'Power Rangers' Review

‘Power Rangers’ Review:

Go Go?

BY IAN TAN

Together we are more.

I’m a little embarrassed to say this but I’ve never seen a single Power Rangers episode in my life, so this was my very first experience watching anything Power Rangers related.

The film tells the story of five ‘teenagers with attitudes’ who, by coincidence, discover five different ‘Power Coins’ at a mining quarry that leads them into a mysterious spacecraft. Soon enough, they are tasked to take on the mantle of ‘Power Rangers’ and to stop the evil Rita Repulsa, who plans on destroying their hometown of Angel Grove. However, things aren’t so simple as the team cannot defeat her until they “morph” into Rangers, but in order to do so, they must settle their differences and learn to work as a team. And so begins our Power Rangers story. 

I honestly had no real interest in this film. The marketing didn’t work for me and the source material didn’t capture my interest as a kid, so I had pretty low expectations for this. But props to director Dean Israelite and the filmmakers for crafting an entertaining superhero origin story. 

So we superheroes now?

A good amount of this film works because of its characters. The five leads, namely Jason, Billy, Kimberly, Zack and Trini are fleshed out enough for us to care about them, and the actors behind these characters are charismatic and share good chemistry with one another. But it’s really RJ Cyler who steals the show as Billy/the Blue Ranger, who puts the film’s heart in the right place and is especially effective during the film’s more emotional moments. Bryan Cranston was also a good choice to play Zordon, the Jor-El-like mentor to the Rangers, and Bill Hader was entertaining as the talking robot Alpha 5. Elizabeth Banks was alright as the evil Rita Repulsa. She wasn’t as over-the-top as I expected her to be, and she’s a far cry from being a Loki or a Joker. She was about as serviceable as any typical Marvel movie villain.

In terms of action, Power Rangers delivers the goods, but only towards the last half hour of the film, when the Zords (controllable dinosaur-like robots) come into the picture, but this isn’t really an issue, as the characters - and the actors behind them - are enough to keep us engaged in the story, even with a lack of action set pieces for the majority of the film.

 

Dinobots?

This isn’t a complaint, but I feel like the film borrows a lot of elements from recent blockbusters, namely Man of Steel, Chronicle, the Transformers films, and Pacific Rim. For a while I was worried that the movie would end up feeling like a rip off of these films, but it turned out to be more of a ‘best hits’ of those movies, which isn’t a bad thing. It could’ve tried taking some more original and creative routes though. Another one of the minor gripes I have with the film is its humour, which was hit or miss for me. A number of times, these teenagers said things that sounded a little childish for their age, and made me cringe a little, especially in the first half of the film.

But at the end of the day, Power Rangers was fun. I had a good time with it and am looking forward to seeing more of these characters in future films. Good job, Lionsgate.

Score: 7.6/10

'Beauty & the Beast' Review

Beauty & the Beast Review:

#BeOurGuest

BY IAN TAN

From the director of Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Parts 1 & 2 comes the live-action retelling of the Disney classic, Beauty & the Beast… this can’t be good.

Nah, who am I kidding? It’s Disney.

Let’s start with the good stuff. Over the past two years, Disney has been very successful (commercially and critically) at adapting a number of their animated classics into live-action counterparts. Cinderella, The Jungle Book and even Pete’s Dragon were solid live-action adaptations of old Disney animations, and so is this year’s Beauty & the Beast.

The cast, for one, does a splendid job at bringing the beloved characters to life. Emma Watson suits the role of Belle nicely, channeling the right amount of charm, fearlessness and humanity to the character. The same can be said for Dan Stevens, who plays the Beast. However, the standouts were really Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson and Nathan Mack as Lumiere, Cosworth, Mrs. Potts, and Chip respectively. Although mainly providing the voices for these characters, these A-list actors bring a level of charisma and emotion to these characters that wouldn’t be present had they been voiced by anyone else. Another highlight was Luke Evans as Gaston and Josh Gad as Lefou, both of whom seemed to really enjoy playing their roles, Evans especially.

 Can't touch this

Beauty & the Beast also benefits from stellar production design and costumes, much like 2015’s Cinderella. The interiors of the Beast’s castle and Belle’s little provincial town are beautifully realized and gorgeous to look at. However, I did find some of the character designs a little weird, especially being so used to their looks from the animated film. For instance, I’m not a big fan of Lumiere’s live-action design; it just didn’t feel very Lumiere-like to me. Ewan McGregor nailed the character’s voice though. I also really liked the Beast’s look. I was curious as to how much emotion could have been articulated with him looking the way he does, and I was very pleased to see how effective the CGI work for the Beast was, and Dan Stevens’ performance really brought out the character's humanity. 

 

Cogsworth was the best

As for flaws, the biggest one for me was probably the predictability of the story, which follows the animated version almost to a tee, save for some additional character backstories. Besides that, there really isn’t anything new story-wise in this live-action retelling of the tale as old as time. It’s a safe way to please fans of the classic, but I was hoping for just a little more innovation in the story and characters, kind of like what they did with The Jungle Book just recently. Another thing that I felt the original did better was its emphasis on the iconic rose, which in the cartoon felt like more of a ticking clock than this movie made it out to be.  As a result, the stakes didn’t feel as high as they did in the animated film. Also, the relationship between Belle and the Beast didn't grow as organically in this new film as it did in the original, which was a wee bit disappointing to me since their relationship is the where the heart of the story is supposed to be.

Humbug

Overall though, 2017’s Beauty & the Beast is still an enjoyable, magically Disney time at the movies, even if it never really surpasses the quality, heart and originality of the 1991 classic.

Score: 7.4 out of 10

'Kong: Skull Island' Review

Kong: Skull Island Review:

On Like Donkey Kong

BY IAN TAN

This would be a great VR experience

Kong: Skull Island comes from the guys who brought us the 2014 reboot of Godzilla, which was a successful reboot, but a rather slow-burn one at that. Skull Island attempts to ride on that film’s success, correct its flaws, and … wait for it… kickstart a shared movie universe dubbed the MonsterVerse. As we know, when done right, shared movie universes can succeed with flying colours, a la the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but when done wrong, things can get really messy, a la the DC Extended Universe. So how does Kong: Skull Island fare as a shared universe set-up?

Much like 2014’s Godzilla, the best parts about Skull Island are all the scenes that involve the titular monster and the other monsters he fights. Also like Godzilla, the worst parts of the film come whenever the humans are on screen, which is a shame considering that this film has a stellar cast. John C. Reilly was pretty good in his role as the stranded war soldier longing to get back to the world. Reilly gave the character some levity and heart, and was by far the film’s most interesting character. Besides Reilly, Tom Hiddleston, Brie Larson, Samuel L. Jackson and John Goodman's characters are paper thin, which makes it pretty hard for the audiences to care about them especially when they're caught in perilous situations. The flaw here lies not in the performances (the actors do their best), but in the script, which is filled with hallow, one-dimensional action movie archetypes. The many failed attempts at humour don’t help either. I’m disappointed to say this but, as uninteresting as the characters were in Godzilla, the characters here are even blander.

A Jurassic World escapee

Another downside to this film is its disjointed editing and poor tonal shifts from scene to scene. There just doesn’t seem to be enough connective tissue between each moment. Couple that with intense scenes followed immediately by humourous ones and we get a pretty weird emotional experience. It also feels as though some large chunks of character moments were trimmed down to tighten up the film’s runtime, which doesn’t do the film any favours as the characters don’t go through very much development, nor do they have much depth to them.

Caesar?

Humans aside, every scene with Kong or any of the other creatures of Skull Island are all fun scenes to behold on the big screen, especially in 3D.  Industrial Light & Magic, the visual effects gurus behind the creatures and environments we see in the film, have done a solid job in bringing the beautiful but terrifying world of Skull Island to life. Kong’s introduction and final battle are especially impressive, and indie director Jordan Vongt-Roberts proves he knows how to handle scale and spectacle. And while the action is very entertaining, nothing here really tops the awesome Kong versus. T-Rex sequence in Peter Jackson’s King Kong in 2005.  The helicopter sequence during Kong’s introduction in this film however, was stunning.

 

Frame this up.

In a nutshell, Kong: Skull Island feels like a typical summer action blockbuster with big spectacle, hallow characters and an on-the-nose post-credit set up for the next movie in the franchise. It’s a fun ride whenever Kong and the Skull Crawlers show up, but at other times it does get a little boring due to its poor characters, some jarring editing choices, and awkward tonal shifts.

Score: 6 out of 10