Frenchman disses 24 and American movies

Well here is a strange thought. A French man is complaining about America. Your shock must be intense.

To be more exact the complaint against America is about the movie studio, 20th Century Fox I believe, which helped to fund and distribute the movie Babylon A.D. The French man is Mathieu Kassovitz. If you are wondering who he is, you are from anywhere but France. He is a Frenchman that is an accomplished actor; in America that means he was in films no one except a handful of film critics have ever seen. And they were paid to watch them.

Mathieu Kassovitz is the director of the new Vin Diesel film, Babylon A.D. and his complaint is that the film sucks. He stated this in an interview as the film is released.

But how bad could it be? Remember this is a director that is French. The land that brought Jean Reno and The Professional. With a movie based on a top French novel. With 2 top A-list actors, 1 of which is a huge international star - Michelle Yeoh. All my hopes of this being a good film were quickly dashed when I heard this though.

“It's pure violence and stupidity," he admits. "The movie is supposed to teach us that the education of our children will mean the future of our planet. All the action scenes had a goal: They were supposed to be driven by either a metaphysical point of view or experience for the characters... instead parts of the movie are like a bad episode of 24.”

Now pure violence is exactly what I was hoping for. If I want to help kids get educated then I would send them to school. If I want to study metaphysics I go to a philosophy course in college. And 24 is far more popular and widely viewed, than every French television program – none of which I have never heard of.

So in a single statement I was told that this director had hoped to make a long (the film was mercifully cut down to 93 minutes by the movie studio) slow paced wordy French version (in English) of say Wuthering Heights. And for some reason he thought that this would be popular, or even seen, by U.S. audiences.

John Woo gets it. Timur Bekmambetov got it. Guillermo del Toro usually gets it. But when it comes to French directors it just seems that there are more misses than hits. They barely understand the thrill Americans like in a film, and several remakes of their films have done fantastically here in America, done by non-French directors and actors. Unless you think the adaptation of Hitman last year was anything but a complete bore and seemingly directed by someone who has never played a videogame in his life. But I do give credit to Luc Besson (Fifth Element and The Professional).

Now I don’t mean that I feel this way about all the French. In fact there are several French actors I like. There is Jean Reno as I mentioned. Great in The Professional, good in Ronin, he was even good in Mission Impossible. Solid actor.

And there was Julie Delpy in Killing Zoe – alright you may not have seen that film but you should.

And?? Gerard Depardieu? I wouldn’t count him but I’m out of French actors. I’m sure there must be more, right?

Ok, so the French don’t get it in general. They may do outstandingly well in France, but I’m not aware of them doing well anywhere else.

Still I did have hopes for this movie. But when this director comes out and trashes his film because it’s not art house enough, well you just have to hope that the movie studio really reworked it. I have no doubt that the director’s cut will do well in France. And I expect that Vin Diesel will get initial groups of fans into the film and sell the DVD. But beyond that I have mixed thoughts.

So far I see that Yahoo shows the film having grabbed $12 million over the holiday weekend. That loses to Tropic Thunder but keeps it at 2nd place. Unless you factor in the number of theaters it was in. Because then it loses to The Dark Knight, Traitor, and The House Bunny. It lost to The House Bunny in its second week.

I haven’t had the chance to see the film yet. I was going to see it this week. But after the comments of Kassovitz I’ll push it back a bit. Traitor is more reliable I’m sure and I like Don Cheadle.

But if you have seen the film I’d love to know who was right. The director’s version or the movie studio’s? Just consider the movie you saw, double the time, imagine yourself in a classroom for the extra time, and kill the action.

You tell me.

Movie Review: Hellboy 2

For those wondering if my preview of Hellboy 2 was any good, here is my review of the movie. But I must note that the film I saw was not the film you will see. Because I’ve been so crazy with several work projects, a potential interview with an elected politician, ad offers, and a new house I had to rely on a website that provides films for free. The trade-off is these bootleg films often lack the visual quality of seeing eye dogs, soundtracks queued up to characters either seen or forthcoming in the film by 5 minutes and other maladies.

Even so one thing was absolutely clear. Guillermo Del Toro has a very fertile imagination that would give most people nightmares. I on the other hand thought it was beautiful.

The visuals are the real appeal to this film. Unlike the very CGI “monsters from beyond” found in the first film, all the creatures are far more realistic in this film – if such a term can be used. The version I saw really did not do justice to the elemental in the film, nor most of the creatures. The rendering of the Golden Army was particularly bad, which is a shame since they still looked pretty good.

If you are looking for an improved plot in this 2nd film you will both be amused and disappointed. There are fewer plot holes or gaps in logic than the first film, but the constant foreshadowing (of a third film) detracts a lot. Plus there are a few moments when you just have to say “Why do that?” or “The solution is really simple here”.

Of course there is another love story in the film that is more a waste of time than anything else. It eats up time and slows the pace, but it also does give an interesting excuse for an American Idol-esque duet (not meant in a good way which is why it was funny).

There is more of a reality base in this film though. Hellboy has relationship problems, problems with authority, and moral crossroads. He is both very humane and very 16 throughout the film. Which at times works and is silly at others.

I can’t really comment on the sound either as portions were problematic in the version I saw. The acting was fine though. No Oscars out of this film but every character gets a moment to shine, more or less.

And it should be noted that this film is more about the other characters Hellboy calls his family than him really. Still seeing the world and the ‘other world’ through their eyes was refreshing since they all stem from Del Toro’s eyes.

The film in a nutshell is good. Not great, not fantastic. I felt it was better than the first, which is all you can really ask of a sequel. And, had I the time, spending the money to see this in a theater beats the experience of watching it on a flat screen any day.

So the film was basically what I was hoping for in the previews. So far this summer Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Hellboy 2, and WANTED have been worth the journey. I only hope that The Dark Knight will exceed my thoughts about the Joker (hype about Heath Ledger getting an Oscar aside) rather than turn into the abysmal failure that War, Inc. and Speed Racer were. But I’m not holding my breath on it.

Hints on the movies of 2009

So since I was recently talking about the start of the summer movie season I thought I might also mention a few movies that will be out in a year or so. Luckily there are 2 that should be interesting, though I’m not sure if that means a good movie or not.

The first is news that the sequel to The Lord of the Rings (in fact it’s actually a prequel and the first book about Middle Earth), The Hobbit will be directed by Guillermo Del Toro. He’s a great director and has a very unique vision. His movies are usually quite entertaining, and he gets a lot out of his actors.

As good as he is, and the bonus that he is one of the very few Hispanic/Latino directors in Hollywood, I have reservations. The bar was set extremely high by Peter Jackson’s version of Lord of the Rings. His ability to translate the words of J.R.R. Tolkien into the visual experience was remarkable and believable. I severely doubt anyone’s ability to duplicate that, even if Jackson were still at the helm.

Yet one positive for the film is that Sir Ian McKellan will be returning in his role as Gandalf the Grey. Well at least they are talking about the pay, so excluding the studio getting cheap, he’s in. Another bit of good news is that Peter Jackson will be producing the film.

Now what other people will be involved is unknown. There are many dwarves and men in this film. And of course there is who will be Bilbo – the original Hobbit on the go. And then there is a huge amount of work for the CGI team in trying to bring to life the central character of Smaug. And a return of Gollum.

The challenges will be daunting. But we will see once the trailers start appearing in about a year and a half or so.

In other movie news there is this other item.

The Terminator is back. But it won’t be the Guvernator on the screen. This time out the story will be advancing to new territory. Or more accurately traveling further into the post-nuclear Skynet controlled future.

In this new movie expect to see Christian Bale and Moon Bloodgood (that has to be a stage name – who would name their kid that?). I have no idea who Bloodgood is, but some may recognize the name from the television series Journeyman. I never saw that so it doesn’t help me. As for Bale, well he has done exceptionally well as the Dark Knight and several other movies so that gives me hope.

And of course there is the other side of the news. It’s a big negative too. The director at this moment is McG, the same person responsible for Charlie’s Angels. That was a horrible television show to movie creation. While it may have made money because of Lucy Liu and Drew Barrymore (Carmen Diaz is just not cute and way too skinny) it was a miserable film. Be honest, you know it was.

Considering the news for the upcoming films in 2009 it’s anyone’s bet on what will be worth the time. Until that time there are a few good things to keep you entertained. As I’ve already mentioned, Iron Man is definitely the movie to see. The new Hulk film with Ed Norton looks appealing and should erase any memory of Ang Lee’s version. WANTED looks to be a major hit with Angelina Jolie, and Morgan Freeman.

The Take with John Leguizamo, Tyrese Gibson, and Rosie Perez sounds like it will make it straight to DVD – a shame since I like Leguizamo and think his ability as an entertainer is severely underestimated.

War, Inc. looks to be the first anti-war movie that will do well and be entertaining. Unlike every film so far that has been a poster-child for the ultra-liberal left wing loons (all 10 of them that collectively went to those films), this film uses humor and a well rounded cast. John Cusack leads the film in a role similar to his hitman in Grosse Point Blank (a really fun film). His sister Joan is also in a similar character. There is a bunch to say about this, but I will wait til I get the trailer. Oh, Ben Kingsley has a small role, and the scary part is so does Hillary Duff.

Of course Indiana Jones is going to be a hit. So far trailers look great and I have to imagine that Harrison Ford doesn’t need the money, and his reputation doesn’t need a flop, so it should be good if not very good.

I’d avoid Speed Racer, and Hellboy might be worth the cost. And the Love Guru seems like it will redeem Mike Meyers for doing The Cat in the Hat.

More on those movies and the rest soon.

Golden Globes, Sundance, and Poker - 1.19.2007.1

So here are the events of the week, I have a new page just for Valentine’s day. Click on the heart and you may see something your sweetheart will enjoy. Go ahead and check it out. My other new section deals with the 2008 election and the people that would run for the Presidency. I need your support on this. Let’s get them to respond to more than just major donors and their political parties on their platforms. Check the link above, or in the sitemap for more.

As for the calendar : Mr Muhammad Ali was born on the 17th in 1942, Dr. Daniel Hale Williams was born on the 18th in 1856 – he was the first to do a successful open heart surgery.

One of the first things I want to mention is that I’m glad to see that Ms. Jennifer Hudson, Mr. Eddie Murphy, Mr. Forest Whitaker, Mr. Guillermo Del Toro, and the movies Dreamgirls and Pan’s Labyrinth have all been recognized. Each won a Golden Globe, which is a strong indication of where the Oscar’s will go. I would love to see each of these individuals, and the respective movies, win Oscar’s. It would be a sweet feather in their cap for each of them. There is no question of ability here, they deserve it. Let’s hope that the Oscar’s infamously rumored biases are put on hold and they get it right. But considering how the Oscar’s work, I doubt if more than one person in the above mentioned group will win anything. [I’ll make a guess and say it will be Ms. Hudson. While the Oscar’s rarely give the award to a new actor/actress I think they want the attention that giving it to an ex-Idol participant will generate.]

In reference to the comments by Mr. Robert Redford (a fantastic actor and solid director) at the Sundance Film Festival, I will make a brief comment. I will simply mention that equally famous, respected, qualified, talented individuals in the entertainment industry that are republican exist and I doubt they feel as he does. [Some of those people include – Mr. Denzel Washington, Mr. Jerome Bettis, Mr. Shaquille O’Neal, Mr. David Robinson, Mr. Bo Jackson, Mr. Reggie White, Mr. Tiger Woods, Mr. Karl Malone, Mr. John Hughes, Mr. Frank Capra, Mr. Bruce Willis, Mr. Quentin Tarantino and more.] I will simply state that there is more than one way to look at what the President has done, failures and missteps inclusive, and to request an apology is unwarranted. To ask it on behalf of the nation is arrogant. I don’t want an apology, nor do I wish Mr. Redford to ask for one on my behalf.

And as for the odd news going into the weekend there is the question of Poker. Is poker a game of chance or skill? It doesn’t seem too hard to figure it out. No matter how skilled you may be, it all depends on the cards you draw right? Well it’s not that simple in East London. It is a question that the courts there will be ruling on. The reason is that a private club was hosting poker games, and in England that is illegal without a gambling license. The government believes that any game of chance, which they include poker in, must be licensed. The owner of the club obviously disagrees.

This should take no time at all. It’s a silly matter that I think must be seen as a waste of the courts time. And it’s pretty simple to figure out. What are the odds of getting 4 of a kind, in a game of say 5 people. Now figure out the odds for a skilled player – the best in the world. Do the odds improve? Since they won’t the risk involved is random and thus it’s a game of chance. But that’s one American’s view. I’m sure our British cousins will work out the details and get to the same point, it just needs to be done with a stiff upper lip and the proper manners. [That’s supposed to be a joke, I realize I’m not a comedian so don’t send me letters about the lack of humor.]

This is what I think, what do you think?