TMNT 2 Review

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows Review:

What A Mouthful of a Title

BY IAN TAN

Cowabunga!

TMNT 2 – I’ll just call it that – is a better film than the first, but only marginally, which isn’t saying much. This time round, the Turtles face new foes in the (ugly) forms of Krang, a talking brain from another dimension, and Beebop and Rocksteady, two humans turned mutated Rhinoceros and Warthog who have brains more childish than a four-year-old. Additionally, the turtles are struggling with the fact that they always have to save the city of New York in the shadows without any recognition whatsoever, hence the subtitle Out of the Shadows.

There are a number of things this film does better than the first, most notably the overall tone of the film. While the first TMNT (2014) film felt a bit too dark in tone for its own good, TMNT 2 is more brightly lit, is more colorful and more fun than the first. Plus, it never takes itself too seriously, which is appropriate considering that the film is centered around giant talking turtles.

The action, which I thought was entertaining in the first, is pretty good here too. One aeroplane sequence in particular was a lot of fun to watch. The characters are also more likable this time round. Michaelangelo, Donatello, Raphael and Leonardo are all given a good dose of screen time and character moments that reminisce that of the old cartoons. Their sense of brotherhood and their relationships with one another are executed pretty well by director Dave Green (Earth to Echo), who replaces Jonathan Liebesman for this sequel. Unfortunately, that is the extent of things that are good about this film.

 

Those biceps though

The humans, although an improvement from the first film, still fall short of being compelling or interesting in the slightest. Megan Fox does alright as April O’Neil as she did in the last one, Will Arnett as Vern Fenwick is a significantly less annoying character here than he was in the first film and Stephen Amell is passable as Casey Jones, but underwhelming for those expecting more from the fan-favourite character. As far as humans go, this movie just isn’t bothered to even try to make them interesting or realistic.

 

It's that spinny ball thingy from Battleship! 

The villains in the film were just terrible. None of them are given any real motivation for their dastardly plans to conquer the world and all of them are so poorly written that one might wonder what the writers of the film were thinking when they wrote the script. I understand that they might not have had any motivations in the cartoons either but its hard to buy into them in a live-action film if they really don’t have any reason for doing what they do.

Beebop, Rocksteady and Krang, Krang especially, are disgusting to look at and really got on my nerves. The issue isn’t that the CGI doesn’t look real, but that these creatures, when transferred from the cartoon world to live-action, don’t translate well. Krang looks like an actual living, talking brain with two eyes and tentacles, and was disturbing to look at. The Turtles were fine though, as their designs look more simplified and less cluttered than they did in the first TMNT.

 

Eww

In summary, TMNT 2 is a watchable film made worthwhile solely for the Turtles and some of the action sequences. All other elements of the film fall flat and are rather uninteresting. I did, however, enjoy this movie more than the first due to its lighter, more kid-centric tone, even if it does get a bit too cartoony at times. I wish the villains and human characters were given as much care from the filmmakers as the Turtles were, but alas, I guess we’ll have to wait for TMNT 3 to find out if they’ll finally get it right.

Score: 5.7 out of 10

'The Conjuring 2' Review

The Conjuring 2 Review:

The Warrens Take On London

BY IAN TAN

France has the best poster

The first The Conjuring was a major success, not just critically and financially, but for studio released horror films in general. At a time where the only good horror flicks audiences could remember were the ones released decades ago, James Wan stepped into the picture and gave us the gleefully creepy Insidious and the memorable The Conjuring, which has now become an audience favourite and in my opinion redefined the horror blockbuster experience. With that being said, does Wan’s sequel hold up to his 2013 smash hit?

Yes, without a doubt.

The minute the film starts, Wan pulls you right into the film with a chillingly spooky opening sequence featuring paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren, who are once again played excellently by Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga respectively. The two have great chemistry together and share a rather poignant romance in the film that’s as engaging as it is sweet. And the best part is that it never feels forced or shoehorned into the story; it actually grows very organically throughout the film.

 

Vera Farmiga has a problem with Patrick Wilson's sideburns

But Ed and Lorraine aren’t the only great characters in the film, as the Hodgsons – a British family who claims their house is haunted – are equally interesting characters that manage to solicit a good amount of sympathy from the audience. As is the norm now, Wan has a fantastic cast of child actors, all of whom act genuinely frightened by their haunted house situation. Madison Wolfe in particular is a standout, playing the Hodgson family member who is suspect of most of the eerie on goings in the film.

Of course, what’s a horror flick without scares, right? As per Wan’s trademark style, The Conjuring 2 is chock-full of very well crafted scares and thrills. I wouldn’t say he’s outdone himself though, as those familiar with his filmmaking style may well be able to tell how certain sequences will play out. While most of the scares in the film prove to be very effective (a sequence featuring the infamous Nun and a painting was edge-of-your-seat frightening) there are a couple that fall short, most of which involving a character called The Crooked Man. That character/entity just felt a little out-of-place to me, especially when he gets involved in a rather action-y sequence towards the end of the film.

 

Just a couple of beers before a paranormal investigation

That brings me to my other minor (read: very minor) gripe about The Conjuring 2. The budget for this film is double that of the first, and along with that comes a longer runtime that doesn’t quite justify itself (some scenes could have been paced better or even left out i.e. scenes with the Crooked Man). Additionally, a few scares here and there don’t hold up as well as some of Wan’s best scares from his Insidious films and the first Conjuring, probably due to the fact that they feel bigger (due to budget) and less intimate than the ones in his previous films.

 

Freddy?

Overall, The Conjuring 2 is a solid sequel to The Conjuring and proves that James Wan is still one of the best horror directors in Hollywood. His horror films all have a sense of fun that is made all the more enjoyable when watching them with a packed audience and a group of friends. The few bits of humour in the film work pretty well too and bring a good sense of levity to the film. He just strikes the balance between fun and scary so well, especially with this film. If the Conjuring films keep delivering the goods as they have so far, and if Wan’s on board to direct a third film in this franchise, sign me up. This could end up being a solid horror trilogy.

Score: 7.8 out of 10

'Warcraft' Review

Warcraft Review:

More Like No Craft

BY IAN TAN

When the poster looks better than the movie.

Warcraft brings director Duncan Jones (of Moon and Source Code fame – both terrific films) to the blockbuster scene. It’s always a risk to hire relatively small-time directors to direct a major 160 million dollar studio film. On one hand, they tend to know how to build characters and tell a good story. On the other, they may not deal too well with studio restrictions and a budget that’s over ten-times bigger than what they usually work with. In some cases, it works pretty well (see: James Wan’s Furious 7), and in others, not so much (see: Marc Webb’s The Amazing Spider-Man films). With that being said, how does Duncan Jones fare with Warcraft? Let’s just say he’s more Webb than he is Wan.

The plot is relatively simple – an orc and a human must join forces in order to put an end to an evil orc force that plans to destroy and colonize the human world. The former world is dying, and their invasion to the latter world will spell extinction for the humans. However, an orc by the name of Dorutan sees the evil behind his kind’s doings and aims to stop it before war breaks loose between the two races. That seems like an interesting plot to drive a fantasy action flick such as Warcraft, but the film unfortunately never lives up to its full potential.

 

Hoping the Director's Cut will be better like...

While Duncan Jones’ previous films followed a small few characters, Warcraft handles ten times that amount, and Jones doesn’t seem to have a good handle on it. There are characters that start out as promising, such as Durotan – who is played fantastically through motion-capture by Toby Kebbell – and Paula Patton’s Garona, but neither of their stories are fleshed out enough for us to truly be engaged in their characters. All other characters are simply bland or downright unmemorable. Travis Fimmel, who plays the main human character Lothar, is given a father-son story (him being the father) that’s supposed to be one of the more emotionally engaging story threads, but it completely falls flat due to poor and uncharismatic acting from both Fimmel and Burkely Duffield, who plays his son. The two human magicians in the film – played respectively by Ben Foster and Ben Schnetzer – are just miscast. Ben Foster looks like he’s trying to be a Zen-like cross between Gandalf/Dumbledore and comes off as pretentious while Khadgar (Schnetzer), who is meant to be the underdog-turned-hero/comic-relief struggles to maintain his American accent, is very unfunny and lacks screen presence.

Opening up the Tesseract

But where Jones fails in characters, he triumphs in visuals. The CGI for the orcs and both the human and orc realms are stunning and immersive. Close-ups of Durotan specifically look as realistic as a CGI character can get. The action is alright; nothing to really shout about and nothing we haven’t already seen in other fantasy-adventure films. Also, we never really get to see the orc-human team up that the film seems to build up, which is a letdown. And a side note about the villain – I’m not sure why but he looked like the kind of villain I’d expect to find in a Kung Fu Panda movie.

 

CGI doesn't get any real-er than this.

What really upsets me is that this film had so much potential. Warcraft has scenes that seem to reminisce the emotional heights of The Lord of the Rings films, but because there’s no real build-up to any one of those scenes, they all come off as oddly placed and wholly unemotional. The poor pacing and editing doesn’t help very much either. There is a great movie somewhere in here, but it never reveals itself. I sincerely hope the Director’s Cut fills in the holes this theatrical version has plenty of, and maybe, just maybe, we’ll get that really great film the theatrical cut struggles to be.

Score: 5.6 out of 10