The End of the Page

New Look, New Home

Conquering is fun!

[image via Flickr: mr la rue]

Big greetings to all the readers out there. You might have been a little troubled and possibly emotionally scarred by the disruption in service yesterday, so for that I humbly apologize. I’ve been working on a new blog design over the past couple months and it finally reached the point where I needed to turn it all on and see it work in action. There were a few bumps in the road along the way, but everything seems to be in place now. There will be more design changes to come, but hopefully they will not interrupt service at all.

Thanks as always for reading and please feel free to leave comments on the posts, share them using the new cool “Share This” widget and keep coming on back! In the coming months you will see some new voices, new topics and an expansion on where this whole project is going. If you have any interest in writing for The End of the Page or maybe just a suggestion on the blog itself, leave me a comment or send an e-mail.

Terminator Salvation: More Human Than Human

Yeah, that’s right, you stupid robot. Pull my finger…

Rating: 5 out of 10

I’m going to change up my tactic for you. I’m going to make an effort to increase your enjoyment of this movie without giving away any type of spoilers. Great debates have been held inside my head about the formation of this review, so let’s see if I can get them all to come together in print and actually make sense. If I get lost along the way, please send a search party and ask them to bring Nerd Rope.

Terminator Salvation brings the robot-battling franchise charging forward into the year 2018 and lands us deep in the war between machines and humans. The humans are being driven underground while the machines seem to be gaining more and more ground every day. When a miraculous tool falls into the hands of the humans which could swing the momentum their way and possibly end the war, John Connor has to make a choice between following logic and following his instincts.

Here’s the hint I’m going to offer you in hopes it will help you enjoy the movie just a little more: John Connor (Christian Bale) is not the main character in this movie! The trailer and the story arc up to this point have built him up to be the main focus, but while watching the movie your attention is drawn toward two other people: Marcus (Sam Worthington) and the teenage version of Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin). These two characters, greatly helped by the actors portraying them, provide numerous layers and poignant moments and steal the focus away from the top billed Bale. Bale suffers both from narrow development of his character and one-note deliverance throughout the film. For large stretches he just feels like Batman without the mask. Don’t get me wrong, I really enjoy him as Batman, but in those films we get to see him as Bruce Wayne as well and he achieves a balance between different sides of the character. Salvation doesn’t really give him that chance, so the blame doesn’t fall completely on him. Worthington and Yelchin, on the other hand, really become the main story of the movie and steal the spotlight. Worthington shows great dramatic range, but he does lose a step during a romantic subplot with Moon Bloodgood. Yelchin, who also plays Chekov in the J.J. Abrams reboot of Star Trek (so far the summers best flick), lands another major role in terms of storyline and mythological importance. As the young Kyle Reese he single-handedly represents the past and the future for the life of John Connor, which is a lot of weight to be shouldering on such a young actor, but Yelchin proves he is up to the task. Displaying innocence and hardened street smarts at the same time, he manages to bring the much lacking human element to this movie front and center.

There is an argument to be made that movies in this genre are not here to astound us with great acting or well thought out plot development. They are here to create insane CGI and never-before-seen special effects to literally knock us out of our cushioned seats. In that realm, Salvation did an exceedingly good job. The robots were bigger, the explosions were louder and you could literally hear each and every gear and servo inside the machines as they whizzed towards our woefully under-prepared human survivors. There is a pair of impressive chase sequences which included some very unique moments and that kept people glued to the screen. Very little of the action seems to move the plot or story along though and in the end you begin to wonder what it was all for; you almost feel the entire film didn’t even need to happen. No matter how deep a movie is inside the action genre, the audience needs to feel that the story had a distinct purpose and Salvation fails to completely deliver in the end.

The decision to focus more on the effects than story falls in the lap of director McG, who gained massive exposure when he brought the 70s iconic TV show Charlie’s Angels to the big screen. It doesn’t seem like he’s really changed that much in his style since then though. It is still all about flash and visual onslaught to keep the people bouncing in their seats without a foundation to make any of it meaningful. Charlie’s Angels was meant to be summertime fluff, so it worked out well, but Salvation has a darkness and grit which needs to be motivated in the writing and direction as well and that just didn’t happen. To extend the olive branch slightly towards McG, he was definitely weighted down by massive paradoxical plot holes in the film created long before he ever dreamed of taking the reins of this apocalyptic franchise. Despite the poor directing and plot development flaws, the box office numbers are not terrible ($68 million opening weekend), so you can be sure the graveled and gruff voice of Bale will be heading our way in a couple years to remind us, “You are the resistance.”

Recommendation: If you are interested at all in seeing this, do yourself a huge favor and see it in the theater. The sound and picture are a large part of what makes this watchable, so don’t discredit yourself with lesser visual and aural impact.

Added recommendation to McG: Leave out the Arnold cameo next time. Seriously. Really.

Angels and Demons: “Run, Langdon, Run!”

I wanna go back to Apollo 13. Most of that movie I just sat in a comfy chair.

Rating: 5 out of 10

There is always a line in the sand drawn between the movies and the people who go to see them. The line represents how seriously the movie is meant to be taken, on one side stands the production company and director who set the tone, while on the other side is the audience who chooses how they want to receive the film. The main battle seems to surround the idea of taking lessons or supposed “truths” learned in the film and applying them to the outside world. Most of the time this line is cut and dry (if the movie is not classified as a documentary, take it with heaping grains of salt; if it is a doc, take with slightly less salt). Yet when a movie has the audacity to delve into the world of religion, you can bet people are going to flood out of the woodworks to take the film and its creators to task for even the possibility of misrepresenting some aspect of their faith. The precursor to this film, The Da Vinci Code, was hounded by protests all over the world, some even authorized and organized by the Catholic church, but the film still trucked on and made over $758 million dollars worldwide. Now, with some water under the bridge, the church has decided to take a different tactic with the release of the new Dan Brown thriller, Angels and Demons. The furor started to bubble up, but word came down from on high that the film was seen as “silly” in the eyes of the church and protest and calls to ban it from theaters were wholly unnecessary. I could go into a whole different discussion about the over blown reactions to movies with religious subtexts, but I’ll save that for another day. For now, let’s take a look into the newest effort from much-acclaimed director Ron Howard and one of the members of the Hollywood royalty, Tom Hanks.

Angels and Demons centers once again around Robert Langdon, who is brought in by the church to help uncover the identity of kidnappers who have taken four high ranking bishops hostage. As the puzzle pieces are fit together, the picture reveals a much more diabolical plot to not only attack the Catholic church philosophically on its fundamental beliefs, but also physically by blowing up Vatican City. Langdon must run frantically against the clock to try and find these men before they are killed and discover the deadly device before thousands of innocent people are sacrificed in the crossfire of a religious war.

The first thing that should be noted about this film is its drastic improvement in many aspects over its predecessor. The Da Vinci Code was stunning in its ability to remove the tension and tempo from the book, which alone was one of the biggest factors for making it such an incredible best-seller. Learning from his past, Howard injected incredible amounts of tension into this episode in the life of Robert Langdon. The only downside is he might have gone a little too far. Feeling like a double-sized episode of 24, the pace of the film doesn’t slow down from the moment Hanks is recruited until the villain is finally revealed. Unfortunately, when the momentum should be rushing us into the final curtain, it slows down and drags us painfully through the last twenty minutes. Also, while I am all for ramping things up, this type of tempo can be draining when kept for such a long time. Most of my friends who watch 24 already feel winded when each episode finishes and that’s only after 44 minutes.

There was also a slight disconnect in believability in the continuing effort to keep the energy high because it seemed Hanks only had mere minutes to get from one location to the other again and again. Here’s the rub: it is made abundantly clear during the movie that people are pouring into the city by the truckload in anticipation of the new pope being named. The idea that Hanks and his compatriots could navigate the ancient Vatican City streets and catacombs in such short time is a bit ridiculous.

While those things took something away from the film, there were some really fun moments and solid work done by the cast which deserves mention. Hanks continued to school all other actors in how to play a leading man with intelligence instead of brawn (luckily this time without the crazy hair). He has an incredible talent for emoting frustration while not completely losing his cool and few things are as enjoyable as watching him outwit one character after another. Bringing added weight to the cast, Ewen McGregor comes on as the personal secretary to the recently deceased pope, which inherently leaves him as the man in charge until the new pope is elected. McGregor gave off the charm and dedication of a man of the cloth, but he balanced it the fervor of one who only sees a single path in front of him. If those two weren’t enough to give the cast the needed gravitas, Howard brought on two actors known for their unshakable seriousness, Stellan Skarsgard and Armin Mueller-Stahl. Skarsgard plays the gruff captain of the Swiss Guard, constantly doubting and rebuffing any deductions made by Hanks, while Stahl plays a cardinal with his eyes set on the throne and has no problem pulling rank over the younger and unqualified McGregor. Both actors brought an enjoyable sense of depth to their roles and kept the audiences continually guessing as to their true motives.

Recommendation: Angels and Demons is beautifully filmed and is certainly a step up from The Da Vinci Code, but it still ends up leaving a bit to be desired. Maybe third time is the charm since Dan Brown will soon be releasing his newest installment, The Lost Symbol. Wait and see…

Star Trek: Warp Speed Ahead, Mr. Abrams!

Seriously, why do you keep asking if we work for Benetton?

Rating: 9 out of 10

Forty three years ago, Gene Roddenberry created the legendary universe of Star Trek and the realm of Sci-Fi was forever altered. Thirteen years later, George Lucas unleashed Star Wars onto the world, proceeded to become a one-man space behemoth and a long standing feud was born between the two franchises. For the last thirty years Trekkies and Jedi Warriors have battled over which universe was better and more futuristically accurate (as if that debate is somehow winnable). In Hollywood the feud took on a different form, the face on the dollar bill. Star Wars cranks in with six films, while Star Trek has racked up eleven (including this latest effort), but I would wager Star Wars still holds the title for most money earned. So, do the Trekkies have to crawl back into their pods and weep in defeat? I think not, because there is one other fight to be had and that is in the realm of quality. While the original Star Wars trilogy is a stunning achievement, with Empire Strikes Back as the shining jewel in that crown, the recent prequel trilogy lacked almost everything that made the originals worth watching. On the other hand, Star Trek has stumbled back and forth in quality throughout their run, with Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan setting the bar in the minds of many Trek fanatics, but this new reboot by uber-director/producer J.J. Abrams does exactly what it sets out to do. Star Trek introduces the franchise to a whole new audience, while simultaneously giving the die-hard fans new faces to attach themselves to, on top of managing to not ruin any of the previously cemented rules and storylines in the Star Trek universe. Trekkies all over the world can hold their heads high, prick up their ears and say, “Hey Lucas, that’s how you make a real prequel!”

Star Trek follows the origin stories of the crew of the new Federation flagship, the U.S.S. Enterprise. It brings together the two worlds of Kirk, a young ruffian with a penchant for challenging authority, and Spock, a half human/half Vulcan child forced to prove himself over and over again due to his mixed heritage. As the crew ventures out on their maiden voyage, they find themselves at the center of a destruction plot created by a delusional and time-traveling Romulan named Nero. Faced with a situation far beyond their training, the crew must make their choices, form their bonds and trust their instincts if they stand any chance of coming out alive.

Launching a reboot is always a dangerous game because while you stand to gain new viewers and fans, you equally stand to cause die-hard fanatics violent and vitriolic reactions, which can take a gnarly chunk out of your box office returns. With those cliffs looming in front of him, J.J. Abrams directed a brilliant beast of a film, packed with action, comedy and historically accurate references to the original canon. The overall story might be a touch contrived and not incredibly complex, but the point of this movie was not to unveil entirely new Sci-Fi concepts or storylines. All Star Trek needed to accomplish was the introduction of the main crew of the ship to a whole new audience without alienating the previous one and I think Abrams nailed it.

The movie definitely centers around our two heroes, Kirk and Spock, played by Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto respectively. Both roles are truly daunting to step into due to the sheer weight of the cultural impact from the characters original performers, William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy (Nimoy gets to reprise his legendary role with a part in this film, while Shatner was left out). For them these roles became their entire lives and while they both were able to continue their acting careers, they will never be separated from what they helped evolve in those early years. Much to their credit, Pine and Quinto stepped right up to the plate and gave respect to the original portrayals, while finding subtle and poignant moments to make their own. Pine showed the brashness and lecherous nature of Kirk, but also found a playful, caring side which wasn’t previously explored, and all of that without falling into the trap of Shatner parody. Quinto slipped into the cool and logical exterior of Spock, yet managed to remind people of his human side and embrace the youth the character still had. In the realm of performance, this role continues a strong public presence for Quinto, who was unleashed on the TV audience as Sylar in the once-mammoth Heroes. Credit being given where it is due, Quinto provided one of the few remaining reasons to continue watching the show (although I believe they are on an upswing heading into Season Four with the return of their original show runner). Returning to Star Trek once again, the entire movie might have fallen off into the land of big-budget parody had these two actors not given such believable and stellar performances.

Spreading the spotlight around, Zoe Saldana (Uhura), Simon Pegg (Scotty), Anton Yelchin (Chekov) and John Cho (Sulu) all got their moments and kept the bar raised quite high all around. Eric Bana, who played the revengeful Nero, also showed more layers than we are used to in our Sci-Fi villains, even though his storyline was a touch weak. The one person I wanted to make sure and give a special mention to is Karl Urban, who played the much mocked and constantly troubled Leonard ‘Bones’ McCoy. This character gave us one of the most quoted lines from all Star Trek history, “Dammit Jim, I’m a doctor, not a [fill in the profession here]!” Sitting in that darkened theater you know the line is coming sometime and when it finally jumps out of that massive bank of speakers, you smile, you laugh, but Karl delivers it in such a way that you believe it too. This was yet another moment when the whole project could have slipped into mockery, but survived on the shoulders of its dedicated and convicted cast. Kudos to you, Karl. Well played.

If you’re wondering why this isn’t a perfect 10 on the ratings scale, my only real big gripe would be near the opening of the film. While the scenes of Spock as a child are useful and informative, the scene of the young and rambunctious Kirk played much worse and really needed to be rewritten from scrap.

Recommendation: Umm…GO SEE IT! I think I’ll be heading back for a second viewing just so I can experience it in IMAX.

Wolverine: Cuts Just Underneath The Bar

C’mon, who wants to try and take the Oscar host gig away from me? I dare ya.

Rating: 7 out of 10

Bring on the over-buttered popcorn, the obscenely large sodas and the amazingly radiated hot dogs…the blockbuster season is upon us! Every summer the world rushes into the theaters daring the movie studios to try their best to blow us out of our seats. CGI masterminds and real life stuntmen pull out all the stops in a yearly effort to make us drop our jaws once more at something we believed we would never see. Amazement and imagination collide inside a brilliant torrent of big-budget action flicks for the next five months and most studios bank their entire year on these “tentpole” films. The money made or lost on these cinematic feats can determine whether a studio will even be in business the following summer. With all that pressure, being the first one out of the gate is a big deal and this year that incredible honor is bestowed upon a familiar face, Wolverine.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine tells of the beginning of one of the most standout characters in the Marvel universe. It follows him from his start as a sickly child though his transformation into one of the world’s most deadly and indestructible killers. It also brings to light his mysterious past in Canada and what made him the missing piece to a terrible and destructive puzzle. Backgrounds and motivations are brought out of the shadows as we delve deeper into the lifeline of this wild and mostly untamed anti-hero.

There was a small rebellion right away when this idea got announced for a Wolverine origin film and the reasoning was some people felt we had already gone down that road in X2. While that is partially true, the secret of this script is it actually tells us more new information on the birth of other characters, letting Wolverine be the lynch pin to bring it all together. Beyond our cigar-smoking hero, we also get the origin story of Sabertooth and Deadpool, which in the end might prove to be the single best thing to come out of this film. Ryan Reynolds, who played Wade (aka Deadpool), has already signed on for a spin-off film surrounding the future of his wise cracking assassin. From the second he was announced as the casting choice fanboys around the world breathed a sigh of relief because they knew they had hit the jackpot. Deadpool is an insanely skilled weapon who never stops talking and cracking jokes, even during the most complicated missions, and that smart-ass nature makes Reynolds that absolute perfect choice for the role. Plus, we had seen him bulk up and take on the comic world before in Blade: Trinity and although the movie itself wasn’t anything to jump and shout about, Reynolds brought some much needed humor to the screen.

Getting back on track with this film, while the storyline of Wolverine might not feel incredibly necessary, the fans can’t seem to get enough of Hugh Jackman playing this iconic comic book role. This film is the fourth time we get to witness him wear the scowl of Wolverine and according to various Hollywood trades it won’t be the last. Making me and scores of other comic book geeks happy, the word has come down that the next Wolverine film will center around his time in Japan, which is a much more interesting storyline than this one.

Following the trend of causing your comic-loving audience to geek out for the sheer joy of it, Wolverine flooded the screen with numerous other characters, which sometimes can be a detriment, like in the original Batman franchise, but Marvel seems to have a slightly better hold on how to approach multi-character films. The most anticipated in this category was certainly Gambit, played by Taylor Kitsch from the TV show Friday Night Lights. I appreciated the physicalization of Gambit and the expression of his powers, but they toned down two of the best parts of who Gambit is, the Cajun accent and his overbearing romantic nature. Admittedly there was no female character for him to draw a bead on, but they could have dropped in at least one line or moment of him making a super-cheesy move on a girl in a bar and watching her melt under his skills. In the comics one of the most memorable things about Gambit is his determined romantic assault on Rogue, which in the X-Men film universe would have to take some clever restructuring since by the end of X-Men: The Last Stand Rogue has given up her powers completely so she can have a real relationship with Bobby Drake (aka Iceman). There were some rumblings about a possible Gambit spin-off as well, but I think his showing in this film wasn’t strong enough to warrant the money and resources, especially not when the Deadpool film is already greenlit and the Magneto script has also already been written (supposedly).

To the other names and faces popping up throughout this film, there was not too much else to get excited about. Will.I.Am, from the music group Black Eyed Peas, did a fine job as the teleporting cowboy, John Wraith, but nothing extraordinary. Dominic Monaghan, who is undoubtedly more connected to Hollywood history than anyone in this film due to his roles in The Lord of the Rings trilogy and the TV phenom Lost, played the cool and quiet telekinetic Bolt, but he also felt slightly underused and just there to fill out a head count of comic book archetypes. Without going through the rest name by name, I will leave you with the person I thought was the worst represented, The Blob. No disrespect to the acting talents of Kevin Durand, but the physicalization of The Blob when he reached his massive and imposing size just ended up looking silly on camera. This brought one of inherent and most dangerous problems of the recent trend in adapting comic books for the big screen, some of the characters just don’t translate well in a realistic fashion. Sometimes you have to find creative ways to get them up there in a different physical form while still holding onto the core meaning and nature of the character, not that I know a way to do that in the case of Blob, but the fact remains, he ended up reminding me of Chet from Weird Science when he got turned into a big pile of crap.

Recommendation: Having a three movie lead-in for this character built up a huge following, which is great for box office potential, yet it also built up huge expectations, which this film did not completely meet. It has some really good scenes, but it fails to keep the pace up throughout.

The Soloist: Plays One Too Many Tunes

You know, it’s easier for me to tip you if the case opened the other way.

Rating: 7 out of 10

At the end of every year there is a wonderful, insane, intentionally over-hyped flood of films known as “Oscar Season”. This is when all the major studios release their heavy dramatic fare, which they hope will garner numerous nominations and armloads of awards. Those accolades not only boost the notoriety of the studios, but usually the critically acclaimed films get a much needed bump in the box office. So it is no wonder that the movie calendar gets incredibly crowded and sometimes a film gets yanked from the slate in order to not find itself dueling with other preening examples of award-bearing cinema. Last year this was the fate of the much anticipated film, The Soloist. Four months later, it sweeps into theaters as the only critical drama in town, looking to round up the reviews in a much quieter time, but it still has to answer the eternal question: Is it any good?

The Soloist is based on a true story (and a subsequent book) about a newspaper reporter named Steve Lopez, who stumbles across a homeless man, Nathaniel Ayers Jr., whose grace and prodigal gift for music inspires Steve to write a series of articles about him and help Nathaniel get back on his feet. Complicating this seemingly simple matter is the painful and paralyzing effects of schizophrenia, which Nathaniel suffers from. Steve finds himself dueling with how far he will engage himself with a subject for the sake of a story and where the line is drawn between objective journalist and compassionate friend.

This contemporary tale of friendship beyond the social mores is the most recent film from Joe Wright, fresh off his nomination for Best Picture in 2008 for Atonement. Known to the American audience more for his Victorian stylings, Wright brings his talent and skill for subtle and intriguing characterizations to modern day Los Angeles. He had well-honed weapons at his disposal with the dynamic duo of Robert Downey Jr. (as the sarcastic and sardonic Lopez) and Jamie Foxx (as the gifted and troubled Ayers). While both gave strong efforts, Downey stole every scene he was in and the movie tended to lag when it drifted away from his character for too long. I’ve seen Foxx do some incredible work before (i.e. Ray), but here he struggles in connecting with the audience, which I think had more to do with the writing and how his character was set up throughout the film. Also, the pair of protagonists didn’t have a physical and real life villain to compete against; instead their battle is against the internal nature of Foxx’s disease and the external nature of society and its treatment of homelessness. Downey comes off as earnest and true, but under all the heavy concepts and conflicts of the film Foxx feels buried and slightly monotone. Not that Downey needed the extra boost on his side, but he shares his storyline with the amazing and lovely Catherine Keener, who plays the ex-wife who can’t help remaining in love with Downey (not to mention seeing him every day since she is his boss at the newspaper). She tenderly supports Downey as he struggles through his journey from social disbeliever back into the world of a connected and responsible citizen.

Beyond the acting, another stumbling point was the various attempts to visualize the effect of music on Foxx’s character. It is truly important to know and understand how music flows through his soul and seemingly calms the numerous voices in his mind, but instead of letting Foxx give us that on screen, we instead receive one scene of two birds soaring through the Los Angeles skyline and another of a painfully long iTunes-esque light show while he listened to Beethoven inside the Walt Disney concert hall. Both choices played incredibly heavy-handed and failed to generate the subconscious connection needed to bring the audience along.

Recommendation: Downey continues his run and shows no sign of falling off his pace, which makes the film imminently worth watching. If they had picked one major story to work with, the schizophrenia or the plight of the homeless, the film would have been much leaner and stronger, but even so, it still shows some strong work from the amazingly competent cast and crew.