This review is spoiler free except a brief hint of the ending in the last paragraph. If you happen to not know the ending of the original King Kong then quit reading when you come to the line I put to separate the first part of the review from the last paragraph.

Ever since I heard that Peter Jackson was making King Kong I have been excited about seeing it. It is not that I am a big King Kong fan…I’ve seen the originals several times as a child and enjoyed them for what they were…but the Lord of the Rings trilogy has made me a big fan of Peter Jackson. Not only did he manage to pull together a team that created the most amazing looking film ever , but the passion for film making that he showed in every frame of the DVD extras of all three films made a believer out of me. The King Kong trailers did nothing but increase my expectations for this film…and it rocked!

The only 2 complaints I read on internet sites prior to seeing the film were that it was a) too long, and b) that Peter Jackson should not have made this film. As to B, I personally think people are ridiculous. If a director has a passion for something and can find a studio to back it then why not make it. As to the length…well there is no denying it is a long film. Three hours and change. But too long? Not by a long shot. Yes, it takes awhile to get you to the monkey but by the time its over you don’t remember the wait at all.

The Special Effects: They are HUGE! WETA’s work with Kong makes Aslan in Narnia look like I drew it with crayons. It is that good. Before you get a good look at Kong you get to see some dinosaurs and they look very good and then you get that first close up face shot of Kong and your are blown away. What makes the Kong so impressive as a digital character is the way that WETA is able to convey emotion through the character. WETA has a track record of course with the Golem character but Golem was also able to talk and the voice tone and inflection go a long way towards giving the character emotion. There are numerous moments in Kong where the emotion is conveyed with only a look and how they were able to get depth and feeling and emotion out of those big brown digital eyes is way beyond my comprehension. I sat in awe! The digital King Kong character gave a better performance than 90% of the human actors/actresses I’ve seen in films this year.

The other effects are very good as well. The early century New York sets and they jungle settings are no doubt filled with visual effects shots and they are amazing as well. Peter Jackson and the WETA crew did a wonderful job of recreating depression era New York City as well as a lush Frank Frazetta-ish jungle setting on Skull Island. The entire movie was a visual feast, especially if you love classic swashbuckling monster movies. It is apparent with every frame that Peter Jackson truly loves the subject matter and this is an amazing tribute to the legacy of King Kong.

The Actors/Actresses: Great choices all around. Naomi Watts was a perfect choice to fill the role of Ann Darrow immortalized by Fay Wray in the original 1933 production. She is attractive enough to play the starlet role and yet not so glamorous as to be distracting…and she does an amazing job. The scenes between Ann Darrow and King Kong are wonderful and the emotional connection she is able to convey with a character who was not physically there during filming is powerful and amazing. Adrien Brody plays the unassuming playwright turned hero Jack Driscoll very convincingly and Jack Black was fantastic. There was a great deal of speculation as to whether or not he would be able to reign in his crazy energy enough to play the role of Carl Denham without making it over-the-top…and he nailed it. He is just greedy and self-serving enough to be the kind of character who looks to make a profit off of everyone but not so one-dimensionally bad that you hate him. You dislike him, but you can also understand him because he represents the worst in all of us and the excesses we see all around us in society today. Andy Serkis not only has a really fun role in the film but does a phenomenal job as Kong. I cannot wait to see the behind-the-scenes stuff with him. The rest of the cast was terrific. Keep an ear open early for a fun reference to Fay Wray and the original King Kong and look closely at the conductor of the orchestra towards the end of the film. Is that Howard Shore? Shore was the original person working on the film score but was replaced by James Newton Howard 7 weeks before the film was to be completed. It sure does look like Howard Shore but they never show him close enough to be entirely sure. There are also cameos by Peter Jackson and other LOTR/WETA producers, etc, mostly as gunners in the airplanes but I did not notice them and only read about it in my research for this review.

_________________________

Overall this is a great film. It looks absolutely stunning and the performances by real and digital characters are outstanding. Keep in mind that this is not an epic story like Lord of the Rings. At its heart it is still essentially a monster movie but Jackson takes a good deal of time to give the characters life and backstories in the first third of the movie and to me this adds extra dimension to the scale of this film. The bonding scene between Ann Darrow and Kong is amazing as are there other emotionally charged scenes throughout the film. Being essentially a tragedy I left the theatre feeling the same way I did when Frodo turned back and decided to keep the ring…I felt like someone had punched me in the gut…hard. Tori did not know how the original King Kong ended and she was affected by how sad it was. The end scene is so incredibly powerful and makes the time invested completely worthwhile. I am so thrilled with the end result of Peter Jackson’s latest film and look forward to hearing your thoughts, positive or negative. In the end this is a must-see film. See it on the biggest screen possible as it is overwhelming! Great, great job and well worth the wait!

Although C. S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia have been a part of the public consciousness since before I was born I myself did not read them until 5 or 6 years ago. I ended up re-reading some of the books to my daughter and am really familiar with The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe. I have to admit that I was somewhat worried that the movie would not live up to my expectations but I needn’t have been. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe was every bit as good as the trailers indicated.

I make it a habit to stay away from reviews until after I have seen a movie mostly because I do not want anything to be spoiled for me but since I knew this story well I occasionally looked at forums to see what the rumors were. The most frequently discussed topic seemed to be whether or not the special effects would meet people’s expectations. Could WETA, who made motion picture history with The Lord of the Rings trilogy, do it again? One of the things that helped with the realism of the digital characters in LOTR is that the color palette of the movie was darker which helped digital and real characters blend together in the scene. LW2 was a much bolder, brighter movie and I must say WETA did a wonderful job. The crowning achievement of the movie was, of course, Aslan and he looked incredible. Every hair on his mane was lifelike and realistic. It was marvelous. The other creatures inhabiting Narnia were terrific as well. I especially enjoyed the beavers. The other unknown was how a group of relatively unknown child actors would do with such a beloved classic tale.

Georgie Henley, Skandar Keynes, Anna Popplewell, and William Moseley played Lucy, Edmund, Susan and Peter Pevensie. The four Pevensie children are wisked away to Professor Kirke’s country estate to protect them from London air raids during WWII. While there young Lucy stumbles across a wardrobe during a game of hide and seek through which she enters the magical world of Narnia. This is truly one of my favorite moments in both the book and the film. Lucy is the Pevensie child that I enjoy the most and Georgie Henley did a wonderful job of conveying the innocence and awe of a child whose imagination is at its peak. I love the scenes between her and Mr. Tumnus (played terrifically by James McAvoy). Lucy and Mr. Tumnus talking over tea and toast is just such a comforting scene. The other actors/actresses did well also. Edmund was just dislikable enough to believe that he would do the selfish things he does and yet not so much as to cause the viewer to write off the character. Anna Popplewell did a great job of conveying the fact that Susan is at that uncomfortable age between childhood and adulthood and does not feel confident in either role. William Moseley’s Peter was played just right…brave enough to do what needed to be done to protect his family but no so brave as to look superhero-ish. My favorites next to Georgie Henley (Lucy) and James McAvoy (Mr. Tumnus) was Jim Broadbent as Professor Kirke. The scenes between the professor and the children were terrific and I wish he could’ve factored into the story more. A number of people left the theatre at the “end” of the movie only to miss the very poignant moment between Lucy and the Professor. For me that scene alone made the whole movie wonderful.

In the few negative reviews that LW2 has garnered the most common complaint is either the “preachiness” of the story or that it was just too simplistic. My response to that is these reviewers must have not read the book as the movie stays very close to the letter and spirit of the novel. C. S. Lewis was very open about the religious allegory in these stories and yet they are written (and the movie was filmed) in such a way that you can read into them whatever you like. The story is very simple on some levels but one must remember it was a story written in the 50’s for children. Some reviewers complained about the violence being glossed over and dumbed down to get a PG rating but the fact of the matter is that it played out onscreen like it does in the books. There are not long, bloody accounts of the battle in the book. It is presented in such a way to be understandable and palatable for young children. I admire the fact that they stayed true to the spirit of the book and didn’t try to amp up the violence, etc. to make the movie more appealing to the LOTR crowd. There is just the right amount of humor, adventure, magic and suspense to appeal to the whole family. Despite the PG rating there are some scenes, the one at the stone table for example, that are fairly dark with scary creatures that may frighten some young children.

Reading the books as an adult the thing that struck me the most was the idea of these children living out full lives in Narnia and then suddenly being brought back to the here and now only moments after they left. It is a somewhat haunting idea that brings with it a bit of melancholy. Although his onscreen time was brief I see this melancholic longing for Narnia in the attitude of the professor. The books/movie give the idea that the knowledge of Narnia fades into a dreamlike quality (as does the real world when you are in Narnia) which somewhat explains how a person could go back to living a “normal” life after years of living and ruling in a magical realm but the whole idea has always been somewhat sad and fascinating for me. To me the idea is akin to the occasional longing for childhood one can experience at different times in life.

Overall I found the movie to be a wonderful experience and while it doesn’t come close to replacing the Lord of the Rings films in my affections it is a marvelous cinematic rendering of a beloved classic children’s tale.

Pull out a $10 bill and hold it in your hand. Now take a good long look at the above image. You have to admit, Charlize Theron is pretty attractive and aesthetically speaking this is a great movie poster. While you’re looking, hold tight to that $10 bill…are you doing it? Look carefully and really take it all in…and now put the money back in your pocket and send me a thank you note for saving you your hard earned cash.

Thanks to my local comic shop I had the opportunity to go see a sneak preview of Aeon Flux tonight with James, Jeff and John (I was the odd man out…no J in my name). We had great BBQ beforehand and enjoyed excellent conversation. The movie? Well contrary to what my friends say it did not suck. In order for a movie to really suck you have to have some kind of emotional connection to it. It takes passion to generate feelings of suck-i-tude for a film. Aeon Flux just couldn’t generate that spark of passion. It was a movie that was simply just there. At roughly 90 minutes I heard many say it seemed too long. For my part I wish they would’ve added 30 minutes to the movie and made me care about the characters. There is nothing storywise that you haven’t seen in movies before and done much better. This year alone The Island explored similar themes and was a fascinating, fun, rollercoaster of a ride. Aeon Flux was blah. Too soon into the movie I was asked to make an emotional connection with a character who dies…she was onscreen for all of 3 minutes. I never saw the supposed “bad guy” do anything bad and didn’t have any emotional connection to him or the other characters as the twists of “who is the real bad guy” began.

The frustrating thing about Aeon Flux is what it could have been. The actors all do a great job, they simply have no material to work with. Charlize Theron is beautiful to look at in her form fitting black outfits and does a fine job in a very two dimensional role. Marton Csokas and the other actors/actresses are all convincing enough in their various roles but there just isn’t anything for them to do. Charlize Theron kicks a great deal of butt but frankly I don’t care because I don’t have anything worthwhile to tell me why I should be glad that she’s kicking their butts. It is a poor, poor story that I have to believe any amature screenwriter could have taken and built a better film with. It is unfortunate as I was really looking forward to this being an entertaining movie. The special effects are good and the settings are interesting, but not enough to bolster this weak story.

Should you see it in the theatre? No. Wait until it comes on DVD and then get a friend to pay for the rental. You’ll be glad you did.

(Non-spoiler review)

What happens when you take one of the most beloved works of classical romantic literature, one that has been given an amazing 5 hour miniseries treatment, and reimagine it with new stars but less than half the screen time? Surprisingly, despite some flaws, it turns out to be a very pleasant theatrical experience.

The biggest complaint I have about director Joe Wright’s version of Pride and Prejudice is the time factor. Why make a 2 hour version of a movie that requires a crash course introduction to the characters when adding 30-45 minutes could have done wonders in making the first third of this film far less confusing? I have to admit that I am extremely enamored of the A&E/BBC version starring Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle. It is extremely faithful to the book and allows the viewer the time to get to know the Bennet family and all the other important characters in all their flawed glory. I had predetermined that I was not going to see this new version out of loyalty to the other but I love period romantic movies and being a holiday weekend it was a perfect movie to go see as a family. I am so glad that I had seen the miniseries a few times. The reason being that the several hours of that version, equating to several chapters of Jane Austen’s novel, flash by on the screen with little chance of comprehension if you are not familiar with the source material. To be fair, this new version makes no bones about the fact that it simply wants to concentrate on the relationship between the main characters, Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy. Even this, however, is very rushed at first and I was thankful that I had the background to better understand the antagonism between these two characters.

Again, this is my biggest complaint. Other than the first third of the movie having to cover far too much ground I really enjoyed this film. Keep in mind throughout the review that I would give the BBC version a full 5 out of 5 stars. I would give the latest version of Pride and Prejudice 4. I would love to see these actors and actresses given a decent amount of time to handle this source material as the cast was wonderful. I prefer Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle as the leads but Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFayden were fantastic. The gave a slightly younger energy to the roles and despite the time/editing constraints they had a very believable chemistry throughout the film. Donald Sutherland and Brenda Blethyn were terrific as Mr. and Mrs. Bennet. Again though I felt like the roles suffered some due to the lack of time to flesh out the characters. My foreknowledge of the characters went a long way towards my ability to understand them on the screen but I’d love to hear what others thought who are not familiar with the story. Particularly in regards to Sutherland’s Mr. Bennet. Alison Steadman and Benjamin Whithrow were marvelous in the 1995 miniseries. In that version the roles were played more strongly to their comic element and in some ways I actually prefer this version. The characters are still very funny but Sutherland and Blethyn made the characters seem much more real and less one dimensional. The joy of any of Jane Austen’s works is the wit and satire of her language and Sutherland and Blethyn did not get the screen time necessary to revel in their many wonderful lines. One of my favorite scenes in this version is a conversation late in the movie between Elizabeth and her father…I like the emotional resonance in it much better than the BBC version.

The turning point of this film, for me, came in the second ball scene…the one held at Mr. Bingley’s estate. Mr. Darcy asks Elizabeth to dance and their repartee during the dance is terrific and Joe Wright films this scene in such a remarkable way that I was sucked into the film. It is a fantastic moment in the movie. There are several other wonderfully filmed moments, one of the best being an outdoor scene where Darcy and Elizabeth have a very heated exchange. Wright picked an outstanding location…lots of beautiful green trees and land with rain falling down…that really adds alot to the scene. Another thing I really enjoyed about this version is that the settings were slightly darker than the BBC version. The Bennet home better depicted their social status giving better understanding as to why Mr. Darcy would object to any relationship that would require ties to the Bennet family.

The only other complaint I have is the fact that the screenwriter, in the interest of trimming material to fit the time constraints of the film, squashed scenes and settings together that are actually more powerful and entertaining in the more faithful BBC version.

Ultimately what it may come down to in regards to preference is which version you’ve seen first. I am happy that I went and saw this version and I will definitely check it out again when it comes out on DVD. The cast was great and there were several terrific scenes. The settings of the film were beautiful and the soundtrack was wonderful. If you are a fan of period pieces I highly recommend this film…but don’t let it be your only exposure to Jane Austen. Read the book and/or see the BBC version to experience all the marvelous nuances of her work.

Today is All Saint’s Day, a day most appropriate for the DVD release of the movie Millions.

It is a rare pleasure to discover a movie that hasn’t been overblown by media hype and yet truly deserves to be praised from the rooftops. Millions is one such movie. Mary and I saw this in its theatrical run back in May for our anniversary. Seeing the trailer online had us sold and Millions turned out to be a real treasure of a movie.

Millions is a story “from the imagination of Danny Boyle”. Boyle is no slouch in the movie department. He’s directed some great ones: Trainspotting (1996) and A Life Less Ordinary (1997) starring Ewan McGregor among others; The Beach with Leonardo DiCaprio (2000) and 2002’s excellent zombie flick 28 Days Later. In Millions Boyle creates a feel good film with the whimsy and flair of Tim Burton’s Big Fish.

Millions centers around 7 year old Damian, a dreamer who sees and talks to dead saints, and his more practical 9 year old brother Anthony. The film opens with the boys moving to a new home with their father some time after the death of their mother. Anthony seems to deal with his mother’s death by being a normal, somewhat self-centered boy. Damian’s grief is dealt with differently. He envisions famous and not-so-famous saints and has detailed conversations. It is these moments that reflect the same magical element that Burton’s Big Fish does. A bag of money seemingly falls from the sky right into the lap of young Damian. Believing this is an answer to prayer he sets out trying to do good with his millions. Damian’s older brother has more material desires in mind. A slightly fantastical storyline involving crooks and a deadline in which the money must be spent sends both boys on a whirlwind adventure.

Everything about this film is amazing and it ranks up there with several bigger budget films as one of the best movies to come out this year. The cast is inspiring. James Nesbitt plays a very down to earth, “real” father, Lewis McGibbon is somewhat self-centered but ultimately very likeable as Damian’s older brother Anthony, and Alex Etel makes his acting debut as Damian and is absolutely terrific. The special, “whimsical” effects are wonderful, the film is vividly colored, and the soundtrack is filled with ethereal, uplifting music. Millions ends on an inspiring note that not only espouses the value of what true wealth is but does so in a way that really makes a difference. This film along with Dear Frankie are two of the best, least stereotypical “feel good” movies I’ve seen in a long time. It is wonderful.

I rushed out to buy this movie over my lunchbreak this afternoon and have already informed the family that this is tonight’s family activity. Mary and I love it and no doubt our daughter will fall in love with it as well. Hopefully you will too.