Nearly 30 years after the original 1981 version of “Clash of the Titans,” the Louis Leterrier remake has at least one major advantage: the advancement of technology.
Unfortunately, what this film boasts in breathtaking visuals it lacks in its depth of storytelling, script and character development.
Based on the exploits of the demi-God Perseus and mankind’s rebellion against the Gods, the focus lies too heavily on the extravagance and spectacle than on the rich source material of the Greek mythology.
Granted, the complexity and unorthodox storytelling of Greek mythology presents significant challenges for big screen adaptations, I can’t help but wonder if half as much effort had gone into developing that complexity as did the scorpion battle scene this movie might’ve had a chance.
The mammoth Kraken, breathtaking aerial shots and majestic recreation of Mount Olympus are a far cry from the marinara sauce oozing from Medusa’s head in the 1981 version. Giving credit where credit is due, the visuals are extremely impressive and visually appetizing. Too bad my appetite requires a little more flavor to satisfy.
Ralph Fiennes does stand out in chilling expertise as the tortured Hades, adding some much-needed depth to the story. And although Liam Neeson’s Zeus is a bit watered down, Neeson makes the best of what he’s given.
Often painful attempts at overacting from the rest of the cast may be some sort of compensation for their lack of meaningful dialogue. The actors do their best, but either miscasting or a cheap script riddled with one-liners and cheesy attempts at inspirational speeches steal whatever potential may have existed.
The story felt bigger than the filmmakers in this one. While it provided some thrills and fun, the story deserves more than that.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Dordt Senior Shows Preview
Story that I wrote for Dordt's school newspaper:
What does a woman trapped in the social conventions of the 1920s and a man searching for his slain father’s sword in Edo, Japan have in common?
Both are subjects of the two senior shows being performed this April, “Machinal,” by American playwright and journalist Sophie Treadwell and “Sukeroku: The Flower of Edo” by Japanese playwrights Tsuuchi Jihei II and Tsuuchi Hanemon.
Senior theatre majors Danielle Roos and Zachary Eggebeen serve as this years’ round of senior directors, with Roos directing “Machinal” and Eggebeen taking on “Sukeroku: The Flower of Edo.”
With auditions freshly wrapped up and casting in place, both directors are ready to begin what Eggebeen calls “the culmination of [their] time at Dordt” as theatre majors, and to put “everything [they’ve] learned to work”
Roos’s “Machinal,” an expressionist play, follows the journey of a woman in the 1920s forced into situations dictated by convention. Written by a woman and based on a true story, Roos was drawn to the play in part due to it’s honest treatment of real and universal struggles of women.
“It’s the story of a young woman going though crises in her life that she feels she has no control over,” Roos said. “That’s something that I thought was very human.”
Eggebeen’s play of choice follows a young man searching for the sword of his murdered father in Edo, Japan, while encountering romance and villainy along the way.
A love of Japanese theatre and it’s history led Eggebeen to his choice. “It has everything,” Eggebeen says, “romance, comedy, drama.”
Aside from the attraction of story, these plays also present unique directorial challenges as well as exciting opportunities for the directors.
“I love working with actors and seeing them grow into characters and get excited about the roles they’re doing,” said Roos, also noting excitedly her casting success.
She’s also taking on a more complex style with expressionism, a style she’s never attempted, allowing her to “learn different directing styles and expand [her] horizons.”
Roos’s Faculty Supervisor April Hubbard commented that expressionism “does not attempt to mimic reality, but to distort and emphasize certain aspects of reality in order to reveal an inner truth” and this play is, to her knowledge, the “first such script performed at Dordt.”
“Danielle's directing experience is already quite extensive for a student, and I anticipate this will be a stunning project of high quality,” Hubbard said.
Eggebeen is excited about facing the challenge of teaching a unique and unfamiliar form of theatre to his actors, as well as introducing it to a mostly unfamiliar audience.
“In Kabuki, the style is much less realistic than in western acting,” he said. “There really isn't the suspension of disbelief that you get in western theatre.”
Ryan Donahoe, Dordt Theatre Deparment’s technical director and Eggebeen’s student supervisor, is extremely excited about the opportunity that Dordt and the surrounding community will have to attend Zach's performances.
“Kabuki is a Japanese theatre style that has never been seen in this area and it is an amazing opportunity for people to witness this in person,” said Donahoe.
Both directors will be working with a combined number of over 25 student actors, their supervisors, and student-run set, lighting, makeup, costume and sound designs. Donahoe figures that all together there are over 50 students involved, offering a great opportunity for majors and non-majors to be involved in theatre.
“Dordt is full of wonderfully talented people in the theatre,” said Eggebeen.
Roos also expressed her excitement to “combine visions” and see a “full concept come to life” in a challenging yet exciting collaborative effort.
With a college career coming to a close and four years of theatre study under their belts, these two directors will have a chance to show the Dordt community a personal extension of themselves and what those four have brought them to.
What does a woman trapped in the social conventions of the 1920s and a man searching for his slain father’s sword in Edo, Japan have in common?
Both are subjects of the two senior shows being performed this April, “Machinal,” by American playwright and journalist Sophie Treadwell and “Sukeroku: The Flower of Edo” by Japanese playwrights Tsuuchi Jihei II and Tsuuchi Hanemon.
Senior theatre majors Danielle Roos and Zachary Eggebeen serve as this years’ round of senior directors, with Roos directing “Machinal” and Eggebeen taking on “Sukeroku: The Flower of Edo.”
With auditions freshly wrapped up and casting in place, both directors are ready to begin what Eggebeen calls “the culmination of [their] time at Dordt” as theatre majors, and to put “everything [they’ve] learned to work”
Roos’s “Machinal,” an expressionist play, follows the journey of a woman in the 1920s forced into situations dictated by convention. Written by a woman and based on a true story, Roos was drawn to the play in part due to it’s honest treatment of real and universal struggles of women.
“It’s the story of a young woman going though crises in her life that she feels she has no control over,” Roos said. “That’s something that I thought was very human.”
Eggebeen’s play of choice follows a young man searching for the sword of his murdered father in Edo, Japan, while encountering romance and villainy along the way.
A love of Japanese theatre and it’s history led Eggebeen to his choice. “It has everything,” Eggebeen says, “romance, comedy, drama.”
Aside from the attraction of story, these plays also present unique directorial challenges as well as exciting opportunities for the directors.
“I love working with actors and seeing them grow into characters and get excited about the roles they’re doing,” said Roos, also noting excitedly her casting success.
She’s also taking on a more complex style with expressionism, a style she’s never attempted, allowing her to “learn different directing styles and expand [her] horizons.”
Roos’s Faculty Supervisor April Hubbard commented that expressionism “does not attempt to mimic reality, but to distort and emphasize certain aspects of reality in order to reveal an inner truth” and this play is, to her knowledge, the “first such script performed at Dordt.”
“Danielle's directing experience is already quite extensive for a student, and I anticipate this will be a stunning project of high quality,” Hubbard said.
Eggebeen is excited about facing the challenge of teaching a unique and unfamiliar form of theatre to his actors, as well as introducing it to a mostly unfamiliar audience.
“In Kabuki, the style is much less realistic than in western acting,” he said. “There really isn't the suspension of disbelief that you get in western theatre.”
Ryan Donahoe, Dordt Theatre Deparment’s technical director and Eggebeen’s student supervisor, is extremely excited about the opportunity that Dordt and the surrounding community will have to attend Zach's performances.
“Kabuki is a Japanese theatre style that has never been seen in this area and it is an amazing opportunity for people to witness this in person,” said Donahoe.
Both directors will be working with a combined number of over 25 student actors, their supervisors, and student-run set, lighting, makeup, costume and sound designs. Donahoe figures that all together there are over 50 students involved, offering a great opportunity for majors and non-majors to be involved in theatre.
“Dordt is full of wonderfully talented people in the theatre,” said Eggebeen.
Roos also expressed her excitement to “combine visions” and see a “full concept come to life” in a challenging yet exciting collaborative effort.
With a college career coming to a close and four years of theatre study under their belts, these two directors will have a chance to show the Dordt community a personal extension of themselves and what those four have brought them to.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Happy Weekend
So, the movie "Bottle Shock" is amusing. And makes me want to learn more about wine.
Also, I learned today (after 4 years in this town) that small towns' limited resources for nights out FILL UP QUICKLY on weekends. Especially in college towns.
And last but not least, I refused to conform today. Was it a significant resistance? Not really. Was it worthy of my efforts? I should like to think so! I resisted changing my facebook profile picture to that of a shark simply because someone deemed this week shark week and said that I could not partake in said shark week unless I changed my picture. I did not change my picture. A small victory, but a victory none the less. Cherish the small things.
Aha, and ONE more thing! I survived sitting through "Dear John" in its entirety! I was fading fast for a little while, but I endured. It has come to my attention that Nicholas Sparks is the Thomas Kinkade of literature. Just a little gem of wisdom for ya.
A happy weekend to all, and to all a good night!
Also, I learned today (after 4 years in this town) that small towns' limited resources for nights out FILL UP QUICKLY on weekends. Especially in college towns.
And last but not least, I refused to conform today. Was it a significant resistance? Not really. Was it worthy of my efforts? I should like to think so! I resisted changing my facebook profile picture to that of a shark simply because someone deemed this week shark week and said that I could not partake in said shark week unless I changed my picture. I did not change my picture. A small victory, but a victory none the less. Cherish the small things.
Aha, and ONE more thing! I survived sitting through "Dear John" in its entirety! I was fading fast for a little while, but I endured. It has come to my attention that Nicholas Sparks is the Thomas Kinkade of literature. Just a little gem of wisdom for ya.
A happy weekend to all, and to all a good night!
Friday, February 12, 2010
Friday
Friday has arrived. That blessed moment when I'm finished with my last class of the day and the weekend is before me. Yet, I'm still stuck in the thickest parts of the week.
They're dead and gone, done, in the past, yet still lingering. In a bad way. How do you shake that stuff? And by stuff I mean how do you convince yourself that worrying doesn't accomplish anything and that what's in the past can't be changed.
Well, you may believe both of those things, but that doesn't make them any easier to put into practice. It's sort of like seeing the reasoning in your parents wanting you to wait til after dinner to eat your dessert but not really wanting to. Or something like that.
Moving forward from past hurts is never an easy thing to do. It hurt. If something was powerful enough to hurt you, it makes sense that it's hard to shake. It could be something as deep as emotional scarring that will be with you for the rest of your life or something as simple as a bad test score. But the point being, they effect you in a negative way. And for some reason the negative is always easier to remember.
So here I am: Friday. I want to enjoy the weekend. I want to shake the burdens what weighed me down throughout the week and look forward. Again, easier said than done, right? For some situations, it's a time thing. Pain needs to heal. For a scrape, a band-aid and kiss from Mom should do the trick by this time tomorrow. For a bad test grade, just convince yourself you'll do better next time or plead with the professor. For other situations, it's a life-long process that's never fully realized until new life begins.
Either way, I'm right here right now, and somehow I have to reconcile that. The more joy I can find the better the ride's going to be. And easier. I don't want to get into a mindset of simply enduring this life til I get to the next, or making it all about what's going to make me happy, either. Though, you may be surprised by what does truly make you happy. More often than not it involves other people:).
God put me here for a reason. If I view my existence as something to survive til I get to move on it seems like I'm missing something.
So, today is Friday. Today my joy is going to be going out with wonderful roommates and celebrating the fact that we were born (literally, it's a combined birthday outing). That, at least for tonight, will overshadow the burdens from the week and remind me of a few of the countless reasons I have to be happy:)
They're dead and gone, done, in the past, yet still lingering. In a bad way. How do you shake that stuff? And by stuff I mean how do you convince yourself that worrying doesn't accomplish anything and that what's in the past can't be changed.
Well, you may believe both of those things, but that doesn't make them any easier to put into practice. It's sort of like seeing the reasoning in your parents wanting you to wait til after dinner to eat your dessert but not really wanting to. Or something like that.
Moving forward from past hurts is never an easy thing to do. It hurt. If something was powerful enough to hurt you, it makes sense that it's hard to shake. It could be something as deep as emotional scarring that will be with you for the rest of your life or something as simple as a bad test score. But the point being, they effect you in a negative way. And for some reason the negative is always easier to remember.
So here I am: Friday. I want to enjoy the weekend. I want to shake the burdens what weighed me down throughout the week and look forward. Again, easier said than done, right? For some situations, it's a time thing. Pain needs to heal. For a scrape, a band-aid and kiss from Mom should do the trick by this time tomorrow. For a bad test grade, just convince yourself you'll do better next time or plead with the professor. For other situations, it's a life-long process that's never fully realized until new life begins.
Either way, I'm right here right now, and somehow I have to reconcile that. The more joy I can find the better the ride's going to be. And easier. I don't want to get into a mindset of simply enduring this life til I get to the next, or making it all about what's going to make me happy, either. Though, you may be surprised by what does truly make you happy. More often than not it involves other people:).
God put me here for a reason. If I view my existence as something to survive til I get to move on it seems like I'm missing something.
So, today is Friday. Today my joy is going to be going out with wonderful roommates and celebrating the fact that we were born (literally, it's a combined birthday outing). That, at least for tonight, will overshadow the burdens from the week and remind me of a few of the countless reasons I have to be happy:)
Friday, February 5, 2010
Film Review: "Up in the Air"
When asked for an opinion on air travel, the average person might respond somewhere between flaming disdain, placid enjoyment or subdued indifference. The long hours, cramped spaces and miniscule food selection generally seem to turn people off and rarely generate any sort of excitement.
Not Ryan Bingham. On the contrary, Bingham feels more at home in the air than in any one place he’s ever called home. He prefers hotel rooms to home, frequent flier miles to friend, and practically “doesn’t exist” to his family, in the words of his own sister.
Bingham works for a company that sends him all over the country doing the dirty work of bosses that don’t want to do their own firing, or, letting go, as the rehearsed line goes. He “makes limbo more bearable,” he tells a coworker.
Bingham insists that his job is to help people transition; he’s supposed to be their shoulder to cry on once the deed is done. This, he insists, is the benefit of firing in person. Dignity. Funny thing is Bingham never sticks around long enough to be of that much use to his clients or to anyone else
The idea of internet firing, a more efficient and cost-effective method, is proposed by an ambitious young college grad, Natalie, who presents a driven if not naïve and slightly cold approach to taking away peoples’ livelihoods.
This new approach not only threatens Bingham’s entire way of life but earns Natalie a round-country trip with Bingham to witness his work and life philosophy. Both have their agendas resisted and eyes opened in the most unlikely ways, including from a fiery blonde business woman named Alex whose philosophy may actually be worse than Bingham’s.
Writer/director Jason Reitman has created an understatedly realistic portrayal of relationships between three incredibly genuine (if not always honest) characters, making this film easy not only to enjoy but to get lost in. Don’t be surprised if you find yourself in one of these people, or somewhere between all three.
The humorous and often painfully ironic screenplay teamed with the marvelous performances of the three lead actors are the key to its success. The scenes alter between hilarious, touching and heart-wrenching, all strung together with the stories of how these people affect each other.
George Clooney’s embodiment of Bingham was a refreshing contrast to his superstar roles. The honesty and vulnerability of his performance invites a likability that encourages us to bear with him.
Anna Kendrick is electric as the bright-eyed ambitious youngster Natalie with agonizing ups and downs. She provides wonderful contrast to Clooney’s character and both are perfect vehicles for forcing the other to see things differently.
Not until Bingham witnesses Natalie’s sorrowfully sympathetic reactions to face-to-face firing does he really start caring about making people feel better, Natalie included. Not until Natalie has to live in Bingham’s world does she realize that maybe there is some dignity in the face-to-face. Bingham’s family visit for his sister’s wedding is especially touching and telling in his transformation.
Vera Farmiga is perfect as the on-and-off again mirror image of Bingham’s playboy lifestyle and unintentional source of his soul-searching. Her staccato presence is both sharp and fast-paced, keeping Bingham and the audience on their toes, creating colorful intervals throughout the film.
This film weaves these people, among others, together to show the importance of connections. Your life is not your own. No man is an island. Not only are you affected by other people, but you affect them too, in ways you’d never imagine.
When asked about my opinion of flying, I’ll usually say I love it as long as I don’t have to do it alone. While a good chunk of that reasoning is because my paranoia of missing a connecting flight will be eased if I have someone to help me, it also comes from the enrichment of other peoples’ company. Airplane company, granted, can be a major headache, but at least it’s interesting. An affirmation I felt walking out of the theatre is that people are worth the risk.
Not Ryan Bingham. On the contrary, Bingham feels more at home in the air than in any one place he’s ever called home. He prefers hotel rooms to home, frequent flier miles to friend, and practically “doesn’t exist” to his family, in the words of his own sister.
Bingham works for a company that sends him all over the country doing the dirty work of bosses that don’t want to do their own firing, or, letting go, as the rehearsed line goes. He “makes limbo more bearable,” he tells a coworker.
Bingham insists that his job is to help people transition; he’s supposed to be their shoulder to cry on once the deed is done. This, he insists, is the benefit of firing in person. Dignity. Funny thing is Bingham never sticks around long enough to be of that much use to his clients or to anyone else
The idea of internet firing, a more efficient and cost-effective method, is proposed by an ambitious young college grad, Natalie, who presents a driven if not naïve and slightly cold approach to taking away peoples’ livelihoods.
This new approach not only threatens Bingham’s entire way of life but earns Natalie a round-country trip with Bingham to witness his work and life philosophy. Both have their agendas resisted and eyes opened in the most unlikely ways, including from a fiery blonde business woman named Alex whose philosophy may actually be worse than Bingham’s.
Writer/director Jason Reitman has created an understatedly realistic portrayal of relationships between three incredibly genuine (if not always honest) characters, making this film easy not only to enjoy but to get lost in. Don’t be surprised if you find yourself in one of these people, or somewhere between all three.
The humorous and often painfully ironic screenplay teamed with the marvelous performances of the three lead actors are the key to its success. The scenes alter between hilarious, touching and heart-wrenching, all strung together with the stories of how these people affect each other.
George Clooney’s embodiment of Bingham was a refreshing contrast to his superstar roles. The honesty and vulnerability of his performance invites a likability that encourages us to bear with him.
Anna Kendrick is electric as the bright-eyed ambitious youngster Natalie with agonizing ups and downs. She provides wonderful contrast to Clooney’s character and both are perfect vehicles for forcing the other to see things differently.
Not until Bingham witnesses Natalie’s sorrowfully sympathetic reactions to face-to-face firing does he really start caring about making people feel better, Natalie included. Not until Natalie has to live in Bingham’s world does she realize that maybe there is some dignity in the face-to-face. Bingham’s family visit for his sister’s wedding is especially touching and telling in his transformation.
Vera Farmiga is perfect as the on-and-off again mirror image of Bingham’s playboy lifestyle and unintentional source of his soul-searching. Her staccato presence is both sharp and fast-paced, keeping Bingham and the audience on their toes, creating colorful intervals throughout the film.
This film weaves these people, among others, together to show the importance of connections. Your life is not your own. No man is an island. Not only are you affected by other people, but you affect them too, in ways you’d never imagine.
When asked about my opinion of flying, I’ll usually say I love it as long as I don’t have to do it alone. While a good chunk of that reasoning is because my paranoia of missing a connecting flight will be eased if I have someone to help me, it also comes from the enrichment of other peoples’ company. Airplane company, granted, can be a major headache, but at least it’s interesting. An affirmation I felt walking out of the theatre is that people are worth the risk.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Time Killing
I have 10 minutes to kill before I head out into the biting wind to orchestra rehearsal. Somehow, at the moment, it doesn't seem worth it:). But I shall don my fuzzy green and yellow Packers hat and triumph.
I always feel sort of irresponsible when I find myself trying to "kill time." That's an interesting phrase. Why "kill" it? Well, I understand what the phrase means, but why not something a little friendlier? I don't know. I'm just killing more time by pondering useless nuggets of nonsense that will never really benefit my life in any way, shape or form in the long run. Yet, I do it so much!
I noticed in talking to a friend today that I argue, playfull of course, about the STUPIDEST things in the world, just because it's fun. I don't argue about the philosophical natures of Aristotle vs. Socrates, or the theology of CRC vs. Lutherans, or even the best way to end poverty.
What do I argue about? The origins of ninjas, why Viggo Mortensen is worth my time, and which LOST character best represents the human condition. Hey, wait! That one's legit!
Ok, I think I've sliced and diced this time quite enough. It's bloody and begging for mercy. Off to orchestra!
I always feel sort of irresponsible when I find myself trying to "kill time." That's an interesting phrase. Why "kill" it? Well, I understand what the phrase means, but why not something a little friendlier? I don't know. I'm just killing more time by pondering useless nuggets of nonsense that will never really benefit my life in any way, shape or form in the long run. Yet, I do it so much!
I noticed in talking to a friend today that I argue, playfull of course, about the STUPIDEST things in the world, just because it's fun. I don't argue about the philosophical natures of Aristotle vs. Socrates, or the theology of CRC vs. Lutherans, or even the best way to end poverty.
What do I argue about? The origins of ninjas, why Viggo Mortensen is worth my time, and which LOST character best represents the human condition. Hey, wait! That one's legit!
Ok, I think I've sliced and diced this time quite enough. It's bloody and begging for mercy. Off to orchestra!
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Film Review: "Ninja Assassin"
The very title of this film is enough to send any anime-loving, geeky teenage boy into a frenzy, any macho, blood-lusting college guy to declare, “Dude, yessssssssssss,” or just about every other person of the male gender to at least take notice.
But what about the rest of us? I have to admit, being a female college student doesn’t exactly place me within the film’s target audience, but I’ve always been a fan of stylized films such as Quentin Tarentino and Frank Miller, so I thought, why not give this a shot. It could be fun.
The basic premise of this film is not complicated, which I think the film has going for it. One of its main strengths is that it doesn’t take itself too seriously. It’s an overused plot that we’ve seen a million times over, and in much better ways. But this film is not claiming to be Oscar-worthy. They just want to keep your attention for 99 minutes. “Dare you to” might actually be a more accurate description.
The intensity is pretty much non-stop from beginning to end. Right off the bat, the opening scene very quickly turns into a bloody ninja massacre. The gratuitous, extremely animated, and unrealistic violence is actually where a great deal of the cheese factor comes from. It’s nonstop, in-your-face, and unrelenting. The bright red corn-syrup gets more screen time than any two characters. This movie must be entered knowing that or you’ll never make it out alive.
Bloodiness aside, the choreography of the fight scenes are spectacular. The “Matrix” guys were definitely involved. The acrobatics alone were enough to keep me glued. They’re such a visual feast that you can’t take your eyes away. Or maybe you can’t keep your eyes opened. To their credit, my attention was kept from beginning to end. But that may not be to my credit.
A legitimate defense of this movie, however, is that it isn’t completely devoid of any kind of characterization. The title character, Raizo, was worth caring about. He wasn’t overly complicated nor did he have much depth, but he was likeable, so I cared, which is essential to any movie’s success.
Raizo’s story was familiar: the devoted pupil realizes the error of his brutal master’s ways and rebels, seeking revenge. Even the murdered love interest is hardly a new concept. But I didn’t really care because I liked him. For this kind of a movie, that was enough.
The movie made this killing machine a human being. Part of how this was accomplished was by dehumanizing his antagonists. His old master and “brother” from the Ninja training school were completely brutal, violent, unfeeling bastards with no regard for anyone other than their cult-like brotherhood. They’re greatest aspiration in life is to kill. It’s what they’ve been trained for their entire lives and what they live for now.
Also serving as a humanizing factor for Raizo is his relationship with Mika, a legal assistant who gets herself in over her head when she decides to pursue an investigation into the dark underworld of the Ninja culture. Raizo becomes her guardian and they establish a sweet friendship. His relationship with a girl within the Ninja school also gives him an endearing if not predictable attachment for the audience to connect with.
While it isn’t really explained why Raizo and not any of the others saw the brutality and inhumanity of their Ninja Father’s ways, it isn’t really relevant because this movie isn’t a character study or a thought-provoking drama. It’s a movie about ninjas, cool fight scenes, and a guy to cheer for. This then leads back to the question of the use and relevance of this genre, but obviously people keep coming back for it. Today’s morbid fascination with violence is only on fire because we continue to fuel it.
This is not great filmmaking. But it establishes its goal. The question of the dangerous level of desensitization our culture is undergoing is a different issue, but one that certainly shouldn’t be disregarded in relation to this movie.
But regardless, this film knows that that’s exactly what’s happening and they banked on it. Don’t expect to come out with a philosophical discussion on your tongue, but simply, in the words of Neo, “Whoa,”…and perhaps a horrific look in the mirror and question of why exactly we do keep coming back for more. And a deathly fear of shadows.
Or is it ok to say that sometimes you're just looking for a senseless good time?
But what about the rest of us? I have to admit, being a female college student doesn’t exactly place me within the film’s target audience, but I’ve always been a fan of stylized films such as Quentin Tarentino and Frank Miller, so I thought, why not give this a shot. It could be fun.
The basic premise of this film is not complicated, which I think the film has going for it. One of its main strengths is that it doesn’t take itself too seriously. It’s an overused plot that we’ve seen a million times over, and in much better ways. But this film is not claiming to be Oscar-worthy. They just want to keep your attention for 99 minutes. “Dare you to” might actually be a more accurate description.
The intensity is pretty much non-stop from beginning to end. Right off the bat, the opening scene very quickly turns into a bloody ninja massacre. The gratuitous, extremely animated, and unrealistic violence is actually where a great deal of the cheese factor comes from. It’s nonstop, in-your-face, and unrelenting. The bright red corn-syrup gets more screen time than any two characters. This movie must be entered knowing that or you’ll never make it out alive.
Bloodiness aside, the choreography of the fight scenes are spectacular. The “Matrix” guys were definitely involved. The acrobatics alone were enough to keep me glued. They’re such a visual feast that you can’t take your eyes away. Or maybe you can’t keep your eyes opened. To their credit, my attention was kept from beginning to end. But that may not be to my credit.
A legitimate defense of this movie, however, is that it isn’t completely devoid of any kind of characterization. The title character, Raizo, was worth caring about. He wasn’t overly complicated nor did he have much depth, but he was likeable, so I cared, which is essential to any movie’s success.
Raizo’s story was familiar: the devoted pupil realizes the error of his brutal master’s ways and rebels, seeking revenge. Even the murdered love interest is hardly a new concept. But I didn’t really care because I liked him. For this kind of a movie, that was enough.
The movie made this killing machine a human being. Part of how this was accomplished was by dehumanizing his antagonists. His old master and “brother” from the Ninja training school were completely brutal, violent, unfeeling bastards with no regard for anyone other than their cult-like brotherhood. They’re greatest aspiration in life is to kill. It’s what they’ve been trained for their entire lives and what they live for now.
Also serving as a humanizing factor for Raizo is his relationship with Mika, a legal assistant who gets herself in over her head when she decides to pursue an investigation into the dark underworld of the Ninja culture. Raizo becomes her guardian and they establish a sweet friendship. His relationship with a girl within the Ninja school also gives him an endearing if not predictable attachment for the audience to connect with.
While it isn’t really explained why Raizo and not any of the others saw the brutality and inhumanity of their Ninja Father’s ways, it isn’t really relevant because this movie isn’t a character study or a thought-provoking drama. It’s a movie about ninjas, cool fight scenes, and a guy to cheer for. This then leads back to the question of the use and relevance of this genre, but obviously people keep coming back for it. Today’s morbid fascination with violence is only on fire because we continue to fuel it.
This is not great filmmaking. But it establishes its goal. The question of the dangerous level of desensitization our culture is undergoing is a different issue, but one that certainly shouldn’t be disregarded in relation to this movie.
But regardless, this film knows that that’s exactly what’s happening and they banked on it. Don’t expect to come out with a philosophical discussion on your tongue, but simply, in the words of Neo, “Whoa,”…and perhaps a horrific look in the mirror and question of why exactly we do keep coming back for more. And a deathly fear of shadows.
Or is it ok to say that sometimes you're just looking for a senseless good time?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)