CA_movie_fan Reviews

Toy Story 3 (2010)

A worthy completion of a classic trilogy

[10/10 · 12 June 2010]

I went to the San Francisco Film Festival screening at Pixar Studios last night not really knowing what to expect. Toy Story has been with us for 15 years now (20, in terms of actual development) and I had a sinking feeling that maybe all the character potential had been used in the first two and this was some shameless plot by Disney to exploit the franchise ("Little Mermaid 2", anyone?). Well, shame on me for underestimating the capabilities of Pixar, who once again have shown how a small studio in Emeryville is a storytelling powerhouse that leaves the rest of the industry in the dust.

Toy Story 3 is the tale of Andy, the toys' owner, going to college and their quest to determine their future - headed between the attic or a daycare center. If you've enjoyed the way the first two films blend character drama with innovative action and humor, this cocktail hits its stride in the third film, which draws on everything we already know about the characters and then adds two new entire sets of toys to the plot. There's a new villain, two very amusing romance sub-plots and a litany of visual gags that push the envelope even further. I'm not allowed to go into any details but the second half of the film is a familiar set piece performed in a completely new way that will forever change your view of certain toys and day care centers.

Apart from a level of animation that sets the bar in the industry and an attention to detail that makes you wonder what most "real" films actually do in pre-production, the real genius of the third film is to provide a satisfying conclusion that gives every character a completed character arc. About 20 minutes before the end, I was wondering how they would do this since there were some fairly dark moments (similar to those in Wall-E and Up), but naturally they manage to pull it together. There's literally not a single wasted shot, let alone a wasted scene, and the pace quickens throughout to keep the tension mounting.

Overall, this is another Pixar classic that easily has enough for both kids and adults (and movie aficionados). It's not difficult to see why each of their movies takes five years to complete - yet despite the technical wizardry, the success of their movies is fundamentally routed in their stories, a fact which most other studios seem to forget these days. As to whether the stage is set for Toy Story 4, I suppose they could always pull it off given the creativity at work here, but I think there was a deliberate attempt to make this the last in the series.

Terminator Salvation (2009)

Really disappointing - more Transformers than Terminator

[4/10 · 22 May 2009]

I'm really surprised to see how the Terminator franchise continually gets trashed by different directors. James Cameron's original premise sets up one of the greatest movie villains of all time against a hero with one of the biggest challenges of all time, and never lets go of its audience, creating a suspenseful sci-fi/horror story that's really second to none. Yet after the first two films, it's gone downhill from there.

Undoubtedly the special effects are the star of this film, with flawless photo-realistic CGI in the majority of shots. The industrial look of the machines is new and really helps to sell the concept that these things exist. At the end of the movie (SPOILERS), Arnold makes a reappearance as a T-800 looking the same age as he did in 1984, which was apparently achieved entirely through digital composition. It's as seamless as the photographic effect used in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and is the only point of the film where our audience applauded. Some of the other CGI suffered from speed/scale problems where machines seemed to move too fast to be real.

Terminator Salvation plot-wise is a mess, relying on a substantial knowledge of the previous films, and never really linking one sequence to the next. The main theme is that there's a 'kill switch' signal that can be broadcast to bring down the machines, while the appearance of a new character reveals a new prototype of machine that Skynet has built. And then there's about 120 minutes of non-stop action in between attempting to connect these two stories. There are huge leaps of logic too: the machines don't try to kill Marcus because he is a machine, but they tried to at the beginning before the audience knows that. Then in the final action sequence Arnold inexplicably disappears mid-sequence to allow John two minutes of expositionary dialog. During that period, I literally have no idea where he goes.

As for Arnold, they use every trick from the last films to finish him off, but apparently the T-800 is now impervious to molten lava, freezing and grenades. MAJOR SPOILER: in a clear indication of endless rewrites, the Terminator sticks a metal pole through John's chest (yes, actually *through* his chest) and in the next scene he is limping out of there awaiting a heart transplant like it's a flesh wound. At this point, we had officially lost cabin pressure on this film altogether.

The characters, for what they are, are one-dimensional at best, mostly existing to shout at each other or get killed. Even Bryce Dallas Howard's character (presumably John Connor's wife?) is never introduced or developed and seems to act only as a reflection to give John dialog. And actually, when they talk it's the only time in the whole film that people aren't yelling. Sam Worthington stole the show as Marcus, but even then it seemed his character arc was centered around "woe is me, I'm a machine".

Location-wise, we move from a gas station in the desert to submarines to helicopters to factories, without any sense of why we go from one place to the next. Even the idea of Skynet collecting humans in concentration camps is there for the imagery and little else (Skynet has become a chess player from the TV series onwards, whereas it was just a destroyer in Cameron's vision). And they now have robots that range from squid- like devices all the way up to 200-foot tall machines, which was more Transformers than Terminator, especially since they can contain motorbikes.

All I can say is that I'm really disappointed. This seems an easy franchise to extend for any skilled director, and fans have been wanting to see Future War since the inception of the series. This is the sort of film that Michael Bay or Jerry Bruckheimer produce: loud, confused, pointless and designed for the A.D.D. generation that just wants rapid bursts of endless action. T3 doesn't even look bad now, and the TV show is looking like Shakespeare compared to this.

Up (2009)

Pixar produces another Oscar Winner

[10/10 · 12 May 2009]

Pixar has become the most dependable studio out there for producing reliable films that don't simply continue to raise the bar in animation but set a level of excellence in storytelling that puts most live-action movies to shame. 'Up' represents another change in style, as significant as Wall-E's shift to photorealism, intricate camera effects and darker themes. It effectively blends moments of tragedy with almost slapstick humor, while showing that their understanding of story structure and pacing gets more refined with every release.

Up is about a 70-something ex-balloon salesman who fulfills a lifelong dream of adventure by tying thousands of balloons to his house and flying away to South America. This trip, inspired by his adventure- loving wife who dies before their dream is realized, is forced when property developers attempt a compulsory purchase on his house and try to move him to a retirement home (issues of death and eminent domain in a cartoon?). The problem is that he has an enthusiastic - and fatherless - 8-year old Wildness Explorer stowed away on the property when it takes off. Their adventure focuses on the characters they meet along the way, while our hero Carl is still trying to drag his house to the dream destination at the top of a waterfall.

The opening shows the life of Carl, growing from an young boy, meeting his adventuring-loving girlfriend, their marriage and her death just before their adventure starts - it's an incredibly emotional 5-minute intro that's light on dialog and heavy on visuals, and didn't leave a dry eye in the theater. This sequence in particular was reminiscent of the dialog-free sections of Wall-E which deliver their plot punches without exposition or the need for endless sequences that would take twice as long in live action. But this approach doesn't leave the younger audience behind either, and for such a dark start, all I could see in the audience were kids and adults alike glued to the screen.

I won't give away any more plot details since the film doesn't open for another three weeks, but every scene and character trait is meticulously plotted so that nothing seems too ridiculous or contrived, even for such a fantastic journey. The graphic stylization is also fresh, in the same way that The Incredibles had a very distinct and authentic look. All of this serves to heighten the humor and there are some extremely funny scenes, helped by the way the characters are quickly and believably established (even the talking dogs, but you'll see what I mean).

This is the second time I've been to Pixar to see a pre-release of a movie and I felt a little scared before seeing this one, wondering if their run of first-class work may have hit a plateau. On the surface, I didn't really think a story about a senior in a flying house could live up to Wall-E, yet although the films are as different as they can be, Up is as gripping and entertaining as any Pixar film. Their ability to blends styles and take the audience from laughter to tears in minutes showcases their deep understanding of story, and it's a shame that more films aren't crafted the same way.

Up opens on May 29, and I highly recommend it to everyone. The next two films out of Pixar will be Toy Story 3 (2010) and Cars 2 (2011). By the way, look at for a very funny short film before Up called Partly Cloudly.

WALL·E (2008)

Pixar's still producing the best movies out there

[10/10 · 7 June 2008]

We went to the San Francisco Film Institute's first public screening at their campus in Emeryville. Everyone's sworn to secrecy, but for a film with little dialog, it carries more of an emotional punch and has a richer story than any live-action movie this year. The tone and style of the film is completely different for Pixar, and Disney haven't tried to override the darker thematic elements at all, making the story surprisingly three-dimensional.

This will end up being the animated film of the year and I had the same 'wow' feeling as after seeing Ratatouille. Considering that animated films have always played second-fiddle to live-action, and have been aimed at kids, it's ironic that once again Pixar produces a film that rivals any live action on every level. Bravo!