And Lilties, who kill things with pointy sticks.
After creating your initial character, you are encouraged to craft up to three additional party members to aid you in your quest. Frankly, I found this one of the weaker portions of the game – the AI is dense as a brick – and only ever created one (a Yuke, to essentially serve as a giant “heal me now” button).
But now that you know the basic scheme of things, let’s break things down, shall we? How does Echoes of Time hold up in the traditional gaming departments?
Graphics & Gameplay, and Technical
Let’s face it folks: the DS can’t do all that much. Though fantastic by 2004 standards, this little chunk of hardware is starting to look a tad dated, even in the handheld market. Echoes of Time is a very strong example of the mixed bag of graphics that such a system – old enough to be pushed to the limits, but teetering on obsolescence – can do.
The game contrasts rather sharply between in-game graphics – which are quite passable– and startlingly beautiful pre-rendered cutscenes. In-game, characters are fairly discernable, easy to work with, and, though perhaps a tad pixilated, not as bad as online screenshots might lead one to believe. Text balloons fill the characterization gap nicely, with portrait shots allowing us to get far more emotional depth out of otherwise expressionless characters.
Meanwhile, the cutscenes are fully animated (though lacking moving lips for whatever reason) and voice-acted by a surprisingly good cast. Though sometimes distracting, they serve their purpose well enough without making us rue the graphical inferiority of the game itself.
Sadly, the controls don’t always quite work. As is wont to happen in these 64-bit (ish) environments, I more than once fell through the geometry. Also, the full-3D environments are sometimes tricky to navigate with a D-pad, leaving you spastically twitching your character back and forth alone diagonal walkways.
Despite these flaws, the game is actually pretty well-crafted. The level design is nice, the music (though a bit repetitive) is atmospheric, and the control scheme very easy to get used to. Magic is simpler than ever, the touch-screen elements blend seamlessly, and the game, over-all, has a passable learning curve.
Story & Setting
The story in Echoes of Time is a far more present happening than it was back in the original FF:CC. In fact, the only word to describe this game is “linear.” With the occasional exception of hunting down a rare item, you will pretty much cruise from level to level with no real stops in-between. Exploration is nonexistent, side-quests could more accurately be called “mini-games,” and even your equipment will pretty much be replaced after each dungeon.
That being said, this straight-as-an-arrow plot you are on is actually quite doable. Essentially, you play the standardized “chosen one” who must defeat an evil immortal bent on re-writing the past. There’s some poorly-concealed “crystals = oil” metaphors going on, but they don’t hurt too much. Characters such as Larkeicus (the aforementioned immortal) and Sherlotta (your surrogate mother/elder-sister) do their job well and get you at least marginally vested in the plot. Which is good, because despite leading you by the hand from level to level, this game is actually pretty low on actual plot-related events. What’s there is good, but the cutscenes are very limited in number, and seem rather detached from the actual dungeon-crawling you had to do to get there. In short, the plot and gameplay, both strong enough on their own, are separated by a 7-inch thick glass wall.
Conclusions
Echoes of Time is a fine game – not stellar, but good. Irritating graphical issues are made up for with streamlined controls, the lack of open exploration is made for with the ease of powering up, and the dungeons, though dangerously close to being repetitive, are short enough not to be bothersome. All in all, you’re only looking at about 15 – 25 hours of gameplay, depending on how many quests you do, what equipment you get, and how hard you play for completion. This works in the game’s favor – by the time I was done with Echoes of Time, I was just starting to get frustrated with the lack of variety.
In short, if you want pick-up-and-play, action fantasy game with little time or monetary commitment, Echoes of Time might be the game for you. I lucked out and got my copy for ten bucks, and was not at all disappointed. Give it a try – it might not be as good as the GameCube title, but you could do a hell of a lot worse.
When you hear the words “Final Fantasy” what images come to your mind? Are you bombarded with thoughts of 8-bit sprites, Dragons, knights, and magery? Maybe your head fills with insane hairstyles, physically impossible weapons, cyberpunk dystopias, and the chants of Latin choirs. Perhaps you think of turn-based mechanics, collection quests, and words like “Ultima,” “Materia,” and “Magicite.”
Whatever your thoughts, if you’re a gamer, you have heard of Final Fantasy. With thirteen games spanning over two decades, the FF series is hands down the best known set of Role Playing Games ever to put paint to pixel. We all have some impression of the series.
Now please forget that impression, as the main, turn-based series is going to be left far behind as we discuss today’s title, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Echoes of Time.
First, a bit of background. The Crystal Chronicles sub-series of Final Fantasy began in 2003 with the Japanese release of Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles on the Nintendo GameCube. Though praised for its graphics, musical score, control, and story-telling, many fans were disappointed with the game. A basic hack-n-slash dungeon-crawler, FF:CC alienated those who were craving a new, turn-based title on a Nintendo consol after the series left for the Playstation for FFVII.
Sadly, the game didn’t sell particularly well as a result, which is a shame, because it was really a solid title. Fortunately, it was successful enough to spawn a prequel on the Nintendo DS, Ring of Fates, in 2007. This, in turn, led to the creation of Echoes of Time, released in 2009.
If you’ve played the original FF:CC, Echoes of Time will feel familiar to you. Controls are basic – D-pad to move, A to attack, B to jump, X to grab, Y to cast magic – and the four “tribes” that serve as the character classes for this world remain largely unchanged:
You have Calvats, the standard “beginner’s choice” human-surrogate,
Selkies, who can double-jump and run slightly faster,
Yukes, who are better at magic,
And Lilties, who kill things with pointy sticks.
After creating your initial character, you are encouraged to craft up to three additional party members to aid you in your quest. Frankly, I found this one of the weaker portions of the game – the AI is dense as a brick – and only ever created one (a Yuke, to essentially serve as a giant “heal me now” button).
But now that you know the basic scheme of things, let’s break things down, shall we? How does Echoes of Time hold up in the traditional gaming departments?
Graphics & Gameplay, and Technical
Let’s face it folks: the DS can’t do all that much. Though fantastic by 2004 standards, this little chunk of hardware is starting to look a tad dated, even in the handheld market. Echoes of Time is a very strong example of the mixed bag of graphics that such a system – old enough to be pushed to the limits, but teetering on obsolescence – can do.
The game contrasts rather sharply between in-game graphics – which are quite passable– and startlingly beautiful pre-rendered cutscenes. In-game, characters are fairly discernable, easy to work with, and, though perhaps a tad pixilated, not as bad as online screenshots might lead one to believe. Text balloons fill the characterization gap nicely, with portrait shots allowing us to get far more emotional depth out of otherwise expressionless characters.
Meanwhile, the cutscenes are fully animated (though lacking moving lips for whatever reason) and voice-acted by a surprisingly good cast. Though sometimes distracting, they serve their purpose well enough without making us rue the graphical inferiority of the game itself.
Sadly, the controls don’t always quite work. As is wont to happen in these 64-bit (ish) environments, I more than once fell through the geometry. Also, the full-3D environments are sometimes tricky to navigate with a D-pad, leaving you spastically twitching your character back and forth alone diagonal walkways.
Despite these flaws, the game is actually pretty well-crafted. The level design is nice, the music (though a bit repetitive) is atmospheric, and the control scheme very easy to get used to. Magic is simpler than ever, the touch-screen elements blend seamlessly, and the game, over-all, has a passable learning curve.
Story & Setting
The story in Echoes of Time is a far more present happening than it was back in the original FF:CC. In fact, the only word to describe this game is “linear.” With the occasional exception of hunting down a rare item, you will pretty much cruise from level to level with no real stops in-between. Exploration is nonexistent, side-quests could more accurately be called “mini-games,” and even your equipment will pretty much be replaced after each dungeon.
That being said, this straight-as-an-arrow plot you are on is actually quite doable. Essentially, you play the standardized “chosen one” who must defeat an evil immortal bent on re-writing the past. There’s some poorly-concealed “crystals = oil” metaphors going on, but they don’t hurt too much. Characters such as Larkeicus (the aforementioned immortal) and Sherlotta (your surrogate mother/elder-sister) do their job well and get you at least marginally vested in the plot. Which is good, because despite leading you by the hand from level to level, this game is actually pretty low on actual plot-related events. What’s there is good, but the cutscenes are very limited in number, and seem rather detached from the actual dungeon-crawling you had to do to get there. In short, the plot and gameplay, both strong enough on their own, are separated by a 7-inch thick glass wall.
Conclusions
Echoes of Time is a fine game – not stellar, but good. Irritating graphical issues are made up for with streamlined controls, the lack of open exploration is made for with the ease of powering up, and the dungeons, though dangerously close to being repetitive, are short enough not to be bothersome. All in all, you’re only looking at about 15 – 25 hours of gameplay, depending on how many quests you do, what equipment you get, and how hard you play for completion. This works in the game’s favor – by the time I was done with Echoes of Time, I was just starting to get frustrated with the lack of variety.
In short, if you want pick-up-and-play, action fantasy game with little time or monetary commitment, Echoes of Time might be the game for you. I lucked out and got my copy for ten bucks, and was not at all disappointed. Give it a try – it might not be as good as the GameCube title, but you could do a hell of a lot worse.
Friday, January 1, 2010
Din's Geek Reviews #6 - Top Geek Films of 2009
Hello, and welcome to another exciting episode of Din's Geek Reviews.
Well everyone, it’s been a big year for us geeks, any way you cut it. Sarah Connor and Dollhouse both got canceled, Star Wars and Star Trek traded venues, and Captain America rose from the grave. But, all that considered, it has really been the cinema that has had the biggest year in geekdom.
With Marvel and DC each only contributing a single film this year, it looked to be a pretty lack-luster season. But then, just as summer was ending, BOOM! stream of awesome.
To celebrate this year in geek-movies, I will be counting down the top six geek films of the year. I’m sure you’ve heard of the majority, but never-the-less, here’s my take on this surprisingly good season, and why it will be a painful, expensive year to come at the DVD stores.
#6 Ponyo
I really, really hope at least a few of you got to see this movie on the big screen.
Ponyo, fully titled Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea, is the latest anime film by legendary Japanese director Hayao Miyazaki. In some ways a loose re-telling of the traditional “Little Mermaid” story, the film follows the adventures of the titular Ponyo, a small fish… girl… thing… as she is washed ashore and rescued by a young Japanese boy named Sosuke.
At the same time, Ponyo’s father (apparently tasked with keeping the oceans in balance) is on a quest to retrieve the little fishgirl, as she has the potential to disrupt nature (or something. It’s been a few months, okay?).
Though featuring all of the reality-bending weirdery that Miyazaki has become famous for, Ponyo is still a charming film. I saw the English dub while it was in the theater, and I must, say, despite using two clearly market-targeted stars (Noah Cyrus and Frankie Jonas as Ponyo and Sosuke respectively) it was actually one of the better dubs I’ve seen. The supporting cast was great, featuring the likes of Liam Neeson and Tina Fey, and the voices always matched the characters.
But what really makes Ponyo a great film is the spectacle. The vast, hand-drawn oceans are simply amazing, particularly during the storm scene about halfway through.
All that said, this film also manages to capture much of that childhood innocence that a lot of kid’s movies lack these days. It’s a wonderfully charming film, with loveable characters, good lessons, and beautiful animation. Go rent it. Show your kids. Enjoy.
#5 Surrogates
Anyone who stepped foot into a theatre between the release of Terminator Salvation and September probably saw the trailer for this film. One of the two big, flashy, old-school sci-fi films of this year, Surrogates is based on a 2005 – 2006 comic book series and follows the adventures of… a character played by Bruce Willis, as he tries to solve a murder.
But you’re not here for that, not really. You’re here for the sci-fi attitude.
You learned about the premise in the aforementioned trailers. It’s the kinda-sorta future, and the supermajority of humans are living their lives through “surrogates” – essentially remote controlled android puppets – allowing them to live without limits. What the surrogates feel, they feel, etc.
However, all is not well for Willis, as the first murder in *generic amount of time* has occurred, forcing him to track down a killer that can murder people through their surrogates.
There’s plenty of action here. The whole normal-people-as-terminators thing is fully exploited, and the action scenes are pretty good. But what really makes Surrogates strong is its ideas.
This movie takes a very older-style sci-fi approach to the plot device – it’s not just an excuse for the action. It really does dabble with the questions raised: what would life be like with no consequences? Would some people give up on their own humanity? How would war change? What if such a system happened, but was taken away?
It’s the little stuff that makes to movie great – the character interaction, the backgrounds, just how normal these machines have become. A fun film to be sure, but probably a better discussion.
#4 Sherlock Holmes
Okay, I just saw this one yesterday, so I might be cheating a little, but I don’t really care. This film rocked.
Sherlock Holmes is the story of, well, Sherlock Holmes, and the continuing adventures thereof.
And I’m not going to spoil it for you. Let’s just say there is murder, and adventure, and high-flying action all around.
Without ruining it, the plot is an interesting blend of intrigue, going off in perhaps a bit of an odd direction. However, it concludes in a way that leaves you very satisfied with the entire adventure, and (as is always the case with good Holmes) gives you the chance to theorize a number of the pieces yourself. (I totally called it on the “fire” incident, by the way)
What makes Holmes wonderful is its acting. Robert Downy Jr. and Jude Law are fantastic in this movie, playing the characters off of each other perfectly. Watson is competent for once, and Holmes is a bit of a disheveled eccentric. I wish I could give you particular examples, but this film is (as most Holmes stories are) so detail-based that anything I could use would give away part of the fun. Just trust me – these characters have not been portrayed this well in… ever.
Oh, and the action was good. That happens too. I particularly liked the early slow-mo bits – they really brought in a new dimension to Holmes as a character that I thought fit quite well.
The only major complaint I have was the use of CGI – really, I know it’s cheap, but the tech is hardly perfect. Build some sets, danggit. If The Muppet Christmas Carol can do practical effects shots of Victorian London, so can you.
But the CG was really only a minor distraction. There’re only two or three shots that were annoying, and they were fast.
It’s still in theatres folks. Go check this one out.
#3 Inglorious Bastards
Alright, I know, this one might not really count as a “geek movie,” but look at it this way: what we’re dealing with is essentially a spaghetti-western set entirely in Nazi-occupied France, starring European actors no one has heard of, all directed by the guy who made bad kung fu movies cool again. Oh, and about 80% of it is in subtitles.
So yes. Yes it is a geek movie.
What may surprise you is that this movie, despite its promotional campaign and Tarantino’s history, is not so very gory. Oh yes, the violence is there, and it’s harsh, but there’s only three or four moments of it, and they don’t last.
What’s more, there’s actually not all that much action. Rather, this film is based on dialogue, building suspense and excitement through conversation – no mean feat, particularly in foreign languages.
The acting is universally enjoyable – even Brad Pit is good – but you’re really here to see Christoph Waltz as Hans Landa, and Melanie Laurent as Shosanna Dreyfus. Waltz in particular is amazing, carrying the Nazi Colonel through not one, not two, but four different languages, and still keeping an atmosphere of venomous evil through the entire film. He’s one of those nice villains – the kind that might give you a cake, but that you really, really don’t want to piss off.
Over all, Bastards was an exciting, stimulating movie, possibly one of the best Tarantino has done to date. Turn your eyes away at the right moments, and you’re in for a treat.
#2 District 9
I dedicated an entire review to this when it first came out, so there’s really no need to re-hash the virtues of District 9. However, I will point out why this movie didn’t make the #1 slot on this list.
Sadly, all its strengths aside, District 9 is a hard movie to watch. The film is emotionally brutal, visually unpleasant, and leaves you feeling physically drained. It is certainly a “must see movie,” but sadly, you will probably only feel up to seeing it once or twice. It’s not a film you will be watching ever couple of months – probably not even once a year. It’s powerful, very, very powerful, but with that power comes the price of effort. You need to be in a particular mood to re-watch District 9.
If you haven’t seen it, see it now. If you have, rent it, watch it, and then put it down for a while.
#1 Watchmen
It’s a little ironic that I opened this list by pointing out the shortage of Marvel/DC adaptations, yet it’s Watchmen that takes the cake.
Where to begin? Well, I suppose the source material is as good as anywhere.
Based on the 1986/7 (and I don’t say this lightly) masterpiece by Alan Moore, Watchmen is a super-hero/alternate-history/Cold-War drama/romance/intrigue/detective story?
Alright, let me back up. It’s the 1980’s, and, in this universe, costumed heroes have been around for years. No powers, mind you, just flamboyant vigilantism. Over time, however, the government decides it doesn’t care for this, and makes it illegal.
The “core” story is that of a series of murders. Someone, somewhere, is attempting to kill off masks, and this does not sit well with those remaining. Clue leads to clue, eventually culminating in events that will reshape the world as we know it and make every reader/viewer question their own humanity.
…
Okay, look. I can’t do better than this. This story is so labyrinthine, so multifaceted, so interwoven between personal relationships, massive governments, and inner monologues on the nature of humanity you have to read it or, in this case, watch it. I can’t summarize it here, and it would be a disservice to try it.
Alright, so wonderful comic. What makes this movie so great?
Most things, to tell the truth. An incredibly loyal adaptation, Watchmen really does what it set out to do. The action is exciting (though admittedly sparse by modern standards) and the plot is well executed, but the reason to watch this is the characters.
Strong performances are delivered by almost the entire cast (with the notable exception of Malin Akerman, who kind of falls on her face). Patrick Wilson and Matthew Goode provide wonderful contrast as Night Owl and Ozymandias respectively, showing the various paths that vigilantism (and wealth) can take, depending on your attitudes. Wilson in particular performs well, creating a believable, insecure, and unconfident character that is easy to identify with.
Billy Crudup also brings a fair bit of talent to the table as Doctor Manhattan, coming off as (fittingly) emotionless. It takes a lot of effort to remain that monotone.
The star of this cast, of course, is Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach. Seriously. This guy nailed it. The monologue, the voice, the expressions – everything. Haley keeps Rorschach what he was in the book – cold, mean, and obsessed. Hell, the guy even looks the part.
As far as super-hero movies go, this one is top-bracket. Though some audiences might find it slow for an action film, that’s actually fine. Because this isn’t an action film. It’s a drama, and a sci-fi. It’s about questions, and discussions. When does the law cease to be justified? How far is too far? To what lengths do you go to protect humanity? What do you do with the powers of God? When does obsession become insanity? Does it even matter?
Watchmen is all about these kind of questions, and more.
Watch the film. Then read the book (you’ll thank me later).
Then buy them both so you can repeat the process every-so-often.
Conclusion
As you can see, it’s been a huge year for geek films. Honorable mentions go out to Avatar for its special effects, Harry Potter for not sucking, and Star Trek for revitalizing the franchise, but in the end, none of those was quite good enough to make it on the list.
Well, 2009 is over. What’s 2010 got in store?
First up will be Iron Man 2 in May. After that? Well, we’ll just wait and see. 2011 is the “big year” for geekdom. But maybe, just maybe, 2010 will have as good a run as 2009.
Well everyone, it’s been a big year for us geeks, any way you cut it. Sarah Connor and Dollhouse both got canceled, Star Wars and Star Trek traded venues, and Captain America rose from the grave. But, all that considered, it has really been the cinema that has had the biggest year in geekdom.
With Marvel and DC each only contributing a single film this year, it looked to be a pretty lack-luster season. But then, just as summer was ending, BOOM! stream of awesome.
To celebrate this year in geek-movies, I will be counting down the top six geek films of the year. I’m sure you’ve heard of the majority, but never-the-less, here’s my take on this surprisingly good season, and why it will be a painful, expensive year to come at the DVD stores.
#6 Ponyo
I really, really hope at least a few of you got to see this movie on the big screen.
Ponyo, fully titled Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea, is the latest anime film by legendary Japanese director Hayao Miyazaki. In some ways a loose re-telling of the traditional “Little Mermaid” story, the film follows the adventures of the titular Ponyo, a small fish… girl… thing… as she is washed ashore and rescued by a young Japanese boy named Sosuke.
At the same time, Ponyo’s father (apparently tasked with keeping the oceans in balance) is on a quest to retrieve the little fishgirl, as she has the potential to disrupt nature (or something. It’s been a few months, okay?).
Though featuring all of the reality-bending weirdery that Miyazaki has become famous for, Ponyo is still a charming film. I saw the English dub while it was in the theater, and I must, say, despite using two clearly market-targeted stars (Noah Cyrus and Frankie Jonas as Ponyo and Sosuke respectively) it was actually one of the better dubs I’ve seen. The supporting cast was great, featuring the likes of Liam Neeson and Tina Fey, and the voices always matched the characters.
But what really makes Ponyo a great film is the spectacle. The vast, hand-drawn oceans are simply amazing, particularly during the storm scene about halfway through.
All that said, this film also manages to capture much of that childhood innocence that a lot of kid’s movies lack these days. It’s a wonderfully charming film, with loveable characters, good lessons, and beautiful animation. Go rent it. Show your kids. Enjoy.
#5 Surrogates
Anyone who stepped foot into a theatre between the release of Terminator Salvation and September probably saw the trailer for this film. One of the two big, flashy, old-school sci-fi films of this year, Surrogates is based on a 2005 – 2006 comic book series and follows the adventures of… a character played by Bruce Willis, as he tries to solve a murder.
But you’re not here for that, not really. You’re here for the sci-fi attitude.
You learned about the premise in the aforementioned trailers. It’s the kinda-sorta future, and the supermajority of humans are living their lives through “surrogates” – essentially remote controlled android puppets – allowing them to live without limits. What the surrogates feel, they feel, etc.
However, all is not well for Willis, as the first murder in *generic amount of time* has occurred, forcing him to track down a killer that can murder people through their surrogates.
There’s plenty of action here. The whole normal-people-as-terminators thing is fully exploited, and the action scenes are pretty good. But what really makes Surrogates strong is its ideas.
This movie takes a very older-style sci-fi approach to the plot device – it’s not just an excuse for the action. It really does dabble with the questions raised: what would life be like with no consequences? Would some people give up on their own humanity? How would war change? What if such a system happened, but was taken away?
It’s the little stuff that makes to movie great – the character interaction, the backgrounds, just how normal these machines have become. A fun film to be sure, but probably a better discussion.
#4 Sherlock Holmes
Okay, I just saw this one yesterday, so I might be cheating a little, but I don’t really care. This film rocked.
Sherlock Holmes is the story of, well, Sherlock Holmes, and the continuing adventures thereof.
And I’m not going to spoil it for you. Let’s just say there is murder, and adventure, and high-flying action all around.
Without ruining it, the plot is an interesting blend of intrigue, going off in perhaps a bit of an odd direction. However, it concludes in a way that leaves you very satisfied with the entire adventure, and (as is always the case with good Holmes) gives you the chance to theorize a number of the pieces yourself. (I totally called it on the “fire” incident, by the way)
What makes Holmes wonderful is its acting. Robert Downy Jr. and Jude Law are fantastic in this movie, playing the characters off of each other perfectly. Watson is competent for once, and Holmes is a bit of a disheveled eccentric. I wish I could give you particular examples, but this film is (as most Holmes stories are) so detail-based that anything I could use would give away part of the fun. Just trust me – these characters have not been portrayed this well in… ever.
Oh, and the action was good. That happens too. I particularly liked the early slow-mo bits – they really brought in a new dimension to Holmes as a character that I thought fit quite well.
The only major complaint I have was the use of CGI – really, I know it’s cheap, but the tech is hardly perfect. Build some sets, danggit. If The Muppet Christmas Carol can do practical effects shots of Victorian London, so can you.
But the CG was really only a minor distraction. There’re only two or three shots that were annoying, and they were fast.
It’s still in theatres folks. Go check this one out.
#3 Inglorious Bastards
Alright, I know, this one might not really count as a “geek movie,” but look at it this way: what we’re dealing with is essentially a spaghetti-western set entirely in Nazi-occupied France, starring European actors no one has heard of, all directed by the guy who made bad kung fu movies cool again. Oh, and about 80% of it is in subtitles.
So yes. Yes it is a geek movie.
What may surprise you is that this movie, despite its promotional campaign and Tarantino’s history, is not so very gory. Oh yes, the violence is there, and it’s harsh, but there’s only three or four moments of it, and they don’t last.
What’s more, there’s actually not all that much action. Rather, this film is based on dialogue, building suspense and excitement through conversation – no mean feat, particularly in foreign languages.
The acting is universally enjoyable – even Brad Pit is good – but you’re really here to see Christoph Waltz as Hans Landa, and Melanie Laurent as Shosanna Dreyfus. Waltz in particular is amazing, carrying the Nazi Colonel through not one, not two, but four different languages, and still keeping an atmosphere of venomous evil through the entire film. He’s one of those nice villains – the kind that might give you a cake, but that you really, really don’t want to piss off.
Over all, Bastards was an exciting, stimulating movie, possibly one of the best Tarantino has done to date. Turn your eyes away at the right moments, and you’re in for a treat.
#2 District 9
I dedicated an entire review to this when it first came out, so there’s really no need to re-hash the virtues of District 9. However, I will point out why this movie didn’t make the #1 slot on this list.
Sadly, all its strengths aside, District 9 is a hard movie to watch. The film is emotionally brutal, visually unpleasant, and leaves you feeling physically drained. It is certainly a “must see movie,” but sadly, you will probably only feel up to seeing it once or twice. It’s not a film you will be watching ever couple of months – probably not even once a year. It’s powerful, very, very powerful, but with that power comes the price of effort. You need to be in a particular mood to re-watch District 9.
If you haven’t seen it, see it now. If you have, rent it, watch it, and then put it down for a while.
#1 Watchmen
It’s a little ironic that I opened this list by pointing out the shortage of Marvel/DC adaptations, yet it’s Watchmen that takes the cake.
Where to begin? Well, I suppose the source material is as good as anywhere.
Based on the 1986/7 (and I don’t say this lightly) masterpiece by Alan Moore, Watchmen is a super-hero/alternate-history/Cold-War drama/romance/intrigue/detective story?
Alright, let me back up. It’s the 1980’s, and, in this universe, costumed heroes have been around for years. No powers, mind you, just flamboyant vigilantism. Over time, however, the government decides it doesn’t care for this, and makes it illegal.
The “core” story is that of a series of murders. Someone, somewhere, is attempting to kill off masks, and this does not sit well with those remaining. Clue leads to clue, eventually culminating in events that will reshape the world as we know it and make every reader/viewer question their own humanity.
…
Okay, look. I can’t do better than this. This story is so labyrinthine, so multifaceted, so interwoven between personal relationships, massive governments, and inner monologues on the nature of humanity you have to read it or, in this case, watch it. I can’t summarize it here, and it would be a disservice to try it.
Alright, so wonderful comic. What makes this movie so great?
Most things, to tell the truth. An incredibly loyal adaptation, Watchmen really does what it set out to do. The action is exciting (though admittedly sparse by modern standards) and the plot is well executed, but the reason to watch this is the characters.
Strong performances are delivered by almost the entire cast (with the notable exception of Malin Akerman, who kind of falls on her face). Patrick Wilson and Matthew Goode provide wonderful contrast as Night Owl and Ozymandias respectively, showing the various paths that vigilantism (and wealth) can take, depending on your attitudes. Wilson in particular performs well, creating a believable, insecure, and unconfident character that is easy to identify with.
Billy Crudup also brings a fair bit of talent to the table as Doctor Manhattan, coming off as (fittingly) emotionless. It takes a lot of effort to remain that monotone.
The star of this cast, of course, is Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach. Seriously. This guy nailed it. The monologue, the voice, the expressions – everything. Haley keeps Rorschach what he was in the book – cold, mean, and obsessed. Hell, the guy even looks the part.
As far as super-hero movies go, this one is top-bracket. Though some audiences might find it slow for an action film, that’s actually fine. Because this isn’t an action film. It’s a drama, and a sci-fi. It’s about questions, and discussions. When does the law cease to be justified? How far is too far? To what lengths do you go to protect humanity? What do you do with the powers of God? When does obsession become insanity? Does it even matter?
Watchmen is all about these kind of questions, and more.
Watch the film. Then read the book (you’ll thank me later).
Then buy them both so you can repeat the process every-so-often.
Conclusion
As you can see, it’s been a huge year for geek films. Honorable mentions go out to Avatar for its special effects, Harry Potter for not sucking, and Star Trek for revitalizing the franchise, but in the end, none of those was quite good enough to make it on the list.
Well, 2009 is over. What’s 2010 got in store?
First up will be Iron Man 2 in May. After that? Well, we’ll just wait and see. 2011 is the “big year” for geekdom. But maybe, just maybe, 2010 will have as good a run as 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
