Monday, March 8, 2010

Alice In Wonderland


The first thing to know is that this is not the original Alice in Wonderland story. Director Tim Burton has said that he was never able to feel an emotional connection with previous versions because it's a girl just going from one strange character to the next, not really a story. So this isn't exactly a sequel or re-imagining, but a sort of extension. And this will likely disappoint, frustrate, or confuse some people.

Once Alice gets into Underland (yes, Underland), I found the film really enjoyable. It's not as whimsical or playful as I might have hoped, but that can be expected when the story is put into a framework and not allowed to just go randomly. You can probably argue that giving this story a grounding goes against the point because part of the charm of the original story is that randomness. But, again, this is something different and new. And it's not a bad thing to give the story an emotional grounding. It helps to give it a more full experience.

I really like that they actually did something new and different with the story. It makes it fresh and gives more a feeling of involvement because you're not quite sure where it's going rather than going through the motions because you already know what's up ahead. One of the most common complaints is that Hollywood doesn't do anything new or original and needs to stop re-making movies or re-adapting books, but this is a clearly a very new take, so that's good, right? Yes.

My only real problem with what they did is give it a sort of Wizard of Oz type of story framework (which is ironic since Lewis Carroll's original Alice stories can likely be pinpointed as an influence in L. Frank Baum's The Wonderful Wizard of Oz – young girl gets whisked to a strange, magical land and meets various strange characters). While it works for Oz, here it just feels cheap. Does there really have to be character's in Alice's real life that mirror those found in Underland? No. Especially when you want to believe that Underland actually is real, this just suggests it's her imagination. A bit of a let down.

As to be expected from a Tim Burton film, it's visually stunning. Very unique set and character design. But it doesn't distract from what's going on. Unlike other visually powerful, CG-heavy, 3D movies, the setting and all of that does not take center stage and is not the only real reason for the film. In 3D, the movie looks good, there's a few unfortunate instances where they obviously chuck things at the screen for the effect, but the movie just looks full (in a good way, not a distracting way).

Major kudos to Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter for their performances as the Mad Hatter and the Red Queen, respectively. The film is unquestionably theirs. They bring real character to the roles, beyond just being 'mad' or shouting 'off with their heads!' There's emotion in these characters as well. And they play them superbly well and it's a delight to watch them work. It's also somewhat humorous to contemplate the level of weird to have two actors known for taking, and portraying, very eccentric roles and characters in Johnny Depp and Crispin Glover sharing the screen in a Tim Burton film.

The film is very good and a visual treat. It's a joy to watch. Great? No. But so much fun and interesting.

3 stars out of 5

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Cop Out


For the past 15 years, Kevin Smith has been making his living writing and directing independent movies. Some very good (Clerks, Chasing Amy, Dogma), some not so good (Zack and Miri Make A Porno). Cop Out is his first foray into the studio system, making a movie which he did not write. It made me uneasy when I first heard about it, a director whose work I really enjoy, for the most part, cashing a check and, from the sound of it at the beginning, playing it very safe. And the trailers and commercials didn't instill any confidence in the film.

So I'll start out by saying this – the trailers and commercials don't do the film any justice. They make it look like a very different, far inferior movie. It's a pretty funny movie. And it's good fun. Unlike the extraordinarily dumb movie the trailers and commercials paint it as.

The film has problems. The story is just good enough. It doesn't bring anything new to the table (not that it has to, or is supposed to, for this kind of movie). It's nothing to write home about, but at the end of the day, that's fine. Some of the characters don't seem to really serve a purpose or add anything to the story, and that kind of is not fine. As nice as it is to look at Rashida Jones, playing the wife of Tracy Morgan's character, in the end you ask yourself if the movie would lose anything if she wasn't in it and the answer is 'no.' The subplot involving her doesn't add anything to Morgan's character or the story. There's quite a bit of time devoted to Jones' character and her possible affair with the next door neighbor, the thing is, we see it affect Morgan's character, but we don't really feel anything or feel that it actually has any effect on anything...it's just kind of there. Without her in the movie, he'd still be exactly the same. It's just a distraction. It's the same with Seann William Scott's character. He's a lot of fun, but just a distraction who doesn't really factor in to the story enough to justify his screen time (which isn't a lot, despite what the commercials make it appear). If they don't bring anything, why are they there?

The cast is fantastic. There are times when Tracy Morgan mugs a little too much for the camera or acts a little too goofy, silly, or dumb for the character, but for the most part he does a fine job. Bruce Willis is, well...Bruce Willis. He has the tough guy, action thing, and he also has the comedy chops. The two of them work well together. And I really enjoyed the supporting cast. The already mentioned Jones and Scott (while their characters may not be essential or matter at all, both their presences are welcome, Scott especially), but Kevin Pollak and Guillermo Diaz are both make very good turns as an antagonistic detective and a baseball obsessed gangster, respectively.

It looks like a movie and feels like a movie, which is not really Kevin Smith's trademark, so he did a good job with that. A movie with something resembling a real plot, not just characters talking about movies and comics. And so I have to commend Smith, by maybe taking a safe step into the studio system, he actually ended up challenging himself a little more than he would most likely have, otherwise. And there's action...Kevin Smith directing action. There's no real big laughs, but the laughs are there and frequent enough to be fun.

That's basically all there is to say...the characters and story leave a little something to be desired, though the actors all do fine jobs. It's not a movie that I'd run out and tell everyone they need to see and it's the funniest thing ever, but I'd definitely say it's worth a shot if you're looking to watch a fun movie.

2 1/2 stars out of 5