Street Kings

I finally had a chance to catch Street Kings, which I took a pass on originally based mainly on the trailer, but recently a friend has convinced me otherwise. Appearing in theaters just before the arrival of numerous summer blockbusters, Street Kings certainly serves its purpose of bridging the gap between the winter and summer releases.

One area Street Kings certainly impresses is its cast list. With Keanu Reeves taking the charge as Detective Tom Ludlow, Street Kings provides a tale of violence and gore entirely from the police perspective. Rather than a cop-and-robber story, Street Kings focuses mainly on the rivalry between police members. Reeves come as close as the dictionary definition of vigilante, with the twist that no one has any oversight. What ensues is almost constant action, as Reeves goes from one gunfight to the next, with each one being equally brutal. There’s no romanticizing of killing and death here - there simply is a lot of it. Although the plot flows smoothly enough, offering just a tad more than the minimum to avoid feelings of manufactured action sequences, the story is certainly a rehash of previous titles. No surprises found here.

Other characters stand well enough on their own, with the most notable being Forest Whitaker as Captain Jack Wander, Ludlow’s boss. Unfortunately, everyone else is easily forgettable and hardly developed. In fact, the other three members in Ludlow’s squad are basically identical. Ludlow’s girlfriend falls in the same line as those three guys - forgettable.

Even with its shortfalls, I am reluctant to criticize Street Kings too much. It makes no excuse for what it’s about, offering plenty of mindless action, perfect for those days when you and some buddies just want to watch some solid gunfights without thinking too much.

Pros: Guns and realism
Cons: Not going to be make you question cops and duty
Conclusion: Don’t expect too much and the respectable cast should win you over.
Score: 3/5

IMDB

Apologies

There is simply no excuse for the lack of updates. The reason is certainly not due to my decrease in consumption of media entertainment, so I will attempt to rectify that with more timely posts (and perhaps some back-reviewing of notable titles). For future updates, I will continue to use the 5 point system, but for now I will attempt to do without the half-point increments. After reading thru some of my past reviews, I realize that I am still disinclined to use the top 5/5 rating, settling rather on the 4.5 level. Another change is that I will include links to the appropriate page on IMDB (The Internet Movie Database) whenever possible for easy access to complete actor/actress/production/release information.

Finally, to reiterate the purpose of this blog, I wish only to jot down some initial reactions to some things I have watched to hopefully provide some alternative options to the much-hyped productions. A lot of good media slips through the cracks, if simply due to a lack of funds for advertisements and billboards. Thus, tripe-A movies such as those from Pixar or Marvel will never show up here. I also keep my mind open regarding foreign films, in particular with an emphasis on those coming out of Asia, so those will also receive plenty of coverage here.

Sunshine

From the start, Sunshine looks like another disaster movie, in particular Armageddon. So if you're looking for a feel-good movie about how the ingenuity of humans can save the human race, you are in the wrong place.

Sunshine starts off while a team of eight astronauts are already on their way toward the sun and lets you pick up the background story as the film progresses. Basically, 50 years from now, the sun is dying and a team has been sent to re-ignite the sun by guiding a huge chunk of fissionable matter into the sun's core. Sunshine is at heart a science fiction film and so has many conventions of that genre, such as techno jargon, space suits, and a talking computer system. The grim setting, as well as that of the mission, is conveyed very well, and the gravity of the mission starts to set in as the crew send back video clips to those they left behind on Earth. What starts out as a simple plot begins to grow in complexity as life onboard the space vessel begins to be fleshed out. A notable device used here is the inclusion of a ship psychologist, who acts as a partial narrator during the first half of the film to tell of the state of mind of the crew.

As the reality of traveling in space for several years begins to take a toll on the crew's enthusiasm, the unexpected begins to occur. The conflict in the film seems to stem from the cruelty of outer space and the fight of the crew to stay alive amidst this harsh environment. But almost at once, the producers appear to have taken liberal licenses in drawing out a plausible future event. This detracts from the immersion the film provides so well and really requires a suspension of disbelief for the movie to be enjoyable. For example, with constant communication with headquarters back on Earth, why is the crew so easily disheartened? Another question may be, since the ship practically runs itself, what have the crew done with several years of their time in space? This latter point sticks out near the end when there's a discussion of the different roles each member plays and so who are the more vital members. But with so much time on their hands, it would be expected that all of them should be equally knowledgable about the spacecraft.

Halfway through the film, the tone suddenly changes. It is as if two different directors shot the two sections and mashed them together. The second half is horrendously bad! Not only do the plethora of bad sci-fi film cliches appear simultaneously, but the film suddenly switches into a thriller genre. I don't get into the specifics of how that occurs, but trust me when I say that the plot device used for the switch is pretty ludicrous. With the two contrasting tones comes two separate views of humankind, one where man is good and human will will always triumph and one where man's basic nature is inherently brutal primitive. Which is the correct view? The film seems to suggest both camps, but in proposing the second, negative view, some of the characters starts to "go nuts." But I ask this: if the fate of mankind is at stake, would the crew not give up all personal desires to complete the mission? Or more likely, would each member of the crew not have been tested to ensure maximum compatibility with each other before the mission launched? The producers surely didn't read over the scripts before production and the end product is a lot of potential that led nowhere.

Pros: Good premise; some likeable characters; good buildup of environment
Cons: The plot; the unrealistic aspects of the film; the entire second half
Conclusion: Watch the movie late at night so when the bad part comes on you're already too tired to care...
Score: 3/5

The Book of Three Han - The Chapter of Jumong/ 주몽 (Joo-Mong)

If you wondered why this space has not received an update in a while, Jumong is the reason. Spanning an epic 81 episodes (60 originally, but extended due to its popularity) of over an hour each, finishing Jumong is no small feat! But aside from a few quibbles, this is a series that drama lovers should not miss.

Set in about 50 BCE, the writers took great artistic license in transforming the many myths surrounding the Goguryeo kingdom's founder Jumong into a semi-plausible plotline that's both intricate and entertaining. Starting off from Jumong's father, the story takes us to a time when Korea was divided into small nations and utterly under the influence of the nearby Han dynasty of China, who are depicted as the villains of the time. As Jumong grows up to take on his father's mission to drive out the Han and unite Korea, he meets many perculiar individuals who swears their allegiance to him. This grand story about the founding of a nation is done with style. With twists and turns all over the place, I always felt like I had to watch just one more scene. Saying anything more would probably give something away, so let's leave it at that and proclaim the plot a "plus".

Next up are the characters, which often times make or break a series. Fortunately, there were no bad actors, which would stick out like a sore thumb in the series' environment of high caliber acting. The many characters, as well as the important support characters, were all filled by awesome actors/actresses that knew what they were doing. In historical dramas such as Jumong, talking's a large part of what's on screen, leaving the characters to fend for themselves, with no special effects or crazy camera-work to save them. Thus, it is great to see that Jumong got it right. In fact, the only complaint about characters is that the actor playing Jumong isn't expressive enough. Sometimes I felt like being told what he's feeling rather than inferring it from his expression. Character development took on logical routes, and needless to say, the villains in Jumong were exceptionally good and appropriate.

The only real complaint I have is that there were not enough extras. After watching some historical dramas from China, it's hard to go back to seeing a hundred or so soldiers and pretending that it's an army of thousands. This problem didn't occur in much of the series since Jumong employed mostly guerilla tactics, but the few times massive battles took place it was hard on the eyes.

The use of music cues and signature moments (such as Jumong doing this impressive rapid-fire shooting technique) always kept the excitement up. Suspenseful moments tended to be resolved quickly, and almost as a defiance to popular Korean romantic dramas, Jumong kept romance to a bare minimum. There were some moments where the audience may feel like two people should be together, but Jumong is a tale of brotherhood and manlihood, and there usually isn't much time for romance after all the strategizing and fighting.

With Jumong, Korea has shown that it is at the forefront of television drama production. This is definitely one point in favor of the current Korean culture invasion and I can only say, "well earned, Jumong".

Pros: Captivating plotline; good acting; believable characters; good sound mixing
Cons: Bland fighting; questionable pseudo-realism; little basis in history; little emotional attachment
Conclusion: Everyone has something to gain from here, so make time and watch Jumong!
Score: 4/5

Fox Volant of the Snowy Mountain /雪山飛狐

Another year, another Jin Yong novel adaptation. This time around, the story is about Hu Fei, who father was killed when he was a child. As he grows up in the martial arts world, he sets out to seek revenge. But who is his true enemy? Of course, the story would not be complete without an ancient treasure thrown into the mix. I can't say I've read the original books, but based on this TV series, the plot's fairly generic.

So what keeps me coming back? The cast themselves. Some of the acting is fairly good (mostly veterans Alex Fong and Anthony Wong), but it's fun to have some recognizable faces such as Gillian Chung of Twins fame. The one big problem with the setting being in ancient times is that bad acting is immediately visible, and these moments do occur. Another potent problem is that the story gets repetitive when the same characters are on-screen scene after scene. Good guy, bad guy, rinse and repeat. This was especially problematic near the end, and I feel that the series would have benefited from a tighter editing. Forty episodes of this quality is simply too much to bear.

Another huge complaint I have is the conclusion of the series. I understand that the original novels ended in a climatic battle, and the scriptwriters have decided to fill in the gaps here. It was a good intention badly executed. The later chunks are so vastly different from earlier portions that I seriously wonder whether the later scripts were hashed out by the TV studio executives.

Despite all these problems, Fox Volant is not a bad series. It took some liberties with an established story and took a few wrong turns. But the core of the source material is still here, and the final product is an enjoyable series. Just don't pay too much attention while watching it.

Pros: Wuxia; good emphasis on the martial arts styles; swordplay
Cons: Repetitive; young, untested actors; hacked-on ending; not memorable
Conclusion: Fun series to watch if you have the time.
Score: 3/5

The Painted Veil

I like to think that I have a somewhat specialized taste in films. I even go as far as to imagine that my taste is refined to such a point that I can categorize films simply by reading its synopsis and watching the trailer. But then films like The Painted Veil come along, and I'm at a loss as to what to make of it.

Two things jumped out at me immediately: that the setting is in the early periods of modern China and Edward Norton is in it. After deciding that one indeed outweigh the other, I was pleasantly surprised at the gentle message the film depicts. Norton plays a very quiet doctor who volunteers to visit China to help with a malaria outbreak while Naomi Watts plays a naive girl who marries Norton to spite her family. When isolated from the English society they were used to, the newlyweds must learn to cope with each other and discover what it truly means to be married.

Norton and Watts do an admirable job at their performances, although this may not be entirely obvious to the causal observer. The film takes on a slow, walking pace, drawing the audience in. Even as the epidemic claims lives in the village, the feel of the film never changes. It is this slow development that proves surprising when the audience suddenly finds that they have established a bond with the characters.

The backdrop accompanying all the action (if you can call it that) is where The Pained Veil ultimately shines. The vast rice fields and the rolling hills convey an excellent sense of the setting, of the lives of the people that possibly existed during this time. I must commend the producers for not following stereotypical white-supremacy views as it makes the film much more realistic.

However, The Painted Veil is not for everyone. This is a very small story, an insignificant story about a couple in the middle of nowhere. There are no world-shattering events here. This is a simple story about two people living together. If you're looking for an epic plot, look elsewhere.

Pros: Great visuals; believable; Anthony Wong makes an appearance; Edward Norton speaks much better Chinese than Tom Cruise (in Misison Impossible 3)
Cons: A greatly simplified look at the relationship between two people; no mass appeal
Conclusion: Prepare for an artistic movie (everything opposite of an action film) - let the characters draw you in and you may find that they have something to offer.
Score: 4/5

Seraphim Falls

Seraphim Falls is something of a peculiarity. The underlying plot is very simple - Carver (Liam Neeson) is hunting down Gideon (Pierce Brosnan) for something Gideon did during the Civil War several years ago. The film attempts to keep suspense by feeding what occurred to the characters in the past in bits and pieces. This works for the most part, but it does tend to get annoying.

The entire story is set amidst a backdrop of the Western frontier, with huge expanses filled with sparsely populated towns a common sight. Western movies have not been a popular genre lately, and this puts Seraphim Falls in a uniquely king-of-the-hill position. The film uses a wide variety of shots such that the audience feels like they're traveling through the new frontier with the main characters. But at its heart, this is a tale of revenge and many elements should be familar to the modern audience.

Both Neeson and Brosnan deliver performances befitting their character. I was very surprised at how well Brosnan fit into the Civil War era (his unshaven beard has a large part to do with this), especially well seeing him brings up images of him in the James Bond films. Neeson, on the other hand, gave the impression of a very stiff character where I would have liked to see more life put into the character.

Overall, this film takes itself very seriously, so audiences intending to watch this should make sure to understand the themes of revenge and the duties of a man in this era. With this mindset at hand, an audience will find that there is a strange beauty in all the senseless killing on screen.

Pros: It's a Western!
Cons: Nothing novel about the storytelling here. Ending's a little on the pseud0-supernatural side.
Conclusion: This is a film for anyone who wants to watch Nature with guns and maybe learn some survival techniques at the same time.
Score: 3.5/5