Reviews have begun to drop for Luc Besson’s Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets, and while it’s early days yet, let’s just say they haven’t been charitable.
The Hollywood Reporter’s Todd McCarthy was particularly tough on Besson’s latest effort, saying, ‘Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets really is that bad, bad enough you don’t know for longest time that Valerian is one of the lead characters and not a planet or a spaceship.’
Steve Pond of The Wrap was slightly more charitable, saying ‘(Luc) Besson takes all that fun and color, along with a wild array of fantastic creatures, and deploys (them) in service of a big, dopey story that remains resolutely uninvolving and quite often annoying.’
Now, as I said earlier, it’s early days yet and a few mediocre reviews aren’t likely enough to torpedo Valerian’s chances at the domestic box office (after all, it’s taken five movies before many moviegoers in the United States noticed that the Transformers movies are really, really bad).
Though I get the feeling at that we’re not going to see Spider-Man: Homecoming-type box office when the movie goes into wide release.
These days as a mover goer I know full well that practical effects combined with CGI can create virtually any type of effect imaginable.
Though what I find infinitely more interesting is when a movie’s special effects are so seamless that I don’t know that what I happen to be looking at is a special effect, which brings me to Captain America: Civil War.
There were two scenes where I recall the Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman) was a full-on CGI character: when he was sliding down the side of a building when chasing the Winter Soldoer (Sebastian Stan) and another when he was slowing hinself down after momentum carried him beyond the Soldier in a second confrontation.
Beyond those two instances, I assumed that the character–as well as many of the locations–were entirely practical.
Imagine my surprise to learn that virtually every scene featuring the Panther had three or four layers of CGI over a practical stuntman, and most of the locations were CGI enhanced as well!
Movie magic indeed.
The first time I had seen the Cars 3 teaser trailer was during Rogue One: A Star Wars Story and someone seated nearby remarked:
“That’s pretty dark for a Pixar movie.”
Whoever this astute moviegoer was, he took the words right out of my mouth because not only is this trailer–tonally speaking–dark but it makes the movie that came afterward almost optimistic in retrospect.
As I have said time and again, I am not fond of remakes.
More often than not they don’t add anything to the original–did we really need to know about Michael Myers difficult upbringing in Rob Zombie’s Halloween reboot?–or they add details that seemingly are there just to differentiate them from the original.
The thing is, as far as remarks go, Rupert Wainwright’s remake of The Fog (it doesn’t help that John Carpenter directed the original) isn’t terrible.
It’s not particularly good, but it’s different enough that you don’t at least hate yourself for wasting an hour and a half that you will never get back.
What works is the whole leprosy subplot–in the original I don’t recall the movie going into huge detail about what William Blake was doing with the gold–but in the reboot the point was to get his people to a place where they could live in peace because they were suffering from leprosy.
He was building a leper colony! It’s a pretty clever idea that the movie unfortunately doesn’t take advantage of (there’s a scene where one of the ghosts comes in physical contact with a person, and she’s decays like she’s caught leprosy on steroids).
Unfortunately it’s an angle that they don’t deal with again.
They could have also done more innovative things with the fog itself, especially when you take into account that the bulk of it is CGI, but unfortunately they don’t.
It’s a movie full of wasted opportunities–especially compared to the original–but at least you don’t feel your time slipping away like digital fog.
Independence Day isn’t the only movie that’s enjoyed a ‘resurgence’ as of late. Most recently, Godzilla has joined to club with Godzilla: Resurgence
And I honestly think that you see more of Godzilla in the trailer than you do in the entirety of Gareth Edwards’ 2014 eponymously named movie.
That being said, as much as I wanted to see more of the big lizard, having done so I recall the adage ‘Be careful of what you ask for, you just might get it’ because this version of Toho Co.’s venerable kaiju looks a bit…weird.
Check out the scrawny arms and dissicated-looking skin. He shares some visual cues with a tyrannosaur, though looks oddly zombified and more than a bit terrifying.
Which is interesting because traditionally Godzilla has never looked particularly scary. Its (which has been at various times male and female, I think) primarily claim to fame were its humongous size, Japanese city-crushing tendencies, and radioactive breath.
Visually? Always interesting, though honestly never evoked a reaction one way or another.
This most recent version? Monstrous.
I also like that it still seems to still be a guy in a rubber suit. Sure, technically speaking you can do less with a more practical Godzilla, but there’s one thing it its favor: It’s actually there.
The Secret Life Of Pets – Trailer 1
With voice talent provided by Louie C.K. and Kevin Hart, you’d think that The Secret Life Of Pets would be pretty awesome, never mind funny.
The Secret Life Of Pets – Trailer 2
But if the reviews that are coming in are any indicator, then seeing this movie is akin to flipping a coin: you don’t know what you’re going to get, though it’s going to be either one of two things:
Either really, really bad or pretty smart and amusing.
The Secret Life Of Pets = Trailer 3
And I have no idea which, but since I don’t particularly care about animated movies–I’ll see something from Pixar (The Incredibles are well, incredible) though I don’t find myself interested in most others, like as the Ice Age or Minions movies.
The Secret Life Of Pets – Official Final Trailer
Then again, Universal has at least $104 million reasons to think otherwise.
I’m not quite sure what to make of the retooled Pete’s Dragon
except that it’s apparently nothing like the original, though oddly enough, what they both share in common is the significant role animation plays–though in this instance it’s the result of–more likely than not–hundreds of computer artists, as opposed to relatively few of the hand-drawn variety.
Another change is that Pete this time around is a wild child in the vein of a young Tarzan or Mowgli–who also happens to have starred in another Disney movie that’s doing really, really well.
Either way, not too interested though Robert Redford has apparently being shared among Disney’s various divisions.