'San Andreas' Review

San Andreas Review:

California Goes Kablooey

BY IAN TAN

Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore and Journey 2: The Mysterious Island director Brad Peyton gives the disaster-movie genre a go. If going into this movie with that kind of filmography sounds like a recipe for disaster (pun intended), keep thinking that way, because with such low expectations, you may actually enjoy this movie. I know I did.

San Andreas, unlike other disaster movies, is a little more intimate. While other movies in the genre capitalize on the entire world getting eradicated, Peyton’s film focuses on California’s San Andreas fault and a little bit of Nevada’s Hoover Dam - the latter of which having one of the film’s standout sequences. The lead character’s (Dwayne Johnson) story is also done better here than in some of Roland Emmerich’s movies (2012, Independence Day). Whether the movie’s slightly more intimate feel is due to budget constraints or directorial choices, it’s one that differentiates this movie (even by just a little) enough for it to exist.

The Rock saves yet another movie from being a flop

         Besides that, more than other disaster movies, this one feels more like it wants to raise awareness on how to be prepared when natural disasters strike, aside from being your typical action blockbuster with such unrealistic stakes. The stakes in this one feel more real and the possibility of characters escaping near-death situations seem a little more impossible unlike in 2012 where everyone makes such fake narrow escapes and cheats death every. single. time. It doesn't feel too much like that in San Andreas, so kudos to Brad Peyton for that. There is one really cheesy death scene involving a shipping container though.

Making waves in San Francisco 

           The visual effects in this movie are pretty much on the level of what we come to expect when seeing a disaster-movie, with a little less of a cinematic touch; they don’t look as epic or as blockbuster-y as Roland Emmerich’s films, but that’s forgivable since this is Brad Peyton’s first big movie. Some of the destruction seen here has been done before i.e. grounds cracking like biscuits, buildings toppling over buildings like dominos, etc. but is shot in a way that makes the audience feel a little more involved in the action. Again, more intimate. San Andreas has its share of wide shots of destruction that made my jaw drop a couple of times, but it’s the shots taken from the ground up that really terrifies. There are noticeably more scenes of destruction seen from the point of view of a person on low-level ground here than in other disaster movies, which adds to the scare factor of the movie better.

Michael Bay's next target

           The characters and plot of San Andreas do nothing to change the game for disaster movies, unfortunately. The side characters, although charming, are flat and quite uninteresting people. Ioan Gruffudd’s character is especially wasted and underutilized. Thankfully, Dwayne Johnson steps in to prevent this movie from crumbling. Heck, there’s even a scene where he looks obliged to save Hollywood blockbusters when he catches the Hollywood sign toppling down just underneath him. I mean, he was the best part of the last few Fast & Furious movies, G.I. Joe: Retaliation, Hercules and almost every other movie he’s starred in. Here, Johnson gives a more nuanced performance as his character Ray, allowing the audience to genuinely care for his down-on-his-luck-because-his-wife-left-him character. He brings a lot to this movie, and is a big reason why it worked for me. Carla Gugino wasn’t bad either as Ray’s ex-wife. Oh, and Paul Giamatti does well as a professor at Caltech doing whatever it takes to warn the public about the earthquake patterns.

Go Caltech professors!

     San Andreas, with all its visuals and Dwayne Johnson-ness, is an entertaining ride overall that’s best experienced in enhanced formats such as IMAX 3D or D-Box. There’s enough rumbling and shaking to warrant a D-Box Motion Seat screening, and just enough visual destruction to justify an IMAX 3D viewing. But still, not much saves the movie from its poor script and share of hammy dialogue and cardboard characters. But hey, what can you expect from a disaster movie, right?

_________________________________________________________________

Final Verdict

San Andreas gets 6.4 out of 10 stars – An enjoyable 2 hours if you’re looking to kill time.

'Tomorrowland' Review

Tomorrowland review:

Bird Does It Again

BY IAN TAN

China's got the best poster

12 years ago, Disney released a film based on one of its iconic rides from Disneyland in the form of Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, which moved on to be one of Disney’s biggest franchises. Despite a fifth installment currently in the works, I think we can all agree that the Pirates craze has muddled down quite a bit. Never fear, Disney’s got loads of other rides they can turn into films, and this year it’s Tomorrowland, based on the Disneyland ride of the same name. Also, Brad Bird of Ratatouille, The Incredibles and Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol fame sits in the director’s chair for this one. Can Disney pull off the same trick they did with Pirates back in 2003?

Yeah, sure. Mostly. In Tomorrowland, the world is slowly tearing itself apart, with riots, wars and natural disasters occurring as a result of humanity’s flaws – basically… Todayland. The film centers on Casey (Britt Robertson), a teenager with big dreams and hope for a better future. After getting bailed from breaking into a NASA facility, she finds a strange gold pin with a blue ‘T’ on it, and whenever she touches it, she’s transported to a world of jetpacks, futuristic buildings and imagination. However, only she can see this world when touching the pin. Determined to find out what that world is and why it called out to her, Casey, with the help of a young girl named Athena (Raffey Cassidy), seek Frank Walker (George Clooney), who’s had a rough history with said world. Together, the three of them unravel the mysteries behind Tomorrowland and how it’s affecting our world today.

 

Not 'The Lovely Bones'

So far, Brad Bird has failed to make a bad film, and he did a pretty great job with this one, further securing himself as one of the better live-action film directors out there today, ala J.J. Abrams (Star Trek, Super 8), who also hasn’t made a bad film to date. The visuals of this movie, along with its production design, are a joy to look at. Casey’s - and the audience's - first glimpse at Tomorrowland’s world is a visual joy; a real feast for the eyes, even if the CGI isn’t quite on-point at several times.  

Exhibit T: A good child actor

As far as performances go, Britt Robertson plays a likable and sometimes funny lead that, by the end of the film, would probably leave you inspired by the character. George Clooney is commendable in his role as well and adds gravitas to his character, showcasing a once hopeful, but now pained version of what Britt Robertson’s character would have been had she given up on hope. But the scene-stealer here really is Raffey Cassidy, who plays Athena. The British youngster soars in her role here, portraying the film’s arguably most complex and likable character. What a great performance she gave; I’m excited to see her in more films to come. Unfortunately, Hugh Laurie is only serviceable as Governor Nix, the film’s antagonist. But most of the issues of his character come more from the script by Damon Lindelof more than actor Hugh Laurie.

Wrinkles

This brings me to some of the flaws of the film. As visually engrossing and as captivating as the film gets, the “big reveal” at the end of the movie really doesn’t live up to all the mystery that surrounded the first three quarters of runtime, and is quite a letdown. Without spoiling anything, I’ll just say that it feels all too similar to other films’ plots (Kingsman: The Secret Service and Avengers: Age of Ultron) and I’m a little tired of it. I guess Hollywood screenwriters all coincidentally had an epiphany one morning that [SPOILERS START HERE] we are the cause of our own destruction and the only way to make things right is to eradicate the human race for good because all we do to the world is destroy it. [SPOILERS END HERE]

D:

Nevertheless, Tomorrowland is able to capture the essence of Disney magic and wonder with charm and a big dose of imagination. Flaws aside, I believe we as an audience deserve more original films like this. Okay, it’s based on a ride at Disneyland, but only very loosely. 

On a side note, that “Keep Moving Forward” quote from Meet the Robinsons kept coming to mind as I was watching this movie, and made me feel pretty nostalgic as the former was one of the Disney films that I connected to the most emotionally, and Tomorrowland reminded me of that same optimistic message and magic from Meet the Robinsons, making this Brad Bird film one of my favourites of this summer movie season.

Final Verdict

Tomorrowland gets 8 out of 10 stars – I want Brad Bird to take me there.
______________________________________________________________

Tomorrowland opens Thursday, 21st May in cinemas, IMAX 2D and Dolby Atmos.

'Mad Max: Fury Road' Review

Mad Max: Fury Road Review:

In Case ‘Furious 7’ Wasn’t Enough

BY IAN TAN

What a poster

Mad Max: Fury Road comes from Australian director George Miller, the mastermind behind the first three Mad Max films starring Mel Gibson and 2006’s Happy Feet. This time round, Miller’s given a much larger budget to work with, and boy, was that budget well spent. This sequel/reboot of the Mad Max series is set in a post-apocalyptic future where fuel, weapons and water are commodities worth starting a war over, with water being the prime resource everyone can’t have because King Immortan Joe is a selfish man. 

Now, I’ve never seen a Mad Max film, so this was all pretty new for me. For the most part, I really enjoyed this movie. It had thrills, spills, non-stop action and its own unique brand of vehicular warfare and death-defying stunts. Fury Road is filled to the brim with edge-of-your-seat, no holds barred action sequences that are as innovative as they are intense. It’s hard to really pick a favourite action sequence because they were all so good.

Hot wheels

           Most of the stunts were shot practically with minimal use of CGI, which made the action all the more thrilling and realistic. I’m pretty sure most of the explosions in the movie were real; they don’t look like the usual CG explosions most blockbusters are chock-full of. Whenever they did use CGI however, it couldn't have looked better. Subtle things like Furiosa’s (Charlize Theron) mechanical arm and some deformed humans look incredibly real. I also really enjoyed the film’s score and will probably head out to buy it when I get the chance to. I can’t wait to drive with that music on.  The cinematography was great too and the action shot very fluidly with minimal use of handheld cameras, which is a major plus especially if you’re seeing this in 3D or IMAX 3D. I guess a D-Box version of this would be fun too, just keep the seat setting to ‘Low’ unless you want to head out the cinema looking like you’re drunk and can’t walk straight.

The Road Olympics

            Leads Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron do a great job in their respective roles, with Theron getting the bulk of the screen time. Her character really is the one audiences follow the most, being the only character in the film that has anything close to a character arc. Speaking of characters, that’s where this movie (ever so slightly) stumbles. Although everyone does well in their roles, besides Furiosa (Theron), they’re just not given enough character development for them to be memorable. Max’s (Tom Hardy) character is developed mainly through split-second flashbacks in between action scenes every now and then, which simply isn’t enough for him to be a hero we can really root for because -if one hasn't scene the previous Mad Max movies- we don’t really know what his story is and what his motivations are half of the time. 

That James Dean, day dream look in his eyes

           The film’s villain, the aforementioned Immortan Joe, is probably the weakest character in the film. Besides looking imposing and threatening, like Max, he doesn’t really have much of a backstory nor much character development. However, he does have the kind of screen presence that's needed from him as a villain, but the fact that he has little to no scenes with our hero characters makes things less dramatic whenever they do go face-to-face with him. The action’s still intense though, it just doesn’t hit some of the dramatic notes it could have had Immortan Joe been given more depth and interaction with the main characters. Then again, this movie was never meant to be a character study piece so that's just me being a little nit-picky. 

In conclusion, Mad Max: Fury Road is an immensely exhilarating and intense blockbuster action flick that provides all the visuals and stunts the summer movie crowd comes to expect from a film of this nature. Despite some minor setbacks in the character development department, I had a pretty darn good time at the movies watching this.

Final Verdict

Mad Max: Fury Road gets 8.5 out of 10 stars – Worth a watch in the best format you can find. 

'Pitch Perfect 2' review

Pitch Perfect 2 Review:

Aca-okay

BY IAN TAN

In Pitch Perfect 2, the Barden Bellas get their performance rights revoked due to an embarrassing hiccup in one of their performances in front of President Obama. In order to make up for it, the Bellas go head to head with Das Sound Machine, among other international a Capella groups, in an international a Capella competition to show the world that they’ve still got what it takes to be an impressive aca-force of music.

 I had a good time watching the first Pitch Perfect. It was fun, enjoyable and I thought  the a Capella performances were well thought out and inventive. The cast was a fun bunch, with Anna Kendrick making her name in mainstream Hollywood and Rebel Wilson owning it as Fat Amy. In the sequel, expect more of the same, but don’t keep expectations too high because Pitch Perfect 2 rarely does anything to really outdo its predecessor. That’s not to say that this is a bad or disappointing movie, though. It’s simply one that just about meets your expectations.

The Bellas get pitch slapped

There are some new characters that come into the picture, the most notable of which being Hailee Steinfeld’s Emily, a univeristy freshman who has a knack for song writing and wants to be a Bella more than anything. I liked her character; she had charisma and a good sense of likability, even when the script made her do or say something cringe-worthy. The actors and actresses who make up Das Sound Machine - the Bellas’ Eastern European competition rival in the movie - are great comedic (and musical) additions as well. Returning faces (all the Bellas from the previous film) are given time to grow as characters here and definitely work as a better ensemble this time round. Also, Elizabeth Banks and John Michael Higgins (the sarcastic announcers) are utilized better here than they were in the first movie.

German badassery

Unfortunately, the friendship and character arc between Beca (Kendrick) and Emily (Steinfeld), which should have served as this sequel’s heart, is glossed over. Instead, the heart of the film surrounds the fact that by the end of the movie, the Bellas would have graduated and moved on from their a Cappela singing days. This doesn’t really work, due to the fact that when some of these characters (i.e. Lilly and Fat Amy, among others) talk about the future and leaving their Barden Bella days behind, you just can’t take them too seriously considering how humourous their characters are. The heart of a film works best when it surrounds characters that are down-to-earth and relatable (or when funny, over-the-top characters are given more realistic lines and purpose) – like Beca and Emily.  One can imagine how much more impactful the film’s closing performance could have been had the film spent a little more time developing Beca and Emily’s relationship with one another, because that final performance was a good one, one that’ll put a smile on your face and feel happy for these characters.

Oh look, Effie Trinket!

A few other things I didn’t like about this movie were that some sequences feel borrowed from the first i.e. another riff-off that isn’t as good as the one in the first. Even some of Pitch Perfect 2’s musical sequences feel a notch below the bravado of the ones from the first movie. Besides that, it struggles to find a proper reason for Jesse (Skylar Astin’s character) to be in the sequel, which was a bummer for me because I quite liked his character in the first movie. He really doesn’t do much to serve the story in this one.

Hailee Steinfeld on the left

    In the end, Pitch Perfect 2 is fun sequel, even if it isn’t as good as the first. It's a good first directorial effort from first-time director Elizabeth Banks, who also stars as Gail in the movie . If you liked the first, you’re likely to have a good time with this, but you’d probably not remember it as fondly as the first time you saw the Barden Bellas on screen in 2012; kind of like how that novelty of seeing the Avengers in Age of Ultron isn’t as memorable as it was the first time they teamed up in the very first Avengers movie.

Final Verdict

Pitch Perfect 2 gets 6.9 out of 10 stars - Okay okay only