Archive for May, 2011

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

The people who crafted the plot of Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides must either believe that they have created some sort of genius storyline, or that the audience is too unintelligent to understand even basic plot element. I believe this because of one key moment in the film, when Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) asks another character to once again explain how they can actually activate the Fountain of Youth’s powers. At this point in the film, this is the third time it has been explained.

As hinted at in At World’s End, Jack Sparrow has decided to find the Fountain of Youth. On Stranger Tides takes place a considerable time after the end of the third film, because Jack begins the film with the unfortunate decision to be in London. He’s there to free his First Mate Gibbs (Kevin McNally), a man he apparently hasn’t seen in a long time. He learns from the King of Britain that both Britain and Spain are also after the Fountain. Britain has employed Hector Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) to lead them, and want to take Jack along for the ride. Based on the previous films, do you really think he wants this?

Jack escapes, runs into an old flame named Angelica (Penélope Cruz), and soon ends up aboard Blackbeard’s ship. Blackbeard himself is played by Ian McShane, and has unexplained powers, like being able to make inanimate objects come to life and make his ship shoot fire. It seems that Blackbeard also wants to get to the Fountain, and so begins a race to both get to the Fountain, as well as get the magical items that allow it to be used.

See, in order for the Fountain of Youth to actually work, you need three things: Two chalices that formerly belonged to Juan Ponce de León, and the tear of a mermaid. Essentially what happens is the two main ships, (Blackbeard’s and Barbossa’s), compete for these items, all the while having Jack Sparrow tagging along, cracking jokes, flirting with Angelica, but not ever doing all that much of consequence. Occasionally he’ll be crucial to the plot, but mostly we just watch the other characters perform tasks, using Jack just to get a “funny” perspective on the entire thing.

The Spanish, who are also looking for the Fountain, appear maybe four times in the entire movie, if that. Their inclusion had little point and it probably would have been a better film to just cut them completely. Their scenes could have either been removed or replaced with Barbossa’s crew performing their tasks, and the film would have been better for it. Their ultimate reason for being in the film is idiotic anyway, and, like I said, someone else could have done everything they did, saving us time and useless characters.
Speaking of the characters, they were a mixed bag. Jack Sparrow is still fun, and it’s clear that Johnny Depp was having fun with the role. It’s also nice to see Barbossa back, although his character was different this time around. I also missed the competition — friendly or not — between Jack and Barbossa, as it was both humorous and intense at the same time. New characters Angelica and Blackbeard are actually in the film less than I expected, and this is too bad. They’re both interesting in their own right, and the dynamics between the three, (if you include Jack), was one of the best parts of the film.

There is also a side-plot involving a missionary (Sam Claflin), and a mermaid (Àstrid Bergès-Frisbey). Suffice to say that this plot, despite getting only about 10 minutes to develop completely, is more interesting than the main one, and leaves in a way that is open to interpretation. Although I do have to question how the mermaid managed to gain legs at one point in the film. I don’t believe that was ever explained to us. If it was, I missed it. Maybe it doesn’t really matter, but things like this should not go unexplained.

Also unexplained is how Blackbeard managed to gain superpowers. The supernatural has popped up a few times in the series, but it has always been explained. The Aztec gold turned people into undead creatures in the first film, while Davy Jones and Calypso were explanation enough for what happened in the second and third. This time though, we’re just supposed to go with the flow in regards to Blackbeard being able to command his ship into belching flames whenever he feels the need, or make it charge straight ahead without the need for a crew to manage the sails, or someone to steer.

Here is another problem with the film: The action sequences are not all that impressive, which means that they fail to break up the boatloads of story that are thrown at us. Sword fighting hasn’t felt this dull in a long time, but here I found myself drifting away anytime that swords were drawn. This includes the “climactic” conclusion, that wasn’t climactic in the least. The middle scenes were also derivative from earlier films in the series, with one directly ripping off the balance-beam sword fight from the first film.

I have trouble making myself believe that On Stranger Tides was a complete failure, but it wasn’t anywhere close to a success either. As for how I rank the series at this point, it’s about on-par with the third film for me, easily behind both the marvelous first film and the pretty good second. But this time around, the story doesn’t even need the nearly two and a half hours it’s given — about half of that would probably do.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides is just about what you’d expect: A cash-in film. I was hoping that being a fan of Captain Jack Sparrow would be enough to save it, but it isn’t. There’s not enough good stuff there to make it a worthwhile watch, while what is there is bloated and somewhat pointless. The action scenes are uninspired, interesting characters aren’t given enough time, and when the best parts of the film come from a sub-plot with a missionary and a mermaid possibly falling in love, you should know you’re in trouble. The people making this film might think they’ve created something you’ll have trouble following along with, but if you have any trouble, it’s because you’ll have fallen asleep and missed something.

The King Of Kong Kast (5/27/11)

The latest episode of the Box Office Boredom Podcast is now up for your listening pleasure.   It features a discussion of the film, The King of Kong: A Fist Full of Quarters.  That’s right- were talking about a Donkey Kong Documentary.

We also encourage you to join our online discussion page by becoming a fan on Facebook. Become a fan of BoxOfficeBoredom.com and join in the debate.

If you aren’t a subscriber to the podcast, subscribe via the link on our sidebar and get every new episode downloaded into Itunes or your favorite podcast software. If you want to be a one- time listener (but why would you just want to listen to just one?), click Here and it will take you directly to a embedded QuickTime file in a new window.

Let it first be known that the end times are NOT going to happen on May 21st. I’ve done the math, studied my Bible and consulted the smartest people I know. So far the evidence is far to silly to really believe that May 21st, 2011 is the end of the world. BUT- Just in case, if you’re like me you would want to spend your last 24 hours watching great cinema. So I tried to come up with a quick run down of 12 films you can watch in 24 hours while awaiting the apocalypse. Rush to your rental store and pick them up- don’t worry there will be no late fees; the world is ending, remember?

His Girl Friday (1940): There is just something about this Cary Grant film that I can’t get enough of. People always tell me Casablanca or Gone With The Wind are true greats, but nothing beats Cary Grant in this film. I love the pacing, the cantor and the acting in this classic film that stars Grant as a newspaper editor who will do anything and everything to keep his prize reporter from remarrying.

The Wizard of Oz (1939): This film was a yearly classic for me growing up, and I’d love to revisit it again. It’s a timeless classic that has defined a generation. It brought to life the famous tale in a way that no one else has been able to do and made Toto and Dorothy household names. There is just something about this film that always amazes me- I know it was made in 1939 but this film just doesn’t show its true age.

The Jerk (1979): If you have never had the chance to check out Steve Martin in this film about a moron who stumbles through life, you’ve missed out on a great deal of laughs. This has always been one of my all time favorite Steve Martin films. Few things as silly as Martin shouting “That man really hates these oil cans!” and “All I need is this lamp, this chair, this paddle ball thing…that’s all I need.” get me laughing more. Simplicity at it’s finest. This is one classic comedy you don’t want to miss.

Annie Hall (1977): When I think Woody Allen, I think Annie Hall. Allen as Alvy Singer is perhaps my favorite “role” for him, however playing a neurotic Jew really isn’t much of a stretch for the man. The way Allen stutters and stammers his way through this role is a fun watch, and the film is filled with inspiration for future film makers. Some of my favorite films over the years have tried to pay tribute to Woody Allen, and when time is potentially of the essence perhaps you should too!

Moulin Rouge (2001): Let’s toss a musical into the mix here. Musicals are always a tough sell for me, but Baz Luhrmann directed this film to perfection. He found a way to take a classic forbidden love story, a vibrant Bohemian underground and popular 20th century songs and make a musical that I can pop in the DVD player and sing along with without feeling ashamed. The vocal talents of Ewan McGregor and Nicole Kidman are quite amazing and Luhrmann provides a directorial style that goes un-matched.

Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981): Steven Spielberg created one of the most iconic adventurers in Harrison Ford and made a bullwhip the coolest thing in the world. Every kid of my generation wanted a fedora hat and a bull whip. Indiana Jones films are always floating around my top lists just because they are good ol’ fashioned fun. Fully knowing real archaeologists never do anything quite this cool probably rains on Indy’s parade a bit, but I love how Spielberg made an action adventure icon and a film that brings so much joy to me on every re-watch.

The Princess Bride (1987): Yes, I have been told this is a kids movie. But it is one of my favorite films. I can’t begin to count the number of times I saw this movie when I was in college. It turns out, The Mike has a soft spot for it as well and we checked it out quite a bit from the limited selection of our dorm’s hall desk. From start to finish this story of adventure, pirates, princesses and warlocks is family friendly, quotable and just all around fun. Inconceivable you say? I say try it out.

Reservoir Dogs (1992): I’ve always appreciated Tarantino films but Ive always felt he is a bit over rated. With that in mind, I find it odd this film came to mind as I was making this list.   However, with Tarantino everything he does pays tribute to something great done by other film pioneers. The man is a film encyclopedia and if you’re pressed for time to see great style and story telling no one quite does it better. In this tale of the aftermath of a botched robbery, this thrown together crew begins to question loyalties and tries to figure out what happens next. It’s graphic in nature, but carefully crafted. From a cinematic standpoint I could gush about what I love about certain scenes for hours. Quite possibly my favorite Tarantino film of all time.

The Godfather (1972): If you know me, you know that I LOVE this film. Sure it’s 3 hours but I can’t begin to describe in one short paragraph all the reasons I enjoy this film. When you talk about a film that is as close to Hollywood Perfection as it gets, this film has to be close to taking top honors every time. Forget Citizen Kane, I will take the Corleone family any day. And if you were so inclined to find out what makes me love The Godfather so much, check out this past article I did. That should get you started.

The Rock (1996):  I would feel really silly if I didn’t toss a Nicolas Cage film into the mix.  While I have much love for Con Air, The Rock hands down is the superior film.  People love to mock Michael Bay for being a terrible film maker.   But pairing Michael Bay, Nic Cage and Sean Connery in a film about terrorist taking over Alcatraz works on so many levels.  It’s the perfect escapist film.  Things go boom in a way that only Michael Bay can provide and Nicolas Cage and Connery work so well together.  ”Glass or Plastic!  Glass or Plastic?- Let’s just cut the chit chat A-h*le” and pop this one in your DVD player already.

The King of Kong: A Fist Full of Quarters (2007):  That’s right, I am telling you to spend your last few movie hours watching a documentary about 2 people going for the high score in Donkey Kong.  When we all survive this May 21st date, I plan to spend some time to go into detail as to why I love this film, but it is one of the best documentaries I have seen.  I rarely re-watch documentaries, yet this is one I have seen more times than I care to list.  The director manages to capture a rivalry between 2 people that is so gripping and so silly you just can’t turn away.  This film will have you hoping and cheering for Steve Weibe by the end.

High Fidelity (2000):  One of my favorite actors, John Cusack, teamed up with Stephen Frears to bring to life one of the stories of my favorite authors, Nick Hornby.  This tale about a record store owner who re-visits all his past doomed relationships is a great film about changing lives, changing pop culture and trying to make sense of it all.  With supporting roles by Jack Black, Tim Robbins and Catherine Zeta Jones this film asks the question that’s on everyone’s mind; Did I listen to pop music because I was miserable? Or was I miserable because I listened to pop music?

Hope you enjoyed the list!  Get those DVD players humming just in case, but if you follow my lead and watch movies for the next 24 hours on May 22nd we will have a lot of awesome cinema to talk about!

Over-Analysis of a Scene: Jurassic Park

Last week we kicked of a series called Over-Analysis of a Scene where we dissected a scene of a film and pointed out a few flaws in the film maker’s logic as he or she constructed a movie classic.  Week 2 of the series is now here and Steven Spielberg gets to be the director in question.

This week’s scene comes from a classic 1993 film, Jurassic Park. Now, this film is riddled with more continuity errors than anyone can count and so it made it quite hard to pick just one area to concentrate on.   However, one of my favorite bloggers, Wolfie over at www.wolfgnards.com wrote about the strange oddity known as the ending of Jurassic Park.  I’ll explain both his observations and my own in a few minutes but….

First things first; let’s watch the scene:

Now onto stage 2; The dissection begins!

When Wolfie originally watched the film he began to question in his original article, The Many Ways a T-Rex Can Get in a Building,  just how exactly a 20 foot T-Rex managed to fit inside the visitor center door.  After all, the only door they show is the door that Dr. Grant and the kids run out of the building through at the end of the scene.  From there, Wolfie begins his quest to point out some of the more obsurd theories behind how the T-Rex got into the building.  My personal favorite: The powers of Jeff Goldblum.

However, upon further dissection of the ending of the film, it is pretty obvious the Wolfie missed a giant gaping hole covered in plastic.  As you may remember from the film, the park was still being finished so most likely one can make the easy leap that the plastic for some reason was covering a gaping 20 foot hole in the wall that the stone masons hadn’t finished yet.  That 20 foot hole would be obviously enough for the agile raptors to get through, and of course the over sized T-Rex.  While Wolfie’s article is a fun read (and I encourage you to still check it out), I think his questions have been answered.

However, this just is the beginning of my questions.  1st things first: lets start with the obvious.  Where exactly does this T-Rex come from?  He just sort of appears out of thin air through the plastic.  Earlier the ground shakes as he approaches, the girl screams, and Dr. Grant and Ellie would freak out.  This time, you’re telling me they are so focused on the two 6 foot raptors they missed the warning signs of the approaching T-Rex?  Or perhaps even more surprising, they don’t see him until he bites the first raptor?

This of course also makes me wonder if instead of debating how the T-Rex got IN, we should be wondering just how he was so stealthy?  After all the appearance of this T-Rex is ninja like.  This is leading me to believe that perhaps Spielberg was trying to convey a little known dinosaur fact that T-Rex’s were nature’s original ninjas.  In fact, it could be quite plausible that the Chinese cultures could have learned their martial arts skills from skills passed down/learned from a T-Rex.  Or even worse- a ninja is just a human infused with Dino-DNA that was once trapped in amber.

I of course could also get into the little side details where my brain begins to wonder just why exactly they finished the entire visitor center except the West wall.  I mean, let’s think this through.  Would you fully furnish the building, stock the fridge and construct a giant priceless T-rex skeleton in your mutli-million dollar visitor center if one of the walls wasn’t finished?  Especially on a remote island that has bouts severe weather?  Your visitor center and it’s contents would be exposed to the elements- potentially destroying it all before the public got to see it.  And before it is said- no- the plastic doesn’t count.  It could blow in the breeze.  It was a glorified drop cloth.  The raptor picked it up off the ground with his nose.

The point is, as a film Jurassic Park is a lot of fun, but I have just over thought this scene.  And now you have too.

Over-Analysis A Scene: Tango And Cash

I’m a fan of a wide variety of cinema, but I find my mind drifting from time to time. Someone once told me that the devil was in the details, but I guess that means when it comes to movies- I like to dance with the devil. I get caught up in the little things. For whatever reason a scene in a film makers movie that seems really cool actually has some really strange fatal flaws in it. When you get down to it, it leaves you scratching your head. Today starts a new series on the site called Over-Analysis of a Scene. It’s where I show you a scene from a film, and then break it down a bit. What are we missing? What doesn’t quite make sense?

This week’s scene comes from a classic 1989 film called Tango and Cash. It’s an 80’s buddy cop film where Sly Stallone and Kurt Russell are hero cops framed for murder and must escape from a maximum security prison and clear their name. In the scene below, the villainous mastermind, played by Jack Palance, lays out his plot to put Tango and Cash behind bars so he can pull off the weapons deal the century.

First things first; let’s watch the scene:

Now onto stage 2; The dissection begins!

First of all, I can’t help but wonder who Jack Palance is talking to other than the TV screen.  It’s obvious leading up to this that his goons are still walking into the room.  In fact they don’t even reach the room until he gets to the little thing all about Ray Tango.

Next he just simply asks “Now do you get why we musn’t kill them?”  in which his goons respond, “No.”  I have to ask here, why would they understand?  They walked in on their boss talking to himself while watching security footage.  They only hear half of the conversation he is having with himself and he is speaking in parables.  Even I don’t understand, and as I viewer, I’ve heard the entire conversation.  I hope he explains more in depth.  After all killing them would be quicker and easier!

Oh wait, quick and easy is how you bake a cake, or clean a toilet bowl or shop by mail; not run a multi-million dollar company like his!

Now we get down to the thinking part: The mice.  He’s keeping these mice in a box for his perfect analogy time.  Look at the box!  It’s a cigar? box, at least a wooden box.  The box has no air holes.  How are these mice alive in the box?  Is this their permanent home?  It should also be noted, if you want to scroll back in the video, he produces this box from no where.  I guess the box comes from his lap; but if you notice as he spins in his chair as he turns off the TV, there is no wooden box of mice in his lap.  He just sort of produces it magically from under the see through table.

Next as Palance explains his elaborate plan to put Tango and Cash behind bars, he places these 2 mice in a elaborate maze/table that is on the other side of the room.  Why does this table exist?  I guess it is a nice illustration, to prove your point that Tango and Cash would be behind bars and thus working through the maze of the legal system, but is it necessary?  Couldn’t you just say hey- We’re going to set them up for murder?  Are these mice really needed?

This scene is fun, but a trifle bit unnecessary.  He went to an awful lot of trouble to divulge very little information about a plot to put Tango and Cash behind bars.  He produced a magically appearing box that contained mice who didn’t require air to breath and placed them in an elaborate table maze he created just to explain to his fellow crooks that he is two hero cops will be in jail.

Yes- I’ve over thought this scene.  And now you have to.  Grenbeck-out.


?>