'Shoot 'Em Up' review

Rating: *** out of ****

I’ve seen bedroom scenes turn into action sequences. Most Robert Rodriguez flicks do that. I don’t think, however, that I’ve seen an action sequence occur during a bedroom scene, while the lovers continue killing people mid-coitus. That’s just how far over the edge ‘Shoot ‘Em Up’ is willing to go. I do not mean that as a disparaging remark, but as one of affection. I have the utmost respect for action movies that are not afraid to believe that live action and comic books can be the same. It’s the same belief that gave us most John Woo movies, ‘Sin City’, ‘Kill Bill’ and now this.

‘Shoot ‘Em Up’ starts in the middle of an event, as Mr. Smith (Clive Owen) witnesses a pregnant woman about to be gunned down. Against his better judgment, he saves her, which leads to one of the most ironic killings I’ve seen in a while. The woman dies, but Smith saves her baby. It turns out that a US senator named Rutledge is dying and the only cure is the bone marrow of infants. Rutledge is running for president and if he wins, wants to ban guns from the U.S. A major gun manufacturer does not want this, obviously, and so they hire Hertz, a hitman with marital issues, to kill all the babies intended as marrow hosts for the senator. Paul Giamatti plays Hertz with a sinful glee, in a role that feels so cathartic after playing back-to-back losers in ‘American Splendor’ and ‘Sideways’. Smith employs the help of DQ (Monica Bellucci), a hooker with a heart of gold (and a penchant for lactating fetishists). Her job is to take care of the child between gunfights and if Smith dies, to take it somewhere safe.

While I’m normally a strong supporter of back-story, ‘Shoot ‘Em Up’ gives minimal back-story and I believe it helps the story. All we’re given about Hertz is that he used to work for the FBI and now he has problems at home. This adds a great comedic tone to a psychotic killer. We learn almost nothing about DQ, except for a previous tragedy that I’m not sure was necessary for her character. Clive Owen plays Mr. Smith with just the right balance of strength, slickness and decency. He doesn’t kill people that he doesn’t need to. He is a character we know nothing about except he also has a tragedy in his past, he loves carrots and he’s really, really good at shooting. Not knowing where the characters are coming from is half the fun of ‘Shoot ‘Em Up’. We’re thrust into this situation, as Smith and DQ are and so the events unfold for us as they do for them – one bullet at a time.

This movie may have the shortest recorded time between start and the first gunshot. I read online that there are 11 action sequences in the film’s 86 minutes. That's more action per frame than any ‘Die Hard’, ‘Lethal Weapon’ or ‘James Bond’ film. Unfortunately, that’s not always a good thing. While much of the action here is completely original and wild, it becomes redundant. I wanted something else to happen besides shooting, shooting and more shooting. ‘Shoot ‘Em Up’ is thin on plot but thick on action.

I know people will watch this and hate it, thinking it’s completely ludicrous, over the top and unrealistic. Of course it is. That’s the point. Creativity should always outweigh reality in movies. That is the joy of cinema. I still advocate that every movie needs a certain level of realism, and ‘Shoot ‘Em Up’ has it: if Smith shoots someone, they die. That’s all the realism this movie needs.

'Sukiyaki Western Django' review

Rating: **** out of ****

This year marked my first experience at the Toronto International Film Festival. Granted, I have only lived in Toronto one year, but still, it was a big deal. Unfortunately, since I was busy, I could only attend one movie. I didn’t care which one it was. I managed to luck out, as my first movie would be director Takashi Miike’s first English language film, ‘Sukiyaki Western Django’. I really knew nothing about the film, except it was a Japanese western and that Quentin Tarantino had a role in it. What I ended up seeing was one of the most surreal films since, well, ‘Grindhouse’.

I was constantly reminded of ‘Kill Bill’ while watching ‘Django’. You can sense Tarantino’s influence, if in camaraderie alone. It reeks of that same joy of moviemaking that made ‘Kill Bill’ so wonderful. Moreover, Tarantino’s role isn’t a shameless cameo as many have suspected. He plays ‘Ringo’, a de facto narrator, lending a hand on back-story when needed. He opens the film on a set that literally seems out of a children’s show. At one point his character has aged terribly and bares an uncanny resemblance to the Emperor from the ‘Star Wars’ trilogy.

Two clans - the Red and the White - have been at war for centuries. Even though the war has wiped out both clans save for a few roaming bands, the fighting continues. Meanwhile, there is a rumor spreading of hidden treasure in a small town. Drawn by the rumors, both gangs have set up shop in said town to search. Of course, the war continues while in this town and townsfolk are wise and flee. One day a stranger arrives - a quick draw artist who prefers to shoot first and ask questions later. It is learned that the stranger is so skilled that whichever clan he chooses to side, they will inevitably win the war. In the true anti-hero way, our hero offers his services to whichever clan is prepared to pay him the largest share of the treasure, once found.

Beyond this, there isn’t much point in talking about story. This film’s all storytelling and no story. It is style over substance, yet the style is of such caliber that it becomes the art. Imagine a movie where one character is shooting at another and the opposing character is able to slash the bullets out of mid-air with his sword. Alternatively, another scene in which one character is such a good shot that he can fire bullets in the complete opposite direction of his enemy, and yet every round finds its target. So many amazing visuals occur that you seem to remember the film in moments as opposed to a story as a whole.

I’ve read that ‘Django’ finds Miike in his supposed ‘mainstream’ mode. While I’ll agree this film is more accessible than ‘Ichi The Killer’ or ‘Imprint’, I would not classify it as mainstream. ‘Mainstream’ tends to imply cliché or lack of imagination. While it is homage from beginning to end, there is nothing unoriginal here. Miike, like Tarantino, is a cinephile and knows just what ingredients to take from where and how to mix them. The film is violent, as most Miike films tend to be. However, the tone is a left turn from his normal affairs - ‘Audition’ for example. The violence is ironic, comedic and fashioned with grandeur that is part Frank Miller and part Bruce Lee. Like ‘Kill Bill’ and ‘Natural Born Killers’ before it, ‘Sukiyaki Western Django’ is an exercise in style that transcends genre. It’s an amalgam of Kurosawa, Sergio Leone and the Wachowskis, to name a few. It’s the first film I’ve seen where the actors are speaking phonetic English and still have English subtitles.

After watching ‘Sukiyaki Western Django’, I was reminded of a quote from Roger Ebert on ‘Kill Bill Vol. 1’: “The movie is not about anything at all except the skill and humor of its making. It's kind of brilliant.”

'Superman: Doomsday' review

Rating: ***1/2 out of ****

With every superhero movie there is a delicate balance between the action and the human elements of the story. That is what made movies like ‘Spider-man 2’ and ‘Batman Begins’ so excellent – they could walk that line extremely well and neither aspect suffered. ‘Superman Returns’ could have been so much better. With the exception of the jet-plane rescue, the action was far from stunning and the human plotline felt flat. Some may see ‘Superman: Doomsday’ as the film that ‘Superman Returns’ should have been.

Based on the best selling graphic novel of all time, ‘Superman: Doomsday’ begins with Lex Luther’s mining company digging up an alien vessel buried in the earth. It turns out that it is not a transport, but rather a prison meant for holding Doomsday, an alien soldier deemed unstoppable. When he was created, Doomsday was unable to differentiate between friend and foe. Therefore, he kills everything in his path. When it was discovered that Doomsday was unstoppable, his creators trapped him in this prison (somehow) and sent him hurdling through space. When uncased on earth it is up to Superman to stop him.

The ensuing battle is something so epic; it felt longer than the battle at Helm’s Deep. I mean that in a good way. I found myself enthralled in the battle between the hero and villain. They fight non-stop through the city of Metropolis, underground, through the air, through buildings and even into space. There is even a moment where Superman lifts a tugboat out of the harbor in order to throw it at his enemy. In live action, this would probably come across as laughable, but I was thrilled.

Superman perishes in the battle and the world is devastated. The film manages to examine the effect of Superman's demise in surprising depth. From the emotional loss felt by Lois Lane, to the pain felt by his mother. Ironically, even Lex Luthor mourns the fact that he was not the one to defeat Superman after all this time.

Weeks after his death, Superman returns (no pun intended). The world is shocked by his Christ-like rise from the grave. However, we learn that Lex Luthor has created a Superman clone in order to fool Metropolis and secretly control the city behind the scenes. The real Superman is resurrected though, with the help of his robot assistant at the fortress of solitude. This all builds into a climactic final showdown between the real Superman and the clone. I wondered if the robot character was thrown in as a nod to Kevin Smith’s infamous draft of a Superman movie in which Brainiac has said robot assistant. Smith even has a cameo in the film, which furthered my speculation, but I digress.

‘Superman: Doomsday’ is not all action. With a running time of only 75 minutes, it manages to have a well-plotted, multi-layered story while being surprisingly realistic and adult. The human elements are done very well. Lois and Superman are seen as sexual beings; their attraction feels realer than ever. Each character reacts to Superman’s death differently, with Jimmy becoming a disillusioned, sell-out paparazzi and Perry White turning to booze to ease his pain. The voice work here is well done. Anne Heche plays a convincing Lois with just the right amount of spunk and attitude. The film is also surprisingly violent and may not be appropriate for smaller children.

‘Superman: Doomsday’ could have stood to be longer and a few elements could have been explored more. I would have liked a bit more back-story on Doomsday, perhaps a glimpse of his home world. The dialogue is a bit corny at times, but it fits perfectly in the cartoon realm. In spite of its flaws, it manages to be one of the best films in the franchise. The film is stripped down to its essentials which keeps the pace and excitement going non-stop; and given that it is supposed to be a children’s movie, that’s appropriate. However, I have a feeling adults may enjoy this more than their kids may. Perhaps Bryan Singer should give this DVD a watch before he goes to work on the ‘Superman Returns’ sequel.

'Hulk' has invaded Toronto!

Now circulating the net are photos taken today from the set of 'The Incredible Hulk'. While I did not take these pictures myself I was only a few blocks from this location today. I was in the neighborhood the other day and got to see the erecting of the Apollo theater sign which was pretty cool.

The following notice has been posted, saying that Yonge Street will be closed from today until Wednesday:

"Please note that Yonge Street will be closed between College Street and Dundas Street from Sunday, September 16 through Wednesday, September 19.

The closure will begin at 7:00 p.m. each night and continue until 7:00 a.m. the next morning.

Sidewalks will also be closed starting at 8:00 p.m. each night until 7:00 a.m. the next day.

The road closure is due to filming."

























'The Incredible Hulk' starring Edward Norton and Liv Tyler opens in theaters June 13th/2008.

'Sunshine' review

Rating: *** out of ****

Danny Boyle’s ‘Sunshine’ borrows from such films as ‘2001’, ‘Solaris’ and ‘Event Horizon’, and while in the hands of another director the film could have been a bastardized mish-mash of sci-fi elements, Boyle handles it with grace and skill creating quite an enjoyable modern sci-fi thriller.

“Our sun is dying,” Capa (Cillian Murphy) tells us in his opening monologue. Capa is a scientist aboard the Icarus II, implying there was an Icarus I. Not a good sign. In the future, our sun is, in fact, dying (a few billion years too early). Earth sends a team of astronauts to reignite the sun by detonating a ‘Stellar Bomb’ on the surface. As they approach the sun, they pick up a distress signal from the Icarus I, the mission that preceded the Icarus II and disappeared, never to be heard from again. The crew of the Icarus II decide to answer the call, thinking that if they do find the ship, they could use their bomb and have a second chance to save the world. It’s aboard the abandoned ship where things go wrong. I will not divulge what happens, but it is rather disappointing considering all the great things that came before it.

I know this sounds like a plot for ‘Armageddon II’, and in fact, there really isn’t much here we haven’t seen before. It’s how Danny Boyle handles the material that makes the film work. He’s able to take standard sci-fi and slasher movie clichés and turn them on their head, or at least make them more enjoyable to sit through. There is a great tension between the crew as lives are weighed. The ways in which they decide who lives and dies in a dire situation are cold and logical. Speaking of the crew, it was nice to see scientists and doctors in a sci-fi movie that I really believed were doctors. The cast isn’t made up of action stars, or people trying to be action stars.

It’s in the third act of ‘Sunshine’ where things go wrong. Boyle and his writer, Alex Garland seem to lose the narrative thread and send the film into the realm of conventional slasher film. The big twist is more confusing than shocking, and I found myself scratching my head. There’s also a self-important ‘best of’ clip show during the closing credits, reminding us of everything we’ve just seen. The third act makes this a good film, instead of a great one.

Still, I'm recommending ‘Sunshine’. Despite the fact that underneath, it's a rudimentary sci-fi action/suspense flick, Danny Boyle is a visionary who can take it beyond that. I found myself fascinated and on the edge of my seat. The first two acts are intelligent, thought provoking and suspenseful. Boyle and his cinematographer Alwin H. Kuchler create a cold, dark vision of space with mesmerizing visuals and a haunting score by John Murphy and Underworld. Aesthetically, this is one of the great pieces of science fiction since ‘Alien’. It’s the story that needed a bit more gravity.