Movie: Star Trek Into Darkness

“When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.

With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.

As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.“

A little underwhelming, if you ask me. Then again, so was the first movie from the rebooted universe. Fortunately for the latter, it had enough charm to propel it into a blockbuster. The second one falters in this aspect, relying mostly on Scotty (Simon Pegg), Sulu (John Cho), and Kirk (Chris Pine) for the emotional hook. Well, on Scotty and Kirk. Sulu was just an awesome badass.

Admittedly, I did have higher expectations this time ’round. I’m not a Trekkie. I don’t have an extensive background on the universe Gene Roddenberry created with Star Trek. And I was very much intrigued with the trailer and synopsis released.

The intrigue died after the first fight between Kirk and Spock, leading to the demotion of the former and the reassignment of the latter. That’s not a spoiler, so much as it’s the first act of the film.

Remember what I said about Iron Man 2? I didn’t like it because the problems felt superficial. The main protagonist was superficially weakened, just so we can root for him.

I wish that’s this film’s only problem.

See, the writers of Star Trek Into Darkness tries to rehash the previous film by having Kirk down and out again. Except, as you go deeper into the story, there really was no need.

John Harrison, played by Benedict Cumberbatch, is not an ordinary adversary. He’s an evolved human, which makes him a strong enough antagonist that you don’t need to cripple your protagonist beforehand. But because the writers do, we lose time on bridging the trust gap between our core characters, instead of using said time on developing the relationship between the characters.

As a result, we get shortened screen time for most everyone. Sure, each one gets enough of a hero moment to make a mark, but it’s only well and good for everyone individually. Collectively, the Enterprise crew is no better than they were at the end of the first film. Which made one of what was supposed to be the film’s emotional highlights feel empty and fake.

And then there’s Zachary Quinto.

I liked him as Sylar back in Heroes, and he’s done a bunch of unmemorable but pretty okay roles since then. I liked him enough in the first Star Trek film from the rebooted universe. But for some reason, I really couldn’t connect to him in this film. Is it because of the fact that he is Vulcan, and that he is repressing his emotions? Well, it was the same deal in the first film and I didn’t have a problem then.

Maybe it’s because this was supposed to have already been addressed in the film. Maybe it’s because we were cheated off actual relationship development between Spock and Kirk.

Zachary Quinto’s supposed crowning moment, during his fight with John Harrison, falls flat because there’s a disconnect between what the audience is feeling at the time, and what the film is telling the audience to feel.

And then, everything that happened after was very paint-by-numbers. Nothing original happens.

I left the theater feeling less than impressed.

Movie: Iron Man 3

“Marvel’s Iron Man 3 pits brash-but-brilliant industrialist Tony Stark/Iron Man against an enemy whose reach knows no bounds. When Stark finds his personal world destroyed at his enemy’s hands, he embarks on a harrowing quest to find those responsible. This journey, at every turn, will test his mettle. With his back against the wall, Stark is left to survive by his own devices, relying on his ingenuity and instincts to protect those closest to him. As he fights his way back, Stark discovers the answer to the question that has secretly haunted him: does the man make the suit or does the suit make the man?” (c) Disney

Oh. My. God.

That seems to be a fitting reaction to Iron Man 3. Seriously. Watch it. Then see if that can be your reaction too. And no, that wasn’t the first thing that came to mind while the credits started rolling, but there were certain circumstances that, well, I’d rather not get into. Oh my God is what I’m feeling right now though, some twenty minutes after seeing the tag scene.

Seriously. The movie was epic.

Now, going back a bit, I enjoyed the first Iron Man film. Immensely. I thought it was perfect. But I wasn’t a fan of the sequel. It was a good summer film, sure, but it just wasn’t up to par with the first film. It felt a little unnecessary. And Tony Stark, let’s admit, is way too powerful to be a hero we can root for, and most of the things he was going through were a little, well, shallow.

It’s not a surprise that I’m a little hesitant with the third film. Iron Man, as we saw in the Avengers film, is even more invincible. He’s done so much more with his suits. What can the people behind Iron Man 3 do to make Tony Stark relatable again? How can we root for him again?

Well, the people behind Iron Man 3 certainly knew how.

I think I can safely say that this is the best out of the three Iron Man movies. Hands down. There’s something about Robert Downey Jr.’s acting that really draws you in deeper into Tony Stark’s dilemmas, and Gwyneth Paltrow is just–let’s just say that Pepper Potts remains as my favorite Marvel movie-verse female protagonist.

The movie actually spoils its end-twist from the get go, but the journey that takes us to the reveal is filled with many awesome moments. None of the characters feel tacked on, and everyone is doing something to propel the story forward without it feeling forced. Because, let’s be honest, no one expects Iron Man 3 to be a study on character and the superhero psyche. Though, it does do that a little.

The movie is action after action after action, but it’s the in-between scenes that really make this a really good, and a really memorable movie.

And I really want to talk more about the film, but I fear that I might spoil things that I shouldn’t.

Let me just say this: I want to watch it again. And to those who are apprehensive about the hype: Bloat your expectations. The movie is that awesome.

Now, who wants to discuss the film with me?

Taking a Break supports ‘Saving Sally’

image used with permission from Avid Liongoren

“Marty, the geek, is an aspiring comic-book artist who is secretly in love with his beautiful best friend, Sally, the gadget inventor. Like every love story, there are complications: Sally has abusive monster parents and a literal dick for a boyfriend, while Marty has the innate ability to do nothing about everything despite his vivid fantasies of defending the love of his life from the big bad world.“

That’s the synopsis creator Avid Liongoren provides TousCoprod, the European Kickstarter where a Frenchman is campaigning for the completion of the film.

A bit of background, I first heard about Saving Sally when Rhian Ramos mentioned it in passing during an interview around three or four years ago. Oh, yeah, in case you didn’t know, I used to interview celebrities for a living. Digression aside, what Rhian said about the film had me intrigued. Unfortunately, waiting for Saving Sally was like waiting for Godot.

I wanted to support the film then, but I’m not really rolling in cash. And then I left that job and, well, I forgot about Saving Sally.

Until someone posted about it on Facebook. And then I remembered. And now I had the means to support the film. Unfortunately, TousCoprod wants Euros. Of which I have none. So I e-mailed creator Avid Liongoren and asked how I could help out financially without having to go through the European Kickstarter.

You can find out how by visiting the website for Saving Sally.

In exchange, creator Liongoren agreed to answer a few questions for my blog:

Taking a Break (TaB): What inspired you to make Saving Sally? Where did the story come from?

Avid Liongoren (AL): I wanted to produce a project that combined actors & lots of drawings (since I’m an Illustrator first & foremost). As for the origins of the story, it’s nothing amazing. The story was written by an old friend based on collective experiences of us & our other friends. Every boy (or girl) has once (or many times) carried a torch for someone special who was with a jerk (or a dick).

TaB: Has the story changed at all from when you conceived it and shot it? How different is the Saving Sally you’re making now to the one you started out with?

AL: Refined, but not changed. If Saving Sally started out as a cheese omelet we ended up with an omelet with mushroom & onions & bacon bits & more cheese… but it’s still an omelet.

TaB: You’ve done a lot of things since you started Saving Sally. You’ve directed ads, mainstream short films (like Party Pilipinas‘s ‘Red Mask’)–has that affected how you’re editing the film?

AL: Our edit has been locked for almost 3 years now. A necessary thing since all we have been doing is building & refining the world around the edit. So no, my other work does not affect our pipeline.

TaB: Why the decision to mix live action with computer-generated images and effects?

AL: Because that is what I’m good at? Also, it was the best way to tell our story.

(“Computer-generated” creates this image of high end visuals, we don’t have that, the film is very low-fi in terms of vfx, we are workig on the other end of the vfx spectrum & we are going for warm charm & not the woah factor, since we are incapable of that)

TaB: Have you seen Tiktik: the Aswang Chronicles? What are your thoughts on the movie, and do you think it will affect how people will receive Saving Sally when it comes out seeing as they employ the same idea of mixing live action with CGI?

AL: I’ve seen it & thought it was great & I’m so happy for them because they took a risk of spending a lot of money on a non Star Cinema type film & it paid off. I have no idea though how it will affect how people will receive our film, my mind is not there at all.

TaB: Aside from budget/finances, what has been the biggest challenge in getting Saving Sally off the ground?

AL: Finding a girl to replace our first Sally & doing the film again from scratch (story told here by the screenplay writer).

TaB: If you could go back in time and tell your past self all the problems that Saving Sally would face–would you have still gone through with making it? Assuming you say yes, what would you have changed then to make the whole thing easier for you without sacrificing the quality of the film you want to make?

AL: Tito Boy Abunda is that you, nasaan ang Magic Mirror? : D

If I could go back in time, I’d still do the film BUT give myself winning lotto numbers : )

And… that’s it. Obviously, I’m a little rusty on the interviewing front. Apologies.

But before I completely sign off, I encourage those who are looking for a project to support to, well, support Saving Sally. They have rewards for donations/financial help, so you don’t feel like you were cheated off your money. But trust me, seeing this film completed would be reward enough.

Check out the Saving Sally website to find out how to donate!

Movie: Jack the Giant Slayer

“Jack the Giant Slayer tells the story of an ancient war that is reignited when a young farmhand unwittingly opens a gateway between our world and a fearsome race of giants. Unleashed on the Earth for the first time in centuries, the giants strive to reclaim the land they once lost, forcing the young man, Jack (Nicholas Hoult) into the battle of his life to stop them. Fighting for a kingdom, its people, and the love of a brave princess, he comes face to face with the unstoppable warriors he thought only existed in legend-and gets the chance to become a legend himself.” — (C) Warner Bros

Not a fan.

Okay, so I might be a little tired from all the things I have been doing in real life. But I was well-rested, sort of, before coming in to watch Jack the Giant Slayer. So imagine my surprise when I slept through the opening scenes.

It wasn’t until the beanstalk sprouted from the ground that things started to feel like something was happening. I didn’t fall asleep after that. I did start to wonder though what story the movie was going to tell, because by that point, I realized that the movie was only about one thing: Jack wants to get inside the princess’s pants.

I read somewhere online that the film was very handsome. And it is. Everything looks great. The computer animated bits? Seamless. Well, the giants looked a tiny bit too clean, but that was it. The rest were visually pleasing. The costumes, the sets–everything. Now, if only the people behind the film spent just as much time on the story.

The story of Jack the Giant Slayer really starts on the night the beanstalk shoots up, up to Jack finding a way to stop the giants from killing everyone. The rest of what happens feels like filler, scenes to stuff the film with just so it looks like there’s a lot happening. What it succeeds in doing though is make the film drag.

Seriously. The film takes so long to get anywhere, and by the time it does, everything just suddenly speeds up and before you know it, the movie’s done.

And the worst part is, I wasn’t even entertained. Well, I was a little. Ewan McGregor is a hoot as Elmont, the leader of the King’s elite guard. Stanley Tucci’s Roderick was exceptionally evil. The rest of the cast, I think, took their roles too seriously. And that created a disjoint, I think. A movie that has sight gags and cheeky winks at the audiences shouldn’t allow their leads act like they’re on a sweeping love story.

I think this was the biggest reason why I couldn’t connect with the film. The film couldn’t even connect with itself!

But that’s just how I see it. Have you seen the film? What can you say about the retelling of Jack and the Beanstalk?

Movie: Silver Linings Playbook

“Life doesn’t always go according to plan. Pat Solatano (Bradley Cooper) has lost everything — his house, his job, and his wife. He now finds himself living back with his mother (Jacki Weaver) and father (Robert DeNiro) after spending eight months is a state institution on a plea bargain. Pat is determined to rebuild his life, remain positive and reunite with his wife, despite the challenging circumstances of their separation. All Pat’s parents want is for him to get back on his feet-and to share their family’s obsession with the Philadelphia Eagles football team. When Pat meets Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence), a mysterious girl with problems of her own, things get complicated. Tiffany offers to help Pat reconnect with his wife, but only if he’ll do something very important for her in return. As their deal plays out, an unexpected bond begins to form between them, and silver linings appear in both of their lives.” — (C) Weinstein

The Silver Linings Play Book is one of the first books I’ve posted about in this blog. Which is why, when I found out that there was going to be a movie, I knew I have to watch and write about it. So here I am. Writing about it. But first–

I loved the book. More so now that it’s been almost three years since I last read it. Rose-tinted glasses and all. And this, I think, might have been detrimental to my enjoyment of the film version. Because, as it stands, I do believe that Silver Linings Playbook was a good movie–it just wasn’t good enough.

Admittedly, I did set expectations. With Jennifer Lawrence winning award after award, and the rest of the cast getting equal amounts of accolades, I thought the film would offer something more. What we get is actually a watered down version of the book. Not that there’s anything wrong with that–unless you’re a fan of the source material.

Sure, I understand that they can’t fit in the whole book into one movie. And some liberties have to be taken to make the characters more film-friendly. What I don’t get is why they didn’t use Total Eclipse of the Heart for the movie. Was the rights to the song too pricey? Because I’m sure they had enough money to get the rights for it.

And, okay, I’m not really complaining because they didn’t get the song. My main beef with the film, I guess, is how they elevated the dance in terms of importance–and yet, didn’t give it the importance it deserved. Look into the lyrics of Total Eclipse of the Heart, and put it side by side to what the source material (and the film) is about.

The dance plays a major part in the book, but it’s not the centerpiece. In the film, it ties things together. And yet, in the book, you can really see the significance of the song and the dance–of the whole thing. In the film, it’s just to win a stupid bet.

I’m probably going to go on and on about this, so I’m cutting myself short.

The film is nice. It’s good. It’s totally worth the ticket price. Just… Just make sure you haven’t read the book yet before you go and watch the film.