azulocean-reviews

[azulocean-reviews]

Spectre: Film Review

Bond, Generic Bond. A film stirred but not shaken. A spectre of better films.

These best describe the 24th entry in the dashing spy’s entry. A film that keeps the pot bubbling, but does nothing new to surprise the audience. A plot sampled from previous entries and other films and painfully familiar dialogue, coupled to meddling with the Craig films’ past, all carve a message of mediocrity upon MI6’s wall (or what’s left of it).

Perhaps this is a touch harsh; Spectre has much going for it. The action is gripping, there are witty one-liners, the Bond Girl is stronger-than-usual, and the musical score surpasses its predecessor. And yet What’s worse is that I can’t tell whether the film’s flaws are the result of laziness or trying too hard.

The plot points are regurgitated with sense of neither innovation nor irony. James Bond [Daniel Craig] is once again rogue and summarily suspended, and again slips custody with greater ease than in Quantum of Solace. The Bond girl is supposedly empowered but is still easily-seduced and requires rescuing (and Madeleine Swann [Léa Seydoux] is combat trained). The villain, like many before him, is God of terrorists, all-knowing of things he shouldn’t and omnipotent over things that couldn’t possibly be done.

An additional lash must be given to the dialogue. While it is serviceable at large and occasionally clever it contains many clichés that shouldn’t have been written nor delivered with such lack of self-awareness. (You’re-Bluffing-Am-I? induced a heartfelt eyeroll.) B-grade romantic comedies have more snappy sensual banter, and Franz Oberhauser [Christoph Waltz]’s lines consist largely of past action villain tripe. Care was taken over the various one-liners, and seemingly nothing else.

But the opening song, despite some semi-deserved backlash from critics, is satisfactory and highly enjoyable on both its own merits and as a Bond theme. Sam Smith’s voice possesses the power needed, but his crooning tendencies and slips into falsetto betray the song’s inherent power; a more heavy approach was needed. Extra props are in order to Simon Hale for his excellent orchestral arranging. The gravitas lost in Sam Smith’s scattershot is regained in the weighty strings and brass. (However, the trend of not including the song on the album release must stop. Casino Royale, Skyfall, and now Spectre suffer this sin. The songs are integral to Bond’s musical legacy, and not including them is an affront.)

Credit must be given to the opening scene. The film opens with a gorgeous continuous shot in Mexico City during La Dia de los Muertos, establishing location and seamlessly settling upon Bond and his gone-in-a-heartbeat paramour. It follows the agent to the roof where he sets his sights upon his target, signaling that Bond is back. Less impressive is that the action sequence is set off by incompetence from the “professional” Bond. Worse, this impressive sequence ends in a problem that haunts the movie: Bond is hunting a character we know nothing about, and yet is supposed to have significance to the plot.

That problem can be applied to the film as a whole. The titular organization is supposed to be a global shadowy puppetmaster, orchestrating the plots of all previous Bond escapades. But rather than being a gut-punching revelation it comes off as the writers having run out of ideas and plundering the past instead of coming up with something new.

Beyond invalidating the previous events it simply makes no sense. The villain is significant only to those who have seen prior films (I myself had to Google him) and relies entirely on that foreknowledge for his personal tie to Bond. Add to that the fact that the events and deaths of Casino Royale and Skyfall are rendered incomprehensible. Neither film left room for a larger organization, as they were explicitly stated to have acted alone. Rewriting canon can be done well, but not when it reeks of cheap plot twist.

Thomas Newman’s score is largely free of such issues. While he misses a time or two that would be well-served by a Norman-Barry theme quote the rest of his score is magnificent. The trademark Newmanisms are out in full force, but blend better with the trademark John Barry/David Arnold sound. Musical localization is excellent, with Newman drawing from Mexican music and Catholic-style choirs as needed by the setting. The score is still a touch too friendly with John Powell’s Bourne music, but the sound remains fresh and more in-line with the franchise’s musical legacy.

All of this mixes together into a film that is consistently engaging in its parts, but utterly fails to bring any significance to itself, Craig’s arc, or the franchise in general. The writing is on the wall indeed. It’s not that 007 is outdated. It’s that the franchise desperately needs its martini shaken, and hopefully before that writing is tattooed onto Daniel Craig’s arm. 6.25 / 10

[azulocean-reviews]

Film Review: How To Train Your Dragon 2

For fans of the hit 2010 film How To Train Your Dragon, the wait is over. The original film was a surprise hit, with audiences being wowed by its superb animation, deft voice acting, poignant story, and vibrant score. It garnered significant critical praise, even being nominated for many awards. Unsurprisingly, a sequel was announced soon after highly positive word-of-mouth sent its box office returns skyrocketing. Several challenges awaited the creators in charge of the highly-anticipated sequel. They would have to expand the world of the Vikings, as dragon-riding would open up whole new possibilities of exploration. Another challenge awaited: the need to realistically age Hiccup and the rest of the cast. The filmmakers specifically endeavored to avoid the pitfall of many animated sequels; keeping too much the same and rehashing. At this they have succeeded, crafting a sequel that is different from the first, yet similar enough to not alienate returning audiences. The final challenge was the most basic, and yet the most elusive in any area: to make it good. Did they succeed?

For the most part, the answer is a dynamic and resounding Yes.

How To Train Your Dragon 2 picks up five years after the events of the first film. Berk and her inhabitants are at peace with the dragons, having seamlessly integrated the once-hated creatures into their society. Now dragons and humans coexist happily, working and playing alongside each other. But all is not well in the idyllic Viking paradise. Drago Bludvist, a man hellbent on controlling Vikings and dragons alike, has returned to the Barbaric Archipelago. Hiccup must find a way to stop him on his path while simultaneously finding his own place among his people in the new world that he ushered in.

This film is ambitious, that much is clear right out of the gate. DreamWorks immediately shows off their immensely-improved animation in a stunning dragon racing sequence, with narration, visuals, and music calling back the first film gloriously. The feel of the first film is immediately recalled, with the sense of joy and adventure infusing the new dragon sport and the whole of the newly-expanded world.The story pulls no punches in its most daring moments, and consequently comes off as a highly mature film in the wake of the comparatively-juvenile Frozen. DreamWorks has truly stepped up their game, as films like this are a far cry from the banal Shark Tale and Shrek the Third.

The plot is quick and complicated, which can be a huge problem for films that barely top 100 minutes in length. How To Train Your Dragon 2 generally manages to avoid some of the issues inherent in that scenario, but falls prey to others. There is a lot going on in this film, both in terms of visuals and narratives. It throws numerous twists at the audience, with mysterious family members and menacing villains emerging from the wings, along with new developments in the dragons. The film remains light and nimble throughout the rapid plot, never boring and only occasionally seeming rushed. The story is unflinching, and even has a couple sucker punches in store for anyone expecting lightweight Disney affair. It is truly heartening to see an animated film take such a risk in a genre that is usually reserved for children’s entertainment. This is exactly what is needed in a society where pandering films like The Lorax break the box office.

The acting continues to impress, with Jay Baruchel lending Hiccup his awkward-but-confident air and Gerard Butler giving Stoick his mighty Viking bombast. Of particular note is Cate Blanchett, joining the cast as Hiccup’s mother, Valka. Blanchett lends her character a sense of elegance and grace, as well as a sense of wildness. Djimon Hounsou is added as well, voicing the blood-crazed foreigner Drago Bludvist. His performance is of special note as well; he delivers some of the more clichéd lines with such vigor that he convinces the audience to ignore their somewhat cheesy nature. What could have been just a silly villain is instead elevated to a truly intimidating antagonist by Hounsou’s inspired performance. Drago’s “Yell at them!” strategy for dragon dominance, which could have been cheesy beyond belief, is rather effective. One would almost believe that Mr. Hounsou could bring a dragon to his feet with the power of his voice alone.

Some issues do present themselves in the course of the story. The focus is almost entirely on Hiccup, Stoick, Valka, and Toothless. The film would have lacked the cohesion if it had not, but the other characters, even the villain, feel underdeveloped. Drago comes off as more of a Saturday Morning Cartoon villain due to some goofy lines about how the dragons will all be his, despite a compelling backstory. The fellow teenagers from the first movie are woefully underdeveloped, some only receiving fewer than five lines apiece. They do each get their moment in the limelight, but they are underutilized, with nothing significant being added to their established traits from the first film. However, none of the problems detailed here detract from the film in a significant manner. There is nothing truly wrong with the plot and characters of How To Train Your Dragon 2. All that would be needed to fix these issues would be a longer run time for the film, as nothing could be restructured without detrimental effect to another aspect.

No review of How To Train Your Dragon 2 would be complete without mentioning DreamWorks’ specialty: the film’s impressive visuals. DreamWorks Animation has long been acclaimed for their stunning work in visual effects, and this offering is no exception. You, the audience, feel as if you were actually riding on the backs of dragons, swooping and diving in some shots that rival the first film. The amount of detail put into each scene is highly impressive. Minute movements and reactions are constant, from both the humans and the dragons. Many of the visuals in this film look real, like there were actually dragons there. Of special note is Valka’s companion Cloudjumper. His design is one of the franchise’s most unique, seeming to draw simultaneously from bats and owls in design and mannerisms. His personality is almost entirely established through body language, much like Toothless in the first entry, and all in the background. Despite this the audience is made to feel as though they have known Valka’s partner as long as any other dragon.

John Powell returned to compose the sequel’s music, much to the rejoicing of film music fans everywhere. His score for How To Train Your Dragon received critical acclaim, with many critics and fans considering it to be one of the best scores for animation in history. The sequel’s score is equally as strong, if not necessarily as brilliant. The music’s tone is much darker and dramatic than before, with much more emphasis on action scoring than the beauty and majesty of the first. He reuses familiar themes from the first film, like Test Drive, Romantic Flight, See You Tomorrow, and Astrid Goes For a Spin, and introduces some fantastic new themes.  The theme of discovery, often associated with Valka, is beautiful and poignant, lending itself to many iterations ranging from introspective to joyful. The other immediately evident theme is For the Dancing and the Dreaming, a folk tune that was conceived as a courting song for Valka and Stoick. Add in some dark and intimidating themes for Drago, and you have a highly competent sequel score. Like the accompanying film, its high points never surpass the first, but the level of quality and maturity shown in John Powell’s work puts it at least on par with How To Train Your Dragon.

How To Train Your Dragon 2 is a fine film, one of the strongest that DreamWorks has put out thus far. It is poignant, beautiful, brutal, tearwrenching, and joyful in its entirety. It does everything that a sequel should, expanding both its world and the characters within it. It is truly films like this that may cement DreamWorks as being the best animation company in business today. . It never hits the high points that the first did, but the film as a whole is emblematic of the overall raised bar that DreamWorks has come to embody.

Pros: Good story, excellent acting, eye-popping visuals, top-notch score, sum-of-the-parts result that compares favorably with the first.

Cons: Somewhat rushed in places, clichéd-but-servicable villain, underdeveloped side characters.

Final Grade: 8.5

A last note about this film: I have gone to see How To Train Your Dragon 2 in theaters twice since it was released, and will see it a third time in the near future. For reference, I rarely see a film more than once in theaters, and never that many times. HTTYD 2 is the first in years to make me do that, so take that as a statement of its quality alone. 

[azulocean-reviews]

Film Review: Maleficent

There is a new contender in the cinematic slots of the CGI-laden summer blockbuster. It isn’t a superhero or testosterone-laden action film, but rather a fairy tale from Disney. Enter Maleficent. It aims to reimagine the classic story of Sleeping Beauty, albeit through the eyes of a significantly more sympathetic villain. Maleficent is no longer a force of pure and undiluted evil, but rather a young fairy who seeks vengeance for a terrible wrong done to her.

Let’s get right down to it. Plotwise, Maleficent is a mess. It is a rushed and disjointed affair, relating little to the either the original story or Disney film. It draws too little from the original film to be recognizable, and lacks enough of its own story to set itself apart properly. It isn’t a behind-the-scenes affair like Wicked, instead opting to outright change virtually all ofSleeping Beauty’s story. Much like Frozen, this is only a problem when the story substituted is inferior to the original. And Maleficent falls far short of the line marked by the animated classic.

The acting is a mixed bag, owing in part to the script, which gives the non-CGI characters few lines, most of which are stilted and clichéd. The king, whose domain is at war with the Moors, is particularly poorly-written, as he rarely, if ever, steps beyond a simple one-dimensional villain role. The Prince is even worse, appearing in the film only to subvert the True Love’s Kiss, which is barely a blip on Maleficent’s cluttered radar. However, some performances do shine through the mucky script and direction. Angelina Jolie shines like a fiery star as Maleficent, perfectly capturing everything that made the original character so enjoyable. She’s worth the price of admission alone, as she goes a long way towards redeeming the wretched script and plot. Elle Fanning and Sam Riley, playing Aurora and the Raven respectively, are similar standouts. Fanning plays her character with a sort of innocent charm, somehow managing to conjure a character with more substance than Briar Rose of the original. (Though, in hindsight, that’s not a hard hurdle to overcome.) Riley is charming in a man-boyish way as the Raven, summoning charisma that makes it easy to imagine that Maleficent would find his company pleasant. These three actors have an excellent chemistry with each other, achieving their believability even with the writing working against them. Sadly, most of the other actors, such as Imelda Staunton and the rest of the fairies, are relegated to little more than miswritten bit parts.

The visual effects are competent in a technical manner, but the deployment of several fall short. The shots of the respective Moor and human kingdoms are lovely, as are the animation of the Moorland inhabitants. It does appear that the visual effects team borrowed much from those that came before, as the forest and rivers recall Avatar with surprising clarity. However, much of the grandeur breaks down when it comes to incorporating actors with the CGI. The flying effects in particular were never convincing in the least. They only ever looked like Jolie had been hung by wires and the wings grafted on by computers. Such overuse and misuse of computer effects make the viewer long for the days of Superman, which could make you believe a man could fly with only practical effects.

The music was quite good, unlike its surrounding movie. James Newton Howard is on board to supply Maleficent with what he described as a Wagner-style score. He largely accomplishes his goal for the film, accentuating the characters and action with soaring themes and dark, dramatic tones as appropriate. It doesn’t stand out particularly, but it is a refreshingly orchestral score, free from intrusive and inappropriate electronics. It’s a solid effort, lovely and deliciously dark with the onscreen action. It’s far from a classic, but it deserves a better film for it to grace its appearance with.

All in all, Maleficent is a poor effort, made more disappointing with all the talent and effort that appears to have been put into it. The film is a sad example of style over substance, as all the glitz and glamor this side of Scotland cannot disguise a feature that is flawed on basic levels. Its script and direction are exceedingly unaccomplished, and the only good performances are in spite of the above factors. It’s perhaps a step more sophisticated than its seasonal action counterparts, but only just. It still stands as a high-budgeted mess, with very few of the filmmakers’ marks being hit. Go for the performance of Angelina Jolie and James Newton Howard’s music, but otherwise save your 97 minutes if any depth, intrigue, or nuance is expected of this trainwreck of a film.

Pros: Quality performances from Angelina Jolie, Elle Fanning, and Sam Riley. The visual effects when not imposed on the actors.

Cons: Sloppy story and stilted dialogue. Talent of actors wasted by poor screenwriting. Many effects look “off”.

Final Grade: 5.25

[azulocean-reviews]

Film Review: X-Men Days of Future Past

Newest in the line of summer superhero movies is the much-anticipated follow-up to 2011’s X-Men First Class, X-Men: Days of Future Past. It is largely inspired by the comic series of the same name, in which the future for the mutant population is dark indeed. Robotic hunter-killers known as Sentinels hunt down and kill most mutants who have evaded initial capture. Only handfuls, including fan-favorites such as Professor Xavier, Magneto, Storm, Shadowcat, and Wolverine, have escaped the mutant holocaust.  Their desperate plan is to send someone back in time to avert the event that precipitates this dark future: the death of weapons developer and military scientist Bolivar Trask at the hands of a mutant.

The stakes are set high from the start both in terms of the plot and the fan expectations for the film. The X-Men cinematic series have had a checkered past, to say the least, ranging from average to excellent to the execrable. It was Days of Future Past’s responsibility to prove that 20thCentury Fox could follow up X-Men: First Class with a film of similar caliber. With Bryan Singer, director of the first two installments (and the most acclaimed until X-Men: First Class) back at the helm, signs were looking good for the future, save for the mutants.

X-Men: Days of Future Past has a very complicated story that throws many characters and setpieces at the audience in rapid succession. This can be quite difficult for a film to pull off, especially an action-oriented flick like this one. It accomplishes the task relatively well, although I did leave the theater confused. Days of Future Past snarls the X-Men film continuity more than any previous installment, as it disregards events from the series’ lesser-quality movies.

Days of Future Past’s status as a follow-up is also perplexing, as it doesn’t build upon The Wolverine’s story or deal with any of the plot ramifications introduced within. It picks and chooses which films to build upon, to the point that a disclaimer at the start as to which it involves would have been helpful. A newcomer to the film series would almost be better off.

The acting is generally quite good, with James McAvoy, Jennifer Lawrence, Patrick Stewart, Michael Fassbender, and Ian McKellen  turning noteworthy performances, the latter two despite the near-cameo nature of their roles. Peter Dinklage as Trask is also a standout, presenting a powerful presence in spite of his small stature. He also manages to avoid the common pitfall of the “Very Evil and The Actor Knows It” manner of portrayal, lending the character a sense of nuance. McAvoy and Fassbender continue their fantastic trend as young Professor Xavier and Magneto respectively. Both have effectively captured the tone and attitudes of their preceding actors magnificently.

Visual effects are excellent, as is par for the course in the modern action movie.  The rendering on the Sentinels is worthy of particular praise. The mutant-eradicating robots are highly intricate in design and operation, and are deployed in excellent fashion. They summon a sense of elasticity and power simultaneously, feeling intimidating despite their spindly nature. Also of note are the slow-motion segments with Quicksilver. During these, the hypersonic mutant rearranges his surroundings and wreaks havoc in one of the most humorously-choreographed scenes to grace an action movie in recent times.

The film’s music was composed by Bryan Singer’s regular co-conspirator John Ottman. He seems to have taken a page out of the Zimmer School of Action Scoring, as he employs string ostinatos, thundering percussion, and even the Foghorn of Doom. Employing these if one is not Zimmer can be a risky move, as many have tried to copy the formula and have wound up sounding like a generic knockoff. Ottman manages to avoid this potential detriment for the most part, using most of the components to his advantage. It comes off as being a bit anonymous overall, but it gets the job done while being a good deal of fun at the same time.

Overall X-Men: Days of Future Past is a noteworthy film. It simultaneously meets the high bar set by recent superhero films and raises it for the franchise as a whole. However, it is not without its flaws. The plot is complicated and relies on the audience having some knowledge of the prior films. It tries to fit a good deal into a 131-minute-runtime, which does lead to some confusing moments, in addition to neglecting the future world’s plotline.  It comes recommended, but with some tempering of expectations in mind. A cinematic masterpiece it is not, but as far as popcorn films go you could do far worse.

Pros: Top-notch acting and visual effects, engaging story.

Cons: Confusing plot and continuity, underdeveloped side characters.

Final Grade: 7.25

[azulocean-reviews]

Film Review: Star Trek Into Darkness

Note: This review will contain spoilers.

  So, this afternoon my father and I went to sample the new installment in the legendary Star Trek franchise. It’s been all over Tumblr, due both in part to the innate nerdiness of the source material, and the notable British talent starring in the film. The reviews for the film have been largely positive, with a few nay-sayers. I went into the movie with an aim to be entertained, but also with a critic’s view, with overall and musical quality in mind.

The initial question of a sequel is “Does it live up to and do justice to the original?” The answer is a resounding “Yes!” STID is highly enjoyable, with some of the best acting and special effects I’ve seen in quite a while. STID also backs up its dazzling visuals with an excellent plot, one that is more personal and nuanced than 2009’s Trek. The story borrows characters from past ST movies, including Carol Marcus and Khan Noonien Singh, although their roles are different than in Wrath of Khan. The principle cast delivers superior performances, with each character being given their five minutes in the spotlight. Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto in particular are especially good. Everyone fondly remembers Shatner’s endearingly over-the-top performance of Kirk in TOS, and Nimoy’s stoic and powerful Spock. Both Pine and Quinto show their predecessors one-up. I’m hesitant to label them superior to the original, but the new cast definitely lives up to the sizable legacy. The many passing references only add to the quality, and often add some much-needed levity to a situation that would have been melodramatic otherwise. STID has less comedic occurrences than 2009, but it still slips some in to lighten the moment.

The visual effects are excellent here. The starships have never looked better, and, surprisingly, there is less lens flare than in 2009. The starship combat is, like 2009, more nuanced than before. Most sci-fi movies subscribe to the “Made of Explodium” trope, meaning that ships tend to explode upon defeat.  JJ Abrams’s Star Trek movies do not do this, instead showing the starships being shot apart, which is much more realistic. The new “warp-out” effect is also a welcome addition.

As stated, one of my interests in seeing Into Darkness was the music. I’m a huge soundtrack buff, as I’ve stated before, and was impressed by 2009’s score.  One of my concerns was that Michael Giacchino would recycle too much music, not write enough new music. My fears were not realized, as he composed new themes, and re-used previous ones in innovative ways. However, it has its share of cliché moments, like the single held string note over a somber moment, or sharp percussion and brass over an action scene. These are generally par for the course with action movies, and it doesn’t detract, but I was hoping that it would avoid the “been there” element that often accompanies action scores. That being said, it’s a great score, with some surprising and not unpleasant choices, but not one that would contend for Best Ever.

For all its quality, Into Darkness lends itself to some minor criticism. The inclusion of Khan as the main villain has the initial “No way!” factor, but it has the flip effect of rendering the film less individual. Even if the film has minimal support from past installments, it still devalues Cumberbatch’s character slightly, since it’s not wholly original. That being said, it’s a very minor gripe, and I mean miniscule. Benedict Cumbarbatch delivers an awe-inspiring performance, one that lives up to Ricardo Montalban’s memorable portrayal.  The ending irks me slightly as well. The bad guy has been defeated, the victims mourned, and the survivors strengthened with new resolve. The ending seems to wrap everything up too neatly, with everyone happy despite the carnage and ready to continue exploring.  It’s more of a personal gripe, but endings like this seem too happy for the content of the film.

In summary, I think Star Trek Into Darkness is a fine film that lives up to the legacy of previous installments despite a few very minor flaws. It surpasses 2009’s Star Trek in almost every way possible, and sets a new bar for the series. I highly recommend it.

Pros: Top-notch acting and dazzling visual effects in addition to excellent writing make this film one of the best Trek films yet. The score gets the job done, and has some great moments. Chris Pine displays the best acting of his career thus far. A strong supporting cast rounds out the experience.

Cons: The villain is a TOS alt-reality revision, which may irk those hoping for an all-new cast of characters. The ending seems too neat.

Final Grade: 7.25

[azulocean-reviews]

Film Review: Imaginaerum

A few days ago I received my copy of the long-awaited filmImaginaerum, the pet project/brainchild of the Finnish power metal band Nightwish, and their frontman in particular, Tuomas Holopainen. If you are reading this, then it’s quite likely that you know of what I speak. For those not in the know, Imaginaerum is a movie based on the concept album of the same name by Nightwish. It’s about a dying composer who has descended into dementia, and his daughter and his shared quest to recover his memories.  For those who care, the score was adapted from the album’s themes. (Now note that as a Nightwish fanboy this movie was a real treat for me.)

The first thing that a moviegoer should note about Imaginaerum is that it’s quite unconventional when it comes to your typical movie experience. It relies less, for the most part, on dialogue and action than it does on music and stunning visuals. And does it do so gloriously.  Imaginaerumis one of the most (no pun intended) imaginative films I’ve seen visually. It truly does feel like a dark twisted fantasy, with visual effects of a quality that one wouldn’t expect from a relatively low budget movie. Mr. White, the friendly-but-somewhat-creepy snowman is portrayed brilliantly, especially considering the fact that several of his appearances were full costume, with only the mouth being CGI.

The plot is highly unusual for a movie. It’s much more intellectual and high-brow than a lot that graces movie theaters nowadays. The story is essentially about the afore-mentioned composer going through his deteriorating mind, trying to regain his memories before he dies. His estranged daughter is going through a similar process in the real world alongside one of her father’s former bandmates. There’s a lot of symbolism and headscratchers that you’ll ponder as you go to bed that evening. The little nods to the band have some interesting implications for Nightwish in real life. One wonders just how Tuomas sees the band in his future. The actors are all very good. I’m not sure of their fame domestically, but I hadn’t heard of any actors in the film. However, lack of wide recognition hardly indicates quality. Everyone in this film performs magnificently. The members of Nightwish have drop-in roles at two points in the film, which are a nice treat for fans viewing the movie. That’s to say, 95% of the audience.

And the music, can’t forget that. I was expecting great things from a score of a Nightwish film. Composer Petri Alanko of Alan Wake fame was responsible for the arrangement of themes from the Imaginaerumalbum for the film. He does a fine job, with the tracks sounding fresh and new.  Some are simply orchestrated, and don’t sound especially different besides re-orchestrating, and some are remixed and rearranged completely. Three songs weren’t orchestrated, but they appeared in the movie. “Slow, Love, Slow” as a song in a jazz club, “I Want My Tears Back” as a background instrumental, and “Scaretale” in a Circus of the Damned.

Imaginaerum, however, is not without its flaws. It is fortunate that dialogue doesn’t carry the movie too heavily, as some lines are woodenly-written. Pacing is an issue in places with a couple sequences dragging more than they should have. As noted earlier, several of the songs were used in a way that was different than their lyrics would portray. Some of the songs fit as far as the tone goes, but ones like “The Crow the Owl and the Dove” and “Turn Loose the Mermaids” weren’t used in a way that one would define as intuitive.  The biggest offender for me is the tune “Arabesque”. The scene that it plays over is where Tom throws and breaks his dancer snowglobe. My gripe with it is that the music was dissonant, not matching what was going on. To say, a serious scene was overlaid with music that would more fit a desert scene. That’s as much as I’d say before I would get into personal preference.  It is noted, as far as these choices go, that the small budget probably had a hand in this, limiting what they had to work with.

All in all, Imaginaerum was a mixed bag for me. It was definitely worth the wait, and was better than I was expecting. It has flaws, but its virtues outweigh them. Tuomas’s dark and twisted fantasy plays out beautifully on the screen. The imperfections are there, but sometimes an imperfect jewel has as much appeal as a refined one. Your journey through Imaginaerum is one well worth taking, and a trip you won’t regret.

Pros: The cinematography is beautiful. This is easily one of the most imaginative I’ve seen visually. The plot is refreshingly original. The cast, comprised largely of relatively unknowns, all portray their roles beautifully. The music is fresh and new, with an element of familiarity.

Cons: Some dialogue issues. Occasionally the original meaning of the song doesn’t match circumstances of the scene at hand. Pacing in one or two scenes.

Final Grade: 8

[azulocean-reviews]

Album Review: Once by Nightwish

So, I’ve finally gotten around to listening to the famous/infamous recordOnce. It stands as the final record that Tarja Turunen recorded with Nightwish, a fact that continues to be divisive in the Nightwish fandom. Some have hailed it as the band’s magnum opus, while others contend that it is a quality, but slightly/majorly overrated record.

Next to Imaginaerum, Once is the record that I have anticipated hearing the most from NIghtwish, and It had quite an amount of hype that I’d heard from the fandom. The first song by Nightwish I’d heard, “Nemo,” is on this album. It had quite a lot to live up to. The question is, did it?

My answer? Kind of. It’s an excellent record, one of the best I’ve heard. Nightwish has demonstrated repeatedly their ability to improve, making each record an improvement over the previous. I have not listened to anything before Wishmaster, but have everything afterwards. Century Child improved on Wishmaster, Imaginaerum improved over Dark Passion Play. Once inhabits an awkward niche, being the last album with Tarja. As such, some elevate it to an almost mythical status. It doesn’t quite reach that level, but its quality is undeniable.

Now my assessment of the actual album. Some of it is very heavy, signifying the band’s full shift into symphonic power metal. Others are ballads, including the beautiful “Kuolema Tekee Taiteilijan”. Ones like “Ghost Love Score” and “Creek Mary’s Blood” combine the two, giving the listener a breathtaking experience of a power ballad. The Lakotan musical influences on the latter are chilling in their impact. This is one of those rare albums that I would describe as being free of any glaring flaws.

The lyrics are beautifully written, in Tuomas’s usual hazy-but-interpretable  style. Tarja delivers her best performance as Nightwish’s vocalist. Her accent is charmingly present, without distorting the words. Longtime fans recall how early songs were nearly unintelligible because of her thick accent.

As noted, there really aren’t any drawbacks to Once. A couple songs have second verses that could stand to be longer, but other than a couple nitpicks, this album is free from blemishes. Except for the two bonus tracks. I don’t count them against my score, because they’re B-sides. They are notably lower in quality than the rest, and it’s obvious why they didn’t make the initial cut. Still, they’re nice to have, and they’re not bad, simply subpar in comparison.

Once certainly stands as one of Nightwish’s best, and as one of the best metal albums I’ve heard. It doesn’t live up to the legendary status than it is sometimes ascribed in reminiscence, but it would be difficult for any album to. It stands as a high note for Tarja’s career with Nightwish to end on, and a high-water mark for the rest of the band.

Pros: Absolutely beautiful composition, tasteful orchestral arrangements,  almost everything. Fitting conclusion for Tarja.

Cons: Few. An odd guitar twang in “Creek Mary’s Blood.” The fadeout in “Ghost Love Score.” It’s a good album when I have to get this nitpicky.

Final Grade: 8.75

[azulocean-reviews]

Film Review: Paranormal Activity 4

Note: Not spoiler-free

Okay, so over the course of the last two days I watched the fourth installment of the famed Paranormal Activity series. I’m a big fan of the first one, despite disliking most horror movies. To me it had the perfect combination of plot, characterization, and scares for a horror movie. I slept in the floor of my parent’s room that night, and jumped at shadows and creaks all night. The second one didn’t do it as much for me. Almost everything in it I’d seen before, although the kitchen cabinet scene admittedly made me jump. Confession, I skipped PA3. I read about how the trailer barely resembled the actual film, and then read the plot, and decided to pass for now. On to PA4.

I have issues with this movie. In fact, my problem with this extends to other horror movies. The ever-present Idiot Ball. For those uninitiated on TV Tropes, this is essentially an instance of a character doing something beyond ill-considered, something that is mind-blowingly moronic that it breaks the suspension of belief required for almost any fictional work. It has failed if it made you say “yeah right!” too often. That’s the case with PA4. An issue I had with PA2 was the dad. He went beyond skeptical and straight into imperviously ignorant. At least skeptical Micah in the first one adapted and acknowledged that there was a demon before the house started attacking them. But I digress.

In PA4 both the parents aren’t just skeptical, they’re not even concerned that a chandelier inexplicably fell, almost killing their daughter. Both think that Alex is just making stuff up, even thinking that she’s crazy after documenting on camera how she was trapped in a garage with a self-starting car and a demon locking her in. To be fair, a lot of the footage wasn’t shown to her parents, which is sort of an Idiot Ball for her.

Spoilers Below

The ending is really what ticked me off. Two characters bite it in the space of twenty minutes, the mom and Alex’s boyfriend. The mom I couldn’t care less about, but other than Alex, Ben was the best character in the film. He’s witty, savvy, and a beam of light whenever he enters the house. He arrives after Mom makes her forced exit from the plane of existence, and heads up to Alex’s room, then is killed by Katie. That’s it. Drop a bridge on the best character in the franchise. Then Alex returns, Dad is killed in the creepy house next door, Alex narrowly escapes, and then is confronted by… zombies. I’m not kidding. Hundreds of undead-looking extras randomly spawn outside the house with no context whatsoever. Then demon-Katie kills Alex. Credits roll.

This has got to be the worst ending to any movie I have ever seen. Maybe there was a nuance that I missed by not seeing PA3, but I did read the plot, and there was no context for the ending. Why were there zombies outside? No explanation at all. Not even a “We are legion” comment. And the fact that they killed the two best characters in the franchise rather senselessly, which is sadly standard for horror movies.

To be fair, it wasn’t all bad. The acting ranged from decent to excellent, with the latter due mostly to Ben and Alex. The effects were very good, but that’s what we’ve come to expect from the series, and we’ve seen it all before.

In summary, Paranormal Activity 4 is a sub-par movie, suffering from a poorly-written plot, bad characters (Save for the teenagers), and franchise fatigue. I was very disappointed, as PA2 was at least decent. The producers in charge need to make vast improvements to the next installment if they hope to recover some quality. The moving tables, shadowy outlines, and cast slaughter isn’t cutting it anymore.

Pros: The teenagers were excellent, making them the sole reason for a casual moviegoer to watch this. The movie affords a few scares, but the are scarce in comparison to previous entries.

Cons: Poorly-written plot, Idiot Balls all around, same-old same-old scares, and WTH ending.

Final Grade: 4.25

[azulocean-reviews]

Album Review: Night Castle by Trans-Siberian Orchestra

I’ve noticed something about my music-listening habits. I’m an album collector, meaning that I like to have the physical copy of a record, as opposed to a downloaded copy. On top of that, I collect all the albums that an artist has produced, regardless of reputed quality. Therefore, when I read some less-than-shining reviews of Night Castle, I didn’t let them stop me. In fact, they motivated my acquisition of the record. Now: the review.

This album is long. It clocks in at two discs and slightly over two hours, counting bonus tracks. This lead to some criticisms that it was bloated and overly long. These have some truth to them. There are many instances of instrumental repetition and vocal refrains that were unnecessary, and only served to add length. To the composers’ credit, none of the songs themselves felt redundant, and all advanced the story. 

The story is large in scope, easily the longest that TSO has written. As usual, the lyric booklet tells the story with the lyrics. The detail is almost like a libretto for a musical, and the music sounds like it came from a Broadway musical, again normal for TSO’s music. The story is interesting, mixing fantasy with real-life conflict in Vietnam. That’s as much as I can say without spoiling.

In conclusion, this album is as strong as TSO’s other works as far as story and music goes, but its repetitious length in individual songs brings it down. All in all, its TSO. If you love them more than fangirls love Vic Mignogna, then nothing will change your mind. If you loath them more than Bunnymund does Jack Frost, then I can’t change your mind.

Pros: The storytelling is top-notch as always, and the songs are interesting to listen to. The variety of vocalists representing characters keep the record fresh. The instrumentation is delightfully classical, both in renditions and in original compositions.

Cons: Sometimes within songs certain parts are repeated excessively, contributing to an overly long album run time. If these excess bits had been trimmed away then the album would have been much improved.

Final Grade: 7.75

[azulocean-reviews]

Album Review: How To Train Your Dragon by John Powell

I’ve posted a blurb about this score before, but after listening to the full soundtrack, I feel the need to write a full review.

The movie is awesome. That was established long before I paid attention to the music behind the action in How To Train Your Dragon. I hadn’t been established as a soundtrack connoisseur yet, still listening toHalo soundtracks almost exclusively. About a year ago that changed. I decided to give HTTYD’s score a chance a couple months ago, and rewatched the movie and paid particular attention to the music. a little over a month ago I received a copy of the OST for my birthday. And here we are.

This score is, without a doubt in my mind, one of the best ever written. I say that as objectively as possible. This score is one of those scores that are almost legendary in their ability to capture emotion. Almost every track represents a feeling, from energetic to peaceful, and joyous triumph. The flying theme always brings a grin to my face whenever I hear it. Powell has captured the feeling of riding a dragon as closely as is possible. If you close your eyes, you can almost feel the cold air rushing by.

The score uses a technique that I am quite fond of, the use of recurring themes and motifs to represent characters and situations. The flying theme is the most recognizable, along with the romantic theme, the excitement theme, and the dragon theme. Something that truly set the score apart was the fact that while these themes appeared periodically, they were never deployed in the same manner twice. It was always different.

Now for the criticisms, a short section. Something that kills a score for me is an excess of filler music, shapeless music that exists simply to fill space. This happens when silence isn’t wanted in a scene, but a moving theme wouldn’t fit. This very rarely happens in HTTYD. I can count on one hand the number of times this happens, and it’s generally isolated on its own track. The other issue I had is the credits song “Sticks and Stones”, which was contributed by Icelandic singer Jonsi. The song itself is decent, but it sounds very out of place. It doesn’t mesh with the rest of the music. It’s a stylistic criticism on my part, but its inclusion irks me. I feel like a more Celtic-sounding one, like “Touch the Sky” from Brave would have fit the film better.

Overall, this score is one of the best I’ve heard, and it deserved every award it got, and several it didn’t. As far as quality I would put it up against any other, save for Lord of the Rings, maybe a handful of others. Five out of five stars easily, and my top recommendation for “Soundtracks You Must Listen To Before You Die”

Pros: The whole thing, almost. The score captures the emotions of the moment flawlessly and perfectly puts the listener in the world of the movie, both while viewing and while listened to alone.

Cons: Negligible. A few filler moments, but nothing beyond that.

Final Grade: 9.75

[azulocean-reviews]

Eragon: Movie Review

Ehh. This film, the intellectual offspring of Christopher Paolini’s brilliant novel “Eragon,” was made several years ago, and there has been a corresponding gap in my life since I have seen it. I have fond memories of it, so when our guest suggested we watch it, I thought “why not?”

I’ve remembered Eragon somewhat through rose-tinted glasses. It’s really not a good movie. I know it sounds like I’m just going to bash on the movie, but bear with me. It’s decent, but it has many flaws.

The main objection that the film’s detractors express is the numerous differences between the movie and the source material. That’s valid and understandable. I agree, to a point. The movie did indeed change too much, although “cut” is a better term. It excluded characters that had a great significance in the book and later entries in the series, and left out setpieces and plot points that were vital in the book, like Angela being in Farthen Dur or Eragon’s capture at Gil’ead. Other issues were more fundamental from a purely filmmaking standpoint. A lot of the writing for the characters is hammy, cliched, and cheesy. Like the infamous “Last Airbender” a lot of the plot and dialogue consists of exposition rather than us being shown. Prepare for a lot of eye-roll moments.

But Eragon isn’t without redeeming factors. The three leads, Eragon, Saphira, and Brom, are all well played by Ed Speeler, Rachel Weiz, and the fantastic Jeremy Irons respectively. They deliver their lines well, despite the spotty writing. Brom’s death here in the movie is very well-done. Quite fitting in its own right. And lastly, the one thing that really stands out, is the majestic Saphira. The filmmakers really nailed her here. She is exactly as I pictured her in the novel, and Ms. Weiz portrays her excellently.

Pros: Cinematography is very good. The filming locations were stunning, if radically altered from the book. The actors deliver their lines to the best of their ability, and sometimes shine. Rachel Weiz delivers a vocal dragon performance that stands with Sean Connery’s Dragonheart.

Cons: Poorly-written script and dialogue. Changes virtually everything from the book, and leaves out way too much than is justifiable. Over-streamlining of the plot.

Final Word: All in all, its a mediocre film that could have been so much better. I would recommend it only to die-hard fans of the books. It has redeeming qualities, but many are hard to enjoy with the film’s overall quality.

Final Grade: 5.5

[azulocean-reviews]

Rise of the Guardians: Film Review

So, I just got back from seeing Rise of the Guardians at my local Carmike Cinemas. Very good, DreamWorks, not bad at all. Rise of the Guardians is this year’s holiday blockbuster featuring the man in the red and white, Santa Claus. But this is more than this year’s lackluster Fred Claus. The roster of characters includes other holiday icons, such as the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, the Sandman, and, last-but-not-least, Jack Frost. Surprisingly enough, the teenage-ish Frost is the main protagonist, rather than Santa, which came as a welcome change from the usual holiday flick.

So, I just got back from seeing Rise of the Guardians at my local Carmike Cinemas. Very good, DreamWorks, not bad at all. Rise of the Guardians is this year’s holiday blockbuster featuring the man in the red and white, Santa Claus. But this is more than this year’s lackluster Fred Claus. The roster of characters includes other holiday icons, such as the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, the Sandman, and, last-but-not-least, Jack Frost. Surprisingly enough, the teenage-ish Frost is the main protagonist, rather than Santa, which came as a welcome change from the usual holiday flick.

The main villain is the Bogyman, dubbed “Pitch” in the movie. He was once a feared and respected figure in the human consciousness, but fell out with the advent of the Guardians. Without giving away too much, Pitch is a decently-crafted and mildly sympathetic villain. As a whole, this film is essentially a holiday kids’ version of The Avengers 

Pros: The cast is very good, and all fit their roles exceptionally. There are plenty of funny moments, and no part of the film really falls flat. The visuals are stunningly rendered. This is seriously some of the best animation I’ve seen in a feature film. The character designs are also very good. Each of the characters is re-imagined as a hero, so each has their weapons and more warrior-styled appearance. The novelty of “Wolverine is the Easter Bunny!” never gets old.

Cons: Some of the plot points are clichéd, and the concept of stealing the belief of children is older than dirt. Older than Jesus! The children’s’ “I don’t believe anymore” and subsequent “re-believing” is very hackneyed in the genre. For those who don’t like fast-paced films this may be one to wait for the DVD on. It’s almost on a sugar rush, and less nimble audiences may find it difficult to keep up with the One! Two! plot pace.

All-in-all, this is a very good movie. It’s not the best ever, but it’s far from the worst, being quite novel and original. It's highly imaginative, and deals with themes beyond its child-targeted audience. I recommend it, but watch out for Jack Frost fangirls here on Tumblr.

[azulocean-reviews]

Thoughts on Mass Effect 3

I just finished playing the final installment in BioWare’s Mass Effect trilogy this morning. And my biggest impression was: wow. I came into the series late, shortly after the release of Mass Effect 2. I completed my Save Import for ME3 about two months after its release. So, as soon as I finished my Import, I plopped down my twenty bucks on Amazon and waited to see Shepard kick the tails of the Reapers from here to the Far Rim.

Except that’s not how it played out. The Reapers are exactly as I pictured them based on their descriptions in the past two installments. Huge, terrifying harbingers of inexorable death and destruction. In the first forty-five minutes of the game we see them tear through Admiral Hackett’s fleets defending Earth. Within the game’s first hour we see Shepard making a narrow escape aboard theNormandySR-2, leaving Admiral Anderson to organize a resistance among the few still remaining on Reaper-held Terra Firma.

Pieces like these help set the tones. Humanity’s leaders are terrified, begging Shepard for help, asking what they can do. Throughout the galaxy similar questions are being asked. The galaxy has failed to construct their ark for the coming storm, and the raindrops are beginning to fall. The tone of the game as a whole is one of hopelessness and despair, as well as a glitter of hope in the dark.

Not all is lost. Though the Reapers are far too powerful and numerous to defeat with even the largest fleet the beings of the Milky Way can muster, a last-ditch resort presents itself. Plans for a relic from the era of the Protheans and beyond are found on Mars. Despite not knowing what effect it will have, the galactic community decides to build it, having no other recourse.

That’s all I’ll say about the story, since I hate spoilers and refuse to provide them. (Even though you’ve probably already played the game if you’re going to.) Now for my review.

The game overall is on the cutting-edge, graphics and gameplay-wise. It’s got the most realistic in-game and cutscene visuals I’ve seen to date. Character expressions are almost always perfectly captured. The voice-acting is top-notch as usual. Both Mark Meer and Jennifer Hale excel as our hero/heroine Shepard. Even NPCs and random characters feel genuine. The gameplay is tight and customizable. It allows for multiple styles of gameplay, a huge advantage over Mass Effect 2. I tend to go for the Arnold Swartzenegger “Hasta la vista, baby!” style of combat, going in with all guns blazing. That didn’t turn out very well in ME2, as it places a good deal of emphasis on cover-based gunplay. That led to me dying several times because of my gung-ho modus operanti. In ME3 that isn’t a death sentence. You can just move around out of cover generally, laying down the hurt on anything foolish enough to get in your way. On Easy, that is.

The ending. Ah, that hot-button topic of today’s gaming. I had heard about it long before I began my playthrough. My take on the endings is this: they’re not that bad. They do sound different and have very similar outcomes, but I can honestly say that the decision asked of me there was one of the hardest I made in any of the three Mass Effect games.

The criticisms now. This game has excellent visuals, as I stated before, but they do break down in places. The most notable is Joker. Something screwed up with the character model for him, resulting in what has been dubbed “druggie eyes.” This effect is noticable on a couple other characters, but it fortunantly doesn’t pop up all that much.

Also one thing that could have been better done is the side missions. Most of them, with the exception of a few N7 missions, were Retrieve missions. Go get this so they can rally their people. Not bad in of itself, but more variety would have been appreciated.

Two positive things I forgot (this thing won’t scroll back up). The characters stories, the time you can spend with them, really flesh them out. The characters feel real, and that is essential for a truely good story. The music is also great. It’s not as iconic as Jack Walls’ was, but Its still top-quality. Whether its a piano interlude or the epic music of extra-atmospheric combat, the score hits all the right notes

So, in summary. Do I think that this game deserves the perfect 10 it got from GameInformer? No. Do I think it’s horrible like many former ME fans? Again, no. I think that Mass Effect 3 is an excellent game, and a fitting end to Shepard’s excellent journey. It has its flaws, but they ultimately do not detract from the overall experience that much. Play this game, if you haven’t already. I promise you won’t regret it.

Keelah Se’lai.