Fantasy films - 2017
| The Dark Tower | King Arthur: Legend of the Sword | Beauty and the Beast |
| The Great Wall |
____________________
 |
Like many readers, I’d been a fan of Stephen King’s horror novels for years. So, when I saw The Dark Tower on bookshelves in the early 80’s I was puzzled. A cowboy-type hero pursuing a bad guy who sounds like the devil from The Stand and set in some fantasy universe? Is King tired of horror and wants to try his hand at fantasy? It doesn’t sound much like Dungeons and Dragons . . . I never bought into the idea. The stories never piqued my interest. But with a feature film starring Idris Elba as the Gunslinger and Matthew McConaughey as the Man In Black, it might finally be worth a look.
The story begins as we are introduced to Jake Chambers (Tom Taylor), an 11-year-old boy haunted by visions of malevolent creatures in some other world and of a Gunslinger who opposes them. He also begins to observe a correlation between his dark visions and tremors in his home in New York City. Eventually, Jake’s visions guide him to a way of crossing over between the worlds and join forces with the Gunslinger himself.
Mixing heroic fantasy with our reality has always been a hard trick to pull off. Fantasy realms as in Lord of the Rings, Arthurian legend, and Game of Thrones require a certain suspension of belief. They work in these contexts because the rules of the world are set up, we accept them, and nothing intrudes to remind us how far-fetched they are. When “reality” is brought into the mix, it usually invites jokes which undercut the drama the storyteller wants to convey. The only fantasy stories I can recall that have gotten away with crossing over between fantasy worlds and our very mundane one are the Narnia stories and Dorothy’s trips to Oz. But these tales are aimed at younger readers. There were times, while watching The Dark Tower, that it seemed a bit like a boy’s wish fulfillment – fighting the forces of evil at the side of a heroic father figure while he possesses a special power that both sides want. I was reminded of The Last Action Hero (1993) and even Masters of the Universe (1987).
However, as simplistic as the story may seem, the performances are actually quite good. The ending leaves the possibility for sequels (or a series perhaps), so now that the characters have been introduced, perhaps further storytelling could flesh out this sketchy multi-verse. The notion of a number of parallel Earths protected from a dark universe by a dark tower is an intriguing notion. It brought to mind the Norse belief in nine realms unified by the world tree Yggdrasil. It has also been suggested that the conflict between the Gunslinger and the Man in Black is a repeating cycle, also common in Norse myth. It will be interesting to see where the story goes from here.
- JC
____________________
 |
I admit to having a fondness for the classics. When a studio says they are planning to breathe new life into a character from old stories or movies, I'm usually on board. I had hoped last year's Tarzan would be a return to the character's popularity of old, but sadly it didn't seem to strike a chord with the public. The same with John Carter. It's been a while since anyone has tried to give King Arthur a big screen treatment and I had hoped that producer/director/writer Guy Ritchie would be able to pull off a win. His direction of Sherlock Holmes and Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, both starring Robert Downey Jr. as a more eccentric, but two-fisted version of the character, had been successful. And while The Man From U.N.C.L.E., which he directed and also wrote and produced was less successful, I still found it enjoyable. Unfortunately, King Arthur: The Legend of the Sword is more than a bit of a mess.
The Back-Story: When Arthur was still a babe in arms, his father King Uther Pendragon (Eric Bana) had just managed to defeat the villainous mage, Mordred, when his villainous brother, Vortigern (Jude Law), allied himself with dark magical forces and murdered the King and his wife. Set adrift on a boat while Uther battled Vortigern, Arthur is found in Londonium by prostitutes who take him in and raise him. He grew up as a child of the streets, learned how to do business, and how to fight.
The Story: While defending the women of the brothel where he was raised, Arthur (Charlie Hunnam) clashes with Vikings under Vortigern's protection. While attempting to flee arrest, he is stopped by the King's soldiers and put on a boat with other men of similar age. The sword Excalibur, embedded in stone, had recently appeared outside of the King's castle and men were being rounded up to see who could draw it from the stone. Arthur succeeds in drawing the sword, but is overwhelmed by its magic and the visions it conveys to him and he passes out. He awakens in Vortigern's dungeon and the usurper King tells him only Uther's true heir could have drawn the sword. Holding people Arthur cares for hostage, he informs him that he will be "exposed" as a pretender to the throne and executed. Allies of Uther and those of his wizard, Merlin, come to Arthur's aid and together they seek to depose Vortigern and place Arthur in his rightful place.
The Good: It was an interesting spin on Arthurian lore to change things the way that Ritchie chose to. He turned Mordred into an adversary of Uther's instead of him being Arthur's incestuous offspring by way of his sister. He created a villainous brother for Uther so Arthur would have an evil uncle, ala Hamlet's Claudius (or The Lion King's Scar), to vanquish to regain his throne. He made Arthur a self-made man, so he would never have been spoiled and weakened by growing up surrounded by wealth and comfort. Instead, he grew up among the people he was destined to rule The ways in which magic in the world is depicted, both psychic and tangible, is seductive and believable within the context of this world. Regarding performances, Hunnam as Arthur stands out. In contrast to his character in HBO's Game of Thrones (Petyr Baelish), Aiden Gillen as Uther's knight Sir William, distinguishes himself well. Also in contrast, I haven't seen Jude Law as the villain before. He nails it as someone both ruthless, but almost sympathetic.
The Not-So-Good: In spite of artistic license, Arthurian lore is fairly well established and I hate seeing people mess with it overmuch. Ritchie's changes may serve his story better, but there are many of us who simply want to see Arthur's story portrayed well, not re-written. An Arthur, with no Merlin, but just a pale substitute in the character of "the Mage" (Astrid Berges-Frisbey) seems a bit lame. (No disrespect to the too-young-for-the-role actress. This is on Ritchie as writer and director.) From a purely technical perspective, this film seems sloppily made. There is a score, but it is noticeably absent in scenes which call for it for dramatic effect. The cinematography often seems amateurish - most noticeably in a chase scene where Arthur and his cohorts are attempting to avoid capture by Vortigern's men after an assassination attempt. The magical fight scenes between Uther/Arthur and the demon knight might have been better if not so dark they could barely be made out.
It was apparently the intention of the producers to turn this into a franchise of films. Honestly, I hope they get the chance to learn from their mistakes and go on because of my fondness for the source material and curiosity about their spin on the story. However, film-making is a business. So, who knows if they will have a chance to do so. The film has been declared a box-office bomb. I think this one could be improved on and salvaged. Ritchie is a talented director, but I'm not sure about his writing skills and it appears it's better with someone else holding the producer reigns. I give this film a very tentative "thumbs up," (51%) only hoping for better in the future. Ground-level is nice enough. But Camelot deserves a bit more grandeur.
- JC
____________________
 |
The latest in what promises to be a long string of live action remakes of Disney animated classics, this year’s Beauty and the Beast is a faithful and satisfying — if largely unoriginal — rendition of its 1991 source material. The costumes and sets are beautiful, all the most beloved songs (plus four original additions) are included, and the star studded cast is perfectly ideal, without a weak singer in the bunch.
Emma Watson, best known for her portrayal of bookish and courageous Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter movies, fits the lead role as bookish and courageous Belle like a glove. Luke Evans’ Gaston is an appropriately hammy, hard-headed, masculine caricature, and Josh Gad steals the show as LeFou, reimagined as a henchman with a secret heart of gold. Finally, Dan Stevens (Downton Abbey’s honorable heir Matthew Crawley) seems an almost inevitable choice to play a Disney prince at some point. Although he spends most of this film buried under a digitally-produced humanoid buffalo costume and voice deepening special effects, he makes a convincing spoiled aristocrat learning to love for the first time. And, in spite of the voice altering special effects, his performance of the Broadway-influenced original song “Evermore” is actually quite impressive and moving.
While the film gets off to a slow start, essentially transcribing the cartoon into a high budget, live action copy of itself, small changes eventually justify the existence of a new movie. Its Gaston is more murderous, its Lefou a reluctant but ultimately redeemable accomplice, and its eighteenth century French setting is more pronounced. We get to visit Belle’s childhood home in Paris and learn more about the death of her mother and the effect it has had on her father Maurice (Kevin Kline). Old plot holes — such as the reason that the enchantress cursed the prince’s servants along with him — are also filled, fleshing out the story and answering burning questions that many viewers may have from childhood. And, while certain songs, like “Gaston” do not work as well without the benefit of animation to emphasize comedic elements, the ballads are well-performed, and the CGI adaptation of “Be Our Guest” is still visually stunning.
Finally, no review of Beauty and the Beast would be complete without some mention of the singing, dancing pots and pans that inhabit the Beast’s castle. Among the supporting cast of human housewares are Cogsworth, Lumiere, and Mrs. Potts, played by theatre veterans Ian McKellan, Ewan McGregor, and Emma Thompson, respectively. While the animated home goods are a bit less lovably human-looking in their modern CGI forms and McKellan’s Cogsworth is notably more melancholy than the original cartoon clock, the actors fit their roles well. Musical veteran McGregor (Moulin Rouge, Down with Love, and Broadway’s 2005 revival of Guys and Dolls) in particular is entertaining and engaging both in dialogue and the show-stopping song “Be Our Guest.” Audra McDonald, Stanley Tucci, and Gugu Mbatha-Raw round out the cast as Belle’s wardrobe, the castle piano, and Plumette, the seductive feather duster.
Overall, this film is not a must-see, but it is well-produced, and fans of the original should be entertained. If, however, you’re looking for something more unique from a live action Disney movie, you might want to skip this one in favor of 2018’s upcoming Mulan, helmed by Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon producer Bill Kong and rumored to be a non-musical martial arts film.
- Kathryn Carty
____________________
 |
The Great Wall of China's history goes back more than 2300 years. It consists of the combined fortifications ordered by multiple emperors over the centuries in order to keep out nomadic invaders of the Eurasian Steppe. (wikipedia.org) The Wall is not actually a continuous line and portions of the barrier are filled in by natural features, such as high mountains or rivers. In the poster for the film, The Great Wall, it is said to be 5500 miles long. But this is just the stretch built by the Ming Dynasty. The official length of the Wall is actually over 13,000 miles. (chinahighlights.com).
The scope and grandeur of the Wall is impressive enough, but the notion that its purpose was to defend against a supernatual threat tantalizes the imagination. Enter the Tao Tie, literally meaning "gluttonous ogre." The visage of the Tao Tie has been prevalent in Chinese art going back to 3,000 BC, even appearing on Chinese currency. It usually depicts a creature that looks like a cross between a dragon and a rottweiler. You wouldn't want one wandering into your back yard, much less a horde of them.
And so, given these elements plus the existence of the Chinese invention of "the black powder" (aka gunpowder, the first man-made chemical explosive), we have the basics for the plot of our story. Around the 10th century (during the Song Dynasty), a band of European mercenaries travel to China seeking black powder in order to gain the power to make themselves rich. Matt Damon and Pedro Pascal portray the members of the group who survive long enough to reach the Wall. Shortly after their arrival, they learn that the purpose of the Wall and the army stationed there is to protect China from a horde of ravenous otherworldly beasts.
Critics have been hard on this film and it's easy to understand why. While the concept is high, the plot is overly simple and the pacing of building suspense and delivering action is weak. The attempts at developing the characters almost seems tacked on. One may have to attribute this to the tendency towards stoicism one often notes in Chinese action films. The only character with much of a story arc in the film is Damon's.
That being said, I find it impossible to condemn this film. Interestingly, the concept and story were developed by Legendary CEO Thomas Tull and World War Z writer Max Brooks. Noted veteran Chinese director Zhang Yimou was set to helm the production. Zhang's background as director of epics like Hero (2002) and the opening and closing ceremonies for the 2008 Beijing Olympics demonstrate his talent for designing and orchestrating gorgeous and dynamic set pieces. What The Great Wall lacks in subtlety is balanced somewhat by its visual impressiveness. The defenses of the Wall by the brigades of Chinese soldiers using various elaborate tactics is something to see indeed.
While The Great Wall suffers from a failure to build suspense and somewhat shallow characterizations, it still has value from its sheer spectacle. If you want to see Chinese warriors fighting dragon-like beasts at the Great Wall and don't need a lot of story, this film is worth seeing.
- JC