Superman Returns - Film Review

OFFICIAL SYNOPSIS:

"Superman - born on a planet which has long since died - has been raised by adoptive parents on the Kent farm in Kansas. The young boy Kal-El is renamed Clark Kent, and though he has grown up among humans, he is not one of them. Under Earth's yellow sun, he can do things humans can only dream of, but to co-exist with them he must live a dual life as mild, unassuming Clark Kent, secretly transforming into the Man of Steel when the world cries out for him.

But now, the world's crises have gone unheeded for five long years since Superman's mysterious disappearance. Without him, crime has risen in the city of Metropolis and beyond; that's not even counting the future destructive acts of Lex Luthor, who has been sprung from prison with the specific intent of using Superman's technological secrets for his own personal gain and glory.

Lois Lane, star reporter for the Daily Planet and the love of Superman's life, has moved on since Superman left without a word. She has even won a Pulitzer Prize for her essay, "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman." Lois has other issues to contend with - she is now engaged to the editor's nephew and has a young son to look after.

But for Superman, the long search for his place in the universe ends back at the Kent farm, among the only family he has ever known. His destiny lies in Metropolis, where one look in Lois's eyes tells him that this place, among the flawed but ultimately good people of Earth, is his true home. And with Lex's plan coming to fruition mere hours after his return, the world will never need Superman more than it does now."

REVIEW:

When the lights went down in the cinema I was surprised by how excited I really was to see Superman Return to the big screen, and then, when the classic theme song came on I couldn't stop myself from grinning madly. I felt like I was in for something special... so how did I feel by the end?

I was satisfied overall, but I have to be honest and say that I definitely wasn't blown away like I'd hoped I'd be. It's really cool the way this film feels like the old ones yet has a new incredibly polished look. However the emphasis on melodrama, at times, is simply too much and detracts from the fun I should have been having. While there are many exciting action scenes and cool Superman moments, there's an over abundance of meaningful stares and longing glances; to the point that it bogs the film down under its own ponderous weight and ultimately feels a little pretentious. I couldn't help but remember how good the old Superman films made me feel and the lightness that Christopher Reeve' bought to the Man of Steel. Brandon Routh is a good Superman/Clark Kent, and at times it's uncanny how similar he looks, acts and sounds like the late Christopher Reeve (whether this is a good thing is up for debate), but this Superman is so emotionally conflicted that there isn't so much a twinkle in his eye, as there is a tear. Yes this is a modern Superman, and with that come the trappings of the modern man; he's overly sensitive and worries too much... come on Superman, surely you aren't meant to be quite this contemplative?

Superman lost in thought... again!

But have no fear, even if Superman Returns is a little too melancholy, it is still an awesome spectacle. The build-up to seeing him -as Superman- for the first time is brilliant and Bryan Singer absolutely milks this scene for everything he can. There are countless other classic Superman moments where he catches huge falling objects before they crush people and puts out fires with his ice cool breath, yet looking back, it is difficult to pin-point another scene that -outside of the plane scene from the trailers- left a big impression. There are several cool bits (like the amazing shot where a bullet crumples against Superman's eye) , but nothing that quite topped the plane scene; I thought they may have saved the best till last, but sadly this is not the case unless you count Superman lifting something very, very large as a worthy climactic feat... I didn't.

By now you may have read a few other reviews, and one thing that's clear is some people love that Superman Returns feels like the original films, while others see this as detrimental and lacking in originality. Personally I think it's cool the way it connects to the old films and this mimicry - or homage if you prefer - of the original is not its source of weakness, that source is Lex Luther. I am not a fan of diabolical schemes (I hated Magneto's stupid plan in the first X-Men) and Lex's plan in Superman Returns is utterly moronic. I know, I know, it's just a comic book movie and stupid diabolical plans come with the territory, but did it have to be this monumentally idiotic? If you've seen the film you will know that Lex's plan makes little logical sense and it strongly detracted from my ability to accept him as a ruthless mastermind; no mastermind would have such severe lapses in logic would he? I can only hope that Lex is not the main bad guy in the inevitable sequel, because it would be absolutely thrilling to see Superman battle a new and more physically challenging Nemesis.

Superman is Back! And in style.

The rest of the cast are fairly good. I missed the old Lois Lane's manic energy, but her more serious demeanor is in keeping with the new film's melancholy vibe. The kid was pretty annoying -what is with kids haircuts in American films?- and wasn't integrated into the story particularly well... but it will be interesting to see where his storyline goes in the sequels.

Much like Tim Burton's Batman films, when Superman Returns finished I was asking myself "Well who is this Superhero and what makes him tick?", unlike Batman Begins -where I felt really satisfied with my understanding of why Batman does what he does- Superman Returns kept me at arm's length, never quite letting me get close to the Man in Tights. It isn't helped by the fact that Superman and Clark Kent barely speak. I can understand why the filmmakers did this -sometimes less is more- particularly when it comes to a hero, but you can only take so many lingering shots of Superman deep in thought before you feel shut out by him.

CLOSING THOUGHTS:

Superman Returns has an old-fashioned quality about it, yet has the unmistakable glossy sheen that only modern-huge-budget films can have. Brandon Routh had big boots to fill and he pulled it off... He is Superman. The action is thrilling, the emotional aspects work overall but are a little too dominant, particularly as we approach the end. The over-reliance on a CG Superman was distracting and had me wondering why Brandon Routh was on wires for months on end if he was just going to be replaced by a CG Superman most of the time. Lex Luther's plan sucked - even if Lex himself was well acted by Kevin Spacey. Basically, less melodrama and more action would have improved Superman Returns in my eyes, yet then it wouldn't be the emotionally complex film that Bryan Singer wanted. I just hope that the twinkle is back in Supes' eyes when he Returns again and that he has a more impressive vilian to face next time, because the potential that Bryan Singer has re-opened is massive. Superman really is back!

8/10

Van Damme's 'The Quest' - DVD Review

THE QUEST (1996)

*This review does contain a few plot spoilers, but I don't believe they will strongly detract from your enjoyment of the film (and let's face it, if you are willing to read this epic review you are probably a Van Damme fan already and have seen The Quest five times by now!)

PLOT SYNOPSIS (from Amazon.com):

"Christopher Dubois (Jean-Claude Van Damme) embarks on an odyssey of self-discovery that spans the globe. Kidnapped and enslaved by gun smugglers, sold by pirates and thrust into the murky underworld of gambling and kickboxing, Chris' journey takes him to forbidding Muay Thai Island where deadly martial arts are taught, the colonial splendor of British East Asia, the dank back alleys of Bangkok, desolate deserts once trod by the warriors of Genghis Khan and finally, the ancient Lost City. There he must face the ultimate test of his manhood in the fabled Ghang-gheng, the ancient winner-take-all competition in which the deadliest fighters from around the world employ the most spectacular feats of martial arts skills ever displayed in order to win the prized Golden Dragon. But fighting prowess alone will not be enough for Chris to triumph over such daunting foes. He must reach deep inside and access all of the determination, strength of character and sense of selfless honor within in order to triumph over this final obstacle on his long trek home."

Or a more succinct way to put it would be: Through a bizarre series of events Van Damme ends up at a fighting Tournament and beats up a bunch of people.

MY OPINION:

Van Damme returns to what made him a star: the classic "tournament" style action film and - as the fans out there already know - he takes on the duties of co-writer, star and director! This is the genre that we all know and love him for, and it makes total sense that this was his directing debut... unfortunately the result is decidedly mixed.

The first thing that's apparent is the amount of trouble Van Damme and his production design team have gone to to make 'The Quest' look unique. This isn't the usual gritty visual approach to the genre, it's far more majestic, however, this thin viel of classy looks can't hide what lies beneath - Bloodsport with a big budget. You could argue that it's unfair to criticise this, as all "tournament" style action films basically boil down to finding a reason for the hero to fight in a ring (the usual being "you killed my brother/sister/family/mentor" etc...), but seeing as they are clearly attempting to stretch beyond these conventions I can't help but point out where they failed - but I still respect Van Damme for attempting to take the genre in a new direction and turn it into more of an action-adventure-globetrotting, martial-arts-extravaganza!

Things start out pretty differently than you'd expect: After a short (and frankly amusing) introduction sequence, Van Damme (made up to look old) beats up some punks in a bar and says "It was long ago...", fade to the past and he is quite literally a clown! What follows is a series of painful scenes where they try to establish that Christopher Dubois (Van Damme) is just a gosh-darn-it-splendid-individual who wants to "help the kids" by -ironically- stealing money from a local gangster. Of-course things don't turn out too well for our thief (because stealing is bad) and after a short chase Van Damme ends up stowed away on a boat heading for who knows where.

What follows is a little more conventional. Van Damme is discovered on the boat and forced to work by the unpleasant looking sweaty pirates, and they don't make things any easier for him when they put him in hand-cuffs -which raises the question: where would he escape to exactly, the ocean? Thankfully for Van Damme, a bearded James Bond (Roger Moore) turns up and witnesses him kicking some butt and is duly impressed, so he shoots some pirates, saves Van Damme's life and then blasts off those pesky hand-cuffs and brings him aboard his own boat.

Van Damme of course owes Roger Moore, but then here's the strange part: Roger Moore just leaves Van Damme on some Island occupied by natives training in Muay-Thai Kick-Boxing and what follows isn't quite what you expect. I assumed I was about to witness a cool Van Damme training sequence (like in Kickboxer) but instead he merely scrubs floors and watches the locals train (I guess he only needs to watch a fighting style to learn it, or perhaps the training sequence is sitting on the cutting room floor somewhere?). Ultimately we cut back to civilisation and we are meant to assume that he did get some training in (after impressing the Muay-Thai folk with back-flip kicks or something) and now he is a popular fighter, worth your money in the ring.

Anyway... this is getting a bit plot heavy! What basically follows is Van Damme teams up with Roger Moore and his chubby friend (who are also thieves) and some reporter chick who adds absolutely nothing to the plot, and they concoct a plan to tag along with the World Heavyweight Boxing Champion so they can steal the famed Golden Dragon which is the prize for winning the Ghang-gheng (the worlds greatest tournament), held at the Lost City. Along the way they discover that the Boxer is really a big sissy and so Van Damme takes his place and FINALLY gets around to kicking lots of arse! As you can see it takes a while to get to the fighting, and the bummer is once you are there, things are a bit disappointing.

The fighting just doesn't manage to elicit much of an emotional response. It is somehow strangely unsatisfying and lacking in impact. While it is cool to place bets and shout "I bet the Soviet Union guy will kicks that Spanish guys' arse!", the actual fights lack the precision and style that made them so cool in Van Damme's previous tournament films. Though that's not to say that there aren't some cool action moments.

Things aren't helped by the dull sub-plot that we continue to cut back to during the climax (where Roger Moore and his chum are attempting to steal the Golden Dragon), it's meant to add dimension to the story, but all you really want to see is the fighting or at the very least have the sub-plot focus on Van Damme's character rather than the supporting characters. And herein lies one of The Quest's biggest problems, after the initial -and admittedly thin- character scenes for Van Damme, he is then relegated to either sitting around waiting to fight, or actually fighting. There isn't a palpable sense of tension as we draw closer to the final fight with the large, mute Mongolian (who likes to break tables). Once the fight begins I found myself not particularly caring for Van Damme's welfare and wasn't really rooting for him like I usually would in the final fight scenes. It simply doesn't compare to previous final fights in Bloodsport, Kickboxer and Wrong Bet.

CLOSING THOUGHTS:

On the one hand I think the Quest has an old-fashioned charm and I like its straight forward approach. I admire Van Damme's attempt to merge action-adventure with Martial-Arts (even if it's not entirely successful) and a few of the fights are pretty cool. On the downside, the fighting is predominantly a letdown (particularly the climax), the supporting characters are fairly pointless and Van Damme's character doesn't get enough of the focus, rendering him dull and difficult to empathise with. Still, The Quest does provide Van Damme with some really cool moments (if only they had added up to something) and ultimately it entertained me.

The Quest 6/10

Picture:
The anamorhpic widescreen image was fairly vivid, with no major compression issues, though considering it's not that old, I'm sure a nicer image could be sourced for a new Special Edition.

Sound:
I was disappointed to find that my version only sported Dolby Stereo and not the 5.1 surround mix that some other DVD versions apparently have. However dialogue was clear and every hit was accordingly bone-crunching.

___________________

Van Damme is rumoured to be returning to this genre with the long in development Bloodsport sequel, so here's hoping it turns out good because it would be awesome to see him in one last, big, kick-arse martial-arts extravaganza!

Read my review of Van Damme's most recent DVD - Second in Command

Second in Command - Ray's Review

OFFICIAL PLOT SYNOPSIS:

"Jean Claude plays an official who's just been appointed as Second In Command to the U.S.Ambassador at an American Embassy in a small, turbulent Eastern European nation.When local insurgents attempt a coup d'etat, the nation's President takes refuge inside the embassy.The embassy is then besieged by the well-armed insurgents.The U.S. Ambassador is killed in the ensuing action, an now it's up to Jean Claude and the embassy's small detachment of U.S. Marines to fend off the attackers."

INTRO:

I believe action films come in two main varieties:

1. The hero mold: Where the protagonist is front, right and centre stage. The whole film revolves around him and there are only the bare minimum of scenes regarding additional characters and story. The filmmakers have no fear when it comes to really making the hero larger than life and provide him with countless show-off scenes and money-shots. They are films which focus exclusively on the hero at the cost of story, but which enable you to really root for your hero (like Bloodsport for example).

2. The story mold: Where the protagonist is just a cog in a larger machine, swept along by the narrative, and often has less screen-time as a result (while the filmmakers connect all the dots of their story). He is often a little more realistic too, as the more complex stories (even the stupid ones) require him to advance the plot and don't provide the hero with enough moments to just be 'the man' (which is the case with Second in Command).

I think it is particularly painful to watch the "story mold" films when they are low budget, because the scripts are usually poor, yet for some reason they are unnecessarily complicated as if the screenwriters have gotten so wrapped up in their cliche ridden story that they have forgotten to create "hero scenes", which then just seem like an afterthought, randomly inserted into the overly convoluted plot to appease audiences. But they've got it around the wrong way! Their plot should be there to simply support the hero and to provide him with countless action scenes where he can shine (and I believe it doesn't have to result in a stupid story either). These days it's like filmmakers fear taking the over-the-top "80's" approach and don't want to glorify their hero, and as a result there will never be another Cobra, Commando or Bloodsport, just more limp, overly plotted films like Second In Command that don't satisfy our action-hero cravings.

REVIEW:

Even with my expectations low I came away very disappointed by Second In Command, this is simply not the kind of film I - as a huge and loyal Van Damme fan - want to see him in. The recent 'Wake of Death' and 'In Hell' were much closer to what works for Van Damme and were a step in the right direction - as reviews indicated - after the tepid 'The Order' and the shockingly inept 'Derailed', alas Second In Command is a step backwards. Like I stated in my intro: Second In Command is not the type of film which plays to his strengths or allows a true action-hero like Van Damme to 'do-his-thing', it merely leaves him standing around as the plot advances, providing him with only an occasional moment to shine (and even these moments are handled poorly, particularly the final fight scene).

If this was a larger budget film, with a more original plot and stronger actors to deliver it, we might have ended up with a solid war film, but the low-budget-direct-to-DVD market is simply not the place to make these types of films. Sure, Second In Command looks good in the basic shoot-out scenes, but once things escalate (and the terrible CG helicopters arrive) things look terribly fake and as a result it's impossible to suspend your disbelief. I didn't see real military men, I saw actors in uniforms trying desperately to seem authoritative and failing. Even in huge-budget war films it can prove difficult to convince audiences of its authenticity (such as in Windtalkers) let alone in a small budget production like this.

Yet sometimes a low budget film can rise above its limitations with the help of a talented director, but this is not the case here. Simon Fellows gets the job done - and the production looks good considering the budget - but he has little grasp on what makes action cool. Take one look at the best action directors and you see the flare, precision and skill they bring to even the most brief and seemingly unimportant action scene. Second In Command is the worst kind of action film-making, the director simply shoots a bunch of 'coverage' and then edits it together later on; you have no sense of geography as the shoot-outs occur, it simply edits from a shot of a 'good guy' firing a gun to a shot of a 'bad guy' firing his gun... and so on until one of them falls over dead. It's not dynamic or cool, it's just there. Trust me, I'm as sick to death as the next guy of poor imitations of John Woo's style, but if this is the alternative, I'd take a cheap imitation of Woo any day.

So what bits are good? Well Van Damme himself is looking good for his age, his face is getting more creases and as a result he looks more rugged which suits him, he's put on a bit more muscle which is a relief to see as he looked a bit emaciated in some recent films. Van Damme's acting comes off as pretty good, which is a feat in itself when you consider how dull his character is. One thing you can say is that he's still charming and has a strong screen presence (particularly evident when acting against such a bland supporting cast). The few fights and the countless shoot-outs are all unexciting and frankly tedious, but there is one highlight where - after saving some hostages - Van Damme crushes a guy's balls, then kicks them, then knees them and then - as if that's enough already - sticks his thumbs through the guy's eye sockets... now that's what I call Van Dammage! More violence like that would have gone along way.

CLOSING THOUGHTS:

If you want an heroic and exciting action film go rent something Van Damme made long ago. If you want a TV-movie-style-War-film where Van Damme stands around nodding and occasionally shoots a gun this is everything you could ever ask for. But seriously, the bottom line is this is one of his weakest films and only worth seeing if you are a huge fan who will take whatever they can get.

Second in Command - 4/10

If you want to know where I'm coming from, here's how I'd rate Van Damme's previous films:

Great:
Bloodsport
Lionheart
Kickboxer
Hard Target
Double Impact
Universal Soldier
Timecop


Good:
In Hell
Replicant
The Quest
Sudden Death
Cyborg
Nowhere to Run
Death Warrant

Poor:
Inferno
Legionnaire
Double Team
Maximum Risk
Knock Off
Black Eagle

Terrible:
Second In Command
Derailed
The Order
Universal Soldier: The Return
Street Fighter: The Movie

Pixar's CARS - Ray's Review

(Cast/Crew list, Production details etc at IMDB)


PLOT SYNOPSIS:

On the way to the most important race in his life, an ego-centric racecar called Lightning McQueen gets lost in the night - because his lights are just 'stickers' - and ends up in a place he dubs 'Hillbilly Hell', a quaint little dilapidated town that's been totally bypassed by the new interstate. While stuck there McQueen discovers things about himself that he doesn't like and the small town inhabitants (all cars in case you were wondering) help him discover the true meaning of friendship and teamwork... queue cheesy ending where our hero is morally redeemed and all is well.

RAY'S OPINION:

Just so you know where I'm coming from here's where I stand regarding Pixar:

The Incredibles 10/10. Finding Nemo 10/10. Toy Story 1 and 2 10/10. Monsters Inc. 6/10. A Bug's Life 8/10.

As you can see I'm a pretty huge fan and there is no denying Pixar's incredible track record; they have pumped out amazing film after amazing film, all with great characters, well developed stories and... well, that are all just such amazing productions. With the exception of Monsters Inc. I own them all on DVD and re-watch them frequently.

So onto Cars. I feared that this would be the first time I'd be letdown by a Pixar film because the premise and trailers just did nothing for me... I mean talking cars! But outside of a few elements that were weak - and I'll get to them shortly - it was a good (not great) Pixar film which I would rate higher than Monsters Inc, but which frankly doesn't compare to the recent achievements of Finding Nemo and The Incredibles.

The really strange thing about Cars is the "reality" we are dealing with. The entire world is populated by Cars, there are no humans (which begs the question who built the first car, but that's getting into the 'chicken or the egg' territory), even the flies are little V-Dubs with wings! I never really accepted this reality; it's not like any of the previous Pixar films where you can imagine that the characters co-exist in a world somewhat like ours... no, this is an alternate reality where there are only cars and I never quite bought it. I know animated films are all about letting your imagination go wild, but it just never made sense on any level for me and at times I found my mind wandering because the reality presented raised so many questions. Trust me, I desperately wanted to just let go of stupid questions and get into it, but the questions would just keep popping into my head like "how can the metal bend when they are talking?". I know talking animals (or Toys for that matter) is just as ludicrous, but at least they have mouths.

Visually, Cars is a mixed bag. The opening and closing scenes at the raceways are particularly dull, I couldn't help thinking how much cooler it would all look if Lightning McQueen was a Rally Car rather than Nascar-like. There's only so much you can do to make a large circuit of cement look interesting and it doesn't exactly make for a visually appealing start and end to the film. However, once we are away from the circuit things look considerably better; the night scenes on the freeway; the rolling deserts and the forgotten town of Radiator Springs all look great. The attention to detail is pretty astounding really, but it's never as beautiful as Finding Nemo or as interesting as The Incredibles.


The story is typical Pixar fare and is sometimes agonizingly predictable, but it's made up for by the interesting characters. The characters may all be cliches, but the funny thing is they are Cars, not people, and this twist makes them all the more bizarre and amsuing. We have the Stoner VW from the 60's who sells organic fuel and rants about government conspiracy theories, an Hispanic Hotrod that re-sprays himself on a daily basis, a Hillbilly Tow-Truck, a Militaristic Jeep... and the list goes on. Suffice to say they are memorable and well designed, but they took longer than usual to grow on me and simply don't compare to strong personalities like Buzz Lightyear and Woody.

Cars hits its stride in what you could roughly call its second act, these scenes are set in Radiator Springs and by the time McQueen had to leave, I truly didn't want him to, which is testament to how charming it all was, but then the cheesy ending at the visually uninteresting race circuit comes along and the charm evaporates and I found myself bored again like I felt at the start (in fact the first 20 or so minutes of Cars is probably the least I've ever enjoyed a Pixar creation).

It also doesn't help that Owen Wilson's one-note act is pretty stale by now, even if he does have an interesting voice that lends itself well to animation I think I would have preferred an unknown voice to allow myself to believe in the character a little more. All the other voices are fine, though nothing stands out as particularly memorable.

CLOSING THOUGHTS:

On the negative side Cars has a slightly weak beginning and ending, bland visuals at times and a predictable story. On the bright side the middle section is involving, some scenes are hilarious (particularly the 'tractor tipping' scene), the characters are quite touching and some of the visuals are incredible. So overall it's a mixed bag, but certainly not a poor film by any means. If another Animation studio released it I'd be less harsh, but one expects such greatness from Pixar, especially from the main man himself (it also didn't help that the trailer for their next film: 'Ratatouille' looked far more appealing than Cars!).

CARS - 7/10