Showing posts with label Martin Freeman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Martin Freeman. Show all posts

Friday, December 13, 2013

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Just remember, if you're not tired of The Hobbit yet, there's still three more hours on the way.

I mentioned in my The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey review that I haven't read the book this is all based on (loosely, I suppose).  That hasn't changed in the past year, so once I again I can't comment on the faithfulness to the source material.  I don't necessarily have any issues with some of the newly added characters or plot points that seem to be more of a reference to The Lord of the Rings trilogy than having anything to do with The Hobbit.  In some cases, they were a good thing, like with the addition of Evangeline Lilly's character Tauriel.  She's a total badass and gives the audience a strong female character to identify with.  It doesn't hurt that she's super hot dressed up as an Elf.  I think she might have replaced Antje Traue's Faora from Man of Steel as my current nerd crush.  I liked her character so much that I would totally support and happily watch Tauriel: Badass Elf Chick.  I liked how they brought Legolas (Orlando Bloom) back into the fray, as he got some really cool action scenes that showed more of a ruthless side that wasn't necessarily seen in the original films.

I don't figure there's a lot of need to get into the plot.  The Desolation of Smaug isn't so much a sequel than the continuation (more like extension) of a story that really could have been told in a single film, but whatever.  Smaug and An Unexpected Journey could have easily been edited into a single, three hour film, but for some reason I was never bothered by the length or pacing of either.  If you've followed my blog at all, you know that I tend to pick on a movie's length or pacing a lot.  Simply put, I enjoy this world so much and hanging around in it that I don't want them to end.  Hell, I've already sat through the Extended Edition of An Unexpected Journey twice already, even though it didn't expand on the story the way the Extended Editions for The Lord of the Rings trilogy did.  You don't even have to twist my arm to say that I've enjoyed the The Hobbit movies far more than the Star Wars prequels.  The Hobbit is how you make a prequel trilogy and throw in references to the originals.

The real question I think most people will be asking is do we finally get to see the dragon in this one.  Well, we do and it's glorious!  Smaug (voiced by Benedict Cumberbatch) is easily the best looking dragon ever seen in a movie.  It's not just a quick shot either.  We get an extended look and he plays heavily during the last part of the film.  The wait was worth it.  Although, I will add this, why is it so hard for a giant, fire-breathing dragon to kill a bunch of halflings?  Shouldn't he have been able to kill them like fifteen times each?

Overall, the special effects had more polish to them when compared to the first film.  There were times in Journey where it looked too much like a computer game, but I didn't get as much of that here.  I think a lot of that look was due to the high frame rate used.  I saw Smaug in IMAX 3D with the high frame rate, and there were still times where it still had that artificial, sped-up look.  I thought it was much less noticeable though, but I can see how some viewers may still have an issue with it.  If you're on the fence about what format to see it in, you should probably err on the side of avoiding the HFR screenings.  I liked the 3D though and don't have a problem recommending it.

Another reason I enjoyed Smaug so much is that there's a lot more action.  Journey took close to an hour before anything happened, but there's less setup in Smaug and more getting to the very creative and fun action scenes throughout the film.  The "barrel scene" has a almost Rube Goldberg feel to it, as did another scene later in the film.  Again, there there are many scenes with Tauriel and Legolas where they get to kick ass.  There are arrows to the head and beheadings galore.  Oh, and there's no musical sequences this time around.  It's not that I dislike them, but they're not always my thing or don't necessarily fit well in the story.  I also appreciated that there was less corny humor.  The whole tone of the film is much darker.

It isn't just better effects and action though.  There were many character moments I appreciated.  In particular, I liked how they took time to show how Bilbo (Martin Freeman) is slowly getting corrupted by The Ring.  I enjoyed how Thorin (Richard Armitage) was developed, and I came away liking him bit a more than I did after Journey. Many of the company of dwarves get to show more personality, especially with Kili (Aiden Turner), who is one of the few characters that gets a love interest.  If there was any disappointment I had it's that Gandalf (Ian McKellen) took a bit of a back seat in this chapter.  I'm assuming he'll be back with a vengeance in the final chapter.

I had a lot of fun with The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.  Sure, it's too long, and purists will have issues with the story, but it's still an improvement over An Unexpected Journey.  If anything, it gives fans another opportunity to hang out in Middle-earth while providing more of the action and spectacle that made The Lord of the Rings trilogy so entertaining.  Plus, there's a dragon...

4 (out of 5) Death Stars

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

The World's End (2013)

Ah, so this is why they say you can't go home again...

Gary (Simon Pegg) returns to reunite his friends and complete the Golden Mile, a marathon pub crawl in their hometown.  Their first attempt over 20 years ago was met with failure, but this time Gary is determined that they'll reach the final pub, The World's End.  However, the gang has all moved on and a pub crawl isn't high on their list of things to do.  One of them, Andie (Nick Frost), doesn't even drink anymore.  The rest aren't too wild about Gary and the fact that he hasn't grown up at all.  The impulsive and talkative Gary manages to convince them though.  They hit a series of pubs before they start to notice that things are a little off since the last time they were in town, and then it gets weird.

I'm not sure how many of you have seen the trailer for The World's End, or if you're a fan of Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg's previous collaborations (which I've just learned is called the "Cornetto trilogy").  The reason I bring this up is that the movie takes a significant turn around the halfway point that I don't want to spoil, but anyone that's seen the trailer or is familiar with their previous work will likely be aware already.  I'm going to err on the side of not spoiling though and be a little more vague and a lot less wordy than usual.

Spoilers or not, it isn't going to ruin your enjoyment of The World's End.  Once things get going, it's a ton of fun.  If you aren't laughing at the situations they find themselves in, then the dialog will get you.  The thing I love about the Cornetto trilogy is not just how well written they are, but how it's clear that Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright love the genres they're riffing on.  There's so much attention to detail and subtle references to other films.  Even Paul, which was written by Pegg and Nick Frost, is full of sci-fi references.  Fans are rewarded with multiple viewings of these films, and I think The World's End will be no exception.  I was recently shown a clip from Shaun of the Dead where the opening scene brilliantly spells out exactly how the movie is going to go.  It's the kind of thing I didn't notice the first time, or even second time I watched it.  I've already heard about a few things from The World's End that I didn't pick up the first time around.

Another thing that makes these films stand out is that there's more to them than clever dialog or genre references.  Like some of the better Judd Apatow comedies, there are underlying themes that give them meaning and more to connect with.  As you learn more about the characters and what's really going on in their lives, you see what's really driving them.  People that aren't necessarily sympathetic at the beginning are by the end.

Much of the cast from the previous Cornetto films return or have small roles in The World's End.  From working so much together, they have great chemistry and play off each other like old pros.  They really do seem like genuine friends.  Rosamund Pike joins the cast to give it a jolt of estrogen.  I've always enjoyed Pike, but I really her taking a stab at comedy from the usual drama/thrillers she's in, and no, Johnny English Reborn does not count.

If you're a fan of Shaun of the Dead or Hot Fuzz, then you'll also love The World's End.  I'd say it's probably somewhere in between those two films a far as overall quality, but your mileage may vary.  Even if you aren't familiar with the Cornetto trilogy, there's a lot of fun to be had, and it's one of the better comedies of the year.  I strongly recommend checking it out, and maybe even getting a pint or two to really put yourself in the mood.

4 (out of 5) Death Stars

Friday, December 14, 2012

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) - Movie Review

At least these prequels don't have Jar Jar Binks.  Sorry, anytime I can take a shot at Jar Jar, I will.

It's really not accurate to compare The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey to other prequels, as the book it's based on was actually written before The Lord of the Rings.  The Hobbit is not as much of a prequel as much as The Lord of the Rings was a sequel to it.  I've actually never read The Hobbit, and only have a vague recollection of seeing the animated feature as a kid, so I was going into this pretty cold as far as what the story was about.

The movie's backstory is spelled out in the first few minutes.  The dwarven city of Erebor is overrun by the dragon Smaug, and the Dwarves are forced from their homes and into a nomadic existence.  The film is framed as an older Bilbo is writing his story on his birthday (as seen in The Fellowship of The Ring), allowing them to link the trilogies together on screen, but it also gives Peter Jackson an excuse to have Ian Holm and Elijah Wood briefly reprise their roles as Bilbo and Frodo. I have to say it was nice seeing those two again and it gave me a comfortable feeling as the story began.

We then go back to a younger Bilbo (Martin Freeman) as he meets Gandalf (Ian McKellen) and is forced to host a party of Dwarves as they assemble and await their leader, Thorin (Richard Armitage).  The Dwarves outline their plan on reclaim Erebor, and Gandalf explains why Bilbo was chosen as the fourteenth member of their party.  Bilbo initially refuses to join, but decides to embrace the adventure and come along.

I could keep talking about the plot, but there so much going on that I could be here all day.  I'm sure many of you are wondering how The Hobbit was stretched into three films (up until last Summer, it was originally planned for two). From what I understand, Peter Jackson is doing a combination of adding things that are just kind of hinted at or mentioned in the appendices, or in some cases just outright making Middle Earth-type stuff up. This isn't strictly going to be the story of The Hobbit anymore.  Again, as I haven't read the book I can't comment on how faithful it all is. However, I can say that the movie did feel stretched out at times (it's nearly three hours), and there were a few things introduced that weren't fully developed or felt thrown in.  We'll see if there's a payoff to these things in the later movies. I trust Peter Jackson's direction, and I don't think the next films will disappoint.

Despite the stretched feeling, I didn't really mind the pacing.  I was never bored or felt like it was too long.  It all felt very similar to The Fellowship of the Ring, where I wasn't totally into the film, but understood how it was building towards something. That's pretty much how I felt here, only this time I was actually disappointed it was ending, where with Fellowship I could felt like I could take it or leave it.  I want to see how this is all going to play out.

Another thing that kind of disappointed me was how familiar it all felt.  Sure this is the same world, so the look, locations and sounds should be familiar, but at times I felt like I was just watching recycled stuff from the first trilogy.  Much of the music is ripped straight from the other films, as well as some of creatures and even plot elements.

I saw this in IMAX 3D, and while I liked seeing it in the IMAX format, I didn't think the 3D was anything special.  I did see this in the HFR format though, so lets talk about that for a bit.  The Hobbit was filmed at a higher frame rate: 48-frames-per-second.  Films are normally done at 24-frames-per-second, which causes more of a motion blur and gives films that cinematic quality we're used to.  Since we're watching the film at higher frame rate, there's no blur at all and it has a super clean look about it.  If you own a Samsung TV, it's pretty much the same effect that the Auto Motion feature gives you.  I've had a Samsung 3D TV for a little over a year now, so I've gotten used to the way it looks.  Despite being used to the effect, I still found the 48-fps a little distracting in the opening minutes of The Hobbit.  There were times where things looked artificially sped up, which was a little off putting.  You may also notice that a lot of the effects-driven sequences have a video game look about them.  Overall, the high frame rate didn't bug me that much, and I think you'll get used it as I did.  It's probably just going to depend on how much of purist you are.  There is a standard frame rate version of the film in theaters, and depending on your location, this may be the only thing offered to you anyway, so this whole HFR thing may be moot.

The Hobbit does look great, and the effects are even better than in the first trilogy.  Nothing showcases this more than when Gollum finally shows up.  Gollum and Bilbo's scene is the highlight of the film and was worth the price of admission alone.  Andy Serkis is amazing again and I wish he'd get more recognition for the work he does.

Despite the large party involved in the adventure, the cast of The Hobbit really isn't all that large (it scrolls by rather quickly in credits).  The story mainly focuses on Bilbo, Gandalf and Thorin, and I thought the performances Freeman, McKellen and Armitage are all fine.  I've always liked Martin Freeman and I think he did a good job as Bilbo.  It helps that as great as Ian Holm is, Bilbo wasn't a large character in the previous films, so it doesn't feel like Freeman is trying to live up a previous performance or hard large, fake feet-shoes to fill.

Another thing I liked was that it wasn't as jokey or silly as the trailers made me fear.  I was really worried that they were going to go for a lot of silly or slapstick humor, especially when the Dwarves were involved, but there are very few laughs to be had and the overall tone of the film was serious. It also helps that the individual Dwarves are developed to the point where they are more than just background characters.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a welcome return to Middle-Earth.  If you aren't already a fan of The Lord of the Rings, I don't think it's going to do anything to make you one though.  It is a gorgeous film (regardless of the format you see it in), has great effects, and thrilling action.  While it's probably a little too long, it's still entertaining and will leave you looking forward to the next installment. You don't need to see it in 3D, but I do recommend seeing it in the theater.

4 (out of 5) Death Stars