Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) review

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)         

Review by George Elcombe

“Another film about a man and his monkey”

Prequels / reboots are a tricky business these days. Mostly they’re made to cash in on franchises with an existing and well known fan base, and this trend of reboots is tedious to say the least.

My opinion is as John Walter’s: Remake the bad films, leave the classics alone. The best example of this is a 1957 b-movie called Zero Hour. A thriller about a passenger flight in turmoil when the crew and passengers succumb to food poisoning. Only one man can fly and land the plane, a traumatised ex fighter pilot. If this sounds familiar, well done, you have seen Airplane (1980) which is one of the funniest films ever made! So if you are going to remake a film, do something different with it.

But we have a hell of a lot of bad reboots / remakes recently: A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010), The Pink Panther (2006) and of course Planet of the Apes (2001) where Helena Bonham Carter looks like Michael Jackson. Having said that we have had some excellent reboots such as Batman Begins (2005), Casino Royal (2006) and my favourite television show Battlestar Galactica (2004 - 2009)

I am pleased to say that this film is up there with the latter and works incredibly well as a stand alone film and within the franchise cannon and I loved the reference to the space shuttle of the (1968) original.

Plot: an excellent James Franco plays a scientist / biologist (Will) who is researching a cure for Alzheimer’s and tests his serum on chimpanzees and other simians. One of his chimps goes ape (sorry, couldn’t resist it) and ends up getting shot and killed in an investor meeting. Unbeknownst to him and the company, the chimp is pregnant and gives birth to a son who was exposed to the cure during the womb. Will takes this chimp home and aptly names him Caesar. Caesar swiftly develops near human intelligence and begins to question his nature as a person or a pet and learns about his birth and why he is the way he is. He develops his own identity and questions his existence and alienation. Following an incident where he attacks a neighbour, he is impounded in a ‘sanctuary’ where he meets other primates and the guy who plays Draco in Harry Potter. He escapes to the lab to steal the serum (which is conveniently in gas form) and infects his fellow captors whom escape in a spectacular finale.

This film is great and engrossing with some excellent actors. James Franco conveys the desperate son tying to bring back the man his father was, whilst playing a father figure to Caesar. His father played by John Lithgow is excellent also yet a little underused. There are many touching scenes with Will’s father’s condition improving with the treatment then degenerating as the film progresses, my favourite being where Caesar helps him use a piece of cutlery to eat his food.

Which brings me to the ever excellent Andy Serkis, who seems to be the go to guy for motion capture these days. Serkis’ motion capture for Ceasar is amazing but it’s the performance he gives showing the evolution of this character throughout the film into a true leader.

This film also explores a few themes current in today’s zeitgeist: ones place in society, class systems, bullying, corporate greed capitalising on untested commercial products and its possible devastating effects. I may go into further details about this some other day but good sci-fi is very much grounded in and reflects modern day issues, exploring them through fantasy aspects to give the audience something to relate to.

However the simians own this movie. Not surprising considering the title, but once Caesar gathers his troops this film picks up pace and I loved the third act carnage. I just hope they make a sequel further exploring the evolution of the simians and their culture while humanity dies. Each of these primates has their own personality and Caesar utilises each one for his army. General scar is there and if you’ve ever wanted to see a gorilla take down a helicopter, then this film show it in an un-cheesy way. As the film progresses you feel empathy for the simians as their human captors have used them for their own selfish ‘inhumane’ lust for greed, without knowing the consequences for what they have created. The next rulers of the Earth.

Ultimately this is an excellent film which asks the question of what makes us human. And Andy Serkis should have won an Oscar for his performance.

8 out of 10

If you like this try

Planet of the Apes (1968)

King Kong (2005)

Absentia (2011) review

Absentia (2011)

Review by George Elcombe

“Tunnel vision”

What is Absentia? Having watched the film, I checked Wikipedia. “In absentia” is Latin for "in the absence". 

Now I'm not the biggest fan of horror movies. Mainly because they are predictable, generic and don't scare me. It’s all about drops, payoffs and foreboding. Paranormal Activity (2007) made me jump, but I never lost any sleep over it.

However I like to go into watching horror films without knowing anything, which worked a treat for Cabin in the Woods (2012) and I am doing the same for this movie.

The DVD cover is similar Quarantine (2008) which shows a woman being dragged away. They stupidly used the final shot of Quarantine (2008) for its cover thus devoiding it all thrills towards the central character, but thankfully this image does not happen in this movie and is spoil free. So, how can I review this with out spoiling anything? Lets try.

Plot: pregnant Tricia is still holding out hope that her husband Daniel may still be alive after being missing for 7 years. Her sister Callie comes to stay to help her move on and declare him legally dead: in absentia.

However, Tricia is having visions of Daniel and Callie is being drawn to a mysterious tunnel near Tricia’s house which may be connected to a series of unexplained disappearances.

This film is interesting and takes the slow burn route with a few shocks. One shock I should have seen coming, but didn't, and at that point I became interested.

It has horror staples: haunted house, a pale ghost-like-thing, night visiony shots in a bedroom, two sisters and a mystery which slowly draws you in.

So far, so clichéd, low budget and the actress playing Callie can’t act very well. It’s obvious that the ‘ghost’ is of Daniel, but it doesn't help that he looks like Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory.

It’s also obvious who the father of Tricia’s baby is but all this is irrelevant after the 40 minute mark. Then things get interesting.

SPOILER ALERT!

Are you ready? Daniel is alive and it's now not another ghost story but a monster movie. I loved how they dealt with this. Why? Because they showed very little of the creature. It looked like practical effects with little or no CGI, just clever framing and use of the dark. I love this. The mind can create anything scarier that what’s on screen. Once you see something full frontal and especially if it’s shiny CGI, then it’s not scary. Just compare the 1982 and 2011 versions of The Thing to see my point. Actually, just watch the 1982 version.

END OF SPOILERS.

So it turns from generic horror to a thriller mystery, utilising drops, payoffs and foreboding until coming full circle at the end. That doesn’t mean that everything’s wrapped up though. I did like how the film dealt with flashbacks and ‘what if’ alternatives created in the characters heads. The events could just be made up, or it could be a more sinister reality. The film deals with how we come to terms with loss and traumatic events, how we reach for answers, understanding and closure.

The DVD menu is good and doesn’t show a lot, and doesn’t spoil anything, just a woman jogging through a tunnel. Both Harry Potter 5 (2007) and Harry Brown (2009) featured horror in a tunnel and admittedly tunnels can be an intimidating place.

I like the moody minimalist sound track but 5.1 wasn’t the default audio option on the review disk, I only discovered this after I watched the film so may re-watch it again to get the full effect. No extras were included on this disk but I would like to see a documentary on the making and funding of this low budget indie film. The legendry Kim Newman praises the film on its cover, so I would love a 5 minute interview with him discussing the film and its place within the modern horror genre.

Good horror is all in the foreboding and misdirection to achieve chills and scares. This film has it. And it doesn’t explain what or why the events are happening. It has no reason, a speculated origin and unknown motives which are all mysteries the minds of the audience will question.

An impressive and engrossing tale which is the best independent horror film I have seen in a while. For those who have seen it all and for those who haven’t.

6 out of 10

If you like this try:

Jeepers Creepers (2001)

Paranormal Activity (2007)

The Ring (2002)

Iron Sky (2012) review

Iron Sky (2012)

Review by George Elcombe

“In 1945 The Nazis Went To The Moon. In 2018 They Are Coming Back”

Do you like your movies to be fun? Seriously, there are many different types of film out there that tailor for various audiences: the Oscar crowd, the indie lover, the Saturday night movie goer, the blockbuster addict and people who just want to watch something silly and entertaining.

So, if your idea of Nazis on the moon planning to invade the Earth sparks your curiosity then you’re in luck.

In a nutshell this film is a blend of Starship Troopers (1997) and Dr Strangelove (1964), both excellent examples of political and military satire.

Plot: as established in an opening scene set in a classroom, Nazis fled to the dark side of the moon in 1945 where they somehow built a swastika themed base, several spaceships and the biggest war machine in the history of human existence.

Fast forward to 2018 where an astronaut and a model chosen to be the first black man on the moon (called James Washington) arrive to aid the presidents re-election campaign.

They discover the base and the astronaut is quickly taken out and Washington is taken captive. The stereotypical mad Nazi doctor Richter discovers that Washington’s smartphone can process and launch their warship, thus enabling the invasion to begin. Unfortunately the device’s battery dies so Nazi commander Adler and the doctor’s daughter Renate (who is destined to be the mother of Adler’s children) travel to earth to collect another device with similar processing power. Oh yeah, they also take Washington with them who is now white thanks to the mad doctor.

They meet the president’s campaign aid who decides to use them (and Hitler’s propaganda speeches) for the campaign trail, and hilarity ensues. I don’t want to spoil too much, but an invasion begins, there’s lots of dog fighting and the film gets sillier as it goes along until the bitter end when we realise how idiotic the human race is in its pursuit of war and control.

I first heard about this film a few years ago and I was hooked by the idea of Nazis hiding on the moon, and I’m pleased to say that this film had enormous support from the online community through various media channels. The fans and buzz generated an extra £500,000 towards production costs and I have to say that the CGI is impressive for an independent production. I should add that the design of the moon base and the grey lighting sets the mood for 1940’s Nazi Germany perfectly.

As I’ve stated before the films tone is generally silly, but very entertaining. It covers a lot of old Nazi propaganda and how Hitler’s goal was to unite the world in peace. It’s just that he was a genocidal maniac and his methods proved to be wrong. But this is juxtaposed by America’s dominance in the world today, mostly through force to exploit natural resources (the George W Bush is a perfect example of this). Although this film did focus on politics, some may say this needed to be elaborated on to make the film more realistic. Personally, I don’t. The satire is spot on with the Sarah Palin look-a-like being pleased with the fact that all presidents who start a war in their first term get re-elected.

The DVD menu is impressive but slightly spoilish showing the invasion, but the design mixes modern and retro and is aesthetically pleasing. The picture and sound quality are great and I especially enjoyed the 5.1 mix.

Unfortunately there were no special features on the review disk, but I hope they include the various trailers, test footage and a documentary chronically the effect that fans and social media had on the films production.

I have to say it’s a shame this film will only get a 1 day release in UK cinemas, a decision the filmmakers re unhappy about. Many friends want to see this on the big screen so I hope this film makes it into cinemas for random late night screenings.

There are wooden performances, intentionally bad dialogue and copious amounts of cheesy moments, and in that respect this film draws its strengths.

This film has been clearly influenced by Dr Strangelove (1964) and some bits are straight out of Fritz Lang’s classic Metropolis (1927), but is also full of fun stereotypes. If you are after a film that doesn’t take itself too seriously and it’s sole purpose is to entertain then you’re in for a treat.

7 out of 10

If you like this try

Starship Troopers (1997)

Planet Terror (2007)

Dead Snow (2009)

Sword for sale

Hi everyone.

Here's the photo of the sword that I couldn't upload on the Labyrinth forum. Please email me with any bids or questions at: georgeelcombe@hotmail.com

The Avengers (2012) review

The Avengers (2012)

Review by George Elcombe

"Hulk, smash"

I love summer blockbusters. Although now we don't queue around blocks anymore, the name still sticks. Its this time of year I attend the cinema most to see hyped up films full of special effects and explosions that deserve to be seen on the big screen. Pure popcorn entertainment and I love it.

Paramount does it very well and manage to drag me back to the cinema again and again to entertain me, but this film is exceptional. Yes, it's been a long time coming and has been hinted at in all the previous Marvel studios films (let's be honest; Iron Man 2 (2010) was just a long advert for this) but this, their 6th movie, is worth the build up and the best of the bunch.

Plot: Loki is after the Tesseract power cube from Captain America (2011) and is planning to open a portal and bring an army from another world to conquer the Earth and enslave humanity. It just so happens that Nick Fury has been planning the Avengers initiative for such an event, and brings together Iron Man, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Captain America, Hulk and Loki's brother Thor to stop him. This is going to be a party to remember! 

Director and co-writer Joss Whedon always does very good character ensembles (Firefly (2002 – 2003, Alien Resurrection (1997)) and none of the main characters is this film felt like they were left out with the exception of Hawkeye who was underused, although I’m glad they did shed some light on his and Black Widows past.

Each of our heroes had an informative introduction, establishing them to new viewers and reminding me why I like Tony Stark so much. Although this film clocks in at over 2 hours, it’s well paced, has you caring about the characters and is never dull.

This also has a lot to do with the epic action sequences and the humour. The entire cinema were cracking up at Joss Whedon's classic one liners and one scene involving Loki towards then end had us laughing and applauding. While the action set pieces are great and there are a lot of them, the finale being the best.

As per most Hollywood action films, this utilises the method of having wave after wave of faceless villains fly in as fodder so our heroes can do what they do best. Smash seven bells out of them, and Hulk does it the best in a rampage which was nothing less than pure joy. Overall Hulk stole the show and I hope we see more of him in future Marvel films. 

It's as great as everyone says and I love Tom Hiddleson as Loki. The cinematography is excellent although the 3D conversion is meh, the special effects are up to scratch but where this film shines is its ability to entertain.

Spoiler zone:

There is a nagging plot hole: if hulk is always angry, then why did he Bruce out on the Helicarrier? Seriously, if he's always angry then it's stupid to have him transform on it when he can just control his rage! But Hulk is fantastic in this film so I'll let it slip. Another nag is when Iron Man saves New York by directing a nuke up into a portal to the alien’s ship, where he may be trapped forever and his suit magically runs out of power. Well, the trailer showed Hulk catching him upon his decent and Iron Man 3 was recently given the green light: thus this moment has no tension at all. Nag.

Agent Phil Coulson is a fantastic character and I've enjoyed him in the previous Marvel films. Although his death is necessary for the development of this film and the unification of the Avengers, he will be missed. But I loved his interaction with Captain America and his trading card collection.

And the post credit glimpse of a future villain I have never heard of! Seriously, I thought it was Red Skull but no, it's Thanos, who we all remember from…. Erm…. I admit I love how Marvel had a very ‘grounded in the real world’ approach in Iron Man (2008) and The Incredible Hulk (2008), but since Thor (2011) opened up the possibility of other worlds, I am intrigued to see where this franchise is headed. It's a shame Fox own the rights to X Men and Apocalypse.

And that shot in Black Widow’s room when Hawkeye walked out of the bathroom, did that imply that they are more than friends? He he he.

End of spoilers.

In short this movie is as great as everyone says, and I am still loving this new Marvel franchise and excited for the next films.

8 out of 10.

If you like this, try:

The Incredibles (2004)

Serenity (2005)