Showing posts with label Peter Jackson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Peter Jackson. Show all posts

Friday, May 10, 2019

Movie Review: They Shall Not Grow Old

They Shall Not Grow Old **** / *****
Directed by: Peter Jackson.
 
Peter Jackson’s They Shall Not Grow Old is an odd experience. What he was done is taken old footage from WWI, and using modern remastering techniques, have cleaned up the images so they look pristine. At first, the footage is small and boxier – and in black and white. But when the fighting starts, the footage switches to color> it’s not perfect color, but it is a heck of a lot of better than colorized old movies, and the color is key to what Jackson is doing here. The soundtrack of the movie is made up of a lot of voices of British soldiers who foot in the war, and describe their experiences. Jackson wants to give a trench’s eye view of the War – but also make it feel fresh and vibrant – not like an old movie soon in history class. He succeeds.
 
In many ways, WWI is the lesser known older brother of WWII. While everyone can tell you about that war, WWI doesn’t quite hold the same place in our collective memory – probably at least in part because there isn’t as much footage of it, and it hasn’t been as memorialized as WWII – and its veterans – became over the decades. Jackson’s film seeks to change that – at least in a way. There is not real talk in the movie about the politics that lead to the war – if you don’t know why it started when you walk in, you won’t know why when you walk out. As the voices in the film make clear, they didn’t really know why they were fighting either. They were determined to go and – and kill the Germans if they must – but they almost didn’t hold it against them. Some share good memories of the Germans they did meet during the war, if they didn’t have to kill each other when they did.
 
Jackson builds the narrative slowly here – first how all the young men volunteered and went off to war, and then what life was like in the trenches. It was dirty and disgusting – filled with disease and rats. They had little food, and spent all their time buried in the muck – some of it mud, some it other things. You were constantly on guard because you didn’t know when artillery would start raining down on you – or when the gas would come. Eventually, Jackson will get to the battles themselves – and the pure hell that it was – bodies piling up, corpses all around you, the wounded everywhere. It is pure chaos.
 
The color in the film is key, I think, because it doesn’t allow you the same distance that old black and white footage does. When WWI is thought about, it’s of a grim slog, dark greys, and the misery of the mud. That’s true, but as They Shall Not Grow Old makes clear, it was still a world filled with color – the men, were mostly boys. The film shows them smiling and laughing. It will also show the darker moments. Coupled with hearing their voices, it becomes impossible to write them off to history.
 
The main purpose of They Shall Not Grow Old is to pay tribute to these men who fought – and in many cases – died. The film makes it clear what it thinks of this war – and most wars – and the catastrophic human toll it takes on those who fight, for purposes that are not always clear. It is a stirring tribute to those men – and a reminder of the horrors of war. Jackson is an interesting filmmaker, and here, he has done something truly special.

Wednesday, December 24, 2014

Movie Review: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies
Directed by: Peter Jackson.
Written by: Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens & Peter Jackson & Guillermo del Toro based on the book by J.R.R. Tolkien.
Starring: Martin Freeman (Bilbo Baggins), Ian McKellen (Gandalf), Richard Armitage (Thorin), Ken Stott (Balin), Graham McTavish (Dwalin), William Kircher (Bifur), James Nesbitt (Bofur), Stephen Hunter (Bombur), Dean O'Gorman (Fili), Aidan Turner (Kili), John Callen (Oin), Peter Hambleton (Gloin), Jed Brophy (Nori), Mark Hadlow (Dori), Adam Brown (Ori), Orlando Bloom (Legolas), Evangeline Lilly (Tauriel), Lee Pace (Thranduil), Cate Blanchett (Galadriel), Hugo Weaving (Elrond), Christopher Lee (Saruman), Ian Holm (Old Bilbo), Mikael Persbrandt (Beorn), Sylvester McCoy (Radagast), Luke Evans (Bard), Stephen Fry (Master of Laketown), Ryan Gage (Alfrid), John Bell  (Bain), Peggy Nesbitt (Sigrid), Mary Nesbitt (Tilda), Manu Bennett (Azog), John Tui (Bolg), Benedict Cumberbatch (Smaug / Necromancer), Billy Connolly (Dain).

After three films in three years, running just under 8 hours combined, Peter Jackson’s adaptation of The Hobbit finally comes to an end. There is no denying that this trilogy has not been as satisfying as Jackson`s previous Tolkien movies – The Lord of the Rings – was. But perhaps some have been a little too hard on these movies as well. Yes, they are ridiculous drawn out – taking  story that probably could have been told in one three, perhaps four hour movie, and making every scene last a little too long. Yet, watching all three of the movies in recent weeks – after a first rewatch of The Lord of the Rings trilogy in years – I have to say that in many ways the Hobbit are close to the quality of The Lord of the Rings movies. Jackson is still an expert at using special effects, and he still directs large scale action sequences well – with none of that kind of rapid fire editing that mars Michael Bay movies. And the Middle Earth Jackson and his collaborators have created is a nice place to spend a few hours each year. I’m not saying that this story needed anywhere near the treatment that Jackson has given it – I think the movies could be a hell of a lot better if there was a hell of lot less of them. Still though, I`m going to miss this cinematic universe.

The third Hobbit movie, The Battle of the Five Armies, is basically a two and half hour epilogue to the first two films. The previous installments have spent a lot of time talking about Smaug – the dragon who sleeps atop the Dwarves treasure in The Lonely Mountain that they need to enter if Thorin (Richard Armitage) is to regain his rightful throne. The last movie ended with Bilbo and the Dwarves awakening Smaug, who isn’t happy about it, and who is on his way to Lake Town to show just how unhappy he is. The ending of that movie led us to believe that the third was going to be all about Smaug, and the effort to take him down – but that`s over even before the subtitle of the movie appears on screen. What this movie is really about is the battle for the treasure of the Lonely Mountain. The Dwarves now have control, but Thorin has started to go slightly insane – he cannot find the Arkin Stone, which he needs to lead. He also will not honor his deal with people of Lake Town, who have lost everything. He has also angered the Elves, who want jewels that they say belong to them. And of course the Orcs are still coming. All of them – plus others – will eventually clash.

There isn’t much story in this third Hobbit movie. It basically covers only about fifty pages of the actual novel. Thorin seems to be slightly schizophrenic at times here – which they explain away as `Dragon Sickness`- but I was more confused by the fact that Bilbo seems to admire and love Thorin as a great man – since Thorin has basically screamed at him for three movies now. I was also somewhat disappointed that the movie called The Hobbit that Martin Freemans Bilbo seems to get lost in the shuffle through much of the movie. He basically only has one key thing to do in the plot – which he does about half way through – and then he’s just kind of there for the rest of it.

There is a lot to admire about the film though. Jackson has always been at his best in these films filming large scale battles – and the film ends with one of the biggest in all of his Tolkien films. There are multiple battles going on, on multiple fronts, but Jackson is skilled at cutting back and forth to all of them so nothing gets lost. Like everything else in The Hobbit movies, it goes on for far too long, but hell it’s well done.

Looking back over the three Hobbit movies, I think it’s safe to say that taken together they are far better than they are as individual movies. Unlike the three Lord of the Rings films, they don’t really work very well on their own. The first film just kind of ended just as things were getting warmed up. The second film had a similar problem – not ending at a natural point, but rather trying to do a TV season finale like cliff-hanger. The third film disappoints in fulfilling the promise of that cliff-hanger – and basically doesn’t have any real arch at all. Taken as a single work however, the films are bloated, sure, but they`re also well made, well-acted and entertaining. After watching all six of Jackson’s films in recent weeks, I think that while the Lord of the Rings movies are undeniably better, The Hobbit films are worthy companions to the earlier series.

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Movie Review: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
Directed by: Peter Jackson.
Written by: Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens & Peter Jackson  & Guillermo del Toro based on the novel by  J.R.R. Tolkien.
Starring: Ian McKellen (Gandalf), Martin Freeman (Bilbo), Richard Armitage (Thorin), Ken Stott (Balin), Graham McTavish (Dwalin), William Kircher (Bifur), James Nesbitt (Bofur), Stephen Hunter (Bombur), Dean O'Gorman (Fili), Aidan Turner (Kili), John Callen (Oin), Peter Hambleton (Gloin), Jed Brophy (Nori), Mark Hadlow (Dori), Adam Brown (Ori), Orlando Bloom (Legolas), Evangeline Lilly (Tauriel), Lee Pace (Thranduil), Cate Blanchett (Galadriel), Benedict Cumberbatch (Smaug / Necromancer), Mikael Persbrandt (Beorn), Sylvester McCoy (Radagast), Luke Evans (Bard / Girion), Stephen Fry (Master of Laketown), Ryan Gage (Alfrid).

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is better than last year’s An Unexpected Journey if for no other reason than because we don’t have to spend nearly as much time in an vain attempt to introduce us to all the characters in the film. I’ve spent nearly six hours watching these two films now, and I still don’t think I could pass a test where I had to match the names to the faces of all the dwarves who Bilbo and Gandalf are accompanying on their journey to take back their homeland (I could get Thorin – and everyone else would be pure dumb luck). In An Unexpected Journey, we spent an hour trying to get to know them all – but this time, after a brief introduction, the film pretty much just kicks in with the plot and action sequences that will drive it for nearly three hours. Yes, like the last film, every scene seems to me to be a little too long – and Jackson seems a little too willing to let everything play out at length, and underline every emotion multiple times (I could have done with far few shots of Orlando Bloom staring at Evangeline Lilly with love in his eyes). It’s clear the Hobbit films will never live up to Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings films – a nearly impossible task – but while their over length hurts the films, it does not kill it. The films are still impeccably made, with great visual effects, and exciting action sequences. Now if only there was a little bit less of everything.

The film follows our hero Bilbo, the wizard Gandalf and the (not so) merry band of dwarves led by Thorin in an effort to retake their Kingdom, which lies under a mountain and was stolen from them by Smaug – an evil, fire breathing dragon, who sleeps on top of the treasure he has stolen. This time – after some adventures involving orcs, wood elves, white water rafting in barrels, a stop at a poor town ruled by the delightful Stephen Frye – our band of misfits actually arrive at their destination – but of course things don’t turn out quite as they planned it – if it did, there would be no third movie after all.

The film contains some magnificent action sequences – a fight with some incredibly large, vile spiders, the aforementioned white water rafting battle, where the dwarves and Bilbo fly down the river pursued by orcs – and elves – and the climax where we finally get a good look at Smaug. Like everything else in the movie, all of these sequences probably go on a little longer than they really should (in particular the barrels) – but they are also expertly crafted by Jackson and company and do give the movies a much needed jolt of energy at times.

Those jolts are necessary, because there are a few too many scenes where a few too many characters have to be introduced – this time, we have to be reintroduced to Bloom’s Legolas (who has a surprising amount of screen time considering he doesn’t do all that much), and Lilly’s Tauriel, the elf he is in love with, but is too lowly for the son of the King – alongside Luke Evans’ Bard – a bargeman who, of course, will play a much bigger role in the third film (at least one hopes considering how much time we spend with him this time). These scenes often drag the film to a halt – and pull focus away from Martin Freeman’s Bilbo – who is shunted off to the background for far too long in a movie where he plays the title character.

The Hobbit films are what they are – which like the Star Wars prequels is nowhere near as good as the original trilogy. That doesn’t mean the films are not good – or not entertaining or well made, or well-acted (by a few people anyway) – because they are. Watching them with lowered expectations help. Yes, Jackson could have easily have made one long (or even two semi-long) films and the storytelling would have been greatly improved – but what he has made is pretty good. If we’re disappointed, it’s because The Lord of the Rings films were a hell of a lot better than pretty good.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Movie Review: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
Directed by: Peter Jackson.
Written by: Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens & Peter Jackson & Guillermo del Toro based on the novel by J.R.R. Tolkien.
Starring: Ian McKellen (Gandalf), Martin Freeman (Bilbo), Richard Armitage (Thorin), Ken Stott (Balin), Graham McTavish (Dwalin), William Kircher (Bifur / Tom Troll), James Nesbitt (Bofur), Stephen Hunter (Bombur), Dean O'Gorman (Fili), Aidan Turner (Kili), John Callen (Oin), Peter Hambleton (Gloin / William Troll), Jed Brophy (Nori), Mark Hadlow (Dori / Bert Troll), Adam Brown (Ori), Ian Holm (Old Bilbo), Elijah Wood (Frodo), Hugo Weaving (Elrond), Cate Blanchett (Galadriel), Christopher Lee (Saruman), Andy Serkis (Gollum), Sylvester McCoy (Radagast).

When I first heard that Peter Jackson was planning on splitting The Hobbit into not just two, but three different films I assumed, like many, that it was purely a monetary move – more movies means more box office. But after seeing the first part, I don’t think that’s the case (at least not for Jackson – the studio on the other hand, I’m not sure of). Because the nearly three hours of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey plays like a film where the director is too in love with the material – he doesn’t want to sacrifice a moment of his film. That isn’t to say that it is a bad movie – it is in fact quite good, with wonderful battle sequences, special effects, production design, music and performances – but it sure does feel padded. Cut out an hour of the film, and Jackson may well have had a great film on his hands.

The Hobbit is the story of Bilbo Baggins, a humble hobbit who lives a quiet life in the Shire, and that’s just the way he likes it. Than one day, Gandalf the Grey shows up at his door and invites him to go along on an adventure. Before Bilbo knows it, his hobbit hole is filled with Dwarves, who plan on storming their old home, beneath a mountain, that they were forced out of by a dragon decades before. Gandalf is going along on their quest, and feels they need to add the skills of Bilbo Baggins. What those skills are no one, not even Bilbo, seems to know.

The film was made by pretty much the same team that made The Lord of the Rings films – and it shows. Jackson strikes the same tone in this film as he did in that trilogy, and cast the same actors. Even nine years after the final Lord of the Rings films, it didn’t take long to sink back into the Middle Earth that Jackson and his team have created. The key addition to the cast is obviously Martin Freeman as Bilbo, and he is quite good. His plays the role more quiet and subtle than I expected him to – but this is actually effective, making Bilbo a more believable character. Ian McKellan sinks right back into the role of Gandalf like he never left it. Richard Armitage is excellent as Thorin, the leader of the Dwarves, strong, tough, brave, but also stubborn. The best performance in the film belongs, once again, to Andy Serkis as a slightly younger, but still crazy Gollum. The riddle scene between him and Bilbo is easily the best of the movie.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a fine movie – not great like The Lord of the Rings films were, but entertaining nonetheless. While I certainly think the film is far too padded – and takes far too long in pretty much every scene – I cannot say I was ever bored by the film. Perhaps it’s just that Jackson has unrealistic expectations to try and meet with The Hobbit – that he already dazzled us with The Lord of the Rings, and now he’s got to return to that world and try to do it again (which is probably why initially, he wasn’t going to direct these movies). And The Hobbit, as good as it is, just isn’t as good as The Lord of the Rings. I have a hard time believing that Tolkien fans won’t enjoy the movie – hell, for perhaps the first time ever, fans of the book cannot complain that things were cut out of the movie version. The Hobbit could have using more editing, but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad film by any means.

Monday, January 18, 2010

Movie Review: The Lovely Bones

The Lovely Bones *** ½
Directed by:
Peter Jackson.
Written By: Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens & Peter Jackson based on the novel by Alice Sebold.
Starring: Saoirse Ronan (Susie Salmon), Mark Wahlberg (Jack Salmon), Rachel Weisz (Abigail Salmon), Stanley Tucci (George Harvey), Susan Sarandon (Grandma Lynn), Rose McIver (Lindsey Salmon), Nikki SooHoo (Holly), Michael Imperioli (Len Fenerman), Reece Ritchie (Ray Singh), Carolyn Dando (Ruth).

To viewers who have only become familiar with director Peter Jackson in the last decade, The Lovely Bones will seem like a departure. This was the man after all who directed The Lord of the Rings movies and King Kong, and this movie is the story of a 14 year old girl who is murdered, and then watches her family and her killer from her perch somewhere between earth and heaven. The world she inhabits can be a dream world, but it can also be a nightmare. But for viewers who have followed Jackson’s career for a long time, they will know that this is a return of sorts to the same type of material as his 1994 breakthrough film Heavenly Creatures (which also introduced the world to the talents of Melanie Lynsky and Kate Winslet). That film was about the abnormally close relationship between two teenage girls that veered off into fantasy, and eventually lead them to murder. Jackson’s new film has the same sort of feeling as that one did.

The Lovely Bones take place in a suburb town in 1970s Pennsylvania. The first 20 minutes or so sets up the Salmon family. Father Jack (Mark Wahlberg) is a loving man, and an accountant, and his wife Abigail is a stay at home mother who worries about her kids. The eldest daughter is Susie (Saorise Ronan), who has a crush on a boy, and is going through the early stages of adolescence. She has two siblings, most notably younger sister Lindsay (Rose McIver). Things seem to be going well in their family. Then one day walking home from school through the corn field, Susie is approached my Mr. Harvey (Stanley Tucci), her neighbor from down the street. He has something he wants to show her, and although initially reluctant, she follows him down into an underground bunker. She is never seen alive again. The days turn into weeks, turn into months, turn into years, and Susie’s body is never found. Jack throws himself into the investigation, bugging the police constantly with his new theories. Abigail is a wreck who eventually cannot take the pressure anymore. Grandma Lynn (Susan Sarandon) comes to help out, but she has spent her life avoiding this kind of responsibility. Lindsay is also drawn into the case, and starts to notice the creepy Mr. Harvey looking at her.

Jackson has crafted the film with the same sort of attention to detail that has marked all of his work. The cinematography by Andrew Lesnie is colorful and brilliant – whether it’s evoking a dream, a nightmare or reality, the film is amazing to look at. This is aided by the pitch perfect art direction and costume design that let you know you are in the 1970s without drilling it into your dead or mocking. The sound design, highlighted by Brian Eno’s emotional, evocative score, and some incredibly tense moments (that floorboard creaking is one of the most memorable sounds of the year) is also top notch. The special effects are used to enhance the story, not replace it. In short, this is another great directorial achievement for Jackson.

The film is anchored – given a real heart – by two of the best performances of the year. Saorise Ronan has a nearly impossible role, and plays it brilliantly. Surrounded by special effects for most of her performance, she is still able to make a complete, realistic character out of Susie. In the two years since her Oscar nominated turn in Atonement, Ronan has simply gotten better. The other great performance is by Tucci as the child murderer Harvey. A lot of credit has to go to the make-up and costume department, who make Tucci look creepier than I have ever seen him, but this is just the surface of his performance. He transforms his voice into a lower, guttural sounding one, where you can tell something is not quite right about this guy, but cannot place your finger on it.

The problem with the film is in the other characters and performances – mainly because their roles are underwritten (just as they were in the Alice Sebold novel upon which the film is based). Mark Wahlberg is probably most successful – making his obsession equal parts grief, love, anger and frustration. Newcomer Rose McIver is also wonderful as Lindsay – with her wide open, innocent face; she does precisely what is required of her. Less successful is Rachel Weisz, who once again is given little to do other than cry her way through the movie. She’s a good crier to be sure, but she needed something else to give her performance weight. Susan Sarandon is a hoot as Grandma Lynn, but it’s a one note performance, and the type of role that Sarandon seems to play all too often lately – someone give her a great role again already!

This is a problem for the movie as a whole. It is not as strongly written as it should have been. Alice Sebold’s novel, despite being a huge bestseller, had some major flaws in it, and the film does little to correct these. The story takes some weird turns that don’t feel genuine, and many characters are simply glossed over. It keeps the film from becoming the true great film it should be. But overall, The Lovely Bones is one of the more interesting films of the year – gorgeous and involving in equal measure. It deserves a lot more praise that it has been receiving so far.