I find that the elation which typically follows such heart-pounding, high-flying action doesn't stick (and oh yes, it most certainly rhymes with the title). I watched it, I consumed it. I gave the film a fair chance. I also thoroughly enjoyed the first trilogy. A revamp was expected by all. Was it required, though? For Batman, I welcomed it with open arms. And it succeeded. It was dark, malicious, and truly brilliant in its execution (all the more reason to see his next installment in a couple of weeks). But this was different. If a revamp was expected in this case, it wasn't necessary. Especially if you were merely going to replicate the origin plot of the first trilogy. Being true to the comic is fine, and there were some more creative plot alterations (like more scientifically explicated theories, and some more credible back stories)--however, if that means that half the audience that saw the original trilogy would be yawning, thinking "I guarantee you that THIS will happen" then perhaps they needed to think about it a little harder.
As a spectacle, I enjoyed the film (spectacular was certainly the word of choice, given the amount of high-flying action). But as a fan of the series, I can't say I did. And I'm no comic book geek. I simply know good cinema. The villain plot (more an experiment gone wrong) fit with the pre-existing relationships between the characters. That fit rather well. But I felt that Dr. Connors (as a lizard in this case) didn't feature as strongly as I would have liked. It all ended rather suddenly and, as is typical of such films, conveniently (green bad, blue good, all screwed, or all cured)--forever dealing in absolutes, in other words. And, it ultimately made the presumption that those without a degree in science or some form of specialised knowledge wouldn't be able to fathom the complexity of cross-species genetics.
The one thing I will say is that the relationship in the film was believable. Also, Emma Stone is, well, you know, up there with the best of them. Which may have biased my opinions somewhat. Nonetheless I find that a true cinematic relationship between two characters has to avoid cliches, which this film did, and also be based on a kind of subtlety inherent in cinematography which only film can pull off effectively.
In any case, what did everyone else think of the film? This now qualifies as a rant, since I have been sufficiently cynical. Nevertheless I'm still willing to be kind: I'll give it 4/5. Simply for its believable characters, good soundtrack (James Horner is always reliable--did someone say Titanic, A Beautiful Mind, Avatar?)
Overall: 4 / 5
No comments:
Post a Comment