Isn't this familiar?

A lot has been said about Avatar.  It made tons of money, and lots of people liked it.  While zipping through the air in an aluminum tube some 30,000 feet in the air, I had the chance to finally watch it.  I know what a lot of you may be saying, if you didn’t see it on a huge screen and in 3D, you didn’t really see Avatar.  Let me first say a few things about 3D.  Is that really what makes a movie good?  Watching it in 3D in a theater?  Does that add anything to the plot?  Do the characters develop better in the third dimension?  To me, 3D is mostly a gimmick that is meant to distract from a lack of any real content (though I admit I did hear that Avatar did a good job of incorporating 3D).  Also, watching 3D movies makes me feel sick.

I will be honest, I did not expect to like the movie.  I had been hearing so much about how it was just Pocahontas in space, and I’ll be honest, I didn’t really care for Disney’s version of Pocahontas.  That being said, I thoroughly enjoyed Avatar. The visuals were stunning, and despite stereotypical characters and a predictable story, it was enjoyable.  To me, this movie illustrated that sometimes, it is not the story that is important, it is HOW you tell the story that matters.

That being said, let me illustrate this point (spoiler alert).  You have a corrupt corporation that has come from a world which has been depleted of all resources.  The corporation is bent of making a profit, and so they explore new planets to make a profit.  They come to a world with vast resources, but come into conflict with the natives, and because of their superior technology, win a quick victory.  But there is a problem, the air on the planet is poisonous to the invaders, and they cannot access some of the resources they most desire.  In order to remedy this, they try to make a peace offering to the natives in order to entice their cooperation.  This ends up backfiring, and the natives become inspired to defend what is rightfully theirs.  Relying on ancient methods and rallying under a new hero, a former puppet of the corporation, the natives lead an uprising against the corporation.  Despite almost losing, the heart and virtue of the natives win out, and they are able to overthrow their oppressors.

What movie is this?  Why, it is Battlefield Earth, of course!  Or it could be Avatar.  Battlefield Earth is one of the worst movies ever made, and everything about it has been derided (even by me), but Avatar, with almost the same basic story, is considered to be one of the best movies ever made.  The true difference here is in how the story is told; and James Cameron knows how to tell a story.  James Cameron took a generic story (seriously, “unobtainium” is the best name you could come up with?), and told it in a way that was enjoyable and moving.  If you haven’t seen it by now, you really ought to.

But, you don’t have to take my word for it.


Do They Know?

I don’t know about you, but sometimes I just get in the mood for a really bad movie.  I don’t mean bad in the sense of “lots of violence and nudity” but bad in a sense of “everything about this movie is poorly made.”  Most often I can turn to the trusty Mystery Science Theater 3000 to curb my craving, but the other day, i wanted something a bit newer.

So I watched Battlefield Earth.  This movie is bad.  What makes it wonderful is that it falls within the “so bad it is good” category.  Acting?  There are scenes where the only spoken lines are “ooga booga.”  Special effects?  They are indeed very special.  Plot?  Utterly ridiculous.  This was the most enjoyably bad movie I have seen in a long time.  And I’ve seen some bad ones.

What blows me away is that this was not some backwater production.  It was a pet project of John Travolta, and he starred in it along with Forest Whitaker.  It had a multi-million dollar budget.  Even with all of that, it is still a horrendous movie.

Almost every scene is shot at a strange angle, and the acting is beyond campy.  The one thing I always wonder is this: when the actors finish a horrible movie, or a scene in a bad movie, do they sit back and think, “wow, this is some great stuff we’re doing” or do they think, “why did I ever agree to do this?”

Take a peek from one of the better scenes in the movie.

Bad, right?  If you’re ever in the mood for a horrible movie, this is one that should be on your list!


Tale of Despereaux (Movie)

I don’t often do movie reviews. In this case, I am willing to make an exception.
Let me begin by saying that I really wanted to like this movie. Roni suggested I read the book Tale of Despereaux, and I really enjoyed it. I highly recommend it to anybody age 5 and up. It was an interesting take on the classic fairy tale.
Initial reviews I read of the movie were highly critical and seemed to unfairly compare the movie to Ratatouille, which was released about a year earlier. I felt, at the time, that reviewers were simply comparing the movie because both movies revolved around animated rodents. I now understand, however, why it is that they made the comparison. The makers of the Tale of Despereaux were not only inviting the comparison, they were begging for it.
It seemed to me that whoever did the Tale of Despereaux decided to not only borrow elements from Ratatouille, but chose to flat out steal characters from Ratatouille! Here is a comparison of two of the major antagonistic elements from each of the movies.
Anton Ego, the harsh food critic from Ratatouille
Botticelli, the main villain from the Tale of Despereaux
Please note the similarities. The elongated faces. The sour expression on the face. The hunched back. Even the voices for the two characters were nearly identical. It seems that the person who wrote the script for the Tale of Despereaux thought that if he combined the book and added elements directly taken from Ratatouille, he would have a sure success. Unfortunately, the combined elements are entirely superfluous, and end up muddling the story so badly that it bears little to no resemblance to the book.
The end result is a movie that is confusing for those new to the story of Despereaux, a brave but odd little mouse, and disappointing to those who are fans of the book. A truly subpar effort.
RATING (out of 5)
Visuals – .5 – the animation is sub par. I understand the desire to stand out from Pixar’s animation style, but this isn’t about style, this is about quality. The quality of the computer animation made it feel more like I was watching a made for TV movie.
Sound – 2 – The music was OK, as was the voice acting. Merely OK, is about the best thing this movie is going to get.
Acting – .5 – Voice acting seemed… forced. I especially disliked Sigourney Weaver’s narration of the story. It felt rigid and emotionless.
OVERALL SCORE – .5 – I have rarely been so disappointed by a movie.