Movie Review: Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

Long running film series are constantly looking for new ideas to seem fresh. Sometimes this means remaking or rebooting franchises, as with the Nolan-verse Batman era. Christopher Nolan’s vision however is clear from the performance of the rebooted franchise, returning to, even surpassing the quality and success of Tim Burton’s original two films Batman (1989) and Batman Returns (1992); whereas Tim Burton’s own reboot of Planet of the Apes (2001, the first film to coin the term ‘re-imagining) was mildly diverting, but ended with a utterly confusing finale and was kicked to death so thoroughly by critics that despite its financial success it itself is now being rebooted. Critically the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise has never fared too well, the first film, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003), was praised for taking a cash-cow idea (being based on a theme park ride) and creating something special, funny, full of great twists and performances. Crucially the film became financially successful and spawned two direct sequels: PotC: Dead Man’s Chest (2006) and PotC: At World’s End (2007). Both were criticised for their sprawling and nonsensical action, bewildering plot and directionless meanderings into whimsy and pseudo-philosophy, but ultimately struck a chord with audiences and the series now continues with a certain amount of spinning off in PotC: On Stranger Tides.

On Stranger Tides reunites old enemies Jack Sparrow and
Hector Barbossa.

Following the adventures of unwashed fey lothario swashbuckler Jack Sparrow, On stranger tides takes Sparrow (Johnny Depp) on a mission to the fountain of youth for some reason or another, and along the way is joined by old enemies in the form of Hector Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), and new ones in the form of Blackbeard (A wasted Ian McShane). Penelope Cruz joins the cast, and some others take over the roles of romantic interest but honestly who cares?

McShane is wasted as hollow villain Blackbeard.

First and foremost the film is dull. So wince-inducingly dull that even Ian McShane can’t save this doomed vessel from careening into the shore. The tired script, auto-pilot performance from Depp, boring and underdeveloped romance from either Cruz/Depp or the other two who by naming them would be giving credence to their performance which they do not deserve means that the film works like a amateur fan-fiction, throwing on the screen this and that about the fountain, this and that about zombies, this and that about mermaids; but absolutely none of it seems connective. The original Pirates’ sequels may have been flawed; even poor, but they had vision, awe and a certain amount of narrative direction. On Stranger Tides is boring, by the numbers mess taking a character that was fun on the sides, but shows that the initially intriguing character of Jack Sparrow has been stretched way beyond his limits by being cast as the main character: even the screenplay saw fit to add a separate romance. Any wonder from the series has gone and what is left is tiresome exercises in cheap laughs, a reliance on Depp’s directionless performance and blind brand loyalty. If the second two sequels were comparable to the Matrix sequels (by nowhere near and good mind) with their extension of an original idea conceived initially to be one film, the closest film to PotC: On Stranger Tides is the awful noisy plot-holed follow up to 2000’s wonderful low-budget sci-fi horror Pitch Black, The Chronicles of Riddick (2004). Both took an excellent fringe character and turned them into some sort of super hero, thereby removing all heart, mystery and darkness from the performance and leaving you with two films as empty and cynical as their franchise’s continued existence.

Terry Pratchett: Choosing to Die

There’s something incredibly wrong, proposes author Sir Terry Pratchett, with a country where people who suffer from terrible afflictions, diseases and the like, are not allowed to die peacefully. Such is the subject of controversial new documentary “Terry Pratchett: Choosing to Die”.

The author, now in his sixties, has had an unbelievably productive career: creating the popular “Discworld” series and commanding an army of millions of fans worldwide and, in 2007, Terry Pratchett publicly announced that he had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s Disease. In answer to the outpouring of support and sadness from his fans Sir Terry decided to take the issue head on in the BBC documentary “Terry Pratchett: Living with Alzeimer’s” and now confronts the idea of whether people who do suffer from conditions such as his should be able to choose to die.

Meeting with elderly couple The Smedleys, Pratchett begins his journey. The couple showing off their admittedly beautiful house, but also discussing the subject of husband Peter’s proposed death; the idea being that they travel to Zurich where a clinic exists to induce an assisted suicide. Peter, a sufferer of Motor Neurone Disease, chose his fate in a very matter of fact way and despite Pratchett’s support for the idea, the process visibly frightens him; ominously referring to the poison that the clients are given as “the killing draught”.

To find out more about the clinic Pratchett travels to Zurich and speaks to the company director of Dignitas, a business that provides the service, who shows him round the house where people come to die. Crammed into an industrial estate due to certain laws about the practices that go on in the little blue tin house, the place itself is oddly discomforting. The inside is dull and plain, vaguely reminiscent of a hospital and the garden is ugly and full of machinery noise from nearby factories, nothing tranquil or peaceful about it, despite the company director’s assurance.

Meeting a second sufferer, a much younger man in his 40s, Sir Terry is overcome. On the day that the young man dies Pratchett and his omnipresent dictation assistant listen to some of the his favourite music and the sadness is palpable, Pratchett’s emotion hidden behind his Gandalf-esque beard; and when it comes for the moment when Peter chooses to die the emotion evaporates. An eery business arrangement dressed up as care takes place as an old man dies, begging for water. The scene is not one of peace, the ugly little factory house with its fakery and quiet attendants looking on. There is something intensely shocking about this man dying and, although the program makes its case well for freedom of choice, the end result is not the romantic image in this strange little shed in Zurich. A day may come when people can make these choices for themselves in this country, but in a process so alien there must be more we can do to help these people, whether to die peacefully or otherwise.

Movie Review: Hanna

From Joe Wright, director of Atonement (2007) and Pride and Prejudice (2005), comes Hanna: a thinly disguised fairytale about a young girl trained to be an assassin chasing vengeance against a shady government agent.

Beginning in the snowy wilderness of Finland, Erik Heller (Eric Bana) and his daughter Hanna (Saoirse Ronan) live off the land until the day when Hanna believes she is ready to take on the task of hunting down Marissa Weigler (Cate Blanchett). Letting the Government capture her as her father escapes, she breaks out of a Government facility in Morocco and ends up hitchhiking with an English family. At the same time Marissa Weigler is trying to locate Erik, and sends sadistic serial jumpsuit-wearer Isaacs (Tom Hollander) to track down Hanna.

The character driven narrative is pleasingly European

Powered by wonderful performances, Ronan is totally engaging and Hollander is suitably creepy as the masochistic mercenary; Hanna is a gripping, if slightly disjointed, chase film. The locales are a little trite at times with the overtly friendly locals and native dances and songs that seem to add nothing to the plot; and the film is full with weird accents: nobody quite nailing their chosen language. However despite these minor points the film runs along at a satisfying pace and the action scenes are just as intriguing and beautifully choreographed as the tragic elements and heart that the narrative throws in for good measure. The Chemical Brother’s score is worth note too for its often tense, occasionally obtuse backing; furthering the film’s eclectic and uniquely European style. Films like 2006’s The Lives of Others and Tell No One share its stark sensibilities. Director Joe Wright’s previous productions have gone from average to overwrought, with Atonement making a modern classic into a monumentally boring exercise in missing the point, despite Hanna’s own Saoirse Ronan giving a barnstorming performance as one of literature’s greatest unwitting villains, Briony Tallis. It is interesting then that Hanna is so stylistically arresting, given the director’s penchant for by-numbers adaptations; and the film certainly sets Wright as a British director to watch.

All things considered Hanna as a chase film with heart is top tier, but given the dearth of intelligent thrillers in the cinema right now Hanna is almost required viewing for any fan of character driven action.

Movie Review: Thor

Thor was always going to be a difficult sell. In the final ultimate super group Marvel Avengers film the Asgard demi-god will be joining forces with tech genius Iron Man, the radiation bloated Hulk and 40’s throwback Captain America; all of which have some grounds in earth-bound science fiction. Thor however is, as the name suggests, a being from another realm: bearer of a mighty hammer and son of Odin who can fly, level buildings and travel through space all without the aid of a suit of improbably powerful computer aided armour, being blasted with gamma radiation or being the result of genetic enhancement. The point is Thor is an alien with all the powers of a god, whereas his peers are humans with powers grounded in scientific experimentation: and in this age of realism based superhero movies like Iron Man (2008) and D.C.’s The Dark Knight (2008), Thor’s flights of fancy may be too fantastical for people to really accept.

Just as Thor (an improbably good-looking Chris Hemsworth), in the realm of Asgard somewhere out in space, is about to take his rightful place as king from his aged father Odin (Anthony Hopkins), the Asgardian’s ancient enemies the Frost Giants break into the Royal Palace and try to steal a powerful weapon. Despite the fact that they fail Thor takes it upon himself to make his way to the Frost Giant’s realm and try to destroy any scent of rebellion within the their ranks. Upon taking the fight to them Odin, who had forbidden his involvement, rescues Thor and his companions, only to strip Thor of his power for his disobedience and cast him down to earth as a mortal. Upon landing he meets physicist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman; getting around isn’t she?) and his journey for redemption begins.

The first act of Thor is back story, setting up Thor’s rise and fall and in general the pontificating and CGI battles are pretty dull, with Anthony Hopkins’ Odin chewing up the scenery in true Shakespearean style. And the Shakespearean style is by no means an accident: director Kenneth Branagh cut his teeth making adaptations and in some ways is a strange choice to direct such a mainstream superhero blockbuster. Once the action is taken to earth however Branagh’s style is truly what makes the film. The fish out of water comedy works wonderfully, with Hemsworth smashing mugs of coffee shouting “ANOTHER!” when he finishes and striding into a Pet Shop and demanding to be given a horse. The opening act is only given any sort of scale once we reach earth, and the battles seem much weightier once Thor becomes a mortal. The cast are reasonably charming and once the opening section is over the comedy and action scenes are excellent; leading to cosmic battle that serves as a satisfying conclusion. Better than The Incredible Hulk (2008) and well in the same league as Iron Man, Thor serves as a meaty introduction to what could have been an incredibly problematic character to introduce: due to Branagh’s masterful comic direction and a likeable cast of misfits.

Movie Review: Your Highness

Your Highness feels a lot like a dated film. Not because of its humour, much of it is as dark and edgy as found in any modern comedy, but because of the way it approaches its subject. Very much in the style of The Princess Bride (1987), Your Highness is a fantasy adventure film with lots of black comedy and stoner jokes thrown in for a modern audience. It is not surprising however that these two very different themes do not sit well together at all.

On returning home from a perilous quest, Fabious (James Franco) is set upon on the day of his wedding by evil wizard Leezar (an unrecognisable Justin Theroux) who steals his bride with a view to fulfilling an ancient prophecy. With his slobbish brother Thadeous (Danny McBride) in tow, they set out on a quest to reclaim the lost princess and destroy the Leezar for good.

The film's fantasy and comedic elements rarely gel.

Your Highness has come under fire for, in a similar way to recent interminable bullshit Sucker Punch (2011), supposedly being sexist and misogynist in its portrayal of women; and as with Sucker Punch, slapping a banner of controversy upon this film is garnering it with attention it does not deserve. Much of the humour is dark, but not outside the realm of Family guy or something similar. Blazing Saddles (1974)’ humour is in many ways much more controversial, and that was made almost 40 years ago. Comparisons with Mel Brookes’ fine send-ups stop there however, as little of the invention or wit of something like Blazing Saddles or Young Frankenstein (1974) is on show in Your Highness. Much of the humour is lost amongst drawn out fight sequences that make the film look like a medium budget, low quality fantasy film, rather than a comedy. There are a few giggles to be had amongst the silliness, but the film ends up being a rather contrived, rather boring exercise stupid dick-jokes and camp nudity and dialog. Academy award winner Natalie Portman and Academy award nominee James Franco seem to enjoy themselves, and most of the funny one-liners come from Danny McBride as Thadeous, despite how utterly hateful his character is. However the film’s warring houses of dark humour and fantasy fun never really come together, and the result is a messy, if occasionally enjoyable trashy farce.

DVD Review: The Illusionist

The line between sentimentality and heartfelt characterisation is a thin one at the best of times. Many directors and writers, Steven Spielberg springs to mind, straddle the dangerous tightrope throughout their career creating some films that are genuinely moving; and others that require the use of a sick bag. The Illusionist, not to be confused with The Illusionist (2006) starring Edward Norton, is a French/British animation directed by Sylvain Chomet and based loosely on an un-filmed Jacques Tati script from 1956. Tati himself has somewhat of a controversial legacy, with his comedy remaining in the hearts of his fans; many of his critics cite his turbulent personal life: and to a certain degree, this is something of a farewell to them.

A French Illusionist living in Paris in the 1950s is beset by unemployment. After a dry spell he travels to England to try to make something of himself; and after making a few contacts ends up in a rainy Scottish village performing for the locals. Amongst them is a young girl who stows away and follows him when he travels to Edinborough, and the two begin a new life in the big city.

The film is often extremely pretty

The first thing that strikes you about The Illusionist is its almost complete lack of dialog: snatches of French and occasionally English are heard throughout the film but nothing in the way of a conversation is ever shown; most of the interactions between characters being visual and indicated by noises. This may seem incidental but it is vital to anyone who hopes to enjoy the film, as the lack of words is occasionally rather alienating, and gives the film a rather empty feeling. The film looks beautiful and the animation is wonderful, but the characters, despite their unique looks, are rather hollow. The Illusionist has the feeling of a short film and, despite being only 76 minutes long, drags rather and the more bleak sections of the film are quite dull. Anybody unfamiliar with Tati’s style of often silent comedy will find the film’s silence boring and frustrating, and many who are aware of his legacy may be put off by the film’s whimsical sentimentality; particularly the movie’s closing few minutes. Less comedic and more lightly sad and occasionally sweet, The Illusionist is a short, if rather dull tale of growing old and that very filmic contrivance of surrogate parenthood; but its narrative never engages in the way of other animations that address such issues like Up (2009) or Howl’s Moving Castle (2004).