In the endless stream of remakes and sequels that is the new normal for summer at the movies, here comes The Incredibles 2. Unlike most of it’s “another chapter in the story” brethren, this movie is well written. The thing is, its story beats are nearly identical to the first one.
Even though this movie is about the exact same thing as the previous installment, it’s still creates and expands on interesting characters, situations and does it in a different way than the first installment. This made me think about what Robert zemeckis said when making Back to the Future Part 2 and how the audience wants the same experience when they go see a sequel as they had the first time and The Incredibles 2 fits this tradition like a glove.
The reason it works is because the revisited story points are covered in broad strokes. For example:
- superheroes have conflict with the public
- conflict within the Parr family
- there’s a mysterious villian
- Edna makes a super suit
- Luscious’ wife complains about his super heroing
- Jack-Jack has powers?!?
And so on. The thing is, the subtext drives the relationship between the characters and the way the audience relates to them. It’s the reason the movie is a fun time at the movies instead of a tedious retread of something we’ve already seen.
At its core, The Incredibles 2 is a carbon copy of the original. It doesn’t quite reach the same heights, but then, what movie could? The original film (in what seems to be destined to become a franchise) is essentially without flaw. While this new entry hits all the right (even if the same) notes, the champ is still undisputed. But I still can recommend this movie to fans of the first one.
The Robocop reboot wasn’t boring and I didn’t hate it, but it just didn’t work very well. It had some interesting ideas but didn’t convey them in a passionate way. The biggest issue is probably that Robocop himself is boring. I didn’t care about him when he was Alex, I didn’t care about him or his family once he became Robocop. I liked that they didn’t just rehash the original and the callbacks were clever, but they don’t work. While the commercials and news programs in the original felt like organic parts of this universe, the Samuel L. Jackson stuff almost feels like it’s from a different movie. Jackson, Gary Oldman and Michael Keaton all turn in their usual, high quality performance, but it’s not enough. One area this movie falls super short in (especially in comparison to the original) is in the antagonist area. These guys just don’t scare me… and the other cops treat Alex as if he was out on vacation when he comes back to work as Robocop… it’s kinda bizarre.
The original is outstanding – I recommend watching that instead. This is a movie that just didn’t need a remake. I give it a 5 out of 10 and I’m going back to the watch original maybe as soon as this evening.
If you don’t count one episode of ER and a segment from Four Rooms (I do not), Jackie Brown is Quentin Tarantino’s directorial follow up to Pulp Fiction, so expectations are high. If Alfred Hitchcock was still alive, I think he’d of made this movie… and done a better job, too. Saying one director isn’t as good as Hitchcock isn’t exactly an insult, but Jackie Brown is not without it’s problems – or its successes. Here are 3 things I sorta understand about Jackie Brown. Read the rest of this entry
Sylvester Stallone’s The Expendables series has brought together some of the biggest action stars of the last several decades together into one movie, and this third time out is no exception. Bruce Willis has been replaced by Harrison Ford, Wesley Snipes is now on board and so is… Kelsey Grammar? That’s right, action movie legend and Cheers regular Kelsey Grammar is in The Expendables 3… and for some reason, these five actors didn’t make the cut. Here are five guys we would have liked to see in The Expendables 3. Read the rest of this entry
I always imagine these multi million dollar movie decisions playing out in boardroom meeting scenarios:
Hey, we’re going to start this new action-fantasy franchise!
Great, what’s it called?
As in a sweater?
No, as in a person who can teleport – or jump – from one place to the next!
That sounds really exciting!
So who should we get to headline this new franchise?
Definitely Hayden Christensen!
Obviously! The last time he headlined a franchise, it worked out so well!
So yeah, that’s what we’re dealing with here: Hayden Christensen starring in a movie that’s clearly supposed to be the first in a series of Jumper pics, but despite a strong showing at the box office, it’s been five years and still no Jumper 2: Double Dutch or whatever the sequel was going to be called. It’s just as well – the flick is nothing special.
Given that Iron Man 2 is coming to DVD and Blu Ray on September 28, I thought it was as good a time as any to take a critical look at Robert Downey Jr. as the Armored Avenger. Be warned: the following review contains spoilers (yeah, spoilers for a movie that made $128,122,480 in its opening weekend at 4,380 theaters) and is a giant ‘whatever’ fest. But read on…
You can’t talk about Iron Man without gushing over its star, so let me get that out-of-the-way. Robert Downey Jr. is the man, and he’s great in the Iron Man movies; whatever you think about the Iron Man films, you can’t deny that. The man has talent, and I can’t think of another instance where an actor had the opportunity to play a character he had so much in common with. Maybe the movie version is a bit sillier than the comic book version, but it works. Read the rest of this entry