Alien 5 (a.k.a. the first film)

A dying trillionaire sends a space mission to explore the possibility of meeting humanity's parent race on a distant, newly discovered planet. There are tunnels, shadows, slimy things, dupicitousness, and a big giant face. Hilarity, as ever, ensues on LV-223.

"Prometheus" (2012)

directed by Ridley Scott

written by Damon Lindelof and Jon Spaihts

starring Noomi Rapace, Michael Fassbender, Charlize Theron, Logan Marshall-Green, Idris Elba, and Guy Pearce

How it is?

I have to come right out with it. The visuals are amazing, but they can't cover up the problems with the script. (My inner scifi fanboy really hated to say that about "Prometheus", but there it is.)

The Players

At the top there are Michael Fassbender, Charlize Theron, and Idris Elba. Fassbender as the Weyland Corporation's premiere android model, David, steals the show. His is a touching and simultaneously sympathetic and casually menacing performance as the android who seems maybe to want to be human... or at least equal, more than a servant. Theron's portrayal of Vickers, the Corporation's no-nonsense executive representative on board the Prometheus, is spot on and arcs well over the course of the film. Idris Elba as Janek, the captain of the Prometheus, is as close to an everyman as the we get in the film, and his performance as the good captain brings a practical, grounded humanity to the film that is missing for the most part in other main characters.

At the other end of the spectrum there are Noomi Rapace and Logan Marshall-Green, but it's not necessarily a matter of lacking performances but rather cardboard characters as written. Rapace's character, Dr. Elizabeth Shaw, was the lynchpin of the whole mission, her theory of an extraterrestially seeded Earth. The theory was more interesting than the character, and the character seemed to be sort of another attempt at bringing scifi and movie fans another Ellen Ripley. Rapace/Shaw simply didn't get enough traction, what with everything else going on in the film. Marshall-Green's character, Shaw's love interest, Charlie Holloway, wasn't substantial enough a character for him to be much more than cardboard. That's not a fault of either and everything to do with the script. And then there's Guy Pearce as Weyland Corporation's aged namesake, Peter Weyland. Pearce manages well with the character through a lot of prosthetic makeup, although Weyland's presence is relatively slight, in both screen time and story contribution.

Behind the Camera

At the top there is Ridley Scott. He is an astonishing film director. With Dariusz Wolski (cinematographer) and Arthur Max (production designer) he made an amazing visual follow-up/prequel to the rest of the Alien franchise. The attention to detail, every little thing practical and digital, was as is his career reputation suggests, mightily impressive. The film moves along at a fair clip the whole way through, with appropriate rising and falling action so the audience gets neither exhausted or lost. Well, mostly neither. The kicker for the film is the writing is where it doesn't quite hold up.

At the other end of things, there are there's the writing. In a nutshell, Prometheus is either a bit overcomplicated or a bit shoddily written. The skeleton of the story is simple enough and intriguing. There were just too many layers added, for whatever reasons, by screenwriters Spaiht and Lindelof, and rather than an interesting ensemble of characters, each with contributions to make, there were a few interesting characters and some other ones thrown in because story formula demanded it. It just never really gels. (Gosh, my inner fanboy is reeling at this.) The writing simply doesn't measure up to Scott's direction and visual scale or what anyone was expecting, really, and that's a real shame.

The Verdict

Prometheus seemed to be more about asking questions than about characters being confronted by those questions and acting accordingly, which is what weakens it. It felt like a conflicted film, a strong visual sense that wanted to show things and get across ideas and a script that didn't know how to stage or explain them effectively so it tended to play with what were sometimes rather obvious tropes. I am notoriously unforgiving of what I believe to be slack or poor or substandard writing, especially from people who ought to know better, and Spaight and Lindelof's script is a decidedly average at best, and the rest of the film can't escape from it.

Due to the strength of the performances by Fassbender, Theron, and Elba and the combined expert visual and technical machinations of Scott and the production crew, the film still comes in looking better than average. It's just that it feels awfully forced in places, trying to cover over the things that really don't really work but were kept in anyway. Alas, the film couldn't live up to the hype.

another peek at "The Avengers"

a clip from Marvel's "The Avengers"

-- Loki imprisoned, chats with Nick Fury --

"The Avengers" hits U.S. movie theaters on May 5.

The Thursday List: My Shelf Edition (Pt 3)

"Apollo 13" (1995)

It was a rough year at the Academy Awards that year, and as cool as "Braveheart" was, for my money this was the Best Picture. Superbly directed, visually stunning, with a top-notch script and near flawless cast, "Apollo 13" is a master class on how to put together an historical drama for film. It also put into pop culture the saying I hear several times a year: "Houston, we have a problem." I believe this film was tops in what was truly a good year for movies.

"Army of Darkness" (1992)

While relying more on slapstick comedy than the violence and gore of its two predecessors, "Army of Darkness" is a fun comedy-horror, and Bruce Campbell is in top form. Critics generally panned it when it came out, comparing it to the first two Evil Dead films, but that was a mistake. On its own "Army of Darkness" holds it own and has a distinct style and tone, and it's good stuff.

"Batman" (1989)

With all the hubbub over Christopher Nolan's two Batman film installments and Heath Ledger's Joker, many people look back uncharitably on Tim Burton's film, and that's a shame. It's a good script with a good story. It has very good, stylized art direction and a distinct, dark feel. Its Batman, portrayed by Michael Keaton, and its Joker, portrayed by Jack Nicholson, don't disappoint. It's just cultural tastes have changed. "Batman" is a very good film, and I recommend it.

Dumbledore, Science Officer Ash, Dr. Zhivago, and Hannibal Lecter walk into a pub...

The SS Britannic sets sail while a tiny third-rate bomb is diffused in a posh art gallery. A man answers a phone after pouring Rice Krispies for a screaming toddler, and then future cinema legends gather to stop a rather dumpy ocean liner from getting blown up by a very clever bomber indeed. And Roy Kinnear couldn't sing worth a damn (probably by design). And believe it or not after reading all that, it all comes together.

“Juggernaut” (1974)

directed by Richard Lester

written by Richard DeKoker and Alan Plater

starring Richard Harris, David Hemmings, Omar Sharif, Anthony Hopkins, Freddie Jones, Roy Kinnear, Shirley Knight, and Julian Glover

How is it?

If you don't mind just about everyone you see having '70s hair, then you will likely enjoy it. Made almost forty years ago, it really has aged remarkably well. 

The Players

The cast makes this one interesting to watch. In addition to the star power listed above, there are supporting and bit players scattered throughout, who are pretty familiar faces to even probably casual moviegoers. But the big star, of course, is Richard Harris, and in this he's doing what he does best. Lieutenant Commander Anthony Fallon is a disarmingly casual, witty, intelligent, and wily ace of the Royal Navy bomb disposal squad, and as him Harris absolutely steals the show when he's on screen. Holm, Sharif, Hopkins, Jones, and the rest do well in their respective supporting roles. David Hemmings gets as close to sharing the spotlight as possible during his time on screen, and he and Harris have real chemistry. They all do, and it makes it fun to watch. 

Behind the Camera

Richard Lester, the man who made films with Peter Sellers and The Beatles and who directed the two 1970s Muskateers films and A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum!, directed Juggernaut. It has a raw, natural visual quality that comes across effectively. It's tightly directed, though its look, texture, and lighting generally make it look more like a tv movie than a feature, particularly it being shot all on location, not on studio sets. The scenes taking place down in the bowels of the ship were actually filmed right in the various corridors below decks of an ocean liner at sea, and the scenes in offices and temporary command centers were filmed on location. That's part of the edge the film keeps throughout, that well-lit and photographed naturalism.

The script isn't stellar, but it's solid. It provides everything the audience needs, and the story as it unfolds will keep you guessing. There are a few oddities along the way, almost certainly due to the a heavy rewriting of the script prior to production, but they don't get in the way of anything. There's an underlying anti-establishment attitude running throughout the whole thing, but it doesn't get preachy, as a lot of tv and movies of that decade did. It's in the characters, what they say and do, which is better than being handed platefuls of exposition.

The Verdict

This was a surprise by me tonight as I scanned my video streaming queue and suggestions. The cast list got my attention, and then it got better from there over the course of the next hour and a half. Juggernaut isn't a classic, but it is certainly a solid, enjoyable film.

Renting it or buying a copy of it will be money well spent.