Reel Time Updates: The Last Airbender

Saturday night saw me and a gaggle of mis compañeros at our local cinema for a 9:50pm viewing of M. Night Shyamalan’s The Last Airbender in 2D. (I’d heard reports that many theater-goers had been able to [clearly] view a good chunk of the 3D version sans glasses, so that was out.) Also, I didn’t want to pay an inflated ticket price for a film that was receiving such lousy reviews.

I did attempt to purchase a student admission, but was informed that, “We don’t do student admissions on weekends.” What, so if it’s not a normal school-day, I’m not a student? The only period of my academic career when I got weekends off were grades K-3 in private school. After that, between home-schooling and higher education online, any attempts to take weekends off resulted in projects getting turned in late. And what are students on the weekends if they’re not students? Delinquent dropouts? All that being said, I’m technically not attending school right now anyway, but it’s the principle of the matter.

The Trailers: For some reason, it seems that less trailers were played before this film than most of the others I’ve seen this year. I remember seeing: Gulliver’s Travels (good for some cheap laughs, but otherwise a waste of time); Rango (I think this film looks like it could be good/interesting. I’d seen the trailer, but, as always, bigger is better); Green Hornet (the action looks good, but I’m still not buying Seth Rogen as the Hornet); and Megamind (it’s about time for a new trailer. This film still has five months before release).

My Take on The Last Airbender: Okay, so several people are threatening to publicly disown me because I went and saw this, but… guys… it’s on my Top Ten list! (Yes, that means I had to go see it.) While I respect and value the reviews of my fellow cinephiles, I simply cannot base my opinions on their opinions. Especially if it’s a film I’ve been wanting to check out. The same for the vice versa: if it’s a film I don’t think looks all that great, I usually won’t go and see it just because everyone is raving about it (e.g., The Hangover, Paranormal Activity, Splice).

But in any case, while there was quite a bit of chatter going on during the film, I managed to take most of it in, and while it was lacking in quite a few areas, I still enjoyed it and may actually give it a second viewing when it hits the “cheap theater”. (Those folks who want to publicly disown me have just upgraded my status to “lynch in a back alley… it’s for your own good”.)

In order to appreciate Shyamalan’s films, I’ve found that it’s best to view them as works of modern art. You know, like those weird pieces you see in museums with blobs of paint on an enormous canvas, or an awkward, toddler-quality line drawn across a piece of plywood.

While some may look at this and say, “This is crap. Anyone can splash paint on a board,” others will find meaning in the work, or will appreciate what the artist was envisioning when they created it. When watching Shyamalan films, I try to do so from the standpoint of the latter group. This makes the film more enjoyable (or more bearable), and I find myself spotting some of the really neat perspectives and camera angles Shyamalan uses.

Now, that viewpoint does not apply as much to The Last Airbender as it has for Shyamalan’s other films because this is the first movie the oft-bashed filmmaker cannot claim to be an original work. It’s based on a very well-written, much-loved Nickelodeon cartoon series, so there was a built-in and very rabid possessive loyal fan base that the writer/director was having to cater to (yes, I have seen and am a fan of the series).

I have automatic sympathy for anyone associated with a reboot or adaptation, because the same fan base that will guarantee ticket sales will also guarantee outlandish expectations. It was silly for anyone to expect this film to be as great as the series. The series was epic, and you simply cannot condense 8+ hours and of epicness (the first season, aka “The Water Book”) into 2 hours and expect it to be just as good (or even comparable, apparently).

The best thing about the film was probably the visuals, and that includes CGI, sets, scenery and costumes. Most of the costumes were close, if not spot-on. While a lot of the hairstyles were off, it’s ridiculous to expect animé hair to translate perfectly into real-life ‘dos (see: Dragonball). While we often got only fleeting glances of a lot of locations included in the film, they were fairly accurate and aesthetic.

The worst thing about the film was the pronunciation of certain names, places and terms. I can’t believe the series’ creators (who purportedly worked with Shyamalan) allowed some of the changes he made in this area. Name pronunciation is a tabula rasa when translating from book to film, because readers have never actually heard how a particular name is pronounced. When they hear it differently than they had been pronouncing it in their mind, there’s the initial annoyance/shock, but then they think, “Okay, I had it wrong all this time,” and move on (see: Hermione). However, when viewers have already been audibly exposed to a particular pronunciation for three entire seasons of a TV series, trying to switch that up is a no-no. Sorry, Shyamalan, but… epic fail.

Probably the most oft-mocked of these was the name of the titular protagonist: Aang. In the series, the name was pronounced AING (rhymes with “slang”), but in the movie, characters pronounced it ONG (rhymes with “long”). Sometimes it even came out as UNG. By about halfway through the film, our entire row (as well as the row behind us) would, in unison (and correctly), chime, “Aang!” every time a character mispronounced the name (which was every single time it was mentioned). Needless to say, said occurrence would be great for a drinking game.

Other than that, the bending was pretty awesome (all though there wasn’t enough of it, and the pre-bending warm-ups were way too long), Sokka (pronounced SOCK-UH, not SOAK-UH!) was not very funny, there wasn’t enough meaningful dialogue, the plot was a poorly-sewn patchwork of the series’ first season, and pretty much the entire Fire Nation (except Dev Patel’s Zuko, why’d they decide to pronounce this one right?) was miscast.

As usual, I understand why this film is taking such a beating. For all intents and purposes, it royally sucked, but I like to try and look at the glass as half full, and there are films that I’ve walked away from feeling much, much worse. Shyamalan, I’m still a fan and it may not be your destiny to remain involved with this project, but I really hope the other two films get made. It would suck if The Last Airbender turned out to be another Eragon or The Golden Compass. C’mon, Paramount/Nickelodeon: yip-yip!

Reel Time Updates: Toy Story 3

Friday the 18th was opening night for the third and final chapter in Pixar’s Toy Story saga. My fellow cinefreak and I were shooting for a 9:40pm 2D showing of the film, but I did not get away from work until almost 9:30pm, and so we ended up snagging tickets for a 10:05 showing in 3D. This turned out to be a really good thing.

I’d purchased both Toy Story and Toy Story 2 on Blu-ray when they were released on March 23rd, both of which included “movie money”, good towards tickets for Toy Story 3. While the movie money certificate was only good for up to $8.50 of the ticket price, the ticket clerk was either clueless or very generous, and I didn’t pay a thing for my late/opening-night $13.25 adult 3D admission.

The Trailers: Most of the previews featured were for family friendly films, I suppose because we were at a “kids’” movie. I remember seeing: Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore (gah, so awful); Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole (they didn’t even show the newer trailer!); The Smurfs (please end the lame reboots/adaptations); The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (saw it online earlier that day, but the theater trailer was in 3D!); Tangled (a.k.a. “Rapunzel”: already seen, but, again… 3D); The Sorcerer’s Apprentice (I could really hear Baruchel’s “Hiccup” voice coming out); and, of the course, the obligatory Despicable Me trailer (Universal is just promoting the crap outta that thing).

My Take on Toy Story 3: As various trailers emerged for this film in late 2009/early 2010, the Pixar magic was evident, but I’ll admit I had some doubts. Sneak peeks included a lot of explosions and mayhem that seemed a little unrealistic in the Toy Story world I’d come to know and love. These doubts were dispelled in a brilliant opening sequence that basically combined those of the first and second films in story and style, respectively.

If you’ve seen the trailers, you know the film’s basic storyline: the toys’ owner, Andy, is leaving for college, and so the Toy Story gang ends up getting donated to a local daycare center. While initially excited about their new circumstances (getting played with all day, everyday), the toys soon discover that Sunnyside Daycare is not all it was cracked up to be. Throughout various trials and tribulations, the toys must once again figure out how to extricate themselves from the mess they’ve landed in, and find their way back to Andy (before he leaves for college).

We are introduced to many new toy characters throughout the film, and while some felt that there were too many new faces to keep up with, each one added to the story in their own way. The humor was on-par with most of Pixar’s films, with a lot of kid-friendly goofiness, and a little “over their heads” humor for older viewers. The action was neither dull nor over-the-top, and the elements of the pint-sized protagonists’ world were used realistically, and to their full advantage. I never found myself thinking, “Wow, that was kinda dumb,” like I so often do with sequels trying to live up to their predecessors.

A lot of reviews I’ve seen for this movie put a lot of focus on the end of the film, and rightfully so. In the (supposedly) last film of a trilogy, there must be a definitive conclusion that leaves viewers satisfied. If the writers can throw in a little respectful reminiscing or jerk a few tears, all the better (oh, yes… I got choked up). The film’s closing sequence was very well done, and I think most viewers will be happy with it.

I only had a couple of very minor complaints (not even really complaints) about Toy Story 3. The absence of Jim Varney (succumbed to lung cancer in 2000) as the voice of Slinky Dog was very apparent, though newcomer Blake Clark obviously did his best to embody the stretchy canine with a southern drawl. The other thing I noted was that the main antagonist in the third film had a very similar story, personality and demise as Stinky Pete from Toy Story 2. There was a great likeness between the two characters, and while this was not necessarily a bad thing (maybe it was intentional), I did wonder if anyone else noticed.

Overall, I urge those who haven’t already indulged to go and catch this three-quel on the big screen. Also, the 3D version is highly recommend. One of the things I dislike about 3D films is when you become so quickly accustomed to that third dimension, you’d forget that you were even at a 3D screening except for the clunky glasses sitting on your face. In these cases, the added dimension has no life, and was not worth the higher admission price. Toy Story 3 is not one of those films. There are enough “wow!” moments where the 3D really pops to justify the higher price, and it definitely adds to the experience.

Oh, and make sure you hit the theater early enough to catch this film’s short: Day & Night. It’s brilliant, and portrays a heartfelt, crystal-clear lesson about understanding those who are different from us.

Reel Time Updates: Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

Tuesday night, beginning at approximately 21:55 hours, another helpless action flick fell prey to the expectant, critical eyes of myself and the other members of my usual movie-crashing crew.

I’m a fan of the Ubisoft game series, which is what fueled my initial interest in this film. (Okay, I’ve only played the first two games of what’s come to be known as the “The Sands of Time Saga” all the way through. I’m still working on "The Two Thrones”, and actually kind of hated "Warrior Within”.) Granted, I probably would have seen this movie regardless, because it’s an action flick, and it stars Jake Gyllenhaal, and looked like overall good summer entertainment. Playing the games (or even having heard of them) is definitely not a prerequisite. There are multiple instances of homage paid to the games throughout the film, but this film can definitely stand alone as a Disney action/adventure movie. Lots of sword-fighting, flashy CGI and bad dialogue ensues.

The Trailers: Okay… seriously? I think I have viewed the trailer for Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole (a.k.a., “that stupid owl movie”) before every single film I’ve gone to see this year. This will probably continue to be the case throughout the summer, because the film is apparently not going to be released until September. Fans of the book series, I’m sure you’re excited, and—yes—I’m sure you’re very deserving of a film based on your favorite, feathery fiction fables (ha!), but I don’t think it’s fair that I have to watch your trailer (and hear all of its bad pop music) over and over and over again at full volume on an enormous screen. I’m just saying…

I also remember seeing trailers for: The Karate Kid (still excited about this one), The A-Team (first time seen on the big-screen), Inception (July 16th can’t come soon enough), and The Sorcerer’s Apprentice (Nic Cage, meh). I’m actually a little POed at that last film, because one of my fellow “Prince of Persia” attendees theorized that the release of Disney’s two “Fantasia” films (Fantasia / Fantasia 2000) on Blu-Ray had been delayed to coincide with the DVD/Blu-Ray release of the live-action “Sorcerer’s Apprentice”. (The 1940 Fantasia animated feature debuted the “Sorcerer’s Apprentice” short film starring Mickey Mouse that the new live-action movie is based on.) The timing is about right, with a mid-July release in theaters for the new flick, and the animated “Fantasia” films coming out in December. Thanks a lot, Nic Cage and guy from “She’s Out of My League”.

My Take on Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time: Going into the theater, I’d forgotten that “Prince of Persia” was helmed by Disney. However, my memory was jogged only a few minutes into the film as the very cheesy dialogue began to flow. I don’t know about the rest of my fellow cinephiles, but dialogue can be a deal-breaker for me. When the characters are speaking in a way that in unrealistic and/or cliché, it totally kills the effect. It bothers me, which makes it more difficult to really get absorbed into the film. The petty, overdone bickering between the titular hero, Prince Dastan, and the way-too-independent-and-outspoken-for-that-culture princess, Tamina, showcased some of more poorly-written exchanges. In Pirates of the Caribbean, similar techniques were used, but it was all very tongue-in-cheek, and so it worked. Prince of Persia tries to pull off the same thing while consequently attempting to take itself seriously, and… just… no. It didn’t work for me. The only character who even came close was the comic relief, Alfred Molina’s Sheik Amar.

The SFX and CGI were great, the Parkour was great, and the story worked, for the most part. I would have preferred to see Prince Dastan battling his way through hordes of mindless sand armies throughout the film, but I guess Disney did not want to make a zombie movie. Instead, we are introduced the the “Hassansins”, a group of silent, deadly, and decommissioned warriors that are sicced on our hero later in the film. Their use of various mystical/ancient killing methods makes for some decent fight sequences, and really push Prince Dastan to his limits.

One thing I wanted to see more of was the dagger’s special ability. The writers did not seem to utilize it very much at all. Heck, I used it every couple of minutes during my bouts of Prince of Persia gameplay. Granted, the games offer a quick and easy way to recharge the dagger’s powers whereas they were very limited in the film. (Also, Jake Gyllenhaal plays a much better Prince than I do.)

Overall, a fun action flick with little complexity. If you’ve played (and enjoyed) the games at all, I would recommend at least renting this film. At just under two hours, it’s worth a viewing. If you enjoy Disney’s family friendly action flicks, give it a watch. If you’ve realized and are annoyed by the fact that Gemma Arterton is prone to playing obnoxious characters that waffle back and forth between damsel-in-distress and warrior-chick-wannabe, don’t see this film. (She’s still obnoxious.) If you can’t stand cheesy, family friendly action films, and/or Disney, then go pick up the Sands of Time game for your favorite platform, and play it (or dig it out of your closet and replay it). While I do recommend the film, I highly recommend the game it’s based on. Not as kid-friendly, and Jake Gyllenhaal is not included, but lots of fun, and it may lead to a greater appreciation of the film.