Tin Man (2007)

Not very long ago I was praising the SciFi channel mini-series (or newer .. SyFy). It seems that I finally got into something that it's on the opposite side and I don't even know if I should spend the time writing about it .. "Tin Man" (by the way, if somebody sees the movie and has a solid argument for the chosen title, please give me a message). Still ...

Still, the critics were relatively positive if you take a look on the awards & nominations list (especially the Emmy one). I won't enumerate them now, and I'll actually consider there were given due to the lack of options during that year maybe (because the only effectively won Emmy was just for makeup). The only aspect that I think really deserves appreciated in the whole movie is the story. We have a sort of adaptation (which actually turns into a "sequel" from some point on) of the classic Oz story by Frank Baum. "A sort of" means actually "heavily adapted" here, meaning that everything is placed in a context that's a bit more realistic than the original one, and altogether more mature. Besides that, it has enough complexity for the whole three parts of its length. As probably the classical tale is well known already I won't insist with details on that. The trailer will say more.

Unfortunately, the story is pretty much messed up by the directing (by the way, I was thinking to place on my "to view" list also SciFi's channel version of "Alice in Wonderland", but considering it has the same director I think I'll postpone it ...). There are lots of parts which could have been a bit more thoroughly treated and others that probably were better left more superficial. In my opinion, the piece of story that came out really well is the middle, the second part. I could even say that's almost on the same level with "Harry Potter & The Half Blood Prince", which probably is the darkest in the series, and by far also the most dense from a psychological point of view. But again, this similarity comes especially from the story ... Because besides the directing which is flawed we have also the cast ...

The only good part about the actors in this movie is the order in which they are enumerated in the trailer. More exactely there are only two who are effectively acting and those are the first mentioned - Richard Dreyfuss si Alan Cumming. The rest .. are pretty lame. I'm not an expert in drama and generally I consider that this part in what I'm writing is purely subjective. But here ... it's so obvious that even if a part of the cast is so & so, having both good parts and maybe just a few bad ones, for the main character played by Zooey Deschanel, the outcome despite her nice blue eyes is simply horrendous. Either she's "on drugs" as somebody on an IMDb board was saying or she tried a very challenging approach for the performance with the purpose of building a more... different type of character than the classical image. But the outcome is far from interesting, ok, or any other positive qualifications ...

Technically the movie is ok, with the exception of the VFX, which despite all the nominations given sincerely they don't look like 2007, even considering that we talk about a made for TV movie. I've seen lots of better effects in older series. As a final idea, I'm waiting to see on screen something else from the same universe. For who doesn't know Frank Baum wrote more than just one book, but every time only this one was put on screen. I haven't read anything from the rest, so I don't know what potential they have though, but there is also another author. His name was Alexander Volkov, and he lived in the old USSR until the '70s. During his lifetime he adapted the first book by Baum and wrote a series of original sequels. I've read one of these (I think the first) many times when I was a kid. It's called "Urfin Joos & His Wooden Soldiers" in a close to original translation. In my opinion this is far superior as a story to the "Wizard of Oz" and I honestly believe that it would be a hit if properly put on screen. By chance I've seen earlier this year a pretty good trailer (see below) for an animated adaptation. Unfortunately if you dig a bit the web it seems to be pretty much an independent "one-man-effort", so I don't know what are the chances to come out. But who knows ...

Rating: 3 out of 5 ( ... pretty much only for the story)

The Lincoln Lawyer (2011)

I'm going to be more short today - 1. I don't actually have much to write about "The Lincoln Lawyer" 2. the eternal "time tends to be = 0" lack of "resources" . So, we have a thriller, which is adapted after a book, which book I didn't read, but which I think it's better than the movie ...

Well, it's not a bad movie, but it could have been much better. Because of this, probably the best part is the one which comes directly from the book = the story. We have a divorced lawyer (whose wife works at the attorney's office) who uses a Lincoln as place of work, therefore the title of the movie. This means, more exactly, that all day long he is moving from one place of the town to another dealing with the various clients incarcerated in the various police precincts, or even handling some of them on the road between. One day, he receives an express request from a guy accused of beating badly a call girl. Considering that the guy is the son of a filthy rich business woman, offering a payment which is several tens of times larger than the usual fee, the case is accepted even if all this sudden interest for the "mobile lawyer" sounds a bit suspicious to him. But the accused one has also a story which despite being a bit far fetched sounds plausible initially - more exactly he sustains that he's completely innocent and the girl managed to get beaten beyond recognition by her own free will just to squeeze him from money. From here onwards, if I say more, I'll spoil too much. The movie has two major twists (well .. at least they could've been major ...), and the first comes exactly after what's above (the second is obviously at the end).

I don't have much more to say about the movie. The directing doesn't help to much, the first twist I was saying about could have been less obvious as outcome = to keep you wondering at least for a while more. I'll stay silent and say only that from that point until the end the relationship defendant - accused changes consistently from a normal one. And the reason for that is not only what's easy to guess and you see also in the trailer, namely that the "not guilty" one is not that innocent.

The cast is ok. In the lead role we have Matthew McConaughey, but probably the best part is made by the accused = Ryan Phillipe. Oh, and I shouldn't forget a presence that's always likeable (at least for me :-p) - Marisa Tomei. I don't have anything to say about other aspects as cinematography, editing, sound, etc because each of this is pretty much "plain simple". As a general idea, the impression I was left is that the movie is "too american" = everything solves a bit to "ok" in the end and the story itself, which if you put it on paper (and probably in the book is like that) it's pretty tangled with some more "depth" potential, on screen gets a bit too "easy flowing" without giving you much food for thought.

Rating: 3 out of 5

Ninja Assassin (2009)

I took a little time to think on how to rate "Ninja Assassin" (although probably that's the least meaningful part of an entry). Eventually I decided to restrain myself and opted for what's written in the end. Just to be sure nobody will think that I'm drunk in case I would have given a higher rating. Although it still might happen if I'm thinking on the last week's movie. But comparing here, just because we're talking about two movies, is like placing Mona Lisa and the Eiffel Tower on the same balance because both are in Paris. On the other hand, this is the second time in the last period when I have a completely different opinion from IMDb and the critics. Let's see why ...

"Ninja Assassin" is an action movie before anything else. Some say it has to little action, some that it has too much. For me it was the perfect amount. Especially considering that it's backed up by a story, even if it's a simple one, maybe melancholic, with plot holes, again for some too long or completely invisible for others. It was quite ok as a story for an action movie. And we have also something that brings some weight for anything from the genre if handled appropriately (but again the critics were probably blind to see it) - an one-to-one conflict = the ultimate good guy (at least from some point onwards) vs. the ultimate bad guy. I'll be back to this, let me take them one by one ...

I. The story: I started with this part to give a sense for what's next, the movie having the same approach (and it works wonderfully). In the first scene we have a ninja "cleaning up" a room from an entire yakuza gang in an a la Tarantino style. After which we have the context - which is presented through a series of flashbacks with sequences from the life of a ninja trained since a little kid by an assassins clan. These flshbacks (which present a bit more complex story than Van Damme's training in "BloodSport" but I won't get into details) are rolled in parallel with the action from the present placed in Berlin. Here a female Europol agent with a bit too much free time finds some occupation by investigating a series of killings throughout the history. From the vague existing documentation she gets the conclusion that the executor group was the same, and paid with the same amount ... since the middle ages. Of course the whole theory with ninja clans seems like a movie story for her superior but he lets her go on with the investigation. And slowly, as she advances, the things start to get complicated, especially from when this path of action mixes with the other one = the flashbacks told story of the ninja which reaches the present. The only thing I'm saying more is that in the last flashback you're presented with the violent split between the ninja who and the clan, which puts him in the position of the "ultimate good guy" and the clan chief as the "ultimate bad guy" about I was saying before. From a couple opinions which I had the time to read in the half of hour I've granted myself for seeing what's the problem with the IMDb rating, it results that is too much story and too thin just to support a bunch of mindless action scenes. I don't want to start here enumerating action movies which have a thinner story than "Ninja Assassin" because I'm not gonna end today. There are indeed some holes in the script but as complexity, what's above is far from being all you get as a story. And it is coherent enough despite everything is said, and it also takes more than five lines of text to put it on paper. Which is good, because from an action movie, if something sticks to your head for longer than one year it will probably be the story, and ...

II. The Conflict: "Die Hard" basically doesn't have not even a quarter from the story here and it still is a masterpiece for an action movie. But it is a particular case. Why ? First, it has a pretty restrained context in which the action develops this allowing the viewer to be more drawn by what he sees on the screen. Second, you have a conflict between a main character on the good side and a main character on the bad side, which conflict is backed up wonderfully by the restrained context which intensifies it. Well, in "Ninja Assassin" we don't have a narrow context, but we have the conflict. And as from "Die Hard" you'll remember Gruber (or in any case if not the name, the evil guy who "hijacked" Nakatomi Tower), from "Kill Bill" you'll remember Bill, from "Speed" you'll remember .. Dennis Hopper ( I'm not recalling the name, with Bill was easier :) ), the same way here you'll probably remember the assassin clan chief. It's not anyway sufficient to just have two main characters, the story has to "build" them in order to "hit" the viewer with the conflict between them, and especially the negative one because the most impact comes from that side (remember "Darth Vader" ? :) ). Well, probably "Ninja Assassin" is not exactly as "Star Wars" for this part, but it really does a good job on "building" the bad character. And this is basically due to the story .. considered useless by some.

III. The Action: The guy who plays the main character (the good guy), Rain, from what I learned is a professional dancer having lots of shows and a ton of success in Asia. Probably that explains the choreography of the fight scenes, about which I don't know how realistic are considering the martial arts technique but they definitely look good. Most of the time it looks indeed like a dance. And to top it the weapon which get the most screen time (I don't know the exact name, something close to Mortal Kombat's Scorpion chained kunai) is not really often seen in movies and adds more to the "artistic impression". Probably that's also the reason why despite the violence and the blood excess (the movie is clearly rated 18+) I believe it's one of the few cases where I can say it's tolerable and not disgusting (although the amounts of spilled red paint could've been definitely lower).

I have written enough about the good parts. There are also bad ones. Yes, as I wrote above the script has clearly parts that could have been better. Same for the actors. With the exception of the three main ones (and even here not all the time), the rest seem to be just picked from the street and brought to the set. Besides that, the worst part is that it sounds awfully unnatural hearing all the japanese talking in English. There is anyway something good, coming from all of these, at least for me :) Remember the bunch of lines in "Commando" between Schwarzenegger and his "kidnapped" action partner which at some point went so far that were not anymore horrible but funny ? Well, it's not the same level at all here, but there are a few moments though when you might have the feeling that "Ninja Assassin" brings a tribute to the screenwriters from "Commando". Which again, for me is funny :), not bad at all. As a final idea I can say that James McTeigue ("V for Vendetta") from my point of view managed to achieve something with this movie that seems to combine the best from "Crying Freeman" with Mark Dacascos and from "The Hunted" with Cristopher Lambert, another two flicks probably to old and unknown but as underrated as this one.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Blood Simple. (1984)

I've seen so many movies having a quite similar subject with the one I'm writing about, that I honestly didn't remember if not this one is also among them. So, I was a bit undecided if to see it or not because even though I have a series of movies about which I know for sure I watched but I don't recall much from them, I'm trying to avoid seeing again when I have another choice. Obviously due to the lack of time. Well in the end I was more certain anyway that I didn't see it, so despite what's above I've chosen "Blood Simple" from '84, the first movie by Coen Brothers over a newer one. And I can't say that I regret this ( maybe just the hour when I watched it :) )

The similar subject I was mentioning is something like: first, we have a small american forgotten town where the population count is probably a number with 4 digits (or at least that's the impression you get; in "Blood Simple" you don't know more than it's somewhere in Texas .. if I'm not missing somehing). Second, we have a bar in that town, or more exactly a bar owner (or if it's not a bar owner - in this movie he is - is another character with more or less unorthodox behavior who's a bit more rich than the rest of the surrounding cohabitants). Number three, the guy has a wife (younger and good looking) and they don't really get along anymore, or even if they do he's paranoid enough to be willing to put her locked in a cage due to jealousy. Number four, in whole this context appears another guy who eventually gets involved in a reltion with the overpriced object above (= the wife, if it's not clear). Number five, somebody is paying somebody ( not necessarily one of the the three ) to kill somebody, and from here the whole story gets complicated. What's more to say is that usually a variable percent ( between let's say 40 and 99 %) from all the characters have their IQ proportional to the town dimension. Well, I've seen all this context, with some variations, in {Red Rock West", in "U-Turn" and I think also other titles, and obviously also in "Blood Simple.".

I won't say more about how the above "template" fits to the current movie, it just does it almost perfectly. Especially the IQ part, although it's not that obvious from the start. What I can tell, without revealing too much is that it takes a while until all this context is set, but starting from number 5 and after the movie gets into the alert phase. Initially you'll tend to think that it's more a comedy (actually it is in part, a dark one). You have the typical Coen Brothers humor (quite similar with what you have in "Burn After Reading"), which makes that the first part of the movie to be pretty "relaxed" to say it so. Well, what this actually does is to amplify the effect of what's coming. And what's coming starts from a scene which seemed to me pretty hard to digest. I will just say that if you've seen "Casino" by Scorsese you'll know what to expect because we have something somehow similar in there. Still, that one for me, probably also due to the age I was when I've watched the movie, is one of the gruesome scenes I've ever seen, due to the fact that it's pushed to an extreme which doesn't get out from the credible ranges (for instance what you have in "Saw" is clearly unplausible and exaggerated which cuts something like 70-80% from the impact on the audience in my opinion). Anyway, getting back to "Blood Simple" ... for me this is the bad part of the movie = I didn't receive it very well, but I have to admit that it proves effective for what's following. Because what's following starts with the impression created by this scene. And even if it keeps a subtle humor drawn mostly from the mentally healthiness of the character, the rest of a movie comes with a load of tension which grows and grows until it reaches a climax at the end (that's why, how I was saying at the start of the entry :) probably 1 AM is not the best hour to see the movie). It has something from Hitchcock in it, so probably it doesn't quote him just randomly. So, to be more clear, due to the way the action develops the movie becomes (at least for me) scarrier than a horror, and that's pretty much due to the fact suggested above = the violence and the situations are relatively plausible or actually not that much as plausible than as possible (as in not exaggerated).

The movie has a really beautiful cinematography. I've been surprised to see that behind the camera was Barry Sonnenfeld about whom I had no idea that he had done also this in his career. The guy is probably most known as a director ("Men in Black" 1 and 2), but I really think that he should have stuck to the camera. You have a variation of frames + angles which fit perfectly with how "loaded" gets the atmosphere. I think I've seen something similar "Shining", but I don't remember much. The soundtrack is also perfect for the context, and I really started to like Carter Burwell although it seems it's pretty much exclusively for his collaborations with the Coen Brothers (after seeing "True Grit" and the one from here), because for the rest I'm not really of the opinion that he qualifies on the current top line of composers (= Mansell, Zimmer, etc) ...

Anyway, what's the main thing to appreciate is the editing + the directing + the script; it's another example, although chronologically the first that what comes from Hollywood and has written Coen in this 3 places deserves with a rate of 80 % certainty to spend the time on it (it still remains something like 20 % with the way too overrated "No Country for Old Men", "O Brother Where Art Thou", and I hope these are all not to destroy the percentage :) ). What I was saying above about the tension it creates it's pretty much due to the editing and to the directing (and the script brings the humour part which is more than necessary to not jump above the limit with the rest). Even if still a part of the movie seemed to me a bit over the limit, finally I can't to do else than just appreciate that the result is what it wants to be, and fortunately for the viewer it sets a quite high level compared to most of the movies you're presented on a current basis.

Rating: 4 out of 5