Review: Bullet to the Head

Stallone returns to more self indulgence as he stomps around, growling and shooting every man he sees. Oh, and he reminds us that he's old now.

A thug-turn-vigilante goes for revenge against an organised mob boss after his partner is killed, while a young police officer wants to bring the same mob to justice.

Stallone's persistent need to resurrect the old 1980/1990s violent action movies surely cannot be more unremarkably transparent than with this offering. Bullet to the Head, by definition, is already brain dead before it begins.
As the film progresses through the typical revenge plot, the scenes quickly get recycled as though the writers had nothing better to show: Stallone and cop partner Sung Kang argue about how he doesn't trust cops; makes a racial slur; Kang argues how they shouldn't just kill people, Stallone kills them anyway; Kang goes his own way, only to get caught before being swiftly rescued by Stallone. These elements repeat over and over in one form or another, the entire second act is nothing but this and will quickly lose the attention of the audience.
Kang and Stallone's dialogue is straight from Die Hard 4.0, (which in light of Stallone's recent remarks on Bruce Willis, makes him a bit of a hypocrite) "Stallone is so old he doesn't know what a cellphone is capable of these days", probably Kang's only moment to shine above the old brute.
 
Stallone's "lone wolf", old, aged hero antics get positively trite at the film's conclusion where he turns his back and walks away (to deliberate "walking away" music) twice in the space of four minutes.

Sure, it is dumb and completely unremarkable, but at least it does what it means to do; throw-away violence. This film is better (marginally) than A Good Day to Die Hard for example, but that isn't saying much is it? I respect Stallone's ability to continue making these films, but I wish he made good movies with this endless energy.

The only good to come of this film is Jason Momoa, who you might know as the man who played Conan in the remake of Schwarzenegger's classic, and really, I'd like to see a film like this with actors like him in the lead role.
Oh, and Christian Slater is in this film, that was funny. But he should have had a bigger role, like he should have been the lead villain!

If you want to see Stallone shooting every single man in sight and act like some impenetrable shield of self-righteous fury, watch this movie. Otherwise, you will probably forget it all after a couple of hours.

Spoiled Cocoa: Avengers: Age of Ultron

It is time for another edition of Spoiled Cocoa! Mostly because I like variety.

And because there's been some outbursts about the brand new teaser trailer for the next Marvel's Avengers movie out next year. It is a teaser though, so I shouldn't call this a spoiler...

So, what can we take from this?
Well it is an awful teaser trailer for a start.

Now I like teaser trailers, I like them because they don't give away the entire plot just to get people into the theatres, they can be artistic vehicles of their own; not falling into the beat-by-beat nature of today's trailers. Heck, I invented my Spoiled Cocoa reviews because regular trailers are so bloated!

But, this new trailer is about as bare bones as a teaser can get, this is worse than the original teaser for The Dark Knight! We have a computer generated Iron Man helmet and dialogue from the previous film, not even from the new film! 
And what the hell is that screaming at the end? I know its meant to be screaming because it fits with the helmet's clear transformation into our lead villain... but, without any context it does sound like a crowd cheering. Cheering for the Avengers? Cheering for Ultron?? Is Ultron going to take over the world with a pop music concert??

It does make an already uninspired teaser trailer end on a weird note.

But this was my first, gut reaction, what good can be taken from this trailer? Not very much to be fair, though it is clearly showing Iron Man's armour being transformed, corrupted or possessed to become Ultron.

Now I don't read comics, but from what I've heard there is a pretty big rumour going around about who or what Ultron is. Though I believe these rumours have been pushed aside by the production team...

From a film stand point, while we haven't seen all of Marvel's Phase 2 (Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Thor: The Dark World) we have seen Iron Man 3, and what happens in Iron Man 3? Tony Stark becomes independent of his suit.

More to the point, his suit becomes independent from him...  

Review: The Proposal

So most of you might be asking: "What?? A Romantic Comedy, what have you done with the real Cinema Cocoa??"

Simply put, a relentless boss forces her assistant into marriage so that she can avoid being deported to Canada for a year and lose her business standing. They hate each other, but does this bribe become more than she can handle?
Its a romantic comedy, of course it does!

I don't rightly know why I was so compelled to see this, but it would be the premise mostly. The idea of a hard, emotionally-void business woman finding herself backed into such a corner she makes the snap decision to marry her assistant, an assistant who wants nothing more than the chance to take her down several pegs.

In this regard, the film succeeds. I really enjoyed the opening act and much of the second. Their office staff being in constant contact so they can message each other whenever Sandra Bullock's cold-hearted Margaret enters the room; "the witch is on her broom". Ryan Reynolds does well too as Andrew, a man at the end of his tether, reveling in switching the bribery around from time to time. It was what I was expecting it to be, but as such it was entertaining!

Then of course... the film develops the characters, oh, and they start having real feelings for each other, etc etc. There are some weird side-tracks in the second act when they go to Andrew's family's home in Alaska, for example Margaret finding his grandmother doing a tribal dance in the forest... What, what am I seeing?
A situation with Sandra Bullock, a small dog and an eagle was priceless though.

People wonder why I don't normally watch "Rom-Coms", and it is because they are often ridiculously predictable, and there's no denying this film is the same. I know, action/sci-fi films are predictable in their own ways, but these sorts of movies don't have the luxury of being blatantly fictional. 
Oh, there's a wedding... hmm, I bet all my money it doesn't go smoothly. These people aren't leaving this chapel happy.
There will be a crushing reality moment where our lovers are separated, but heroically our man will run, climb, struggle through crowds in the dying minutes of the film to fix everything.

Yep, The Proposal isn't a film I'm likely to watch again, but I am glad I bothered to give it a go. It is a short, amusing waste of time, and most importantly, I could buy into these two actors playing these roles.

Additional Marshmallows: Another thing about Rom-Coms, look at that bland, uninteresting poster! Seriously, did a robot design that? 
(and yeah, I will say the same about Skyfall's marketing for the same reasons!)

Review: Rush

Rush proves that an intense, thrilling and impassioned true story can be made from the world of Formula One!

In the mid-1970s a rivalry between two men gripped the world of motor sport, that of Britain James Hunt, and the Austrian Niki Lauda. The film begins with both men taking the leap from Formula 3 to Formula 1, and their fierce determination to win ties them into a personal battle for the World Championship. But how far will the obsession take them, when the sport's dangers become too great?

Formula One has a bad rap from many, especially when trying to construct a genuine story (memories of Stallone's ridiculous Driven cannot be shaken) but Ron Howard has stuck the nail on the head with this film. While the excellent Senna was a well crafted documentary film, this is of an equal measure for a full dramatization. It heavily focuses on the very real dangers involved, stressing and showing the sort of shocking crashes and devastation that occurred before the sport became as safe as it is now.
Chris Hemsworth plays Hunt, a racer with a rockstar's mentality, good looks and womanising antics, who instantly falls for the glamorous lifestyle of Formula One, while his polar opposite Niki Lauda, played impeccably by Daniel Bruhl, is an intelligent recluse who finds Hunt's behavior unbearable.

Both performances are excellent, they radiant the confidence that these men must have had to commit to such a deadly sport, yet also carry massive personal burdens that discolour their lives as they rise to fame. Unlike Senna, which was quite biased towards Aryton Senna, Ron Howard's film does its best to give each man equal footing; neither of them is a saint, and neither of them makes the right choice. At the end of the day, they are both foolish and brave in equal measure.

The film's direction of the sport's intensity is spine-tingling. Formula One is, nowadays, often seen as drab and repetitive, but Rush does capture the ferocity of the cars and sheer lunacy of the people involved.

Of course any Formula One fan must see this film, and of course they should know what significant event occurs during the story. While the film follows both men there comes a point where Niki Lauda's story comes to the forefront and, compared to the rest of the film, it becomes so intense it is almost unbearable. In my local cinema some audience members were apparently sick, and I sympathise; the film's intensity and style makes everything intense, but I'm sure a lot of it stems from this being real events, captured with grim reality.

Will non-Formula One fans enjoy this? I think they will. It is a story worth telling, and it is a definitive rivalry between two very different men. It isn't buried under Formula One jargon or rules (I... admit, as a fan, I could have used more of the sport's structure being involved, a lot of the season's races are summarized in montage too) so it won't lose people.
I can't say anything bothered me to the extent of ruining the film for me. It is a beautifully crafted love letter to the sport as a whole, and captures the raw passion that it can hold (and one can argue, a passion it has lost).

But one, one little thing... the soundtrack was a bit bland, and the credit roll proved it to me: Hans Zimmer, god, he really wasn't the man for this film. I don't want Batman/Superman music droning on and on here. But like I said, it didn't ruin the film for me!

Go and see it, especially if you are a fan of motor sport, this is a great interpretation of real sporting events with zero seams on show!

Additional Marshmallows: Daniel Bruhl was so focused on delivering the performance truthfully, he was in contact daily with Niki Lauda asking him how he had felt during the events.

Review: Seven Psychopaths

Seven Psychopaths was more intriguing than I had first thought, though it does feel like a poor man's Tarantino movie.

The film's advertisement (and the title!) suggested it followed seven psychopaths, played by the leading stars involved, and that isn't entirely true.
We follow Colin Farrell's character Marty, who is an author struggling to write his film script "Seven Psychopaths". To help him out, his friend Billy (Sam Rockwell) gets him in contact with real life murderers and psychopaths, including kidnapping the Shih Tzu dog of an especially derailed man.

The film keeps your attention with a familiar Tarantino-Pulp Fiction-style storytelling; we follow multiple characters as their stories begin to interweave before the conclusion, from Marty and Billy, to Christopher Walken's kind hearted Hans. But then we have fictional character arcs that Marty has invented for the story he's writing. All of this compiled with gun waving lunacy and fast-talking dialogue.
The conclusion is certainly clever, and turns into quite an interesting slice of what could makes someone "psychotic", whether they actively want to be, or become such a thing while seeking something genuine. Honor among psychopaths, can it exist?

While it is packed with diverse characters, I can't say the writing is quite as clever as it wants to be. Maybe it is unfair to compare it to Tarantino, but I felt as though this script should be full of quotable lines, but it only boils down to "Who gives a Shih Tsu" level of intellect.
Sam Rockwell's character quite possibly steals the show (asides from Christopher Walken, who's being... well... Christopher Walken!) and though his character perhaps has the most interesting story, it is the most vulnerable to giving away the aces up the film's sleeve too early.

It is a good film for spending an evening with, a black comedy with unique, violent characters in a world were there are no heroes.

 

Review: Jack Reacher

Jack Reacher feels like it could have been a hard-boiled detective thriller but ends up feeling confused, predictable and at times... laughable.

When a man guns down five innocent people only to plead innocent at his arrest later, he asks for one Jack Reacher. Reacher is an elusive "army cop"; a vigilante with military training who plays by his own instincts and rules. With the help of a young female lawyer, Jack discovers there is considerably more to the random killings than was first suggested.

Oh, Tom Cruise... can you please do something that isn't an action film one of these days? Please? I'd like to think you have more scope than this, and I think you are an alright guy, but you make it increasingly difficult to defend you!

This film's biggest problem was its tone, and it baffled me multiple times. We open with a grisly shooting, provokingly shot through the scope of the rifle as we gun down innocent passers by. Intense stuff. What follows unfortunately is Tom Cruise getting into fights with the world's stupidest thugs, including one scene in a bathroom that was positively looney toons.
 
The film's first act is what I could call "Tommy's First Investigative Thriller". I can't say I was ever in doubt that there was more going on, in fact some of the characters seemed woefully oblivious to the clues, and so the film drops all pretense almost immediately. Enter Mr Cruise, who is bewilderingly playing a man with split-personality disorder. I'd like to tell you Jack Reacher is an anti-hero, a rogue vigilante, he even says at one point: "I am no hero", yet he frequently does heroic deeds. He sticks up for a young lost girl, he goes into danger to save one woman when he could have chosen another way. I never found him compelling as a "tough guy", he still had that PG-13 Tom Cruise thing going, made worse when he suddenly switches between this and a hard-boiled act in certain scenes!
The less I say about his female counterpart Rosamund Pike the better, I'm happy to say though it appears I'm not the only one who thought she looked like she had wobbly, googly eyes inside her head. 

The film's opening is decent, but the rest that follows is awkward and unconvincing. Only when we get into third act car chases and fight scenes do we find some more compelling direction; the car chase is particularly good and the action isn't all shaky camera nonsense, I could see what was happening. One might say though that it is too little, too late.

I do like Tom Cruise, but I wish he did a wider range of films, he didn't always do action films before, and Jack Reacher is average at best. I feel as though it should have been a lot grittier, more intense but have a dry wit and merciless humour to it, and while I say that as someone who hasn't read the books, the film comes across as wanting to be such a thing.

 
Additional Marshmallows: I should totally get around to watching Valkyrie, Tom Cruise with an eye patch can only be giggle-inducing.
 

  

Review: Riddick

A follow up to a disastrous flop made nine years ago, Riddick scales things back to basics in an effort to capture a sense of peril, intensity and horror thrills. But like the big man himself says at the film's opening: "This ain't nothin' new".

Richard B. Riddick, criminal, murderer, convict, finds himself left for dead on a wasteland world. Alone and wounded he has to survive against creatures that want him dead. The only way to escape is to send a beacon and summon bounty hunters who are looking for him, kill them, and steal their ship. But the planet's inhabitants aren't going to make that any easier.

If you saw my Chronicles of Riddick review, you will know I have my issues with this film. Riddick, as a complete package, is a retread of 2000's Pitch Black, and yes, the older film remains superior to this.
That shouldn't be a surprise to you. The film has a lot less heart than the older movie; now we have Riddick up against two bands of mercenaries and cutthroats, and while there is a tiny sliver of effort to make us relate to some of them... it is nowhere near enough. They all become cardboard targets for Riddick or the creatures hunting them. 
Pitch Black's remarkableness is due to Riddick having what is called a "character arc", something most good characters have in common, and that he wasn't the only focus in that movie. While the bafflingly titled Riddick attempts the same idea by harking back to the previous events, it is too little too late... and if I'm honest, badly handled.

So far I'm talking about the film's third act, which is easily the weakest part. The film opens with an unconventional approach as we see Riddick alone and vulnerable, learning survival techniques. Director David Twohy lets us remember the dazing vistas and bleak wastelands of his superior film by replicating them here. It may be a similar, but it is still effective.
There is too an explanation to connect this sequel to the condemned Chronicles of Riddick, which was a blessing (and perplexing, I actually liked seeing the return of the Necromongers) the explanation didn't sit right with me... and was instantly forgotten about, but at least it was acknowledged.

I still feel bad for the character; I find him much more interesting than Diesel's Fast and Furious alter ego, yet they still haven't fully explored what made him interesting at the end of Pitch Black. 

This was a decent attempt at recovery, but it just lacks heart and becomes little more than a testosterone fueled chest-beating action fest.

Additional Marshmallows: At the very least, I can respect Diesel showing off his ability to throw people (and aliens) around in this franchise, unlike in a series about car racing!

   

Trilogy Review: The Chronicles of Riddick

Before The Fast and the Furious came along, Vin Diesel played an iconic part in a little known science fiction thriller Pitch Black. Asides from a bit-part in Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan and voice work in The Iron Giant, this film projected Diesel into the mainstream as it gained cult status and following.

What happened next, with Diesel's fame sky-rocketing with endless Fast and Furious films and even his American all-action spy XXX, his character from Pitch Black would get his own movie series.
Video games, anime films and a bloated sequel all followed Pitch Black's one-time gimmick in a hope to capture the audience's imagination. Now we have 2013's bafflingly titled "Riddick", which looks like a retread of the original movie...

Why is this such a big deal? Because Diesel wants more money making franchises? Probably. But the character of Riddick himself is very interesting, but there are some strange creative decisions being made...

Pitch Black (2000)

A reasonably well budgeted sci-fi thriller that puts all its time and effort into atmosphere, visuals and a tone of gritty desperation.

When a space ship carrying civilians accidentally crash lands on a barren planet, the survivors must deal with whatever had killed the population that had once settled there. However their ship was also host to transporting a vicious criminal, who's under custody of an unruly law enforcer.

Pitch Black has a very regular premise: who can be trusted, and who will survive, but it has a great sense of build up and visual flare for such a small project. The key characters are fleshed out nicely and their personalities are warped and changed as the situation escalates. Vin Diesel, who plays the criminal named Riddick, steals the show with ridiculous amounts of dry, uncompromising wit and cynicism. Radha Mitchell definitely gets a mention too, as the ship's pilot-turn-leader who has the most pressure on her as she must control her merciless male counterparts. She really becomes the heart of the team, and possibly the most relevant character of the entire series (not that you would know this from watching the sequels...)

The film has a good sense of humour when it needs to, not always gravitating around Riddick though quite regularly. It breaks up the overbearing tension that builds.
Certainly some audiences will find its opening and secondary acts a little slow paced; the film's dedication to landscapes and oppressive deserts and darkness might alienate some. But in today's climate, where films constantly blow things up and shoot people throughout, Pitch Black's restraint in holding all of its cards to its chest until the final forty minutes is a real credit!

It is one of my favourite science fiction films, and stands the test of time given it is thirteen years old (now I feel old....) and I would recommend anyone interested to see this film! Especially if the new film, Riddick, is the money-grubbing remake I think it is...

Additional Marshmallows: Video game fans will acknowledge two heavy hitters in Pitch Black, Claudia Black (Dragon Age: Origins) and Keith David (Mass Effect, Halo 2 and 3) are both present!

Dark Fury (2004)

Set mere moments after Pitch Black's conclusion, Dark Fury is an animated short designed as a bridge between that film and its sequel.

We join the action when Riddick and the other survivors are caught in their skiff by a massive mercenary ship. The mercs are led by a sadistic woman who has a fascination in catching criminals and preserving them, statue-like but still alive. Riddick must battle his way out of her clutches and protect the survivors he now owes his life to.

I saw Dark Fury after seeing the sequel The Chronciles of Riddick, and how can you blame me, they both released in the same year. Directed by Peter Chung who has done work for The Matrix "Animatrix" shorts as well as creating the Aeon Flux animated series (NOT the live action film...) I find his animated pieces incredibly fluid and kinetic. It is a distinct style and quite unforgettable. Dark Fury also benefits the return of the actors from Pitch Black providing their voices, giving a near seamless transition.
It is only thirty-five minutes long, and while there are some nods to where the film's sequel will go... I feel as though some proper explanation would go a long way. Pitch Black is a very grudgy, dirty environment and none of the characters display signs of the super-advanced, alien-esque culture that is being revealed here and in Chronicles. Even with this bridge, it is still very jarring to see Riddick in such environments.

The action is excellent, as it should be from Chung's direction. The choreography is exceptional and you know what's happening. The characters are still involving, for a thirty minute experience at least, though I wonder if some things were cut short? Some of the editing feels a little clunky and throw-away.

 

The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)

"All the powers in the universe can't change destiny", says the tagline. All the ways you can look at this film, doesn't prevent it from being bad.

The ruthless killer Riddick has escaped the bounty hunters on his trail for five years, but when he is drawn to the planet Helion Prime by an old friend, he is brought into a universe-changing battle. The Necromongers, a brainwashed legion led by a fanatical dictator seeking immortality in what he calls The Underverse, are intent on destroying Helion and all cultures that do not join their army. However, while Riddick attempts to find Jack - the young survivor he rescued - a destiny and lineage finds him.

In this day and age of remakes and lack of imagination, I find it hard to rail so harshly on The Chronicles of Riddick; here is a film full to the brim with creativity and otherworldly concepts. Right from the get go we see the Necromongers and their world-ending technology, right from the start we have Dudi Dench's "Elemental" giving narration about destiny and fate. Creative costume, set, weapon and ship designs are rife. We are given so much lore, pomp and circumstance that goes way, way, way over our heads instantly. 

But what the heck does any of this have to do with a handful of civilians surviving vicious aliens on a barren planet during Pitch Black? Not a darn thing.

Pitch Black is a small, isolated story, and its cult following is due to how it works well with what little it has. TCoR is so bloated with concepts and ideas that were never referenced to, and so completely dwarf the original film's significance, and that none of what we know about Riddick even matters anymore.
Indeed, Riddick himself feels lost in this story's heady heights; I almost feel bad for him and this supposed destiny he has been labored with. I suppose they wanted to give him backstory, since he was a mystery, but I personally don't think this is the backstory he deserved.
Indeed each of the Pitch Black survivors suffer in this film, especially Jack, whose unique perspective of Riddick just boils down to becoming a generic bad-ass. I felt there was a lot missing here, despite watching Dark Fury (if you haven't, you will find this character's development even more confusing...) Speaking of Dark Fury, that anime had better action choreography and pacing that this.

What's worse, TCoR was meant to be the first of three films. This was designed to be a vehicle for Vin Diesel and creator David Twohy to make their mark with. Naturally, this sort of "diving in feet first" approach backfired in the worse possible way, and no follow up was attempted for what is now nine years.

Asides from the costume, set and creative designs, I would say the film's second act is best, when Riddick is imprisoned once again. It is evident that the character belongs in small, claustrophobic environments, not sprawling vistas with armies of enemies.

I hear there is a Director's Cut out there, so I should track that down as it apparently explains more about... what the hell is happening and who everyone is.

So yeah, watch if you are a big sci-fi fan, but the CG is pretty bad for nine years ago. Otherwise, just enjoy Pitch Black as a singular, awesome slice of a universe we don't know.

So I will be seeing Riddick soon, so expect a review in the coming week. I... have my extreme doubts about it satisfying any questions brought up by Chronicles, I think this is a deliberate backpedal to the degree that they are basically remaking Pitch Black.

Which is a shame for multiple reasons. One; remaking things is unimaginative and I feel detracts from current audience's appreciation of the original, and two; Chronicles is very imaginative, and to ditch so much of that creativity just because it was too much too soon is disheartening. All it needed was a bit more focus, a bit more time to breathe and explain things to the audience.

See you then! 

Review: You're Next

Despite all the atypical slasher cliches, You're Next does have some appeal. Even if it is a long slew of endless murder.

When wealthy parents invite their children and partners to their countryside house, they are suddenly surrounded by masked murderers who are intent to hunt down and kill every one of them. However, one of the hunters' victims may not be all they appear to be, and someone may have ulterior motives.

You're Next is very predictable. I could tell you what happens and you probably wouldn't be greatly phased when watching it. Like all horror films these days they feel the need to have a twist (a simplified boast of wit or intelligence maybe?) but here it is almost clear from the start.
It has all of the classic jump scares, even some of the more embarrassing ones: someone alone in the house, early on, gets a fright when a friend gets their attention by... putting their hand on their shoulder from behind. WHO WOULD DO THAT??

The characters are quite interesting however, and the film's attempt at building a family unit initially was quite convincing to me; I felt like I could relate to some of them. Some of them, anyway. There's a LOT of family members, in fact the film's gradual introduction of them all felt a little cartoonish, like the dwarves arriving at Biblo's house. "How many disposable characters are we going to have??" I wondered. I think there were ten in total.

I think what was interesting for me was the hunters... who turn out to be pretty bad at their work! They incompetently fall into traps and are actually dispatched as readily as the victims. This was very amusing to me, besides the usual slasher cliches that made me chuckle. It is probably due to them wearing impractical masks that probably remove ALL peripheral vision; I was surprised they didn't lop their own legs off with those axes!
The soundtrack too was very distinct, it almost had a 1980s, or even sci-fi tone to it and as such became quite surreal to hear in such a grudgy environment. Still, I found it interesting.

I feel as though I'm giving credit only to take it away again immediately. If you know your slasher movies, you won't find anything out of the ordinary here. It is literally a long procession of murders strung together by an overhanging ambiguity as to why it is happening and who's behind it.
If you want a cheap scare, there are certainly worse choices than this! Kudos for being an 18, even if that was mostly just for excessive gore.

Additional Marshmallows: In a bid to resist spoiling everything... I can't not complain a little about all the "super-powered women" in films now (especially horrors). I mean, I get it, but after so many they are going to get repetitive and not at all surprising. We need another Evil Dead "Ash" type hero!