Serial Mom – It is what it is

‘Serial Mom’ and ‘Snakes on a Plane.’ Two films that – technically – shouldn’t really ever be compared to each other because they’re so radically-different.  However, maybe the one thing they do have in common (besides sharing space in my DVD collection) is that they basically tell you all you need to know about the film in the title, therefore you should know what you’re in for before you sit down to watch.

Kathleen Turner plays the titular ‘Serial Mom’ – a wife and mother to a typical American suburban family who, on the outside, are perfect in every way.  But, the family’s ‘dark secret’ is clearly apparent in the title.  She takes pleasure in messing with some people and even killing others.

And, like ‘Snakes on a Plane,’ once you’ve given what little elaboration of the title is needed, there’s not an awful lot left to say.  If you’re looking for an – extremely – black comedy then you’ll definitely find one here.  Kathleen Turner is brilliantly evil, but don’t expect too much in the way of backstory as to why she’s like the way she is.  This film was made in the early nineties and I reckon that if something similar was produced today then we’d get a detailed backstory as to why she does what she does.

Either way, the film is – as I said – darkly comic and kind of pokes fun of the media reaction of the day (again, if this film was remade then expect all sorts of internet-related jibes involving the social media reaction to such events becoming public).

Oh, and if you ever watched Ricky Lake’s talk show then you’ll be surprised at what she used to look like before she had a studio audience standing behind her!

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Downsizing – Big concept, downsized execution

‘Downsizing’ looked really good from the trailer.  Yes, don’t all films?  It’s about – believe it or not – a world where, if you want to decrease your carbon footprint and get more for your money, you can be shrunk to a mere five inches tall and (effectively) live in a doll’s house-like world with your friends and loved ones.  I know the premise is a little ‘out there,’ but Matt Damon is the lead and it looked really funny.  And it nearly was. 

The film had two major stumbling points for me.  I was quite happy to suspend my disbelief in order to accept the plot.  However, the first fault came because I’d seen the trailer.  The film almost feels like two stories rolled into one.  The first half is basically the trailer, only full-length.  Therefore, if, like me, you’ve seen the trailer, then you’ve basically seen the entire first half of the movie – i.e. no shocks, surprises or new gags to come.

Then, at roughly the halfway mark, it feels like a completely different writer took over control.  The film ditches ninety per cent of its established characters and brings in a load of new ones.  Not only this, but the whole film feels weirdly-different from everything that’s set it up beforehand.  The first half is like a quirky romantic comedy and the second turns into a deep drama with heady political messages about the environment.

Matt Damon is likeable enough in the lead and if you’re a huge fan of his then you’ll enjoy it.  The supporting cast all do their best, but it’s the writing of the secondary characters that lets them down – they individual character arcs all seem totally unbelievable.  It’s like Darth Vader suddenly turning good halfway through the first ‘Star Wars’ film.

Also, was it just me or did the special effects seem a little on the cheap-looking?  With a story involving tiny people interacting with normal-sized people you’d expect them to blend the two seamlessly.  However, much of it looked very ‘blue-screen’ esque.

I know I’m sounding quite negative about it all, but, believe it or not, it is quite fun.  There are definitely good jokes that land in there (well, mainly the first half) so it’s not all bad.  I just wished that it had chosen one particular genre and stuck with it, rather than trying to be everything all at once.

5/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back

Underworld: Blood Wars – The franchise has jumped the lycan

I’ve always been a fan of the ‘Underworld’ franchise.  The first film totally blew me away and – amazingly – the sequel (in my opinion, anyway) was that rarest of beasts of a sequel that was actually better than the original.  Yes, a few people said the prequel that came next was a missed opportunity, as it didn’t address a lot of the mythology that people were hoping for.  And, despite many film critics absolutely despising the fourth instalment, I took some dumb enjoyment out of the affair.  Therefore, I couldn’t really see how ‘part 5’ would be anything other than more of the same silly, action-packed entertainment.  I was wrong.  Sadly.

I just couldn’t believe how much the quality has fallen with this one.  It just felt like one of the most generic, by-the-numbers films ever made.  Yes, it had some of the same characters in it.  Yes, Kate Beckinsale looked good in her catsuit.  And, yes, there are still plenty of action scenes.  Yet, this time round, it just didn’t feel like anything other than an extended trailer for a film.

Although Kate Beckinsale does her best in the lead, this time round she seems almost bored to be here – like other roles have dried up and she needs this one to pay the bills.  The other characters are equally forgettable; there’s a new vampire who basically looks like the ‘Mother of Dragons’ from ‘Game of Thrones’ and (yet another) new leader of the werewolves (sorry, ‘lycans’) who just snarls in a menacing manner and even the – normally great – Charles Dance can’t really add any old-school charm to the proceeding. 

However, when I sat down to watch this, I was hardly expecting major character development and meaningful story arcs – I would have settled for some decent vampire versus werewolves action.  I didn’t even get that!  The action scenes are possibly some of the worst ever in modern movies.  Twenty years ago they might have been considered something special, but times have changed and people are expecting something a little different.  But, again, I could have taken dull action – what I really got was ‘stupid’ action!  If you think about any of the major fight scenes they make no sense whatsoever.  The characters do things that are so ridiculous that it makes all those old horror films where the blonde leading lady doesn’t bother killing the killer when she has the upper hand absolutely believable and inspired.  I’ve never seen a more poorly-trained army of vampires who gets wiped out like they’re ‘normal’ humans.  I suppose at least they don’t ‘sparkle’ in sunlight.

On the plus side, it does shed some light on some questions raised in previous instalments regarding characters who just – sort of – disappeared from the franchise, but apart from that, there’s really not much here that you haven’t seen before.  I hear there’s an ‘Underworld 6’ in the pipeline – I’ll probably watch it, but this instalment has severely lowered my expectations towards the franchise.

5/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back

A Beautiful Mind – Much better than I expected

I never watched ‘A Beautiful Mind’ at its time of release as I wasn’t a massive fan of Russell Crowe and I didn’t know what the film was about.  For me, this was the ultimate example of never judging a book by its cover.  I still proclaim that the cover of the DVD looks pretty dull and gives no real hint as to what the film was about.  Yes, I knew that Crowe won an Oscar for his performance and that it was a story about a guy who did stuff, but nothing about (the little) I heard about it really grabbed me.  However, now nearly twenty years later, I finally got round to seeing what all the fuss was about.  And I’m actually quite glad I did.

I guess my overriding predictions of ‘A Beautiful Mind’ was that it was a love story and nothing else.  However, the film is actually based on the real life story of John Nash (Crowe), an American code-breaker who helped the US Government decipher Russian messages during the Cold War, making the whole thing more akin to a spy thriller than a romantic drama.  I’m not saying that just because it’s about spies you’re going to get a load of high-octane James Bond car chases and gadgets.  What you have here is a far more realistic take on the profession.  We see how Nash is ‘recruited’ by the Government and the way he uses his gifts with patterns and numbers in order to help them out.  Of course there’s always going to be a reasonable helping of romantic sub-plot and here it comes in the form of Jennifer Connolly who becomes his wife throughout the course of the story.  But, in my opinion (now!), it’s primarily a spy story.

I won’t go into too much detail regarding the rest of the plot as there are most likely some things that you won’t see coming.  Or, at least from my perspective as someone who knew nothing about the film before watching, I certainly didn’t predict what would happen.  But, I do recommend watching it, even if you’re not a fan of spy-stuff.  If nothing else then Crowe’s performance is definitely worth a look.  You can see why he got his Oscar as he does put everything he has into the portrayal of a man who, by his own admission, isn’t that likeable and yet you want to see what happens to him.  Ed Harris and Christopher Plummer should also get mentions as they both provide integral parts of the story.  I know Jennifer Connolly was good too, but I felt she had little to do other than be Nash’s long-suffering partner throughout the story.  It is a kind of long film and I think perhaps around fifteen to twenty minutes of the final act could probably have been trimmed to make it a tighter film.  It may take me another twenty years to watch ‘A Beautiful Mind’ again, but I’m pretty sure one day I will.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

The Commuter – Liam Neeson hits people on a train

I know that ‘shared universes’ are very popular these days with film franchises, so I’m rapidly coming to the conclusion that, along with the ‘Marvel Cinematic Universe,’ there’s also a ‘Liam Neeson Shared Universe.’ In this dimension Liam Neeson just wanders from one situation where he has to fight people to rescue his family.  If you’re familiar with the film ‘Taken’ (which kind of reignited Neeson’s career as an elder action hero) you’ll know he’s more than competent at saving the day in middle age.  In that he had to rescue his daughter (and beat many people up along the way).  This was followed by the inevitable sequels and some other films that were basically ‘Taken,’ but with a different title. ‘The Commuter’ is one of these.  However, just because it’s effectively the same movie with a different coat of paint doesn’t make it bad.

There’s not an awful lot I can say about this film that I haven’t summed up in the title – Liam Neeson hits people on a train.  It’s pretty much your standard action movie and by no means perfect.  Whenever he’s on the train (which is most of the time!) the outside world speeding by looks severely computer-generated.  He gets into fights and takes punishment that would put down a Terminator, there’s an attempt at adding moments that you won’t see coming (and you’ll definitely see them coming) and parts of the plot that just probably wouldn’t happen in real life.

Yes, for all its numerous faults, it actually kept me very entertained.  It’s not overly-long and if you’re either a fan of Liam Neeson’s ‘Taken-type’ movies, or just modern action films in general, then this is something to eat popcorn to.  Seeing that Liam Neeson has now beat people up on planes and now trains, I’m guessing the logical progression for his career will be for him to find himself trapped in the back of an Uber with a terrorist at the wheel and he must fight for his survival (and most likely his family’s, too).  And, I’m guessing I’ll probably find some enjoyment in that, too (I have low standards!).

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Vanilla Sky – More ‘Lynchian’ than love

It’s hard to imagine that in 2001 a love story starring Tom Cruise, Cameron Diaz and Penelope Cruz was actually considered a Box Office failure.  But then that’s because it wasn’t a love story.  However, much of the marketing that surrounded it concentrated on the ‘relationship aspect’ of the film, lulling people into thinking this was what they would be getting.  Therefore, by the time they had left the cinema and their heads had stopped spinning, they possibly were among the many who simply described ‘Vanilla Sky’ as a ‘mess.’ Yes, the story is centres around a print billionaire (Tom Cruise’s) slowly falling in love with a struggling artist (Penelope Cruz) while at the same time trying to fend off his existing lover (Cameron Diaz).  So far, nothing particularly out of the ordinary.  However, once the film gets going (and I say this referring to much that comes in the second half, as the first half sets everything up without giving too much away as to what’s about to come) things start taking a turn for the weird.

Dreams are mentioned more than once and that’s a good analogy as to how the film progresses.  Things happens that appear a little random, leaving the audience to wonder whether there may ever be some form of supernatural influence involved.  The story chops and changes and deliberately leaves the viewer feeling pretty disorientated, much like you’d feel upon waking up from a particularly vivid dream.  Naturally, this form of story-telling doesn’t make for an easy ride when it comes to understanding the narrative.  I can see it leaving some people a little confused (it took me a couple of watches to actually ‘get’ the film entirely!).

I mentioned ‘Lynchian’ in my title.  This refers to film-maker David Lynch, who’s famous for his weird, surreal, completely NON classic Hollywood narrative way of telling a story.  He, like ‘Vanilla Sky,’ likes to leave a fair element of the story up to the viewers’ interpretation, rather than spoon-feeding them every plot point.  Therefore, this is most likely a film that you’re going to find yourself discussing with friends after a viewing (although, in my opinion, ‘Vanilla Sky’ actually gives you a lot more answers than the average David Lynch film!).

If you know what you’re in for I think people who are in the mood for a particularly weird and slightly disturbing type of film will quite enjoy this.  You definitely have to be in the mood.  I’ve seen it a fair few times, but, if I’m simply craving car chases and shoot-outs, then this isn’t the film I put on.  I think if anything sums it up best it’s Cameron Diaz’s performance in ‘Vanilla Sky’ – on the surface, sweet and frothy.  However, dig deep and you’ll find dark and creepy (and that’s not an insult – she’s really good in this!).

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Romancing the Stone – Big hair and bigger snakes

Someone told me that ‘Romancing the Stone’ was actually a romantic comedy, rather than an action movie.  Yeah, I guess there’s an element of ‘romance’ in as much as the two lead characters are male and female, therefore if you even know what a ‘film’ is you’ll realise there’s going to be an element of two people getting together in the midst of an outlandish adventure.  However, I still always see this film as an ‘action’ movie, rather than luvvy-duvvy stuff!

A writer (Kathleen Turner) finds her sister has been kidnapped in a South American country and sets off to rescue her (or rather just pay the desired ransom).  Once in the jungle territory she finds herself woefully out of her depth, but luckily she seems to bump into the only other American in the continent (Michael Douglas) who is skilled in the ways of jungle survival.  I can’t quite recall which came first – this, or ‘Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.  Either way, they seem to co-exist in the same universe when it comes to tones (although Temple of Doom strays into the supernatural, as opposed to a drugs cartel, but for the early part of the film they’re near identical in terms of tone). 

Not just do our bickering heroes have each other and the terrain they’re stranded in, they also have Danny DeVito’s slimy little character hot on their heels, not to mention a tonne of drug lords and, of course, the kidnappers.  So there’s plenty of time for conflict to come into play here.  Personally, I think the film has stood up to the tests of time in terms of action and entertainment.  There’s clearly plenty of chemistry between the two leads and the film’s a lot of fun.  However, you can tell it was filmed in the eighties (not just by Douglas’ ‘mullet’) due to how the woman is basically portrayed as a ‘damsel in distress’ type character and the man is clearly in charge at all times.  Then you also have the stereotypical South American characters who are all shady (at best!) or simply drug dealers.  If you can get over the fact that this was just how films were made thirty years ago then you should find this a fun film to watch on a lazy Sunday afternoon (and make sure you see the ‘full’ version rather than the one that’s been ‘cut for TV’ as it contains a lot more ‘croc action!’).

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one