The Karate Kid (2010)

The Karate Kid kicks on - in China....

There is practically no karate in this new Karate Kid.

But aside from that little wistful desire that America should finally get the rest of the world right, there is really little doubt that the former Fresh Prince of Bel Air, Will Smith, has served up something of a gem, while officially presenting his son and heir apparent, Jaden Smith, as a future and upcoming heartthrob and superstar.

Simply put, Jaden is his father's son. Adorable at such a young age, the boy nevertheless displays an irresistible charm and an uncanny flair for humour that his father is so famous for.

Sure, he still lacks a little something in the emotive department, but like his character Dre Parker quips while being trashed in table tennis by a Chinese man (???), "Dude! I'm only 12!"

JS & JC - striking up a fine camaraderie....

Jackie Chan takes on a bunch of kids... ouch - for them....

Jaden Smith - your up and coming action superstar?

But enough of that for now. How fare this 2010 version against its 1984 original?

The film is essentially a remake of the 1984 Karate Kid starring Ralph Macchio and the famous Pat Morita. In essence however, this 2010 film is actually quite different in tone.

What sets this apart from its predecessor is the injection of quite a bit of comedy, and in a sense, it works very well.

Jackie Chan delivers some of the most hilarious deadpan lines as Mr Han, the kungfu master masquerading as a local apartment caretaker.

Equally funny, though perhaps unintentionally, is the sight of the legendary Jackie Chan pitted against a bunch of Chinese kids (all smaller size than him), when Mr Han tries to save Dre's skin. Somehow I can picture a bunch of white kids ganging up on Pat Morita's Miyagi, but here? I don't wonder if JC himself wasn't embarrassed with the match-up.

The Karate Kid (2010) IS funny, I give you that. And to be fair, the representation of Chinese Kungfu, especially showcasing a trip up the mountain (Mt. Wudang perhaps?), is excellent.

But I cannot help but suspect that the comic element is both a boon and a bane. What worked well as a coming of age movie as the 1984 original was, seems to now have been lost amidst all the laughter and levity.

Ralph Macchio & Pat Morita from the original - a more coming of age experience....

I remember one of the original film's iconic moments, when Daniel (Macchio) adopted the crane stance against his opponent - that was quite something else.

But while that scene is repeated in the remake, it ended up being more funny than actually inspiring.

The story may be the same, but the setting and tone are certainly very different. Perhaps it is a reflection of the times we're in. But in no way should those detract us from an otherwise entertaining, and fairly successful remake.


Moometer Reading:
Moo-o..

A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010)

"One, two... Freddy's coming for you...."

Oh please no more Nightmares.

The highly successful franchise has seen a total of seven sequels to the original A Nightmare On Elm Street, so the producers decide it is time to do a remake and reboot - a reflection of current film making trends I'm afraid.

But how do you take a novelty idea from 1984 and rejuvenate it for today's audiences when it has all but worn thin?

The idea of course is to reinvent, to update on the original to fit the times. Unfortunately, this 2010 version fails on both counts, making for an ultimately plodding storyline with cheap and predictable scares.

To be fair, this is indeed a basic remake, with only a few major changes from the original. The characters are more or less the same. The major difference is the serial child killer in the original has been relegated to a maybe only child molester (I know, what in the world...?).

And of course there is Freddy Krueger, the masterful and iconic Robert Englund now replaced by Jackie Earle Haley, who was himself incredible as Rorschach in Watchmen.

I still remember as a kid, how a classmate of mine fervently did his own impression of that scissorhand arch villain - complete with hat, glove and claws - and he called himself Freddy.

This was the effect Freddy Krueger had on scores of young lads throughout the world for a good decade and more.

This new Freddy unfortunately, lacks character. The face looks too plastic, though that is supposedly done to more closely match those of burn victims.

No teenager or otherwise is going to be inspired or truly frightened by this Freddy, certainly not when Freddy lookalikes, parodies and caricatures have been around for over two decades.

Yes. Hide that face a bit more, because Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy Krueger doesn't quite... cut it....

Rooney Mara and Kyle Gallner play the only two characters in the film with any personality at all....

Do not fall asleep in class, or Freddy's gonna get you....

While there is little to take away from this reboot, the production value is nonetheless quite decent. The cinematography and sets are also pretty good, though an over-reliance on poor CGI tends to let the film down.

The supporting cast are forgettable, underdeveloped, or just plainly Freddy fodder. Only the two leads, played by Rooney Mara as Nancy and Kyle Gallner as Quentin, give any favourable performances at all.

Reviewers slam Mara's "wooden acting", but I disagree. I have known girls like that - shy, hesitant, unsure of how to express themselves - and to see two atypical teenagers fighting off a nightmare villain is exactly how you want you want horror flicks to be.

And the jury will have to be out on the new Krueger. Clearly the new makeup has created a stumbling block, but Haley is a talented actor, and had there been an expansion on his backstory, his performance just might have worked.

Unfortunately, the film chose to introduce precisely that, then inexplicably abandon it in the end for a silly twist that fooled basically no one.

Haley is signed on as Freddy Krueger for another two installments, so I'm hoping he really gets to make that role his own, to give it a new lease of life.

Because otherwise, like a broken record that keeps on playing, this could be one reel Nightmare that really never ends....

Moometer Reading:
Moo?

Query for:

? No sense of direction: Seriously, Director Samuel Bayer has to take responsibility for this one. The story was already there, all he needed to do was to plan some new and interesting scares and kills. How is it possible that one could visualise a story actually worse than the original? And while it's fine to create a darker, more serious Freddy, what about giving this Freddy some meaning for being so? It's one thing trying to fill a big pair of boots, quite another to just make a simply bland and boring film.

Paranormal Activity

Paranormal Activity: Truth or fiction? See it to believe it....

A couple plagued by mysterious hauntings in their comfortable two-storey home in San Diego, California, decide to record their experiences on a digital video camera.

Unlike most videos shot by paranormal investigators, their documentary effort actually does strike gold, revealing a whole plethora of creepy and unexplained happenings that occur even while the couple sleep.

Steven Spielberg apparently got spooked while watching the 'video recording' because his bedroom doors inexplicably locked by themselves minutes into the show, and he had to call a locksmith to get himself out.

If this is the first you have heard of Paranormal Activity, the documentary style horror film that has taken America by storm, then read no further, put everything down and go watch it - Paranormal Activity will freak you out.

Much of the action takes place in the couple's bedroom - but did they really have to leave the door open? Spooky....

Katie Featherston is the girlfriend haunted by a demonic presence since childhood. Micah Sloat plays the skeptical boyfriend.

Audiences being scared silly during a screening.

But if you have heard of it and know what it is, then there might be a problem.

Following on the documentary shooting style of such classics like Cannibal Holocaust and Blair Witch Project, Paranormal Activity thus suffers from the same problem that plagues such films - it is all FICTION.

But while Cannibal Holocaust and Blair Witch Project are genuinely frightening to watch, Paranormal Activity features more of the mundane lifestyles of the two lead characters, punctuated by a series of weird and unexplained occurrences that only slowly escalate to a chilling conclusion.

Needless to say, it is no Exorcist or Haunting in Connecticut (which is after all based on a true story).

You need to truly believe it is real. You need to recognize that a perfectly normal person who stands motionless in front of her bed for hours into the night is a genuinely creepy thing.

But if you do believe, or can make yourself believe - then there you have a winner.

Because Paranormal Activity is every paranormal investigator's dream, to actually record tangible supernatural events in a haunted house.

It is like seeing with your very own eyes the final conclusive evidence - that spooks indeed do exist.

It all boils down to how one views the film. Those built on a staple of slasher flicks and Asian horror may not be too thrilled with Paranormal Activity.

But credit where credit's due - rookie director Oren Peli has scored a home run on a measly shoestring budget of just USD15k, with the film breaking records as the most profitable independent film ever.

Now that is one accolade you cannot argue with.

Moometer Reading:

Moo-o...?!!

Exclamations for:

! Outstanding New Idea: A novel idea that has gripped nationwide attention; a film that is now the most profitable independent film ever - director Oren Peli has certainly hurled himself into the limelight with this low budget offering.

! Non Shaky Camera Work: After Blair Witch and Cloverfield, Moovy Revue is just thankful that the director figured out how to avoid the nausea inducing shaky scenes that have plagued similar documentary style films - by shooting most scenes on a standard tripod. Duh.

Query For:

? Being Fiction: It is a pity then for this non-fiction wannabe that there will always be those who will not be impressed by the understandable lack of pacing and the 'plodding' scares that cannot quite rival the normal fictional horror films - not every American haunting has to be an Amityville Horror here.

Antichrist

Antichrist: A surrealistic sexual mayhem....

The idea of female castration just never seemed plausible until Lars Von Trier shows us how - in his controversial 2009 film Antichrist.

That, plus a bloody handjob; a dangling dead fawn; a bolted leg; and a falling baby, are but some of the disturbing images that haunt Von Trier's latest outing.

A couple struggling to cope with the loss of their infant baby (circa copulation no less) retreat to a cabin in the woods to help dissipate their grief.

The husband (Willem Dafoe) plays therapist while the wife (Charlotte Gainsburg) recollects her thesis on gynocide and the antichrist that she previously wrote in that same cabin.

But nothing is quite what it seems out in the lush, quiet forest. Husband and wife soon descend into an irresistible orgy of explicit sex and violence that will consume perhaps their very lives and souls....

Carnal sexuality somehow minus the love - though the chemistry is great between Dafoe and Gainsburg.

Willem Dafoe in a feast of visual and sound, though the actor does seem a tad Hollywoody in an arthouse flick....

An amazing if disturbing performance from Charlotte Gainsburg. The film is accused of misogyny, so don't expect her to play the heroine.

Beautifully shot on digital video and boasting some 80 shots of computer-generated imagery, Antichrist more than delivers on the shock value, but otherwise struggles to actually make its point felt.

Actually, what is the point? There is none, unless it is a study into the deepest and carnal recesses of the human soul.

The film has certainly split opinion however, with the film accused of misogyny and even receiving an 'anti-award' from the ecumenical jury at the 2009 Cannes Festival.

But Von Trier is no stranger to controversy, and he has his share of both the critics and plaudits.

Antichrist is certainly worth a view for its graphic and visual content, which is at times splendid and other times stark (but powerful). But you are warned - give it a skip if you cannot stomach explicit sex and especially violence.

Moometer Reading:

Moo-o.!!?

Exclamations for:

! Outstanding Actress: French Actrice Charlotte Gainsburg certainly looks the real deal as the aggrieved and disturbed wife, easily shifting between sensual to spaced out to deranged with convincing intensity.

! Outstanding Visuals: The visuals are not simply just graphic or explicit. The imagery is disturbing - yes - but that is coupled with visuals of the dark forest and the slow motion hail of falling acorns. The mood is mostly sombre, but stark and frightening when its needed. Lovely in a sick way....

Query for:

? Pointless Plot: Von Trier had been deeply depressed while shooting the film, which may explain the seeming pointlessness of the film. Perhaps Antichrist is more of a personal look into Von Trier's state of mind and being at the time?

City of Life and Death - A sanitised telling of the Nanking Massacre

City of Life and Death aka Nanking! Nanking!

I must be getting jaded.

City of Life and Death is not an easy film to watch. Not because of the tragedy involved but rather and strangely enough, precisely due to the lack of it.

Let me explain. The death, devastation, looting and rape are all there; but somehow the portrayal of these crimes seem sanitised - as though the producers were withholding the whole truth behind the Nanking Massacre.

Considering that the film was quite beautifully shot in stark black and white, City of Life and Death should have had all the right ingredients and elements to rival the likes Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan.

Instead, the film somehow falls well short of greatness.

Mind you, I'm not saying that it is a bad film. It is good, and for a regular audience, possibly superb even. But it can be so much better. City of Life and Death just seemed to be missing a certain something.

Hideo Nakaizumi plays the sympathetic Japanese soldier.

Gao Yuanyuan gives a stirring performance as an administrator giving her all to protect civilians in the Nanking Safety Zone.

A limited but nonetheless memorable appearance by Liu Ye.

Jiang Yiyan as the prostitute who volunteers to be a comfort woman for the Japanese.

Fan Wei plays John Rabe's secretary; Qin Lan plays his wife; and John Paisley in a strangely small role as John Rabe - the Schindler of Nanking.

So what I did was to obtain a copy of Nanking, a documentary on the tragedy - notably made by non-Chinese.

What I saw blew me away. Not because of a higher production value - it was nowhere near that of City's - but because it pulled no punches. It revealed pictures that showed the full atrocity committed by the Japanese.

And just one single eye-witness account from the documentary beats the entire film - hands down.

Comfort women being carted away after 'use' in the film - it is not shown how they died after supposedly just three days.

The real faces of the Nanking Massacre - not what you get to see in City of Life and Death.

For the uninitiated (and those from outer space), City of Life and Death tells a story of the period of several weeks immediately after the Japanese occupation of Nanjing in 1937, the then capital of the Republic of China. The events of that period had since come to be known infamously as the Nanjing (or Nanking) Massacre.

One of the major criticisms of the film directed by Lu Chuan is the over sympathetic portrayal of the Japanese soldiers in the film.

While I had no problem with the character Kadokawa (Hideo Nakaizumi), a Japanese soldier who sympathises with the plight of the Chinese (ironically, Hideo pretty much plays the main lead, though the Chinese are loathe to admit it), I do take issue with how the rest of the Japanese are portrayed more like spoilt kids fighting over cookies (which in this case refers to the women of Nanjing).

The Japanese in this film might be cruel or sadistic (as children can be), but one word that cannot be used to describe them is 'vicious'. I can barely remember any moments in the film where a Japanese soldier was actually vicious. The producers have somehow contrived to take the 'viciousness' out of the film.

The problem I suspect is that the film has the 'Made in China' label attached to it.

The Chinese film industry is still at a fledgeling stage (not counting Hong Kong and Taiwan). The rating system in China, or lack thereof, means that censorship is a major issue to contend with. A film like Schindler's List (gas chamber scene) would never have passed the Chinese censors.

Perhaps it would be better to allow someone outside China to make the film instead.

Now that would have been a spectacle.



Moometer Reading:
Moo-oo...