Tuesday, October 31, 2017

Stranger Things 2

Stranger Things 2 takes a year later approach in offering a sequel to the series and succeeds in its endeavor in the continuing tales of the story of these characters. This season I'll grant has a certain advantage in that I already care about the characters, love the sense of place, and just need them to continue with this. Well they do. The series also quite carefully expands the right arcs while perhaps keeping some characters at a constant yet not making them seem stale in that sense either. It also helps from a couple of nice additions in Sean Astin and Paul Reiser, a pair of iconic eighties alumni themselves. This season is less exact in its plotting yet still works in its altering currents, and perhaps less complex story line as well. This isn't a problem though as every story still works, well the teenagers and the journalist wasn't great however minimal screentime was devoted to that. This season though also benefited from the enormous success of the previous season and that is seen on screen in its more impressive set pieces throughout. This is only a good thing making for more dynamic climax in some ways. What keeps me there though are the characters and I loved what they did with almost everyone particularly Joe Keery's Steve, Gaten Matarazzo's Dustin, and of course Eleven. That even includes in her "Terence and Philip" episode, that was essential her arc despite the rabid hate it received. Again found the plot compelling but more than anything once again just loved spending time with these characters.  
5/5

Stranger Things

Stranger Things one can examine many of things even outside of the show itself, but in terms of the nature of a show such as this. I actually watched the show just as it originally came out before hype for the series had taken over granting a suppose a pure view of it as I simply just enjoyed a show I knew nothing about and in turn loved it. Now on that point what is that I love about the show. There is its 80's setting which I think holds more than nostalgic power, after all creating the atmosphere for a period and successfully creating a real sense of place and time is an achievement with any film or tv show. I will say the 80's previously had struggled to be captured often times on film. Stranger Things goes further though in granting a Quentin Tarantinoesque approach. Now this is not in terms of his overall style as a filmmaker but often the basis for his storytelling. In that Stranger Things for the 80's does what Tarantino did for the 60's and 70's in that he utilizes facets and styling of the old films for his own. Is this the most original habit, not necessarily but that really doesn't matter. Execution can often be more important than originality, for example Super 8 attempted a similair thing yet failed, whereas this series succeeds. In part there is originality in that this hasn't been done before in this exact way, and though the characters come from a known starting point they find their own life. Furthermore the combination of Stephen King, John Carpenter, Wes Crave, Steven Spielberg, John Landis, and Joe Dante among others does result in something original through that combination. As much as appreciate all of that styling what makes the show work though are those characters and the performances, which though there hiccups, there is definite greatness. The show though succeeds most in making me care about every character and becoming invested to the point I could honestly have just watched the kids play D&D for a whole episode. It is not a flawless series, the main monster for example is hindered a bit by CGI and the build up is better than the climax. I thoroughly enjoyed every moment and cared in the way you only get with a great show. 
5/5

Friday, October 27, 2017

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader marks the third film in the Narnia series, and seems to have the passion of someone saying "eh lets do this now". The film is directed by Michael Apted who has a most unusual filmography to his name, some of it quite good, however still was not the best man to create a singular vision. In all honesty the film Apted director before this was that feels most apt to compare is his James Bond effort The World Is Not Enough. Apted uses what already came before once again. In Narnia as with Bond, he doesn't remake any wheels, he doesn't break the wheel, but he fails to stop it from rusting more than a bit. This whole film feels like half hearted effort in every respect, as there is no sense of urgency, there's no sense of wonder throughout the film whole. The film above all suggested it needed someone with a real method to bring the viewer to a whole new world, but here we just get a pretty bland sailing adventure. There's nothing of note, the only thing sort of enjoyable is the new addition from Earth Eustace turning into a Dragon to learn a lesson. That comes from the source material of course, but at least one can say that's didn't screw that up. This isn't so much about screwing up but rather by the sheer lack of any even bit of original inspiration to a single facet of this film. It is a dull affair that seems like it was only made because someone needed to make it. There's no sense of passion to any of it, and it is not surprising that it put the series on a temporary hold.
2/5

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian

Prince Caspian follows very much the same vein as the first film. This changes a bit more and here and there with the the adaptation, naturally focusing more on the final battle, however still nothing overly dramatic. As with the first film everything is just fine really, though it has one major nice addition in Peter Dinklage's grumpy dwarf its falters with very underwhelming if not downright boring villains. The film trudges along well enough but never with any daring to really give the source material any extra umph to it. The dramatic beats are okay, the battles are decent, everything is okay, but nothing is great. It isn't a film that truly underwhelms yet it only ever seems like it is just enough, no more, no less to be deemed a minor success. The material itself perhaps is not as strong as the original leading quite naturally for this film to be not as strong either.
3/5

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe

The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe probably was greenlit the moment The Fellowship of the Rings proved to be a great success. The series of Narnia is after all the friendly companion to that series as they both come from the minds of scholars J.R.R. Tolkien, and C.S. Lewis with a love for the classical fantastical stories of old. This story is a different beast than LOTR, in that it technically skews closer to the Hobbit, in that it is more overtly a children's fantasy tale, and where Tolkien rejected allegory Lewis embraced it. This film follows up the greatest fantasy trilogy ever put on film so it probably wasn't going to quite match it, perhaps the source material did not even allow for it. This film though suggests this series as attempting a recreation of that success than fully embracing its own. The film lacks a visionary director at the helm. What they do is instead rely on the strength of the source material, and of its various artist on and off screen. There isn't that same cohesion in the work though individual aspects are strong, but not everything has the right type of consistency. Thankfully most of it does work, and the source is strong enough to make for a good film even if this is not an extraordinary adaptation. It's a more than decent one but only just that.
3.5/5 

Bram Stoker's Dracula

Bram Stoker's Dracula takes its crack as the oft told tale of the blood sucking count through delivering the most faithful adaptation of the source material as written, taking the more complex plot of the book, with the multiple suitors and multiple liaisons to Dracula, and actually making the only a major change an addition. The addition being trying to add some humanity to the villain by having Mina Harker (Winona Ryder) be the reincarnated long lost love of Dracula's whose death spurned him to embrace Satan and become a vampire in the first place. I will actually say that aspect of the film is a weaker of it, well except for Dracula's monster cry of sorrow over her at one point. This is perhaps because such a romance requires a bit of sincerity, and how this film thrives is Francis Ford Coppola's direction of the film. Coppola seems to know the material is absurd in some ways and plays into this brilliantly by playing up the camp by going through a broadly operatic tone. This fits the material actually quite well and enlivens through Coppola's mastery of the technical aspects of the film. The film looks amazing in every regard particularly its special effects and makeup, and he has the right type of fun in the madcap visuals that represent the story. Now the only thing Coppola doesn't take a strict control of in this regard are the performances where you can have fun picking out who understand the tone and who does not. Gary Oldman as Dracula gets it, Sadie Frost gets it, Anthony Hopkins gets it, Tom Waits really gets it, but Keanu Reeves doesn't nor does Winona Ryder. They seem to be in a different film however they really don't get in the way too much. Coppola's tone, which is perhaps his last great hurrah as a visionary, masters the material brilliantly by making the insanity of it wildly entertaining.
4.5/5

The Dresser

The Dresser is a stage adaptation about an actor and his troupe and crew, particularly his dresser attempting to put on a production of King Lear during World War II in England. The idea of the stage adaptation is always a bit tricky as it is easy enough to lose the power of even a great source material if mishandled or misjudged. Director Peter Yates not only captures the power of the original source material but he finds the needed effort in making it cinematic. There are perhaps a few additional moments there to make the film overtly so, but that's not the focus of what makes this film work. It is still most often in the theater. Yates is careful to add these touches in the right moments but perhaps most importantly realize the strength of the material that is already there. The material itself is filled with such rich difficulties through the strong personalities of the troupe particularly the central actor, but also finds something very special in the central relationship. The two of them are fascinating together, obviously amplified by the performances of Albert Finney and especially Tom Courtenay. The two are terrific in finding the way the two are separated yet find a common ground through the production, the way they speak yet never exactly seem on the same level. It is a brilliantly dynamic fully realized and made actually surprisingly moving by the end of the film. Yates allows the performances to thrive as they should yet he has a careful eye in never abusing his hand, yet giving every scene in the theater the right touches to enliven them. It is never just a scene of actors simply talking. This is memorable adaptation as it captures the strength of its source yet successfully delivers onscreen. I wouldn't say you can completely forget that it came from the stage, like say an Amadeus, but you can say "that's a great stage adaptation".
4.5/5

The Right Stuff

The Right Stuff was a box office failure upon its release, despite finding a fair amount of success with the Academy Awards, but I would not say it is a film that has found its place with a cult status. It is instead specifically beholden to those who see it, which isn't a cult in this case, it's just anyone who happens to see it. The failure of the film seems strange, but perhaps it is because the film itself does not pigeonhole itself in its genre whether it be as a historical epic, a character study, a satire, or specifically a special effects driven picture. It is all of these, but you cannot sell the film on a single one despite excelling in each. On one hand it is a picture that celebrates ambition, and pure Americana in a purest of sense. Granting it this invigorating mysticism particularly in the exploits of Sam Shepard's Chuck Yeager. It captures that achievement purely. It succeeds in being a character study of Yeager, but also so many of the Mercury seven realizing the different big personalities so brilliantly. It is a satire though in that it reveals the ridiculousness of the propaganda and subverts the American dream even after having given credence to it. It does both without failing at either nor losing the sense of its tone. On top of it all it is a visual masterpiece with visual effects which hold up to this day. I love this film because it successfully says that this story doesn't need to be about a single thing. It is about the thrill, and achievement through overall ambition. It is about the big personalities it requires to fulfill the ambition, it is about how all of that is even ridiculous in its own way too. It finds the complexities and revels in it. It's a great film.
5/5

Cabaret

Cabaret may be to many the film that nearly beat the Godfather for best picture, after all the film won more Oscars overall including best director for Bob Fosse. This film though is not some simple musical adaptation from the stage as Fosse, who despite coming from the stage himself as a choreographer and director, strives to adapt the stage musical into a truly cinematic work. Well for this non-fan of musicals, I will say this is quite a success. Fosse cuts the flab, often a problem in the adaptation, by limiting songs to only where they make sense. Those scenes tend to have an even greater impact as the songs never feel there for the sake of it, but relate far more directly to themes also realized outside the club. There is only a single song we see outside of the club, where singing comes naturally in performances, and that is the anthem "Tomorrow Belongs to Me". That scene stands as one of the most single brilliant pieces of direction in the 70's as it leads into the song of seeming of just beauty and pride, to reveal it to be this fervent anthem for Nazism. The film excels in keeping that underlying current of dread as related to the Nazis even as it reveals purposefully in the excess of our main characters. What it carefully does though is never becomes caricature giving life to everyone even granting sympathy to Liza Minelli's Sally Bowles, partially because of her striking performance, but also because Fosse never demonizes the character despite her nature. He instead captures this sense of the people on the edge some hopeful, yet tragically so, in the pure relationship of the Jewish couple, then the more lustful examination of the writer, the count, and Sally who seem to shy away when any substance seems to be found in their relationships. It's a great film and it is interesting that a man who came from the stage knew so clearly that a dynamic adaptations needs liberties, and changes to become truly cinematic.
5/5