KICK-ASS 2; Carlisle's Final Word

"If I was even thinking about a Kick-Ass sequel, I had to get serious." 

Dave Lizewski.

Will they kiss-and-makeup?

Synopsis;

Bumbling but well-meaning superhero Kick-Ass joins forces with like minded have-a-go-superheros to make the streets a a safer place. However, Hit-Girl (Kick-Ass' infinitely more capable crime-fighting partner) succumbs to the pressure of her new guardian to hang up the cape and lead the life of a normal fifteen year old girl. But trouble is looming on the horizon in the form of super-villain The Motherfucker- an enemy from Kick-Ass and Hit-Girl's shared past, and one who is intent on a very violent revenge...

Script Logic; 1/2

Well, the script sort of makes sense- given the context of superheros and the constraints of comedy. While the film does well to avoid the original comic's more-offensive moments (such as a gang-rape, child executions and a tortured dog) in many ways it does take a swipe at plot threads so well established in the original film- in particular the main character's relationship with Katie Deauxma. Here, Katie has been rewritten as something of a bitch, possibly to better fit with the continuity of the comic sequel (the first comic and first film had wildly different endings). That's is a real shame, seeing as that same relationship was so well-established and affectionately played-out- while Kick Ass' new 'fling' with fellow vigilante Night-Bitch is a hollow one-note affair by comparison. All that work and chemistry completely gone to waste...

Despite this, perhaps the script's worst failing is the lack of any wit. The one-liners are dead-on-arrival and the comedy in-general is far more juvenile; nowhere near as smart, sassy or subversive (or deliberate) as it's predecessor. Without that particular ace-in-the-hole, all we're left with is a sub-par action movie, and a reliance on cranking-up the grossness and violence...

Pace; 1/2

It has to be said that at least the pace is never slow- if anything, it's too rushed! The film's tendency is to wedge too much into the running time, which means that whole sub-plots, character arcs and set pieces struggle to make any impact; individually these are all sound 'ideas' that simply fail to take flight because of a lack of substantial screen-time allowing an audience to properly invest in these characters and their individual struggles. Instead the film relies on a certain amount of good-will generated by the previous film rather than working out it's own failings. One or two stories well told is better than a dozen botched attempts.

Acting; 2/2

Nobody really drops the ball here; Aaron Taylor-Johnson does what he can with his scenes and a scatty story arc, Christopher Mintz-Plasse makes an amusingly volatile villain (and epitomizes everything wrong with the worst kind of teenage fan-boy), and Chloe Grace Moretz makes a very welcome return as Hit-Girl (who is clearly the script's most favored character). However, the real stand-out performances in this film belong to the criminally underrated John Leguizamo and (dare I admit this) Jim Carrey. The first plays a pivotal role as the villain's first body guard, a sympathetic crook whose murder acts as that character's tipping point from 'pathetic snot-nosed nerd' into a very warped antagonist, and the second puts in  a scene-stealing and unrecognisable turn as psychopath-turned-born-again-christian superhero Colonel Stars & Stripes (shame he ruined any kudos by bad-mouthing the movie in relation to the Sandy Hook tragedy- see my note on the subject for more details).

Aesthetic; 1/2

While the costumes and sets all remain fittingly-glossy, the fight scenes- such a highlight of inventive insanity the first time around, here are all flat and lifeless. I watched this film only the other day and I struggle to remember any of them- nothing as outlandish or stand-out as 'that' corridor scene, or Kick-Ass' first failed outing and subsequent beating at the hands of two car-jackers. Even the film's climax, a mass-battle between hundreds of masked heroes and villains, fails to make an impact.

A clash of titans, something that the film intentionally build towards, Hit-Girl vs. the bulging and brutal Mother Russia (Motherfuckers most dangerous ally) is also depressingly mundane and unimaginative. I'll admit, seeing a teenager slicing up a bunch of criminals is never going to be as eye-popping as seeing a child do the very same thing, but even overlooking this fact there's no excusing just how uninspiring the fight sequences are. Only one moment featuring a lawn mower even comes close to anything in the first Kick Ass...

On a similar note, in this film the violence is far more leery and mean-spirited, which I appreciate may be more in keeping with the source material (myself, I'm not really a fan of the comic), but it's strikingly at odds with the overall warmth of the original... This is especially true in relation to the 'prison murder scene'...

Originality & Intention; 0/2

The original Kick-Ass film, despite the language and violence, was a charming film with a big heart and a mischievous sense of humor. By comparison, this is a leery, immature and spiteful film which feels more like the bad fan fiction of a teenager with a few 'issues'. This film is the product of a creative team who just aren't as driven, talented or witty as those responsible for the first Kick-Ass; failing to build on the foundations of the first film, they have instead turned-in a lack-luster sequel that fails to properly appreciate (or understand) what a gift the first film actually was.

Final Score; 5/10 

It's not that Kick-Ass 2 simply fails to live up to the first film, it's that Kick-Ass 2 is just a shoddy film, full-stop.

CARRIE (2013); Carlisle's Final Word.

“You pray, little girl! You pray for forgiveness!”

Margaret White.

"You've got red on you."

Script Logic; 1/2 

Pace; 1/2

Acting; 1/2

Aesthetic; 1/2

Originality & Intention; 1/2

Final Score; 5/10

For once I'm current!

Another unnecessary remake, one in a long line. You can’t (shouldn’t) review a film like this without considering the source material. Some might argue that a film has to ‘stand on its own merits’ but as far as I’m concerned, you remake a classic, you accept the risk of comparriosn. It’s only fair if you’re going to copy what’s already been done…

So, first the casting. Gone is the haunting and melancholic presence of Sissy Spacek, the antagonist now portrayed by the much-too-conventional Chloe Grace Moretz, totally miscast as the teenage outcast. Timidity never really fits Chloe so well as it did Spacek, and I found it hard to believe that she was ever bullied in school for the way she looked- it was like watching one of the countless American high-school rom-coms, where you’re just waiting for the nerdy girl to remove her glasses, shake her hair loose and step out as a jaw-dropping sex bomb. There’s no escaping from the fact that when Spacek walks through the fire and carnage of the climax, with her rigid figure and startling eyes, she’s a terrifying agent of malevolence and retribution, a Greek fury-made-flesh. When Chloe Moretz floats around she looks more like one of the X-Men.

Subtlety and suspense are not the film’s strongest suit, everything here is turned up to 11; From Carries psychic awakening to the cruelty of the Carrie’s worst tormentor (seen this time round slitting a pig’s throat, just so the audience knows for certain that she's the villain). The end result is a quicker, slicker and louder Carrie, but one which for all its brash editing and effects  fails completely to capture the macabre final of its predecessor.

Polish and CGI do not a good horror film make.

WORLD WAR Z; Carlisle's Final Word.

"Every person we save is one less zombie to fight."

Jurgen Warmbrunn

Visits only safe city in the world. City is over-run. Jinx.

Script Logic; 1/2

Pace; 1/2

Acting; 1/2

Aesthetic; 1/2

Originality & Intention; 1/2

Final Score; 5/10

A zombie film for people who don't like zombie movies, or, if you prefer; a zombie film without any bite. In fact, ignore that- save for the fact that it features zombies, this is not strictly a zombie film... To my mind at least, zombie films are about so much more than their antagonist; they should be claustrophobic, socially relevant, and suspenseful, but even more importantly, they are about characters (their conflicts, their hopes, their drive to survive). A typical zombie film usually follows a small cast who are given the space and time to develop before the inevitable blood shed. So I put it to you that World War Z in in reality an action film; this is Brad Pit's film and the story is interested in his character alone, as he defies the rising odds with little to assist him other than hundreds of expendable soldiers and a few minor characters who never develop past their one-line stereotypes.

World War Z has little to offer the real horror or zombie movie enthusiast. It's the Woman In Black to The Shinning, the Hunger Games to Battle Royal; it's slick, fast paced (too fast I'd argue), and designed to offer spectacle rather than any lasting chills. It's only real innovation is the 'zombie horde' effect, which I always found too CGI-rubbery to be convincing. No real acting, no need for it. Pretty but very, very fake- no rawness, no dirt, no blood.

WWZ is at least unique in the role of its protagonist, a former United Nations investigator, who by the end of the film's first act is evacuated from an over-run city because "he's the only man who can save us now" (although why him and nobody else is never explicitly explained). Usually those types ('government agents') are the mustache -twirling villains in films like this, so Brad Pitt's role here as the hero is at least novel but ultimately unrewarding, as at every turn Pitt's character is saved by a never ending tide of disposable 'meat'. He never really has to 'survive' in the traditional way of zombie movies. What could have been a savage critic of governmental failure and callousness has been dropped in favor of a more generic 'America saves the day' type plot. Honestly, the world-view and politics of the film is so simplistic, and the action so over-the-top, it's like a zombie-mod for the Modern Warfare games. Even the font they use to set each scene is exactly the same.

And finally, and possibly the most troubling aspect of the film, what's with that fucking scarf? "I know" thinks Brad, with a flick of his salon-fresh hair, "I'll protect my arms from zombie bites by wrapping them in rolled-up magazines... Now I'll put on a long pretty scarf that can easily snag or be grabbed at..." Give that man a medal.

EVIL DEAD (2013); Carlisle's Final Word.

"Feast on this, motherfucker!"

Mia.

Katie Hopkins on 'This Morning'.

Script Logic; 1/2

Pace; 1/2

Acting;1/2

Aesthetic; 2/2

Originality & Intention; 0/2

Final Score; 5/10





Final Word: Jesus, these 'final words' are getting longer, arn't they?
I could write a lot more on this film because, if nothing else, it's certainly an "interesting" film. First time director Fede Alvarex shows some promise and has a real handle on intensity, but one-time hot-shot screenwriter Diablo Cody's 'polish' on the script appears non-existent, and that's where the biggest issues of the film stem from. Any of the naturalistic wit or quirky indie sensibility of her previous (and overrated efforts) is completely missing from this mess of cliches. Instead of anything too original we're served with a cast of typical stereotypes, who speak only in trailer-dialogue, doing unspeakably dumb things: a nurse who thinks the best way for a junkie to quit heroine (infamously dangerous practice at best) is to essentially hold her prisoner in an isolated cabin, a 'protective' brother with all the charisma and vitality of knotted rope, a homosexual best pal and the group's intellectual-type who only seems capable of reading if he speaks aloud, a whiny blond who's only real defining features are 'she's blond and whiny', and a sassy junkie chick who, for all intense and purposes, IS Diablo Cody (seeing as she basically takes starring role in all of her screenplays). The plot is likewise weak, and full of inconsistances! I know that this is magic we're talking about here, and not a legal contract, but it has to at least make sense and abide by it's own rules.

Spoilers ahead: The Abomination, the demon called fourth from the book to unleashe a Hellish fury upon the 5 'happy campers', must claim 5 souls (convenient) to walk the Earth as flesh and blood. Yet one of these characters dies from his extensive injuries (not possessed by the evil, so surely soul-intact?), while another blows himself sky-high in the typical heroic-sacrificial manner (again, surely his soul is also safe?). And, by the the Abomination does "come fourth", one of the characters has technically already 'saved' their soul, so she shouldn't count to the tally either! Even if you count the dog, you're still a couple of souls short here... And when the Abomination DOES finally show up, talk about a pansy-ass demon! And for all of it's blood-drenched 'realism' (and some of it is very wince-inducing) it looses much of its credibility when the heroine walks away from the final showdown with an amputated arm but without so much as a grimace: seriously, she has to rip her fucking arm off from under fallen wreckage and she seems perfectly comfortable- her only concession to this hideous injury is to tuck her stump discreetly under one arm. I fucking kid you not.

Despite this, there are some nice touches to be found in Evil Dead. The intensity is raw and the pace, when the supernatural elements finally come into play, is never slow. Although the film clearly borrows heavily from a wide range of horror styles (most notably Japanese-Horror, Giallo and Torture Porn), it almost manages to mold them together into something new and consistent. Almost. The downside to this is that more savvy audiences will find themselves playing "which film did they steal this idea from?", distracting your core audience and taking them 'out of the picture'- a big no-no.
Anyway, that's probably enough for this review- although I will end by saying (shock / horror) that this is probably a better film than the original Evil Dead- a film which is wildly overrated by an army of overzealous horror fans. Unfortunately, this remake does little to improve on the original's many faults; instead, this is more a glossy face lift with modern-day styling than a whole-heated reboot.
In short; less than the sum of it's individual bloody parts...

"NEVER ANYTHING ON, IS THERE?"

Liz (Sean Of The Dead).

"Should have said- bass"

A quick guide on how I qualify the final score for the 'Carlisle's Final Word' posts...

0/10:                       God I hope to never have to sit through a film that scores 0.

0 to 2 out of 10:      Crap. Utter crap.

3 to 4 out of 10:      Useless, don't even bother watching this.

5 out of 10:             Watchable, if there's nothing else around. Hire it, don't buy it.

6 to 7 out of 10 :     Good, solid effort and enjoyable.

8 to 9 out of 10:     Excellent, worth seeing at the cinema, and certainly worth buying.

10/10:                    Perfect. Rare as hen's teeth. Need I say more? I couldn't fault it.

THE HUNGER GAMES; Carlisle's Final Word.

“They just want a good show, that's all they want.” 

Gale Hawthorne.

Script Logic; 1/2

Pace; 1/2

Acting; 1/2

Aesthetic; 1/2

Originality & Intention; 1/2

Final Score; 5/10

Just to be clear: I am not ‘down’ on the Hunger Games just because it’s popular.

I actually really enjoyed everything leading up to the games themselves; the satire on television and X-Factor style celebrity was both well observed and pensive. Shame then that the whole thing falls apart half-way through, descending into absurdity and contrivance.

The script has a number of very irritating plot flaws, even if you accept the surreal nature of the setting, and the majority of the acting from the younger cast is amateur at best. Jennifer Lawrence  as Katniss Everdeen alone seems able to act, although she looks far too well fed to convince as someone who routinely has to scavenge for food.*

The CGI is pretty weak, and looks as though it were created for a mid-range TV show, undermining the fantastical elements of the story. The violence is diluted and bloodless to the extent that the it ceases to be shocking very quickly- which is a major problem when you’re passing yourself off as a critic on violence and not just an adventure film- and without the strength of its own convictions the story has very little to say for itself. By taking the ‘safe’ and more palatable option, the film undermines its whole point, as if to say “yes, violence is bad, but here’s some we’ve edited so you can enjoy it”.

…And holographic mutant dogs is just plain stooo-pid.

*I do not mean Jennifer Lawrence is fat. It occurred to me that simple-minded teenagers (or, as I call them, Twilight fans- joke) might misconstrue what I said, so just to be clea; I only mean that it looks as though she has a healthy diet, and not that her character is on the brink of starvation. That is all.

TWILIGHT; Carlisle's Final Word.

 "And the lion fell in love with the lamb." 

Edward Cullen.

 Script Logic; 1/2

Pace; 1/2

Acting; 1/2

Aesthetic; 1/2

Originality & Intention; 1/2

Final Score; 5/10

Just to be clear: I am not ‘down’ on Twilight just because it’s popular. I watched this with a very open mind (believe it or not).

Not scary enough to be a horror. Not romantic enough to be a romance. Not dramatic enough to be a drama. Not acted well enough to be a character piece. Not original enough to deserve its influential status- this story doesn’t have a single original or inventive idea to call its own, and anybody who’s even slightly interested in the vampire genre should know better. Not even a ‘Jack-of-all-trades’, more like a folded and dog-eared five-of-clubs. I’m not sure I understand how or why this is so popular, all I can surmise is that teenage girls these days are really fucking stupid, border-line mentally retarded (I’m not sure who should be most offended by that comparison), or just really thankful to have a film finally aimed at them that’s not released sorely on the Disney channel. It's not terrible, it's just not great either.

God, I despair. Someone call in Blade, or Buffy.

THE AMAZING SPIDERMAN; Carlisle's Final Word.

"I am issuing an arrest warrent for the masked vigilante known as Spiderman!"
George Stacey (The Amazing Spiderman, 2012).

 

 

 

 

 

Script Logic; 1/2

 

Pace; 1/2

Acting; 1/2

Aesthetic; 1/2

Originality & Intention; 0/2

Final Score; 4/10

 

 

Final Word;
A deeply flawed attempt to reboot the franchise, so flawed that it deserves it’s very own article to explain that in better detail (yes, I'm writing one) A slick aesthetic design can’t make up for a shockingly lack-lustre script, dull pace and weak central villain. While admittedly some of the new touches are very interesting, not enough is done to prevent the “seen it all before” issue central to its conception.

 

ALIEN RESURECTION; Carlisle's Final Word.

"Hey, Ripley. I heard you, like, ran into these things before?"

Johner.

Script Logic; 0/2

Pace; 1/2

Acting; 1/2

Aesthetic; 2/2

Originality & Intention; 1/2

Score; 5/10

Final Word; The first nail in the coffin of the alien franchise. The few good moments of acting are horribly skewed by the duff performances, and the story is a complete mess (a suprise considering Joss Whedon bought us the sharply written Buffy and Firefly series)- and made even weaker for having to shoe-horn in the main character who was (spoiler) killed off during the climax of the previous film. Gone is the gritty genre-breaking realism of its predecessors, replaced by the brash comic-book sensibility of French dircetor Jeunet, and sinking in the process any chance of the film actually scaring. 'The trick, Potter', is to build on what has come before- don't shit all over it!

A horrible miss-fire, and the tipping point for a once great franchise; sure, Alien 3 could have been better, but a decent fourth offering could easily have recovered things. Instead, what do we have to show for the good times? The fucking brain-dead Aliens Vs Predator and the head-up-arse Promethius. Yes, I'm more than a little bit fucking bitter about this.

...And as if the film didn't have 'FAIL' stamped so boldly over it already, here's a little-known fact: with the release of Alien Ressurection, the Alien Trilogy became known as the Alien Saga, and later "Quadrilogy". Quadrilogy is not a real word. The word relating toa set of 4 is "Tetralogy".