A Little Tease of THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2

On April 18^th, Spider-Man will be web-slinging his way through New York City again. The Amazing Spider-Man was a reboot of the popular comic-book hero and, now they have placed the foundations of our awkward teenager into place, they can build upon the story. Repeating the beats on Raimi’s Spider-Man, the 2011 blockbuster showed us again how the arachnid bit the boy; the Uncle killed and a love-interest was turned down after a whirlwind romance. Thank God, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 can now go in whatever direction it wants, and indeed, after watching the first film I’m glad we are finally here.

Witnessing a thirty-minute show-reel screening, I can honestly say that I am excited about the next instalment. Marc Webb introduced the video by telling us how The Amazing Spider-Man 2 portrays Spider-Man at the “top of his game” while Peter Parker is trying to be a “regular kid”. The missing back-story of Peter Parker’s father, alluded to in the previous film, is expanded upon in the opening moments of the upcoming film with a rough and messy hand-to-hand fight set within a jet recalling the type of directing Paul Greengrass has shown us in The Bourne Supremacy. This flashback soon cuts to Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield) saving the Big Apple as Rhino (Paul Giametti) ploughs through downtown, smashing cop cars and yellow cabs to the side of the road. Andrew Garfield is cheeky and cheerful, while retaining a certain amount of smug arrogance that immediately gains our attention. We like him, and for me, we like him more than Tobey Maguire’s slightly-too-awkward portrayal in the 2000-2008 series.

Lead-villain Electro is played by Jamie Foxx and, though showcasing some incredible special effects and strong, effective use of 3D, his one-liners (“It’s my birthday – it’s time to light my candles!” BOOM!) and blue make-up seems to recall our favourite Batman villain - Mr Freeze (from the critically-panned Batman and Robin). But this is Spider-Man! He’s our favourite guy! He is fun and games; a geek we can relate to; an optimistic lad who can’t quite believe how crazy-cool his supernatural powers are! The Avengers are building a universe that is epic in scale – reaching from earth to Asgard. Man of Steel seems to be so serious while X-Men: Days of Future Past is so political. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 looks like it will be fun – and pronounce f-u-u-u-un, with a huge grin on your face. Over the top villains, snarky heroes and gorgeous romantic interests (with perfectly-balanced chemistry between Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield) is what we want to see. While he may be limited to the Manhattan skyline, that’s not a bad thing. It means it looks like the comic book we know and feels like the gloss and shine of New York blockbusters. This doesn’t look like throw-away fun but maybe the fun you’ll revisit time and time again. April 18^th will answer out questions…

This post was originally written for TQS on March 25th 2014

Planet of the Apes (Tim Burton, 2001)

"I think it's fair to call this hostile territory"

Introduction

It is strange how, in a week whereby I watch Batman (I was not happy about that film) and Batman Returns for the first time, I then write about another previously-owned property, Tim-Burton-ised for a new audience. He claimed it was a 're-imagining' of the original Planet of the Apes film. Since the end of the original saga, the film was in development in different stages from 1988. Over many years with a wide range of directors (Peter Jackson, Chris Columbus, James Cameron, Sam Raimi, Oliver Stone) and a diverse possibility of actors (Tom Cruise, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Charlie Sheen), it seems the reboot of Planet of the Apes could've been anything. Arnie, the 'scientist' travelling back in time? A half-humn, half-ape creature within the Ape version of the Renaissance? A "sword and sandal spectacular" set within an Ape version of the Roman civilisation? These were all considered ... but it eventually fell to Gothic Tim Burton signing on to direct and Richard D. Zanuck producing.

The Scale Roddy McDowell Dreamed Of...

The problem with the earlier saga was how small in scale it was. The idea of Apes taking over the world simply didn't have the same effect when you only see the apes fighting within car parks and in spaces which are clearly stage-sets. From the opening scene we see what we had never seen before - lots of space. Bar Taylor's (Charlton Heston) brief introduction at the start of Planet of the Apes, we never truly see the wide, expansive galaxy that earth hovers within. Even in Escape from the Planet of the Apes, whereby Zira and Cornelius crash-land on earth and tell us how earth was destroyed, we don't see their journey.

Tim Burton, and his $100m budget ensures that we see all of space. Our hero is Leo Davidson (Mark Wahlberg), an astronaut on board a mothership which trains apes to explore areas which are unsafe. Davidson's favourite chimpanzee is sent into an electro-magnetic storm and, without question, Davidson decides to save him when it is clear that he has been 'lost. A time-warp takes Davidson onto a different planet whereby Apes are the dominant species and, in the same manner as Schaffner's original, Davidsons - amongst primative humans - is chased by apes, and caught.

Already a change in the characterisation of our lead role - he is now not neccessarily a morally-ambiguous lead, he is very-much a hero. In the opening sequence, Davidson is a hero - he saves apes. To make matters worse, not only does a stunning female-slave Daena (Estella Warren) fall for him, but it seems that Ari (Helena Bonham-Carter), a liberal ape who doesn't agree with slave humans, also falls for him. The apes and humans all speak, and the subtext about communication is lost. The film knows what it is - a heroic journey whereby our hero has to 'win' by defeating the enemy.

Enemies

General Thade (Tim Roth) and General Attar (Michael Clarke Duncan) provide our hero with his enemies. Chalton Heston even cameo's as the aging Father of Thade, upping the ante, by showing Thade that 'guns' exist. This is all alongside the religious subtext regarding a holy site named CA-LI-MA and a Messianic figure in Semos - who the apes are descendants of.

Interestingly, pre-9/11, the story is very much about extremists as General Thade is overtly 'religious', even uttering the lines:

"Extremism in defense of apes is no vice"

The film is highliy critical of faith, but equally undermines it by implying that Wahlberg himself is a Messianic figure. Ari tells him how he is "sent from the stars" and his actions inspire the humans, leading the way to their salvation - and to war.

An Epic War

As previously noted, this is epic in scale. At the time, films including The Mummy, Gladiator and Armageddon were the buzz around Hollywood. The ancient civilisations in the former-two seen as a major draw at the box-office. Egyptian and Roman Empire's celebrated on the silver-screen - could the Ape Empire be celebrated on such a scale too? Throw into the mix a space-station, science-fiction element that - in the third act - is found again, having crashed to planet earth and it seems that you have a combination of all three. The latter is a bit of a stretch, but it is fair to say that both Armageddon and Deep Impact were huge-draws in 1998, and both of which spent a considerable amount of time on-board a spaceship.

But the war-finale pre-dates The Lord of the Rings trilogy, and combined with the religious overtones and historic civilisation, it caught the imagination of an audience keen to watch action sequences on such a large scale. We see explosions and a battlefield pitting humans against apes - a far cry from Battle for the Planet of the Apes. Mid-fight, a spaceship lands, and the ape Davidson originally seeked, arrives on the planet.

Lets Do The Time Warp Again

The time-warp element is important to the apes film and Burton doesn't leave it out. IT is integral to the plot. Davidson managed to survive blasting through a time-storm, the chimpanzee seems to do the same - whilst the spaceship Davidson was on fails to jump the time-warp and instead crashes down on the planet, beginning new life and new conflicts. But that is not all. God-like Mark Wahlberg sets off, leaving the planet (this time, in-keeping with Pierre Boulles novel) and returning to Earth before finding that time has been altered and General Thade has replaced Abraham Lincoln. It makes no sense. Don't even start to think it through - it is ridiculous.

This finale sharply pulls everything sharply into focus- the film is merely a light-hearted joke. This is an Apes film without depth, without personality and without meaning. Prior to Burton's Planet of the Apes, every film raised a social-issue that you could discuss afterwards. The film brings nothing new to the argument. It hints at ideas about equality, faith and 'truth', but it doesn't resolve the issues. In 1968, Planet of the Apes conclusively stated how earth will destroy itself if it continues in the same manner. Beneath The Planet of the Apes tackled nuclear power - and our obsession with weapons and power. Escape from the Planet of the Apes tackles the fear of exploration, and fear of acceptance. This film doesn't directly conclude any of the issues raised and, within all the fighting and fire, you know that it simplifies everything. Taylor wasn't neccessarily 'good', Ceasar was complex - frustrated by the injustice and angry about human greed. Leo Davidson is 'Good'. Ari and all the humans are 'Good'. Thade, Attar and Limbo are 'bad'. They need to all get along ... and by the end of the film, they do get along. Praise be to Semos. 

Rock Of Ages (Adam Shankman, 2012)

"This place is about to become a sea of sweat, ear-shattering music and puke."

Introduction

In 2006, the Disney Channel released a TV-only film: High School Musical. This went on to become the most successful 'Disney Channel Original Movie' ever produced. In 2009, Fox released a TV-series in the same vein: Glee. An incredibly successful TV-show and film-series, both were musicals set in high-schools. The fundamental difference is how Glee re-imagined well-known songs and adapted them to suit the stories of the characters. This change is in in response to the success of reality-TV shows American Idol and The X-Factor, whereby songs are often covered by up-and-coming artists, only to be released soon after. I think, with regard to the revival of musicals in the last decade (Mamma Mia, Hairspray, Nine, Chicago, Dreamgirls...), it would be nice to attribute it to the success of Moulin Rouge. But we all know that this is simply not true - as production companies are well aware of the multiple sales available in different formats (At the time of writing, the best-selling 'soundtrack' on itunes is from Smash! with Burlesque and Hairspray still within the Top 20. I doubt those two films are as popular as film downloads.). The cult-following alone ensures a consistent financial-income can be generated over a long-period of time - Mamma Mia become the fastest-selling DVD in the UK. Ever. Musicals are very much 'in fashion' in production houses.

Rock of Ages is in the same world as Glee and Hairspray. The added bonus of Tom Cruise will surely get those ticket sales tip-top, but as soon as the film begins and Britney-Spears-a-like Sherrie Christian (Julianne Hough) sings with a chorus of bus-passengers, we realise the type of film we are in. This is a loose story hung together by rock-songs, which you will recognise, that has no connection to emotion, purpose or - of course - reality. Purples, reds and blues light up Los Angeles and, despite nods to the homelessness, drug-taking and prostitution within the city, the afflictions are merely a backdrop to the 'fun' musical that it is. At its core, it is pure Hollywood - shiney, A-list stars and big music. But it is hollow, soulless and contradicts the only issue it attempts to raise.

You Should Be Dancing

 

My partner Sarah has seen the musical and her biggest issue with the film was the lack of dancing. On stage, huge numbers are performed by a large dancing cast. Though I do recollect some dancing, the focus was always on the lead role and their 'emotions'. For example, the "Juke Box Hero"/"I Love Rock 'n' Roll" medley, clearly included a number of dancers alongside Drew and Sheriee - but we constantly cut-away to Brand and Baldwin singing on their own, before focussing on Drew singing whilst jazz-hands flicker at the side of the screen. Why not a static shot? Whereby the dancers are front and centre? If this is an all-out musical, show me something I don't see on The Voice because only 'Hit Me With Your Best Shot' portrayed dancers dominating the screen - and one song in a film-musical is simply not good enough.

Supporting Roles

The standout performance here is between two established actors - Paul Giametti and Tom Cruise. A fascinating dynamic whereby the business is up against the artist. Staciee Jaxx (Cruise) is everything he needs to be - and you desperately feel the love everyone has for him. It is also much-more than a 'supporting-role'. The film demands an actor who is well-know. By casting Cruise in this role, he demands your attention. Not only because of his iconic status, but he is doing things that we have never seen him do before. Paul Giametti shows two sides - we sympathise with the difficulties he has in reigning-in Staciee Jaxx, but we also despise his greedy money-making ideals. Staciee Jaxx is how he gets his money and we can see he will do anything to ensure that it happens. Catherine Zeta-Jones and Breaking Bad's Bryan Cranston are not as memorable, but they manage to give a little comedy to some dull-roles - Jone's is an up-tigh, conservative campaigner whilst Cranston is a Mayor with an interest in S&M.

The Complete Contradiction

The end of the film portrays Drew Boley (Diego Boneta) as he manages to sneak into the music-industry, but unfortunately, the 'rock-and-roll' time period is over - Wham! and Vanilla Ice is the new thing. Poor Drew sells his soul and becomes a George-Michael-looking pop star. Obviously, the film - and musical - criticise the late-80's pop-world, but the irony is how the film becomes the cheap-Hollywood it also criticizes. Its akin to the complete conflict when Britney Spears covered 'I Love Rock and Roll'. It simply doesn't make any sense. Then again, maybe all these 'rock-and-roll' ballads in the 80's were simply cheesy pop-songs dressed up as rock songs?

At any rate, Russell Brand  (Dennis Dupree) and Alec Baldwin (Lonny) both represent the old-school values of Rock and Roll. Initially singing "I Love Rock n Roll" (as Drew sings "Juke Box Hero" - already the conflict between fame-against-music perhaps?), the two characters then fall for each other, in a memorable duet covering REO Speedwagon's 'Can't Fight This Feeling'. A song covered by the Glee cast on their first album. But again, this is the contradiction - songs already performed by Glee (including Journey's 'Don't Stop Believing') and re-re-covered in Rock of Ages, so I'm sure that even the core-audience will watch it and have a feeling of deja-vu.

The "Fun" Finale

As a musical, I don't believe 'spoilers' are going to ruin the film for you. Suffice to say, at the end of the film, we see Staciee Jaxx perform with his band Arsenal in a stadium - and the crowd is going wild. They are singing Journey's 'Don't Stop Believin''. Initially, you think to yourself that maybe Staciee Jaxx has stolen the song from Drew (the "writer" of the song), who performed the song in the previous scene at The Bourbon Club. A very pessimistic ending I thought, until Jaxx says to the crowd "lets give a big hand to the writers of the song - Drew and Sheriee!". The crowd cheers and Drew and Sheriee continue singing the song on the stage. We see all the cast somewhere in the audience singing along. This is ridiculous.

And I think that this final scene summarises my feelings towards the film. Other than a rousing finale, whereby all the characters can sing a little bit, and we can all cheer, there is no purpose to why the story would play-out in such a way. The entire film, we have seen Drew and Sheriee struggle to 'make it' in LA. Do they achieve success? We don't know, they are merely brought on stage briefly at an Arsenal gig. Why would Staciee Jaxx even want them on his stage? Why would anyone cheer them on? These are writers - a profession which is historically not appreciated in the film and music industries. The story wraps up nothing except relationships - girl and guy get together. The entire '80's pop' destroying rock 'n' roll is not truly tackled. The whole Paul Giametti as a money-man isn't resolved - indeed, Staciee Jaxx fires him, but I'm sure he'll survive (a standout scene). But as long as the finale looks cool and the songs are great, theoretically we can all walk out happy to have sung, hummed and tapped our feet to the sounds of Foreigner, Poison and Starship. But that is it - a bunch of songs we all like to hear. But sung by actors. In a cheesy-pop manner.

I'd rather just listen to the original songs myself.

TSAJFS: 30/01/2011 Black Swan/Barney's Version/NEDS

Blimey Charlie! This week sees the release of Darren Aronofsky's Black Swan and both Simon & Jo get stuck right into the film with a discussion of its story, style and themes. They've also managed to check out a couple more new releases this week, Simon gives his frank views on Barney's Version while Jo holds court on NEDS, directed by Peter Mullan.

Some exciting films to consider, plus the usual assortment of movie news stories, featuring an initial reaction to the Oscar Nominations and rumours about Annie, the Matrix saga and Tron: The Next One. There's plenty of lively debate and some interesting insights, tune in for a week of angry ballet, grumpy men growing old and violent Scottish teenagers.

Links

Facebook-er of the Week is Scott from the Frankly My Dear podcast and blog He Shot Cyrus.

Twitter-er of the Week is fustar aka J G Byrne.

Blog of the Week is by Nick Jobe, Random Ramblings of a Demented Doorknob, with his awesome vlogging skills.

Music

Music is taken from Clint Mansell's Black Swan soundtrack, available on Amazon and itunes.

Remember - you can always email The Simon and Jo Film Show directly using this email: simonandjoshow@gmail.com

We are also on Twitter  and Facebook.