Pages

Showing posts with label Sharlto Copley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sharlto Copley. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Review: Oldboy

by Trevor Kirkendall

I was going to pretend that Spike Lee’s “Oldboy” was not a remake of one of the best films of the last decade. I was going to sit there and watch “Oldboy” as if I didn’t know what was going to happen. I was not going to write my review for “Oldboy” and not compare it to the classic film from Chan-wook Park. Then I saw Spike Lee’s “Oldboy”. And now I just can’t help myself.

Josh Brolin helps butcher a classic film
It’s October 1993 as the movie opens. Joe Doucett (Josh Brolin) works in a New York ad agency. To put it politely, Joe is not a very nice person. He’s a raging alcoholic who is only interested in looking out for himself and his business. He doesn’t even want to attend his daughter’s third birthday because he has an important client to meet for dinner. After making a fool of himself at said dinner, Joe wanders aimlessly drunk through Chinatown until he passes out.

When he wakes, he’s in a dingy motel room, but there isn’t anyway out. He’s been kidnapped and is being held prisoner. All he has is a bed, a toilet, a shower, a TV and a copy of the Bible. On the TV, he finds out that his wife has been brutally murdered and the he is the prime suspect. He also learns through a true crime show that his daughter has been given up for adoption. Time passes and after 20 years, he is set free. He’s given a stack of 100 dollar bills, some sunglasses and an iPhone 5.

Enlisting the help of his old friend Chucky (Michael Imperioli) and an assistant at a mobile medical unit named Marie Sebastian (Elizabeth Olsen), Joe sets out to find out who kidnapped him. He keeps receiving calls on his iPhone from a blocked number. The voice on the other end (Sharlto Copley) tells him he has his daughter and he’ll kill her if he doesn’t play the game. Joe needs to figure out who this man is and why he kidnapped him. Otherwise, it’s lights out for the daughter he really wants to know.  

Min-sik Choi and Hye-jeong Kang in the vastly superior
2003 version of "Oldboy"
I fully intended on judging this film as a stand-alone movie and not a remake of one of the best films to ever come from the Korean peninsula. Halfway through the film, however, I couldn’t help but wonder why this film was deemed necessary to be remade. I suppose there are plenty of people who were never privileged to see the original Chan-wook Park masterpiece. The vast majority of the movie going public is probably very unfamiliar with this story. If you’re going to remake something, you might as well make one that most of the people haven’t seen.


But you also need to bring something new to the table. I’m not suggesting that Spike Lee’s “Oldboy” is a shot-for-shot remake of Park’s “Oldboy” but there isn’t any new substance, depth or complexities to the story or the characters that weren’t in the original. This version does not find Lee at his finest form. Far from it. What we have here is a film that seems to scare Lee. He seems timid in his approach to remaking such an acclaimed classic, even if the cinephiles were the only ones in the United States to have seen it.

Lee tries to incorporate too much of a Korean homage to his film. Korean films have their own very distinct voice. It’s much different than what American audiences are used to seeing. Someone could look at a Korean film and think some of the action, pacing, editing, photography and dialogue are on the campy side. While Lee keeps the vast majority of the film feeling very much like an American film, his occasional homages feel largely out of place. One scene in particular involves Brolin fighting a gang of people. It doesn’t quite fit the tone that’s trying to be achieved and comes across looking very out of place.

Furthermore, Lee included Samuel L. Jackson in a minor role. Jackson is typical Jackson: loud speech and plenty of profanity. He’s also dressed in some equally loud costumes too. His costumes scream Asian cinema. His character, however, is distinctly American.

Brolin doesn’t ever come across as the hero he’s meant to be. I found myself easily able to root for Min-sik Choi in the original. Brolin just seems like some arrogant guy that I wouldn’t even be interested in striking up a random conversation with at a bar. You can’t root for someone who isn’t likeable. The screenplay from “Thor” scribe Mark Protosevich gives him absolutely nothing to work with.

The one bright spot in this entire disaster is Elizabeth Olsen who plays Brolin’s investigative counterpart. She’s already carved out quite a career for herself in only a few years. She has easily escaped what could have been an extremely large shadow cast over her by her former megastar sisters. While Protosevich also gives her very little in the script, Olsen has been able to build the character up all on her own. We’re given very little backstory, but she seems much more relatable and much more empathetic. Olsen saves this movie from being completely forgettable, but she alone doesn’t make this a worthwhile venture.

“Oldboy” should have been off limits from Hollywood. If we do have to have remakes, then I think that looking at small foreign films is the route to go instead of remaking overplayed Hollywood films everyone knows. But internationally acclaimed classics such as Park’s “Oldboy” need to be left alone. For those who haven’t seen the original, I recommend you get on that right away. It is available on Netflix’s instant streaming service.


The only catch is the film is dubbed instead of subtitled. That’s a cardinal sin for foreign language films. Rather than reading it, you have to listen to some guy who got paid SAG minimum to sit in a recording booth and mumble his way through a script. And then the final product looks awful because the dialogue doesn’t even match the movement of the actor’s lips (cue jokes about old “Godzilla” movies). While dubbing this classic film’s soundtrack is an extremely disrespectful move, it comes nowhere near the blasphemy of its remake.

Monday, August 12, 2013

Review: Elysium


by Trevor Kirkendall
★★


“Elysium” takes place in the year 2154. At this time, the citizens of earth are split up into two different classes. The very wealthy live on a pristine space station orbiting above the planet called Elysium. Everyone else lives on the surface of earth which is a very poor place, overpopulated and heavily diseased. On Elysium, there is no disease because each house comes equipped with a med-bay that scans your body and fixes anything wrong with you. Cancers are cured, paralyzed people can walk again and broken bones are healed.

The story revolves around a citizen of earth named Max (Matt Damon) who works for a top defense contractor called Armadyne, which provides all the police robots on earth and the security systems on board Elysium. He’s also a reformed felon trying to keep himself on the good side of the law. His former partner in crime Julio (Diego Luna) even tries to get him to join in on new jobs, but Max refuses to participate. He’s also reconnected with his childhood friend Frey (Alice Braga) who he hasn’t seen in years, and he’s eager to see if there might be a future between the two of them.

Things change for Max when he’s exposed to a high dose of radiation and is given only five days left to live. He knows the med-bays on Elysium will cure him, so he asks the local crime boss Spider (Wagner Moura) for help getting up there. Spider wants Max’s help stealing something from a rich guy first. They want to steal the thoughts from Armadyne CEO John Carlyle (William Fichtner) in order to get bank numbers and other valuable information about Elysium.

What they don’t know is that Carlyle is working with Elysium Secretary of Defense Delacourt (Jodie Foster) on plans that would remove the current President from power and install her as the new leader. When Max and Spider steal the information from Carlyle, they get this information as well. Delacourt sends out Kruger (Sharlto Copley), a ruthless agent, after Max to get that damning information back.

Writer/director Neill Blomkamp, known for directing the 2009 Best Picture nominee “District 9”, is, in my opinion, too smart to be making movies in the first place. Listening to him do interviews is like listening to an astrophysicist talk about what they do for a living. “District 9” was a smart film and a modern day sci-fi masterpiece. But all the things that made “District 9” so great have been scrapped from “Elysium”. Instead, Blomkamp has given us way too many dense subplots that distract from the main characters and plotline of the film.

Its hard to care for your protagonist when there are so many other people clogging up his screen time. Not once did I find myself caring whether of not Max would get up to Elysium and be cured. I know that sounds harsh, but that’s Screenwriting 101. How can you care about someone when setup and development are sacrificed in order to give an equal amount setup and development to a supporting character? Supporting roles do not need the same type of attention that lead roles require.

Blomkamp should know this. His screenplay for “District 9” was so well done because it was so simple. There was one character and we were shown what he was like before the traumatic events on the film began to unfold. He was easily identifiable with the audience. In “Elysium”, Max doesn’t fit this mold. He’s set up as an everyman working in a low paying yet physically demanding job, he’s trying to better his life, he’s trying to reconnect with a former love interest. It couldn’t be anymore forced or contrived if they tried.

None of the talent on screen is overly impressive either. We’ve seen Damon and Foster in these roles before. The only actor who’s actually doing something we’ve never seen before is Copley. His role as Kruger is quite the polar opposite of what he was in “District 9” which is refreshing. I did enjoy Kruger’s character in this film. He’s a ruthless man out for blood, and Copley plays it very well.

Its also full of sharp action sequences, which isn’t a surprise given that Blomkamp has already demonstrated himself as a proficient action director. But polished action scenes and fancy special effects alone do not make a good movie. I feel like Blomkamp rushed this one, which is weird given that its been four years since we’ve seen anything from him. What looked like a promising break from the typical summer films, “Elysium” falls into the exact same traps that plague every other movie that comes out of Hollywood during the hottest months of the year. From the man who gave us something as brilliant as “District 9”, this is quite a disappointment.