Second ComingI wish that I had gotten to do something before I saw this movie that I ultimately didn't have the time to do. I really did want to read the book this film is based on. Normally, I don't think it necessary to read source material of a film, particularly if it need be to enhance the pleasure of the film, but this was a time when I really wanted to get to that book, particularly because I was one of the millions who sought out the cheap thrill known as Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code (and this is a book I actually like). Oh well, I suppose, the deadline has passed, and I have already seen this film. Now, I obviously can't judge how well this film holds up to Brown's original novel. However, what I can say is that coming from one of the few who found some pleasure in Da Vinci Code, this film is vastly superior.
Written as a sequel to the first film (though the events in the book take place before, that I do know), Professor Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks, thankfully rid of that God-awful haircut) once again finds himself in the middle of murder and intrigue all with a religious backdrop. Now he's been called to investigate the kidnapping of four prominent cardinals in the Vatican that just so happens to take place before the election of a new pope. The kidnapper has threatened to kill off the priests using methods upheld by the Illuminati, a free thinking, scientific based secret society (what other kind of society is there) that now claims to take revenge against the church for stopping their progress through torture and death centuries ago. At the end of it all, a stolen weapon capable of great destruction is promised to go off and consume the Vatican City entirely.
As I said before, this film is far better than its predecessor, and one of the reason is because it's light on the talking. One of the major problems of The Da Vinci Code was that many characters would break out into these grand monologues detailing the past hundred years of history leading up to his point. When these moments come after scenes of action, it screeches the film to a halt and creates an uneven tone. To be fair, this film does have its fair share of explanations, and they do slow the movie up, but the numbers are fewer. The film spends most of its time in fast paced and tight action sequences, and that is where the film really finds an accomplishment. I never thought the addition of David Koepp would be positive, but co-writer Akiva Goldsman should be thankful.
Returning to direct is Ron Howard, a man who has had an uneven career himself even with projects I thought were good (Cinderella Man I loved, others not so much). I think now Howard has learned from his mistakes of the past. He doesn't count on the characters to fill us in on a story that needs a lot of filling in by the characters. Sometimes a movie needs to be a plot-driven vehicle, and by Howard recognizing that this time, he's able to make sure that when the action and suspense need to pay off, they do so in a big way. Since Howard and his crew were banned by the Vatican from filming in their city, it's a little distracting to see every Vatican set take place within a computer generated world, but it still is a small complaint I have.
There isn't much to say about the cast, as Hanks is literally doing the same character he played three years ago. Nothing bad, but nothing spectacular to report either. Ayelet Zurer plays the new female companion for Langdon, and she feels like a stronger personality than her predecessor. Other nice additions include Ewan McGregor as a young, paranoid priest, Stellan Skarsgard as the shifty head of security for the Vatican, Thure Lindhardt as a tenacious and nosey Vatican bodyguard, and Armin Mueller-Stahl as an older cardinal with a great screen presence. The only thing this cast is missing is that spunk and energy that Sir Ian McKellen brought to the first film, which would have been a perfect fit for a rather bland assassin the film carries who is about as fun to watch as Silas's chastising.
I do not deny the film has some faults, as many other critics will promptly point out. However, I do believe this to be a film that has learned a great deal from the mistakes of the past, and has set out to make a film with a different goal. The movie focuses more on the action and suspense while throwing in a few good characters to match. I think this makes up for the film's trips in story that are dug in deep and plenty. I still feel sorry I didn't read the book, but since I've seen this film and what it is, maybe I don't want to anymore. *** / ****; GRADE: B
Sibling ChivalryI don't know about you, but I have a hard time getting to foreign films. I'd really like to get to more of them in the theatres, but I guess some movie houses are afraid of subtitles and don't play them as often as they should. Last year I only got to one, the superb Swedish vampire film known as Let the Right One In. I seem to have already broken my record this year, and this film is my second one following with Mexican Sin Nombre. Although, I wonder if it counts if the two films are from the same country. I don't have the answer to that. However, what I do know is that this is a purely enjoyable and delightful film.
Eight years after the international hit Y Tu Mamá También, Diego Luna and Gael García Bernal reunite as companions on film. This time, instead of being close friends, they are distant brothers each with a passion for soccer. Luna is Beto, the more hot tempered brother who earns the nickname "Rudo" for his behavior as a goalie. Bernal is Tato, a starter on the field, who also is a passionate tone deaf singer, who gets the name "Cursi." Both are workers on a plantain farm when they get picked up by talent scout Batuta (Guillermo Francella). Because they're picked up at different times, they end up playing for different teams. Their rough dealings with fame lead to their personal lives is dismay and end with a climatic battle between the two in an all-for-nothing game at the end.
Luna and Bernal are great actors, and each are able to carry their own stories quite well. Bernal doesn't make Cursi being the always shy and quick witted one, and Luna doesn't let Rudo vent in one bad decision after another. We can admire Cursi's dedication to the game and professing love to his girlfriend yet be irritated by his casual naive sense and screeching singing choice. We can be upset with Rudo's poor gambling habit, yet be excited when his winning streak allows him to spread lavish gifts to his family. Both of these actors are able to make these characters well rounded, and that more believable. I'm still undecided about Francella, as his character sometimes slows down the scenes that could be more powerful with a sole emphasis on Bernal and Luna, but he mostly does a fine job at providing either comic relief or insight through his omnicesnt narration.
Carlos Cuarón, brother of Alfonso and co-writer of Y tu mamá..., takes the sole reigns here as writer and director, and he is able to show a good sense behind the camera. He is able to let all the scenes flow very nicely, and there are few that feel caught in stasis. I would still argue that he is better at creating the story, and the accomplishment of such well rounded characters should be just as much given to him as the film's lead actors. The characters here, and their fully rounded personalities, saves the movie from becoming another "brothers at war" piece. Instead we have something more complicated and even a little sweeter than that. Maybe the efforts of Carlos's brother, or the other that join the "Three Amigos" (Alejandro González Iñarritu and Guillermo del Toro are co-producers along with Alfonso), are to add to it, but whoever the persons are, they have done the film a great service.
To be fair, I'm not saying this is anywhere as good as the Cuarón brothers first effort, nor is the chemistry between Bernal and Luna quite as strong. Still, while the film is a softer accomplishment, it still is an accomplishment in the end. The two leads are still working well on screen, able to carry the film in the combined and separate scenes, and the film has a nice structure to overlook some flat execution and a few uninteresting characters. If you're like me, then you'll be having a hard time finding this film. However, I would advise you to seek out your theatre and demand they summon up the courage to embrace the subtitles. *** / ****; GRADE: B
No comments:
Post a Comment