Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters

Overall Inches on the Action Erection Scale:
4 out of 12

It’s official. They’ve sold out... 

Hansel and Gretel have joined their pals Abraham Lincoln (Vampire Hunter) and Snow White (and the Huntsman)  by getting a Hollywood makeover. My best guess: The Brothers Grimm needed the money to payback Charlie Sheen.

*Sigh* Let's get on with it...

The Story:

The concept is about what you'd expect: The fairy tale brother-sister couple have grown up, trading their German accents in for squeaky fetish gear and Matrix-lite fight moves.

When the local village is struck by a series of child abductions, Hansel (Jeremy Renner) and Gretel (Gemme Arterton) step in to solve the case. Unfortunately, they have to contend with an incompetent sheriff (Peter Stormare) and a town full of people who'd rather pyre first and ask questions later.

Several high-speed broomstick chases later and Hansel and Gretel discover that these kidnappings link back to that fateful day when they easy-baked their first witch. 

(Actually, I think I made it sound more interesting than it really was.)

Can you believe she is almost 50? Can you believe we still
love Famke despite X-Men: The Last Stand?

 The People Who Get Paid to Talk:

When it comes to movies like H&G:WH I tend to sympathize for the actors involved. That is, the longer I sat through this film the more I became aware of the fact that actor Jeremy Renner, a two-time Academy Award nominee, was spending most of the movie's mercifully brief running time rolling around on the ground covered in "blood," punching and kicking rubber monsters. Actually, that pretty much sums up the work of all the actors involved: Peter Starmore (who was great as Lucifer in Constantine) says a few lines of exposition...gets punched in then nose, rolls on the floor, and spews fake blood. Famke Janssen (my favorite Bond Girl) says a few lines of exposition...gets punched in the baby-maker, rolls on the floor, and spews fake blood. The delicious Gemma Aterton (another Bond Girl) says a few lines of exposition and then...well, heaves her breast, punches somebody, rolls on the floor and spews fake --- you get the idea.

What is action a go go?

Well, the film's action gets a shoulder shrug at best (although, props to Zoe Bell for showing up for duty). Director Timothy Wirkola (Dead Snow) definitely finds surprising ways to earn the film’s R-rating, but the choreography feels like an endless series of pratfalls with leftover prosthetics from The Hobbit...

From this...

What is action a no no?

Which brings me to the fact that this film was produced by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay, the comedy team responsible for Talladega Nights and the like. For that reason, I'm willing to bet that Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters was originally intended to be more of an action-comedy (Think: Your Highness) than what we get here. 

Supporting that theory is the fact that Director Timothy Wirkola's previous work, Dead Snow, relied on absurdity and hysterics just as much as it did its horror elements. The goal here seems kind of similar but, just like Dead Snow, the potential is wasted on low-budget splatter and jokes that go THUD. Instead, H&G:WH just views like another in a long line of fairy tales turned dim bulb Hollywood actioners. 

...to this. (I was going to comment on the decline of western
civilization but then I realized how much I
love this pic.)

The Verdict:

Never trust a movie that opens with a prologue re-explaining a classic tale by making it less interesting than the original story. Hell...never trust a film that turns a time-tested classic into an action film. I should've known better, but so should Hollywood.

*Sigh*x2

At least we got to see Gemma Arterton in a corset.

Happy thoughts. Happy thoughts. Happy thoughts...

25 YEARS OF DIE HARD: Die Hard (1988)

Often imitated, never replicated, DIE HARD (1988) still stands as an action movie masterpiece. It's got everything you can ask for in an action movie. A fantastic script, a unique setting, iconic performances, and intense action scene after intense action scene. Oh...and an amazing soundtrack.

But I know what you're going to say. "Derek, what can you, a no name BLOGGER tell me about DIE HARD that I don't already know?"

Well, let's go for a ride and see if I can surprise you.

THE STORY AND THE PEOPLE WHO GET PAID TO TALK

We all know the story. John McClane (Bruce Willis) heads out to L.A to visit his family. His first stop is a party at his wife's workplace. Her name is Holly Gennaro McClane (Bonnie Bedelia). While at the party all hell breaks loose when a group of terrorists lead by Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman) storm the skyscraper and take the whole thing over. Of course, only John McClane can stop them.

And hilarity ensues.

All kidding aside, the acting is the unsung hero of this movie. If you look at all of the performances given not one can be looked at as weak. Also, every character has their own little space carved out in the movie and is allowed to shine.

This is in marked contrast to other action classics up to this point. Think: THE TERMINATOR (1984), RAMBO FIRST BLOOD PART 2 (1985), NO RETREAT NO SURRENDER (1986), or ROBOCOP (1987). Sure, all of these movies have great casts with great characters, but none of them match DIE HARD when it comes to the breadth of emotion and story.

Best hostage in a movie ever?

We get even the most mundane characters. For example, take Harry Ellis (Hart Bochner). His death is unique because he's pitching to the terrorists before getting shot in the head. Before that, we see that he's obviously trying to get with McClane's wife, creating a minor love triangle that's destroyed once he is executed. Because of his execution, we learn just how serious these bad guys are.

In the other previously mentioned flicks, the first execution would be a screaming, no name hostage that the viewer barely get to know. In DIE HARD, these characters are savored and brought to the forefront, which makes it a much more engrossing film on every level.

Besides the aforementioned Hart Bochner, there are many standout performances. As Sgt. Al Powell, Reginald Veljohnson is a great pseudo-sidekick, playing the role of a bumbling beat cop on the sidelines.

Stair into the cheery eyes of the law...or Reginald Vel Johnson. 

The same can be said for William Atherton's excellent slime ball reporter, as he a character type that Atherton seems destined to eternally play. was typecast as that in other movies. (And if you don't believe me then check him out in GHOSTBUSTERS.)

The 80's were kind to everyone's favorite slimball, William Atherton. 

Of course, the two standouts are Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman. They only meet for a scene or two, but the chemistry is fantastic and each brings maximal performance to the screen.

Rickman is so affable and charming it's hard not to root for him along the way. It's like you want him to just get what he is looking for and gingerly hop on a helicopter for his next heist. It's still his best performance, and possibly the best villain of the 80's.

Bruce Willis on the other hand…what can be said? He helped create a character that's had legs for the last 25 years and shows no sign of loosing popularity. In John McClane we have more than the average action hero. McClane is a hero who struggles. Hell, he spends a good chunk of the movie trying to convince other cops just to show up! Thee authorities aren't even on his side! But as the movie progresses we see the whole mess start to wear McClane down physically. By the end, he's not stone faced and standing tall like the machines in ROBOCOP or a force of a nature like John Rambo. He's limping along bleeding all over the place and is barely coherent. But he will not stop. And he will not lose. This makes him one of the most relatable action heroes of the 80's, and of course well into the 90's and the next century.

JOHN MCTIERNAN:  THE MAN, THE MYTH, THE INCARCERATED…

A huge part of what makes DIE HARD work is the relentless artistry of John McTiernan. Besides the actors themselves, I'm sure McTiernan was responsible for bringing all that talent onto the screen. It's something he was able to do with PREDATOR (1987), but in a totally different context.

With PREDATOR (1987) we got to know each and every character with a scene here and an interaction there. By the end of the first act we've got a good baseline of all of the characters involved. We know these characters. We also get to know the jungle they are running through and the dangerous creature hunting them. But it's all done in bits and pieces that equal one magnificent whole.

DIE HARD inherits this economy of characterization and manages to extract even more from its setting. In the skyscraper we have a cage. The rats can see the outside world but cannot touch it. This makes all of the characters isolated to a certain degree, and with that isolation we are able to peer into their lives and get to know them in way's that other action movies don't dare to travel.

Also, McTiernan revels in turning the genre on it's head. In DIE HARD, we have police officers and FBI agents, traditional symbols of authority, nearly all portrayed as self-absorbed idiots throughout the film. As a matter of fact, whenever they get involved things get worse. Even McClane himself is simply a problem that won't go away. It's the best and most ironic joke in the film that isn't repeated as heavily in rest of the series.

WHAT'S ACTION A GO GO…

Everything.

It's also a Christmas movie. It's important to remember that.

THE VERDICT

Well look what we found here...another awesome action movie.

DIE HARD will probably never be beat.

A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD is going to try and walk in it's footsteps, and hopefully it will give it a good go.

Next on the list is DIE HARD 2. Often forgotten in the wake of DIE HARD  and DIE HARD WITH A VENGENCE (1995), we're going to see what we can drag out of "DIE HARDER." I think it will be fun.

We hope you enjoyed this, and please leave something in the comments if you want to add anything or just let us know what DIE HARD means to you.

Derek Scarzella 

P.S  Oh, and here are some funnies...

Anybody else play this game? Awesome....

THE LAST STAND : The Boys Are Back In Town...But Should They Be?

He's back, baby. After taking time off to pursue his favorite hobby of running California, Arnold Schwarzenegger is where he should be staring in a Hollywood action bananza. That movie would be THE LAST STAND. Sure, he appeared in THE EXPENDABLES (2010) and in THE EXPENDABLES 2 (2012) he had a role, but this is Arnold prime as the lead role with a collection of solid performers in tow, including Oscar winner Forest Whitaker (THE LAST KING OF SCOTTLAND – 2006).

So what's the final verdict here? Is Arnold over the hill? Should Johnny Knoxville ever appear in a movie again? When is Luis Guzmán going to get his Oscar?

READ ON TO FIND OUT!

THE STORY AND THE PEOPLE WHO GET PAID TO TALK.

A Mexican drug lord named Gabriel Cortez (Eduardo Noriega, VANTAGE POINT (2008) breaks out of death row and begins to make his way to the Mexican border in a high powered Corvette ZR1. FBI Agent John Bannister (previously mentioned Forest Whitaker) is tracking him along the way. The town Cortez is heading to has a Sheriff, and that Sheriff and his deputies are the only thing standing between Cortez and his freedom. That's pretty much it.

The cast does a good job and is full of familiar faces. Luis Guzmán, Jaimie Alexander (THOR, 2011), Rodrigo Santoro (300 (2006), he played Xerxes! He's so short!), and all give solid performances. Johnny Knoxville...is in the movie.

The bad guys do a decent job as well. Eduardo Noriega and Peter Storemare (MINORITY REPORT, (2002) give excellent, if over the top, performances. So good job to them.

So I'm not going to lay into any of the players, cause they just got paid to talk.

WHATS ACTION A GO GO...

This isn't really an action movie, it's more of an extreme action comedy. Whether it's trying to be funny at certain times is hard to tell, but the movie certainly is laughable.

The end of the film has some intense moments and earns it's hard R rating. Also, some parts are genuinely laugh out loud funny.

This mix of old and new is....interesting....

The biggest surprise here is Arnold. There are times in this film where he shows some subtle emotions and is truly acting here. We're talking caring, touching moments. Also, it manages to play off his age, and you see it in his face. He looks like he's legitimately having a hard time and it works.

But's that's where the good stuff ends.

WHATS ACTION A NO NO...

"Let's find the person who wrote this script and shoot him!"

Oh, so much of this movie. I place the blame directly on the script and the directing.

You have Arnold, one of the most iconic icons in the business, and his best line is “I'm old!”. Really? And that just is one example of how weak this script was throughout. Cliche after cliche is thrown at the viewer and talent is wasted left and right. Forest Whitaker gives a great, commanding performance here, but why? It's wasted on one interrogation scene and a lot of looking at computer monitors.

"What are you doing here, Forest?"
"I...I just don't know anymore Arnold...."

But the biggest complaints have to do with the direction of this film. Car chases are marked with haphazard filming that is made for T.V, not the big screen. Comedy is met with a fumbling simplicity. Beautiful scenery is zoomed by instead of savored. To my understanding this is Jee-woon Kim's first American film and I am not looking forward to his next.

THE VERDICT

Even if you are a die hard action fan such as me I would recommend skipping this.

Arnold can do better. Hollywood can do better. I know, because I've seen what James Cameron, Paul Verhoeven, and John McTiernan have done with Arnold in front of the camera. Even Paul Michael Glaser got more out of Arnold with THE RUNNING MAN (1987)!

But even if you take Arnold out of the equation this just isn't a good movie. The movie does manage to redeem itself towards the end, but by then this action fan just didn't care.

So that's it. This movie is not ACTION A GO GO approved.

Today is truly a said day....

P.S

But how bout we cheer ourselves up with our favorite tradition?

I don't throw around the word "Perfect" a lot, but in this case....Jaimie Alexander might fit the bill....

Dueling Movies: Marvel’s The Avengers vs. The Dark Knight Rises (The Final Word)

In 2012, the rivalry between “Marvel zombies” and DC Comics fanboys left the comic shops and came to a head at cineplexes across the globe. The lines were drawn.

In one corner, you have Christopher Nolan’s Batman franchise, a far more sober take on the comic book genre than audiences were used to. In the other corner we had Marvel Studios’ string of colorful superhero flicks, all building up to their all-or-nothing final chapter, The Avengers. 

We’ve talked endlessly about our love for Marvel’s The Avengers (even going as far as to label it as our 2012 movie of the year), so forgive us if this go-round is a bit TDKR-heavy. It’s just that we hate repeating ourselves.

The Summary

In theory, the narrative structure of a trilogy should be circular. Intelligently, The Dark Knight Rises does just that, reintroducing the League of Shadows from 2005’s Batman Begins and catching back up with their overly-elaborate plot to reset the imbalance of power in the world.

Then you have Avengers, a superhero slugfest pretending to be a sibling drama at its core. Mainly springboarding off of details from 2011’s Thor, The Avengers reacquaints us with Loki (Tom Hiddleston), Thor's half-brother. Apparently, Loki has met some powerful friends in outer space. Friends with the same world-beating hard-on as him. From there, wackiness actually does kind of ensue.

The People Who Get Paid to Talk

This is where it gets tricky. Cinephiles (AKA movie snobs) will be impressed by and argue in favor of all the accented actors to be found in The Dark Knight Rises. Let’s see…you’ve got Christian Bale (Wales), Gary Oldman (London), Michael Caine (London), and Tom Hardy (London). Unfortunately, the actors in Dark Knight Rises are let down by a wooden script from Christopher Nolan and co-writer Jonathan Nolan.

While movies of this nature tend to have plot-driven dialogue, the best filmmakers find ways to relax all that exposition, giving the actors (and viewers) something digestible to work with. And that’s the issue with TDKR, despite its potential for powerhouse performances, the players are saddled with some of the clunkiest “speechifying” imaginable. All the players except one...Anne Hathaway as Catwoman/Selina Kyle.

Oozing charisma, Hathaway is a Disney alumni and it shows. Early in the film, she plays Kyle as an easily-intimidated cocktail server. Because this is Catwoman, Hathaway sheds her timid demeanor long enough to put Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) on his ass and somersault out the nearest window. The way she executes this switcheroo (one of several) is a testament to Hathaway’s understanding of the character and the many actresses that have played her before. It’s a spirited and notable performance, especially in a film where most of the other actors are inaudible (Hardy and Bale) or stuck in plot device hell (Morgan Freeman, Marion Cottilard, and Michael Caine).

Then there is The Avengers...

Reiterating my point from earlier, some actors are only as good as the material that they are presented. And when I say “material” I’m not really referring to the script as a whole, but how meaty the dialogue is and how much they can play with it. In that regard, screenwriter-director Joss Whedon is the gift that keeps on giving.

As expected, Robert Downey Jr. (Iron Man) delivers every line as if it just fired off the top of his head (which I’m certain some of it did), but it seems like everyone else in the cast is being just as improvisational. But that’s just it. It’s not improv, it’s the patented Joss Whedon-style. A winning mixture of artistic license, unexpected humor, and perfectly implemented character beats.

Basically, the actors are having fun and it shows.

Winner:

Avengers 1/TDKR 1

Tie! Acting is acting, guys. The material dictates the tone. Unfortunately for TDKR, the dialogue hurts the actors but God bless ‘em for trying…

The Story

Let’s be honest here...both Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises are two of the poorest scripts produced by their respective screenwriters. I mean, they are rife with goofy clichés and questionable short cuts (Batman gets his spine smacked back into place and the Chitauri just collapse upon defeat). The only difference is that one director knows how to maneuver those clichés because he works almost exclusively in that genre.

As stated earlier, I have to admit that the third installment of Christopher Nolan's Batman comes full circle. However, that doesn’t negate the fact that it feels like Christopher Nolan took the worst impulses of his otherwise exceptional filmmaking career and highlighted them (more on that later).

While TDKRawkwardly went for a French Revolution film by way of Batman, Whedon went for a straight-up superhero romp, one that used its exposition to set up pay offs and punchlines while TDKR used its plot to repeat heavy-handed idioms.

In addition, while Nolan tried to connect characters and themes in an effort to close out his own trilogy, Joss Whedon put five films by five other directors on his back and made it look easy. Yes, movie making is tough…but that's real tough. His years of experience as a executive producer for several television shows and writer’s rooms paid off.

(NOTE: Both films have a climax involving clean energy and a hero flying an explosive device away from civilians. F@ck you, Hollywood!)

Winner:

Avengers 2/TDKR 1

Special Effects:

This one is a no-brainer. Avengers literally gave us something we hadn't seen before: a superhero vs. aliens showdown in Manhattan (No, I haven't forgotten about Superman II, but the advancements in visual effects has changed drastically since then.)

Yes, shades of the film are reminiscent of 2011’s Transformers: Dark of the Moon (which, by the way, is because the FX crew from Transformers were brought on to assist with the Avengers’ finale), but it's still light years better than what the the opposition has to offer...

Simply by comparison, The Dark Knight Rises’ comes up short in the effects department. To be fair though ---  just at a glance --- the movie doesn't rely on digital effects nearly as much as Avengers. I mean, a lot of the city shots in Avengers were handled via green screen while most of the city shots of Gothamin TDKR were done on-location. That being said, there are shots of  Batman’s aerial assault vehicle, that have what I can only describe as “jaggies” --- little pieces of polygon that trail off the black surface of the "The Bat" as it zips past the camera. It’s an old video game term, but it applies here.

Winner:

Avengers 3/TDKR 1

Action

Earlier, I mentioned that TDKR highlights all of Christopher Nolan’s shortcomings. That means stiff, humorless dialogue and uninspired action.

Firstly, I want to give credit where credit is due (again): Christopher Nolan makes great psy-fi. That is, “genre” films that are primarily driven by psychological drama. If you’ve seen Inception, Momento, or The Prestige then you catch my drift. That being said, Christopher Nolan is NOT an action director. Yes, he gave us that spinning room sequence in Inception, but he also gave us that incredibly generic snowy hilltop shoot out in the same film as well. 

TDKR takes that generic-ness and highlights it. The audience is subjected to horribly bland punch outs between Batman and Bane. In fact, the fights are so bland that Nolan seems to forget to give us the big iconic moment between the two characters: “The breaking of the bat.” It’s a big moment for comic book nerds and for the Batman mythos, but Nolan strips it of its iconography. It happens so quickly --- so matter-of-factly --- that when it’s explained later that Batman’s back is broken, you’re left scratching your head as to when. 

Meanwhile, Joss Whedon (with plenty of help from his experienced effects team) stepped up his game, dashing all concerns about his limited filmography or inexperience with diverse fighting styles and Michael Bay-level action.

Sorry, but the winner is obvious…

Winner:

Avengers 4/TDKR 1

The Verdict:

The fact of the matter is that both directors Christopher Nolan and  Joss Whedon had an unenviable task in front of them. And, while neither director made "The Greatest Superhero Movie of All-Time," (which, according to my blu-ray collection, has been proclaimed almost annually since Spider-Man) only one of these filmmakers effectively wrangled his ambitious project and soared. Joss Whedon.

And that’s what it boils down to. Ambition and the execution of both filmmakers’ aspirations. Both movies shot high, but only one of them was the underdog going in. Only one of them defied expectations and was confident enough to deliver on it's adventure and action. Marvel’s Avengersis that movie.

ZERO DARK THIRTY: It’s About Time….

           Nothing has affected the United States of America more in the past two decades than the attacks of Sept. 11^th 2001. At the dawn of a new century our country was attached in the most brutal way possible and the consequences have reverberated through our society and the world ever since. You are reminded of this when ZERO DARK THIRTY begins and all you hear is a collection of recorded voices screaming, talking to loved ones, and begging for help. From that point on you are elbows deep in the hunt for one of the most notorious terrorists of our time.

Jessica Chastain in her biggest role yet.

            The plot centers are a wicked smart CIA field agent named Maya, played by Jessica Chastain (LAWLESS 2012). Over the course of a decade we follow her through dead end after dead end until finally a big break emerges. Along the way we meet fellow CIA agent Dan (Jason Clarke, also in LAWLESS) who specializes in enhanced interrogation techniques. We get to know other field agents along the way as well as the CIA station chiefs and field operatives. Some are lost, others give up. Through all of this Maya perseveres until a decades worth of work pays off.  When she’s with the NAVY SEALS before the mission even they bend to her latent authority. Joel Edgerton and Chris Pratt play the SEALs well.  

Here we see Chris Pratt and Joel Edgerton as Navy Seals.

Instead of getting to know the team overall these two are focused on and provide us a window into just what these are about before, during, and immediately after the mission. The SEAL that has the kill shot is just a face in the crowd, as it should be.

Mark Strong gives a stirring performance.

Some performances stand out, like Mark Strong as George, a CIA higher up who struggled to convince the White House just how big this was. Kyle Chandler takes an excellent turn as Joseph Bradley.  Chris Pratt does an excellent job playing against type. Jason Clarke is menacing as Dan, and Jessica Chastain is a marvel to behold. But truth be told, all of the performances are sincere and show genuine craft.

           

The movies greatest achievement is that it has managed to do what an untold number of movies since 9/11 have tried to do. Let me explain. As recently as SAFE HOUSE (2012) “enhanced interrogation techniques” of the Bush era were shown as what some consider them to be. Torture. We also had ACT OF VALOR (2012), a love letter to the NAVY SEALS (as well as the video game series CALL OF DUTY) that got into the nitty gritty of how they operate. THE KINGDOM (2007), BODY OF LIES (2008), and TRAITOR (2008) are all movies that dealt with battling terrorists and the moral ambiguities that arise during the hunt.

But ZERO DARK THIRTY manages to trump them all. And it’s not because it has the luxury of dealing with Osama Bin Laden head on. No, it’s because it steeps itself in the real work that goes into bringing these men down. We see agents sitting at desks pouring through books, files, and recordings. They’re spending time gathering info and putting the pieces together. They are getting inside the heads of these men, desperately trying to grasp at the only thing that matters in the intelligence field. That ever elusive thing called truth.

Moral questions and politics take a back seat while the hunt is on and the only consequence of failure is another deadly terrorist attach in this real spy world.

For Kathryn Bigelow this is a triumph and an affirmation of the incredible artist and director that she is. For what it’s worth, this is the best movie she has ever made, including THE HURT LOCKER (2008).

The writing of Mark Boal is also on point. He manages to pick highlights of the past ten years and weave them into a story that demands your attention. If this team doesn't work together again it will be a shame, as they are seemingly unstoppable together.

Of course after all that praise I have to say the movie is not totally perfect. At the beginning of the movie it really is sink or swim. As in, you commit to this movie and put the pieces together yourself or you could get lost. In that sense there is a lack of focus in the actual story itself. Also, this movie is nearly entirely told from the perspective of the Maya and other operatives. It would have interesting to see something from the vantage point of Al Qaeda.  But if you could tell I am stretching things a bit.

This movie is amazing. Even more importantly, it felt like closure. I remember where I was when 9/11 happened. And I remember where I was when President Obama announced that we got Bin Laden in a raid in Pakistan. ZERO DARK THIRTY manages to connect those moments in time and put all the hard work, frustration, and desperation in focus.

For that, it is a triumph.

Go see it. It has been worth the wait. 

P.S

Oh...and tradition is tradition...