Inception - ****
Christopher Nolan's latest film comes on the heels of his--nay, one of cinema's biggest--movies. Namely, The Dark Knight, where he shaped a tale of human mind coping with various maze-like twists and turns as we delved deeper and deeper into the psyches of the movie's irresistable force (the Joker's chaos) and the movie's immovable object (Batman's justice). This time, Inception puts us literally into the maze of the mind.
Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is the world's best extractor: someone who can enter a mark's dream reality to expose hidden secrets, both literal and metaphorical. After proving his skill to Saito, a wealthy Japanese businessman (Ken Watanabe), Cobb assembles his team, including his partner Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), forger Eames (Tom Hardy), chemist Yusuf (Dileep Rao), and architect Ariadne (Ellen Page). But this job goes beyond what they can normally do. Not extraction of information, but inception. That is, the implanting of an idea in someone's head in such a way that they think that they thought of it. Think about it: how many ideas have started with the phrase "It came to me in a dream?"
Ariadne, the architect, is an especially important character. She works as the audience's guide throughout the world of Inception: being shown what's possible, how dreams work, and even being shown that a dream's reality is not limited by physics, but by imagination and feeling. The very word "paradox" comes to mind (like the Penrose stairs).
Inception creates a complex web (I'm getting tired of it being referred to as a maze, even though it really is one), but unlike most movies centred around the idea of dreaming and false reality, never loses sight of the whole web. We are never lost in the world of the dream, even though we know there are levels and layers of it all. In fact, the movie ironically is paradoxically complex in its simplicity.
Part of the plot is also the death of Cobb's wife, Mal (Marion Cotilliard). To call her part of a sub-plot would be short-sighted, considering she becomes a very intricate and important piece of the puzzle. While that sounds like a spoiler, I can assure you that (to use another maze metaphor) even if you can see where the movie begins and where the movie ends, navigating the web is the important part.
If I have one complaint about the movie, it's that it felt a little long. There are action scenes that I did get engrossed in, but there's only so much that you can do when you realize that the attackers are nothing more than the brain's version of an immune system fighting off an invading virus. Still, the action isn't hard to follow, and Nolan's style of what I like to call "not stopping to breathe" editing is not distracting (not that it ever really is).
Nonetheless, Inception gives us just enough to chew on at the end. It doesn't feel heavy-handed like other movies do when they make you question "Oh, was that a dream? Well, what about that?" but gives us just enough to wonder. There are a lot of subtle interactions that I'm sure will give me more on a second viewing.
July 21, 2010
July 14, 2010
Despicable Me - Review
Despicable Me - ***
Sitting in the theatre and waiting for the movie to begin, I started realizing that my showing of Despicable Me was populated by a large percentage of moms and elementary school-age children. But it didn't hit me that this is the audience until there was a slight joke in the movie that went over 99% of the audience.
Despicable Me tells the story of a self-professed super-villain named Gru (voiced by Steve Carell) who has, compared to most movie villains, a relatively minor goal: to be known as the greatest super-villain of all time. Why? It's a hobby, I suppose. After all, what's the point of putting your time and money into an operation if you don't want to be the best? He certainly doesn't seem to make a lot of money off of stealing the Times Square jumbotron (complete with NBC logo). Maybe he just likes being evil. You don't just walk into a coffee shop and freeze-ray everyone lined up in front of you just because you want a coffee.
But when another super-villain one-ups him by stealing the pyramids, he has to shift things into high gear. By stealing the moon. How? Shrink-ray. He's going to fly a rocket to the moon, shrink the moon, grab it, and hold it ransom. At least, he happened to mention that he'll get anything he wants. But in order to succeed, he has to get a bank loan. What bank would give him a loan to complete this plan?
Here's where that joke comes in. I don't feel bad spoiling it because it's not a really big joke, but it's still clever. Here goes. Gru heads to the bank, enters through a secret entrance to a giant underground complex with a giant underground door that reads: BANK OF EVIL (formerly Lehman Brothers). The fact that I heard very few parents makes me wonder. Maybe they're just there to make sure the kids don't scream or something. I don't know.
Anyway, when the plan fails (don't worry, that's the set-up), his new plan necessitates the adoption of three adorable little girls. The girls have no idea that he's a super-villain--but there sure are hints. Oh, boy, are there hints. The girls have an idolized vision of what their adoptive parents (yes, plural) will look and be like. But it's no surprise that when they spot Gru, they go with it because he still seems better than the mean Miss Hattie that runs the orphanage.
You can guess what happens when Gru is forced to spend time with the girls, so I won't mention it. Just let me say that seeing the imagination in Gru's lair is wonderful, including the retrospectively-laborious process of going to his lair from the main floor of his suburban-yet-gothic (seriously, it sticks out like sore--or necrotic--thumb) home.
And the minions. I won't be surprised if these tennis ball-looking plush toy-seeming little guys end up on shelves in toy stores (marketing. Go figure). But don't let that scare you from them. They're cute little guys who do most of Gru's grunt work and are happy to do it (working for Gru must have one hell of a benefits package if that underground complex of his includes room for a spin class).
But why did I mention that barely-noticed Lehman Brothers joke? The movie has very few (in fact, I think that was the only one. Maybe.) noticeable jokes for adults. But it's enough fun that parents with kids won't mind watching it. I don't have kids, and I had fun. But I did say "noticeable." Well, the rival super-villain Vector (voiced by Jason Segel) has an eerily similar look to Bill Gates (if Bill Gates didn't grow up and became a super-villain), and the whole idea of an underground society where super-villains scheme and invent just makes me wonder how far around the world this extends.
But I still can't figure out something about the shrink ray. I know it shrinks the size of an object, so I assume it would shrink all the molecules and atoms that make up the object, too. But you'd think that if you shrank the moon, that mass would still be there, and you'd end up orbitting it like a black hole. But then-- oh, forget it.
Sitting in the theatre and waiting for the movie to begin, I started realizing that my showing of Despicable Me was populated by a large percentage of moms and elementary school-age children. But it didn't hit me that this is the audience until there was a slight joke in the movie that went over 99% of the audience.
Despicable Me tells the story of a self-professed super-villain named Gru (voiced by Steve Carell) who has, compared to most movie villains, a relatively minor goal: to be known as the greatest super-villain of all time. Why? It's a hobby, I suppose. After all, what's the point of putting your time and money into an operation if you don't want to be the best? He certainly doesn't seem to make a lot of money off of stealing the Times Square jumbotron (complete with NBC logo). Maybe he just likes being evil. You don't just walk into a coffee shop and freeze-ray everyone lined up in front of you just because you want a coffee.
But when another super-villain one-ups him by stealing the pyramids, he has to shift things into high gear. By stealing the moon. How? Shrink-ray. He's going to fly a rocket to the moon, shrink the moon, grab it, and hold it ransom. At least, he happened to mention that he'll get anything he wants. But in order to succeed, he has to get a bank loan. What bank would give him a loan to complete this plan?
Here's where that joke comes in. I don't feel bad spoiling it because it's not a really big joke, but it's still clever. Here goes. Gru heads to the bank, enters through a secret entrance to a giant underground complex with a giant underground door that reads: BANK OF EVIL (formerly Lehman Brothers). The fact that I heard very few parents makes me wonder. Maybe they're just there to make sure the kids don't scream or something. I don't know.
Anyway, when the plan fails (don't worry, that's the set-up), his new plan necessitates the adoption of three adorable little girls. The girls have no idea that he's a super-villain--but there sure are hints. Oh, boy, are there hints. The girls have an idolized vision of what their adoptive parents (yes, plural) will look and be like. But it's no surprise that when they spot Gru, they go with it because he still seems better than the mean Miss Hattie that runs the orphanage.
You can guess what happens when Gru is forced to spend time with the girls, so I won't mention it. Just let me say that seeing the imagination in Gru's lair is wonderful, including the retrospectively-laborious process of going to his lair from the main floor of his suburban-yet-gothic (seriously, it sticks out like sore--or necrotic--thumb) home.
And the minions. I won't be surprised if these tennis ball-looking plush toy-seeming little guys end up on shelves in toy stores (marketing. Go figure). But don't let that scare you from them. They're cute little guys who do most of Gru's grunt work and are happy to do it (working for Gru must have one hell of a benefits package if that underground complex of his includes room for a spin class).
But why did I mention that barely-noticed Lehman Brothers joke? The movie has very few (in fact, I think that was the only one. Maybe.) noticeable jokes for adults. But it's enough fun that parents with kids won't mind watching it. I don't have kids, and I had fun. But I did say "noticeable." Well, the rival super-villain Vector (voiced by Jason Segel) has an eerily similar look to Bill Gates (if Bill Gates didn't grow up and became a super-villain), and the whole idea of an underground society where super-villains scheme and invent just makes me wonder how far around the world this extends.
But I still can't figure out something about the shrink ray. I know it shrinks the size of an object, so I assume it would shrink all the molecules and atoms that make up the object, too. But you'd think that if you shrank the moon, that mass would still be there, and you'd end up orbitting it like a black hole. But then-- oh, forget it.
July 10, 2010
Toy Story 3 - Review
Toy Story 3 - ***1/2
It's a strange feeling I got when I realized that I had been awaiting a sequel as an adult to two movies that I saw in childhood. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that if this had been a sequel to two movies by almost anyone else, I would've laughed it off as childhood nostalgia.
Toy Story 3 is the third and final chapter in the relationship that a group of toys have with their human owner. We've seen how a favourite toy deals with being shoved aside for a new number one, and we've seen toys deal with their own mortality. Oh, but not by dying. The idea of what makes these toys alive versus being dead or inanimate is never explored and any philosophical exercises about their existence is best left to philosophers (both expert and wanna-be ones).
And now the toys deal with a new change in status quo. Toy Story 3 picks up years after the second installment, where we realize that the toys have been living a neglected life ever since their owner, Andy, lost interest in toys and gained interest in more "mature" activities (note: the only thing I'm implying by "mature" is that it's a relative term. And nothing else). In fact, he's given away or sold most of his collection, leaving only most of the core group--a scene where Pixar show their mastery by mentioning that Bo Peep is gone, letting Woody have a quite moment. But what makes this time different? Andy's going to college, and is tasked with the ultimate fate of the toys: a) take to college, b) attic, c) daycare. Except for Woody (voiced by Tom Hanks), he puts them all in the attic. That is, until a mix-up with Andy's little sister that gets them almost thrown in the trash. The toys don't like this. They instead volunteer themselves to be donated to the daycare, despite Woody's insistence that it was a mix-up.
They arrive at the daycare, run by a big pink stuffed bear named Lotso (voiced by Ned Beatty) who fools them into believing it's a paradise. And it would be. Except for the fact that new toys (I'm tempted to call them "fresh meat," but this isn't strictly a prison flick) are forced to play with the younger kids who have no toy etiquette (I'm sure you've seen the scene in the trailer where a kid jams Mr. Potato Head's eye in his nose).
There are scenes reminiscent of The Great Escape, and the toys really do out-do themselves with the plans. The movie is clever (the jokes with Buzz's reset button are especially memorable), and the movie really works on even the most steel-hearted. I really doubt that anyone who's seen the first two will feel disappointed.
There's only one problem, and I'm going to admit that it may be a problem with me, and not the movie, but I'll say it anyway. After movies like Up, Pixar would have to work really--and I mean really-- hard to out-shine itself. Toy Story 3 does meet the barrier, but it doesn't quite break it. So this may be from raised expectations, and over time, I may end up liking this more than Up (I doubt that this'll get an Oscar nomination. Maybe, but I doubt it), but movies aren't made in a vacuum.
Nevertheless, this was a very touching movie and I'd say that the eleven-year wait was just about worth it. Now if only the Star Wars prequels would've worked out the same.
Oh, and I saw this in 3D. Don't see it in 3D. I'm pretty sure that if those stupid glasses weren't on and the distraction of depth wasn't there (seriously, why do you need to see a children's daycare in 3D?), my persistent cries to "man up" wouldn't have worked.
It's a strange feeling I got when I realized that I had been awaiting a sequel as an adult to two movies that I saw in childhood. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that if this had been a sequel to two movies by almost anyone else, I would've laughed it off as childhood nostalgia.
Toy Story 3 is the third and final chapter in the relationship that a group of toys have with their human owner. We've seen how a favourite toy deals with being shoved aside for a new number one, and we've seen toys deal with their own mortality. Oh, but not by dying. The idea of what makes these toys alive versus being dead or inanimate is never explored and any philosophical exercises about their existence is best left to philosophers (both expert and wanna-be ones).
And now the toys deal with a new change in status quo. Toy Story 3 picks up years after the second installment, where we realize that the toys have been living a neglected life ever since their owner, Andy, lost interest in toys and gained interest in more "mature" activities (note: the only thing I'm implying by "mature" is that it's a relative term. And nothing else). In fact, he's given away or sold most of his collection, leaving only most of the core group--a scene where Pixar show their mastery by mentioning that Bo Peep is gone, letting Woody have a quite moment. But what makes this time different? Andy's going to college, and is tasked with the ultimate fate of the toys: a) take to college, b) attic, c) daycare. Except for Woody (voiced by Tom Hanks), he puts them all in the attic. That is, until a mix-up with Andy's little sister that gets them almost thrown in the trash. The toys don't like this. They instead volunteer themselves to be donated to the daycare, despite Woody's insistence that it was a mix-up.
They arrive at the daycare, run by a big pink stuffed bear named Lotso (voiced by Ned Beatty) who fools them into believing it's a paradise. And it would be. Except for the fact that new toys (I'm tempted to call them "fresh meat," but this isn't strictly a prison flick) are forced to play with the younger kids who have no toy etiquette (I'm sure you've seen the scene in the trailer where a kid jams Mr. Potato Head's eye in his nose).
There are scenes reminiscent of The Great Escape, and the toys really do out-do themselves with the plans. The movie is clever (the jokes with Buzz's reset button are especially memorable), and the movie really works on even the most steel-hearted. I really doubt that anyone who's seen the first two will feel disappointed.
There's only one problem, and I'm going to admit that it may be a problem with me, and not the movie, but I'll say it anyway. After movies like Up, Pixar would have to work really--and I mean really-- hard to out-shine itself. Toy Story 3 does meet the barrier, but it doesn't quite break it. So this may be from raised expectations, and over time, I may end up liking this more than Up (I doubt that this'll get an Oscar nomination. Maybe, but I doubt it), but movies aren't made in a vacuum.
Nevertheless, this was a very touching movie and I'd say that the eleven-year wait was just about worth it. Now if only the Star Wars prequels would've worked out the same.
Oh, and I saw this in 3D. Don't see it in 3D. I'm pretty sure that if those stupid glasses weren't on and the distraction of depth wasn't there (seriously, why do you need to see a children's daycare in 3D?), my persistent cries to "man up" wouldn't have worked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)