FLAWLESS (2007) - May 31, 2009
A handsomely made but otherwise dull heist film about a woman working in a large diamond company in the '60s who decides to go into cahoots with a janitor to steal some diamonds. The problem with this film is that it just isn't particularly interesting; it takes way too long to get going, and then when it does, it keeps the audience in the dark about how and why the heist was pulled off the way that it was, in favour of a dramatic last-minute reveal. The film seems to be operating more as a drama than a conventional heist movie, which is fine, only the two main characters are kind of thinly developed -- Demi Moore's character essentially spends the bulk of the film looking shifty, and Michael Caine's intentions are left foggy until the last few moments of the film. There is also a lot of time spent with essentially superfluous side characters, which doesn't help. Nor does the fact that a framing device set in the present essentially removes much of the tension, as it's fairly clear that Demi Moore has gotten away with it. The film isn't completely terrible -- Michael Caine was quite good as always, and Demi Moore was fine I guess -- but it doesn't work particularly well as a heist movie or as a drama, so I'm kind of wondering what the point was. **
Short reviews of all the movies I see, rated out of four. Reviews containing spoilers are marked with an (S).
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Up
UP (2009) - May 30, 2009
How? Seriously, how? How do Pixar manage to maintain such a mind-bogglingly high standard of quality? What are they doing that every other studio isn't? About the adventure that ensues when an old man decides to fly his house to South America, with a precocious kid tagging along, it shouldn't come as a surprise at all that this is an amazing film. One of the things that's so great about this movie is how good of a job it does of developing Carl Fredricksen, the central character; the film opens with a brief recap of his entire relationship with his recently passed wife, which is completely brilliant on so many levels -- aside from how moving it is, it does a perfect job of getting the audience into the character's head, and allowing us to really empathize with him. The kid is another really memorable character, and serves as a perfect foil for the somewhat curmudgeonly Carl. The film pretty much nails everything -- it's exciting and funny, it's poignant with great characters, and it's just plain fun. And it looks so good, too. Anyone who doesn't like this film is a monster. ****
How? Seriously, how? How do Pixar manage to maintain such a mind-bogglingly high standard of quality? What are they doing that every other studio isn't? About the adventure that ensues when an old man decides to fly his house to South America, with a precocious kid tagging along, it shouldn't come as a surprise at all that this is an amazing film. One of the things that's so great about this movie is how good of a job it does of developing Carl Fredricksen, the central character; the film opens with a brief recap of his entire relationship with his recently passed wife, which is completely brilliant on so many levels -- aside from how moving it is, it does a perfect job of getting the audience into the character's head, and allowing us to really empathize with him. The kid is another really memorable character, and serves as a perfect foil for the somewhat curmudgeonly Carl. The film pretty much nails everything -- it's exciting and funny, it's poignant with great characters, and it's just plain fun. And it looks so good, too. Anyone who doesn't like this film is a monster. ****
Friday, May 29, 2009
Drag Me to Hell
DRAG ME TO HELL (2009) - May 29, 2009
About a woman who offends a gypsy and winds up with a curse that will, after three days, literally drag her down into hell, this was Sam Raimi's return to the genre that made him famous. It's clear almost immediately that the years spent making dramas and superhero films have done nothing to dull Raimi's horror movie directing chops; if anything, he's just gotten better over the years, as I think this may just edge out any of the Evil Dead films in terms of pure effectiveness. The film is exceptionally fast-paced, and features a lot of "boo!" scares -- a tactic that generally comes of as laziness in most horror films, but which seems to go perfectly with what Raimi is going for here. Raimi isn't trying to reinvent the wheel or do anything particularly innovative, he's just trying to make a really fun movie, and he succeeds with gusto. I should also mention that the film's awesome final moments are probably my favourite since There Will Be Blood's "I'm finished!" I definitely need to watch this again, both because I enjoyed it so much and because the crowd I saw it with was kind of crappy. ***1/2
About a woman who offends a gypsy and winds up with a curse that will, after three days, literally drag her down into hell, this was Sam Raimi's return to the genre that made him famous. It's clear almost immediately that the years spent making dramas and superhero films have done nothing to dull Raimi's horror movie directing chops; if anything, he's just gotten better over the years, as I think this may just edge out any of the Evil Dead films in terms of pure effectiveness. The film is exceptionally fast-paced, and features a lot of "boo!" scares -- a tactic that generally comes of as laziness in most horror films, but which seems to go perfectly with what Raimi is going for here. Raimi isn't trying to reinvent the wheel or do anything particularly innovative, he's just trying to make a really fun movie, and he succeeds with gusto. I should also mention that the film's awesome final moments are probably my favourite since There Will Be Blood's "I'm finished!" I definitely need to watch this again, both because I enjoyed it so much and because the crowd I saw it with was kind of crappy. ***1/2
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Army of Darkness
ARMY OF DARKNESS (1992) - May 28, 2009
Featuring Ash, after having traveled into the past at the end of the last movie, defending a castle from demons in the middle ages. The confined setting of the first two films is replaced here with a much more epic feel, and all traces of the more generic Ash from the first film have been completely wiped out -- the Ash here is a one-liner spouting bad-ass, and is definitely a supremely memorable character; it goes without saying that Bruce Campbell is pretty much perfect in the role. This is also the funniest of the three films (the Three Stooges-esque scene involving Ash being accosted by a bunch of skeletons in a graveyard being a highlight), and probably the most flat-out entertaining. ***1/2
Featuring Ash, after having traveled into the past at the end of the last movie, defending a castle from demons in the middle ages. The confined setting of the first two films is replaced here with a much more epic feel, and all traces of the more generic Ash from the first film have been completely wiped out -- the Ash here is a one-liner spouting bad-ass, and is definitely a supremely memorable character; it goes without saying that Bruce Campbell is pretty much perfect in the role. This is also the funniest of the three films (the Three Stooges-esque scene involving Ash being accosted by a bunch of skeletons in a graveyard being a highlight), and probably the most flat-out entertaining. ***1/2
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Star Trek
STAR TREK (2009) - May 27, 2009 (Third Viewing)
So good. Seriously -- as far as summer movies go, this was pretty much perfect. It has a ton of action, but it knows exactly how much is too much, and it never crosses that line. From J.J. Abrams' stellar direction (I may have to revisit M:I III) to Michael Giacchino's memorable and rousing score (his best since his equally awesome score for the Incredibles) this is primo summer entertainment. ****
So good. Seriously -- as far as summer movies go, this was pretty much perfect. It has a ton of action, but it knows exactly how much is too much, and it never crosses that line. From J.J. Abrams' stellar direction (I may have to revisit M:I III) to Michael Giacchino's memorable and rousing score (his best since his equally awesome score for the Incredibles) this is primo summer entertainment. ****
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
The Evil Dead II
THE EVIL DEAD II (1987) - May 26, 2009
Taking place immediately after the events of the first film, this one finds Ash (after a brief recap of the original, which changes a few things around) fighting some more demons, first on his own and then joined by a new group of people. Featuring a much more darkly comic tone than the original, it's even more over-the-top, if that's possible. It's also pretty much plotless; it's basically just a series of set-pieces, but it works. It's really well directed by Sam Raimi, completely entertaining throughout, and short enough that it never begins to over-stay its welcome. ***
Taking place immediately after the events of the first film, this one finds Ash (after a brief recap of the original, which changes a few things around) fighting some more demons, first on his own and then joined by a new group of people. Featuring a much more darkly comic tone than the original, it's even more over-the-top, if that's possible. It's also pretty much plotless; it's basically just a series of set-pieces, but it works. It's really well directed by Sam Raimi, completely entertaining throughout, and short enough that it never begins to over-stay its welcome. ***
Monday, May 25, 2009
The Evil Dead
THE EVIL DEAD (1981) - May 25, 2009
About a group of friends who go on a trip to the cabin in the middle of the woods; things almost immediately go very wrong when they inadvertently unleash a bunch of evil spirits. This is Sam Raimi's first film, and though obviously made on an extremely low budget, it features all of the stylistic quirks that he has become known for. Featuring an almost ridiculous amount of gore, this was quite entertaining throughout. ***
About a group of friends who go on a trip to the cabin in the middle of the woods; things almost immediately go very wrong when they inadvertently unleash a bunch of evil spirits. This is Sam Raimi's first film, and though obviously made on an extremely low budget, it features all of the stylistic quirks that he has become known for. Featuring an almost ridiculous amount of gore, this was quite entertaining throughout. ***
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Rogue
ROGUE (2007) - May 24, 2009 (S)
About a group of tourists on a boat in an isolated river in Australia who wind up being terrorized by a giant crocodile. This is Greg McLean's follow-up to Wolf Creek, and like that film this one takes its time setting up all the characters before the crocodile shenanigans start kicking in. They're all pretty much stock characters (ie. the happy family, the bickering couple, the quiet guy, etc.), but I suppose that's necessary to be able to set them up all reasonably quickly. There's not quite as much crocodile carnage as you might expect (the bulk of the film is essentially Lifeboat with a crocodile), but it's suspenseful in parts and definitely entertaining throughout. And then there's the ending, which features Michael Vartan infiltrating the crocodile's lair in order to rescue Radha Mitchell, which is riveting and flat-out awesome. I kinda wish that the film had been more like that all the way through, but... oh well. ***
About a group of tourists on a boat in an isolated river in Australia who wind up being terrorized by a giant crocodile. This is Greg McLean's follow-up to Wolf Creek, and like that film this one takes its time setting up all the characters before the crocodile shenanigans start kicking in. They're all pretty much stock characters (ie. the happy family, the bickering couple, the quiet guy, etc.), but I suppose that's necessary to be able to set them up all reasonably quickly. There's not quite as much crocodile carnage as you might expect (the bulk of the film is essentially Lifeboat with a crocodile), but it's suspenseful in parts and definitely entertaining throughout. And then there's the ending, which features Michael Vartan infiltrating the crocodile's lair in order to rescue Radha Mitchell, which is riveting and flat-out awesome. I kinda wish that the film had been more like that all the way through, but... oh well. ***
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Terminator Salvation
TERMINATOR SALVATION (2009) - May 23, 2009
Another step down for the once-great, now crappy Terminator series. This one finds John Connor essentially reduced to a side character, with the emphasis shifted to Sam Worthington's Marcus Wright, a convict who is executed in 2003 only to wake up in the post-apocalyptic 2018 (the reason for this is completely spoiled in all the ads even though it isn't revealed until at least an hour into the film, though I suppose it would have been pretty obvious). One of the main problems with this film is that none of the characters are particularly interesting -- not even John Connor, played with monotonous intensity by Christian Bale. McG's slick, faux-gritty visual style also doesn't help matters. His action direction is decent (it's coherent, at least), but it's kind of mediocre and, for the most part, not particularly exciting. There are a few decent action set-pieces, such as the one in which a band of survivors is terrorized by a gigantic robot with motorcycles coming out of its feet -- but even that feels completely out of place in a Terminator film, and seems like it would be more at home in the latest Michael Bay Transformers movie. I guess I was essentially entertained throughout, though it is kind of sad that the best I can say about a new Terminator film is "eh, I wasn't bored." The conclusion, which apes the endings of the first two Terminator films by ending in a steel mill of some sort (I guess they make terminators there, though I didn't see any evidence of that other than a few terminator heads), only serves to demonstrate how much worse this film is than the first two. My attention did start to seriously wane at this point, though the appearance of a slightly off-looking CGI Arnie did basically make it worthwhile. **1/2
Another step down for the once-great, now crappy Terminator series. This one finds John Connor essentially reduced to a side character, with the emphasis shifted to Sam Worthington's Marcus Wright, a convict who is executed in 2003 only to wake up in the post-apocalyptic 2018 (the reason for this is completely spoiled in all the ads even though it isn't revealed until at least an hour into the film, though I suppose it would have been pretty obvious). One of the main problems with this film is that none of the characters are particularly interesting -- not even John Connor, played with monotonous intensity by Christian Bale. McG's slick, faux-gritty visual style also doesn't help matters. His action direction is decent (it's coherent, at least), but it's kind of mediocre and, for the most part, not particularly exciting. There are a few decent action set-pieces, such as the one in which a band of survivors is terrorized by a gigantic robot with motorcycles coming out of its feet -- but even that feels completely out of place in a Terminator film, and seems like it would be more at home in the latest Michael Bay Transformers movie. I guess I was essentially entertained throughout, though it is kind of sad that the best I can say about a new Terminator film is "eh, I wasn't bored." The conclusion, which apes the endings of the first two Terminator films by ending in a steel mill of some sort (I guess they make terminators there, though I didn't see any evidence of that other than a few terminator heads), only serves to demonstrate how much worse this film is than the first two. My attention did start to seriously wane at this point, though the appearance of a slightly off-looking CGI Arnie did basically make it worthwhile. **1/2
Friday, May 22, 2009
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
TERMINATOR 3: RISE OF THE MACHINES (2003) - May 22, 2009 (Third Viewing)
A passable enough action movie, though pretty much a failure as a follow-up to the first two Terminator films, this was about the further adventures of John Connor in the days leading up to the apocalypse. Though Jonathan Mostow is a decent enough director in his own right, this movie is an unfortunate demonstration that he is no James Cameron. The action scenes -- which thankfully avoid the tiresome quick-cut/shaky-cam device employed by most contemporary action films -- for the most part feel perfunctory and unexciting; they're not necessarily bad, nor are they particularly good. They're just there. "Meh" would be a good word to describe them. As for the rest of the film -- Arnie's T-101 has essentially been reduced to a clown, particularly in the first half of the film. Kristanna Loken's "Terminatrix" makes for a passable, though bland, villain (it's hard not to compare her to the perfectly cast Robert Patrick) -- though attempts to play up her sexiness, such as when she sultrily licks a used bandage (!), just come off as laughable. The film does improve in the second half, when the plot starts to really get into gear, and the movie starts feeling more like a legitimate Terminator film and less like "The Super Wacky Robot and Friendz Happy Hour!" Special props must go to Nick Stahl, however, as his casting is the one element that this film gets 100 percent right. If this had been just a random action movie, I would have said it's a decent if unspectacular summer blockbuster. But as the follow-up to the nearly perfect Terminator 2, it's a pretty big let-down. **1/2
A passable enough action movie, though pretty much a failure as a follow-up to the first two Terminator films, this was about the further adventures of John Connor in the days leading up to the apocalypse. Though Jonathan Mostow is a decent enough director in his own right, this movie is an unfortunate demonstration that he is no James Cameron. The action scenes -- which thankfully avoid the tiresome quick-cut/shaky-cam device employed by most contemporary action films -- for the most part feel perfunctory and unexciting; they're not necessarily bad, nor are they particularly good. They're just there. "Meh" would be a good word to describe them. As for the rest of the film -- Arnie's T-101 has essentially been reduced to a clown, particularly in the first half of the film. Kristanna Loken's "Terminatrix" makes for a passable, though bland, villain (it's hard not to compare her to the perfectly cast Robert Patrick) -- though attempts to play up her sexiness, such as when she sultrily licks a used bandage (!), just come off as laughable. The film does improve in the second half, when the plot starts to really get into gear, and the movie starts feeling more like a legitimate Terminator film and less like "The Super Wacky Robot and Friendz Happy Hour!" Special props must go to Nick Stahl, however, as his casting is the one element that this film gets 100 percent right. If this had been just a random action movie, I would have said it's a decent if unspectacular summer blockbuster. But as the follow-up to the nearly perfect Terminator 2, it's a pretty big let-down. **1/2
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Terminator 2: Judgment Day
TERMINATOR 2: JUDGMENT DAY (1991) - May 21, 2009 (Sixth or Seventh Viewing)
Pretty much a perfect sequel, this is one of those rare sequels to a really good movie that actually manages to top the original. The budget for this film is clearly much, much larger than for the first -- the action sequences are expectedly larger-than-life without ever coming off as overblown. Sequences such as the one in which the T-1000 pursues a moped-riding John Connor in a gigantic truck easily rank among the best action sequences of all time. But all that explosive action never comes at the price of the characters -- even if there were no action in this film, it would have still been really good just because the dramatic stuff is so well done. I mean, who doesn't get a bit choked up when the Terminator sacrifices himself at the end, giving the thumbs up as he descends into the lava? A robot, that's who. ****
Pretty much a perfect sequel, this is one of those rare sequels to a really good movie that actually manages to top the original. The budget for this film is clearly much, much larger than for the first -- the action sequences are expectedly larger-than-life without ever coming off as overblown. Sequences such as the one in which the T-1000 pursues a moped-riding John Connor in a gigantic truck easily rank among the best action sequences of all time. But all that explosive action never comes at the price of the characters -- even if there were no action in this film, it would have still been really good just because the dramatic stuff is so well done. I mean, who doesn't get a bit choked up when the Terminator sacrifices himself at the end, giving the thumbs up as he descends into the lava? A robot, that's who. ****
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
The Terminator
THE TERMINATOR (1984) - May 20, 2009 (Second or Third Viewing)
A superlative action film. About Sarah Connor, a woman from the present who must contend with a cyborg from the future who is out to kill her. This has justifiably become known as a classic in the genre; aside from the dated synthesizer score, the film has aged quite well, and it's easy enough to see why it launched James Cameron's career. The direction is pretty much perfect, and the film does a really good job of blending the action and the more character-driven stuff with Sarah Connor and Kyle Reese. ***1/2
A superlative action film. About Sarah Connor, a woman from the present who must contend with a cyborg from the future who is out to kill her. This has justifiably become known as a classic in the genre; aside from the dated synthesizer score, the film has aged quite well, and it's easy enough to see why it launched James Cameron's career. The direction is pretty much perfect, and the film does a really good job of blending the action and the more character-driven stuff with Sarah Connor and Kyle Reese. ***1/2
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Coraline
CORALINE (2009) - May 19, 2009
About a young girl who finds a portal to a strange alternate world, which at first seems perfect, but slowly reveals itself to be completely sinister. The film's striking visuals and animation were clearly the highlight -- the film itself wasn't quite as good as the visual style, but it was definitely entertaining throughout. The version I was was in 3D, which worked fairly well and was impressive in parts, though I still would have preferred to watch the non-3D version (wearing those glasses gets cumbersome as the movie goes on, not to mention the fact that they are practically sunglasses and make the film seem much less vibrant). ***
About a young girl who finds a portal to a strange alternate world, which at first seems perfect, but slowly reveals itself to be completely sinister. The film's striking visuals and animation were clearly the highlight -- the film itself wasn't quite as good as the visual style, but it was definitely entertaining throughout. The version I was was in 3D, which worked fairly well and was impressive in parts, though I still would have preferred to watch the non-3D version (wearing those glasses gets cumbersome as the movie goes on, not to mention the fact that they are practically sunglasses and make the film seem much less vibrant). ***
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Angels and Demons
ANGELS AND DEMONS (2009) - May 17, 2009
Though a clear step up from the Da Vinci Code, this was still inferior to the book -- it was more fast-paced than the turgid original film, but it still failed to match the book's pacing and level of excitement. Tom Hanks was much better here (his dull performance from the first film was the closest he's ever come to a bad performance), but he still didn't really have much to do, as there was a ridiculous amount of plot crammed into this film and not much time to do anything but move from one set-piece to the next. The film moves at a really fast pace, and I was never really bored -- but I was never fully drawn in, either. **1/2
Though a clear step up from the Da Vinci Code, this was still inferior to the book -- it was more fast-paced than the turgid original film, but it still failed to match the book's pacing and level of excitement. Tom Hanks was much better here (his dull performance from the first film was the closest he's ever come to a bad performance), but he still didn't really have much to do, as there was a ridiculous amount of plot crammed into this film and not much time to do anything but move from one set-piece to the next. The film moves at a really fast pace, and I was never really bored -- but I was never fully drawn in, either. **1/2
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Taken
TAKEN (2009) - May 12, 2009 (Second Viewing)
Super awesome. Seriously. I think much of what makes this movie so great is Liam Neeson -- his affecting and awesomely badass performance elevates an above-average action movie to something special. I've always been a big fan of Neeson, and this movie has definitely made me like him that much more. ****
Super awesome. Seriously. I think much of what makes this movie so great is Liam Neeson -- his affecting and awesomely badass performance elevates an above-average action movie to something special. I've always been a big fan of Neeson, and this movie has definitely made me like him that much more. ****
Saturday, May 09, 2009
Star Trek
STAR TREK (2009) - May 9, 2009 (Second Viewing)
Yep -- this is a stellar summer action movie, and a pretty much perfect rebooting of the original Star Trek series. It's fun, perfectly cast, and really well made. ****
Yep -- this is a stellar summer action movie, and a pretty much perfect rebooting of the original Star Trek series. It's fun, perfectly cast, and really well made. ****
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Back to the Future III
BACK TO THE FUTURE III (1990) - May 7, 2009 (Umpteenth Viewing)
Another stellar sequel, this conclusion to the trilogy finds Marty and Doc getting into various shenanigans in the late 1800s. This makes most of the film essentially a western, which works just as well as anything from the first two films. Though the first movie in the trilogy is definitely the best one, all three films feature a remarkably consistent level of quality. Good stuff. ****
Another stellar sequel, this conclusion to the trilogy finds Marty and Doc getting into various shenanigans in the late 1800s. This makes most of the film essentially a western, which works just as well as anything from the first two films. Though the first movie in the trilogy is definitely the best one, all three films feature a remarkably consistent level of quality. Good stuff. ****
Monday, May 04, 2009
Blind Dating
BLIND DATING (2006) - May 4, 2009
About on par with a movie-of-the-week, this was a cheesy though competently made made film about a blind guy who, about to undergo an experimental procedure to restore his sight, falls in love. It's easy enough to see why this went straight to video, though it does feature a really charismatic performance from Chris Pine, who hopefully won't get typecast as Captain Kirk. **1/2
About on par with a movie-of-the-week, this was a cheesy though competently made made film about a blind guy who, about to undergo an experimental procedure to restore his sight, falls in love. It's easy enough to see why this went straight to video, though it does feature a really charismatic performance from Chris Pine, who hopefully won't get typecast as Captain Kirk. **1/2
Saturday, May 02, 2009
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
X-MEN ORIGINS: WOLVERINE (2009) - May 2, 2009
Not wholly inept, but not exactly good, either, this was a mediocre origin story about Wolverine, leading into the first X-Men movie. The performances were fine, and Hugh Jackman was pretty much perfect as Wolverine, but the movie just wasn't that good. It was kind of boring. I think one of the film's major flaws was that it was essentially a revenge story -- only we know that Wolverine can't possibly get revenge on either Sabretooth or Styker, because they have to be around for the X-Men movies that follow. So that renders the revenge stuff pretty much moot, which makes most of the film kind of a drag to sit through. It's pretty shoddy. **
Not wholly inept, but not exactly good, either, this was a mediocre origin story about Wolverine, leading into the first X-Men movie. The performances were fine, and Hugh Jackman was pretty much perfect as Wolverine, but the movie just wasn't that good. It was kind of boring. I think one of the film's major flaws was that it was essentially a revenge story -- only we know that Wolverine can't possibly get revenge on either Sabretooth or Styker, because they have to be around for the X-Men movies that follow. So that renders the revenge stuff pretty much moot, which makes most of the film kind of a drag to sit through. It's pretty shoddy. **
Star Trek
STAR TREK (2009) - May 2, 2009
Superb. I was pretty skeptical when I first heard the idea of a Star Trek reboot with a young "hip" cast, but my skepticism was, happily, completely unfounded -- JJ Abrams has pulled off the seemingly impossible task of straddling the fine line between pleasing the fans and catering to a new audience, and has pulled it off pretty much perfectly. The film manages to remain faithful to the spirit of the original without getting weighed down by it -- this is a movie that anyone can (and should) enjoy. It gets around the inevitable changes via an ingenious plot device involving time travel, which never feels like a cheat or an affront to the fans. It's definitely more action-heavy than any previous Star Trek offering, but it's never overwhelmed by the action -- it still manages to have quieter moments with the characters, some emotional moments and a good amount of humour sprinkled throughout. It helps that pretty much all of the roles are perfectly cast, though special props must go to Karl Urban, who does a ridiculously dead-on Bones without it ever coming off that he's merely doing an impression. ****
Superb. I was pretty skeptical when I first heard the idea of a Star Trek reboot with a young "hip" cast, but my skepticism was, happily, completely unfounded -- JJ Abrams has pulled off the seemingly impossible task of straddling the fine line between pleasing the fans and catering to a new audience, and has pulled it off pretty much perfectly. The film manages to remain faithful to the spirit of the original without getting weighed down by it -- this is a movie that anyone can (and should) enjoy. It gets around the inevitable changes via an ingenious plot device involving time travel, which never feels like a cheat or an affront to the fans. It's definitely more action-heavy than any previous Star Trek offering, but it's never overwhelmed by the action -- it still manages to have quieter moments with the characters, some emotional moments and a good amount of humour sprinkled throughout. It helps that pretty much all of the roles are perfectly cast, though special props must go to Karl Urban, who does a ridiculously dead-on Bones without it ever coming off that he's merely doing an impression. ****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)