Coriolanus (2011)

"To be or not..." ...nope, wrong story. Since I'm not seeing a live play very often, I told myself to upgrade a bit my knowledge in the dramatic area and I tried watching "Coriolanus", a modern adaptation of Shakespeare's tragedy. I tried = I did it on the 2nd attempt, the first one failed by sleeping...

We're talking about a classic play, therefore we shouldn't be afraid of spoilers. In the context of the Roman-Volsci conflict (where Volsci was a tribe located close to Rome), the Roman general Caius Martius returns home after conquering the city of Corioli. Welcomed with honors and the title of Coriolanus following the victory, the general decides to run for the consul position. The political intrigue, however, present there as always in history, changes dramatically the public opinion about the man, or otherwise said we have here the definition of "from hero to zero". And like that from being favorite for ruling, Coriolanus ends up exiled. And the best option for a frustrated military with a long career behind is turning towards the closest enemy. And like that, serving the Volsci now, he starts the siege on Rome. And Rome, losing its main defender now turned attacker, asks for forgiveness and peace using Coriolanus' mother and wife. He can't say no to them, which is not very convenient for the Volsci leader. End of Coriolanus, end of story.

Leaving aside that Shakespeare in original is meant to be played on stage, not on a movie set (where it's impossible to avoid the effect of the typical dialogue that creates on screen some unbearable lengths that are not present on the stage), the major problem of this movie is the modern approach. So, what's the modern part... all above is set in the present day, somewhere in the Balkans probably, shot with a visibly low budget (maybe a reason for the chosen location), but it's keeping all of the original context: the geography, the names, the lines. I've seen adaptations of other plays, but I doubt I was ever so annoyed by the ridiculous association between the Shakespearean dialogues or monologues and the context they're set in. The cherry on top, the Volsci leader, Tullus Aufidius, is a Gerard Butler using his natural Scottish accent and is carrying an AK being dressed a Cuban revolutionary uniform (or a Bosnian considering the probable location). And that's just one example. As good as the actors might be, sorry, but it doesn't work...

Rating: 2 out of 5

Side Effects (2013)

Is it the pill, or it's not the pill? That's the essential question in "Side Effects". And which sticks up to the end. It's been a while since I've watched a movie that gives you that feeling of "I know who did it!" and change it after. And I think it does it more than once.

The setup goes like this. Emily is a depressive woman, whose husband is jailed for something like evading taxes (you're not told that, but it's probably something like that) being released after four years. Unfortunately from the status of former prosperous businessman, the guy now lives out his wife's salary who meanwhile wishing or not, had to find a job. Unfortunately neither his release, nor his efforts to get back his life seem to comfort the woman, who reaches out for a psychiatrist. The doctor switches her between several prescriptions, until we're getting to one with side effects. Bad, terrible, side effects... Since, up to this point you have to get through what I could name the boring area, with an extra touch for some moment trademarked Soderbergh (the director) that seem way longer than it's needed although you can't tell clearly what's the extra part, I will give a light spoiler: somebody dies (which makes you think if there aren't too many faces on the poster...). After that... is it the pill? :)

Risking another spoiler, between the lines, looking at the ending, I can say that the movie is quite disturbing. I mean, I would've taken the first "I know who did it!" and left it there. Although the action is quite different it reminded me somehow of "Gone Girl". Even though there you know quite well who's guilty. Here, as I said, you're induced of believing something, after which something else, and so on, and the development is subtle enough to not let you know until close to the finish if you're taking the right side.

Rating: 4 out of 5 (objectively, subjectively we stick to the standard 3.5 :) )

Bad Genius (2017)

I think it was written somewhere that "Bad Genius" is based on real facts. I don't know in what extent, but I suppose not too much. Otherwise we could also add SciFi to the genre. The movie is somewhere in the teen drama area, but considering at what level it brings an apparently mundane topic = exam cheating, it's at least worthy of comparing with Mission Impossible (since we anyway had that on the list recently).

We have two very bright students (a girl and a boy), but with a poor social status, who are granted a scholarship in a top high school in Thailand. Long story short: the kids coming from rich families see a good opportunity to pay a fee to raise their grades. And from this a series of very complex cheating strategies starts getting devised, culminating with an international test required in the admission process to U.S. colleges, where it gets to "time zone difference exploits". I won't spoil now the charm of the movie with too many details. It's enough to say that this is the "SciFi" part (note the quotes).

We also have consistent drama involved here, which is maybe less visible in the trailer. From the motivation for the "evil master plan", up to the relation between the two main characters and a radical change from cheater to non-cheater and vice versa of both of them. I won't give spoilers of who does what, but at some point we have a very nicely composed scene, somewhere on a highway bridge... pay attention to the traffic signs - if that's not intended than even more the outcome is excellent. Considering the action, even if the first 15 minutes seem to announce something slow and with a serious boringness potential, the movie gets pretty alert afterwards. There are moments when the action slows down or which don't make much sense (how can you know in Thailand what kind of toilet sinks are in a test center in Sydney, or how come a guy looking like a Russian mobster - accent included - ended up as part of the surveillance personnel there). All things apart, overall is catchy enough and I'd even say that given the subject, there wasn't much more to get out of this.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 (I know... it gets a bit boring, but since I don't have time to find something better.. or worst... what can I do?)

Mission Impossible: Fallout (2018)

I wrote before that I prefer the "MI" series to "Bond", one of the main reasons being that it doesn't take itself so serious as it happens in the 007 universe = typically you have a decent story, an ok action, and a comic relief factor that's there when's needed. It doesn't try to pass as a pretentious drama. It just comfortably sits in the action movies list and it does it really well. Or well... since the subject now is "MI6: Fallout" (no pun intended), it used to do it well...

Unfortunately the last part of the serious does exactly what I was criticizing above. It tries to be more "Bond" than before. First of all, it looks to me as the MI which si by far the most centered on the main character = Ethan Hunt, considering that other defining part of the series was "the team" and not just Tom Cruise as a super-spy. Don't get me wrong, we still have "the team", but much more of team leader on the screen. Besides that we have a story that being slightly complicated wants to pose as intelligent but it doesn't work. Because all the twists (not so many) are at least predictable, if not really under your own eyes. It's very annoying that the first consistent part of the movie where it's clear that a character in the good guys team is actually playing for the other side but nobody sees it, and even more he's obviously the guy searched by everybody but who nobody knows who really is. Maybe I should've written spoilers before saying that, but honestly... I really don't know who's not gonna get it...

Something good - the action scenes are indeed impressive, and it's pretty hard to achieve that anymore. It reminded be a bit of "Cliffhanger" (helicopters in the mountains). Simon Pegg is still in the team - so the comic relief is still there and works very well. The story itself is not so bad, but also not at the level where the previous two got. Tom Cruise runs marathons with a speed that would make Usain Bolt think if it wouldn't have worked doing that instead sprints... well, I'm not sure if this is something good. Anyway, enjoyable, but unfortunately way too predictable, which gets it way far from the critics' praise of "best action movie of the year". We still have some left of 2018, so I can hope to something with a more clever story...

Rating: 3.5 out of 5