Movie Review

  • Pledge This! (2006)

    Pledge This! (2006)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, July 2011) There’s an unsolvable contradiction at the heart of Pledge This! that condemns it to being a terrible film, and it’s more amusing to see the film try to ignore it than it is to witness the gross-out gags and weak jokes that pass themselves off as a comedy.  The contradiction is that the film capitalizes on its star Paris Hilton, even as it tries to set up an underdog plot opposing “normal” girls to the plastic sorority ideal that Hilton incarnates.  The first five minutes set the unpleasant tone, as Hilton’s character’s affect-less voice-over introduces herself as a heroine of mythical proportion, teaching girls how to be perfect pledges without a single hint at deprecating self-awareness.  It takes a while, in fact, for the true heroines of the film to be introduced, and Pledge This! is such a prisoner of Hilton’s top billing that it wimps out whenever it tries to oppose its heroines to the kind of superficial ideal that Hilton represents.  That would be enough to sink a film, but Pledge This! is also remarkable by how badly it’s made.  Forget about direct-to-video; this straddles the line between professional and amateurish.  Acting, staging, cinematography, sets, screenwriting: nearly every aspect of filmmaking is perceptibly worse than average in this film, and it’s not an intentional artistic choice or a consequence of the budget.  In an effort to goose up the interest of the film, the “naughty edition” DVD includes more female nudity, but even that fails to be impressive when it’s shoehorned so obviously: on at least three occasions, the film stops dead for about ten seconds as the camera lingers on naked breasts, and the result feels more embarrassing than alluring.  Compared to such rank incompetence, commenting on Hilton’s lack of acting skills, lack of intonations and forced “That’s hot” dialogue seems almost beside the point.  But her very presence actually drags the film further down because she will not allow herself to be considered as the villain her “character” is supposed to be.  She even torpedoes a number of one-liners that would have been funnier from just about any competent actor.  There are, to be truthful, a few chuckles here and there: Kerri Kenney makes the most out of a small role, while Noureen DeWulf somehow earns smiles in a borderline-offensive role.  Still, it’s hard to avoid that this isn’t a comedy as much as something for frat-boys to put on the big-screen TV while they drink themselves to a stupor.  Wikipedia’s entry on the film details Pledge This!’s troubled production history (shot in 2004, delayed, re-shot with nude scenes in 2005-2006, delayed, publicly disowned by Hilton, and released direct-to-video in late 2006) but does not excuse the final result.  It’s certainly an instructive demonstration of about half a dozen ways a film can self-destruct, but don’t take this as a recommendation.  The DVD itself sports one of the cheapest-looking menus and making-of featurette I can recall, faithfully reflecting the impression left by the film.

  • Sharktopus (2010)

    Sharktopus (2010)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, July 2011) There seems to be an almost unexplainable appetite among young viewers for cheap trashy monster features, and Sharktopus seems determined to exploit this fascination without shame.  Playing up the camp elements of such stories, Sharktopus mashes a shark and an octopus (well, maybe a squid) and sets in in the middle of an intensely familiar monster-movie plot.  Someone gets eaten every few minutes while the plucky adventurers go hunting for the rogue creature.  Revelling in cheap special effects, Sharktopus doesn’t rise far above its “SyFy Pictures” straight-to-cable-TV pedigree: it only looks good when compared to some of the worst abominations coming out of SciFi/Syfy.  The acting is over-the-top, the script barely shows signs of sentience, the cinematography struggles to capture the lush tropical location… and yet, Sharktopus isn’t a complete waste of time, largely because it doesn’t really take itself seriously.  It’s not a comedy, but the nature of its set-pieces is ridiculous enough to suspect that someone is clearly having some fun behind the camera.  The actors have their own charm (Eric Roberts understands that he’s there to bark, whereas Sara Malakul Lane does have, to quote another character, that “sexy librarian thing going on”) and the forward narrative rhythm of the film isn’t too bad.  Sharktopus may be trash, but it’s engaging in its own way.  For producer Roger Corman, already a legend of B-movies, this is practically second nature: deliver an exploitation movie, make it fun, make it fast and don’t worry too much about respectability.

  • Casino Jack and the United States of Money (2010)

    Casino Jack and the United States of Money (2010)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, July 2011) Documentary filmmaker Alex Gibney specializes in films designed to infuriate his audiences, and after such minor masterpieces as An Inconvenient Truth and Food Inc, documentary audiences are back for more with Casino Jack and the United States of Money, a non-fiction piece about the influence of lobbying in Washington… as seen through the story of Jack Abramoff, the most infamous lobbyist of them all.  Abramoff’s sin wasn’t being a lobbyist: it was pushing it so far beyond the venal standards of Washington as to be caught and reigned in.  As is now the case for many top-notch documentaries, Gibney’s entertaining exposé mixes fictional re-creation (“A documentary?  Why don’t you make an action movie?” says Abramoff in an email; so Gibney obliges by recreating a gun-down that figures somewhere in Abramoff’s checkered history.), talking heads, infographics, press clippings, archival material and a bit of original reporting.  It paints a damning portrait of a man who saw an opportunity to soak his clients and did it.  But Abramoff’s story is far from being the most infuriating aspect of Casino Jack Casino Jack and the United States of Money, given how thoroughly the film suggests, explains and demonstrates the astonishing power of money into the American political system.  Don’t like a law?  Pay lobbyists to call politicians, “explain” the issues to them (via exotic junkets and campaign contributions) and wait for results to roll in.  Call it a quick and nauseating primer into the way politics are conducted in the real-world.  Even cynics may be disgusted to see their worst fears given form.  Abramoff may have done prison time for his crimes, but it’s important to remember that it takes the willing participation of politicians for this scheme to work… and Casino Jack Casino Jack and the United States of Money ends on a somber note, pointing out how quickly the Washington establishment dropped any enquiries into the Abramoff scandal once it was assured that the lobbyist would go away for a long time.  While the brainy subject matter may not make this a crowd-pleasing favourite, it does make another entry in an increasing number of cogent high-quality documentaries tackling real issues.  It makes a compelling (if confusingly-named) double-feature with the docu-fictive Casino Jack, starring Kevin Spacey: Watch the fiction to sympathize with the character, then watch the documentary to get the facts.  In-between showing scenes from Abramoff’s Hollywood feature Red Scorpion and ending on the absurdist note of seeing Don Delay (who willingly built the infrastructure that made Abramoff’s schemes possible) on “Dancing with the Stars”, Casino Jack and the United States of Money speaks for itself and the self-satirizing nature of contemporary American politics.

  • Casino Jack (2010)

    Casino Jack (2010)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, June 2011) Casino Jack never played in more than a few dozen theaters, but this limited release had more to do with its specialized subject than any particular fault in the film’s execution.  Consider the total audience for a low-budget sardonic comedy about a real-life American lobbyist who ended up in prison after a few spectacular instances of fraud, taking along a few others with him.  It’s not exactly wide-audience stuff, but maybe that’s a good thing, because this fictional take on the Jack Abramoff story may not be able to afford much in terms of production values, but it can afford to be remarkably engaged about its subject.  For the facts, have a look at Casino Jack and the United States of Money, which covers the same ground from a documentary perspective.  For a surprisingly sympathetic portrait of a professional con man like Abramoff and a blackly amusing look at the way Washington really works, however, get this film.  Kevin Spacey shines as Abramoff, portraying a complex character with a lot of empathy.  Supporting players include Barry Pepper as a business partner, Jon Lovitz as a hilariously inept businessman with ties to the mob and Rachel Lefebvre as a woman scorned.  While the film does feel a bit flatter than it should be given the subject matter, it’s not a bad time at all, and one gets the feeling that Abramoff himself would like the result.  The DVD contains only a few special features.  Skip over the gag reel and deleted scenes, but sadly-deceased director George Hickenlooper’s written notes and pictures of the production give an intriguing glimpse of how a low-budget film shot near Toronto could double for Washington and Miami thanks to second-unit work and clever location scouting.

  • Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011)

    Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In theaters, June 2011) I never thought I’d be thankful for 3D reining in a director’s worst impulses, but looking at the dramatic increase in Transformers 3’s visual coherence over its predecessor, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Michael Bay has finally met a limiting factor he couldn’t blow up.  Simply put, the visual salad of quick cuts and flashing color that undermined Transformers 2 simply doesn’t work in 3D, and Bay has adapted his style in consequence.  Much like accessibility for disabled people ends up benefitting everyone, it turns out that Transformers 3D is a lot more accessible… even for 2D viewers.  There are a few amazing long shots in the film (one of the best being a highway stunt in which a robot transforms around its human passenger), and everything feels far more controlled and enjoyable as a result.  It helps that the plot is better than the preceding films, blending a healthy dose of conspiracy theory with multiple betrayals and catastrophic imagery.  (There’s a particular chilling moment that makes no sense in the context of the series, but shows what the trilogy could have built toward had it been coherently conceived.)  It’s easy to miss Megan Fox (her replacement is bland), to wish that Ken Jeong should have gotten a better role and to think that Shia LaBeouf is this close to developing a distinctive screen personality (albeit not a pleasant one), but various bit players such as John Turturro, John Malkovich and Frances McDormand do quite well with small roles.  Transformers 3 is hardly perfect, mind you: The plot holes are still obnoxious, the robots still look like unconnected piles of hardware, the lack of attention to characters is still annoying and the dumb humour of the series is still intrusive, but the improvement is perceptible –even when it comes from the actors doing their best with the material they’ve got.  At more than two and a half hours, Transformers 3 is overstuffed with barely relevant material: A good script re-write could have combined characters for greater impact, and cut 30-40 minutes without too much trouble.  But part of the pleasure of the Transformers series is in finding out what kind of spectacular mayhem can be put on-screen with an ultra-big budget. (The remarkable pre-credit sequence alone is probably more expensive than most movies in the history of movies.)  On this level, Transformers 3 certainly doesn’t disappoint, even for jaded action junkies.  The last hour of the film pulls out all the stops in portraying inventive set-pieces in downtown Chicago, and some sequences (such as the glass skyscraper) are nothing short of awe-inspiring.  It’s lavish summer entertainment with terrific audio/video production values, and for once there’s just enough interesting material in the script to keep us interested while Bay’s direction benefits from some much-needed restraint.  While I’m not saying that the film will end up anywhere near this year’s end Top-ten lists, it’s such an improvement over the first two in the series that it feels like a success.

  • Cars 2 (2011)

    Cars 2 (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In theaters, June 2011) For years, Cars held the distinction of being Pixar’s worst-reviewed film, even as it led to massive merchandising sales for Disney.  Now it’s about to lose this dubious honour to its own sequel: Cars 2 is, by a significant margin, the least impressive Pixar film, probably their first artistic flop to date.  I wasn’t a big fan of the original, with its ludicrous word-building, nostalgic sentimentalism and annoying characters.  But Cars now looks like a controlled achievement compared to its sequel, which ditches small-town blues for international espionage comedy and puts the most exasperating character of the franchise front and center.  Yes, this time around it’s Larry the Towtruck Guy who gets to star in another just-as-dumb riff on the mistaken-spy tropes, albeit with extra-special what-the-what? sauce given how the film delves into alternate energy source.  The villain’s plan barely makes sense in a “wouldn’t there be easier ways to do this?”, the world-building is just as superficial (Dinosaurs?  Staircases?  Wait: Dinosaurs?) but most damagingly of all, there’s a strong feeling that this is really a movie for kids that has very little to say to the adults.  Now, keep in mind that most of this bile is unjustified when read cold –most of it comes from the step down in quality after the extraordinary streak that Pixar managed for so long: After Ratatouille, Wall-E, Up! And Toy Story 3, something like Cars 2 –which clearly manages to satisfy expectations for a kid’s film—feels like a substantial disappointment.  There’s nothing really unlikable about the film, nor (aside from some cartoon violence) is it reprehensible or badly made.  The visual quality of the film is spectacular, and the numerous side-gags will earn the film at least a second viewing.  In a good mood, I may even praise the risks taken by the filmmakers in widening the scope of the series so dramatically (now with planes!  And ships!) and how, if the script is using well-worn tropes, it’s not exactly doing so dumbly.  Heck, I may even point out that I was enjoying myself during the film.  Still, there’s a difference between Cars 2 and the extraordinary output that Pixar sustained over the past half-decade, and it’s that difference that makes the difference.  Any other animation studio would kill for a film this good.  From Pixar, though, we’re left wondering “Really?”

  • The Goonies (1985)

    The Goonies (1985)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, June 2011) Never having seen The Goonies (I know, I know…), I can’t say for sure if the film holds up for those with fond memories of the original.  But seen fresh, the film still has a lot of fun and narrative energy.  Sure, the kid actors often overact: Corey Feldman, in particular, seems to be mugging for the camera over and above what a motor-mouth should.  The acting is broad and unsubtle: there’s little naturalism in how the characters are portrayed.  But up to a certain point, that’s part of the charm: The Goonies is recognizably an early-teen fantasy of adventure and action: in-between wacky inventions, ingenious traps, first kisses, sibling tension, silly criminals and treasure maps, the film aims square at boys and girls and succeeds in portraying the kind of adventure many wished for in late grade school.  As a collaboration between producer Steven Spielberg, writer Chris Columbus and director Richard Donner, The Goonies is also a powerhouse of talents who were at their mid-eighties peak: all would go on to make other things, but their reputation would hinge heavily on this film.  Even from the first snappy minutes, it’s easy to see how everything clicks in this film.  Not every sequence and plot elements works as well (I’m not so fond of Sloth, nor the various plot tricks), but even a quarter of a century later, the pacing is fairly good, the atmosphere between the kids is credible and the spirit of adventure rarely flags.  There’s an added bonus in seeing familiar actors in younger roles, from Sean Astin to Josh Brolin to Joe Pantoliano.  The DVD does justice to the film, with great picture quality and extensive supplements ranging from a superlative audio/video commentary to a few featurettes about the making of The Goonies.  I’m probably one of the last kids of the eighties to see this film, but the wait has been worth it.

  • Bridesmaids (2011)

    Bridesmaids (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In theaters, June 2011) There’s definitely something refreshing in seeing a women-centric film trying to one-up the boys in the R-rated comedy department: Bad language, worse behaviour and gross-out gags aren’t the sole province of frat-boys, and seeing Bridesmaids trying to be outrageous carries its own doubtful freshness.  I just wish the result would have been consistent, because the entire movie veers between downbeat humiliation and all-out outrageousness.  The pacing of the film, particularly in its first half, seems slack to the point of obnoxiousness: mini-sketches go on for far longer than the joke is worth (ex; one-upping memories of the bride-to-be at the engagement party) while the story advances with little wit in its editing.  (Things change, a bit, with the trip to Vegas and the “trying to get a cop’s attention” sequence.)  It really doesn’t help that the script seems convinced of its ability to combine the cringe-worthy story of a woman hitting bottom while still flying off in far less subtle bursts of crass comedy. Character-driven comedy doesn’t always mesh well with pratfalls and crude silliness, and Bridesmaids shows why: By the time the heroine trashes a sumptuous bridal shower, we’re cringing rather than enjoying the self-destructive nature of the act.  (It’s also annoying that at times, the film seems to ape Saturday Night Live, not only in dragging scenes longer than they should be, but building the film as a series of sketches.)  Dramatically, the self-destructive lead character is too annoying to be fully sympathetic and the film seems so intent on chronicling her downward spiral that it doesn’t provide much in terms of payoffs.  Still, even with mixed feelings about the film in general, I still laughed a bit too much to be entirely dismissive: While Kristen Wiig is better when she’s acting seriously than when she’s trying to mug for the camera, Melissa McCarthy steals practically nearly every scene she has, Wendi McLendon-Covey and Ellie Kemper are both under-used and I’m already on record since Idiocracy as being happy to watch Maya Rudolph in just about anything.  There are a few funny lines, successful sketches (the airplane sequence, overlong but ending on a high note), silly sight-gags and absurd non-sequiturs to qualify Bridesmaids as a comedy when it’s at its best –the problem is the time in-between, stuck watching the protagonist as she digs herself deeper in trouble.  Those don’t belong in the same movie.  Where’s a competent script editor when you need one?

  • Real Genius (1985)

    Real Genius (1985)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (Second Viewing, on DVD, June 2011) The danger is revisiting an old favourite whose memories have faded is discovering the dull bits in-between the remembered highlights.  While Real Genius is still an amusing-enough film with a strong whiff of mid-eighties Cold War atmosphere that now adds to the comedy, it’s far more leisurely paced than I remembered, and the standout lines (“A girl’s got to have standards.”) feel more like abnormalities in the middle of a far less funny film.  The surprisingly heavy military satire takes a lot more time than I remembered, and the script doesn’t have the zing than its more inspired moments lead to remember.  Still, judged by the standards of films now twenty-five years in the past, Real Genius has survived pretty well: Its portrait of gifted students is sympathetic, and never more so when the brash and self-confident character played by Val Kilmer (looking impossibly young) reveals that he’s behaving this way to avoid burnout.  Compared to Kilmer, film anchor Gabriel Jarret is practically a non-entity –overshadowed by a flashier supporting character, and not given anything interesting to do by the script.  The ending at least has the decency to wrap everything on a high notes, with the memorable popcorn explosion and an oh-so-typically-eighties musical moment with Tears for Fear’s “Everybody wants to Rule the World”.  In-between the comic set-pieces, Kilmer snark and odd moments of antiestablishment politics, Real Genius is just fine –not a classic, clearly, but a fond memory.  The DVD, unfortunately, has no extra features.

  • Siren (2010)

    Siren (2010)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, June 2011) While the box cover art promises a schlocky sex-and-supernatural-horror film, Siren is really a classy sex-and-supernatural-horror film.  The difference lies mostly in the absence of nudity and the presence of some good cinematography.  The story is dirt-simple; as three young people (a randy couple, plus their friend) end up on a deserted island where various foreboding omens don’t stop them from spending time with a beautiful woman who clearly knows more than she’s willing to say.  It doesn’t get any better for any of the characters after that.  But in horror films, it’s all in the delivery, and the small cast gets to play against some beautiful Mediterranean scenery, well-framed within widescreen cinematography.  The pacing of the film is leisurely, the characters are mildly unpleasant, the coda barely makes sense and the lack of nudity feels more frustrating given the naughty nature of the film (which even throws in a bit of girl-on-girl kissing as further titillation), but there’s still a lot to admire in the way this low-budget film plays with the elements it has on-hand.  The blood and violence is restrained, effectively showing up only during the last act.  (A pretty good bliss/death sequence certainly shakes things up.)  The actors struggle a bit with their English, but they’re appealing in their own way despite the indifferent script. (Headliner Anna Skellern is particularly good as the protagonist.)  Siren’s rhythm, as slow as it is, certainly gives an extra gloss of respectability to what is, after all, a fairly lightweight B-movie.  The script could have used a lot of tightening-up (or even a few extra characters/subplots), but DVD extra features show how much worse the film’s original vision could have been, with the Siren character suddenly talking the ears off the other characters in a few judiciously deleted scenes.  While I’m not exactly a fan of the film and resent the marketing bait-and-switch, Siren is far more respectable than many other straight-to-DVD horror films, and it may be worth a look by horror fans looking for a change of pace.

  • Green Lantern (2011)

    Green Lantern (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In theaters, June 2011) Every so often, a film reminds me that I’m fast aging out of the coveted male-geek’s demographic segment… and makes me grateful for that.  So it is that I come out of Green Lantern wondering why that movie even exists.  My tolerance for comic-book mythologies has never been particularly high, and seeing the Green Lantern universe on-screen only highlights how profoundly silly it is, even by comic-book standards.  Here, the accumulated weight of decades of backstory abruptly presented on-screen never goes beyond the simply ridiculous.  (Was it really important to learn that practically all characters in the film were grade-school buddies?)  By the time we’re flying across the galaxies, discussing the yellow power of fear and fighting threats that unfortunately take the form of a skull over liquid-brown tentacles, the whole Green Lantern shtick is so far removed from human concerns that the film practically degenerates in nonsense.  Few of the many people writing the script apparently stopped to ask why audiences should care.  Little of the blame over the film’s lack of success should go to Ryan Reynolds, whose cocky charm prevents the film from sinking further into irrelevancy.  (It’s also awesome to see Angela Bassett on the big screen again, even in such a small role.)  On the other hand, Reynolds’ screen persona is so self-assured that the film is never believable when it questions the character’s lack of courage: Green Lantern’s annoyingly familiar coward-to-hero dramatic arc never gets going, let alone concludes satisfactorily.  The dull script occasionally gives birth to a few well-handled scenes (mostly thanks to director Martin Campbell’s touch when it comes to action sequences), but the overall impact is muted.  There’s also something slightly off with the special effects, although this ties into the whole “let’s go cosmic without making you care for it” problem.  Clearly, I’m not as good an audience for comic book movies as I used to be when I can’t be bothered to say nice things about average efforts like Green Lantern.  Ultimately, it may have more to do with the film’s point: Is it using comic-book mythology to talk about something else, or is it simply content to regurgitate the mythology on-screen, without caring if it has any real-world relevance?

  • The Marine 2 (2009)

    The Marine 2 (2009)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, June 2011) The original The Marine wasn’t much more than a forgettable action B movie, and that may explain why this sequel feels pretty good, even though it went Direct to Video.  Taking the basic plot of the first film (Marine rescues girlfriend from clutches of bad guys, gun-fights, explosions, etc.) but with new characters, structure and setting, The Marine 2 daringly moves the action to a resort in Thailand.  After the protagonist’s wife is taken hostage, our protagonist spends the rest of the picture killing bad guys; it pretty much ends like you’d expect.  There normally wouldn’t be much more to say about a low-budget action film, but this one actually seems to have good production values and an imaginative director who knows what he’s doing: The first few minutes in Thailand offer some really spectacular scenery, while the action sequences are better-directed than most action films there says.  Director Roel Reiné is fond of using lengthy shots, and as a result one hand-to-hand fight is far more interesting to watch than you’d expect.  Most of his action sequences show a good sense of geography, and it looks as if he was able to push the limits of his budget.  This doesn’t make The Marine 2 a good film: the dialogue is average, all-American-boy-hero-killer Ted DiBiase Jr. is bland as the lead, and there’s a mid-movie lull in which the hero spends 40 minutes going back to the resort to kill more terrorists without much by way of plot progression.  Still, it does make of The Marine 2 one of the increasingly common DTV semi-sequels that have at least some entertainment value, even in isolated bits and pieces.  At a time where theaters and movie-rental chains are getting marginalized as movie distribution channels, non-awful DTV films are a significant development.

  • Super 8 (2011)

    Super 8 (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In theaters, June 2011) The best homages aren’t as much about faithful imitation as much as they’re about the understanding of what made the original click and working from the same assumptions and methods.  So it is that Super 8 is a gleefully good throwback to some of the great summer blockbusters of the eighties, from E.T. to The Goonies to Gremlins and more.  Set in 1979 and featuring half a dozen kids stumbling upon a big mystery while shooting their own amateur film, JJ Abrams’ authorized Spielberg pastiche is a solid filmmaking accomplishment: It balances mystery, action, terror, laughs, spectacle and sentiment in a deft fashion, constantly evoking pure joy at every moment.  It’s a highly satisfying film, in part due to how Abrams focuses on the basics even with the latest digital tools at his disposal.  (This being said, Abrams should really give up his addiction to lens flares –they were bad enough in Star Trek, but they’re getting ridiculously intrusive here).  The SF elements are restrained but effectively used, and the nostalgic glance at 1979 is sincere and fascinating without being overpowering or condescending.  Worth noting is the absence of any name actors (the best-known being Noah Emmerich), allowing the picture to take place without the distraction of any familiar faces.  The kid actors are very convincing, and Abrams never forgets to spend time with his characters –even though some emotional moments are carried just a bit too far, especially toward the end.  Individual set-pieces include a terrifying attack on a bus where a few characters are imprisoned, a spectacular train derailment and the amazing sight of a small Midwestern town taken over by a befuddled military attack.  It all amounts to a comfortably enjoyable summer film –easily the kind of film that a whole family could go enjoy in theaters.

  • Sanctum (2011)

    Sanctum (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, June 2011) The spirit of adventure is something that Sanctum gets right, at least in its first half: The idea of going deep underground, in underwater body-tight passageways is both terrifying and exhilarating, and there’s some joy in seeing characters looking at new things just because no one else has seen them before.  Then the film turns into not just a survival adventure story, but one that is structured around a horror-movie structure –with characters dropping left and right until the story is over.  While some of the footage, special effects and establishing shots are interesting, the same can’t be said about the characters or the dialogue.  Even some of the special effects work looks a bit shoddy at times.  Released in 3D in theaters, the flattened film that can be seen at home has little left to impress.  Of the actors, Richard Roxburgh is most remarkable as a hard-boiled adventurer who will let nothing stand in-between him as his survival.  While the sense of claustrophobia is effectively used and some of the footage evokes a sense of natural awe, most of the action sequences quickly become boring, allowing viewers to tune out until the identity of the latest victim is revealed.  Even at less than two hours, Sanctum feels long, with a third act that could have ended a few minutes early.  While the film is just a bit too beautiful to be called a complete waste of time, it’s nowhere near as gripping as an adventure of that scope should be.

  • The Hangover Part II (2011)

    The Hangover Part II (2011)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In theaters, June 2011) The platonic ideal of a sequel is to recreate the experience of the first film while bringing something new to it.  So it’s not much of a surprise to find out that the screenwriters at work on The Hangover II felt completely justified in stealing the original’s structure almost plot beat per plot beat.  It’s certainly familiar, and that may not be ideal: Part of The Hangover’s appeal was the delirious way in which it went left and right, bowing to traditional narrative expectations only late in the third act.  Here, the element of surprise is gone, and viewers can feel themselves anticipating what should have been twists.  It also lends an unfortunate feeling of laziness to a film that nonetheless went around the world in big-budget style.  It could have been worse, mind you: The characters are recognizable without feeling reduced to catch-phrases (although Zach Galifianakis’s always-irritating “Alan” went from slightly-retarded to too-stupid-to-live in-between the two films), the Bangkok location provides plenty of good color, the rhythm of the film is fine, Bradley Cooper makes for a capable anchor, Ken Jeong is just as refreshing in his brief scenes (even though his presence is absurdly contrived) and up to a certain point, setting the film far away makes it feel a little bit less reprehensible that the quasi-local hijinks of frat-boys gone wild in Vegas.  Still, the film as a whole doesn’t feel quite as joyful as the first one: the laughs seem to suffer in the face of increased danger and raunchiness.  But it’s the feeling of familiarity that brings The Hangover II down, a sense that it’s quite literally going through the same motions as its predecessor.