Glory Road (2006)

"You call that a foul?  I call that a love tap." -Head Coach Don Haskins

Glory Road means well.  It does. It is part of long tradition of historical sports movies that combat social ills.  Sports is the crucible upon which our society is forged- according to Disney related sports movies. And Glory Road fits the mold. It's unfortunate that it has nothing more to offer, but it is what it is.

PROs:
Acting:  Josh Lucas is passable and puts on a pretty convincing Southern drawl. Jon Voigt proves that, with a little make-up, he can basically do anything he wants.
Music: It peaks right when it is supposed to.  The sound track is a groovy mixtape of 1960s hits.  Good on them for including: Ballad of the Green Berret.  A strange schism exists in 60s films that discounts its popularity.  I assume it has to do with that the anti-Vietnam movement has had a more lasting cinematic impact.
Social Commentary:  As I mentioned above, the social commentary sports movie is alive and well in Glory Road. In this particular instance, Glory road makes a points of tackling not just African American and white relations within the team and against society, but also African American and white adjustment to the Mexican/Latino culture of West Texas in the 1960s.

Cons:
There was a very understandable, yet confusing, and kind of unnecessary plot involving the wife of Don Haskins as played by Emily Deschanel.  Emily Deschanel is fine actress and when I saw that she was in the movie. I thought that her role would be substantial.  It was not. It was kind of a waste of screen time and narrative.  What was her role supposed to be?  Did something get left on the cutting room floor?

On a scale of a triple double on the court to a triple double at In & Out Burger, I give Glory Road 2.7 out of 5 stars.

Jurassic World (2015)

"What happened to the sibling?" -Owen Grady
"She ate it."- Claire

"What kind of diet doesn't allow tequila shots?"- Owen Grady

**Contains Spoilers**

Jurassic World has dinosaurs. The dinosaurs are big.  The dinosaurs run amok. Children, tourists, and prissy business ladies are in danger. Different archetypes of masculinity vie to protect them.  That is all. Done and done.

On to a more interesting topic for Jurassic World. As evidenced by the weekend box office, there appears to be no law of diminishing returns on spectacle and WOW!!, financially. The more funding one puts into bigger, meaner, scarier, faster, sexier, destruction causing things the more it pays off. Yet, this is not the moral of Jurassic World. My takeaway was that the writers, director, and producer-Steven Spielberg- feel there are diminishing returns on spectacle.  Bigger, meaner, scarier, faster, sexier, destruction causing things lose their luster instantaneously, do not endure, and have diminishing, if not non-existent, artistic returns. Few movies have ever put forth a thesis so counter to their underlying financial raison dêtre.

Is it possible we are reaching a macro-leveling effect of visual effects effectiveness across the movie industry? Can audiences actually tell and demonstrably appreciate the differences between CGI in 2003 and CGI in 2015?  Or is the difference just less than between say 1988 and 2003? Perhaps the visual effects singularity is near at hand?

Back to Jurassic World. Watching the original T-Rex fight and defeat the new improved Indominus Rex was like watching an updated version of Godzilla 2000. Of course the foam suited Godzilla will defeat the 3D one. I would pick foam suit Godzilla to defeat 1993 T-Rex or even 2015 T-Rex.  No contest.

What do you all think?  Are there diminishing artistic returns on visual effects in film?

On scale of Technicolor to 3D, I give Jurassic World 2.89 out of 5 stars.

Mad Max: Fury Road (2014)

"You shall ride eternal: shiny and chrome." -Immortan Joe

WHOA!! Just whoa!  It's been over a week and I am still geekin out. Mad Max Fury Road is a cinematic spectacle, and I loved it.

In turns, it is: terrifying, disgusting, shock inducing, unsettling, and beautiful. oh and while I hate to think that I am part of hyperbole creep....Mad Max Fury Road is awesome.

The only thing that I believe holds Mad Max: Fury Road back from true cinematic greatness is that, as of now, I don't connect Mad Max to any higher themes of human existence or treatises on current issues. Mad Max: Fury Road seems to be just the most well done bit of "RAWR!!" I have seen this decade, if not ever. Perhaps that is theme of human existence...?

On to the technical highlights.

1. The story boarding and shot selection for Mad Max reminded me of Ozu or Kurowsawa. Every shot is worthy of a still frame. George Miller, you have outdone yourself.
2. The first 5 minutes are possibly the most terrifying five minutes of the decade. I was amazed at how filming in fast motion and then slowing it down increased the terror.
3. Those stunts were ridiculous.  Of course there was CG, but I appreciate how many of the stunts were real.
4.To go along with my praise for George Miller, I really appreciate it when a film knows how to conduct tension throughout a film.  Fury Road is essentially just one big chase scene for two hours.  That could get boring. *I'm thinking of you Duel.* Yet, through the use of ever more impressive narrative devices and stunts that beggar belief tension and attention are held. I thought it was over when there was a gasoline spitting contest on the front of two speeding semis, but no.
5. The icky factor: much of what made Fury Road suspend belief was its attention to the details and tactile nature of icky icky things, Immortan Joe's back for instance.  Without that solid grounding in putrescence, other things like a blind guitar player shredding the horde on to war might seem silly.  (It was not. It was just too cool.)

*Point for conversation* I saw this film in a rather shabby theater in a mall in Phnom Penh, and with a little research I believe there were some rather significant edits to the Cambodian version.  1. There is apparently a lactation sequence that was cut and 2. The damsel in distress in a cage was supposed to be naked. In the Khmer version she was wearing clothes. Were there other changes? Comment and let me know.

On a scale of the little drummer boy to the blind albino guitar fire guitar player of the horde, I give Mad Max: Fury Road 4.1 out of 5 stars.

also the cat name of Imperator Furryosa is pretty great.

Castles in the Sky (2014)

"That was a stupid idea, but it was the least stupid idea we've heard today."-Albert Rowe
"You're trying to build a death ray. Yeah..that will never work."- Robert Watson Watt

So I watched this mistakenly when I was trying to watch Castle In the Sky. I was disappointed enough to stop after 5 minutes, but those 5 minutes were enough to make me come back and watch the whole film later.  Very impressive.

As historical dramas go, I liked Castles in the Sky.  The story of the origins of radar was worth a movie.  I had my doubts, but no longer.

I always seem to doubt the acting abilities of Eddie Izzard.  I shouldn't, but I do.  Based on Castles in the Sky, I will endeavor to give him all due credit.

In terms of quality, I think the BBC generally does a fine job.  Cuts are sharp. The script is concise and the accents are, for an American, spot on.

On a slight negative critique, It was unclear if Robert Watt ended up breaking up with his wife or if they got back together or if there was any resolution at all.  I think I was supposed to understand that they divorced...but it was just unclear.

On a scale of full windsor to half windsor, I give Castles in the Sky 2.6 out of 5 stars. 

The Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

"I have a better theory.  You are all not worthy." -Thor

As you may have noticed (if any of you are long time readers) that I enjoy Marvel movies. They are crafted just well enough to be a great experience....but are in no way art. Fish in a barrel.

Even though I thoroughly enjoyed The Age of Ultron. I could tell that the sparkle was slightly diminished from The Avengers' previous incarnation. I applaud Joss Whedon for doing the what amounts to basically the impossible.  The only down side is that he has succeeded before with panche. so anything else is a let down.

There is no greater meaning to Age of Ultron other than nerdom.  I wish there was...but...meh.

Cool movie, cool characters, well packaged, same as always. Woot!

I did notice that Black Widow was less overtly sexy in her exits from screen as compared to the first Avengers film.  This is probably for the better.

Things I liked:

Linda Cardellini

"Code Green"

Andy Serkis (just cuz, I like him.  He was not particularly central to the film.)

Things I didn't like so much:

Ultron's motivation: Its not bad...but I guess I just would have wished his horrifying logic was more clear.

James Spáder: I like you.  You were the original Daniel Jackson. I didn't necessarily like your performance as Ultron. It was well crafted, meticulous, and purposeful...but not my cup of tea when it comes to super villains.

On a scale of Phase II to liquids, I give The Avengers: Age of Ultron 3.0 out of 5 stars.

The Black Cauldron (1985)

"Oh that horned king.  That black hearted devil." -Dalben
"Munches and Crunches."-Gurgi
"We do not give.  We do bargain." -Witches

The Black Cauldron gets a bad wrap and part of this comes from that it was released in 1985 and Disney did not release a home version until 1998. *There have only been two versions released, the 1998 release and the 25th anniversary dvd in 2010. Happy 30th to the Black Cauldron this July.* This was its supposed punishment for box office failure: to be forgotten.  Ask most even moderate Disney fans and they will have never heard of The Black Cauldron.  It doesn't exist for them.  There are no songs.  No rides. No characters. No attractions and very little merchandise. One begins to wonder how truly dreadful the Black Cauldron must be to merit willful societal memory erasure? *Made me think of George Lucas buying back all the physical copies of The Star Wars Christmas Special.

The answer is: Bad but not so bad as to deserve its fate.  The Black Cauldron suffers from an extreme lack of production execution, writing, and storytelling.  What it does not lack for is ambition. Disney swung to try and make "Snow White" for a new generation and ended up missing the mark, spinning around and looking silly. We should all want them to keep trying, despite that The Black Cauldron is pretty awful.

A little historical digging produced a number of interesting and laudable point that are pro Black Cauldron. 1. This was the first Disney film to use any kind of computer assisted animation. 2. They planned and made a serious effort at attempting a holographic sequence in 1985. 3. The sound track by Elmer Bernstein was recorded in the latest Surround Sound and is beautiful. Oh and the general word used to describe the voice of the horned king (John Hurt) is sepulchral..."chilling".

On the con side: The writing is terrible.  The story makes no sense. The characters have really difficult names to pronounce like Princess Eilonwy (eye-lon-wee) -That's not a con so much as just a barrier to understanding. Oh and I really dislike Gurgi.  He's like a Jar-Jar before there was a Jar-Jar. Well..ok he's better than that but not by much.

On the uncomfortable side:  There is a un-forgettable scene wherein Fflewddur Fflam gets turned into a frog by some witches and the proceeds to get lost in one of the witches cleavage. Too far Disney!

On a scale of regular born to cauldron born, I have The Black Cauldron 1.9 out of 5 stars.