AVATAR by jaiskizzy

apercu: just like how south park put it. it's dances with smurfs. but for anyone who gets off on synopses...it's the far future and a wheelchair-bound ex-marine fills in for his dead brother and is sent to planet pandora to help out with research on the blue cat-people called na'vi. jacked into a genetically engineered na'vi, he becomes part of the natives, learns their culture and falls in love with the local hottie. soon enough, he is faced with a dilemma: help his fellow humans obtain the unobtainium or fight with the na'vi to protect their homeland. (i like parentheses)

review: something i hate to admit is having watched titanic six times. three times in the theater, twice on home video and once on hbo. of those instances, only once was voluntary. anyways, james cameron's return to film has been touted as a game-changer and change the game it did. that game would be the 3d motion capture game which beowulf played well but lost. it was more in the gamut of pixar and dreamworks toons. avatar, on the other hand, well, as much as i like swimming against the tide, i am compelled to agree with the majority of moviegoers that this wasn't a movie. it was an experience.

but let's deal with the minuses first, shall we? (i'll pretend that you said "ok") the first gripe i had was on the voice-overs. it was quite unnecessary and i dont think its absence would have made a difference to the movie, er...the experience. half of the time, the protagonist was merely describing what was or what would be happening. i get that they're connected with the video logs (i am not gonna say "vlog" because i think it's stupid and gay) but the narrations were short and sparse and added nothing to the scenes. it would have been better if, like, when the colonel was talking to him while in the power-suit, he voice-overed "i should get these guys to do a dance in those suits and upload it to youtube lol". moving on, complaint number two: the near similar titanic storytelling. in titanic, the movie would switch from the ship scenes to the old woman recalling her memories. avatar employs the same switching from human mode to na'vi mode. i guess this is a gripe because i actually thought that jakesully (the protagonist) would get trapped in his na'vi body, hence more pandora sequences (more on that in next paragaph). anyways, the most criticized aspect of avatar is its flat, cliche story. the love story cliche. cliche evil guys after cliche treasure against cliche good guys. but (and now i swim on the opposite direction) it didnt bore me at all and i believe the simplicity helped propel the 3d experience forward by not delving on complicated subplots or overlong character developments. yes it wasnt original but it wasnt bad either. at least the drama didnt try hard too hard to jerk tears out of the audience.

now let's get to the meat of the matter, the cgi and the mocap technology. a few sentences back i mentioned the human mode na'vi mode switch. a large part of what makes it annoying is that i wanted to spend more time in pandora. dude, that place looks awesome. i came into the movie knowing that the na'vi and their environment are all computer generated and yet i could swear that those bushes, trees and animals (no aquatics though) were real. and james cameron has perfected the mocap because although the na'vi were obviously cgi, their movements and emotions looked very real. heck, even the long-noticeable mouth problems seem to have been fixed. it's all very amazing. the other thing that james cameron must have labored hours for was the science of the film. for one, pandora is kinda like a moon to a bigger planet so it would be natural for pandora to spend some time under the bigger planet's shadow and have longer evenings. and that is why most of the flora and fauna have luminescent abilities. they have evolved to survive the darkness. there is so much more to talk and ponder about the film, from the little details of the fingers (human-na'vi hybrids have five, real na'vi have four) to the nature-based "religion", which, to be completely honest, is one i would get behind if we had it here. but no review would encompass the true avatar experience. like jakesully in pandora, it's something jack into and see for yourself.

finalword: here is a film that pits humans against blue catpeople and you root for the catpeople. james cameron waited for the right time to realize his vision and the wait was all worth it because he has created an instant classic, this generation's bar-setter in visual effects. bravo, sir. and good luck, challengers!

the good: cgi, mocap, science

the bad: pace, narration

the ugly: the forced theme song

the verdict: 9 eywa jellyfish

abattoir.

NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM: BATTLE OF THE SMITHSONIAN by obi

SPOILERS!!!

The spoiler...
Several years after the movie's part 1, Larry Daley hit it bigtime as a CEO of his own company leaving the nightguard post in the Museum of Natural History behind.

When the museum closed down for upgrades, some of the display artifacts are sent to the Smithsonian Institute archives in D.C. including the tablet of Ahkmenrah that which turns these objects to life. Triggered by the tablet, the Smithsonian displays are reanimated including the Egyptian pharaoh Kahmunrah and his unlikely allies Al Capone, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Ivan the Terrible.

The ragtag gang plans to rule the world by unsealing the gates to the underworld and summon forth a daemon army. But to accomplish this, Kahmunrah needs the tablet hieroglyphs deciphered! Larry, who breaks into the Smithsonian archives as soon as he is contacted by Jed the miniature cowboy for help, seems to be the pharaoh's only hope to break the code. With his reanimated friends being harassed by the bad guys, Larry had no choice but to work on the tablet, meeting new museum personalities as he go through it.

All the while, Larry's friends from the Museum of Natural History are brewing a daring attempt to get rid of Kahmunrah. They are able to do it in time as the pharaoh has just opened the gates to the underworld... Abe Lincoln's monument swathing daemons back to the netherworld!

With Kahmunrah gone, everything returned to normal in the Smithsonian. Larry brings back his friends to the Museum of Natural History and had it open 24 hours where every past midnight, patrons may walk with the reanimated museum artifacts.

The verdict...
It comes as a surprise to me that I enjoyed this film more than its prequel! And surprising even more is that it's not all about Ben Stiller's performance. He even hardly carry most of the fun stock of the story. I watched this movie expecting to see something entertaining yet won't require me to think too much deeply AND it did not fail me. It was good brainless fun! A must-see for a family outing.

The GOOD...
The new museum characters are a laugh trip... Kahmunrah has a comical lisp, Bonaparte squeals like a chick, and Al Capone and his honchos are in black and white! Even General Custer and the new capuchin monkey have their share of hilarious antics. The old museum characters are still kickin' fun as well. I particularly liked this scene where the miniature Octavius attempted to charge across an expansive lawn, tiring himself for naught (melodramatic and all!).

The entire production is just right. Costume and set design fit what needs to be depicted in the story. Computer graphic works is really creative and done flawlessly.

The SO SO...
Ben Stiller. I think he can't pull off a better-than-average presence in the film. I don't know if its because his script is lackluster or everybody else just outshines him! His female counterpart Amy Adams (Amelia Earhart) is a poor attempt at throwing in a romantic twist. She's exaggeratedly perky for me.

The BAD...
The story is not really impressive. It's developed just for the sake of having a plot to pour the comedy into. So with that, don't expect much depth on it or wish on having lose ends tied up. It's a fantasy story. Things happen, rationally or not. To add to that, the story ending is rushed.

Robin Williams is cheesy.

The rating...
7 of 10.

ANGELS & DEMONS by obi

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD!

The gist...
The symbologist Dr. Robert Langdon has been called by the Vatican to solve a threat by the church's long-dormant nemesis - the Illuminati.

The situation is this:
* The Pope is dead.
* The Conclave of Cardinals is in session for Papal election.
* Four of the top candidates - the preferatti - are kidnapped by the Illuminati.
* A bomb threat is up in the Vatican... a powerful bomb that can wipeout the entire city-state.

The Illuminati will start to murder the kidnapped Cardinals one by one before midnight - the time the bomb is set to detonate. Langdon, starting with a clue from a Galilean book, follows the trail of the culprit around the walled city as the latter sets to accomplish his murder spree. Three dead Cardinals after, the symbologist still hops around the Vatican in a race to make sense with everything that is happening.

As Langdon closes in on the murderer, events unfold that leads to the discovery of the people behind the plot. On a dramatic climax, he saves the last Cardinal and exposes (in a sorry way of tying lose ends) everything that the viewers need to know.

The verdict...
What's outright striking about the movie is the overall aesthetics of the sets and locations. As if on a tour bus racing around the Vatican, the scenes switch from one landmark to another... as quick as the fast paced movie can showcase in two hours. Great cinematography!

The story is a lame excuse for a mystery flick. The development of the conflict is progressive only up to the point where Langdon flew to the Vatican and started nosing around. By the time clues started raining down on the symbologist, all went in a confused flurry of lame riddles and chasing around the Vatican and boring action scenes. I can imagine a more interesting Hardy Boys plot line.

What sparked a bit of interest for me is the same reason why I enjoyed "Da Vinci Code" - the way Robert Brown interlaced facts and fiction and make it seem to have an appearance of plausibility. I love the concept of the Illuminati and the personalities Brown affiliated with it... Galileo, Bernini, Michaelangelo, and Raphael Santi. He could have used the mystery of this clandestine group for a deeper plot line than just being a mask of the Carmelengo's deeds.

I haven't read the book so I can't tell if it was adapted in the movie well. But I have a big hunch it did not.

The acting is cool. The cast is cool. The script lame. Langdon is a walking curator! I mean 80% of the film, he's wise-talking and annotating every single Encyclopedia entry they pass through along the story. Again, I don't know if that's how Langdon's character is supposed to be since I quite remember a different Langdon from the "Da Vinci Code". And I don't mind it either... it's educational! It's just that there are a lot more creative ways of presenting information to readers than directly spoon-feeding.

In all, don't take the story too seriously or prepare to be disappointed. It may appear to have depth in the start but as Langdon starts to crack through the mystery, you'll have this notion that the story is more of an elementary detective novel than a CSI-ish episode.

6 of 10.

ANGELS & DEMONS by jaiskizzy

apercu: the pope dies and just as the vatican dudes are about to choose the next one, an enemy from the past, the illuminati, abducts the candidates and hides an antimatter bomb somewhere in the holy city set to go off at midnight and delete the world's smallest country from google earth. with no pope and no hope, they turn to a swimming tom hanks for help, who thankfully doesnt stay in his trunks for the rest of the movie.

the da vinci code was bad. you would expect that all those bad reviews of that movie would immensely affect the plans for the sequel and make the planners double their efforts to produce a better film. but i guess they just didnt care and went ahead with shooting tom hanks snap into lectures about history in the same annoying way the paperclip pops up in microsoft office and uncover the dumbest mystery ever by following clues that are so dumb the perpetrators could have just left those sticker footprints you find in malls and it wouldn't have made a difference. seriously, there are way better scooby-doo and 1960s batman vs. riddler episodes than this movie. here is a rough example of the audience brain cell murdering of angels and demons: tom hanks and the gang arrive at the scene. they look for an angel sculpture. it has to be an angel for reasons i didnt pay attention to. they find the statue. it's pointing to somewhere. west, i think. they look at a map for churches in the west for the next clue. there it is. a church with an italian name that in english means castle of angels. ayfkm?!? (are you fucking kidding me question mark exclamation point question mark)

the dialogue was quite terrible. there were attempts at humor but failed. the action scenes didnt get any reaction from me. the ending was unsurprising because, with such a small of well-knowns, you know it had to be one of them. i cant wait for a movie where the one behind all the evildoings was an extra who was always somewhere in the background. the only aspect of the film that was watchable was obi-wan, as my beloved jeej refers to him. to me, ewan mcgregor will always be mark renton and it's pretty amazing that the same guy who dived into a toilet to retrieve suppositories just to get a fix is a priest in this movie. when he did the speech with the cardinals, i was expecting him to seque into the choose life monolgue.

don't know about the book but this movie ought to be condemned for its sin of crappiness. for the lost souls out to find cinematic pleasure, allow me to spread the word: thou shalt not waste thy moolah on this. if there is a hell, it could probably be looped screenings of this movie.

the good: the science versus religion thing and the ewan mcgregor thing.
the bad: the every thing else.
the ugly: tom hanks' "facial"
the verdict: 4 smoking cardinals



the illuminaughty.
or
angers and dream-ons

STAR TREK by obi

SPOILERS AHEAD!

The gist...
A humongous Romulan starship got sucked back in from the future. Bent on avenging the destruction of his homeworld, its Captain (Nero) initiated a blackhole in the core of planet Vulcan to decimate the planet from within!

Out to investigate the catastrophe, an armada of Starfleet cruisers are sent to Vulcan. All these cruisers are decimated by the Romulans in a cunning ambush bar one - the "Enterprise". James Kirk, who is just stowed aboard the infamous starship, predicted this attack and is able to forwarn the Captain about it. In a daring attempt to negotiate with the Romulans, Captain Pike of the "Enterprise" appointed First Officer Spock as temporary Captain and the braggart Kirk as substitute First Officer while he dared to ferry himself into the Romulan spacecraft.

Captain Pike is eventually held captive by Nero. Outgunned and outsized by the Romulan ship, Spock take the logical choice to retreat and redezvous with the Starfleet. Kirk forcefully opposed the idea (wanting to outright follow and attack the escaping Romulans) which eventually made the Vulcan Captain eject him out of the "Enterprise" and into a nearby ice planet.

There, Kirk meet an older Spock (also from the future), who showed him to an onplanet Starfleet outpost and meet Montgomery Scott. Scott devised a gadget that beamed them back to "Enterprise". Aided by insights from the old Spock, Kirk tricked the present-time Spock into relinquishing his command of the cruiser and appointed himself the new Captain. With this new post, he executed his original plan to chase the Romulan ship and, in a foolhardily heroic plan, is able to beam inside the enemy vessel!

Being the good guys they are (good guys are just... y'know... good!), the plan went off well and the "Enterprise" are able to get rid of the Romulan ship and rescue Captain Pike. For this bravery, Kirk becomes permanent Captain of the "Enterprise" and the rest is let us say a joyride for the Trekkie fandom.

The verdict...
I'm no Trekkie but the film impressed me. I can only vaguely remember the original series but I guess this worked as an advantage for my enjoyment of the movie. It feels all new to me aside from the ship and the crew!

The CGI is a visual treat! Flawless and sleek, it effectively made the movie a must-see in the big screen. The sets are creatively designed and although they have touches reminiscent of the old Star Trek settings, most are fused and interspersed with props and materials that are of original concept. I particularly liked the "inside" of the Romulan ship, keeping the idea that it should look ahead of technology (as it's supposed to be from the future) while portraying the cabalistic nature of the crew.

The opening part of the movie can be quite confusing as it's not outright implied that the plot would involve an alternate universe and a time travel. Aside from that, the screenplay is generally mediocre with plot lines that are, if not totally briliant, just enough to bolster what the rest of the movie has to boast. As long as it's not outright dumb to waste such a good production, I'm good with it.

The assemblage of casts to portray the much-loved crew of "Enterprise" is well-done. Chris Pine (Captain James Kirk) nailed the William Shatner portrayal of the Don Juan chief of the starship and added little touches of his own device. Zachary Quinto's Spock (the younger one) is very very convincing as somebody torn between his emotionless and logical Vulcan nature and his sentimental Earthling half. John Cho's character Sulu is really vague on my recollections but I've always remembered him as a kick-ass fencer. It's kinda portrayed in the film as he duelled with a sword against a Romulan. So so acting. Anton Yelchin (Chekov) doesn't have to do much but talk in his annoying accent. Simon Pegg (Scotty) and Karl Urban (Bones) have really likeable characters while Zoe Saldana (Uhura) blew her's. She's obviously just trying. Eric Bana's Romulan captain Nero is a strong performance.

Salute goes to Leonard Nimoy (the original Spock) for reprising his role. He doesn't have to do much anyway but act as a more laid-back Spock than the one he used to play. Should not be hard for an aging man.

Action scenes are packed good along the story. I like how the space fights are designed. None too grandiose as Star Wars' but just excellently crafted to be visually impressive. I don't like the Uhura-Spock romance. It seems like a poor attempt at putting it just for the sake of having a love angle in there.

To sum it, the director has been bold enough to fuse some new concepts into the old premise of Star Trek and still pull it off well.

9 of 10!

X-MEN ORIGINIS: WOLVERINE by obi

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD

The spoiler...
Logan and his brother Victor served the American army formidably and this is mainly because of their innate mutant abilities. Along the way, they met Colonel Stryker, an ambitious officer who assembled a team of mutants (and conscripting the brothers in it) that acted as a Special Force for the military. After a while, the team's differences took toll and they separated to live their own civilian lives.

Logan went a simple living on the mountains of Canada with his wife. One day, Victor returned and claimed the life of his beloved. Wanting to kill Victor for revenge, he agreed to Colonel Stryker's experiment to infuse adamantium to his bones rendering him almost indestructible. Tagged as Weapon X by Stryker's experiment, Logan opted to rather be called as Wolverine (taken from one of his wife's tales). He learned that Stryker wanted something else out of the experiment and tried to erase his memories. Wolverine escaped the facility and along the way learned that Stryker himself is in league with Victor.

The two are involved in kidnapping mutants and conducting experiements with them on a secluded facility called the "Island".

Wolverine went out to search for this facility and after arriving on it, new revelations has been revealed - his wife is not dead and is only blackmailed to cooperate with Stryker to save the life of her sister who is under the Colonel's captivity. Freeing the captive mutants, Wolverine (with Victor helping out) eventually has to battle with Weapon XI, the last and best mutant warrior Stryker's experiments have produced.

They are able to defeat Weapon XI and destroy the facility. The captive mutants are saved by a cameo appearance of Professor X. Wolverine however was shot by Stryker in the head with an adamantium bullet. The wounds healed but the damage in his brain made him forgot everything. Stryker was arrested by the military and rest is... well... X-Men history.

The verdict...
I've always liked Wolverine and I have to agree that Hugh Jackman (though out of scale to the original Wolverine who should only be 5'3 feet in height) is one of the best choice to grab the role. He looks like Logan and acts the role well.

It's cool that I'm familiar with most of the mutants on the film and like a fanboy I go "Oooh, I know him/her!" in my mind when a mutant appeared along the story. Some are not outright recognizable but there are enough hints to know who's who. Some of the most prominent characters are the Blob, Sabretooth (Victor), a young Cyclops, Deadpool (one of my favorites in Marvel), Emma Frost, and Gambit. It's disappointing that Gambit has been shown a lot of times in the movie's preview but doesn't play that much role in the movie itself.

There are obvious deviance from the canon story as read in the Marvel comicbooks but I believe that they are made in good spirit of TRYING to come up with an interesting story. This made the film also fairly acceptable to people who don't know crap about Wolverine and the rest of the Marvel mutants in print. The storyline is typical of comicbook adaptations where lose ends fly aplenty and impossibilities are only limited by the scriptwriters' ingenuity to make things happen. It's a leave-brain-at-home screenplay.

Actually, the movie can be boring, really, if you'll not be dazzled by the more-than-enough action scenes it packs. Some time along the movie you'll realize that mutant characters come and go like they just want to throw in as much mutants as possible even if they don't really help much on progressing the story. I can go as far as saying that there's not enough "flash" on the film (which should be expected on sci-fi flicks like this). Computer effects is horrible as some of the green screen scenes and digital edits are obvious. They've provided subtle fan services to the really hardcore Wolverine fans but it won't change the impact to people who would look for value for what they paid.

In all, it's your generic superhero flick. Nothing innovative is introduced in it except the fact that you'll learn that Wolverine's name actually originated from a who-knows-what-language word that sounds like "koo-koo kachoo!" Haha... laughtrip!

4 out of 10.