Just like last year, I am now listing
my picks for the ten best movies released in the first half of the year that I
have been able to watch (while at year end, I will be listing those that I would
have watched during the second half – regardless of being released in the first
or second half).
Yes, there could be several
first-half movies that I might have liked if I had been able to watch them. There’s the Great Gatsby, which I refused to see since I always want to read
the book first before watching a movie adaptation of it, and I haven’t read
that classic yet (that’s the reason I haven’t watch a single episode of Game of Thrones yet; I want to read the
books first. And this might also become
the case with Ender’s Game, which is
coming out later this year. I am
desperately trying to find a copy of it.
But it’s different with World War
Z though, which was merely an “adaptation” in name only. I can watch it since it has not much
semblance with the book anyway, but I still haven’t got the chance as of
writing). I haven’t seen Joss Whedon’s Much Ado About Nothing – a movie I have been looking forward to ever
since last year – yet, since it hasn’t been shown in the theaters here and it’s
not yet available in the Net. There’s
still a lack of Sundance movies of
2013 that are available for general viewing.
I’ve been meaning to watch Olympus
Has Fallen, The Purge, This is the End, and Now You See Me, but haven’t been able to
yet. Will make room for these movies – along
with the many fascinating movies set for release in the second half of the year
– in my movie watching for this second half.
But, for now, let us concentrate on the top 10
movies of 2013 that I got to watch from January to June 2013:
10.) OZ THE GREAT AND WONDERFUL
Though it had its charms, there
was nothing exceptional about this movie’s concept – normal guy was magically sent to a
magic land, became its champion, and saved the day. This trope has been done too many times
already – and in more superior ways.
Still, it was a solid and fun fantasy story. Character developments on some characters,
especially the lead character’s, are fascinating enough. And the dazzling visuals alone – being the
strongest point of the movie – should keep you entertained and in wonder. The visuals were fantastic enough to keep you
on your sit even when the narrative starts to lose your interest.
9.) HANSEL AND GRETEL: WITCH
HUNTERS
I’m a movie fan who doesn’t care
about what the majority of critics and movie goers think of a particular movie. If I sincerely liked a movie, even if others
didn’t, I would state the fact that I liked it and won’t be embarrassed of it
(heck, I liked Battleship, even if it
was ridiculed and hated by many). This
applies with this movie. Critics gave this
movie a ton of bad reviews. I, however, liked
it. I found it ridiculous but in a good
way. For me, the silliness of the
premise, plot, and script totally worked.
I was greatly entertained by the badassery and wackiness of the action
and violence featured in this movie.
Also, Gemma Arterton is kind of hot, isn’t she?
8.) EVIL DEAD
This movie simultaneously served as
a remake and a loose sequel of the original Evil
Dead trilogy. It has several
elements that were throwbacks or homage to the original movie series. Just the same with the original Evil Dead movie, it was an effective combination
of horror and dark comedy.
Evil Dead was a gory and brutal thriller, but it wasn’t that nightmarishly
terrifying. You will probably be doing
more laughing than screaming from the over-the-top violence in this movie.
7.) WARM BODIES
You should get the idea of this
being merely another godawful Twilight
rip-off (capitalizing with zombies as Twilight
had capitalized with vampires) out of your head. That perception is completely wrong. Warm
Bodies is infinitely superior to Twilight.
The humor of Warm Bodies was not hilarious, but it was clever and funny. I was surprised when I learned that this was actually
based on a book, and according to those who have read it, the book was wittier
than the movie. This observation is not
surprising at all, since a book has more room to explore the internal
monologues in the mind of the lead male character/narrator – a zombie.
The premise was quirky but
justified, and the romance was vindicated, important, and not corny (again,
it’s not Twilight). The action, however, was not so much – just
enough to push the story, which is actually a good thing. And I can forgive the meh CGI.
Initially, I had doubts and
ridiculed this movie. But after watching
a trailer, I saw something promising about it.
I gave it a chance, enjoyed it, and become glad I did.
6.) EPIC
To be honest, aside from Epic, I haven’t seen any other animated
movies released in the first half of 2013.
I haven’t seen Monsters U or The Croods (which has the highest IMDb
score among 2013 animated movies so far) yet.
I haven’t seen any direct-to-video animated movies released this
2013. I haven’t seen the new Dragon Ball Z movie and Hunter X Hunter movie, which I am
excitedly looking forward to see (as soon as they’re available in the Net. LOL). So the lack of choices helped Epic a lot in securing a spot in my
list.
Overall, I’ve enjoyed Epic.
However, Epic hasn’t lived up
to its name. Seriously, if you name a
movie “epic”, you are setting a very high standard for yourself. And if you fail to meet that standard, that’s
already, in a sense, a disappointment, right?
Anyway, I did my best to evaluate this movie as it is, and not based on
the high expectations it had forced on itself.
Most of the time, it was
engaging, but it has never overwhelmingly won me over. The animation was beautiful but it was not so
stunning. And while the story was
fairly appealing, the narrative totally lacked originality and magnetism. Nonetheless, Epic is a solid, entertaining animated movie. But it’s far from becoming a classic.
5.) G.I. JOE: RETALIATION
G.I. Joe: Retaliation was another movie that the critics generally
panned while I, on the other hand, had adored.
Yes, it was a dumb action movie.
But it was a kickass and pleasurable dumb
action movie. If you are a fan of the comics and the animated series, you would
find that this movie totally captured the essence of G.I. Joe. So who cares if Retaliation had a weak and dumb script? G.I.
Joe never pretended to be “smart” anyway.
It has always been a “stupid, over-the-top ridiculousness in characters, action, and plot” brand of cool, enjoyable entertainment.
What matters to me is it did deliver that.
The movie oozed a lot of badass
and entertaining moments: Every scene that featured Snake Eyes and/or
Storm Shadow; the epic ninja battle on the snowy mountain; The Rock and Channing
Tatum’s comedic chemistry; the badassery of The Rock’s character, Roadblock (especially
when he clashed with Firefly); Cobra’s insanely ridiculous plot for world
domination (which is actually something you would expect from them); etc. The movie is far from brilliant, but it
certainly succeeded in providing the elements for having a pretty good time.
4.) ODD THOMAS
Odd Thomas, written by Dean
Koontz, is one of the most beautiful books I’ve ever read. And Odd Thomas, the character, is one of the
most layered, most fascinating, and most empathic fictional characters I’ve
ever encountered. After reading the
book, I easily became a great fan and fondly followed the series (so far, I
have the first four books and a graphic novel in my collection). That’s why I was really surprised and
thrilled when I’ve learned that an Odd Thomas movie was made – something I’ve
only become aware of sometime this year.
Major movie news sites haven’t hyped it (because it was not really meant
to be a major blockbuster film this year).
I’ve only learned of it when I saw the trailer; I even actually thought
the trailer was fake (great was my excitement when I saw it was legit).
Here are my thoughts after
watching it: It sacrificed plenty of
important details, especially Odd’s friendship with the novelist Ozzie and the
ghost of Elvis. Still, the movie was generally
loyal to the main plot of the novel. It
also successfully captured the feel, the wit, and the emotion of the novel. It almost moved me as much as the book. Almost.
I really liked the movie, but it could have been better.
Lastly, as the ending implied, in
which (spoiler) Odd walked across the desert and then looked over Las Vegas at
the distance, the direction of this movie might be actually different with the
book series’. The sequel – if any –
might not follow the events and plot of Forever
Odd, the second book in the series.
If the next movie sets Odd’s next adventure in Las Vegas, maybe this is
where he will encounter the ghost of Elvis for the first time. Which is something to look forward to in the
next Odd Thomas movie installment.
3.) MAN OF STEEL
If you are going to evaluate Man of Steel as a Superman movie, then
the verdict is it has utterly failed in understanding and interpreting what
Superman is all about. But if you choose
to look at it with fresh perspective, in which you would merely treat the
character as the protagonist of this particular movie, and watch the movie as
you would watch any fantastical movie that isn’t an adaptation of any literary
(or comicbook) material – ignoring the essence, premise, philosophy, mythos,
and characterization established about Superman in the comics – you will have
an enjoyably great time watching it. However,
if you watch this movie through the eyes of a serious comicbook fan, or worse,
as a big Superman fan, you would find several aspects and developments in this
movie that will drive you crazy. Just
treat Man of Steel as merely an Elseworld reinvention so you can enjoy
it immensely. That’s what I did.
Man of Steel has been given the “Dark Knight” treatment. Meaning it
was dark, gritty, and “realistic”.
Superman was Batman-esque in portrayal – angst-y, lost, tormented, and
troubled. Again, if you would evaluate
it as a Superman movie, this portrayal doesn’t work. It doesn’t work because Superman is no Batman. Superman has always been the anti-thesis of Batman
as a superhero. Being gloomy, cynical, and gritty works for Batman because he represents the “dark” kind of
superhero; while Superman represents the “light” kind of superhero – hopeful,
optimistic, and idealistic.
Even if a comicbook fan (like me) looks at this movie through the advised “Elseworld” lens, to refer to his Superman presuppositions can’t be helped. Thus, there are several instances in this movie that made me cringe. There was Pa Kent’s reply of “Maybe” when young Clark asked if he should have just let the other kids die when they were trapped underwater, for the sake of protecting his secret because it was not yet the “proper time” to reveal himself (the Jonathan Kent I know would never think like that). There was Superman’s apathy for collateral damage while he was fighting the Krytonians (Superman always holds back). But worst of all, there was the part Superman had to kill Zod.
Even if a comicbook fan (like me) looks at this movie through the advised “Elseworld” lens, to refer to his Superman presuppositions can’t be helped. Thus, there are several instances in this movie that made me cringe. There was Pa Kent’s reply of “Maybe” when young Clark asked if he should have just let the other kids die when they were trapped underwater, for the sake of protecting his secret because it was not yet the “proper time” to reveal himself (the Jonathan Kent I know would never think like that). There was Superman’s apathy for collateral damage while he was fighting the Krytonians (Superman always holds back). But worst of all, there was the part Superman had to kill Zod.
Now, Superman doesn’t kill! He never chooses “the lesser evil”
option. When given two impossible choices,
he still manages to go around them to save the day. He always finds a way to win without killing. He can do this because he is Superman! Batman might vow not to kill, but because he
is human and, thus, limited by humanness, he can’t enforce this vow when facing an impossible
dilemma. Superman, however, can enforce
his vow of not killing even in the face of an impossible dilemma because his
godlike qualities should allow him to do so. That is what’s being SUPERman is all about. He is better than us. He is better than Man. (Of
course, there were rare times when Superman had found himself in situations where killing was unavoidable. But, again, these instances are rare.
These instances are merely exceptions to the rule. And such exceptions are not what defines
Superman, and thus should not be used on an origin movie that would define
Superman.)
But once again, I forced myself
on looking at it with the necessary point of view. And that is, Superman’s decision to kill Zod
is merely in line with the direction or mood DC is going with in establishing
their shared movie universe, which is being grittier and more “realistic”
compared to Marvel Studios’ take on their superhero movies (which is closer to
the comic book feel). I’m okay with
that, if that’s what DC wants. So with
that put into consideration, I began to like the situation Superman was put
in. It was a “realistic” scenario. Because in real life, moral choices are not
always uncomplicated as picking between an objective, definite right and an
objective, definite wrong; sometimes, one has to deal with a “trolley problem”or, worse, a “ticking time bomb scenario.”
So if this movie Superman – an Elseworld
interpretation – is going to be “realistic”, then even though he has godlike
qualities, there will be times he would be forced into taking a “lesser evil”
option – just like with real life moral dilemmas. And with this, applying this context of being
“realistic”, all other moments in the movie that made me cringe slowly made
connections and sense.
Overall, the movie has been fun
and exciting. The action scenes were
terrific. The visuals were generally
awesome, though too annoyingly CGI-heavy at times. Henry Cavill did well as (a reinvented)
Superman, and Russell Crowe and Kevin Costner had powerful performances as Jor-El
and Jonathan Kent respectively. Amy
Adams, though, never impressed me as Lois Lane (because the greatest live
portrayal of Lois Lane ever is still Erica Durance in Smallville). But my most
favorite performance in this movie is Antje Traue as Faora – Zod’s
second-in-command – who was memorably kickass.
2.) IRON MAN 3
Marvel’s “Phase 2” got a strong
start because of this movie. Oh, it’s
not perfect. But this is arguably, for me, the best movie of the Iron Man trilogy. I love how Tony did some sleuthing. I love how Pepper was given a bigger role. I love how Tony was pushed
to the limits. But the best thing about
this movie was the action. The action scenes
were intense and excellent, especially the kickass climax in which Tony Stark
unleashed his Iron Man army (second most awesome action scene was the Air Force
One sequence).
The thing about this movie that
received a lot of backlash was the treatment of the character of Mandarin. It infuriated a lot of fans. As for me, I’m split about the matter. Half of me was disappointed that the actual
comicbook characterization of the Mandarin has not been executed in the movie
when a very capable and very fitting actor like Ben Kingsley was available to
perform the role (though Kingsley was still brilliant in the movie’s
interpretation of the character). But
half of me enjoyed the unexpected twist of the movie: the “Mandarin” was actually
not the true main villain but was merely an actor working as a dummy front for
the real villain.
My main disappointment on this
movie was its absence of appetizing elements – like a cameo of a future
superhero – to preview and connect to the next Phase 2 films. Really hoping the post-credit scene was Tony
Start in a deep-space Iron Man armor rocketing upwards toward outer space (as a
prelude to Guardians of the Galaxy)
or a glimpse of Hank Pym.
Overall, it was a very enjoyable
movie. Though, just like Man of Steel, if you looked at Iron Man 3 as an overzealous comicbook
fan who expects it to conform to everything the comics had established about
Iron Man and his mythos, you will get irked.
If you would just watch the movie as it is, and
would continually remind yourself that this movie is merely an alternate
version of the comics’ universe, you will have a wonderful time.
1.) STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS
Star Trek Into Darkness had my full spellbound attention from start
to finish. It could be my most favorite
Star Trek movie ever. Primarily because
this was the most visually amazing Star Trek film ever made. This movie was so awesome that I can easily
forgive the plot holes (seriously, why do they need to hide the Enterprise at the bottom of the sea at
the beginning of the movie? Why not just
let it orbit the planet? Saving Spock
would have had no complications if they have done so). The action in this movie – from the starship warp drive chase to the face off between Spock and Khan – has been quite exhilarating
and the plot has been engagingly fast-paced.
Every cast member did great with
regards to portraying their respective characters and making them shine when
given the exposure and opportunity.
However, it was Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan (a.k.a. John Harrison) who
easily stood out from the rest. He carried
this movie from being great to epic awesomeness. His performance has been very magnetic,
layered, terrific, and interesting. Some
were annoyed of all the extreme secrecy and denials of who Benedict’s character
was going to be; they said the extreme secrecy was unnecessary.
However, for me, this “unnecessary” secrecy still made it possible for a
slight thrill to happen during the scene that finally confirmed “John
Harrisson” as a mere alias (as expected).
A minor tingle still went up my spine once Benedict dramatically
uttered, “I. AM. KHAN.” For me,
Benedict’s Khan has been more compelling and fascinating than the original
depiction of the character.
The loudest criticism about the
movie was its lack of originality; that this movie was merely a “greatest hits”
gimmick instead of creating something new, as what the first movie (Star Trek) had promised. But I want to argue that Star Trek Into Darkness was somewhat of an extension of the Star Trek reboot – which established
this new timeline. I want to point out that
things were still being set up in Into
Darkness; most notably, at the end of the movie, the starship USS Enterprise’s was only starting on with
its 5-year mission “to boldly go where no man has gone before” – which is the
entire premise of Star Trek. Hence, Into Darkness was still part of the introduction or “origin” process. So, now
that the premise has just been established, the real room for originality can only
really start on the next installment.
No comments:
Post a Comment