Transporter 3 Review

30-03-2009 Zantor No Comments

Frank Martin’s back! The world’s coolest delivery boy gets assigned to deliver Valentina, the Ukrainian Prime Minister’s daughter, to Odessa. Some wicked CEO types have kidnapped Valentina, to strongarm the PM into letting them toss toxic waste in his country. Or something. Plus, Frank and Valentina get explosive devices strapped to their wrists, so if they go 75 feet from the car, they die. Obviously, plot is secondary in a movie like this. People watch a Transporter flick to see three things: Statham throwing down on thugs, Statham defying physics with his beautiful Audi, and Statham shedding his shirt for no good reason. The third installment delivers on this, but to a lesser extent than the first two. The hand-to-hand fight scenes are well shot but not creative. (Frank uses his shirt as a weapon; Frank fights off an entire gang with a pipe. We’ve already seen this!) The “can’t leave your car” concept makes for a couple fun scenes: one in which a goon apprehends Frank’s car and he has to chase it down on a bicycle; another where he must think fast to avoid drowning. However it also leaves the movie with a lot of in-car scenes where Frank and Valentina make tedious small talk.

I’ll admit it, I love Jason Statham. I could watch him beat up a phone book (and in this movie he actually does.) He plays Frank like every character he’s played: tough, cool and slightly irritated. Natalya Rudokova’s performance as Valentina was more problematic. She annoyed me, though to be fair I think Valentina was just a badly written character, swinging from sullen teenager to manic pixie in a matter of minutes. We’re supposed to believe she will make Frank less uptight, instead of sending him running. One of the big attractions for me was the casting of Robert Knepper as the villain. One of my favorite character actors, Knepper has a special knack for playing sleazy and scary. Unfortunately he doesn’t have much to do here beyond making threats over the phone. Francois Berleand returns as Frank’s pal Inspector Inspector Tarconi, who’s always one step behind Frank until it’s convenient to the plot for him to catch up.

I’m not familiar with director Olivier Megaton’s other work, aside from Hitman (on which he assisted). Based on this I’d say he’s pretty average at setting up a scene.

Overall Transporter 3 was a little disappointing. I don’t mind style over substance, especially in an action flick. But this movie didn’t have enough of either to really pull me in. Will it tide me over until Crank 2 comes out? Yes, but I’m also glad I waited to rent it.

Filed under:

Who’s Watching the Watchmen? — Everyone!

27-03-2009 Zantor No Comments

I went to see “Watchmen” the other night with my family. This movie was long awaited and long anticipated by my son. Having read the graphic novel, and insisting the rest of the family do the same, we went into the theatre with a pretty good idea of what to expect. This was a good thing. The movie was exciting and action-packed. The special effects were terrific, and the movie did an excellent job of following the graphic novel. I must say, however, that had I not known what to expect, I would have had a difficult time figuring out parts of the plot line.

“Watchmen” is very dark and extremely violent. With the exception of one character, Dr. Manhattan, the superheroes in the movie don’t actually have any superpowers. The premise of the movie is based on the crimefighters actually being a group of masked vigilantes. The backdrop of the movie is 1985 and has civilization out of control and Richard Nixon has been in office for 24 years (that’s enough to scare anyone.) After a law is passed banning vigilantism, (“Who’s watching the Watchmen?”) the group has essentially gone into retirement.

The characters are interesting, but not necessarily likeable. Rorschach is paranoid and psychotic, the Comedian, vicious and violent. The blue-colored Dr. Manhattan can control atoms, gaining this power as a result of a laboratory accident. He has the ability to change his size, teleport, and incinerate objects and people at will. The beautiful Silk Spectre and Night Owl round out the group and provide romantic interest. The characters have depth, and we are introduced to each through a series of flashbacks and given an understanding of what made them who they are.

After one of the group is murdered, the remaining Watchmen reunite to help find the killer. This plot line is interspersed with a greater risk of a villain attacking the superpowers of the world and pointing the finger of blame at Dr. Manhattan.

The movie is visually outstanding with awesome CGI effects. The dialog is crisp and often humorous. This is not a movie for little ones – the violence is extremely graphic, and as my son put it, you see a lot of blue “wang”. The movie is long, 2 hours and 42 minutes, but is visually stunning and exciting enough that you don’t really notice it. If you have the opportunity to see this in IMAX, by all means do so. It rocks!

Filed under:

The Three Things That Make Action Movies Rock!

26-03-2009 Zantor No Comments

A good action movie can get your blood pumping in so many different ways that it can actually become a thrill ride all by itself. Action movies rock for a lot of reasons, but there are three things about action movies that make them very different from other kinds of movies. Most movies will take the time to develop a plot, and some key characters, before they get to the real interesting parts of the story. An action movie lets you know right from the start that you are there to see an exciting movie. In Transporter 2 the first scene in the movie is Jason Statham beating up a street gang for touching his car. It is violent and a bit over the top, but that is how an action movie introduces itself to the viewers. Other movies take the time to develop the story and slowly introduce us to key characters, while action movies punch you right in the face from the very beginning.

Action movies love to make the impossible seem common place. In a good action movie you see things done that seem impossible when you really think about them, but when you see them played out in the movie they seem so realistic. In Transporter 2, Jason Statham discovers that the car he is driving has a bomb attached to it that is almost ready to explode. If this were to happen in the real world then Jason Statham would have more than likely blown up, but in Transporter 2 he does some of the most amazing driving tricks ever to get the bomb dislodged from the bottom of the car. The scene ends with the bomb exploding in mid-air and Jason Statham driving away to yet another adventure, and the viewer is left to determine for themselves whether or not it could really be done. Action movies use the element that most people temporarily believe what they see on a movie screen as long as it isn’t a fantasy movie. If you see a guy driving a car then, as long as the car does not turn invisible or something else outrageous, you tend to believe anything that driver does with that car. That is how action movies get us to believe that you can dislodge a bomb from a car with some fancy driving, and they make it seem exciting as well.

Even though action movies start off with instant excitement, there is an art to making a good action movie that builds the audience into a frenzy of believing just about anything. An action movie can grab you and hold on to you with great scenes of drama and high speed pursuit, but the third thing that rocks about an action movie is that you start to believe that you could do the things you are seeing the actors and stunt people do. Of course you should never try anything you see in a movie at home, but a well done action movie has you believing that you can drive like Jason Statham and pull off any of the stunts his character pulls off in Transporter 2. They even make the fight scenes look easy without really explaining that it may have taken weeks, or even months, to get that one fight scene just right.

Action movies are great forms of escape because they bring you in to the movie and never let you go. They rock for so many reasons, but they are especially effective at getting your attention, making the impossible seem possible, and making you feel like you could pull off those stunts on your own. Don’t try these stunts at home, but if you get a chance to take in an action movie then go right ahead. You will certainly forget your troubles for an hour or two.

Filed under:

Quantum of Solace Keeps Us Squarely in the Bond-Craig Era

25-03-2009 Zantor No Comments

007 fans will not be disappointed by the newest Bond entry, “Quantum of Solace.” Like its predecessor, “Casino Royale” (2006), “Quantum” presents a hard-bitten 007 who uses his his license to kill whenever he sees fit. Concerned that Bond’s obsession with avenging his lover Vesper’s death from “C.R.” has turned him into a loose cannon, his Mi6 boss M (Judi Dench), at one point, exercises her own license to kill against Bond. This misunderstanding, which is eventually resolved, enhances a plot full of intrigue and romance, and the fights, car crashes, and high-octane explosions 007 fans have grown to expect. Added to this brew is a clever, old-fashioned dogfight sequence between airplanes and a truly suspenseful parachute jumping sequence. Throughout such action, this Bond, as he did in “Casino Royale,” actually bleeds, giving both Craig films a more realistic edge than earlier 007 outings.

The plot invovles Bond’s investigation of the organization he believes responsible for Vesper’s death. His sources lead him to Haiti, where he meets a ruthless businessman, Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), one of the organization’s major players, whose plan is to monopolize the world’s oil supply. Ostensibly assisting him in this operation is the beautiful Camille (Olga Kurylenko), who has a hidden agenda that gives her sufficient plot motivation to become Bond’s latest love interest.

This film features some new twists, as well as some welcome homages to earlier Bond films. I especially liked a scene in which M receives an urgent call late at night concerning Bond’s latest activities; her husband rolls over in bed, answers the phone, but then hands it to his wife. It’s refreshng to see films like this reflecting women’s equal empowerment, in that a female character (not her husband) is important enough to have to take a middle-of-the night call requiring her immediate expertise. Bravo!

As for nostalgia, Greene’s plans are reminiscent of Goldfinger’s, with oil as a substitute for gold. There’s even a scene in which a travel agent with whom Bond has dallied in the night is found dead in their hotel room the next morning, in bed, naked, her body and pores clogged with–not gold, but oil. Paging Shirley Eaton!

As sequels go, Bond fans will find much to enjoy in “Quantum.” My one complaint is that Bond’s CIA friend, Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright) is given very little to do,” and that’s a shame, given Wright’s great talent. Still, “Quantum of Solace” is well worth a look, and should prove a worthy edition to any 007 fan’s collection.

Filed under: