Tag Archives: Movie Review

The Last Witch Hunter

As direct-to-DVD movies go, The Last Witch Hunter is surprisingly oh wait I saw this in the theater.

TheLastWitchHunterI had fun, but here I am a day later trying to write a review, and the movie has already faded into the meld-haze of urban fantasy “hidden world” films in which a badass protagonist fights ultimate evil. Why did this even get made?

Maybe because Vin Diesel is a giant nerd, and wanted to make a sci-fi/fantasy/horror genre movie that he got to be in?

Look, I had fun during the film. It cleared my Threshold of Disappointment (unlike the OTHER Vin Diesel film I saw this year) and was interesting enough that I did not finish my popcorn or my soda.

But it was predictable, and sloppy, and took shortcuts, and could have been a truly memorable, outstanding addition to a crowded field full of similar things. Here’s a bulleted list of sins which, had they not been committed, could have allowed this film over my Threshold of Awesome.

  • Shaky-cam during cool action
  • Shaky-cam as a “oh no we’re getting slaughtered” device
  • Shaky-cam
  • Cliché dialog as a shortcut for selling us an emotional state.
  • Immortality as a boon/curse, which (gasp) can be taken away.
  • Betrayal we all saw coming.
  • Why didn’t you just lead with that?
  • If you have little vials of “detect magic,” you should be using them all the time, or you should be explaining that they are expensive/rare.
  • Man of few words who seldom shows emotion
  • Because he’s tortured by memories
  • Which we are going to have to sit through
  • But it’s okay because they’re central to the plot.

It’s a long list, I know. A great many genre movies commit these same sins, and are mediocre-to-bad as a result. It’s a good thing I like Vin Diesel, and an even better thing that Rose Leslie (who I’d never seen in a film before) shone the way she did in a cast full of bigger names.

(Note: If there is a sequel that has ZERO Vin Diesel, and is all about Rose Leslie’s character Chloe taking up the Witch Hunter mantle despite being herself a witch, I would pay opening night fancy-seat money. No, wait… just give her a franchise of her own, without the baggage of this film.)

That reminds me:

  • A non-immortal character who is interesting, and who we care about, who can be threatened with death to make us feel tension

The Last Witch Hunter enters my list at #20 out of #30. Do I recommend it? When it hits Netflix it might make for a great excuse to have the TV on while you knit something. If you’ve got movie money to spend, though, there are many much better options.

Pan and Goosebumps

If you’re going to re-imagine a bit of written fiction through film, and if you plan to treat the source material as canonical inspiration for an amendment of that same canon, you’re setting a high bar for yourself.

Goosebumps

Pan

Goosebumps clears it.  Pan does not.

I’ll grant that Pan had a higher bar to clear, what with Barrie’s work being a century-plus-ten-percent old. Still, Goosebumps has been part of the popular consciousness for many moviegoers’ entire lives, so for those folks, both have been around for as long as they can remember.

Pan was clumsy. It was a very by-the-numbers origin story painted over the top of the heroic monomyth, and as others have already said, its biggest mistake was giving us a Peter Pan who was kind, brave, and heroic. That’s not really who Peter Pan IS. Not really.

I have neither time nor patience to enumerate the other mistakes. Pan was pretty, but it made an absolute mess of its mythos, and was head-scratchy and disturbing in the wrong ways (“why did they even MAKE this movie?”) rather than the right ways (“oh, this says so much about the parallels between innocence and evil…”)

Goosebumps, on the other hand, went way out on a limb and gave us a single meta-story in which all of the Goosebumps stories share canon.  To its infinite credit, I did not think of Jumanji even one time while in the theater. If you’re going to borrow a high concept, this is a sure sign you’re pulling it off correctly.

Goosebumps is more of a spooky-action-comedy than a “horror” movie, but the trailers make that pretty clear. Yes, there are creepy dolls and jump scares, but there’s also a lot of running around and successfully DOING things, which makes everything less horrible. The performances were all solid, and Jack Black was very entertaining to watch.

Fun-wise, Pan enters my 2015 list at #26, below the Threshold of Disappointment. Goosebumps comes in at #17, which is respectable, but still not above the Threshold of Awesome.

The Martian

“The movie is never as good as the book.”

Actually… not never.

The Martian just cleared that bar.

TheMartian-MovieAnd in an even more amazing, and seemingly impossible twist on that thing everybody knows, not only is The Martian movie as good as The Martian book, The Martian movie is as good a movie as The Martian book is a book.

I realize that sentence is hard to parse. Maybe go back and re-read it? I’ve spent 30 minutes on that sentence, trying to communicate that thought but I need to get on with the rest of this post.

Put another way: I declared that The Martian (novel) was the best hard science fiction novel I had ever read. It is not a perfect book, but it is an outstanding book that does “book things” brilliantly.

I’m now declaring that The Martian, (movie) is the best hard science fiction movie I have ever seen. It is not a perfect film, but it is an outstanding film that speaks the way only a film can, and uses the medium in ways that the very best films do.

High praise, I know.

I’ve never seen book-to-film translation work this well before. I thought it was impossible, frankly. Now I know that it can be done, and I look at it and wish I’d been a part of it. The Martian is a magnificent achievement, and I have to content myself with watching it and gushing over it.

If you haven’t read the book, it’s a great book. Go read it! Do you want to see the movie first? Go! See the movie! It will not undermine your enjoyment of the book. Sure, whichever one you consume first will provide spoilers, but that doesn’t really matter.

Now, back to that “best” claim I made…

We could argue definitions forever. What distinguishes hard science fiction from regular fiction set in believable near-future technological settings? Down that road you’ll find only a forest of nitpicks and misery and not much movie-enjoying. When I say The Martian is the best hard SF movie ever, I’m stacking it up against films like Gravity, Interstellar, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and Moon. There are a number of techno-thrillers that also qualify, including this year’s Ex Machina, and last year’s Transcendence. 

The Martian is a better hard SF movie than all of those.

2001: A Space Odyssey is a more important movie, and carries a lot of weight, but have you watched it recently? I love the thought of that movie, but can’t sit through it.

Gravity is a more daring movie, arguably more artistic for its use of a tiny cast and lots of silence. To my mind it’s the closest contender, but the power of The Martian‘s ensemble cast puts it over the top.

Insterstellar doesn’t come close. Cool moments, and I liked what it tried to do, but ultimately it was a preachy time travel paradox story, and as pretty as it was, it lost my interest by the end.

Moon? Powerful, and thought provoking, along with Transcendence and Ex Machina. The Martian says nothing about identity or singularity, but what it says about knowing science to survive speaks louder, at least to me, than the cautionary tales do.

I don’t often put this kind of stake in the ground. I’m sure more experienced film critics, students of cinema, and assorted experts by other names will argue convincingly against its placement. I suspect, however, that those experts will better serve their fields by dissecting The Martian in an attempt to determine how great books can be turned into great movies going forward. “Best” is hard to quantify. Answering the question “why did this movie work so well?” is easy, by comparison, and more important to address.

The Martian enters my 2015 rankings at #1, and when I look at the line-up for the rest of the year I’m pretty confident that it will keep that spot.

(ADDENDUM: Sandra and I saw The Martian in 3D. It was stunningly beautiful. There were a couple of moments where the 3D render was weird, but Sandra didn’t notice them. I wear progressive lenses, so it’s possible the issue really was just me.)

Everest

I was pretty sure I didn’t actually need a cinematic event to convince me not to put climbing  Everest on my bucket list, but I’m extra convinced now.

EverestThe film was powerful, and beautiful, and tragic. The various accounts of May 10, 1996’s disastrous Everest ascents have appeared in at least half a dozen books, but I doubt the books can convey the story in the way IMAX 3D can. The filmmakers used some cinematic shorthand to make the tale fit a single sitting, of course, but I think they did the story justice.

I came home with a nice feeling regarding my own objectives in life. Climbing to the summit of a really tall mountain is an obvious sort of “look at me” thing, but the overwhelming majority of human people shouldn’t need that specific accomplishment to feel complete. It serves as a nice symbol, and let’s just leave it at that while we get on with doing the things that are important to us.

Everest‘s emotional arc pretty much precluded record-setting “fun,” but I did enjoy the film. It enters my list at #17.