 Let the record show that as long as there has been any talk of any sort of 'Naughty Dog' movie (aka, the developers of 'Uncharted' and 'The Last of Us', among others), I have been pretty opposed to the idea. When it comes to the 'Uncharted' and 'Last of Us' games, specifically, I hold onto the idea that those games are story-driven enough that they sort of become their own movies.
Now that they've finally done it, were my thoughts warranted? Was this just a crappy money-grab in which the creators said "give them a famous title, but just do basic homework and release whatever"? After all, 'Uncharted' is easily one of my favourite game franchises, that warrants a full play-through once every couple of years or so. And yes, that means we finally have a movie on the 'Arcade' page that I'm reviewing where I can say "I can compare this to the games because I've played them!" With that said, I'll come right out of the gates by saying one is gonna have to treat the film as something somewhat separate from the game series. The film is meant to be an origin story in which treasure connoisseur/hunters Victor "Sully" Sullivan (Mark Wahlberg), Chloe Frazer (Sophia Ali) and of course, Nathan Drake (Tom Holland) all meet and go on their first big hunt. It all begins as we see young Drake (Tiernan Jones) and his big brother, Sam (Rudy Pankow) going after the authentic map of the Magellan expedition, on display at a nearby museum. However, they are caught in the act and brought back to their orphanage for punishment. Sam gets kicked out, and is about to be sent away, but not before he ditches, leaving Nate with the one and only “Sic Parvis Magna” (essentially "Greatness from Small Beginnings") ring - which any 'Uncharted' fan will know about. From then on, he disappears without a trace, but Nate holds onto hope that they'll meet again. Several years later, Nate ends up becoming a skilled bartender, and an even more skilled thief, using his charm to his advantage. Soon enough, Sully catches him in the act. But instead of offering Nate any trouble, he offers him a job - which happens to involve the very same map the boys were after in the beginning. Unless it's only a story, the map should be the first piece of a huge, geological puzzle that could very well lead to a pile of gold. Of course, no 'Uncharted' story is complete without opposition. In this case, we have another man after the gold, also knowing some of the clues, Santiago Moncada (Antonio Banderas) and his skilled henchwoman, Braddock (Tati Gabrielle). Once again, it's a race to the treasure story, as to be expected with a title like 'Uncharted'. I have to say that I went in, wanting to see an 'Uncharted' movie done well, and I more or less got what I wanted. It's tricky because right off the bat, there's some inaccuracy about how Nate and Sully meet. One will also notice just from the trailers that there are plenty of scenes lifted right out of the games, which probably makes one wonder what game it's based on, in particular. Most of the elements it takes are even from 'Uncharted 4', in which Nate's a "retired" guy, almost, but not quite, too old for the treasure hunting game. With that, I think that it all comes down to overthinking. For those wondering, I would place this (accurate or not) right between the flashback scene of 'Uncharted 3' and the first game. I realize that doesn't help a whole hell of a lot, but it's important to remember that we're looking at these characters as younger versions of themselves. This movie is meant to be a prequel of sorts. However, it seems they are already working towards a sequel for this, so I do get the feeling that we're going to have a whole "different universes" thing going on. Not to the extent that 'Spider-Man' does it now, but something unofficial, like the 'Batman' movies. The real treat about this particular video game-based movie is that it's the first on several up-and-coming Playstation Studio movies. When I see something like that, I have a bit more faith that they can do things better than some who don't have such a direct hand in it. They even throw a pretty funny cameo in here for the real fans, which you'll know right away when you see. Think something Stan Lee level, but perhaps a bit hammier. Otherwise, I almost feel like the trailer shows you what you're in for, and if you feel like the 'Uncharted' spirit is there, do yourself a favour and check it out. Video game movies don't have a great history, but they are LONG overdue for the right hands to come along and do them justice. We may be getting something like that with Playstation Studio. I'll admit that the film isn't perfect, and I think that several purists might not take it as well as I did. But everything you want to see in an 'Uncharted' adventure is actually here. It reminded me a lot of 2018's 'Tomb Raider' in that sense. I think it's probably time to give up on the "perfect" video game movie though, and just focus on things like this. If the film had a different title, I would still say it's an "Uncharted Movie". This genre does seem to be getting better, and I hope to see more solid titles along the way! 4/5
0 Comments
 When it comes to doing a 'Mortal Kombat' film "right" (in my opinion), you need a few key ingredients to mix into your fatality fudge cake. You'll want a generous helping of blood and gore, a few sprinkles of one-liners from the game, plenty of recognizable fight moves, the appropriate characters, and make the tournament take place in some kind of grand arena. The only thing I felt like I didn't get here, however, was that final ingredient.
The film opens in feudal Japan, where Bi-Han, aka eventual Sub Zero (Joe Taslim), and his Lin Kuei assassins attack their rival ninja clan, Shirai Ryu, including the wife and son of Hanzo Hasashi, aka eventual Scorpion (Hiroyuki Sanada). Bi-Han emerges from the fight, triumphant, but misses one member of the family; Hanzo's infant daughter. This is when Raiden (Tadanobu Asano) shows up to rescue the child and take her under his protection. As centuries pass, the Hasashi bloodline continues, and eventually falls to Cole Young (Lewis Tan); a former MMA champion, and no one we've ever heard of in any of the games. In my opinion, a somewhat bold move on their part, but an interesting one nonetheless. Cole, his wife, Allison (Laura Brent), and daughter, Emily (Matilda Kimber), are soon attacked by Sub-Zero, but they are intercepted by Special Forces Major Jackson "Jax" Briggs (Mehcad Brooks). Jax directs the family to Sonya Blade (Jessica McNamee) who has further information as to why Sub Zero is attacking them. Cole finds out that it all has to do with his birthmark, which turns out to be a mark several people have (including Jax), basically branding them to represent Earth Realm in a major tournament called "Mortal Kombat". Currently, the realm of Outworld is about to take it all, with only Earth to have to get through, so Sonya and Cole set out to find the Earth Realm Temple to prepare for the fight ahead. The character that is perhaps most worthy to mention through the film is probably Kano (Josh Lawson); a mercenary who Sonya makes a deal with to help them, and who also has a mark. He provides a lot of the comedy relief, but does so with a dark sense of humour that's very fitting for the film. However, I might suggest that most of the characters here are actually a little bland. We eventually come across Liu Kang (Ludi Lin) and Kung Lao (Max Huang) who add a little something as well, but I have to admit that I found these characters pretty one-note, and there just isn't quite the same charm we got from the '95 version. Call it a guilty pleasure, if you will, but I had a more fun time with the '95 film than I did here. However, this wasn't without its dark charm that lied elsewhere. For those of us who came here to see good fight scenes, complete with fatalities, we do get a fair share of it. When these fighters fight, it's quite a show, and they do a good job at not sparing us the blood we crave with a movie like this. Having said that, this did a much better job here with gore than the '95 version. So one could say that opinion between the two all depends on what you're looking for. If you want the R-rated blood and cuts, go for this one. If you just wanna have some nostalgic fun, go with "MK 95". They're both in the realm of "just okay", and neither is very mind-blowing, but there's no real reason for me to think they simply can't be enjoyed by fans. At the end of the day, it's 'Mortal Kombat', and it was never to be taken too seriously. I found that I enjoyed this, but it wasn't without a few things I really didn't like. The thing that stood out the most to me was, I'm sad to say, Sonya's character. She could have been a bit more interesting, but they mostly just use her for reaction shots, and to give exposition about the tournament she's been researching. It didn't help that the camera was constantly flipping over to her for no real reason. One could make a drinking game out of all of the "Sonya reacts" shots. Her reaction is always the same, deadpan look too. To be clear, I don't blame the actress, it seems to be bad direction and bad editing combined with just giving her nothing to do, at least not until the very end, which even then provides no surprise as to where she ends up. I liked a few of the Easter eggs scattered throughout the movie, and I enjoyed the tail end of it, but things are left wide open for a sequel that I wonder will even come to pass. If it does, it needs to be a bit better than this, perhaps actually taking place in Outworld as opposed to it mostly being characters from Outworld coming to visit us. A few things irked be just the same; for example a fight in the famous "Pit" that does not involve the uppercut/impaling fall. I thought it was a total waste. I might consider that a personal nitpick but WHY have the Pit if you're not going to use it? Anyway, that aside, I think if I had to pick one to be "better", I might just stick to the '95 version, if only because I had more actual fun with it. But hey, if you're more of a gore hound, this might be the better route. All I know is this; at least this wasn't on the level of 'Mortal Kombat: Annihilation'! 3/5  Well, I have some good news and some bad news to start this review with. Starting with the bad news, I must beat the dead horse once again by stating that I know pretty much nothing at all about the 'Monster Hunter' games. In fact, I'm so "under a rock" with this, that I'm not sure I'd even heard of it before the release of this film - which I honest to God thought was about to be another 'Resident Evil' movie with the first few glimpses of Milla Jovovich doing actiony stuff. Well, it's not, but being that it's directed by Paul W.S. Anderson, it might as well be.
Now, as for the good news, the idea of me not being familiar with a movie based on a video game franchise ends with this (at least for the time being). I'm sincerely hoping they try to focus more on trying to perfect bigger video game titles. Getting these stories and characters right over the years has been a huge problem, and the way Marvel films have opened up the cinematic world with perfected CG and a good budget backing them, there's no real reason the same can't be done for video game movies. But I digress, as I'm here to once again review this with no real bias about it either way. The film opens in an interesting world where sailing ships crash over seas of sand. In this world, humankind coexists with a whole whack of monsters of all shapes and sizes (mainly extra large), and we find a Hunter (Tony Jaa); someone trained to hunt and kill monsters, gets separated from his team upon the sudden attack of the Diablos - huge, horned, hungry and subterranean. We also meet the Admiral (Ron Perlman) here, who will make his main appearance much further into the movie and potential spoiler territory. But I will admit that I find Ron Perlman is an actor who always adds a good dash of brutish fun to just about anything he's in. Meanwhile, back on Earth, U.S. Army Ranger Captain, Natalie Artemis (Milla Jovovich) and her team on in search of a missing team of soldiers in the desert. Suddenly, there's a brutal storm that pulls the soldiers through a portal to this monster world, where the team finds themselves face to face with the likes of gigantic creatures, straight out of their nightmares. Eventually, Natalie manages to meet the Hunter, and together they try to navigate this world to get him back to his team, and her back home to Earth. So for the most part, this ends up being a survival movie, and it's not without a bit of imagination, and a LOT of great action. Once again, I'm incredibly far-separated from the game series, and even Googling seems to offer quite a variety of titles. But the gist of it is that the first game was released in 2004 for PS2, and provides a fantasy/action role-playing experience where you take control of a Hunter and, well, hunt and trap monsters. If anything about that is wrong, feel free to correct it in the comments. But either way, other than 'FFVII', the RPG thing was never really for me, so the idea that I missed out on these isn't entirely shocking. But to think that I hadn't heard of it until this movie release does say a lot about how much I really game (as do all the reviews that say I'm unfamiliar). For the most part, audiences seemed to turn their back on this one. While I certainly didn't hate it, I can understand a few reasons as to why. First and foremost, the fans of the games (and this will come as no surprise) complain about it being too far apart from the games (a lot like 'Resident Evil'). But on top of that, this is a good example of an action movie that just kind of "goes" right from the beginning with not a whole lot of explanation about things. This is one of those "all style, no substance" movies, in which everything about it looks great, and it can be a fun action ride if you let it be. But if you're looking for anything with mood or even any real feeling other than "HOO-RAH!", you might be out of luck. I had fun with this, but only as eye candy, as Paul W.S. Anderson keeps pulling off. But he DOES need to do better with story, characters, plot, dialogue, and everything else that isn't action. 3/5  Truth be told, I would consider myself a "non-fan" of Pokémon. Don't get the wrong idea though. I have no problems or issues with Pokémon or anyone who's into it. In fact, I'd even go so far as to say that I feel like their fan-base is one of the nicer, less toxic ones, unlike some of the stuff I'm into like 'Star Wars' or 'Game of Thrones', where fans go off like dynamite if something isn't to their liking. I'm sure fans here can do the same, but from my perspective, it's far less noticeable.
When I first saw this, I wanted to experiment and pay close attention as a non-fan to see if I could get anything out of it. And the truth of the matter is, to my surprise, I actually got quite a lot out of it. In fact, this is kind of the perfect Pokémon movie for someone in my shoes. I know just enough for a beginner's pop quiz on the subject, and this does a very good job of not only unveiling their world, but going a direction with it that works for a mass audience. We're introduced to Tim Goodman (Justice Smith) and his friend, Jack (Karan Soni). Jack is keen on getting Tim back into hunting and training Pokémon, since he gave it up. While trying to catch a Cubone (which we even get a glimpse of a history on with a couple of seconds of dialogue), Tim receives the news that his Father, Harry, was killed in a car accident Cliché. This leads him into Ryme City; a place where Pokémon society and Human society have become integrated , so that he can collect his Father's assets. Ryme City has an equal rights subtext to it where Pokémon aren't hunted, but work with humankind instead,, and it works very well. Pokémon aren't "pets" here (so to speak) so much as partners. It's neat to see how some of them work too. For example, Squirtles work with the fire department, which makes perfect sense. Anyway, it's here, he eventually meets Pikachu (Ryan Reynolds), and is miraculously able to understand him. Pikachu reveals that he has amnesia, and the last thing he remembers was working a case with Harry when the car accident happened. It's further revealed that Harry might very well still be alive, and the film turns into a search for the truth behind that, blended with the investigation of a mysterious gas known only as "R" that makes Pokémon go mad. The first thing that jumps out to me with this film is the animation style. Although anything I know about Pokémon was learned through a little bit of word of mouth, and about two months worth of playing 'Pokémon Go', these characters were instantly recognizable (at least those I knew about) and looked pretty much exactly as they should. Although Pokémon have always been cute, the animation here makes you wanna reach through the screen and pet them, or cuddle them. Whatever the case may be, they're cute as hell, and Psyduck, was able to give me quite a few genuine chuckles. But it also gets a bit dramatic here and there, marking the film with some genuine heart as opposed to it being just a noisy mess of strange creatures (which it totally could have been). Other than the awesome animation, comedic and dramatic moments, the big question is "can a non-fan walk away from this movie, still enjoying it?" I'm gonna go ahead and say yes. Even if you know nothing at all about Pokémon, if you just watch and pay attention, you do end up getting a sort of crash-course about the whole deal in the first act of the movie. As the movie goes on, you develop a little tiny bit of an education on some of them as well. For example, going back to the Cubone, I didn't know the skull was supposed to be the head of their dead relative. Or when it comes to Psyduck, I didn't know that he exploded under extreme stress. These may be painfully obvious things to fans, but bear in mind that I'm still pretty much blind to about 80% of it all. I know the very basics of hunting, catching and training, and I can recognize a handful of their faces. I really don't know for sure how the hardcore fans have taken to this movie since its release. A lot of them seem to overlook this and stick with their hunting. But with that said, and going against the grain of several other reviewers, I might go so far as to say that this film was actually made more for the non-fans, while the regular fans are there more to appreciate a lot of the Easter eggs hidden throughout it. I never actually got lost in this, and everything that was necessary to explain seemed to come through. In the end, I think this is one of the best video game based movies out there. Will fans disagree? Sure. But this a great way for fans to get non-fans to dip their toes into that Pokémon water. 4/5  Back when I reviewed this as a "Now Playing" review, I mentioned that video game movies may finally be finding their footing. It was either that, or expectations for video game movies have become so low that we're starting to realize they might deserve a little bit of slack. It's hard to get a video game movie really "right", but there's still those few that stand out, just because they at least feel like the game. The primary example for me is 'Mortal Kombat'; not perfect, but feels right. This film is no exception, really. It's not the best film, but damned if it doesn't deliver what I came to see. Well, at least within it's last half hour.
The plot behind this one involves an experiment gone awry on a satellite involving a monstrous, mutated rat. In other words, it's obvious that we have some big corporation testing something on animals, and some side effects include some monsterism. A crew member is ordered by her company, Energyne, to retrieve a bunch of canisters that contain the mutagenic pathogen, created by some crazy lady named Claire Wyden (Malin Akerman). The canisters crash land on Earth, and the first is discovered by George (Jason Liles), a rare albino gorilla at the San Diego Wildlife Preserve. He's cared for by Primatologist Davis Okoye (Dwayne Johnson), a man who is also a former US Army Special Forces soldier and a strong part of an anti-poaching unit. Something from the crashed canister starts to take George over though, making him angry, confused, emotional, and grow very big very quickly. The rest of the underlying story has to do with figuring out how to help George out, and we find out the same old story that Energyne is trying to use the pathogen as a biological weapon rather than the supposed cure for *insert disease here*. So yeah, pretty 'Resident Evil'-ish. It's also kind of preachy about its message to protect wildlife, has some cheesy dialogue, and isn't tremendously acted. So where's the good in it? Well, again, it's in that last half hour. Personally, I feel that 'Rampage' is another one that has some leeway to it. Here we have a movie based on a game where the whole point IS to play as a monster and wreak havoc on a city, tearing down buildings, eating people, it was awesome times. In that sense, if a movie is made for something like that, then you can expect the unforgiving tearing apart of a city. I dunno how many lives are saved during an evacuation process, but honestly, I was gonna give this movie that much slack anyway. I'd have been more disappointed in NOT seeing it, being that it's what the game offered. It was very much the same idea with 'Tomb Raider' where the last parts of the movie feel enough like the game that it sort of makes up for the otherwise not so grand opening. This is a movie that isn't at all great if you're looking for substance, but it can be a lot of fun if you're looking for style. For me, it's probably one of the better video game movies out there, if only because... well, it's 'Rampage'. This is an example of a movie you go to in an effort to see destruction, mayhem and things get torn apart, because that's pretty much all the game ever was. In my opinion, the movie did it justice, and even had the right monsters for it. If nothing else, I think this one actually provides a pretty fun ride. Yeah, it's silly, but it's a good time. 3/5  Let's face it. A good video game-based movie is hard to come by. If it's trying to be more like the game, it doesn't translate to screen very well, and if it does it's own thing, it's not close enough to the game. To create a video game movie is always a gamble with a double-edged sword. Unlike a lot of the games these films are based on, you just can't seem to win. However, in my personal opinion, 'Tomb Raider' here seems to have found a happy middle ground, and I'll even gives a bit of hope for the genre.
Based on the game of the same name (the more modern one, anyway), this film brings in a new Lara Croft (Alicia Vikander). As we see things start off, we learn a bit about this new Lara Croft who happens to be a far cry from Angelina Jolie's interpretation. She boxes in her spare time, stays fit, and takes on challenges that test her limits. Namely this is with a "fox hunt", where Lara is on a bike with a tail attached to it, and she is chased through the town of London by other cyclists trying to grab the tail. A neat idea to show off her potential as a badass, but it doesn't entirely fit with the familiarity of 'Tomb Raider'. I did have that twitch early on and assume that the rest of the movie was about to suck. Gladly, I was wrong. Lara is meant to declare her father dead, after his missing for seven years. She takes what her father leaves her in his will, and it turns out to lead her to a secret room consisting of files and documents on Himiko - a supernatural Mother of Death that her father chased after with the hopes of bringing his wife, Lara's mother, back to life. Long story short, instead of destroying it all like her father asks in the will, she uses it to try to track him down. Lara then finds herself racing against an organization called Trinity who wants to weaponize Himiko's power. So fairly typical of this type of film. It's always a race. It's once she reaches the island that the film takes off in a lot of positive ways though. I enjoy that they made Lara fallible here instead of just an automatic badass who knows exactly what she's doing, as the Jolie interpretations would portray. There's a sense of danger, and she gets lucky a LOT of the time. As iffy as this sounds, what that lends itself to all of her cliff-hanging, climbing, running, jumping, trap-avoiding and even puzzle solving that you want to see, translated from the games. In the end, this is a new Lara Croft story, with no direct basis on any games, rather than the updated persona. The character is believable as both a video game and movie hero that you can route for, and it's my opinion that some game-based adaptations can come in with this idea in mind. For example, I wouldn't want to see a 'Last of Us' movie because the game is pretty much it's own movie, and it's got a great story behind it that doesn't need to be touched. But, there's no reason a new and different story can't exist from someone else's perspective, still involving the main characters and keeping the spirit of the game in mind... Like 'Last of Us 2' (they really shouldn't make that movie). It has a bit of a slow start, and a lot of the action sequences are unbelievable as they are. But hey, you can't tell me a lot of the stuff in the game isn't as unbelievable. Just keep in mind this isn't big-breasted, posh badass Lara Croft. This is athletic, brave woman who faces her fears Lara Croft - honestly, the type of Lara I'd prefer. She's a little more humanized here. I probably enjoyed this more than most, but as far as game adaptations go, even if you don't end up loving it, I'd definitely claim it to be one of the better ones. 4/5  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  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  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 |
RSS Feed