Review: The Incredible Hulk (Louis Leterrier, 2008)

This far surpassed my expectations after seeing the trailer and is EXACTLY what i wanted in a Hulk movie! It promised big things and it delivered, big time. In short-it was INCREDIBLE (sorry had to say it)!! At first it seemed they have tried to dismiss Ang Lee's original take and instead re-booted the entire franchise- new actors, new style and a new Hulk design. But we find out that it is a continuation of sorts, and starts where the last one left off. They just wanted to package it differently for Marvel's new future intentions (which you will understand with the last scene of this movie and the extra-special scene after the end credits of Iron Man which i hope you all caught!) Now i'm one of the very few people that really admired Lee's take on the comic in the original movie. Whilst everyone else was expecting mindless action (which is what we get here, but done to a perfected standard), i appreciated that he did it differently and from a psychological drama perspective where we really feel and understand Banner's inner torment properly and thoroughly. That, as we now see here, was the "origin" story- and so with this movie we cut to where it counts: the ass kicking! Wheras Lee's version was a slow, complex drama- this is just straight forward action of epic scales, which juxtaposes perfectly against it's predecessor. Gone is the long build up origin story- here we see the story set up in the beginning credits, and then what follows is a relentless action movie which moves at breakneck pace.

Hiding away in Brazil, Bruce Banner is still on the run from the US Army intent on capturing him and abusing his powers for their own personal use. Unable to catch him , they hire top KGB agent Emil Blonsky- the best soldier on the field. Even when he can't seem to bring The Hulk down, he decides to even the playing field by injecting himself with an even greater quantity of Gamma radiation than Banner was exposed to. Blonsky then transforms into the Abomination- a being with strength and anger that far exceeds even that of the Hulk. What follows then is the biggest, baddest most epic ass kicking i have ever witnessed on film! Norton is terrific as Bruce Banner (a different portrayal than Eric Bana's from the first movie, both work great), Liv Tyler is "meh" as Betty Ross (though her lines are pretty weak, her facial expressions do portray the character really well- its when she says nothing that really make her role work though she is no match for previous actress Jennifer Connelly). Stand out performance here, for me anyway, was Tim Roth as Emil Blonsky aka The Abomination. I've admired him as an actor for years now and here it seems he's just playing himself, but even then he oozes coolness and i thought he was great. William Hurt now plays General Thaddeus "Thunderbolt" Ross, and whilst he his sneaky, manipulative and menacing to a T i still thought Sam Elliot played it better in the first movie.

The action, at first, is given in suttle doses but when it gears up it literally unleashes hell! Exacty what we want to be seeing in a movie about a giant green angry creature! And when it kicks up near the end, it's unstoppable- perfect pacing for a Hulk movie. Action is intense the whole way through and the final battle between Hulk and The Abomination was mightily impressive; it was pretty long for a finale but even then i still wanted more- and that's saying something considering usually i can't wait for long battles to end (Transformers was guilty of this). CGI here is awesome, Hulk performance is brilliant and the choreography is mind-blowing and there are enough nods and homages to the comics, video games and original TV series to make it stand out (loved the new rendition of The Lonely Man theme from the 1970s show!).

I loved every second of Hulk's screen time and i wanted more! Even though i thought the original was awesome, they upped the stakes here and made him 10 times more angry and it worked a treat. Needless to say i was once again smiling like a kid every time Hulk showed up- bigger and badder than ever before! Director Louis Letterier (Transporter, Transporter 2) a veteran of stylish action movies gives us his piece de resistance here- and it really rocks!

Of course the movie does have it's faults- it seems disjointed at times and the pacing seems off, however it is understandable considering there were disputes between Universal, Letterier and Norton with the final cut of the movie, and so a good 70+ minutes were cut out of the film (which will be put back in for the Director's Cut Blu-Ray). So at times the movie seems a mess but i can see why the cut stuff out considering the first film didn't do particularly well as it was overlong. Still, there's enough depth in the film as needed between the action and it does it's job. There are also other faults but i was having way too much fun to even contemplate looking at those!

All in all a perfect Marvel comic book movie and a perfect Hulk movie- as well as being a perfect overblown wham BLAM action compliment to Ang Lee's original subdued drama. Lee's version played more like Ridley Scott's "Alien", and Leterrier's is more James Camerons "Aliens". Both go hand in hand very, very well!.

Verdict: Incredible and for the fans! 9/10

Review: Rob Zombie's Halloween (2007)

As a big fan of Rob Zombie I was very much looking forward to this film, having loved his stylish, gritty and powerfully visceral style in his critically acclaimed The Devil's Rejects. Whilst I found the same fresh tone in this "re-working/imaging/making" of a horror classic, it is of course not without its flaws, of which there are unfortunately plenty. I myself am not a massive Halloween fan and have only ever seen the first movie, so I thought this new remake was fine to an extent. However, talking to fellow fans of the series they felt that it completely messed around with Michael Myer's character, his past and his universe.

Here we get to see Michael's childhood, a dark and depressing one where we being to see all the factors which make him what he is. He, on the surface, seems like a normal 8 year old child but deep down is battling against angst, powerful emotions and disturbing urges his mind and body can't control. His family are the epitome of "trailer trash" - he is raised by his drunk, foulmouthed, jobless and abusive stepfather, his older teenage sister is the irresponsible school slut and his mother, who at least dearly loves him, is a stripper who can't handle the demands of rearing a family and is always at the end of her tether (excellently played by Sheri Moon Zombie, completely opposite to her role as the feisty and frankly insane Baby Firefly in House and Devil's and who is always a pleasure to watch). Myers is bullied at school relentlessly as he is at home by his stepfather and so, as external and internal factors reach a devastating balance, he completely loses sense which starts the chain reaction where becomes the legendary savage killer the series is infamous for. Act 2 is Myers growing up in a Sanitarium where psychiatrist Dr Sam Loomis (played by the always cool Malcolm McDowell), the only one who understands Myer's true inner being, tries to help him but to no avail as Michael becomes more and more recluse, eventually not speaking, eating and sleeping anymore and completely hiding away behind his obsession of masks. Act 3 is Myers, fully grown into a hulking figure of cold, black emptiness, (now played by 6' 8" Tyler Mane in a brutally awesome performance) escaping from his prison and going on the murderous rampage in his home town as seen in the original Halloween movie in a basic re-treading of the classic movie.

I didn't have a problem with this movie to be honest because this is Rob Zombie's vision and not a direct scene for scene remake, however the latter half of the movie goes against this and it turns out to be nothing more than the original movie albeit sped up to fit into the remaining time limit. Because I'm not familiar with the original Halloween movies this is probably why I was more forgiving, as a standalone film I liked it and thought it was far from the "mess" which people and fans have been saying it was. Alas this is a film which stands in the shadow of a classic series and so it will, no matter what, have a lot to answer for and so the backlash has been pretty big (even though the last few titles in the series have been less favourable).

Whilst Zombie does add some dimensions to the infamous Myers character and his past, it's not enough to make it any more interesting that what we have already seen a million times before in movies about psychopaths. Yes the character typically had issues which transformed into something far greater as is always done with all Hollywood psycho killers, and that's all that is shown here again albeit more stylistically. Zombie's directing is not at fault here as it suitably powerful and artistic, it's more so his writing which is poor that lets the movie down. That and the fact that there's really nothing new here to make it any different to what we have all seen a million times before in slasher films- it's the same old movie just looking different.

Whilst I love Zombie's original look and style this is still a predictable horror movie, more so being the same exact Halloween with a new look. Long term Fans of the series will no doubt be angered and should stay away but if you want a stylish, gory and innovative approach to the predictable by-the-numbers slasher movie then I say watch this. As a fan of Zombie's style and not a fan of Halloween, I enjoyed it, but I'm in the minority here. I rate this film high only gore, action, choreography, style, look, music (great score by Tyler Bates and the Halloween theme always kicks ass) and direction as a stand-alone movie. This director's cut DVD does have some slightly longer scenes and a very good alternative ending which works better than the one in the movie which is why I'm giving it a slightly higher score than the norm too.

As a Halloween series movie and a remake (along with writing and character issues) I would rate this lower. But I honestly say I was entertained by it, it was good for what it is and an interesting take on what essentially is a predictable teen slasher movie. I felt this was a more than a worthy addition to an otherwise dying franchise and definitely boosts it back to where it was before. Though many people will disagree, i think this more than makes up for all the crappy sequels and semi-sequels the series has produced over the last few years.

Verdict: An above average yet all too predictable slasher movie that entertains immensely. 7/10

Legend: Analysis of an Oddity

To those that don't know, when Ridley Scott's Legend was first released in 1985 it wasn't recieved well with US test audiences (mainly teenagers who all thought it was a bit funny and old-fashioned amongst other qualms), so Ridley Scott was forced to edit the movie, drop the Jerry Goldsmith classical score and bring in German electronic band Tangerine Dream to modernise and contemporise the feel of the film for the then MTV-savvy youth. Whilst the US got this new, different version, the rest of the world got the original peice of work, and as a result the movie became infamous and synonymous due to it's different, varied but still fantastic versions of the film. I grew up watching the Tangerine Dream version of the movie, but recently I bought the Region 1 (American) Ultimate Edition DVD which includes both versions of the film. I now have 3 versions of it- the version that is currently available in the UK (the only one out in the UK which is a different cut to others), the original Director's Cut and the US theatrical version. After watching all 3 back-to-back, here is what i think the pros and cons are for each version of Ridley Scott's underrated (and underappreciated) classic :

US Theatrical Version (Tangerine Dream soundtrack)

Pros
+the opening prologue music sets the tone well, as does the text
+good electronic music by Tangerine Dream throughout
+ a darker, more sinister tone through the whole film
+a cool retro 80s feel to it
+ Bryan Ferry in the end credits is a nice touch that adds to the 80s feel
+scene with Darkness in his lair at the start is more menacing and evil
+an MTV vibe

Cons
- editing sucks
-scenes don't make any sense now becuase of the excessive trimming
- way too short encounter with Meg Mucklebones leads to a wasted character
- "Loved by the Sun" near the end absoloutly KILLS the vibe of the movie, an awful, cliche cheese-ridden song that marrs the quality of the film
- the 80s vibe makes it look dated
-Darkness is seen at the start, kind of kills the surprise and terror of what he looks like
-Voice of father is annoying and doesn't work as well as the Director's cut
-an MTV vibe

Director's Cut (Goldsmith score)

Pros
+Longer scenes which make sense such as the conversation with Nell
+No retro 80s quality to it so it doesn't look dated, instead more timeless
+happier tone
+orchestral score makes it look and feel more like a ballet, which works really well
+Darkness is not seen till his entrance out of the mirror which makes it more terrfying and works better
+Voice of father is high pitched, hissing, makes it scary
+ Encounter with Meg is longer, better, more screen time and more characterisation for an awesome character
+no MTV vibe

Cons
-the Goldsmith score is hit and miss at times
-Goldsmith score is too uplifting and happy, and the darker vibe that the TD music adds is lost
-Lily can be very annoying in this version as all her scenes are longer
-no opening scrolling text, which i think worked well
-"My True Loves Eyes" i don't think works at all, and i personally hate the song

European DVD version

Pros
+Slightly longer scenes but not as near as long as the Director's Cut
+/- the Goldsmith score only

Cons
-lots of other minor scenes cut out
-Darkness spinning around in space at the end is cut out
-Voice of Father is the stupid one from the TD version, not the Director's Cut

This is basically the director's cut but slightly shorter with minor changes and more significant scenes cut out, essentially an inferior version to the Director's Cut so it is in fact the worst version out of all three.

Personally, i like Tangerine Dream's music and think it fits well with the movie, but the version of the film with that score is terrible- things are cut out here and there and disrupts the whole flow, and characterisation suffers becuase of this. The Director's Cut perfectly gives us fleshed out characters and scenes but the music is to a desired taste, it's nice orchestral musical gives it an operatic quality but the ethereal tone of Tangerine Dream's electronic soundtrack gives it a funkier vibe. Legend is indeed an oddity and in all it goes to personal taste, but here i think it's a question of music over story and vice versa- the TD version sounds great but the story suffers whilst the Goldsmith score sounds okay but the story is more fluid. I guess for me everytime i watch the movie will have to be twice to enjoy it on both accounts- both of them have merits which are far too good to miss.

Mistaken Symbolism

Games developers really need to be a bit careful when they delve into other cultures and religions for their "inspiration". I'm not religious in any way but i can see how it can be see as very insulting for those that are, especially when imagery, symbolism and ideas are used in video games which can be seen as ignorance and disrespect. Everyone is guily but none more so than the Japanese, who really should research a bit more before doing things as careless as they have done in many games over the decades.

In Super Castlevania 4 for the Super Nintendo games console there was an image of a Crucifix which is destroyed by lightning. They had to change it when the game came to the US for fears of complaints.

Castlevania Aria of Sorrow for he Game Boy Advance made the Hindu Goddess Kali into a monster that tries to kill you.

Shinobi for the PS2 also had a monster who looked exactly like a statue of Buddha.

Shiva, God of destruction and transformation ambiguity and paradox, is also the name of a blue demon woman with Ice powers which helps and is controlled by the player in battle in the Final Fantasy games by Squaresoft.

Agni and Rudra are the Gods of fire and wind in the Hindu religion. Games developer Capcom needed a cool sounding name for swords of fire and wind power in their game Devil May Cry 3 for the PS2, and some ignorant bozo thought it would work to name them after the Hindu gods. Now this is fine if you are just naming a weapon after a God, but the fact that the weapons are personifed into evil demon monsters that you have to fight first before they turn into weapons you can use is what takes the cake. That's like having a weapon which has the power to control water and calling it Moses, but Moses is a monster you have to fight first before you get to have the weapon named after him. Would anyone ever dream of doing that? of course not, it would cause outrage. So why do it with Hinduism? Pure ignorance if you ask me.

They pick things becuase they look cool with no disregard that it may be offensive to other religions. That kind of narrow-mindedness needs to be stopped. I think it's silly and i don't really care but considering we live in a world where religion is a huge thing and it can upset people and drive them to do silly acts in the name of it, i think we should be a little more careful regarding it. Otherwise we get angry insulted people rowing over it from all sides which is just pointless and uneeded.

Look at the whole Harry Potter thing where Christians boycotted it becuase it promoted dark magic and witchcraft.

Also look at that incident in Europe where someone drew a cartoon of Allah and muslims around the world were so offended they wanted to behead whoever did it.

And also recently where that teacher in Sudan named a teddy bear Mohammed and agian, they wanted to execute her.

It's a sad time we live in when such things can upset people but thats the way it is. And in that respect i'm saying that these games developers should be more careful when naming things after religious dieites or text when there are people out there willing to do crazy things in the name of religion.

Games may be popular world-wide but they don't get as much attention as novels and movies and tv shows. If Agni and Rudra depicted as demons were in a movie then it surely would have resulted in getting noticed and protested agianst.

The fact is Agni and Rudra are kind, heavenly Gods who bestow prosperity in the Hindu religion but in Devil May Cry 3 they are evil monsters in a hellish place you have to fight. Even is it is a reference, it's still insulting because they've given postive, Godly names to negative personas. Same with Kali and Shiva- these are dieties people worship yet they are depicted as devils/monsters that try to kill you in the Castlevania and Final Fantasy games. Of course this is offensive to Hindus, it's absurd that Capcom even put them in there. I remember playing DMC1 and one of my christian freinds was angry at the use of christian text and imagery in the game, especially showing Mundus as a Lucifer/fallen angel figure, the last levels blatantly being fought in some pseudo-Heaven and Hell and Trish in a crucifixtion pose, despite her being a demon created by "the devil". I laughed at her at first but becuause she held religion dear to her i can understand where she was coming from. Just becuase we don't find it offensive doesn't mean they don't.

Sure, we can see it as "references" to religion and Gods, but other's won't. There's a fine line between "homage" and insult, spcially when it concenrs religion. To us, we just see a bearded guy who made up a bunch of stories years ago. To them, it's Jesus Christ- saviour of saviours, king of Kings, son of God. To religious people this man actually LIVED and will come back one day, and everything he said is the truth. They see things differently, and hold their life to it with infinite respect. And in this crazy world we live in where people are willing to take their own life for a religion the whole-heartedly agree in, it's very careless and stupid for games companies to be taking this kind of narrow-minded approach to religious text and imagery in games. Yes it's just a video game, but it doesn't matter- if it insults a religion then it can upset the world. It can cause a lot of unnecssary hassle and frankly the world's already in a dire state already, last thing we want is to piss off some religious extremeists agian.

Religion is far too powerful a weapon these days, over the half the world embrace some form and it's a way of life for people, they believe it with their whole bodies. Half the world's wars have been fought over some kind of religious dispute- and the fact is it's always been around and it's here to stay, and thats the sad state of it all unfortuenatly which means holding our tongue when discussing it for fear of upsetting minorities, countries, even nations. But that defies the definition of free speech- what exactly is it? And do we really have it? Not really.

Battle Royale: The Issues

I was watching this the other day on TV (haven't seen it in ages) still an entertaining film, but there was something that bugged me about the whole BR program in the first place: Rather than just have random schools and classes picked to play the BR game, i felt it would have been much better if the people forced were kids with a track history of being ASBO/nuisances/hoodlums/punks.

It's kind of silly that generally nice, kind, polite and happy kids that aren't screwed in the head who care about getting an education and want to do something with their lives are chosen to play the game. To put it simply- anyone with a record of some sort, whether criminal or not, should have automatically had their name put into a database for the game, not just random schools and classes with nice kids that have done nothing wrong.

I know the game's purpose is the Government's desperate and radical way of cutting down on the troublemakers of the country thus weening the future so only "worthy" people inhabit it, but come on- some generally nice kids were killed off for no apparant reason except the fact that the school was chosen in a "random lottery" way. I think whoever made up that law should have thought about it more.

All i understand is the description at the start of the movie, where it explains that society has collapsed and kids were rebelling agianst the adults to make it a more dangerous place to live, and BR was a legitamte way of how adults fought back. Sure, but not all the kids were being idiots- hence not all the kids should have been forced to play the game, just the troublemakers as punishment. And then it would have been the survivor from that roster who would have learnt the lesson and then has the decision to turn their life around for the better. If they didn't, then they would have probably died in the game.

I just can't seem to understand how killing off the good kids too would help in the detoxification of the country. Surely it's adding to the problems and now you have a country that will be full of the screwed-up/punk kids that have won BR too? For example, the winner of the game shown at the start, how can she ever move on from her nightmarish experiences of the game and how is her mental instability supposed to help in society? Constant mental breakdowns would plague her and ruin her life, probably leading to suicide at some point, the same affect with anyone whho survived the ordeal. She's as good as useless in society now and can probably never make do in the real world wheras she would have if she had never been invloved- so agian BR is making things even more worse to the individuals involved.

Gather the fact that (from what i gather) this game happens every year (or even more often) and it's really not doing anything positive to soceity, ultimatly creating a situation where the kids unite and rebel in the sequel through acts of extreme terrorism trying to prove a point. And if the kids didn't fight back, the adults of the children involved would have.

I know it's a work of fiction but still these questions plagued me throught and detracted from my overall enjoyment. I would have liked it more if they were all thugs playing the game, and then we find out that they aren't really all that bad after all, just misunderstood, being the way the are becuase life/upbringing/other personal issues have made them who they are, and they learn about themselves and know they have failed and see their flaws and decide to do something about it, turn a new leaf etc. I think we would have felt sorry for them more once we got to find out about the characters much more this way, as we do with the messed up charaters in the movie who seem evil but really aren't (like the girl who was abused as a kid). I believe no-one is really bad in this world just misunderstood/lost, so in that sense as an audience we would have found out that we got them all wrong, just like all the adults did when they passed the law in the first place.

Considering the world is in a shithole right now and Governments in every country are doing everything they can to stop kids shooting/stabbing/murdering etc people (and failing to do something about it) i can totally see something like a BR program (to an extent) happening as a realistic form of punishment, it's certainly a lot more believable than bringing back capital punishment. Okay so the movie is entirly a work of OTT fiction, i'm not suggesting they do it how it is in the movie with neck-bombs and weapons like a Running Man type game, but sending off kids to a contained island to learn to work together and a chance to change themselves as a form of punishment is very believable, and a lot less harsh than any form of normal prison which would screw them up even more.

In that sense ony the people worth punishing should have gone. They should also have been given sentences through court hearings and verdicts and the public given a choice whether to send them there or not. At least it makes it more believable than a "random lottery".

I just like my films to have a certian foundation for their arguments, sure they do a simple enough job explaning why BR exists but too many questions are left unanswered becuase of this which gets in the way of me enjoying the movie as it should. Sorry, i just ask a lot of questions as to why thats all.

Good film nonetheless, a hell of a lot better than the sequel. However i'm not looking forward to the American remake (damn you!) but i hope it answers my dilemma properly.