THE CRONICLES OF NARNIA: PRINCE CASPIAN

THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA:
PRINCE CASPIAN

PRINCE CASPIAN is the latest of this summers big releases. This is the second movie in the Narnia series based on the C. S. Lewis stories in THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA. I should point out to those of you who are not familiar with THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA that it consists of really seven separate stories. The first movie, THE LION, THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE, was based on the second story in the series. It was released in 2005 and won 1 Oscar and was nominated for two others. PRINCE CASPIAN, based on the 4th story in the series stars the same four main characters from the first movie, Georgie Henley as Lucy Pevensie, Skandar Keynes as Edmund Pevensie, William Moseley as Peter Pevensie and Anna Popplewell as Susan Pevensie.

PRINCE CASPIAN wastes no time with recaps or character building. It assumes you are already familiar with the story line and characters from the first film. With that out of the way, the story wastes no time in getting started. The story is age old, a young prince is going to be overthrown by the evil pretender to the throne and flees for his life to find a way to get back his throne and overthrow the evil usurper. Our young heroes are summoned back to Narnia, which in Narnia years is 1300 years since they were last there, but only one year in their time scale. They are the Kings and Queens of Old.

That’s all I’ll mention of the plot and story line. I don’t want to spoil it for everyone.

The movie is well done, like the first; I’d even say it was done better. The makeup and special effects are wonderful. There are a ton of different characters both human and non-human, but I have to say that the mice have the best lines!

The movie is directed by Andrew Adamson, who also directed THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE, SHERK and SHREK 2. Adamson was also a writer in both Narnia films and SHREK 2 and SHREK THE THIRD. After you have seen this film, you will notice that there is a slight resemblance between Reepicheep the mouse in PRINCE CASPIAN and Puss ‘n Boots in SHREK. That is no accident as Adamson has stated that he developed the character of Puss from the Reepicheep character in Narnia, except for a few subtle differences. Interesting trivia.

The movie runs 146 minutes, the first movie ran 145, and the time flies. There are just a few spots where the story drags a bit, but other than that it’s pretty non-stop.

The CGI characters are all wonderful. Computer animation has come a long way. I did have some problems with the centaurs though. The centaurs in the Harry Potter films are 100% CGI, if I remember correctly. The centaurs in Narnia are actors with CGI added for the hind sections. This is quite a feat to do and it is done very well for the most part, but still, there are a lot of scenes where the centaurs are always facing directly to the audience to hide their hind sides. I found that obvious and a bit annoying. But, I’m far too critical here, I’m sure. I also wish that the centaurs had a bigger role in the dialog. There are lots of centaurs, but very few lines for them. I see them as far too important characters to be left out.

The other thing that bothered me was the acting of the William Moseley (Peter Pevensie). He just didn’t do it for me. He came off as to strained and phony, but, hey, I’m a critic, right? But, that is made up for with the mice. I just love what they did to the cat!

But, despite it all, I found PRINCE CASPIAN a well done, exciting and entertaining film. For non-Narnia fans, I’d give it an 8 out of 10 since you don’t know what it’s all about. For Narnia fans, I’ll give it a 9 out of 10. If you’re a fan or not, read the books!!

IRON MAN

IRON MAN


Ok, the first of the summer “blockbusters” is out, IRON MAN, in the latest version of Marvel Comics takes over Hollywood. IRON MAN is based on the Marvel Comics super hero and I must say plays true to the true super-hero philosophy. Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.) is a wealthy brainchild industrialist/scientist/protégé like his father before him. He owns Stark Industries, which is a huge corporation that builds military weapons. The cast also includes Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges) as the #2 in the corporation, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) as Stark’s assistant, and a host of well cast bad guys.

The movie starts right off with our hero being captured by insurgents in Afghanistan who insist that he build them a copy of a new weapon he has developed. Then the film goes back to what led to the present situation. With that done, we come back to the present situation, Stark’s escape from the insurgents by building the Iron Man prototype (not giving anything away here, it’s in the previews!) and return to the good old USA.

Once home, Stark has had a change of heart in what direction his corporation, and his life, has been going in and wants to make changes, but the board of directors (those always nasty unscrupulous people) want to lock him out. So, he spends his spare time building and perfecting his Iron Man suit, since he has nothing else to do.

There are great sequences during the building and testing of the suit where Stark’s only friends are his computer and all the robotic helpers with which Stark carries on constant conversations with a lot of great shtick. Stark’s first venture into the real world is a great sequence and makes you want more.

This movie is fun, with more than ample special effects that are very well done, a lot of sight gags, a lot of great dialog, and a lot of great cars. The cast, as mentioned before is well cast and Downey is a perfect fit for the part of Stark. Other good supporting cast include Shaun Toub as Yinsen (the assistant during his capture) and Faran Tahir as Raza (the bald bad guy). The only character I didn’t like was Col. Jim Rhodes (Terrence Howard), who was supposed to be Stark’s friend, but his character was never developed or relationship really established. To me he just seemed to get in the way.

I have to mention that I do not recall a single profanity is this movie and the “romance” was limited to one brief scene only to develop part of Stark’s personality and playboy image at the time. That’s refreshing.

I certainly won’t say that this is the blockbuster of the summer … we still have the new Batman movie, Wall-E, Indiana Jones, Journey to The Center of the Earth, to mention just a few, yet to come. But, I will say this is a fun movie and great entertainment. I am torn between giving this a 9 or a 10, but my humble rating system says I’ll give it a 10. By the way, I just LOVED the ending!!! I’m sure there will be sequels.

THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM was described by one critic as “Kung Fu lite”. This is a martial arts, tongue in cheek, don’t expect anything surprising, old time formula flick that is just good entertainment, especially if you are a fan of Jackie Chan or Jet Li who both star in it.

The story centers around a kung fu obsessed teen (played by Michael Angarano) from Boston (of all places) who seems like any other teen nerd type that the movies portray as the stereo-type nowadays. He has a “friend” who is an old, old pawn shop owner who keeps him in stock with kung fu movies and articles of interest. In the back of the pawn shop, he finds an ancient staff. Well, not to tell too much, there are the “bad teens” who show up and threaten our hero who mystically gets transported through the “gate of no gate” (just a dumb plot device to get the kid where the action is) where he gets mentored by an always drunk Jackie Chan who can still best an army of bad guys while totally in the bag! What a guy! The plot is that our young hero must return the staff to the Monkey King who has been turned to stone for 500 years. Along the way they add the silent monk (Jet Li) and Sparrow (Yefei Liu) to the party.

There is nothing special about the plot of THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM and even the title doesn’t seem to have anything to do with the story … so who cares. Just bring on Jackie and Jet and have some fun. And that’s what the movie does. There is plenty of screen time for both Chan and Li. The martial arts scenes are what the martial arts movie buffs want and I don’t think they will be disappointed. I especially liked the arch villain the Jade Warlord (Collin Chou) who I thought made a great bad guy. All that mascara reminded me of Ming the Merciless.

I think the costumes and sets were wonderful and very well done as was the matt work for most of the scenes. The photography was good to the point of distracting, especially the scenes filmed in China. I found the whole film a pleasure for the eyes to behold. I did have some trouble understanding parts of the dialog from Li and Chan, which annoyed me a bit. But, if you’ve seen these guys before, you’re used to it.

Still, this is just another kung fu movie, nothing new here except it has both Jackie Chan and Jet Li. Despite the Karate Kid story line and the very predicable plot, I found this very entertaining. And that is what I go to the movies for, to be entertained. And it was a real pleasure to see Jet Li smile and even laugh in a film. Now that’s entertainment!!

I’ll give it an 8 out of 10 on my ever so humble Monkey King movie scale. You the man!

EXPELLED: NO INTELLIGENCE ALLOWED

EXPELLED: NO INTELLIGENCE ALLOWED is a semi-documentary film by Ben Stein (see links at bottom) that takes us on a journey around the globe where he interviews scientists, educators and philosophers that are being persecuted in a modern day witch hunt because they believe in intelligent design and dare to speak out against Darwinism. These learned people of education are being fired, ridiculed and ostracized for merely challenging Darwin’s theory; proposing that life on this planet could be a part of some intelligent design and not random chance. And you though the Scopes trial was over!

The movie has many topics that are covered and interviews with people from both sides of the street. Sure, there is a controversy involved with these two theories and there has been for decades … even centuries. There are hundreds of web sites out there each screaming the “evidence” to prove their point. I mean, this battle is so intense that people’s careers and lives are ruined by their beliefs. To me this is the main travesty that is exposed by this film. The loss of freedom and suppression of thought.

This points out to me is what I have seen my whole life. Some call it “the old boys school”, some say it’s elitism, there are dozens of names, but is IS out there and I, for one, have seen it first hand my entire life. It is good to see someone speak out about it for a change.

I can remember in High School English class. We were studying poetry. The teacher gave a student a failing grade because that person dared to interpret a poem differently than the teacher’s interpretation. I was glad to see that it didn’t stop there. The student complained and escalated the problem and after a battle with the powers that be, the teacher was forced to back down and acknowledge that there can be more than one interpretation.

This is one of the stories this movie is telling, except the “powers that be” here are more powerful and the mountain is harder to climb. We have the group with the power telling everyone what to believe. There is no debate and anyone who opposes their view is ostracized, fired, blacklisted and on and on. In this particular battle, I have also seen first hand, as have we all, the deteriorating of the conservative point of view, not because of proof or the evidence tells us the conclusion, but because others say it’s the way it should be and the rest of us must tow the party line.

This brings me to another point. This movie points out that theses scientists pushing Darwinism shouldn’t even be called scientists since they do not follow the scientific method which all scientific research must adhere to. For those who forget what the Scientific Method is, here is the definition from Wikapedia:

“Scientific method refers to the body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. It is based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.”

If you listen to what is said in the film, none of those against the theory of intelligent design have any proof. It is all based on conjecture and consensus. Science is not based on consensus, but on facts otherwise it is not science, but, in fact, conjecture. After all, Darwinism is a THEORY, not a fact. Even Darwin admitted that the fossil record did not support his theory and so don't its supporters. But yet, they teach and talk about it as if it were fact. Yes, those opposed to intelligent design have a theory, too. That is why both sides should be allowed to express their theories or we will be thrust back into scientific dark ages. I better get off the subject at this point, this is supposed to be a movie review!

I won’t go into the interviews with British biologist Richard Dawkins, or others. I won’t get into the some of the opinions on how life was brought here by aliens in UFO’s or tie-ins with the Holocaust and other atrocities. You will have to see it for yourself.

I found this movie well done and thought provoking. It shows that there are a lot of learned people out there that are just plain “stupid”... but, we already know that! Sure, my mind was made up on what I believed even before I saw this film and nothing could have changed what I know to be right. But, no matter which side you are on, I suggest you see it. There is so much information given and the discussions are so compelling that I will probably see it again. I feel this is a must see for everyone. I have to give this a 10 on my humble movie rating scale.

If you want to debate any of the content of this review or the topics of the film, feel free to add comments.

"But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty" I COR 1:27


More on Ben Stein

Personal website: http://www.benstein.com/

Or for lazy people: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Stein

VANTAGE POINT

VANTAGE POINT



Forgive me for making this a short review, but if I say too much about this movie I might spoil the plot and you wouldn’t want that, now would you?

Thomas Barnes and Kent Taylor are two Secret Service agents assigned to protect President Ashton at a landmark summit on the global war on terror. Agent Barnes is recovering since he took a bullet for President Ashton six-months earlier and they make it clear that we don’t know if he is up to the challenge of protecting the President. The setting is the teeming Plaza Mayor, or central square, in Salamanca, Spain where crowds and dignitaries have gathered for the event. The time is high noon. President Ashton arrives at the plaza and is escorted to the stage by the Secret Service. After an opening address by the Mayor of the City, the President is shot twice. Chaos and panic ensue and escalates when bombs begin to explode outside and then inside the plaza. This is all seen from Barnes point of view.

Then a curious thing happens. The story rewinds about 15 minutes or so and the same story is told from a different person’s “vantage point”. This happens 5 times during the film, each time you are given more clues to what has happened and you can correct your wrong guesses from the previous perspective. The final segment provides you with the entire truth and the completion of the story.

This is not a new technique for movies. The most famous, and by far the best use of this method was Akira Kurosawa’s Rashômon (1950), a great film.

The film has a good cast, but I found Forest Witaker a bit out of place in the film and most of the time when I saw Dennis Quaid, he reminded me of Harrison Ford when he played those same kind of roles in the Tom Clancey stories and the like … that same scowl. But, maybe that’s what people on government payrolls are supposed to look like.

Although a lot of movies “critics” haven’t had too much good to say about this movie, I’ll remind you of my philosophy of what a good movie is. A good movie to me is one that either entertains you, makes you think or stretches your imagination. This movie is one that makes you think … you try to put the pieces together as to who done the dirty deed, then why and how are the “good guys” going to stop them. Sure this movie has it's problems and is far from perfect. But, it kept me thinking and trying to guess the plot until the end. Some parts I figured out ahead of time, others surprised me. I’ll give this an 8 out of 10 on my humble movie rating scale.

THE BUCKET LIST

First off let me state that I have never been a Jack Nicholson fan. I’ve tolerated him in most movies and, to me at least, his acting seems to be stereo-typed where he always plays the same type character roles. So, having seen him once, you’ve seen him in everything (my opinion). On the other hand, I’ve always liked Morgan Freeman, ever since watching him with my kids when he was on The Electric Company. (Now that dates me!). So, I went into THE BUCKET LIST with mixed feelings, but the premise was enough to make me want to go.

The story is about two men, from totally different ends of life, society and perspective, who are forced to room together in a hospital cancer ward for a very long period of time while. Edward Cole, played by Jack Nicholson, is a billionaire self-made executive and Carter Chambers, played by Morgan Freeman, is a working class mechanic who never attained his real desire to be a history teacher how keeps sharp by knowing all the answers to all the Jeopardy questions ever written. Both are suffering with terminal cancer. This is the only thing they have in common. They eventually become friends and come up with a “Bucket List” of things they want to do before they “kick the bucket”.

The list contains such items (that are supposed to ring your heart and mind with the wonders of the human spirit – right!) as skydiving, racing in a Mustang 350 GT, getting a tattoo, visit the Taj Mahal, the Pyramids, Rome, Africa, laugh until you cry, see something majestic (whatever that really means), help a complete stranger for the good … you get the picture.

So, our two “heroes” set off to fulfill the list mainly due to Edward’s unlimited funds and desire to go out with a bang. This is what I see as the “typical” stereo-typed Nicholson role. It is who he plays all the time (granted, I haven’t see all his films), but it’s what I have come to expect from his roles. Carter decides to go with him and as they strut off around the world, they become the best of friends.

At this point, and very early on in the film I might add, is where I start to feel uncomfortable. Here is Carter, married for 46+ years, a devoted husband, father and grandfather, deciding to ignore his family, especially his wife who pleads for him not to go, and doing the most selfish act in his life. It doesn’t make sense to me and it is out of character for the Carter we learn about to this point. Now a lot of “new agers” will say, “What’s wrong with him doing all the things he always wanted to do but never had the chance to?” to which I would reply, and what about his wife’s dreams that she will never have fulfilled? (Believe me, folks, this is my very, very short answer!)

This movie was directed by Rob “Meathead” Reiner, who I believe wanted this film to be a comedy based on the adventures of these two guys as they run around the world doing their bucket list, having funny adventures, a few laughs and then, realizing who they are, come to grips with the real meaning of life. But, mainly, this was to be a comedy. I respect Rob and he has done a lot of really great stuff in the past, but, I think with this one he misses the bucket. There are some really funny moments with Edward and Carter seeing the world, but nothing that wasn’t done before or even unexpected. It just didn’t have what it needed to tell the story. I fear it was the writing and directing more than the acting.

I found the acting generally good, with Jack playing the Jack role and Morgan playing … well, the Morgan role, if you get my drift here. There is nothing too new here. At this point I will give Jack a plus-up. Yes, me, giving Jack Nicholson a plus-up. I liked the sincerity that he played in the end on the film … how he changed. I found this very convincing and well done, much to my surprise. I felt that I could identify with both the Edward Cole's that he played in the film. But, alas, it was too little, too late.

I’ll have to give this a 7 out of 10 on my humble rating scale. Don’t blame me, the cat made me do it!

WINDWALKER (1980)

WINDWALKER (1980)

In the winter of 1797, illness has forced a band of Cheyenne to migrate to the south, leaving behind those who were too weak or sick to travel. The aging warrior, Windwalker (Trevor Howard), is ill and dying. His family, which consists of his son Smiling Wolf (Nick Ramus), Smiling Wolf’s wife and three children, stay with him after the band leaves. While laying in bed, he tells his grandchildren about his life as a young brave, his marriage to his beautiful Tashina, the blessing of having twins born and the pain of having Tashina die young and one of his children stolen by Crow warriors, the enemy of the Cheyenne.

After Windwalker dies, his family starts their journey to the south, unaware that a Crow war party is stalking them. But the Great Spirit awakens Windwalker for a final mission to complete his life’s journey.

This is a wonderful story and well written and well narrated by Nick Ramus and is told as we would have believed it was told around Indian campfires. This is an American Indian story. There are no white men and no white man influence anywhere in the story. The photography is beautiful. Again, a small regret that the best cinematography equipment wasn’t available for this movie. The shots could have been spectacular. But, some of the shots are still pretty awesome. The scenes of Nick Ramus majestically riding his white war horse are scenes that will always come to my mind whenever I think of American Indian warriors. That horse is beautiful.

It wasn’t hard to fit Trevor Howard into the role of an Indian here. I would have preferred a Native American to play the part, but the distraction of the very English Howard was only minor. If you didn’t know who Trevor Howard was, you wouldn’t have noticed. All the other actors are excellent in their roles and it doesn’t take long to get swept up in the story. The film is fascinating as the story unfolds and has a totally satisfying conclusion, which is more than I can say for most films. The dialog that Windwalker has with the Great Spirit during the film is a nice way to express what is going on in his mind as he tries to figure out what is happening around him and the confusion he is having because he knows he should be dead but isn’t. There are a lot of nice touches in this film.

Needless to say, this is one of my favorite films. Well worth the time to see. I rate this a 9 out of 10 on my modest rating scale.