Whether or not we decide whether or not we enjoy the 'Resident Evil' film series, one can't really deny its success. They cranked out six movies, each was pretty successful (though none really did gangbusters), and it was a series that managed to set up a lot of continuations through cliff-hangers, and see them through to the end. I might even argue that the way this ends, though not a cliff-hanger, does suggest that things could continue. So far, for yours truly, it has been a steady ride of sinking and plateauing, but never really rising. That is until now, and even having said that, it's still only by a small increment. So what made this one good to me, while the others played out anywhere from bad to average? Well, it's hard to put my finger on it, but perhaps it's a better idea to get to know my tastes a little more. Whether or not something is good, it can develop some kind of nostalgic factor for me, and I do have this with the first of the films. This came along in 2016 when I was 34 upon its release, concluding a series that's been around since 2002, when I was still 19 upon its release. So the series does cover my twenties, and it's like remembering funky 80s hairstyles. Perhaps they're not particularly close to my heart, but the memories of the 'Resident Evil' movies coming out was simply a part of things. I'm also a sucker for things concluding after a long run, not so much because it ends, but because I always feel like there's more put into a final chapter... unless it's 'Freddy's Dead' or 'Jason Goes to Hell', but I digress. As the film opens, Alice (Milla Jovovich) does a recap with a bit of history for anyone new coming into things. Founder of Umbrella, Dr. James Marcus (Mark Simpson) had a daughter named Alicia who was dying from progeria - a genetic disorder which makes one appear older than they really are. If you've ever seen the Robin Williams movie, 'Jack' - same deal. In his desperation, Marcus attempts to use the T-Virus on her (not knowing its full effects yet) and various other patients suffering with the disorder. However, they reanimate as zombies, and Marcus tries to shut the program down before things get out of hand. But then Dr. Alexander Isaacs (Iain Glen) has him secretly killed by Albert Wesker (Shawn Roberts), and adopts Alicia, taking over Umbrella. The film picks up where the last one left off, as Alice awakens in Washington, DC. The Red Queen (Ever Anderson) hologram pops up and informs Alice about Umbrella developing an airborne anti-virus that's being held back at the Hive - the setting for the first film. If Alice can get her hands on it, and release it, that will mean the eventual end of the T-virus altogether, and may very well also mean Alice's death. During the mission for this film, Alice ends up finding out just how tied in she is with Umbrella's past and, though things do get a little convoluted, I have to admit that I actually appreciated some of the turns this took. They bring in new characters (including new badass female protagonist, Abigail, played by Ruby Rose), bring back old characters (including Ali Larter as Claire Redfield) and things manage to come to a suitable end with one big action-packed feast for the eyes. I think a big part of why I liked this a little more than the others also has to do with the fact that I saw this with fresh eyes. Ulike all of the previous titles, this was my first viewing. So, much like seeing a 'Fast & Furious' movie these days, there's that matter of knowing exactly what to expect. I went into this knowing that action-wise, it almost had to be parallel to the previous couple of films- if not more (which it was). Put simply, these films have developed a rollercoaster ride reputation, so this time around it was pretty easy for me to just strap in and enjoy the ride, rather than looking for all of the ride's various problems. For whatever reason, this was probably the 'Resident Evil' title that I ultimately had the most fun with as it provided me with a lot of cool visuals that almost made me feel like a kid again. One's opinion on the 'Resident Evil' series is bound to differ from movie to movie though, and I can see people disagreeing with my thought process here pretty easily. When it comes to these, it sort of just depends on what you're looking for, as each film has it's own little bit of spectacle to it. Unfortunately, if you're looking for any sort of faithful game adaptation, you should probably just stick to the games and avoid these altogether. These movies exist as their own thing, borrowing various elements from the games, as opposed to just being direct adaptations. It seemed to all work out for the franchise in the end, and from what I understand, there's some "remake" stuff going on right now, so we'll have to see what happens. But for now, these can be a fun watch with the right mindset, even if they're not all that great. All you need to do is toss that brain of yours out that window. 3/5
0 Comments
Once again, my experience is minimal at best. All I've really done with the 'Assassin's Creed' game series is offer myself the short end of the stick by only ever renting and playing the first. Why? Because I'm a stickler for playing and watching things "in order", and I really need to learn that a lot of the time with gaming, it doesn't matter all that much. It was long enough ago that I don't remember much, but what stood out was how incredibly easy it was to hide from idiots by pulling up that hood. I also remember hay-diving, and having to start at the same God-forsaken point every single time. Needless to say, I wasn't the biggest fan of the game. Most will tell me, however, that it's probably the lamest of the series (although I'm not sure if it has been replaced with a lamer title. That's all up to the fan-base). The idea is interesting enough. You control a character who lives in the modern day named Desmond Miles who lives the genetic memories of his ancestor, Altaïr Ibn-La'Ahad through a machine known as the "Animus". As the game unfolds, as do details about the struggle between the Assassin Brotherhood; fighting for peace through free will, and the Knights Templar; also fighting for peace, but through control. I suppose one could think Jedi/Empire. Both seek an ancient relic called the "Apple of Eden", which can be used for mind-control. As the Templar wants it for fairly obvious reasons, the Assassins wish to intercept and destroy it before it falls in the wrong hands. The game is played in a pretty open-world setting, and focuses largely on combat, parkour, and "stealth" (a part of the game I consider insanely broken). All things considered, adaptation-wise, this actually does a pretty good job, but unfortunately doesn't come without a few glaring problems - not the least of which is the simple fact that it's actually kind of boring (of course, I'm only speaking for myself here). In the movie, we meet Cal Lynch (Michael Fassbender) who uses a revolutionary new technology to time-travel to 15th-century Spain by using his genetic memories from his DNA. In Spain, he lives out the experiences of a distant relative and member of the Assassin Brotherhood, Aguilar de Nerha (Also Fassbender). Using his experiences from the past, Cal soon develops skills he needs to stand up against the very corporation sending him back, soon realizing he's being used to obtain an ancient relic - and yeah, it's also the Apple. So really, aside from maybe using the proper names, this isn't entirely off from what it's supposed to be. But what about that boredom I experienced? The film also gives us the characters of head scientist, Sofia (Marion Cotillard), CEO of the Templars' Abstergo Foundation, Rikkin (Jeremy Irons), Cal's father, Joseph (Brendan Gleeson), fellow assassins, Lin (Michelle H. Lin) and Moussa (Michael Kenneth Williams). In all honesty, this was just to illustrate some of the star-power the film has. Each has their respective role, but I could also be here all day unfolding the plot when what a review comes down to is "what did I think about it?" Despite my overall boredom here, I have to admit that the film had its moments that reminded me of my in-game experiences and, honestly, I think the boredom might be a "me" thing. There was something about the way they talked in this that started slowly putting me to sleep. That's not to say that the action and adventure that takes place in the games isn't there, but I think it's overshadowed by a bit of a convoluted plot, and quite a bit of exposition. I can't say I hated it, but I can admit when a movie doesn't strike me, and this sure as hell didn't strike me in any particular way. With a movie like this, I like to say it's just sort of "there". It exists, and I didn't have any real reason to check it out until the purposes of this review. It does, however, put a glimmer of hope in one's imagination for Hollywood finally getting video game movies right - but again, this is all up for debate. 3/5 My overall experience with 'Warcraft' is minimal at best. I never did delve into the whole 'WoW' thing, and the only chapter I really ever played was 'Warcraft 2' back in the late 90s... with all the cheat codes because I was ridiculously impatient with strategy games. "Every little thing she does", "Make it so" and "Glittering prizes" were my personal favourites (alternatively, "all upgrades and infinite mana", "speed up", and "10,000 gold, 5000 lumber, 5000 oil"). Yeah, much like my experience with the 'GTA' game series, it was something I didn't so much "play" as mess around with for fun. However, getting to the review, this was a project announced ten years before its release as a collaboration between Legendary Pictures and a then controversy-free Blizzard Entertainment. By the time of its eventual release, however, some fans weren't exactly chomping at the bit anymore, and the film underperformed at the domestic box office, receiving the unsurprising bad reviews one pretty much expects at this point from a video game-based film. It did, however, do very well worldwide, which goes to show that 'Warcraft' has some real international reach. In fact, it currently stands as the highest-grossing video game adaptation of all time, despite its American flop of a release. Story-wise, the main focus has a lot to do with the Orcs ('Warcraft' orcs, not 'Lord of the Rings' orcs), as we're introduced to Durotan (Toby Kebbell) and his pregnant mate, Draka (Anna Galvin). The couple are facing a blight on their kind, caused by a force known as fel magic - a dark magic used by the orc warlock, Gul'dan (Daniel Wu). Using this magic drains the lifeforce from Gul'dan's prisoners, and the orcs, forming the Horde, use it to form a portal to the human world of Azeroth to find more victims. Protecting the land of Azeroth are King Llane Wrynn (Dominic Cooper), brave fighter, Anduin Lothar (Travis Fimmel) and wizard, Medivh (Ben Foster). Before long, with his growing family, Durotan shows growing concern about the future of his homeworld of Draenor. He eventually concludes that the only way to stop things from getting worse is to form an alliance with the humans.That's basically the short version, and knowing so little about 'Warcraft' other than what cheat codes come in handy for 'Warcraft 2', it's hard for me to conclude whether or not there's any accuracy to any of the storylines within any of the games. But from my perspective, I honestly didn't mind this one, with the exception that if feel it does move a bit slowly, when the story is simple enough. I think for me, what it comes down to is all around design. They didn't try to make things "dark", or try too hard to make it look like something normally medieval. When you look at the orcs here, they definitely have the right look, but more to the point, even the human armour is... I don't want to use the word "cartoony", but let's just say a suitable match of accuracy, at least, if memory serves correctly. I also like that this is something where we see the orcs as both bad and good, and the humans as, well, human. Things are pretty neutral here, and that's always been something I've enjoyed in film. So to conclude, I like it fine. It's perfectly passable. Nothing I'd rush back to, but I'd be happy to see what various fans (many of them personal friends) think of it. 3/5 If you remember my review on 'Hitman' you might recall that, and I quote, "I just plain didn't care". 'Hitman' was extremely average as an action flick, and felt a bit more like a movie within a movie. To top that all off, it was also a game collection never took any interest in. I think I had a demo for the first one, tried it, and it was just like these movies - okay at best. What can I say? It was another popular title I didn't quite latch on to. But once again, reviewing this as more as its own movie than a movie based on a game, it all just lands on one simple non-word - "meh". Going a bit more into Agent 47's origins, we learn (again?) that 47 (Rupert Friend - because Timothy Olyphant had better things to do) is a genetically enhanced super soldier who was created by a geneticist named Dr. Petr Litvenko (Ciarán Hinds). 47 becomes a hitman for the fictional ICA (International Contracts Agency) after Litvenko abandons the project due to a guilty conscience. For the last few years, 47 has been on the trail of Litvenko's daughter, Katia (Hannah Ware). Scared for her life, and cursed with a superhuman awareness of the world around her, she goes along with a man named John Smith (Zachary Quinto), who offers her protection. In the meantime, there is a group of mercenaries, led by a man named Delriego (Rolf Kanies) trying to find Litvenko in an attempt to recreate the Agent program for their own selfish means. Also, when it comes to Katia, she is searching for an unnamed man who may or may not have more of a connection to her than she could imagine - in fact, so does Agent 47. And with all that said, what can I say? I probably cared about this one even less than the first. I can't quite put my finger on what it is about 'Hitman' that I can't seem to get into, but much like I said in my last 'Hitman' review - it's simply not for me. Considering a lot of the video game titles I do like, that is honestly pretty strange, but here we are. To keep it plain and simple, this is another example of a movie that uses other movies to piece itself together. Although I must admit that the film didn't have my full attention, there are hints of the first couple of 'Terminator' movies going on here, along with... well, more of the same of the previous film. As far as action flicks go, it's kind of generic, and there's nothing here that really holds my attention. In fact, in trying to remember bits about the first film at this point, even though my review was recent enough, I've already forgotten most of what happened. There are other video game movies - some of the even worse in quality than this - that can hold my attention better, and I can manage to keep good memories of. Sometimes they're flat out bad movies, but at least they are entertaining in a cheesy way ('Street Fighter' being my prime example).In my opinion, on a shelf of video game movies, these flicks would be titles that I'd completely overlook in search of something else I could have more fun with. The funny thing is, these movies aren't even that terrible, they're just all-out forgettable. They're another fine example of movies you should throw your brain out the window to enjoy. However, I should probably mention that the "brain out the window" thing can only go so far. This didn't feel, to me, something I could look back on and have fun with, re-watching it and laughing with some friends. 'Super Mario Bros', 'Street Fighter', 'Mortal Kombat', they all have that corny quality where we see that they're pretty bad, but we still have a good time because it's all so dumb. This is more a matter of it being an action flick for a boring Sunday afternoon when you're super bored. If action movies were cups of coffee, this would be a small, regular - average at best, not enough to be memorable, and something you'd "drink" for a little pick me up as opposed to your glorious morning cup. 2/5 I always enjoyed the fact that 'Breaking Bad' ends the way it does, and 'Need for Speed' ended up being Aaron Paul's next project. The only thing was, said project, came and went about as fast as the cars that it features. In the same sort of vein as something like 'DOA' or 'Tekken', this is a film based on a well-known game franchise, but some people still don't fully realize the films exist. There actually seems to be quite a few of those I've come across, so I've been pretty happy about at least being able to view new titles to me. But I digress. More review, less filler! We meet a mechanic named Tobey Marshall (Aaron Paul). Desperate to keep his family-owned business going, he begins life as an underground street racer. When he ends up in dire straits, he forms a reluctant partnership with ex-NASCAR champion, Dino Brewster (Dominic Cooper). Together they stand the possibility of completing a project started by the late, great Carroll Shelby (who we may remember from 'Ford v Ferrari'), that has the potential to earn them a handsome amount of cash. However, their sale to car broker, Julia Bonet (Imogen Poots) includes a disagreement between Marshall and Brewster, and a tragic street racing accident is used to frame Marshall, and send him to prison. Two years later, Marshall is released on parole with vengeance against Brewster on the mind, but getting it done on the streets. Winning top prize in America's biggest underground street race, the De Leon, would get this done without hurting anyone (I mean, as far as that goes when it comes to street racing). But Brewster has also put a bounty on Marshall's car, while the police are constantly on his tail, making his task no easy one. But hey, does any of this sound familiar? I dunno about anyone else, but I feel like I more or less got what I wanted from this. Making rivals on the streets between police and other street racers? And the idea that this is based on a game with no linear story through its library? Although the film, on the whole, isn't exactly the best, it definitely is a 'Need for Speed' movie. The only question is, are you willing to accept it as it is? I can't help but feel if they took this plot and put it into another 'Need for Speed' title, it would be just fine. Things would feel pretty much natural. Maybe not the best of the series, but it'd work out. Unfortunately, a big screen adaptation of something like this is just another street racing movie, that feels too little too late. I think at this point, competing against 'Fast & Furious' movies (especially with 6 at this point, and #7 well on the way) is pretty much an automatic no-go. Somehow, that franchise cheeses things up to the utmost degree, but we love them because they're fun movies to lose your mind to. That's incredibly hard to compete with - a franchise that knows it's dumb, but people love it because it's dumb. I think the biggest problem with this movie is, honestly, just the length of it. It's a full 2 hours and 15 minutes, and it crowbars in celebrities like Michael Keaton to pad things out. He's a good name to have, but he's just a DJ who follows these underground races, channelling his inner Beetlejuice as he talks. The film could lose all of his scenes and would still make perfect sense. Although, at the time, Keaton was the biggest name the film had, other than Aaron Paul. It just felt unnecessary to me, but he was still pretty entertaining, as it felt like he was really into it. This is a tough one to make out. It really is just another street racing movie, with not a hell of a lot going for it (aside from a few cool stunts). But because its entitled 'Need for Speed', I personally feel like I can forgive it for its flaws much more. I just wasn't really that disappointed considering I got pretty much what I would have been looking for in a 'Need for Speed' movie. The film's main problems lie somewhere between the writing and the unnecessary length. But this is tolerable for what it's supposed to be, and while still pretty bad, might make for one of the better video game adaptations - if only things weren't so simple and they had more to work with. 2/5 So far, on this list of video game flicks, the one that stands out as best overall (at least for yours truly) has been 'Silent Hill'. There's a certain dark, horrific beauty to it that I couldn't help but admire. And while it may or may not be reminiscent of the game for fans, it totally works on its own as a simple, mind-bending horror movie. In other words, you really didn't need the game to enjoy it - all the stuff that needed to be there was there; not the least of which was a brilliantly eerie soundtrack (perfect for Halloween). But now we take a look at the film's sequel; a somewhat convoluted mess that I almost feel like I should watch again before reviewing it, because it was kind of confusing, but I don't want to, so here we are with a somewhat half-assed attempt. So, some years after the events of the first film, Christopher Da Silva (Sean Bean) and his adopted daughter, Sharon (Adelaide Clemens) find themselves on the run, assuming different identities; prominently, in this film, Harry and Heather Mason (I will keep calling them Chris and Sharon for purposes of recognition). Now for those catching up, we know Chris and Sharon from the first film, and as far as we know before going into this, they remain somewhere in Silent Hill - so IS this the real Sharon? While Sharon is convinced that their running has to do with Chris being in trouble with the cops, Chris knows better that it's actually a cult from Silent Hill known simply as "The Order". Now, the standard 'Silent Hill' story tends to involve someone venturing, or being taken into the dark world of Silent Hill, and another venturing in after them. In this case, the Order kidnaps Chris, and Sharon heads in to find him with the help of one, Vincent Cooper (Kit Harington). Maybe it's just my ADD at work, but pretty much around the time the Silent Hill stuff starts to go down, that's where things started to confuse me. This was a film that I found to be a jigsaw puzzle pieced together wrong. It consisted of all the right pieces, but it get to be too much for a plot that should be about as basic as the first. If you're in the mood for a lot of disturbing imagery that borders on torture porn, however, this could be pretty ripe for the picking for you. That's one thing I'd say the movie did really well - the atmosphere of the first film is still ever present, and that includes the soundtrack that I so praise. So as far as the mood goes, in my humble opinion, the film nails it. There's also some pretty great usage of practical effects to add some of that real "meat" to things. All in all, the film is successfully creepy, and uses various stars to its advantage like Carrie-Anne Moss and Malcolm McDowell. Who do they play? No spoilers, but if you need to know, here's this. The film unfolds with some mystery and intrigue, but I personally had a tough time with it. While certain aspects of the film are done really quite well, other things are either confusing or even sort of redundant. I mean, we have a character going into Silent Hill looking for another character while the story tells some kind of horrific history in the town, for some reason always involving a little girl. And I think that's where the film really drops the ball; it's sort of more of the same, and the cool, gruesome, horrific imagery just isn't enough to save it. In my mind, I'd say stick to the first one, as it just plain works as its own horror movie complete with a twist ending. This, while I wouldn't consider it trash, is a bit more or a spectacle than a good story. Who knows, it could make for a guilty pleasure for the Halloween season. 2/5 This one picks up where the last one left off, and again, hits the ground running with some action. As I mentioned in my previous review, this is part two of the "Umbrella Trilogy", which pretty much feels like one long climax complete with good fight choreography, action and visuals along with a pretty sweet soundtrack. In the right frame of mind, these can be fun. But the fairly bad acting and sometimes overacting, basic ongoing plot point of going after Umbrella, and many other reasons you need to throw your brain out the window to enjoy it, it's still not the best thing out there. I'm gonna try to keep this spoiler free, but when we last left our heroes, Alice (Milla Jovovich), Claire Redfield (Ali Larter) (and a couple of other big spoilish names I'm iffy about mentioning), they were on board an Umbrella Corporation freighter. They are violently attacked by a bunch of V-22 Ospreys, led by a brainwashed Jill Valentine (Sienna Guillory). During the attack, Alice is captured, and we are randomly thrown into her waking up, living an average suburban lifestyle with her husband, Todd (Oded Fehr), who we otherwise know as Carlos, and daughter, Becky (Aryana Engineer). We then see a fairly typical zombie outbreak occur, where Rain Ocampo (Michelle Rodriguez) tries to help out to little avail. We also soon learn that this is not the real Alice. The real Alice, having been captured, is interrogated by Jill, but escapes during a power failure, only to find herself in her own simulation of a zombie outbreak in Shibuya Square, Tokyo. Here, Alice runs into one of Albert Wesker's (Shawn Roberts) best agents, Ada Wong (Bingbing Li), and Wesker himself appears on a screen, thought to be dead, explaining that the Red Queen has now taken over Umbrella. The main facility is now in Kamchatka, Russia, located underwater. The plan is to have Alica and Ada rendevouz with a rescue team consisting of Leon S. Kennedy (Johann Urb), Barry Burton (Kevin Durand), and Luther West (Boris Kodjoe) and go take care of business. The thing is, do we dare trust that Wesker is trying to help the cause? Of the 'Resident Evil' movies, I only actually caught three of them in theaters; 'Resident Evil', 'Afterlife', and then this. Between 'Afterlife' and this, I pretty much just stopped. In fact, if I'm being perfectly honest, I still haven't actually seen 'The Final Chapter'. So it may be unfair of me to claim these final three as the balls-to-the-wall three-film climax when I don't know anything about the last one yet. Well, except one thing - it's very easy to assume, considering it comes after these last couple, and the fact that it's the final film of the franchise. I see this one pretty much on the same level as I saw 'Afterlife'. The difference being that this is even a little more convoluted in its delivery of awesome eye candy, and plot that's a bit hard to make sense of. It occurs to me with this one that the theme of reaching that final boss keeps happening, but keeps having to go further. In fairness, that's what video games do. But also, in fairness to the fans, all of the big-wig creations in those games, though often seen, do seem to take a bit of a back seat through this series. Once again, they look pretty damn cool, but I can't help but feel they are severely underused. I furthermore don't know how the hell one is supposed to suddenly be able to trust Wesker, considering he's been the source of so much of Alice's anguish through all of these movies up until this point. Even to look at him, you're just like "VILLAIN!" I think the one thing this movie has going for it above the others is that it delves quite a bit into Alice's apparent past, which of course includes her daughter, Becky, who does come back around to play a sort of Newt (from 'Aliens') character while Alice is the very clear Ripley (although I might suggest Ripley is more bad ass). Much like the previous film, it's one in the series I sincerely don't care for much. All style, very little substance, and when it tries to have heart, it's actually kind of unsuccessful. There's something about Alice's past that feels too little too late, but perhaps that's just me. This isn't something I hate, but it's definitely a weak point in the series (which says quite a bit). That said, I'm actually kind of looking forward to how this all ends... 2/5 When it comes to the 'Resident Evil' movie franchise, I have a tendency to divide it into two trilogies. The first three, I'd refer to as the "Apocalypse Trilogy", where the big concern is surviving undead creatures and Umbrella's sinister creations. The second trilogy, is the "Umbrella Trilogy", where the focus shifts far more towards the Umbrella Corporation itself, and taking down the big wigs while making sure everything "looks cool". I also consider the second trilogy to be more of a "style over substance" thing, almost as if all three final films are one big climactic epic. This is debatable, but this is just me. The fourth film even opens with a recap from "My Name is Alice" (Milla Jovovich), and since this begins the "Umbrella Trilogy", it's only fitting that I do the same, so we can start somewhat fresh here. So to recap, an incident happens in an underground lab that unleashes the "T-Virus", and eventually leads to the zombie apocalypse. This unfolds in the first three films by showing us its evolution through the Hive (Umbrella's secret underground facility), the fictional Raccoon City, then of course, the world. Former Umbrella worker, Alice, survives the first film, and by the second film is experimentally infused with the T-Virus, bonding with it, and creating a bad ass. Alice pretty much makes it her mission to hunt down Umbrella for not only destroying the world, but keeping constant with experimentation - which includes using her DNA to recreate her. This is where the fourth film here picks up, as Alice has found a buttload of clones of her, has freed them, and as a team, a whole whack of Alices is now storming Umbrella HQ in Tokyo, and they just tear shit up. Umbrella Head, Albert Wesker (Shawn Roberts), however, manages to escape, detonating a bomb that destroys Umbrella HQ and all Alices within - except of course the real one who manages to escape on Wesker's plane. Her attempt on his life is nearly successful, but he manages to inject her with an anti-virus, taking away all of her awesome abilities. Just to get things rolling, however, the plane eventually crashes, and Alice survives, but now has to rely on her average abilities which are surprisingly similar to her superhuman ones. Anyway, she travels to her Alaskan destination of "Arcadia", determined in the third film to be the last refuge for humanity. Before the end of the third film, however, Alice goes after Umbrella, leaving the friends she made to make it to Arcadia, themselves. Among them, Claire Redfield (Ali Larter), who Alice stumbles upon when she finds Arcadia to be not quite what she expected. Anyway, I could be unfolding plot stuff here all day, but the pair soon travel to Los Angeles where they find a prison full of survivors. Lead by Luthor West (Boris Kodjoe), they also meet Wendell (Fulvio Cecere), Crystal Waters (Kacey Clarke), Bennett (Kim Coates), Kim Yong (Norman Yeung), Angel Ortiz (Sergio Peris-Mencheta), and last but not least, Wentworth Miller in his heyday, playing someone who may be a huge spoiler if revealed. As the film continues, we learn things like what Arcadia really is, and the fact that Alice's venture against Umbrella isn't over yet - indeed, it's just beginning. As for Wesker? Well, again, no spoilers (even if you don't really care). For me, the 'Resident Evil' film series is okay at best, and a lot of it has to do with chapters like this, where it's nothing but eye candy - and at this point, dated eye candy. The slow-motion, or "bullet time" cliche has pretty much become a parody of itself, and it was used a LOT here. A lot of that was also to show off the new superior 3D technology we got with 'Avatar'. Yes, this was the second (I believe) film to actually use it. So in theaters, I remember it looking amazing, but that was about the extent of it. Otherwise it felt very simplistic, and there to show off new technology and what it could do. As usual, I'm reviewing this not so much as a video game adaptation as its own thing - the fourth of a chain of six movies telling one long story. If you're able to see things as such, and you're not really that into the games (like me), it can be a perfectly entertaining experience if you can just let go, and treat it like some kind of bad ass Saturday morning cartoon... with swearing and violence. These have never been a set of movies I've hated in any way, but there are a few I find to be "lesser" than others, and this is one of them. The entertainment comes from the look and style, and the big problem with the 3D aspect, is that it's only really available on the big screen. After that, it's kind of just a balls to the wall action flick with very little substance, and this would continue with the next film. But more on that soon enough. 2/5 We all know that this is one of those movies that has gone down in cinematic history as something very "white-washed", and I'd like my audience to know that this is not something I'm about to touch with a ten-foot pole. It's a film that's old enough that by now, it's out there, and it can be used as some kind of educational example. I also don't pretend to know anything about these games, namely the one that share's the film's name, and I don't know how accurate things are (I know, surprise, right?). But I will admit something, cards on the table right now. Honestly? I actually enjoyed this. For a little history, let's turn to my homework on the 'Sands of Time' game. It's a third-person puzzle platformer that follows an unnamed Prince who's father attacks an ancient city. During this, the Prince finds the "Dagger of Time" and his father finds an hour glass containing the "Sands of Time". The Sands are presented as a gift to the Sultan of Azad, but a traitorous Vizier tricks the Prince into releasing the Sands, which in turn transform the townspeople into monsters the Vizier is able to control. The adventure involves the Prince, along with the Sand-educated Farah to set things right, and the game was released to critical acclaim, especially when you could use your dagger to rewind time and fix your mistakes. The film introduces us to a white boy named Dastan (William Foster) who lives on the streets in Persia, playing 'Aladdin' in his spare time (no, seriously, watch this opening and tell me it's not ripped out of 'Aladdin'). He stands up to some captors after trying to steel some fruit, and impresses King Sharaman (Ronald Pickup) who adopts him. After fifteen years, the King's princes; Dastan (Jake Gyllenhaal), Tus (Richard Coyle) and Garsiv (Toby Kebbell) are given the news that the city of Alamut is forging weapons for Persia's enemies. This attack is what leads Dastan to the dagger mentioned in the game description. Alamut falls, and Princess Tamina (Gemma Arterton), realizing Dastan holds the sacred dagger, agrees to marry Tus in order to unite their nations... makes sense. Anyway, this eventually leads to the death of the King, Garsiv accusing Dastan of murder, and Tus being appointed King, setting a bounty on the heads of both Dastan and Tamina. So it pretty well ends up being an "on the run" adventure movie, and the adventure and action here is actually pretty solid. There's more to the overall plot that involves actors like Ben Kingsley, but I could be here forever unfolding plot point after plot point. The key factor here is that the film, though containing elements from the game, is not the same story. This is always something that I understand when it comes to criticism about video game movies. A movie has to work in a certain way where a game can jam more information into it. For example, I don't know the reason he's unnamed in the game, or if he's ever given a name, but it might have been pointless to have him nameless. I'm going to go ahead and imagine that as an adaptation of the game, it probably dropped the ball. But if the game never existed, and perhaps the white-wash fact wasn't a thing (I know what I said about touching the subject, but still) this could have just been the next fun Disney adventure flick. It's another case of all the right elements being there, but the execution leaves a little to be desired. Although I do enjoy it for what it is, it might be a good example of it being a good movie if it wasn't called 'Prince of Persia'. This is more a matter of me being disappointed for fans of the established and very well received game. But perhaps it can be used as an example of why we really don't need a 'Last of Us' movie? Anyway, for me, passable. For others, I totally get it if it's not. 3/5 When I get thinking about one-on-one fighting games, my go-to titles were always 'Mortal Kombat' and 'Street Fighter' (namely 'MK'). When it comes to games like 'Tekken', I have really only played it either at a friend's house, or at the arcade. I never really developed skill enough to have my go-to characters, or really know any moves other than basics. I just saw it as pure arcade fun for a couple of dollars worth of gaming, if I had time to hang out in the arcade after catching a movie, or shopping. So once again, my knowledge of what this is supposed to be isn't abundant. However I will say this - I actually enjoyed it. This film was released in 2009, following the releases of six games in the main series, ranging from 1995 all the way up to 2007. There was also 'Tag Tournament' in '99, and 'Dark Resurrection' in '05. So with eight games in the franchise altogether, it seems that this one took quite some time, and may have felt rather "too little too late" for fans. For me, however, this might as well be a whole new thing for me, as I haven't even visited a 'Tekken' game since 'Tag Tournament' over 20 years ago. I basically forgot everything I ever had any knowledge of with the games. Having said that, the film is said to be loosely based on elements of the first three 'Tekken' games, and follows Jin Kazama (Jonathan Patrick Foo), who first appears in 'Tekken 3', as the lead character. Raised by his mother, Jun (Tamlyn Tomita), he learns martial arts, and believes his father to be dead. Once he hits 19 in the year 2039, he begins living his life as a fighter and contraband runner in a place called The Anvil. One night, Jin gets himself targetted by an elite specs group known as the Jackhammers, who are there to ensure the safety of The Anvil. Upon returning home, he finds his mother has been killed by the Jackhammers, and he swears vengeance against a man named Heihachi Mishima (Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa). In order to do so, to keep it basic, he has to climb the ladder at the Tekken tournament as an "Iron Fist Fighter". So, much like with 'Mortal Kombat', this ends up being a pretty good adaptation in as much as it's about a character fighting through a tournament to get to, and defeat that final boss. Surely, one must be wondering what other 'Tekken' characters join this cast, so it's probably time for another roll call, as done in my 'Mortal Kombat' and 'Street Fighter' reviews. Well, there's a lot, so I'll simplify as much as I can. On the main stage, we have Steve Fox (Luke Goss), a former boxer and Iron Fist fighter who becomes Jin's sponsor, Christie Monteiro (Christie Monteiro), who Jin more than befriends at the tournament, Heihachi's son, Kazuya Mishima (Ian Anthony Dale), and to a lesser extent, the tournament's present champion, Bryan Fury (Gary Daniels). But it's not really like they cut a lot of characters out of this either. Just featured in fighting, there's also Marshall Law (Cung Le), Raven (Darrin Dewitt Henson), Eddy Gordo (Lateef Crowder), Miguel Rojo (Roger Huerta), Nina Williams (Candice Hillebrand), Yoshimitsu (Gary Ray Stearns), Anna Williams (Marian Zapico), Sergei Dragunov (Anton Kasabov), Miguel Rojo (Roger Huerta), and I may have even left one or two out. Although my overall unfamiliarity with these games certainly plays a part in my review, I can't really deny that this was a movie I didn't expect to like, but enjoyed anyway, just because of its simplicity. This was like 'Mortal Kombat' in that sense. I can't honestly say I expected much more than what I got, and I enjoyed the fact that the soundtrack and set design actually gave it a bit of an arcade-like feeling that I can't really explain. It's really quite simple - I had fun with this. Stylistically, it was kind of like watching a long music video, the fight sequences were pretty damn cool, and I actually found Jin to be a character I could route for. But I will say that I'm making it sound more awesome than it actually is. I mean, it's certainly not without a problem or two. The things that weigh this movie down quite a bit include, mostly, the acting, and probably what they do with all of the characters. I'm no expert, but when a one-on-one fighting game becomes a movie, the studio seems to really like to take liberties. If Balrog and E. Honda working on a news crew in 'Street Fighter' doesn't suggest that, I dunno what does. I'm altogether unfamiliar with this group, but I have to imagine they screwed up here and there. I would probably consider this a guilty pleasure of sorts, speaking for myself. Sometimes a dude just needs to watch other dudes beat each other up. Add a revenge plot to the whole thing, and I'm good to go for that little bit of junk food for the mind. This can be found on Amazon Prime, if one is curious to see for themselves. Just bear in mind, I'm DEFINITELY against the grain on my positive review! So if you end up hating it, don't blame moi. 3/5 |