Movie Review - I Am Legend

It is the first week of January, time to kick off the new year with a new movie.

I Am Legend is an interesting movie. All the previews and trailers are a little bit cryptic, and dont really offer a lot about what the story or plot is. Apparently it is a remake of an old film, which was based on a book, which unbeknownst to me at the time of watching the film, is apparently widely recognised as one of the most influential horror novels of recent times.



Without this knowledge that the book was about monsters or vampire/zombie like creatures, I went into the film thinking it was going to be a bit of an action/disaster movie, really in a similar vein to movies like Independence Day, or Deep Impact. This idea was based on what was shown in the trailers, particularly the action scenes of the city, the planes bombing bridges, and the frantic mob.

This view was not really accurate. I Am Legend is really a horror movie. All of the setup and the story about Robert Neville being the last man on earth is really just a vehicle to provide the horror material. While I did have some preconceived ideas about the plot, I went into the film with quite an open mind. Had I been less open, I would have felt quite misled and ripped off to an extent, because I think the marketing of this movie is inaccurate. It really is just a horror movie.

The most disappointing thing is that the premise of the story - that almost all of the 6 billion humans on the planet are wiped out by a virus that mutated from a supposed cure for cancer - leads to plenty of interesting ideas and issues, but none of these are explored in any detail. The scenes that are shown about the 'past' (which is really set in about 2009, the majority of the film is set in 2012), are really interesting and pose many questions. How did this virus come about? What happened to make things go wrong? How did Robert Neville get through the initial onslaught? How did he set up his fortress? What is happening outside New York? All these issues would be enough to fill a whole movie in itself, and really I Am Legend could be a bit of a sequel, as the makers really leave the audience to assume a whole lot about what happened between the initial disaster and the time we begin following Neville.

The story that is followed, is not really well developed. We follow Neville on his day to day life in the new world, and watch his attempts to find a cure for the virus. We learn that he was a Colonel in the US Army, and had been charged with trying to deal with the problem in its early stages. His efforts to find a cure dont really get much attention, or go into much detail. Again, there is not much attention devoted to Neville's character development either. Really, it is all about the monsters.

While there are some flaws in the story development, and I was disappointed that it was not what I was expecting, the horror scenes are very well done. This movie is scary. And it is scary on a number of levels. It is scary due to the downright, in your face horror of watching Neville being chased by these monsters. But it is also scary due to what I think was the very real way in which it portrayed the world in a situation where things went bad. The film allows you to feel what it would be like if everything went bottoms up in a big way, and it does not leave you with a feeling of optimism. The film uses all the classic horror techniques to keep you on the edge of your seat, and there are plenty of times you will find yourself jumping.

I Am Legend has very impressive sound and visuals. The mutants emit a horrible screaming, groaning sound, and the animation is not too bad. The images of New York deserted and overgrown with weeds are quite spectacular, but some of the CGI of some animals looks a bit cheap.

All in all, I enjoyed the movie despite it not meeting my original expectations. There are so many issues that could have been explored but weren't, which is a bit disappointing, but maybe they could make a prequel to address some of these?

The Good

The horror scenes are really well done, this is a scary movie
Spectacular sound and visuals

The Not-so-good
Disappointing and under-developed plot
Many issues not addressed in detail, or at all
Did not reach potential

Score

6 out of 10 - not a bad film, but did not reach its potential

Movie Review - Bee Movie

Bee Movie is Jerry Seinfeld's latest project, and one which he has been working on for a number of years. It is a Dreamworks animated comedy following the story of Barry B. Benson, a young upstart fresh out of school. I saw this film at the drive-in, which was pretty cool, and something I havent done in a long time.

As you can expect with this sort of movie these days, it was a very polished, very flashy, visually impressive affair. Sometimes such family movies can lack in story, and in entertainment value for mum and dad, but that is not the case with Bee Movie. The writing is excellent, and the scenario of a bee entering the human world leads to lots of interesting considerations. And exploring these small details and awkward situations is exactly what Jerry Seinfeld is very good at.

The cast is first class, with plenty of familiar voices being present. Seinfeld basically plays himself as Barry B Benson, and his exasperated antics are classif Jerry. The writing is funny. I laughed out loud plenty, and I think there would be more in it for repeat viewings. Again, there are comparisons with Seinfeld, particularly Barry's relationship with his parents. I love Seinfeld, and his fingerprints are all over this movie. If you like Seinfeld, you ought to check it out.

The story does lag a bit at the end, but hang in there for a very good lawyer joke near the end.

I would definitely buy this one on DVD, and I would probably pay $15 for it, I think I could watch this movie another 2 or 3 times and still enjoy it.

Movie review - Death Proof

'I used to think Tarantino was pretty cool'

'Kill Bill was good, wasnt it?'

'Yeah, Pulp Fiction was a top movie too'

These are just some of the things you might find yourself saying if you are unlucky enough to sit through the agony of Death Proof. Perhaps ole man Quentin was being a bit clever with this title, because the audience will be amazed that THEY haven't died after the non-stop, excruciating agony of this movie.

Wow, it is really that bad.

I had seen the shorts for this movie on TV and I thought it looked ok - not great, but not horrible. Ole man Quentin has made some pretty awesome movies. Kill Bill and Pulp Fiction are both up there as some of my faves. However, I was sadly mistaken.

Kill Bill and Pulp Fiction show good character development and have twisting and turning plots delivered in (somewhat) unique and interesting ways. The over the top violence and swearing make for a bit of a fun ride, but ultimately it is the stories that make them great films. Pulp Fiction is a wildly twisted, tangled web of storylines and people, and the way it is cut - with the various characters getting their own chapters - keeps the storytelling interesting and surprising. The Kill Bill films use a classic revenge story, and also use chapters to dynamic effect.

The same features are sadly lacking in Death Proof.

The premise of Death Proof is that Stuntman Mike, played by Kurt 'I thought you were dead' Russell, stalks and terrorises groups of young women. There are two groups of victims, and each group is given their own section in the movie - with the second group being targeted 14 months after the first. Similarly to Kill Bill, the story is really about revenge, with the second group seeking vengeance on Mike for the unknown-to-them murders of the first group.

This story is not in itself bad. It makes for some creepy viewing as Stuntman Mike gets close to his targets and then moves in for the kill. It certainly came as a surprise to me when I realised that Mike was in fact a bad guy. I dont know if this was because the story was so great, or because I was missing the point.

The massive problem with this movie is that it is overloaded with meaningless, boring, inconsequential dialog. The first group of girls in particular - led by local radio announcer 'Jungle Julia' (played by Sydney Poitier) - are inherently unlikeable. Their very limited conversations cover off on drugs, the need to score, and talking about sex, all in a very low brow and uninteresting way. I dont think I am a 'high brow' person, but seriously these women were boring, boring, boring, and I just did not give a monkey's about what happened to them. So when Mike did the deed, I didn't feel any sympathy or sadness for them.

The second group of girls sees the introduction of Zoe Bell playing herself. Zoe was apparently the stand-in/stunt woman for Uma Thurman in Kill Bill. It is glaringly obvious that Ole Man Quentin has the hots for Ole Zoe. And it is the self-indulgent wankfest that follows that really breaks the camel's back for this film. Again, the dialog in the latter half of the film is trashy and boring, and Ole Man Quentin takes every opportunity to put Zoe on a pedestal. He also throws in all sorts of obscure movie references, as if to further impress on everyone that he has an encyclopedic knowledge of all cult and underground cinema. This does not impress.

Ultimately, after watching Death Proof I was left with the feeling that maybe Ole Man Quentin is not as good as I thought he was. The failings of this movie highlight some aspects of his previous work that I didnt really think about before. For instance, the non-stop idol worshipping of Zoe Bell really seems like the desperate, self-indulgent attempts of a rich, loser director to get his rocks off. Sound familiar? Well it is a lot like Kill Bill (and Pulp Fiction to an extent) really in this regard, but with Zoe filling in for Uma.

To be balanced, this film was not presented in the way it was originally intended. This was part of a double feature that paid tribute to 'grindhouse' cinema. Ole Man Quentin simply added extra time to this film and made it its own feature. Big mistake.

I think Margaret Pomeranz summed this up pretty well when she said: 'It's sort of like a male wet dream, you know, and where they're talking about, you know, the sex with the guy the night before, constantly. Every scene, every sequence goes on way too long. You want to slap him across the jaws and say, "Get your act together and cut all that bit out" '. I could not agree more, and will definitely think twice before investing my hard earned in another QT flick.

Avoid it at all costs

Would I buy it on DVD: No way, not even for a buck

Movie Review - Rogue

So I havent seen too many Aussie films this year. There have been a few good Aussie films in recent times, such as Wolf Creek and Jindabyne. There have also been some this year that I have not yet seen, but that look good, like Noise, and Club Land. But, I havent been out to see any yet.

Rogue, which is a thriller/horror/attack of the killer crocs film, will be the first. You have to love a good psychotic animal movie. There arent enough of them are there? Walking in, my expectations were not high, I was just happy to kick back and enjoy whatever came along.

Rogue ended up being a pretty good affair. Nothing great, but entertaining enough. There are plenty of familiar faces in the cast, including Radha Mitchell, Steven Curry, and John Jarrett. All play their parts very well. The characters in this movie are the only really believeable part of it, and this gives support to the feelings of despair and angst that arise when our heroes are being hunted by the ravenous beast.

The story and the action were good, following the typical scary movie formula: 'no, dont do that, no, not there, WHY DONT YOU JUST RUN!!!!'. Because the characters are believeable, I found myself quickly drawn into the story, wanting them to make it, wanting them to survive, willing them to run. This is not Oscar winning stuff, but there have been plenty of horror movies where you just dont care about the protagonists. This is not the case in Rogue.

The story basically follows an American writer who is in town to get material for his holiday writing. He joins a river tour, which goes wrong after they spot a flare in a remote location and try to investigate. They run aground on a tiny bank in the river and soon learn that a giant rogue croc is on the prowl. The party then tries in vein to escape before high tide, and a number of them are picked off by the hungry reptile.

The set-up and the plot provide plently of material for the tense moments in the film. While the story is not particularly believeable, it is good fun, and it is scary. There are some particularly hairy moments where our hero finds himself face to face with the beast in its underground den. Eventually some members of the party make their way to safety, but it goes without saying that their numbers are severly depleted.

The special effects in the film did, at times, lead to some raised eyebrows. There arent a lot of them, and the director made good use of 'fear of the unknown' to build suspense. They develop a lot of tension without needing to show anything much. We know there is something out there, but we dont know what, or where, or when it will attack. This is a very effective technique, which both leads to great suspense, but also avoids overuse of the special effects. Some of the effects were pretty funny. But I guess that is what you get when you are trying to create an enormously oversized croc.

Overall it was a good movie. I enjoyed it, but dont think I would watch it over and over again.

Would I buy it on DVD? Maybe, but not for more than $10

What to buy?

Well, after much umming and ahhing I made a decision.

Elements and Ultra.

A&G I think is too expensive for what it is, and co-signers i didnt really like the look of much. Plus I have set a target now of trying to get all the Kouzmanoff co-signers cards, so that could be fun and interesting.

So, stay tuned for a couple of box breaks coming up soon....

bad religion and strung out 7 Nov 07

Went to see bad religion and strung out at the hordern

Second or third time I have seen Strung Out, after seeing them at Livid in 2003, and then again at the Gaelic Club a year or two ago. But it was the first time I have seen Bad Religion, and I am not sure when was the last time they were in Australia , but I wonder if they will ever come again. So, it was a must see show.

I have to say straight up that Strung Out were disappointing again. I am really starting to think they are more of a studio band than anything else. On record they are tight as, and the vocals are included in this. Live, the band is also tight as, but the vocals are really, really bad. I gave them the benefit of the doubt after seeing them before, thinking that perhaps it was the end of a tour, and his voiced was overworked, but after three times I can now say that I am unimporessed. They are such a good studio band, but no good live for me. They did play a good mix of stuff, old and new, but the vocals ruined it for me.

Bad Religion on the other hand were absolutley fantastic. They played stacks of new stuff, and plenty of older stuff too. This gig made me realise that I really need to get into the old stuff more. I know some of the bigger songs, but they played a lot that i dont know. The songs that I did know were awesome. The sound quality, vocal harmonies and drumming were all first class, and the crowd was right into it. All in all it was an awesome bloody show, and I will be there for sure if we are lucky enough for them to come back again. Hopefully the next show wont be on a Wednesday.

What to Buy: Part 3 - Topps Allen and Ginter

Third up, the massive hit for Topps this year, Allen and Ginter. Based on a card design from the 1800s, this set not only recongises baseball players, but other prominent sportspeople, politicians and actors etc. It also has an insert set of Flags of the World. This product has apparently been huge in the states, and heaps of people are way into it. These boxes go for about $100 to $120 US. This is perhaps attributable to the huge demand for these cards.




I have to say I am not all that fussed by the base set. While they are obviously going for the traditional Allen and Ginter look, I am not a huge fan. It doesnt have the same appeal as a beat up old raggedy 1887 card:


Part of Allen & Ginter's big deal is that they produced cards across a whole range of things and people. These honoured famous military figures, sportsmen, and 'American Editors'! This is kind of cute I guess, but not really what I want in a set, I'm in it for the baseballers, not the history lesson.


So in the 2007 Allen and Ginter, rather than getting a card in a tobacco packet, you get a box of 24 packs of 6 cards. The breakdown includes:

• 2 Autos, Relics, Printing Plates, A&G Originals or Rip Cards per box
• there are 274 veterans and 31 rookies in the set
• there are also 25 'Historic Figures' and 20 'World Champions'
• Dick Perez original 1/1s - 30 in all, available in the Rip Cards
• 30 Allen & Ginter autos hand numbered to 10 in red pen
• 40 mini cards that can only be found in Rip Cards
• Parallel Mini cards printed on Wood - only found in rip cards, all 1/1
• inserts: one per pack out of 'Mini Flags' (50 flags of the world, 1 in 12 packs); 30 Dick Perez sketches reproduced (1 per pack); Cut Signatures featuring ten world leaders, all 1/1; framed auto cards (at least 60 competitors from the base set, including 30 non-baseball players, on mini cards framed to the standard size); framed relic cards including 15 non-baseball players; bought back original A&G cards framed to the standard size; box loader (1 per box) can be 1 of 15 original style N43 cards, a relic N43 numbered to 25, a N43 auto numbered to 10
• a whole heap of other crazy mini inserts and others I cant be bothered with.

Therein lies my problem with this set. Too much. Too much in the way of crazy inserts. Too much in terms of non-baseball. Too much to make it possible to collect them all. Too much of a gimmick. I dont care about a Bruce Lee card, or a George Washington DNA card. Sure they may be great rips because they will pick up a ton on ebay, but it is just boring to me. Is it just over-hyped? I think so, and I think it is a bit artificial in terms of collectability.

This is something that irks me about cards at the moment. Companies trying to make things collectable. To me things should have an attraction based on some personal connection to the card. Popularity should be related to a personal feeling towards the subject of the card, not simply liking something because it is popular, or because it is a short print. I am more of a set collector I think, and even if I dont end up collecting a whole set, I like to be able to do so if I want to. And I want the cards to be related to baseball. Not to politics, or acting, or flags! Allen and Ginter seems to way out for me I think.

So, I think I have made a decision.

NO!!! to Topps Allen and Ginter. Certainly not at more than a hundred bux a box.