Pacific Rim

Posted on July 11, 2013 at 6:00 pm

I know there’s only one question you have about this movie, and the answer is yes. If you ever wanted to see a movie with giant monsters battling giant robots, this is it.

And if you ever wanted to see a movie that is nothing but giant monsters battling giant robots, this is that movie.

Not much more to say after that. And thankfully, director Guillermo del Toro understands that. I don’t remember ever seeing a movie that gets to the point so quickly. Less than a minute into the running time there’s a monster attacking a city and cars falling off a bridge and moments later, we get, you guessed it, a monster fighting a robot. And it’s pretty much monsters and robots from then on.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. These are some mighty fine monsters and robots.

So, here’s the deal. There are monsters. We don’t know where they came from but they arrive through some sort of “Thor”-like portal under the Pacific Ocean. Its cheeky conceit is that the dinosaurs were a sort of failed advance team and the monsters had to wait until humans evolved and deteriorated the environment until it was Goldilocks-just-right for them.

These are very, very big monsters known by the Japanese term “kaiju.” Del Toro loves monsters, and these are absolutely fantastic. Like Ray Harryhausen, del Toro and his character design team understand that we need monsters to be at the same time very strange and very familiar, impossible but possible. The structure of bone and muscle and teeth has to make sense to us. They have to be able to support their frames and their movements have to feel weighty and powerful. These monsters are masterfully designed, marvelous and scary. There are blue, glowing tentacles and massive jaws with pointed teeth. They attack cities like Godzilla’s gigantic brother, stomping and chomping.

What’s cool here is the sheer scale of the things. Over and over, it take your breath away.

At first, the humans think it is a one-time attack. But then there are others. And the earth has to recalibrate all notions of what is possible, all priorities. They have to find a way to fight the kaiju. They have to build robots the size of the Empire State Building.

The robots look great, with ninja heads and believable scuffs and dents. Some of what they do does not seem physically possible — how does that running and jumping thing work? — but mostly their movements seem to make sense and feel believably powerful and weighty. What goes on inside, not so much. We can build robots the size of a skyscraper but the arms and legs have to be operated manually, like a kind of gym stair-stepper? And what is this mumbo-jumbo about how the pairs who operate them have to be able to “drift” — meld their neural pathways so they can access each other’s thoughts? Oh, well, let’s get to the fights!

Charlie Day provides some comic relief without going overboard as a nerdy scientist. Ron Pearlman shows up as a colorful profiteer. He goes overboard, but that’s what he’s there for. Idris Elba gets to use his real accent for once, is majestic as the guy in charge. Charlie Hunnam, bulked up, fades into the background, more generic than the machines. Whenever they try to add some human interest, everything stalls, but fortunately that does not happen too often.

There are a couple of good touches about the way different elements of civilization respond to the monsters. I couldn’t really understand who was doing what some of the time or what they were saying much of the time (a lot of the usual sci-fi moments of people staring intently into monitors, but it is always nice to Clifton Collins, Jr., and he does better with the jargon than most people). But there were robots fighting monsters and in the middle of the summer, that’s good enough for me.

NOTE: Be sure to stay halfway through the credits for an extra scene.

Parents should know that this film has non-stop and intense sci-fi action violence with massive destruction and genocide, very scary monsters, chases, explosions, suicide missions, gruesome images, sad deaths, brief language

Family discussion: Why didn’t Staker want Mako to go out in the Jaeger? How is the cooperation between Gottleib and Geiszler like the drifting of the Jaeger operators? What are three different ways we saw characters respond to the attacks?

If you like this, try: “Independence Day,” “Top Gun,” “Blade Runner,” and the original “Godzilla”

Related Tags:

3D Action/Adventure Science-Fiction

Despicable Me 2

Posted on July 3, 2013 at 10:00 am

Is there more to the story of “Despicable Me” after Gru (Steve Carell) isn’t despicable anymore? The original, with Gru and Vector (Jason Segal) as warring super-villains, was one of the best animated films and one of the best family movies of the past several years. The characters, brilliantly designed by illustration great Carter Goodrich, were a magnificent contrast, Gru all musty gothic and Victorian, with heavy carved wood and hammered metal and Vector all sleek and mid-century Creamsicle colors. The happy ending had Gru’s heart warming to three adorable orphan girls and saving the day.

With all of that resolved, this movie never quite reaches the emotional resonance of the first, and this edition’s villain (I will try not to give away any surprises that occur after the first third of the film) is not as interesting as Vector, visually or in terms of plot or character.

But it is still wonderfully imaginative and fun, with a masterful use of 3D and breathtaking, precision-timed, action sequences that are both exciting and hilarious. And there are minions.

The adorable yellow creatures who appear to be made from marshmallow peeps and serve as Gru’s version of ooompa-loompas are even more effective scene-stealers than they were in the first outing, whether wearing a fetching maid uniform, reacting to the taste of a very bad batch of jelly, or suffering the effects of a transforming serum called PX41. Watch the end credits — they appear to be poised to take over the next chapter.

There are some new characters in this sequel, too, most delightfully Lucy, an agent for the Anti-Villain League who recruits Gru to help her save the world. She is charmingly voiced by Kristin Wiig (a different accent and a different character from the orphanage director she played in the first movie), and deliciously drawn, with Lucille Ball-red hair and a fearless but charmingly dorky personality. A local mom keeps trying to fix Gru up with her single friends and the girls want him to try a computer matchmaker. But it is Lucy who makes him consider for the first time getting over the childhood trauma that made him decide that romance was beyond his ability. Lucy is adorkable, both coltish and rubber-limbed, cheerily explaining to Gru that he should not announce his weapon until after he uses it, and then demonstrating by singing out “lipstick taser!” as he seizes and jerks on the ground.

Meanwhile, there is a new super-villain to track down. The Anti-Villain League has traced him or her to the local mall (witty and imaginatively conceived). So Gru and Lucy go undercover with a cupcake shop called Bake My Day and try to figure out which of the local merchants has the PX41. This is much more exciting than trying to make an honest living manufacturing jams and jellies, especially after the departure of his long-time aide, Dr. Nefario (Russell Brand), who leaves for evil-er pastures.

In the midst of all this, Gru still has his parental responsibilities, including some worries over oldest daughter Margo (Miranda Cosgrove), who has spotted a cute boy named Antonio (“Kings of Summer’s” Moises Arias), who has Beiberific hair and all the charm of a future Latin lover.

A chase scene that has the minions trying to protect Gru is one of the best action sequences of the year and Gru’s entry into the super-villain’s lair is cleverly designed. It is fun to see Gru try to manage a 6-year-old’s birthday party (like Steve Martin in “Parenthood,” he has to step in as the entertainment) while redefining himself as a man the girls can trust and respect. It isn’t the villain who’s his match this time, it’s his partner in non-crime. While not as liberatingly refreshing as the original, it is still a blast and one of the best family films of the year.

Parents should know that this film has several instances of potty humor and some violence and peril (mostly comic but with weapons and drug-induced personality transformations). There’s a brief shot of a bare minion tush and a joke about being drunk.

Family discussion: Why was it hard for Gru to tell Lucy how he felt? What “despicable” qualities did Gru have that helped him be a better good guy?

If you like this, try: “Despicable Me” and “Megamind”

Monsters University

Posted on June 20, 2013 at 6:00 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	Kindergarten - 3rd Grade
MPAA Rating:	G
Profanity:	None
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Mild peril, bullies, insults, hurt feelings
Diversity Issues:	A theme of the movie
Date Released to Theaters:	June 21, 2013
Date Released to DVD:	October 28, 2013
Amazon.com ASIN:	B008JFUPLC

“Monsters Inc.” is one of my favorite Pixar movies, filled with wit, imagination, and heart. This prequel is a lot of fun, still very funny and wildly imaginative, but a little hollow where the heart should be.

One problem Pixar just can’t solve is that a prequel has to end before the original begins. “Monsters Inc.” has a brilliant premise: there’s a monster world fueled by the screams of frightened children. The monsters themselves are terrified of humans, even a toddler named Boo.

There is a power factory that sends them each night into children’s bedrooms. The monsters have to scare the kids without being seen by grown-ups and get home without being “contaminated” by contact. By the end (SPOILER ALERT) the monsters have discovered that children’s laughter is an even better energy source, and the audience goes home feeling happy and reassured. But a prequel has to stick with the idea that scaring children is a worthwhile goal, indeed it needs us to get on board with the idea that we should root for the characters to be really good at it. We know Mike and Sully will end up as friends. So the sweetness and the dramatic tension are dialed down.

Once again, our heroes are Mike (Billy Crystal), the anxious one who looks like a green beach ball with arms and legs and one great big eye, and Sully (John Goodman), the giant polka-dotted furry guy who thinks it all comes naturally and he does not need to work. They both pick the prestigious “scaring” major, under the stern eyes of Dean Hardscrabble (Helen Mirren, impeccable as always) and Professor Knight (Alfred Molina).

Fans of the original will be intrigued to find that in the beginning, Mike and the chameleon-like Randy (Steve Buscemi) were roommates and friends. How that turns to rivalry while the initial enmity between Mike and Sully turned into professional partnership and personal BFF-dom is the story of the film, with some overtones of “Animal House,” “Harry Potter,” and every ragtag group of underdogs movie you’ve ever seen.

Mike is the one who studies all the time. Sully is the party animal who thinks that he can get by on charm and talent. Both find themselves kicked out of the program, with just one chance to get back in. If they can be a part of the team that wins the intramural games, they can get back in the scaring program and become professional human child scarers. They will have to work together — and bunk together — with the oddballs and rejects at the bottom of the school’s social hierarchy, the members of a fraternity known as Oozma Kappa (OK). Their fraternity house is the home of one of the members, with his mom as their RA and chauffeur.

The frat brothers are adorable, especially the two-headed Tracy/Traci (voices of Sean Hayes and Dave Foley), and a fuzzy purple log-shaped guy named Art who looks like a Muppet reject (Charlie Day). Art is a new age philosophy major who eagerly presses his fellow OK-ites to try dream journals. Don (Joel Murray) is a middle-aged guy trying for a new career (apparently there’s a recession in Monster-world, too). None of these monsters is especially smart or strong or fast or scary. They have to compete against the fearsome athletes of Roar Omega Roar (ROR), let by the arrogant Johnny (Nathan Fillion).

There are some exciting and funny moments in the competition, especially a too-knowing obstacle course where the teams have to avoid a truly terrifying foe: human teenagers. The monster-ification of the classic college movie developments is a lot of fun. In making sure each team has a quorum, Johnny sneers, “We count bodies, not heads.” Tracy/Traci only counts as one. Of course, the struggle to be liked by the cool kids is the same whether you’re a person or not.

They did not want to go for the usual ending here, which is admirable, but the result is surprisingly downbeat and disquietingly know-nothing. If is not the loud, over-done “Cars 2,” it is also not the expansive, transcendent “Toy Story” sequels. Second-rate Pixar is still better than most of what is out there, but we expect more.

P.S. As always, the movie is preceded by a marvelous animated short from up-and-coming Pixar-ians. This one echoes last year’s “Paperman” romantic (and meteorological) theme, with blue and red umbrellas finding each other in a rainy city.

Parents should know that this film has some mild peril, bullying, insults, and hurt feelings. Characters cheat and have to pay a penalty.

Family discussion: Why didn’t Mike and Sully get along at first? How were they different? What was good and bad about the fraternities in the movie and how are they like groups you know? How do they make a deficiency into an advantage? How can you?

If you like this, try: “Monsters, Inc.,” “Sydney White,” and “The Lawrenceville Stories”

Man of Steel

Posted on June 12, 2013 at 6:00 pm

B-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence, action and destruction, and for some language
Profanity:	Mild language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Some drinking
Violence/ Scariness:	Extensive sci-fi/action violence including acts of terrorism, characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	A theme of the movie, diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	June 14, 2013

Come on, guys, can’t you give us one superhero who is not all angsty and conflicted? Director Zack Snyder, who presided over the ultimate superhero deconstruction in Watchmen, and producer/co-screenwriter Christopher Nolan, who put the cinematic “dark” in Batman’s Dark Knight have taken the original superhero, the one all the others are a reaction to, the one who never needed to be reminded that with great power comes great responsibility, and saddled him with an existential crisis.

This is less an updating of Superman than a downgrade.

That is not the fault of British actor Henry Cavill, who plays Clark Kent and Superman with a lot of heart behind that flawlessly heroic jaw, cleft chin, and broad shoulders. It is the sour tone of the script and the drab look of the film, with completely unnecessary post-production 3D adding a greyish cast over the bleached-out images.

And a reboot really does not require yet another retelling of the origin story. We all know about the little spaceship sent off from Krypton by Jor-El (Russell Crowe) and Lara (Ayelet Zurer) before the planet exploded, and the baby who was discovered by the childless Kents, honest farmers who called their new son Clark. Here the re-telling is used to lay the foundation for a battle of former Kryptonians, with towering rage specialist Michael Shannon as General Zod (memorably played in “Superman II” by Terrence Stamp). A new wrinkle: as in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and “Gattaca”, the decadent, depleted Kryptonian society genetically programs fetuses for particular purposes.

In defiance of this system, Jor-El and Lara produce a child the old-fashioned way, the first such birth in generations. But it is too late. Krypton has ignored its inconvenient truths for too long. The world, including technology that features a phone that looks like a talking pomegranate, is about to end. General Zod, once Jor-El’s friend, rebels, killing Jor-El, and vowing revenge as he and his followers are sent to the Phantom Zone. (And by the way, the Phantom Zone here is not nearly as cool as the rotating glass plane in “Superman II.”

After the Kryptonian prologue, we get a distractingly disjointed story, beginning with Clark as an adult, saving the day in secret and disappearing before he can be identified. In flashbacks, we see that Martha Kent (Diane Lane) teaches him how to manage his super-senses without getting overwhelmed. Jonathan Kent (Kevin Costner) tells his adopted son not to reveal his powers because the world is not ready to understand and appreciate him. Though he loves his parents, Clark feels isolated and anguished. He cannot help stepping in when rescue is needed (and in one case when a bully needs a comeuppance), but then he has to move on so his secret cannot be uncovered.

Lois Lane (Amy Adams), spunky as ever (“What can I say, I get writer’s block if I’m not wearing a flack jacket”) finds out Clark’s secret immediately. She is not someone who is going to be fooled by a pair of glasses and a timid demeanor. Indeed, one reason this story seems so sterile is that it leaves out some of the core elements of the Superman story. No kryptonite. Instead of graceful soaring through the sky, he takes off like a jumping bean. He does not call himself Superman and is only called it once. Instead of the iconic bright red and blue uniform, he wears a textured supersuit with a dramatic but not very practical ankle-length cape. Edna Mode, where are you when Superman needs you?

Clark keeps his secret, with tragic consequences, until General Zod arrives and insists that Earth surrender its lone Kryptonian. This leads to a half-hour fight sequence that is ably staged but empty in spirit. Post-production 3D effects are applied indiscriminately, with the pores of the actors’ skin unsettlingly immersive. The action is indiscriminate and overblown. Perhaps some day we will be able to appreciate mass destruction without painful associations. But here and now, it feels gratuitous. Clark Kent/Kal-El gets so caught up in his own existential angst he overlooks some complex moral issues in his fight with Zod. The plot draws too heavily from “Star Trek” (in at least two places) and not enough from Superman’s decades of history. What about Mr. Myxlplyx? The City of Kandor? Bizarro World? Don’t make Superman into another Dark Knight. Let Superman be his own super-self.

Parents should know that this film includes extended scenes of comic book-style action violence with fights, chases, explosions, tornado, planet annihilated, sad deaths of parents, crashes, and massive city-wide destruction. Many characters are injured and killed including fetuses. There is a non-explicit childbirth scene, some strong and crude insults, and some drinking.

Family discussion: Was Clark’s father right to tell him to keep his powers secret, no matter what the cost? How does this Superman differ from other portrayals and why? Is morality an “evolutionary advantage?” What would you pick for the symbol of your house?

If you like this, try: “Superman” and “Superman II” and the new book about the teenagers who created the character of Superman: Super Boys: The Amazing Adventures of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster

Epic

Posted on May 26, 2013 at 10:08 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	4th - 6th Grades
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG for mild action, some scary images and brief rude language
Profanity:	Brief language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Fantasy/action/cartoon violence and peril, mostly non-graphic, arrows, swords, poison, sad deaths (one onscreen, discussion of death of parents and death of child)
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters and voices, all combatants white males
Date Released to Theaters:	May 24, 2013
Date Released to DVD:	August 19, 2013
Amazon.com ASIN:	B00CQFINCE

“Epic” means big — usually a big story filled with grand adventures. This is a grand adventure, but the story is very small, or at least its characters are. Like “Honey I Shrunk the Kids,” “A Bug’s Life,” and “The Ant Bully,” this is a story about the tiny creatures who live in the forest, riding on hummingbirds and swinging swords the size of toothpicks.

They are so little and move so quickly that most humans cannot even see them. But there is a scientist named Bomba (Jason Sukeikis) who knows they are there. He is so obsessed with tracking the little creatures that he lost his wife and daughter. Everyone thinks he is crazy.

As the movie begins, his ex-wife has died and his now teenaged daughter MK (Amanda Seyfried) is arriving. She has had almost no relationship with him and is not sure she wants one now especially when she learns that he still insists that there is a community of tiny beings in the forest. He has rigged up motion-sensitive cameras and he keeps detailed records of his sightings. MK decides to leave, but on her way out she has a close encounter of her own and suddenly finds herself shrunk down to the size of an insect and with the dying queen of the forest (Beyoncé Knowles) giving her custody of a magical bud. If the bud is not exposed to moonlight at exactly the right once-in-a-century moment, the forest will fall into the hands of the evil Boggens, led by Mandrake (two-time Oscar-winner Christoph Waltz).

In the forest, there is a constant struggle between the forces of life and decay. The queen is protected by an army of Leafmen, led by Ronin (Colin Farrell). Ronin is responsible for Nod (Josh Hutcherson), the impetuous and rebellious son of a close friend who died in battle. Nod quits the Leafmen in frustration, but when everyone is needed to make sure the magical bud gets to bloom in the moonlight, including Ronin, Nod, MK, and an adorable snail and slug duo (Chris O’Dowd and Aziz Ansari, the comic highlight of the film).

The co-producer, co-writer, and production designer is the brilliant writer/illustrator William Joyce, inspired by his book, The Leaf Men. The visuals are pure magic, from the grand sweep of the forest to the tiniest details of the saddle on a hummingbird. Every shot is filled with marvelously imaginative ideas, exquisitely rendered. MK’s absent-minded scientist father has a wonderfully messy office filled with charts and equipment and record books that have a slightly stem-punk, Victorian feel. Chase scenes through the trees are deliciously vertiginous in 3D. And the quiet moments are lovely, too, with MK and Nod sharing the experience of losing a parent and learning to appreciate the families they have.

Parents should know that this movie includes a discreet but sad death of the murdered queen and references to divorce and the death of parents. Mandrake’s son is killed, and characters are in frequent peril. There are some scary images and characters use brief strong (for PG) language. There is one sweet kiss.

Family discussion: “Who gives up everything for a world that’s not even theirs?” What does it mean to say “many leaves, one tree?”

If you like this, try: “Robots,” “Ferngully,” and “A Bug’s Life” and the books by William Joyce.