The Da Vinci Code (2006)

Director: Ron Howard
Format: DVD
DVD Features: Previews, tons of featurettes, interviews, PC puzzle game demo
Starring: Tom Hanks, Jean Reno, Audrey Tautou
Trailer

I avoided the theatrical release of this film mainly because the book had gotten so much hype. I also tend to avoid movies that star Tom Hanks and were made after 1990. However, I did read the novel and curiosity finally got the better of me. It’s always interesting to see how the adaptation will be. The producers/director did appear to solicit the input of Dan Brown, judging from the special features and I feel that the more the original creator has to do with the movie version of their work, the smoother the transition will be from text to screen. I was not altogether disappointed with the movie version of The Da Vinci Code. Except for a few minor details, the movie script followed the novel quite well.

Novelist and lecturer Robert Langdon (Hanks) is approached by the French authorities in connection with the death of Jacques Saunière, curator at the Louvre. Under the guise of consulting Landon’s deep understanding of historic symbols, Captain Fache (Jean Reno) brings him to the murder scene. It is when Agent Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou) comes to his rescue that Langdon realizes he is actually wanted in connection to the crime. The deceased, who also happens to be Sophie’s grandfather, has left a trail of clues for the two of them to decipher. Before long, it is clear to Langdon that it isn’t Sauniere’s killer that he and Neveu are looking for, but something far more sacred – The Holy Grail. The two fugitives begin to follow the string of clues and decode the messages and riddles that unlock the secret of The Grail’s resting place. There are some, namely the religious sect Opus Dei, who would also like their hands on the sacred treasure, recognizing the threat it brings to the church. At every turn, Langdon and Neveu must fool not only the authorities, but dodge the attempts of another mysterious interested party to steal the secret. One of the issues that I had with the book, was that I was always one step ahead of the characters when it came to figuring out the next clue. Watching the movie made the situation worse, as I had already discovered each answer in the novel. The suspense wasn’t quite the same either, as it takes a much longer period of time for Langdon and Neveu to get to the next clue in the book. So, the compression of time needed to transfer the story onto film detracted from that aspect. The story on the whole is intriguing, especially considering that most of the clues in the story actually exist.

Plot: 4 stars

As mentioned earlier, I am not particularly fond of Tom Hanks. No matter which role he takes, there’s an air of arrogance about him that I find very unattractive. He didn’t convince me as Langdon. Audrey Tautou is a fantastic actress, especially when she plays French roles (Amelie). She wasn’t how I envisioned the character as I read the novel, but she fits snugly into the role. Jean Reno is also a great actor, in certain roles, but he wasn’t Fache to me. The role of Silas, the albino monk working for Opus Dei, was played by Paul Bettany. In the book, I remember Silas as being a large, hulking creature, terribly threatening in part due to his devout convictions. But, in the movie, Bettany is way too small and the only think that makes him frightening is the Latin he speaks. I also envisioned the character of Teabing differently. The novel gave me the impression that, aside from being crippled, Teabing was also of substantial weight. In the film, Ian McKellen portrays him and although his determination comes through, he is much frailer than I expected. On the whole, with the exception of Hanks, the acting was neat, clean and well executed.

Cast: 4 stars

As befitting a film of international treasure hunting and shadowy secret societies. The Da Vinci Code features a satisfying dose of action. The movie includes a brief gunfight, a car chase in reverse, and plenty brandishing of firearms. Though not quite up to par with 007 type of over-the-top pyrotechnics and such, this movie satisfied my RDA of action.

Action: 3 stars

Watching some of the extra features, I realize what a challenge it may have been to film in The Louvre. All of the artwork in those scenes is apparently the real deal. My biggest complaint is that the director felt it necessary to enhance some of the symbols and clues artificially, when they were blindingly obvious in the first place. Is it really so difficult to see that a six-pointed star is made up of an upward pointing triangle and a downward pointing triangle? The screen on which Teabing illustrates some of the finer points of DaVinci’s “The Last Supper” comes in handy, as well as the images showing Langdon’s recollection of Newton’s headstone. So, it while it may have served well to illustrate some scenes this way, it was overused in the majority of scenes.

Visual: 2 stars

Here, I present the winning quote from The Da Vinci Code, “As long as there has been a one true god, there has been killing in his name.” How true and apropos. There weren’t any vocal failings, aside from the fact that Langdon never seemed surprised or convinced of what he was saying.

Dialogue: 3 stars

All in all, I was satisfied with the movie version of The Da Vinci Code. There were very few diversions from the original story and I have to give points for “shot on location”. Most of the acting was well done and I found it difficult to tear myself from the screen, even after the third go round. I do recommend picking the DVD up from the rental shoppe, but I would hold off on adding it to my personal collection. The features on the disc are a bit disappointing. Plenty of interviews and behind the scenes excerpts, but they only seem to be advertising the film rather than explaining it.

Alternate viewing choice: Raiders of the Lost Ark
IMDB site

Official site

Rotten Tomatoes Review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

A Sound of Thunder (2005)

Director: Peter Hyams
Format: DVD
DVD Features:
Starring: Ben Kingsley, Edward Burns, Catherine McCormack
Trailer

When I think of my favorite genres of film, “Sci-Fi” isn’t often one that comes to mind. There are just too many, especially with the rise of CGI, that are poorly constructed and even more pathetically acted. I read sci-fi novels and enjoy them, but their movie counterparts are almost always a disaster. So, when Dad asked me to go to the movie store and pick up something “science fiction”, I cringed and prayed for any new release that was remotely tolerable. We’ve all already seen War of the Worlds (both versions), so I knew that wasn’t going to fly. During my last sweep of the shelves, however, I came across A Sound of Thunder.

The main theme of A Sound of Thunder is the basic “butterfly effect” scenario. One of the cardinal rules of time travel is never to change even the smallest detail in the past. If even a butterfly is harmed, the future may be affected exponentially. In the year twentysomethingorother, Charles Hatton (Kingsley) has turned the invention of time travel technology into a lucrative business. For an exurbanite fee, the adventurous and social elite can spend a moment hunting game in the prehistoric past. Because the ancient beasts are moments before the point of a natural death (unbeknownst to the paying hunters) the past isn’t affected. That’s only as long as the hunting party remains on the path and doesn’t leave anything behind or take anything home. Inevitably, something has to go wrong. After a failed hunting trip, the team of scientists at TimeCorp (or whatever it was called) start to notice that their timing is off. That’s before the waves of evolutionary change begin to hit. The leading man, Travis Ryer (Burns) seeks the help of scientist Sonia Rand (McCormack) to figure out how to beat the clock and fix the past before it’s too late for the human race. Yes, it’s a plot line that film makers never seem to tire of. The time ripples are an interesting twist, showing progressively the impacts of their altered past and giving the characters something to race against.

The only actor in A Sound of Thunder that I recognized was Ben Kingsley. He’s a veteran of the semi-indie circuit, seen in such films as Species, Lucky Number Slevin, and House of Sand and Fog. He’s a fair actor, but I don’t see him starring in any Hollywood blockbusters. Edward Burns isn’t bad either and I can see him moving up to a Matthew McConaughey type of role. With the exception of those two, the acting was on par with a Sci-Fi Channel made for TV movie.

There is plenty of action to behold in A Sound of Thunder. Most of it consists of running and shooting. It’s the kind of action one might find in Jurassic Park. The waves of time catching up didn’t seem as regular as Sonia Rand would have you believe, but then again, we’re talking about time distortion here. It actually gets the pulse pounding in a couple of scenes (namely the subway sequence).

At the beginning of the movie, there is a horribly awful blue-screen effect that made my hopes sag for what was to follow. One viewer even remarks (on IMBD) that the background in this scene is on a loop. Eeesh. I don’t know how you can get much worse than that. But the dino-critters are not bad CGI and the overgrown city was almost convincing. I really thought that the subway scene was fun.

How did I manage to rent two movies in a row that have titles completely unfit for their content? A Sound of Thunder? C’mon people! My favorite line from the movie is, “What’s the point of having money if you can’t spend it on things other people can’t afford?”

Unless you’re keen on The Sci-Fi Channel, I don’t recommend this film at all. Granted, it wasn’t as horrible as Catwoman or the American version of Godzilla, but I could have gone the rest of my life without watching this one. Think Evolution meets The Butterfly Effect.

Overall Rating: 2 stars
Hottie Rating: 0 stars

Alternate viewing choice: The Butterfly Effect
IMDB site
Official site
Rotten Tomatoes Review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

I’ll Sleep When I’m Dead (2003)

Director: Mike Hodges
Venue: DVD
Trailer

The only complaint that I have with Netflix is that, often times, a disc will wait in my cue for several weeks before its turn to be shipped off in the mail. By the time that I get it, I can’t remember why I wanted that particular movie. Sometimes I just cruise around their site and click on whatever catches my fancy at the time. Other times, I get an interest in a certain actor and will rent anything with their name on it (anything that doesn’t look like a chick-flick). When I’ll Sleep When I’m Dead appeared in my mailbox, I remembered who’s filmography it came from, but my concept of the film was a good deal different from the reality of it.

Will Graham (Clive Owen) has spent the last 3 years living a quiet life in the forest; quite a change from the life he led as a gangster in the city. He’s left that life behind – or so he thinks. When his employment as a lumberjack is cut short, he decides to return to the city and check in with his brother Davey (Jonathan Rhys Meyers). Little does he know, just the day before his arrival, his brother had met an untimely end. So, he sets out – with little help from his severely dysfunctional family – to discover the reason behind his brother’s death and punish whoever may be responsible. The focus of this film is not actually Davey, as one might initially perceive. Rather, I saw the point being more about Will and the change – or inability to change – in his life, or in anyone’s life. I respect the choice of the director to create Will’s past out of character interaction, rather than flashbacks. Flashbacks have always seemed like the easy way out to me. Refraining from depicting Will’s former life visually serves to anchor the plot on the here and now and helps to maintain the focus of the story.

Plot: 3 stars

As I mentioned earlier, sometimes I get a fancy for a certain actor and decide to shop their filmography. The actor, in this case, is Clive Owen. I had seen him in Gosford Park and Closer. My interest was peaked by his performance in Sin City. I still haven’t decided if I like him or not though. After all, he doesn’t play the friendliest of characters. But, it’s that voice and that calm, cool delivery I can’t escape. Jonathan Rhys Meyers offers up a solid performance as the younger brother, even if it is a short part (and is, incidentally, quite the hottie). The mother (actually, I couldn’t quite tell if she was mom or not) of the two brothers (Helen) is played by Charlotte Rampling. Her character is completely devoid of maternal warmth and bitterly icy. I haven’t figured out what her motivations as the movie closes are, but she was perhaps the most complex person in the film. Although I disliked Mickser, the father figure of the boys, it is due entirely to the script and not at all to Jamie Foreman’s performance. In fact, it might be considered a testimony to it. The more I consider it, the acting was wonderful, but the roles themselves didn’t grab my interest as much as they should have.

Acting: 3 stars

If I was to be shelving movies at a rental store, I would file I’ll Sleep…under “drama” rather than “action”. For a movie about a former gangster, there is very little action involved. In fact, the film moves at a very slow pace. People walk slowly, move slowly, talk slowly and the story takes its own sweet time. A relaxed pace is not always a negative quality in a movie. Many Akira Kurosawa films are epically long, and still earn the description “masterpiece”. However, if you’re trying to watch this with an Attention Deficit Disorder afflicted teenager and a fidgety father, it can be painful.

Action: 1 star

I’ll Sleep When I’m Dead is beautifully filmed. Each frame is delectable and easily imagined as a postcard. Be sure to pick up the widescreen version (which is always preferable) so that you can fully enjoy each shot. It is imagery that illustrates the bridge between Will’s mountain man life and his return to gangsta, which is pivotal to the story. Costume and set design, while not surreal, are appropriate to the time and characters.

Visual: 3 ½ stars

As mentioned earlier, it is the dialogue in the movie that serves to describe Will’s former character. And, as the transition is so very important to the plot, the dialogue plays a vital role. I have to wonder what the person who titled this film was smoking. “I’ll sleep when I’m dead” isn’t even a spoken line in the movie, let alone descriptive of its content. One line that is spoken, however, is “You think you've changed, do you? You haven't changed. Not really. People like us don't change. Not deep down.” And that, I think, is the summing up of the film. Part of the reason that I’ll Sleep..moves so leisurely is its lack of dialogue, and what little there is can be quite confusing.

Dialogue: 2 stars

I’ll Sleep ..is not a movie that will make it onto my “to buy” list or even my “will watch again” list. The director seems to be attempting some sort of existential artsy beyondness, but it doesn’t work the right way. There are a few elements missing that would have pulled the film together more and still left some of the more interesting questions intact. The cinematography is fantastic, but the other factors don’t quite measure up.

Alternate viewing choice: Violent Cop
IMDB site
Official site
Rotten Tomatoes Review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Sleepy Hollow (1999)

Director: Tim Burton
Venue: DVD
DVD Features: trailers, photo gallery, interviews, featurette, director commentary
Trailer

Let me start by stating the obvious (to some). I am a Tim Burton fan. He’s got a distinctive sense of style, a great sense of humor and that certain finesse that few directors can touch. So, my review of any film directed by Burton is going to be a little biased. Conversely, the few movies that have disappointed on the scale of his other works, might otherwise have been given a good review, when compared to any common film. With that said, let’s take a look at Sleepy Hollow.

Hopefully, many people are already familiar with the story of Sleepy Hollow. I personally recall seeing the Disney animated version several times as a child and Burton reportedly based his version on that one. This new version of Washington Irving’s classic tale adds much more depth to the character of Ichabod Crane (Depp). After causing trouble in New York with his newfangled ideas of scientific research and criminology, his “superiors” sentence him to investigate the mysterious decapitations occurring in the village of Sleepy Hollow. Once he arrives, he is told the story of The Headless Horseman and sets out to disprove the myth and catch the real killer. However, his investigations lead him right back around to the world of magic and fantasy.

Plot: 4 ½ stars

As far as I am concerned, Johnny Depp is among the most talented (not to mention best looking) actors in the world. He’s also one of the most under-appreciated, in my opinion, as he has yet to be presented with an Oscar. He and Burton have a successful history together and he played a fantastic Ichabod Crane. Depp plays the character as an awkward and eccentric detective with a shadowy and troubling past and does it all in a beautifully humorous fashion. On the other hand, the worst casting call in Sleepy Hollow is the role of Christopher Walken as The Headless Horseman. Why cast an actor known for his brilliant performances and famous delivery as a character with virtually no lines!? It’s a travesty to be sure. Christina Ricci, who plays Crane’s love interest Katrina, didn’t seem very invested in the role to me. It was as if she was constantly distracted. I think any other similarly compensated Hollywood actress could have filled the role without much of a noticeable difference. Michael Gough, who plays Notary Hardenbrook, does the finest job of any of the village elders in Sleepy Hollow. Although his role isn’t a very large one, he is totally convincing in it. Miranda Richardson, however, is completely awful as Kitrina’s evil stepmother. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that she was reading from cue-cards.

Acting: 4 stars

It should already be obvious that Sleepy Hollow doesn’t feature any car chases or gun fights. But, it does have severed heads! (Yay for severed heads!) It has horse/carriage chasing and even witchcraft, wooden stakes, and an undead soldier. What more could an audience want? Did I mention that there are severed heads?

Action: 3 stars

As with most of Tim Burton’s films, expect a fantastic wardrobe of black and white stripes and that special brand of creepiness that pervades the entire set. The town of Sleepy Hollow is wonderfully absorbing due in large part to the set designs, costumes, lighting, make-up and other random features integrated throughout. The minimal CGI is not quite up to par with more recent films, but well done on the scale of the late 90’s.

Visual: 4 ½ stars

My favorite quote related to this movie isn’t in the script. Another interview I was reading for the film quotes the director as saying, "I've always wanted to make a movie where one of the characters didn't have a head." What’s that you say? “Not fair, you have to pick a quote from the film,” you say? Fine then! I guess I’m just so pissed off that Christopher Walken doesn’t have any lines that I got distracted. The best string of dialogue that comes to mind is the scene in which Ichabod is huddled in bed following his encounter with the horseman. “But it was a horseman…(pause) headless! (faint)” The line doesn’t look like much on paper, but the way Depp delivers it is hilarious.

Dialogue: 3 stars

When I saw this movie in the theater, back in ’99, I didn’t think much of it. I had been so psyched up about Burton’s rendition of the tale, that I was actually a bit disappointed with it (especially the acting). Now that I’ve seen it a few times on DVD, it’s grown on me, but it’s still not one of my favorites.

Alternate viewing choice: Delicatessen
IMDB site
Official site was not found
Rotten Tomatoes Review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

The Mothman Prophecies (2002)

Director: Mark Pellington
Venue: DVD
DVD Features: music video
Trailer

The trailer for this movie gave me chills from beginning to end. Often, the teaser for a film will do that, whereas the actual movie makes somewhat less of an impact. This was not the case with The Mothman Prophecies. Not only did the trailer raise hairs on the back of my neck, but I got that feeling constantly throughout the feature as well. I should mention though, that I have not read the book of the same name and doing so may have given me a different perspective. (I encourage anyone who has read the novel to leave a comment about your experience as pertains to the cinematic version.)

According to the closing message, The Mothman Prophecies, is based around an actual phenomenon experienced globally. People have reported seeing visions of a winged humanoid (mothmen) prior to catastrophic or otherwise significant events. Such is the case with John Klein’s wife (Debra Messing), just before their car careens off the road. In the hospital, following the accident, Mary fills a notebook with sketches of the shadowy creature she glimpsed. Some years afterward, John (Richard Gere) gets into his car and suddenly finds himself in West Virginia, hundreds of miles away, with no recollection of the journey. A bizarre experience leads him to meet Connie Mills (Laura Linney), a local law enforcement officer. When she mentions her recent troubles with citizens seeing “visions”, Klein decides to stick around and investigate.

Plot: 4 stars

I don’t usually go in for movies starring Richard Gere. It’s not that he is a horrible actor, he just isn’t on my list of favorites. The actors in this movie, however, all do a stand-up job in their roles. Linney makes a great small-town cop, trying to be skeptical but open at the same time. Gere is mostly convincing as a grieving reporter trying to wrap his head around the supernatural. Some combination of the story line and the performances really makes The Mothman Prophecies tingle.

Acting: 3 stars

Most of the action in this movie is consolidated into the climax. This is where all of the explosions and car crashes take place. However, the audience is made to sweat in anticipation of that climax via plenty of tension and de ja vue sensations. The Mothman Prophecies isn’t suffering due to its lack of combat, gunfire or chase scenes. The pace of the film is on target with keeping the audience interested.

Action: 3 stars

It’s not necessary to have a high degree of CGI in Mothman, so very few of the visual effects are achieved this way. One neat thing to watch for is the use of light and arrangement of objects that suggest the Mothman shape. Some shots are more obvious than others. Aside from that fun little visual, the movie is fairly unremarkable as far as effects are concerned.

Visual: 3 stars

The most intense scene dialogue-wise is Klein’s phone conversation with Ingrid Cold. Although somewhat spoiled by the trailer, it’s still creepy. It was well put together and succeeded in generating suspense and chills. The rest of the movie is fairly “blah” as far as characters’ verbal interactions.

Dialogue: 3 stars

To wrap up, despite starring one of my least favorite actors, The Mothman Prophecies was a great experience to watch. I love movies that deal with eerie coincidence! So, I’ve marked it on my list of movies to buy, as long as a good deal comes along.

Alternate viewing choice: The Ring
IMDB site
Official site was not found
Rotten Tomatoes Review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Seabiscuit (2003)

Director: Gary Ross
Venue: DVD
DVD Features: commentaries, history, making of, photographs
Trailer

I had hesitated for quite some time before seeing Seabiscuit. For one thing, horse racing has never been an interest of mine. For another, I wasn’t sure that I could see Tobey Maguire as anyone other than Spiderman. Its amount of critical acclaim (it was nominated for 7 Academy Awards) didn’t convince me either. However, when my father rented this movie for one of his friends, I decided that I might give it a shot, if only for the fact that it was a movie I’d never seen (there aren’t many).

This movie is the story of a racehorse, Seabiscuit, and his jockey, Red Pollard (Maguire), who rise to the top of the racing world in depression era America. Because his parents lack the ability to provide for their many children, Red is left to live on a horse ranch at a young age. He grows up handling the horses and fist fighting for money. Seabiscuit is a bit small as racehorse standards go, but full of spirit and untapped potential. These two underdogs (Red is too tall for a jockey) become a team under the training of Tom Smith (Chris Cooper) and the ownership of Charles Howard (Jeff Bridges). All of these characters mourn some sort of loss in their lives and their concentration on training horse and rider become a focal point for them and eventually a way to heal. As cheesy as the basic plot outline sounds, Seabiscuit really pulls off an inspiring and absorbing story. It’s not one that has been overused and overproduced.

Plot: 3 stars

After about the first half hour or so, I stopped seeing Maguire as Peter Parker and started to realize him as Red Pollard. I really hope that when the Spiderman series is over, he can move on from the roll and not be forever typecast. Bridges is a seasoned actor and makes a convincing ex-automobile tycoon. Cooper’s character is suffering the loss of the open range and finds a place caring for the animals in the arena. He acts as a kind of sage in the story. However, it’s a role I frequently see him play and I wasn’t able to generate much sympathy for the character.

Acting: 3 ½ stars

Seabiscuit is surprisingly good on action. Although they lack the fiery explosions of car racing, the horse races get the adrenaline pumping and genuinely entice routing for the star players. There are a few fistfights, seeing as how Pollard’s beginnings, and one of his handicaps, evolve from that occupation. I didn’t feel that the story lagged too much in any one place, so the action was well paced throughout.

Action: 3 ½ stars

Visually, the set design and costuming are successful in creating a 1920’s atmosphere. Old cars are a significant part of the storyline and also add to the flavor of the times. However, during the racing scenes, it is a little bit too clear that Maguire isn’t really atop a horse. Although I understand the insurance risks of having a Hollywood actor actually race a horse, I have seen movies where the effect is achieved more seamlessly than it was here. The countryside where Seabiscuit was filmed is very appealing, but nothing about the cinematography says, “Wow!”

Visual: 3 stars

This movie was basically on par with what I expect from the genre as far as dialogue is concerned. I vaguely remember a line about not “throwing away a life”, but nothing so inspiring as to plant itself firmly in my memory.

Dialogue: 3 stars

Finally, Seabiscuit was far better than I expected. Enjoyment of the film is not contingent upon a love of horseracing, so let that not be cause for hesitation when considering it as a viewing option. Probably not something I would run out and purchase, but not a movie I regret spending my time on.

Alternate viewing choice: Million Dollar Baby
IMDB site
Official site
Rotten Tomatoes Review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***