Movie Review

(In theaters, April 2007) There are bad dull movies and there are compulsively watchable bad movies. Pathfinder falls squarely in the first category. A war movie in which Vikings go against Native Americans in the year 1000, Pathfinder thuds in theatres and can’t be bothered to be interesting. Bad direction, ugly dark-and-blue cinematography, faint characters, major continuity mistakes (What’s that about walking to the Rockies from the eastern coast?) and a total lack of interest are the distinguishing characteristics of this sorry excuse for entertainment. At every moment, we’re reminded that Apocalypto did the whole “ancient war movie” so much better. Even by the low standards of action cinema, Pathfinder has little going for it. Go ahead; rent it despite the warnings of this review and feel sorry for yourself.

(In theaters, April 2007) This second Disney CGI effort after the uneven Chicken Little is a good step up for the new animation house: Not only is it a solid kid’s film, it espouses a number of worthwhile values and even presents a mission statement of sort of Disney itself. Not bad for a film dealing with a genius twin being carried away in the future. The pacing is brisk, the characters are surprisingly well-defined, the animation is fine and little of it is saccharine or maudlin. Better yet: the film often allows itself little forays in bizarre territory, such as when a dozen characters are introduced in ninety seconds, or when a family dinner turns into a cheaply dubbed martial arts sequence. Not exactly the kind of thing you’d expect from the fairly standard trailer. Perhaps the best thing about this film from a purely geek perspective is how it embraces the notion of technological progress as an extension of human values; that’s a nice SF attitude right there, and it does much to make me fond of the movie. (Heck, I even went back two weeks later to see it as a 3-D feature and still enjoyed it.)

(In theaters, April 2007) The boys of Shaun Of The Dead are back with another genre comedy, and this time it’s both the quaint English countryside character comedy and the big old Hollywood action movie who successively come under fire. Simon Pegg is exceptional as the super-agent “Nick Frost” transferred from London (where he makes the rest of the force look bad) to a small village where nothing happens. Nothing? Well, OK, not nothing: maybe a continuous series of suspicious incidents… It’s all fun and surprisingly gory jokes until the two-third mark, at which point the film changes gears and truly tackles action movie clichés with a delirious energy. The solid all-star cast does little to distract from the fun. So far, this is the comedy to beat this year…

(In theaters, April 2007) At a time where out-of-left-field plot twists are becoming the norm in the thriller genre, it’s a refreshing change to see a competent howhedidit rather than a ludicrous whodunit. Here, there’s little doubt that Anthony Hopkins’ character shot his wife: the only question is how he was able to do it and yet do his best to escape every effort to convict him for the crime. Despite at least one huge whopper of a coincidence and a very convenient suicide, Fracture nonetheless moves along at a pleasant pace, in no small part due to Hopkins’ self-aware acting, and a decent turn by Ryan Gosling as a young cocky lawyer who learns better. Pay attention, and you will even hear a heartening bit of public service boosterism. Otherwise, well, Los Angeles is convincingly portrayed, the direction is efficient, and there’s a guilty thrill in looking at the brilliant antagonist as everyone plays according to his plan. While not flawless, or even truly memorable, this film will do as rainy afternoon entertainment.

(In theaters, April 2007) I expected nothing from this teen Rear Window wannabe, so imagine my surprise at a well-done and reasonably entertaining teen thriller. Shia Lebouef emerges as a compelling lead in this film, and he’s ideally suited to the mixture of drama, comedy, romance and thriller that develops as Disturbia unfolds. There are some modern twists to the story, but the bare bones of a voyeur thriller are there, with an adolescent dash of mischief. It’s hardly perfect, what with the cheap plot twists, incompetent voyeuristic skills of the characters and manipulated dramatic twists… But it holds up to casual viewing, and ends up being much better than the cheap “Rear Window remake for teens” label might suggest.

(In theaters, March 2007) The tag-line of this film says it all: “There’s more than one way to lose your life to a killer”. That’s both the film’s thematic statement and the reason why Zodiac feels fresh after a spate of other serial killer movies. For one thing, it’s well-handled by David Fincher, whose welcome return is a breath of cinematic talent after so many incompetent directors. Fincher know what he’s going, and his mastery of cinematic technique is only exceeded by the skill with which he understands the delicate balance between suspense and cheap thrills. Zodiac sticks close to reality, with all of its ambiguities and doubts, and in doing so attains a higher level of meaning. Meanwhile, we watch the lead character practically drive himself crazy with the unsolved mysteries of the case, obsessing over something he simply could have ignored from the beginning. The period detail is convincing, the special effects are used judiciously and the film has the detail-oriented heft of a good book. While some scenes can drag and there’s a manipulative element to the way the film suggests a solution to a mystery that’s still officially unsolved, Zodiac makes a confident entry as one of the first good films of 2007.

(In theaters, March 2007) There isn’t much more here than a good little conspiracy thriller, but don’t let that be a problem: Director Antoine Fuqua is back in shape after a trio of underwhelming films, and the result is competent enough to satisfy. Updated from Point of Impact, an original novel by film critic (!) Stephen Hunter, Shooter amps up the conspiracy angle of the book to include an entire machinery of government and industry (riffing off the waning power of truth and decency during the Bush administration), yet can’t resist a vigilante-like conclusion. Don’t worry: The protagonist will escape his pursuers, find the real story, prove it to the right people and get the girl. It’s the way in which it’s done that’s worth the ticket, and here Shooter does everything well. Cool supporting characters (including an old man with a historically significant shovel), nice action set-pieces, big explosions and a little bit of courtroom showdown are all we need. The updated references immediately make the film fit in the twenty-first century and mark Shooter as a solid thriller with a bit of a wider vision than is usual in movies of its type.

(In theaters, March 2007) Never mind Lewis Padgett’s much-beloved original short story: The Last Mimzy is the perfect example of how an adaptation can misunderstand the story’s fundamental theme and jam it into a generic template. From an original beginning, the film inevitably converges with the plot of just about half of the SF/fantasy films out there. Thematically, the original story was all about superhuman intelligence as a goal in itself and how it doesn’t allow you to come back to normality. The adaptation turns super-intelligence into a minor affliction that makes the afflicted kids help other people and soon goes away to let them go back to normal. But that’s nothing compared to the woo-woo subplot about the crazy Tibetan prophecies, or the way it suddenly turns into a Homeland Security thriller, or the way the conclusion is another one of those “don’t fall in the CGI vortex” cheap stunt. There are, however, still a number of things to like about this film, from the likable kid actors to some of the special effects, to the way that is all comes together acceptably well. It’s certainly not a classic, but it ought to please to most of the family, and that’s already not too bad.

(In theaters, March 2007) With time, I’m learning that everything is possible, including seeing my tax dollars finance a zombie comedy. A good one, even: Like the best zombie films, Fido understands the satirical social relevance of zombies, and starts off strongly with a critique of suburban America mixed with a metaphor for slavery and/or racism. The alternate-history nature of Fido is clever and amusing, and so is the first act of the film, which plays off zombie archetypes against a brightly-coloured suburban background, with a plot that seems inspired by Douglas Sirk . At times subversive and amusing, gruesome and wholesome, Fido is a great deal better than you’d expect from a B-movie. Sadly, the imagination of its creators seems to run out at the same time than their budget, leading to a flat conclusion that is visibly hampered by shoestring film-making: the climax is a muddle, with no great thematic denouement and hesitant staging that can often feel more ridiculous than suspenseful. But three-quarter of a good film is better than none, and so Fido earns a marginal recommendation on the strength of being better than expected. That Carrie-Anne Moss has a leading role certainly doesn’t hurt.

(On DVD, March 2007) Nervous nellies who think that remakes destroy the original work can relax a little: I’m one of those weird people who have seen the Zack Snyder remake before the original Dawn Of The Dead, I can reassure everyone that the original remains unspoiled and enjoyable on its own term: It’s a tight and terrific horror film that shares a premise with the remake but almost none of the plot. The satirical intent is certain clearer here than in the 2004 version: The idea of the mall both as a fortress and a gathering point is amusing, and the very idea of running around a mall for weeks on end smacks of wish-fulfilment. But the horror scenes also work well, and the mounting dread of the zombie apocalypse going outside the mall is frightening enough. Decades later, some pieces aren’t as successful: the introduction takes up too much time, the truck-running sequence is flabby and the character balance feels wrong. (All of which were improved in the remake.) Still, Dawn Of The Dead remains a pretty enjoyable film even today, and there aren’t a lot of films from 1978 who can still claim that.