About Time

© 2013 Ray Wong

At first glance (and as the trailers would tell us), About Time is a romance with a time-traveling twist. In reality, it is really a love story — and not just about romantic love. It is a fable about love and life in general.

After his 21st birthday, Tim (Domhnall Gleeson) gets the surprise news of his life from his father (Bill Nighy): all the men in their family have the ability to time travel. While most men in his family tended to misuse the super power (for money, for fame, etc.), Dad has found the secret, but he wants Tim to figure it out for himself. For Tim, everything has always been about love.

Tim eventually moves to London to start a new life as an adult, and he meets beautiful and kind Mary (Rachel McAdams). When he accidentally erases Mary from his life because he used his time travel to help his friend Harry (Tom Hollander), Tim time-travels again to fix his misfortune. While Tim succeeds in getting Mary back and their lives on track again, he discovers that his time traveling has consequences; and that he cannot make someone fall in love with him, and that he cannot fix all his problems. As Dad is dying from cancer, Dad delivers one last advice to Tim on the secret of happiness.

Domhnall Gleeson (Anna Karenina) is quite a chameleon as an actor. As Levin in Anna Karenina, Gleeson was handsome and rugged at the love-sick farmer. As Tim, however, Gleeson looks incredibly young (playing a 21-year-old, no less), naive and — once again — love struck. Gleeson has an ease to his performance, exuding a nervous, shy and uncertain lad who, with a little bit of practice, can achieve great things. Gleeson’s non-nonsense performance is the reason why we like Tim so much to follow his bizarre journey through time and life.

This is the second time Rachel McAdams (Passion) appears in a “time traveling” love story, and this time it is a much lighter role as the object of Tim’s affection. McAdams excels in being the sweet girl next door, and her chemistry with Gleeson is just right to pull off the relationship, which can sometimes seem a bit thin. Bill Nighy (The World’s End) is fantastic as Dad — a whimsical, humorous and yet warm and lovely family man.

The supporting cast is strong with Lydia Wilson (Never Let Me Go) as Tim’s free-sprit sister, Lindsay Duncan (Last Passenger) as Tim’s strong and resilient mother, and Tom Hollander (The Invisible Woman) as a self-absorbed, narcissistic playwright.

Written and directed by Richard Curtis (War Horse), the film definitely has a light, whimsical fable feel to it. Even the characters seem to be more quirky than usual. Curtis decides to keep the story focused on love itself (as “time traveling” stories can go in so many different directions). The result is somewhat unbelievable at first (who, while processing the ability of time traveling, would not at least try to get a better job or a tip in the stock market?) But once we suspend the disbelief, the story gains on us.

It’s not to say the plot and characters are without their conventional and trite trappings. There are some rather blatant cliches; and plot holes are all but inevitable in a story about “time traveling.”  For example, one of the rules is that one cannot travel past the birth of a child, and yet at one point, Tim and his father travel to a time before his sister was born (or any of his own children). Such inconsistency, however, does not mar the general quality of the story, which really isn’t about time traveling anyway.

In fact, time traveling becomes almost a metaphor, as Tim continues to learn and understand what life and love mean to him. I think that’s the sweetest thing about this movie — it has a very sweet, almost innocent look at life and love, and I find that rather refreshing in today’s cynical world. And that may be the film’s biggest flaw — just not cynical and bitter enough for today’s audiences. For me, it’s about time we have something so pure and fun, sometimes almost magical.

Stars: Domhnall Gleeson, Rachel McAdams, Bill Nighy, Lydia Wilson, Lindsay Duncan, Richard Cordery, Tom Hollander, Margot Robbie
Director: Richard Curtis
Writers: Richard Curtis
Distributor: Universal
MPAA Rating: R for language, sexual content
Running Time: 123 minutes

Ratings:

Script - 7
Performance - 8
Direction - 7
Cinematography - 8
Music/Sound - 8
Editing - 8
Production - 7

Total - 7.7 out of 10.0 

Carrie

© 2013 Ray Wong

A remake of the 1976 classic that was based on Stephen King's bestseller, Carrie tells the story of a young girl with a tremendous and deadly power. It is also a story about parent-child relationship and bullying. How relevant!

Reclusive, religious seamstress Margaret White (Julianne Moore) lives with her teenage daughter Carrie (Chloe Grace Moretz) in a small town. When the state requires that Carrie be taken out of homeschool and put into a local high school, Margaret reluctantly let her go but constantly reminds her of the sins and evils around them. When Carrie unexpectedly gets her period during P.E. class, her classmates, led by Chris (Portia Doubleday), tease and taunt her as well as record a video of her ordeal and putting it online to humiliate her.

Feeling bad for what she's done to Carrie, Sue Snell (Gabriella Wilde) believes that she must set things right. So she asks her popular, boy scout of a boyfriend Tommy (Ansel Elgort) to take Carrie to the prom instead. Tommy reluctantly obliges, but later finds that he really likes Carrie. Feeling wanted and happy for the first time in her life, Carrie defies her mother and agrees to go with Tommy.

Meanwhile, because of her part in bullying Carrie, Chris is suspended from school, and thus is barred from going to the prom. Chris decides to take revenge on Carrie at the prom. When Sue realizes what is going on, she rushes to the prom to warn Carrie, but she is too late…

As Carrie's mentally ill, religious mother, Julianne Moore (Don Jon) has given one of her best performances of the year. There is a good range in her portrayal, from the mentally disturbed and Bible-thumping fanatics to being a loving, concerned mother. Chloe Grace Moretz (Kick-Ass 2) did her best with the iconic role as Carrie, but she is no Sissy Spacek. Personally I think Moretz was miscast in this role. She is way too cute and pretty and smart (she is Hit Girl, after all), and she never really convinces me that she is this shy, helpless girl. Thus her transformation at the prom seems forced and unauthentic.

Gabriella Wilde (The Three Musketeers) is bland as Sue Snell, the moral center of the story. Don't get me wrong, Wilde is beautiful and sweet, looking the part, but her performance is underwhelming. Portia Doubleday (Almost Kings) does better as the villainous Chris, but her portrayal also edges on being two-dimensional. Judy Greer (The Descendants) does a good job as the no-nonsense gym teacher who is the only person (seriously, where are all the other teachers?) kind to Carrie. Newcomer Ansel Elgort is all right as Tommy, the kind-hearted jock, but Elgort plays it so straight that even Superman would feel threatened.

The screenplay by Lawrence D. Cohen and Roberto Aguiree-Sacasa stays rather true to the original novel and movie. They only updated certain things to make the teen horror more relevant (modern-day technologies, jargons, etc.). However, they didn't do enough to update this (one could use some Hip Hop or relevant pop culture references, for example), and the whole thing feels old-fashioned. It's as if we were watching something made in the 80s but with 2013 technologies. So the result is an odd sense of inauthenticity. It feels off.

And while King's story and characters still feel relevant today (religious zealots, bullying, revenge, child abuse, etc.), I can't help but feel that the treatment of Carrie, at least in this rendition, feels seriously outdated. The idea of some teenage girl's viral video of being tormented for having her period doesn't ring true to me in today's world. Yes, teenagers can still be cruel today, but the things they do would have been much, much worse. As a horror film, I doubt today's audience would find it riveting or scary.

Kimberly Peirce's (Boys Don't Cry) direction also is bland. The visual flair of the original movie by De Palma is gone. True, this movie feels more realistic and less stylized, but the result seems dull in comparison. Why do a remake if it can't be as good or better than the original? In that regard, Carrie fails spectacularly. It is still very entertaining, for sure; but it's also rather forgettable.

Stars: Julianne Moore, Chloe Grace Moretz, Gabriella Wilde, Portia Doubleday, Alex Russell, Judy Greer, Ansel Elgort
Director: Kimberly Peirce
Writers: Lawrence D. Cohen, Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa (based on novel by Stephen King)
Distributor: Screen Gems
MPAA Rating: R for bloody violence, disturbing images, language and some sexual content
Running Time: 100 minutes

Ratings:

Script - 7
Performance - 7
Direction - 6
Cinematography - 7
Music/Sound - 8
Editing - 7
Production - 7

Total - 7.1 out of 10.0 

Man of Steel

© 2013 Ray Wong

Do we need another Superman movie? Apparently DC Comics and Hollywood think so, but this time producer Chris Nolan and director Zack Snyder (both no strangers to superheroes) want to take a different approach than in the past.

Clark Kent (Henry Cavill) has always feel different from the time he was a child. After growing being ridiculed and for learning to control his super powers, Clark sets out on a long self-discover journey to find himself and, most important, who he really is and where he came from. His search leads him to Alaska where spaceship has been hidden under the ice for millennia. There he finds out the truth about himself, that he is Kal-El, the son of Jor-El (Russell Crowe), chief scientist of Krypton. The planet, due to its unstable core, was destroyed years ago with the rest of its citizens including Kal-El's parents. They tried their best to save their people but after they failed, they found a way to send Kal-El to Earth, one of Krypton's old outposts.

What Clark/Kal-El does know is that Jor-El's nemesis General Zod and his minions were exiled from Krypton because of treason. But the planet's destruction set them free, and they are tracking Jor-El's son to Earth. They also discovered that Jor-El has injected the genetic imprints of the entire Kryptonite population into Kal-El, and through him, Zod will be able to revive their race and take over Earth as their new home.

Feeling ostracized by people of Earth, Clark has to make a decision which side he is on. Should he continue to hide his superpower as his adoptive father Jonathan (Kevin Costner) once told him that humans are not ready for him? Or should he embrace his power to protect Earth and humans against his own kind? Where does he loyalty lie? And is Earth ready for him as one of its own?

Lots of existential questions for a summer popcorn superhero movie as universal and well-known as Superman. What writer David S. Goyer did was giving Superman a darker, more complex personality and backstory. Clark's struggle as a child and young man ring true as an outcast. Gone is the cockeyed optimism of yesteryear's Superman universe, where Superman is revered and worshipped. Instead, Superman is feared, misunderstood, ridiculed, and marginalized as nothing more than a threat to mankind. 

In Goyer's version, Clark Kent's life purpose is more murky, and the character himself is more ambivalent and confused. Even though Kal-El is all Kryptonite, Clark Kent remains very human after all. He struggles with his conflicting feelings about himself, his purpose, his place in a world he's called home since he was a child. He struggles between his true identity and his new identity as a human. He struggles between his feelings for Lois Lane (Amy Adams), and his duty as the world's ultimate protector against things and people like General Zod.

On many levels, this darkened version of Superman works, even though some may feel uncomfortable with the amount of changes the filmmakers have made to the original characters and cannon. Let's face it, Superman is not the Dark Knight. By making Clark more brooding and complex, Goyer has deepened the characterization and given the story and characters more layers, and yet he's somehow stripped out some of the defining characteristic of Superman. The truth is Superman is NOT the Dark Knight. Superman has always been the light and God-figure, the super boy scout of the universe. So this change fundamentally changes how we see Clark Kent/Superman, which can be good or bad depending on how attached you are to the Superman you know.

Henry Cavill (Immortals) has done a good job portraying this new Superman. He is incredibly good-looking and chiseled, definitely super fit for the role. What's impressive is that he also brings sensitivity and complexity that we really haven't seen since Christophe Reeves, and Cavill's portrayal is more in line with Christian Bale than Reeves.

Amy Adams (Trouble with the Curve) is amiable as the iconic Lois Lane, but I feel that she is somewhat miscast. That's not to say her performance is bad; it's just that I don't see her as Lois Lane and after seeing the movie, I still don't see it. There's just something off. Michael Shannon (Premium Rush) plays General Zod with all the villainy he can muster but to me, he lacks the subtlety and sublime layers of Terence Stamp, who remains the definitive General Zod for many fans.

Diane Lane (Secretariat) and Kevin Costner (The Company Man) are both excellent as the Kents, given the over-the-top production some needed down-to-earth quality. And Russell Crowe (Les Miserables) brings great dignity to the role of Jor-El, which surprisingly has a much bigger role in this version.

Zack Synder is no stranger to big budget superhero extravaganzas, and by and large he delivers. Maybe a bit too well. The movie's quieter moments (the flashbacks, the introspection, Clark's solitude, etc.) are very well handled. The action sequences, however, are topnotch Hollywood stuff. Unfortunately, eventually the actions feel drawn out and overlong. One battle after another, we can't help but feel exhausted. The movie is at least 30 minutes too long, and much of the subplots could have been cut. The problem is that Synder and Goyer tried to put both the origin story and a revamped Superman II plot into one movie, and that's just too much. It simply feels like two separate movies being stitched together into one and the over the top actions, and there are many, become distractions instead.

Granted, Man of Steel is still superbly watchable, entertaining, and popcorn worthy. With the added layers of characterizations and the darker aspects, this could have been outstanding like the Dark Knight trilogy. Unfortunately, Goyer and Snyder have bitten more than they could chew and the result is an overlong, over-complicated mash-up of two different movies. It would have been better if they had made this a two-part series instead.

Stars: Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Diane Lane, Russell Crowe, Kevin Costner, Christopher Meloni, Laurence Fishburne
Director: Zack Snyder
Writers: David S. Goyer
Distributor: Warner Bros.
MPAA Rating:  PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence, action and some language
Running Time: 143 minutes

Ratings:

Script - 7
Performance - 7
Direction - 7
Cinematography - 9
Music/Sound - 8
Editing - 8
Production - 9

Total - 7.8 out of 10.0 

Pacific Rim

© 2013 Ray Wong

Clearly influenced by Japanese anime of giant combat robots and monsters (Kaiju in Japanese), del Toro's Pacific Rim is unabashedly bombastic, loud, larger than life, and fun.

After the first Kaiju's (big monsters) destroyed some of the world's biggest cities, the world reacted by creating the Jaeger project: Jaegers are giant robots that can fight and defeat the Kaiju's. But the way that Jaeger works require two pilots who are "drift compatible" to operate; the Jaeger proves to be too dangerous for one person to handle. Raleigh (Charlie Hunnam) is one of the Jaeger pilots. But after his brother/co-pilot was killed in one of the battles, Raleigh quits the program and retreats into obscurity.

Five years later, the Jaeger project is being shut down as the world's government determines that the Jaegers are insufficient to stop the Kaiju's, which are coming at increasing frequency, through an inter- dimensional rift deep under the Pacific Ocean. Director Pentecost (Idris Elba) decides to run the operation as a rote project, and he recruits Raleigh again as he is one of the remaining pilots. At the base, Raleigh meets science officer Mako (Rinko Kikuchi) who happens to be a pilot-in-training and more important, drift compatible with him.

At Raleigh's insistence, Pentecost agrees to let Mako become Raleigh's co-pilot, but Mako's emotional instability threatens everyone's safety and the effectiveness of the Jaegers. Because Raleigh is connected to Mako, he discovers from her memories a deep secret. When the Kaiju's threaten to put a final nail in the coffin for mankind, the remaining four Jaegers must rise to the occasion and defend Earth, maybe for the last time.

Charlie Hunnam (Sons of Anarchy) successfully channels a young Heath Ledger or Garrett Hedlund as the would-be hero. The character Raleigh is handsome, charming, and sensitive. He is also an alpha male. Hunnam has done a good job, in a broad action-adventure way. Idris Elba (Prometheus) once again plays the military type as Director Pentecost, and he does it really well with great resolve, authority, and heart. 

Rinko Kikuchi (Shanghai) impresses as the unlikely heroine of the story. As Mako, Kikuchi is smart, typically Asian (meaning quiet and respectful), but also resourceful and resilient as the strong, silent type. She and Hunnam have good chemistry together to portray the would-be lovers.

The supporting cast comprises of good actors doing typical, cliched comic-book characters. Charlie Day (Monsters University) is particularly annoying as Dr. Newton Geiszler who is more of a buffoon than a scientist (and why do filmmakers always depict scientists as these buffoons?). Burn Gorman (Johnny English Reborn) is Day's counterpart and is just as foolish. Max Martini (Colombiana) reminds me of Sean Bean in The Lord of the Rings even though he's playing a futuristic Jaeger pilot. Robert Kazinsky (Red Tails) is all cocky as Raleigh's rivalry. Clifton Collins Jr. (Parker) is a bit lost in a minor role, and Ron Perlman (Bad Ass) has a flashy role as a "Chinese" smuggler.

The screenplay by Travis Beacham (Clash of the Titans) and Guillermo del Toro (Don't be Afraid of the Dark) follows a pretty simple, standard framework of a sci-fi action adventure. The premise and story remind us of yet another giant robot-alien franchise: The Transformers. The comparison is inevitable.  Fortunately, Beacham and del Toro have done a better job developing the characters and plot between the big fights and set pieces. Their characters are at least believable and likable, and there are actually scenes that move the characters forward instead of just letting them be chess pieces.

Still, this is a giant robot vs. giant monster movie, so don't expect Shakespearean writing and character development. What we've come to see are, you guess it, giant robots fighting giant monsters. And we get what we deserve. Under del Toro's unapologetic direction, the actions are bombastic with full-on energy. Everything is done on a grand scale, including the mass destructions. It brings us back to the pure joy and awe of watching old Godzilla  movies in which the giant monster destroys the entire city. Here, we get to see the Jaegers and the Kaiju's destroy San Francisco, Tokyo, and Hong Kong with style. That's got to be satisfying.

Still, del Toro has a few missteps. He gives away the plot too quickly in a rushed prologue that leaves not much to the imagination. There are not enough scenes where we can witness the awesomeness of the Kaiju's (or the Jaegers, for that matter). There are way too many scenes shot at night or in dark situations, and too many close ups that it's difficult to discern what is going on. At times the action sequences become so repetitive that I start to worry: "Is this yet another Michael Bay's Transformers?"

Well, del Toro is no Michael Bay. He's much better. Granted, Pacific Rim is nothing as profound and beautiful as Pan's Labyrinth. But as genre sci-fi action/adventure, it does a good job entertaining us with bombastic larger-than-life action sequences and out of the world special effects. With its international cast and exotic locations -- and did I mention giant robots and monsters? -- this should do very well at the home box-office and around the Pacific Rim.

Stars: Charlie Hunnam, Idris Elba, Rinko Kikuchi, Charlie Day, Burn Gorman, Max Martini, Robert Kazinsky, Clifton Collins Jr., Ron Perlman
Director: Guillermo del Toro
Writers: Travis Beacham, Gullermo del Toro
Distributor: Warner Bros.
MPAA Rating:  PG-13 for sequences of intense sci-fi action and violence, brief language
Running Time: 132 minutes

Ratings:

Script - 7
Performance - 7
Direction - 8
Cinematography - 8
Music/Sound - 7
Editing - 7
Production - 8

Total - 7.5 out of 10.0 

Oz the Great and Powerful

© 2013 Ray Wong

An unofficial prequel to the 1939 classic The Wizard of Oz, Disney's Oz The Great and Powerful unabashed pay homage to the film (while steering clear of any legal issue as the film is property of Warner Bros.) and L. Frank Baum's book.

Oscar "Oz" (James Franco) is a Kansas carnival magician, or a self-proclaimed conman, trying to make a few bucks. He is also quite a ladies' man. While escaping from a beating, Oz climbs into a hot-air balloon only to find himself in the middle of a tornado. Soon he finds himself in a strange land full of wondrous sights.

The first person he meets after he crash-landed is Theodora (Mila Kunis), who tells Oz that she is a good witch, and that Oz must be the wizard according to the late King's prophecy. The Theodora convinces Oz to come with her to the castle so he can help her and her sister Evanora (Rachel Weisz) defeat the wicked witch. At the same time, Theodora falls in love with Oz.

Lured by the promises of the kingdom and riches beyond his belief, Oz accepts the challenge of helping the sisters. He sets off, with is humble sidekick Finney (Zach Braff) to the Dark Forest to find the wicked witch and on his way, he saves a porcelain girl named China Doll (Joey King) from the ruins of her village. When they find the wicked witch, they discover something they didm't expect…

James Franco (Lovelace) could have been a great Wizard of Oz, what with his dashing looks and charm. But it is not an easy character to play -- at first Oz appears to be an unlikable conman and womanizer. Franco's portrayal never goes deeper than the obvious, and his goofy grins and demeanors are distracting. The role was originally written for Robert Downey Jr and I can see him as a much better Oz. That's not good for Franco.

Mila Kunis (Ted) is fine as Theodora, especially in the beginning. Later, as her character goes through some changes, Kunis' performance becomes less convincing and more grating. Rachel Weisz (The Bourne Legacy) is dazzling as Evanora, however. She is deliciously flamboyant and evil, even though she is extraordinarily beautiful in those outrageous costumes. Michelle Williams (My Week with Marilyn) is also fantastic as Glinda the Good.

The supporting cast includes Zach Braff (Tar) who plays both Frank (Oz's real-life assistance) and voices the flying money Finney. Braff does a fine job with both. Bill Cobbs (The Muppets) is steadfast and stoic as Master Tinker. Joey King (The Dark Knight Rises) also plays dual roles but her voice as China Doll is wonderful.

The original story is written by Michael Kapner (Romeo Must Die) and David Lindsay-Abaire (Rise of the Guardians), based on L. Frank Baum's classic novel. They've taken many elements of the book and weaved a backstory surrounding the arrival of the Wizard of Oz. It's hard not to compare this to the 1939 movie starring Judy Garland. It is not an easy job to steer clear of the classic film (since Disney has no rights to it) but true to the book. By and large, the writers have done an admirable job piecing it all together, although the story arc and plot do seem to feel tired and cliched -- after all, it is a story and characters we've come to love (and copied) for 100 years.

Sam Raimi's (Spider-Man) direction is a mixed bag. Visually stunning, the production is as fantastic as we can get. A good mix of CGI, old-fashioned effects and real ornate sets, Raimi obviously pays homage to the classic film while also trying to steer away from anything that is clearly not in the book but in that movie. While the imageries are fantastical, the pacing is off at times, especially in the middle when Oz is trekking his way to find the wicked witch. Also, Raimi's direction, at times, are bogged down by the huge production, large cast of extras and the special effects. It feels drawn out.

That said, the movie is every bit as colorful, vibrant, fun and entertaining as the MGM classic, and is a worthy prequel to it because of it.  Raimi's taken care of matching the two films while sidestepping any legal issues with Warner Bros. and the result is a careful, thoughtful collaboration of creativity. Despite its flaws and a rather lackluster lead, I thoroughly enjoyed the film and it is mostly to Raimi's credit. Oz may not be great or powerful, but it certainly is lovely.

Stars: James Franco, Mila Kunis, Rachel Weisz, Michelle Williams, Zach Braff, Bill Cobbs, Joey King, Tony Cox
Director: Sam Raimi
Writers: Michael Kapner, David Lindsay-Abaire (based on L. Frank Baum's novel)
Distributor: Walt Disney
MPAA Rating:  PG for sequences of action and scary images, and brief mild language
Running Time: 130 minutes

Ratings:

Script - 7
Performance - 7
Direction - 8
Cinematography - 9
Music/Sound - 8
Editing - 7
Production - 9

Total - 7.8 out of 10.0 

Jack the Giant Slayer

© 2013 Ray Wong

A retelling of the famous fairy tale, Jack the Giant Slayer follows a familiar story arc with added plot twists, actions and characters (a lot more characters).

Jack (Nicholas Hoult) is a farm boy always dreaming of adventures. He grew up reading the great story of King Erik and the kingdom of the Giants. One day at the market, as Jack is trying to sell his horse and cart so he can fix the decrepit house he and his uncle live in, he has a chance encounter with Princess Isabelle (Eleanor Tomlinson). Smitten with the Princess, Jack knows his place even though he has left an impression on Isabelle.

Somehow Jack ends up trading his horse for some beans. His uncle is furious with Jack and knocks the beans on the ground -- one of them falls through the crack between the floor planks. Trying to escape her royal duties and seeking adventures herself, Isabelle is lost in the woods when she comes across Jack's house. The two hardly have time to fall for each other when missing bean magically grows into a giant beanstalk, taking Isabelle with it.

The King (Ian McShane), upon seeing the giant beanstalk, arrives with his rescue warriors, headed by his royal advisor Roderick (Stanley Tucci) and valor knight Elmont (Ewan McGregor). Jack volunteers to join the rescue as he worries about Isabelle. When they finally reach the top of the beanstalk, they discover a strange land full of grotesque giants -- whose leader is General Fallon (Bill Nighy). Fallon has a plan to lead his warriors down the beanstalk to invade the kingdom. And little do Jack and Elmont know that Roderick has a plan of his own, too.

Nicholas Hoult (Warm Bodies) has lately craved a niche for himself as unlikely fantasy/science fiction heroes. While his role and performance in Warm Bodies were interesting, the same can't be said about this. As Jack, Hoult is bland and generally passive and, in some ways, too much of a nice kid to rise above the material. Eleanor Tomlinson (Alice in Wonderland) does better with her character Isabelle -- an interesting mix of traditional damsel in distress and the modern princess warrior. Unfortunately, Hoult and Tomlinson have almost no chemistry together, and the added romantic element to the fairy tale is distracting.

Fortunately, the supporting cast does a better job. Ewan McGregor (The Impossible) is loyal, charming, exciting, valorous, dashing as Elmont. And what great hair he has. One only wishes he were the hero of the story, and not Jack. Ian McShane (Snow White and the Huntsman) is solid and King Brahmwell, who vacillates between arrogance and kind consideration quite nicely. Stanley Tucci (The Hung Games) seems to have had a lot of fun playing the schemer, san that twirled mustache. Bill Nighy (The Most Exotic Marigold Hotel) provides the menacing voice and motion capture for General Fallon, and he does a great job.

Written by an army of writers headed by Darren Lamke (Shrek Forever After), the screenplay is a hodgepodge of familiar stories, cliches, and something new. The story adheres to the time period -- a cross between Medieval and Renaissance -- and the general arc of the original fairy tale. Still, there are plenty of upgrades. No longer just a tale of Jack and the beanstalk, there are many added characters and subplots, including an army of giants who look suspiciously like the trolls in The Hobbit. In many ways, this story and these characters are derivative, filled with old cliches and archetypes. If you're looking for something totally new and fresh, then look elsewhere.

Still, even though confined by these constraints, the movie manages to entertain. It is surprisingly violent and gruesome for a "family" movie, thus the PG-13 rating (don't worry though, parents; there is hardly any sex except maybe some mild kissing between the two leads). Young children may have nightmares afterwards after seeing men (and some sheep) being stomped on and chomped on, kind of like Jurassic Park set in Medieval times (and no, that movie isn't suitable for young children either).

Bryan Singer's (Valkyrie) hasn't directed a movie since 2008, and he jumps back into the fray with such a big budget movie. The risks are certainly there. The fact is, Singer didn't do anything that is phenomenal here, or really leave his mark. Instead, it seems like he is just a director for hire, and his movie could have been directed by someone else and we probably wouldn't even have noticed. That's not the say it is bad. The direction is skillful and the pacing is just fine. The production is quite easy on the eye, and despite some early criticism, the CGIs are adequate.

Jack the Giant Slayer is by no means a disaster. It is just not a very good movie, and it seems such a failure when we consider the budget. In truth, it is an enjoyable escape to a fantasy world which reminds us what it was like to be kids, fascinated by adventures and gruesome monsters. Boxoffice slayer it may not be, but it sure accomplishes what it is supposed to do.

Stars: Nicholas Hoult, Eleanor Tomlinson, Ewan McGregor, Stanley Tucci, Ian McShane, Bill Nighy
Director: Bryan Singer
Writers: Darren Lamke, Christopher McQuarrie, Dan Studney, David Dobkin
Distributor: Warner Bros.
MPAA Rating:  PG-13 for intense sequences of fantasy action violence, scary images and brief language
Running Time: 114 minutes

Ratings:

Script - 6
Performance - 7
Direction - 7
Cinematography - 7
Music/Sound - 8
Editing - 8
Production - 8

Total - 7.0 out of 10.0 

Beautiful Creatures

© 2013 Ray Wong


Based on Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl's popular YA fantasy series, Beautiful Creatures makes no apologies retelling a teenage love story between a "mortal" and a special being -- any resemblance to Twilight or any other fantasies is purely coincidental. Or not.

Ethan (Alden Ehrenreich) is a curious and book-smart jock (if there's such a thing) who yearns to leave his South Carolina small-town existence behind. When the Ravenwoods returned, the town is abuzz with speculations about satanic curses and abominations. Lena (Alice Englert), niece of patriarch Macon (Jeremy Irons) becomes the easy target when she enters the local junior high, trying to pass as normal. She also catches the eye of Ethan, who is drawn to the mystery and sensibility surrounding Lena.

In his pursuit of Lena, Ethan discovers that Lena and her family are Casters -- another term for witches -- beings with supernatural powers. Lena tries very hard to act normal and fit in, but she has little control over her increasing power. According to Lena, on her 16th birthday, she will be claimed by either the light or the dark side, depending on her true nature, and she is afraid that the dark side is going to win, just like with her mother or cousin Ridley (Emmy Rossum). Ethan convinces her that she has enough good in her to avert the fate of her mother.

As Lena's birthday draws closer, she and Ethan fall deeply in love. However, they also discover that their respective ancestors were once lovers, and the two families have been bound by a curse. And with this curse, Lena's chance of being claimed by the Light becomes slim. With the help of Amma (Viola Davis), Lena finally figures out how to break the curse, but it does come with a significant price.

The two leads, Alden Ehrenreich (Stoker) and Alice Englert (Ginger and Rosa) are relative unknowns. Englert has recently garnered attention for her role as Rosa in Ginger and Rosa. Her portrayal of the teenage witch is charming, vulnerable, and sweet but not without her fair share of darkness. Englert does a good job with her complicated role. In comparison. Ehrenreich is stuck with a stereotypical, too-good-to-be-true character who is simply a female's ideal. The character development doesn't allow Ehrenreich to do much except to be a love-sick puppy. Fortunately, Ehrenreich and Englert have good chemistry together that makes, at least, their relationship seem plausible.

The supporting cast tries their best. Jeremy Irons (The Words) plays Macon with the typical Iron-esque savviness and creepiness at the same time. Somehow, though, I feel that he's channeling everything from Gomez Addams to Snape. Viola Davis (The Help) is reduced to a stereotypical southern African-American woman who knows a thing or two about the underworld. Emmy Rossum (Poseidon) has not much to do with her peripheral character who seems to just storm in and out of town simply as a plot device. The standout here is Emma Thompson (Men in Black 3) who somehow turns a cliched character into someone that is fun to watch (well, it helps that she is actually playing two characters).

Writer-director Richard LaGravenese (Water for Elephant) tries his best to adapt Garcia and Stohl's novel into a coherent story with interesting characters. It has all the right elements: likable leads, a budding romance, Southern mysticism, witchcraft, supernatural powers, a handful of quirky and unusual characters, and for the most part it works as designed. However, that simply reveals the derivative nature of the story and characters. They remind me of everything from Twilight to True Blood with bits and pieces of The Addams Family or Beetle Juice or Romeo & Juliet or Teen Wolf, etc. thrown in.

We also can't overlook the cliches and stereotypes:  a country boy falling for a worldly girl, a creepy patriarch, evil relatives, bratty ex-girlfriend, an African-American woman who happens to be a medium, etc. etc. In comparison, True Blood at least play around these familiar tropes (vampires, witches, werewolves, etc.) and comes up with twisted new ideas. In this story, we come to realize we've seen this show a thousand times already. Not to mention the smart, athletic, loyal, romantic, sweet, kind, and steadfast hero is too much of a female's dream to be believable. Wish fulfillment, anyone?

That said, I did rather enjoy the production. Under LaGravenese's direction, it has a giddy, perky and fun vibe. It is quite beautifully shot. The love story has its sweet moments. And there are a few scenes between Jeremy Irons and Emma Thompson that showcase how good these actors can be, if given the right material. Unfortunately, by and large these veteran actors are way too good for this material. Too bad, despite their best efforts, this simply isn't the beautiful creature we've hoped for.

Stars: Alden Ehrenreich, Alice Englert, Jeremy Irons, Viola Davis, Emmy Rossum, Emma Thompson, Thomas Mann, Eileen Atkins, Margo Martindale
Director: Richard LaGravenese
Writers: Richard LaGravenese (based on novel by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl)
Distributor: Warner Bros.
MPAA Rating:  PG-13 for violence, scary images and some sexual content
Running Time: 124 minutes 

Ratings:

Script - 6
Performance - 7
Direction - 7
Cinematography - 7
Music/Sound - 6
Editing - 7
Production - 7

Total - 6.8 out of 10.0 

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

© 2013 Ray Wong

It's inevitable -- expected even -- that director Peter Jackson has brought The Hobbit to the big screen given how incredibly successful financially and critically the Lord of the Rings trilogy was. What is unexpected, however, is how Jackson decided to make it into a trilogy as well, and how tepid the final result is.

Taking off at the start of the Lord the Rings trilogy, where Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm) is having his birthday party. At the same time, Bilbo is writing the story of his adventures some 60 years ago. In that story, the great wizard Gandalf (Ian KcKellen) pays Bilbo (Martin Freeman) a visit and speaks of an adventure that would be unlike anything Bilbo has ever experienced. Not interested, or so Bilbo thinks, until some uninvited guests show up at his home. These are dwarfs, led by Thorin (Richard Armitage), who have been driven out of their home by a dragon named Smaug. The dwarves are determined to fight and get back their home, but they need help. Gandalf happens to believe that Bilbo is just the right Hobbit to do the job.

Initially rejecting the idea, Bilbo is soon intrigued by the idea of a once-in-a-life-time adventure. Their journey will take them through the wild of Middle Earth, through the territories of dangerous orcs, wargs and goblins, finally to Lonely Mountain, and they have to get there at the precise time or they'd lose all possibilities of ever finding their way in. Their journey also takes them to Rivendale, the home of the ethereal Elves. The Dwarves and the Elves are not necessary on good terms either, as Thorin blames the Elves, especially the elven king Trandull (Lee Pace), for not helping them defend their home. 

As the dwarves try to escape the goblins' tunnels, Bilbo is separated from the group, and comes in contact with a strange creature named Gollum (Andy Serkis). Here, Bilbo accidentally gets hold of Gollum's "precious" ring. Little does he know how that encounter and the ring will change everything.

The huge ensemble cast is led by Ian KcKellen (X-Men: The Last Stand) who reprises his role as Gandalf. McKellen handles the character as if time hasn't passed between Return of the King and The Hobbit, but this Gandalf is younger and more unsure. Martin Freeman (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) is rather good as young Bilbo, channeling Ian Holm (who also has a cameo reprising the role) while making the character his own.

The dwarves are played, sentimentally gruff and rough, by Richard Armitage (Captain America: The First Avenger) as Thorin, Graham McTavish (Colombiana) as Dwalin, and Ken Stott (One Day) as Balin. Even though the actors are buried in layers of hair and fur, they give each dwarf a distinctive personality and it's easy to set them apart. Hugo Weaving (Cloud Atlas) and Cate Blanchett (Hanna) also reprise their elven roles as Elrond and Galabriel respectively, and Elijah Wood (Celest & Jessie Forever) has a cameo as Frodo. Andy Serkis (Tin Tin) also contributes again as Gollum via motion capture.

The screenplay adapted from J.R.R. Tolkien's timeless work is a collaboration between Peter Jackson, his team of writer, and Guillermo del Toro. The material is similar to that of the Lord of the Rings trilogy except seemingly on a smaller scale. The tone is right, and there's this whimsical aspect of it. However, in a way, it lacks certain urgency as the story is told in flashbacks, and given what we already know about the Lord of the Rings, we already know how it turns out. The stakes are not high enough, and often it feels like a introduction to Lord of the Rings instead of a story of its own right. Also, Jackson et el has turned a 300-plus-page book into a trilogy, and this one installment is almost three hours long! There is just not enough material to give it an epic treatment.

So what we have here is a lot of repetitions. Bilbo, Gandalf, and the dwarves are constantly traveling, dodging one enemy after another, in one familiar setting after another. After a while, it feels very derivative and tiresome. The first hour of the movie also moves along in a dreadfully slow pace -- the plot doesn't move until Bilbo decides to accept the challenge. Even then, there is no sense of real adventure or high stakes, even though we're constantly reminded how dangerous it will be.

Visually stunning, as it should be, The Hobbit remains a masterfully made film in terms of technical achievements and cinematic storytelling. The visual effects are top-notch, even though some scenes do look too computerized or animated. With the advance of technology, Gollum looks and acts even more real -- between Gollum and Peter Parker in the Life of Pi, one can only imagine how incredible digital actors are going to be in the near future.

While technically a triumph, I simply can't overlook the derivative nature of the story, the pacing issue, and the repetitiveness of The Hobbit to make it enjoyable. It should have been one movie, and it should not have been 3 hours long. While it is a much anticipated prequel to the Lord of the Rings saga, how it trudges along is truly unexpected.

Stars: Ian KcKellen, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Ken Stott, Graham McTavish, William Kircher, James Nesbitt, Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett, Elijah Wood, Ian Holm, Andy Serkis
Director: Peter Jackson
Writer: Fran Walsh, Phillipa Boyers, Peter Jackson, Guillermo del Toro (based on novel by J.R.R. Tolkien)
Distributor: Warner Bros.
MPAA Rating:  PG-13 for extended sequences of intense fantasy action violence and frightening images
Running Time: 169 minutes 

Ratings:

Script - 6
Performance - 7
Direction - 7
Cinematography - 9
Music/Sound - 8
Editing - 8
Production - 9

Total - 7.4 out of 10.0 

Cloud Atlas

© 2012 Ray Wong

David Mitchell's Cloud Atlas is one of those critically acclaimed novels that are deemed to be unfilmable. Somehow, Andy and Lana Wachowski (the Matrix series), together with Tom Tykwer (The International) manages to make a mostly-coherent epic out of it.

I won't even detail the plot, as the movie contains not one, not two, but six different stories with totally different characters. However, these stories and characters are linked not only by a clever story construct, but also by themes. In late 19th century, a trader named Adam Ewing (Jim Sturgess) is about to get into slave trade when he is poisoned by the ship doctor (Tom Hanks). In 1936, a young gay composer Robert Frobisher (Ben Whishaw) becomes the protege of a famed composer, and it's at the older composer's house that Robert comes across the journals of Ewing.

In 1973, a young reporter (Halle Berry) gets a tip from a nuclear scientist Rufus Sixsmith (James D'Arcy) that something is wrong with the nuclear power plant owned by oilman Lloyd Hooks (Hugh Grant). When Sixsmith was murdered, the reporter finds letters to Sixsmith left by Frobisher as well as a classical piece called Cloud Atlas composed by Frobisher. in 2012, publisher Timothy Cavendish (Jim Broadbent) is forced into a nursing home where he plans an elaborate escape. Before then, he was about to publish a novel that details the nuclear plant incident.

In early 22nd century, a fabricant named Sonmi-451 (Doona Bae) is rescued from her imminent fate by Agent Hae-Joo Chang (Jim Sturgess). In hiding, Sonmi-451 watches an old movie about Cavendish's adventures. In late 24th century and after "The Fall," Zachry (Tom Hanks) and his family are living in tribes when a visitor Meronym (Halle Berry) arrives. Zachry is inflicted with an inner demon that wants him to harm Meronym. When he takes Maronym to the abandoned city, they discover a message left by Sonmi-451…

The main ensemble cast portray many different characters in these six connected stories. Tom Hanks (Larry Crowne) gets to play Zachry, a scientist named Isaac Sachs, a hotel manager, among other characters. While Hanks is a good actor, the fact that his highly recognizable face is portraying these different characters -- some understated and some over the top -- is very distracting. The same is true with Halle Berry (New Year's Eve) whose two main roles are the reporter Louisa Rey and Meronym. As other characters, she too is very distracting.

Jim Broadbent (The Iron Lady) has a better job juggling between his different roles as he somehow manages to disappear in the characters. The same can be said for Hugh Grant (Music and Lyrics) who, with the help of make-up, does a good job portraying the many different characters. Jim Sturgess (One Day) should also be commended especially for playing Adam Ewing and -- with a race change -- Hae-Joo Chang. Doona Bae, in her English-speaking debut, is fantastic as Sonmi-451. She also gets to play some minor characters -- a Mexican woman comes to mind. Hugo Weaving (Happy Feet Two) is awesome as the devil, and a great comic relief as Nurse Noakes. However, he sticks out like a sore thumb with other minor characters, especially when he's playing Asians (the makeup simply doesn't work).

Tykwer and the Wachowskis have done a tremendous job deconstructing the novel and piecing everything together and give us an epic spanning over 400 years. At times, the intercutting stories seem disjointed and disorienting, and some of them seem irrelevant or too humorous to fit with the rest. Over all, however, they have done a good job maintaining a consistent tone, weaving the stories together with visual cues and thematic links. Through the use of a birthmark, the audience comes to realize that the characters that bear the same birthmark is the same soul that comes back again and again, to learn and to grow. Sometimes it fails (as in the case of Robert Frobisher), but sometimes it triumphs (such is the case with Adam Ewing or Sonmi-451).

They abandon the novel's challenging storytelling structure. Instead, they rely on a linear storytelling technique that weaves the six different stories together through artifacts from the previous story: Ewing's journal, Frobisher's Cloud Atlas and letters to Sixsmith, Cavendish's novel, a movie about Cavendish, and Sonmi's message to the world. Through these links, the filmmakers are able to help the audience understand the themes and the relations between these characters and stories.

I also understand their decision to use the same actors to make the various different roles. It is a challenge that doesn't always pay off. The fact is that these actors are not playing the same "soul" and that can be very disorienting. While it must have been fun for the actors to play, for the audience, it becomes very distracting. We start to wonder, for example, whether Tom Hanks is playing the same soul throughout the film, and then we find out that he's not. So we now question, why the heck is he playing these characters then, other than "it's fun for Tom Hanks"?

That said, Cloud Atlas is a cinematic achievement and I must give kudos for the filmmakers to at least attempt to adapt this impossible book into an epic movie that is wonderful to look at. The editing is fantastic, especially when we consider how challenging it must have been to piece all six stories and multiple characters together. That alone is a tremendous achievement, and technically Cloud Atlas is a marvel in many ways. 

Stars: Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Hugo Weaving, Hugh Grant, Jim Sturgess, Doona Bae, Ben Whishaw, James D'Arcy, Susan Sarandon
Directors: Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski, Lana Wachowski
Writers: Lana Wachowski, Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski (based on novel by David Mitchell)
Distributor: Warner Bros.
MPAA Rating:  R for violence, language, sexuality, nudity, and drug use
Running Time: 172 minutes 

Ratings:

Script - 7
Performance - 7
Direction - 8
Cinematography - 9
Music/Sound - 7
Editing - 9
Production - 9

Total - 7.9 out of 10.0 

The Odd Life of Timothy Green

© 2012 Ray Wong

The title of The Odd Life of Timothy Green is a bit misleading. The story really is about the childless couple who become Timothy Green's parents. And what "life"?  Timothy Green didn't even live past one season…

Jim (Joey Edgerton) and Cindy (Jennifer Garner) Green are a young couple who lives in Stanleyville, a small town famous for its pencils. Despite trying for years, Cindy and Jim can't conceive. Devastated by the final verdict, Jim and Cindy write down all their hopes and wishes for their "child" and put the notes in a box, which they bury in their backyard. Then something magical happens. A young boy shows up in their house, and his name is Timothy, the same name that Jim and Cindy picked for their non-existing son. Where did he come from? Did he run away? Then when they see leaves growing out of Timothy's legs, they know.

Acting as Timothy's adoptive parents, Jim and Cindy have to hide the fact about Timothy, especially the fact that he has leaves on his legs. They try to act normal and eventually become a normal family with Timothy, who is everything they ever wish for in a child. Through Timothy, Jim and Cindy get to learn to become parents. They make mistakes, too. They go through all the ups and downs of parenthood. They worry about Timothy. They have hopes and wishes for him. And they want to protect him from bullies and judgmental people such as Jim's absent father (David Morse), Cindy's braggart of a sister (Rosemarie DeWitt) and humorless boss (Dianne Wiest).

And then Timothy falls in love with a free-spirited girl named Joni (Odeya Rush). They intrigue each other. And Timothy tells Joni a secret that he doesn't even tell his parents -- a secret that will eventually change all their lives.

Jennifer Garner (Valentine's Day) is earnest to a fault as Cindy Green. Her portrayal is affecting and sincere, and one only realizes that Garnet must relate to the character and story as a mother herself. It is just that her character is too nice and sweet and kind, almost a stereotype. In comparison, Joel Edgerton (The Thing) has a more complex character to play. Jim Green isn't a perfect father, but at least he tries, to not repeat the mistakes his own father made with him. Edgerton does an admirable job with the character.

CJ Adams (Dan in Real Life) is sweet as Timothy. Though not as talented as Freddie Highmore or Haley Joel Osment, Adams has an innocent charm that is perfect as Timothy Green, who is basically an angel figure, if you will. Odeya Rush (Curb Your Enthusiasm) is lovely as Timothy's crush, Joni. On the cusp of being a young woman, Rush portrays the young girl with just a hint of blossoming sexuality (that stays within the boundary of a PG movie).

The supporting cast is largely serviceable in more conventional and cliched roles. Rosemarie DeWitt (My Sister's Sister) plays a brat rather well. David Morse (Collaborator) is aloof and stoic as Jim's father. Dianne Wiest (Rabbit Hole) seems underused as Cindy's boss, but she shows us a glimpse of her great acting in a oddly-sensual (and a bit inappropriate) scene. Ron Livington (Going the Distance) plays the town bully and Jim's boss with his usual smirks and smarminess.

Written by writer-director Peter Hedges (Dan in Real Life) from actor Ahmet Zappa's (Jack Frost) story, the screenplay is very typical Disney-esque. Something we come to expect from a Disney family movie. With that expectation, we can somewhat tolerate the sappiness and blatant heartstring tugging. Well, to a certain extent. I'm a little surprised, though, by how manipulative the screenplay is. I liked Dan in Real Life and Who's Eating Gilbert Grapes, so I am a fan of Hedges' work. Still, here, I feel that he has given in to Disney to present us with a story that is so over-to-top sugary.

Don't get me wrong. There are genuine heart-warming moments. While many of the characters are cliches, some are quite affecting.  The premise and plot, however, require a huge dose of suspension of disbelief. Even as a fantasy, we must ask what is the point of Timothy's existence? Is it to teach Jim and Cindy how to be parents? There are better ways. Is it for Timothy -- a pure soul -- to touch and change the people around him? The fact is, I don't see a lot of changes? At the end of the movie, the most changed people are Jim and Cindy. The others seem the same to me. In a way, I feel that Zappa and Hedges are trying to hard to create their version of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. I mean, come on, even the titles sound similar.

Hedges' direction is simple and direct, which actually serves the film quite well. There is a bit of this fantastical, fairytale tone in the production, which also works well. The pacing seems slow in the middle, when the plot doesn't seem to move. Timothy's "secret" is no secret at all -- we all know what it is and where it is leading us. The ending is predictable and in a way anticlimactic. However, I actually like the soft, quiet ending that feels right for the characters.

As a family movie, Timothy Green has all the elements to please and delight. Too bad it's done in such a heavy-handed way, and even if it does manage to squeeze a few tears from the audience, I have a feeling they will come out of the theater feeling a bit manipulated and coerced. 

Stars: Jennifer Garner, Joel Edgerton, CJ Adams, Odeya Rush, Rosemarie DeWitt, David Morse, Dianne Wiest, Ron Livington
Director: Peter Hedges
Writers: Peter Hedges, Ahmet Zappa
Distributor: Walt Disney
MPAA Rating:  PG for mild thematic elements and brief language
Running Time: 105 minutes 

Ratings:

Script - 7
Performance - 7
Direction - 7
Cinematography - 8
Music/Sound - 7
Editing - 7
Production - 7

Total - 7.1 out of 10.0 

Total Recall

© 2012 Ray Wong

I never quite understand why studios want to remake a classic -- a cult classic, at that -- except for one reason: money. Even then, the movie must be good enough to recoop the escalating costs, let alone make a profit. Unfortunately, I am afraid Total Recall may not be able to do that.

In 2083, Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell) is a poor factory worker who lives in the colony of the United Federated Britain (UFB) with his beautiful police officer wife Lori (Kate Beckinsale). Quaid lives his peaceful but dull and repetitive life, going to work every day with his best friend Harry (Bokeem Woodbine), but deep down he feels that he is something else, someone different. He's itching to try out Total Rekall where they can implant their customers with any experiences as memories. A botched visit, however, leads Quaid on the run from police. More fascinatingly, Quaid realizes he has skills and intincts of a spy.

He also realizes that his whole life has been a lie -- somehow his memories have been replaced. Lori, in reality, is working for Counselor Cohaagen (Bryan Cranston), a ruthless politician who intends to stage an invasion of the colony to squash the resistance, led by a recluse named Matthias (Bill Nighy). With the help of a rebel named Melina (Jessica Biel), Quaid tries to piece everything together and find out who he really is.

Colin Farrell (Fright Night) is a good actor especially in smaller films and roles such as In Bruges or Crazy Heart. As the action hero of a big-budget sci-fi action-adventure, however, Farrell gets bogged down and buried by all the special effects and stunts. Don't get me wrong, Farrell looks and acts the part, but he just can't rise above the material to make the role his own. Everyone is going to compare him with the original Quaid -- the unimitable Arnold Schwarzennigger. It's no small feat to begin with, and Colin seems lost in the production. I keep wondering if Mark Wahlburg would be a better choice as Quaid.

Kate Beckinsale successfully juggles between action (the Underworld series) and drama (Everybody's Fine), and she does a fine job, albeit one-dimensional (I blame that on the screenwriters, however). Still, as ruthless and beautiful as she is, she is no Sharon Stone, who was brilliant in the 1990 original. Jessica Biel (New Year's Eve) is utterly lost as Melina. She seems to have only two or three expressions, and her character is so underwritten and developed that she may as well be played by a robot.

Bryan Cranston (Rock of Ages) hams it up as Cohaagen. He's larger-than-life and seems to have a great time playing the villain. Bokeem Woodbine (Devil) is serviceable as Harry and has an interesting scene or two. Bill Nighy's (Wrath of the Titans) talent is completely wasted as Matthias, who has maybe five minutes of screentime and not much else to do. John Cho (American Reunion), however, makes good use of his limited screentime as Rekall owner McClane.

Written by Kurt Wimmer (Salt) and Mark Bomback (Unstoppable), the screenplay follows the same structure and general arcs of the original (which was based on Philip Dick's story). They change a few things though, so it's not exactly a remake, but a reboot instead. There is no Mars. No one ever goes there. There are no mutants, but there is a post-apocalyptic world with an oppressive, totalitarian government. Sounds familiar? The problem with the story and plot is that, in order to set itself apart from the original, it settles for something predictable and "safe." We've seen that world before, in V for Vendetta, Bladerunner, I Robot, even Star Wars, to name a few. There is nothing fresh here. In fact, the central theme of "who am I?" echoes eerily films such as The Truman Show, but in a less thought-provoking and profound way.

In fact, everything about the writing and production leans toward the profane. Under Len Wiseman's (Live Free or Die Hard) direction, the movie is loud, busy, face-paced and unrelenting. Granted, there are some eye-popping special effects and set pieces, and certain action sequences are impressive. Kudos to the production designs and art direction as well. They have done a great job creating that universe, and a few "updates" from the original movie are truly imaginative. However, in all that slickness and sophisticated production values and effects, it seriously lacks a heart. We never really have a chance to come to sympathize and relate to Quaid or Melina or Matthias or the rebels. Nothing matters except for the breakneck actions. The relentless nature of the plot leaves us no room to breathe, let alone getting to know and relate to the characters.

Even with the state of the art special effects that make the original look outdated and cheesy, it lacks the original's sense of wonderment, cheekiness, and over-the-top charm. And Mars is a much more interesting place than a nuclear wasteland.

Needless to say, I'm disappointed. With all the money they threw into this, and all the talents involved in the project, it falls way short. Is it entertaining? Definitely. Is it action packed? Absolutely. Is it an eye candy? Of course. But does it leave enough of an impression five minutes after you leave the theater? I am sorry -- I don't recall.

Stars: Colin Farrell, Kate Beckinsale, Jessica Biel, Bryan Cranston, Bokeem Woodbine, Bill Nighy, John Cho

Director: Len Wiseman

Writers: Kurt Wimmer, Mark Bomback (based on Philip K. Dick's short story)

Distributor: Sony

MPAA Rating:  PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action, some sexual content, brief nudity, and language

Running Time: 118 minutes 

Ratings:

Script - 5

Performance - 6

Direction - 7

Cinematography - 8

Music/Sound - 7

Editing - 8

Production - 9

Total - 6.1 out of 10.0